Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
In other words, you can't do what I asked.Nope^ no dragging involved, I'm afraid.
He has been involved in a thread about abortion. if you truly believe he wasn't participating by defending and giving "agree" and "winner" reactions on the posts of the prochoice remarks, then by your definition he was trying to derail the thread by changing the subject at hand, which is against forum rules.
I asked him to clarify what he was doing on this thread. He didn't answer. That means, he was eavesdropping, and trying to derail the thread rather than engage in the discussion about abortion. (That would be against forum rules.)In other words, you can't do what I asked.
I would say that pointing out a factual error, particularly one on which your argument is based, is genuinely partaking in this thread.I asked him to clarify what he was doing on this thread. He didn't answer. That means, he was eavesdropping, and trying to derail the thread rather than engage in the discussion about abortion. (That would be against forum rules.)
He jumped to the defence of a particular poster (see post #1,194) he was lurking on the thread and not genuinely partaking.
Here's another example of him defending the (same) poster:
View attachment 326608
View attachment 326609
I disagree. Considering he defended the same poster, against 2 different peoples arguments. Not once did he do the same for the prolife side. So I rest my case.I would say that pointing out a factual error, particularly one on which your argument is based, is genuinely partaking in this thread.
He was pointing out a mistake you made, and he was quite correct to do so. Your conclusion that this constitutes a declaration of his views on abortion is not justified.I disagree. Considering he defended the same poster, against 2 different peoples arguments. Not once did he do the same for the prolife side. So I rest my case.
He has 44 posts in this thread. How do you figure that is not engaging?Does that change the fact he was lurking on a thread defending comments made by pro-lifers without actually engaging in the thread? No.
No one actually has "demon children", and if sex occurred, then they were supposed to have children, biologically speaking.Some people just have different beliefs, and that's okay. I'm with abortion personally, since some people have demon children that they weren't supposed to have, and accidentally conceived. I'm a mild example of this, but I've also seen more severe cases of this happening as well.
Oh yeah, you're right. I'm just speaking from the words that my mother told me, so it may sound a bit warped. Haha.No one actually has "demon children", and if sex occurred, then they were supposed to have children, biologically speaking.
The antichoice side is well represented, but makes so many facial errors that I'd hardly have time to correct them all.I disagree. Considering he defended the same poster, against 2 different peoples arguments. Not once did he do the same for the prolife side. So I rest my case.
You jumped to the other posters defence.
Here's the link:
Response:
Your response:
Also: lots of "winner & agrees".
View attachment 326555
View attachment 326556
Are you still denying you're for abortion?
Cya!
As I keep explaining, you can't give consent to an entity that does not yet exist.
It exists as soon as sperm meet egg. Many things occur in the body as a result of actions you take. If you eat large amounts of sugar and carbs don't be surprised when you put on weight. Egg and sperm meeting are a natural part of the body working. It is like gaining weight from carbs completely avoidable when responsibility is taken.But it doesn't exist yet at the time in question.
No. Consent is giving permission. That takes a conscious act. If they were giving consent there would not be not be an issue with the resultant pregnancy. Since there is an issue it is an indication no consent was given. You can't simply claim "consent" by fiat.
Which does not directly address my point that you can't give consent to an entity that does not yet exist.We are not talking about a person who is a stranger outside of your body doing something to you. The egg is part of the woman's body and the sperm is part of the mans body. The new person formed is a a part of them both. The same way someone who is about to cut themselves with a knife doesn't ask their hand for permission. You don't ask your egg for permition to become fertilized, you know it can and you take steps to prevent it. The brain already knows the outcome of causal sex may be pregnancy ot a sexually transmitted disease, it just ignores those possible outcomes.
Which is much laterIt exists as soon as sperm meet egg.
If you gain weight, you can have it surgically removed.Many things occur in the body as a result of actions you take. If you eat large amounts of sugar and carbs don't be surprised when you put on weight. Egg and sperm meeting are a natural part of the body working. It is like gaining weight from carbs completely avoidable when responsibility is taken.
If the railing fails and you fall off the stairs, you go the the hospital. Contraception are the steps one can take to avoid pregnancy. But if it fails, as it does at least 1% of the time, there are steps that can be taken.You don't ask your body for consent. You understand how it works and take the needed steps to avoid things you don't want before they happen. You don't jump off a 2 story balcony and bemoan your broken ankles, you take the stairs and avoid breaking your ankles.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?