User Controls
Poll: ?
- Yes
- No
Should abortion be legal?
-
2020-06-29 at 5:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I didn't mention gender. Your sex is determined by the biology of your body, chromosomes and shit, not some made up term.
yes, biology of our body, which biological functions can be changed by doctors.
and show me where was it casted in stone that the basis of ones sex is determined by its chromosones.
show me the commandment. -
2020-06-29 at 5:18 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny yes, biology of our body, which biological functions can be changed by doctors.
Cite 1 case where a male skeleton has been changed to that of a woman's, show me 1 case where the chromosomes of every cell in a male have been changed to that of a females, show me a medical procedure that added functional ovaries to a male, functional breasts, the muscle density differences, show me 1 case where functional testicles have been added to a woman etc etc.. -
2020-06-29 at 5:20 PM UTC
-
2020-06-29 at 5:22 PM UTC
Originally posted by HTS Hard for me to fathom how you think democrats letting their voters get abortions is somehow increasing the number of democrat voters, but I guess I'm not a fucking retard.
… is that a serious question? Things that are legal can become illegal and vice versa. Whether something is one way or the other at present does not make the question of whether or not it should be that way any less relevant.
HTS splaying Cigretting and brickhead Don -
2020-06-29 at 5:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by cigreting Why dont you take any sentence of what i wrote and disprove it or specify why you disagree instead of acting like a typical liberal
The entire premise of your post is speculative and baseless. What the fuck do I even disprove? There's nothing in your post that is proven. The foundation of your post relies on the idea that somehow Planned Parenthood is actively creating democrat voters, but from where? Converting republicans? Undecided voters? Any undecided voter who was planning on an abortion and decided not to go through with it but was still totally okay with the concept of abortion afterward was already leaning democrat. You're saying there are enough women who are being persuaded by abortion - specifically abortion - because it represents a general ideal like "women should have their own choice" that it not only counterbalances all the babies not being born (most of whom were probably going to be raised by democrats) but overcomes it. And you're saying this based on... nothing concrete and the hard evidence that "pregnant women get emotional lol". If we're being wildly speculative and basing this on "women do be emotional tho", the experience of considering an abortion and then deciding not to go through with it is liable to make a woman resent the fact that she was put in a position to even consider it in the first place and by extension come to resent democrats.
Yeah. Sorry. I'm not such a risk seeker that I feel I can make myself stupid enough to try and see how you think all that adds up. Like I said, I'm surprised you can even fucking breathe if you think that makes sense, or that it is reasonable enough for you to have this level of confidence in it (enough to tell me to "disprove it" line by line - holy fucking narcissism).The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-06-29 at 5:27 PM UTCI don't think it's valid for anyone else to tell a woman what she can or cannot do, to her own body. Abortion all the way, baby. Besides, Earth needs less humans. 👍
-
2020-06-29 at 5:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by WellHung I don't think it's valid for anyone else to tell a woman what she can or cannot do, to her own body. Abortion all the way, baby. Besides, Earth needs less humans. 👍
I agree with the last part. However women and most humans DO need to be told what to do...that's been demonstrated nicely in places like the CHAZ and CHAD zones this past week or two, the apes go apeshit when they don't have someone giving them direction (or food and water). -
2020-06-29 at 5:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by HTS If so many people have "comprehension" issues when it comes to the shit you say, maybe it's not them… maybe it's because you're an inscrutable moron who has an ego inversely proportional to the number of his sincerely held beliefs, who makes nonsensical arguments about minutiae because he's too mentally handicapped to meaningfully dispute anything substantive in an opponent's argument or to even remain consistent in his own arguments.
Fucking lolololThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-06-29 at 5:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Cite 1 case where a male skeleton has been changed to that of a woman's, show me 1 case where the chromosomes of every cell in a male have been changed to that of a females, show me a medical procedure that added functional ovaries to a male, functional breasts, the muscle density differences, show me 1 case where functional testicles have been added to a woman etc etc..
non sequitor.
with the exception of functional breasts and wombs/testeses which can be done with donors and transplants,
none of the traits you cited such as skeleton, bone / muscle density, chromosone plays a part in determining whether sex could occur between 2 (or more) individuals.
whens the last time you fucked someone because of their skeleton.
whens the last time you fucked someone due to them having high muscle cell density.
did you really count her chromosome before you fuck her ?
no. the sole determining factor of what ones sex is should be its ability to cause sexual attraction and arousal in people who come into contact with it.
if a person can cause sexual arousal on a man whos only attracted to women, then that person qualifies as a woman. even when its a robot or an ET. -
2020-06-29 at 5:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny non sequitor.
with the exception of functional breasts and wombs/testeses which can be done with donors and transplants,
none of the traits you cited such as skeleton, bone / muscle density, chromosone plays a part in determining whether sex could occur between 2 (or more) individuals.
