On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 14:57:03 GMT, wmbjk
wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 06:47:53 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 19:29:15 GMT, wmbjk
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:03:58 GMT, Gunner
wrote:


Got a good practical solution. Adoption. Or simply use birth
control. Or..dont ****.

Oh yeah, real practical, those methods have worked so well thus
far....

Face it, there are always going to be unwanted pregnancies. What kind
of fool prefers them to morning after pills? The good sheeple kind,
the loyal party foot-soldier, er... chair soldier. And of course one
of the most beloved party planks is that there's unlimited money to
pay for all those unwanted kiddies, hospital bills .... oops, there
seems to be a flaw in your plan. Will they kick you out for that, or
just award you more demerit points?

Wayne

And this means what?

Gunner

It means that you'd rather waste your life and your health writing
reams of contradictory nonsense in the delusional belief that's
"effective", instead of just admitting that some of your party's
policy is not in the public's interest.

Of course I admit that the Republican party has a number of negatives
about it. Indeed. Which is why Im a Republitarian.

On the other hand..I admit that the majority of the Republicans
platform is far less harmful than the Dems majority. The Dems even
have some things I like. Damned shame its such a tiny fraction.


Blocking the way to easy
availability of morning after pills, and making prescription drug
reimportation illegal, are two good examples. If you disagree with the
leadership on either of these issues, you've gone miles out of your
way to avoid saying so, which is to be expected from a good little
loyal chair soldier.

Im very much pro choice. If RU-384 was available over the counter, Id
not bitch. However..as my posts indicate quite clearly, Ive no
illusions about the process, nor do I use weasel wording or some self
delusional mumbo jumbo to justify the murder of a human being. Which
is more than I can say for you. I noticed a distinct lack of comment
from you on my "illogic" when I ran it through the ladder.

The only comment in fact..was a weasel about how a woman could be the
definer of whether or not her child is a human or not. And I covered
that quite well in my comments to Jim that he needed permission from
his wife to kill his daughter.


In the process, we've been treated to your
money-is-no-object opinion that adoption is a "practical" solution to
unwanted pregnancy.

Wayne

Where in my posts did I mention money? I did indicate that adoption
was a very viable solution for some women. You call me and
extremist..but simply spew out the lies and half truths you need to
justify your world view..as evidenced by the lies in your post above.

If cost was the issue, ammo is cheap, and simply putting a $.02 22lr
round in the back of your daughters neck at the skull junction is very
cheap. Far cheaper than an abortion, even when its paid for by the
State.

Gunner

"The entire population of Great Britain has been declared insane by
their government. It is believed that should any one of them come in
possession of a firearm, he will immediately start to foam at the
mouth and begin kiling children at the nearest school. The proof of
their insanity is that they actually believe this."
-- someone in misc.survivalism