Radio Blue Heart is on the air!, merelygifted: sirrah22: It was never about saving...

latexstefan reblogged this from brathacusbull

uncharacteristically-articulate liked this

imextremelynice liked this

iwasbusybeingdead reblogged this from marquisofsinningsimps

this-hufflepuff reblogged this from hollandandosterfield

underlandjunction liked this

marvels-bitch-boy liked this

jacelion reblogged this from gayformyspouse

anima-chara liked this

teyvat-writer liked this

lukacei liked this

disasterofahuman reblogged this from disasterofahuman

fredsofort liked this

soulakuarian reblogged this from slipping-into-madness

celebratingsexuality liked this

dinnafashnowlassie liked this

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog Thank you! All answers are either link referrals, someone else’s or insults so debating you is rather difficult. I wanted your answers not listen to you parrot others. Good day sir/maam

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 I’m not wasting my time with someone that doesn’t even have the basic knowledge of the subject. It’s obvious your opinion isn’t grounded in knowledge. Have the last word I’m bored with you.

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog let me rephrase then….if the court makes the definitive decision to reverse RvW, will you respect that decision like the ones made over the past 50 years?

bmsfloyd-blog said: What should I expect from squirrel nuts lol?

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 this court hasn’t made a definitive decision yet…you really don’t know anything. The decision that’s expected is widely panned by the vast majority of legal experts.

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog Seems this court has thought this out as well. So if you relegate your answer to the courts decision then why disagree with them just because you don’t like the decision?

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 I did answer the question. All the ages and circumstances covered in the past 40 years of supreme court decisions until this court. If you’re unaware of those limits we can’t have a debate because you know nothing about the topic.

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog that didn’t answer my question. What age?

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 the legal definition we currently use because it’s a well thought out decision.

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog you’ve only shown me you dint understand definitions and a healthy dose of whataboutism. But let’s debate. What stage or age do you believe is the cut off for abortion and why?

bmsfloyd-blog said: Why I’m bothering to talk to someone who has a picture of squirrel nuts for his blog is a question I should be asking of myself. It’s obvious I’m not going to get anything thoughtful from you.

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 you didn’t tag me so I know you don’t want to debate and I’ve already shown your hypocrisy. If the question is human life and not control over women the Republican Party would support universal healthcare and gun regulations. It is not and has not ever been about human life.

bluefiredragon24 said: Bmsfloyd-blog SMH I thought you wanted to debate this issue and you’ve already resorted to insults and virtue signaling. Funny how you went straight to dollars tho I was using that as a reference and completely ignored the fact your definition of miscarriage is wrong. I’m not mudslinging with you. It solves nothing. You want to debate maturely let’s go. I’ll wait

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 so there’s a dollar amount to save a “child” lol. I’m not surprised by your hypocrisy. If every “child” a woman was forced against her will to carry to term was funded by a tax you could see in your paycheck abortion wouldn’t be an issue. Yes you’d have to read the link and I know reading is horrible for you guys…sorry

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog I would love to read your link that you feel justifies your point but a miscarriage is unintentional. So much so the word unintentional is used in the definition of miscarriage. How about we encourage women not to get pregnant until they are properly insured? Medicare for all sounds great but do you really think that it won’t be abused anymore than what it is now? Medicare fraud in a multi billion dollar a year scam.

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 no it’s intentional. Poor uninsured women are far more likely to miscarriage than wealthier insured women. If Republicans championed medicare for all it would save 10 times the amount that outlawing abortion would. But it was never about saving a “child”. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art… here’s the proof

bluefiredragon24 said: @bmsfloyd-blog No. Miscarriages are unintentional. Manslaughter is

bmsfloyd-blog said: The only difference in this equation is the woman’s choice. One is no big deal the other that hates on women say it’s murder. It’s the choice that Republicans hate.

bmsfloyd-blog said: @bluefiredragon24 up to 50% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortions better known as miscarriages. Do you classify those as manslaughter?

bmsfloyd-blog liked this