Sex as in male or female, not whether they can have sex or not.
When a skeletal corpse is found the skeleton is used to determine the sex of the owner..yes. The fact no one tests chromosomes to determine sex doesn't mean they couldn't...they don't usually need to because of other factors that help make that determination.
All the other things I mentioned is very sequitur as again, chopping or adding bits doesn't change the fundamental biological sex of a being which can be determined by those and many other factors. -
2020-06-29 at 6:58 PM UTC
Originally posted by HTS If so many people have "comprehension" issues when it comes to the shit you say, maybe it's not them… maybe it's because you're an inscrutable moron who has an ego inversely proportional to the number of his sincerely held beliefs, who makes nonsensical arguments about minutiae because he's too mentally handicapped to meaningfully dispute anything substantive in an opponent's argument or to even remain consistent in his own arguments.
-
2020-06-29 at 7:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by cigreting No. Abortion is another way for Democrats to get more votes. They know that when a woman gets pregnant she gets extremely emotional and when it really comes down to getting the abortion she won't do it.
It's another way for Democrats to say that women should have their own choice but really when it comes down to it they know most will not abort their children. Then she'll be leaching from tax payers by government assistance for 18 years and voting Democrat just like her skeet trophy will from some guy she doesnt even know
Its ironic that this is a nonsensical and ridiculous attempt at justification for your emotional position.
I think you might be pregnant. -
2020-06-29 at 7:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson
Sex as in male or female, not whether they can have sex or not.
yes.
sex (gender) is relative and the only thing that determines the sexual characteristics of that person is the sexual arousal and attraction it can generate in another person.
a person that arouses a heterosexual man is a female irrregardless of what genetalia it may posses.
a person that arouses a homosexual man is a man irregardless of what its chromosome says. -
2020-06-29 at 7:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny yes.
sex (gender) is relative and the only thing that determines the sexual characteristics of that person is the sexual arousal and attraction it can generate in another person.
a person that arouses a heterosexual man is a female irrregardless of what genetalia it may posses.
a person that arouses a homosexual man is a man irregardless of what its chromosome says.
A male skeleton is a male skeleton regardless of "arousal"...you're not getting it and keep talking about sex as an act rather than a biological fact.
Sex - regarding biological makeup
and
Sex - gender/attraction, sucking dick
..are two different things. -
2020-06-29 at 7:57 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson
A male skeleton is a male skeleton regardless of "arousal"…you're not getting it and keep talking about sex as an act rather than a biological fact.
i dint know skeletons have penises.
also no.
if you are really talking about skeletons there isnt really such thing as male or female skeletons since a majority of criterias that define one as either a male or female are absent on skeletons.
in skeleton comparison what you really have is skeleton type A with high bone density, broad shoulder and narrow pelvis that used to belong to a male, used to, but theres nothing male, man or manly about the skeleton now.
you cant say a skeleton is a male. -
2020-06-29 at 8 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny i dint know skeletons have penises.
They don't...but again a penis isn't a determination of a persons sex (not gender).also no.
if you are really talking about skeletons there isnt really such thing as male or female skeletons since a majority of criterias that define one as either a male or female are absent on skeletons.
Ask an anthropologist how they determine the sex of a 1000yr old skeleton...they will say by the bones...not by flipping a coin. (The pelvis is a dead giveaway for example) -
2020-06-29 at 8:11 PM UTCLet me give you an anology that might help you understand.
Are you familiar with kit cars?
That's where a person takes the chassis and engine of something like a Ford Escort and puts a Lamborghini body kit on it...it looks like a lambo..but it's still a Ford Escort at it's core.
-
2020-06-30 at 4:49 AM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson They don't…but again a penis isn't a determination of a persons sex (not gender).
ok, lets see your definition of sexes and genders.Ask an anthropologist how they determine the sex of a 1000yr old skeleton…they will say by the bones…not by flipping a coin. (The pelvis is a dead giveaway for example)
the devils are in the details. no respectable archeologist / anthropologist will tell you that a skeleton is a male or a man. they will say it belonged to a male. was male.
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Let me give you an anology that might help you understand.
Are you familiar with kit cars?
That's where a person takes the chassis and engine of something like a Ford Escort and puts a Lamborghini body kit on it…it looks like a lambo..but it's still a Ford Escort at it's core.
your anal-logy is flawed.
kit cars are nothing but cross dressers, its just men putting on pretty dresses and panties before tucking themselves into bed at night. like you.
when you get doctors, donors and transplants involved, then this is what results.
where i live lots of people buy half cuts of different cars and join them together into a hybrid. they almost always break into half in accidemts but are pretty cool before that. -
2020-07-04 at 12:05 AM UTCYes, but not as a form of birth control.
-
2020-07-04 at 12:26 AM UTC
