View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14834 Location: on earth
|
Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mat-ty wrote: | MalibuGuru wrote: | If you've ever seen an ultrasound, then held a newborn baby, you realize they're just as human as they were 5 months ago. Still don't know how you could kill your own baby. |
Come on Malibu you know it's a woman's right to murder her baby. |
by your right wing definitions aren't you two serial murderers? _________________ when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000 Posts: 2343
|
Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MalibuGuru wrote: | vientomas wrote: | Murder is murder...All those who would deny a woman the right to choose are also against the death penalty. Right?
Matt-ty...MG? You are against the death penalty? |
I've stated many times here that I'm against the death penalty. A guy was just released her in California after serving 37 years for a murder he didn't commit.
I believe that prosecutors should be executed if they prosecute a case that results in someones false execution. That'll eliminate most of it. |
Wait...you are against the death penalty but want to execute presecutors? That sounds like murder to me. So in your world you believe prosecutors should me murdered, but a woman has no right to choose?
If we are following your logic, then should the proesecution witnesses be excuted too? More murder condoned by you? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9293
|
Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Theoretically, a prosecutor would refuse to ask for the death penalty under those rules, so your minimal logic is greatly flawed.
I had my tounge in cheek. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000 Posts: 2343
|
Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MalibuGuru wrote: | Theoretically, a prosecutor would refuse to ask for the death penalty under those rules, so your minimal logic is greatly flawed.
I had my tounge in cheek. |
No prosecutor is at the scene of the crime. Jane Doe swears on a stack of bibles that John Doe killed Mr. X. Prosecutor brings charges and based on the testimnoy of Jane Doe, John Doe is convicted of murder and sentencd to death. Later, Jane Doe recants and says she did not see John Doe kill Mr. X.
You would execute the proecesutor in this scenario. Ya right, tongue in cheek. More like caught in a logical fallicy. Go home to mama MG, she believes your BS and will stoke yout huge ego. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9293
|
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
No ego. I've been against the death penalty for ever. No tongue in cheek. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14834 Location: on earth
|
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
_________________ when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9293
|
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to an interview with Sky News, Debbie “White Dove” Porecco isn’t taking any offense to Trump’s name for Warren, and she’s an actual descendant of Pocahontas herself. In fact, not only is she not taking offense, she looks at Trump as a “hero.” “I know that he uses ‘Pocahontas’ sometimes with Elizabeth Warren,” said Porecco. “He said, ‘well does that offend you when I use that?’ And I told him no, it doesn’t offend me.” |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MalibuGuru wrote: | According to an interview with Sky News, Debbie “White Dove” Porecco isn’t taking any offense to Trump’s name for Warren, and she’s an actual descendant of Pocahontas herself. In fact, not only is she not taking offense, she looks at Trump as a “hero.” “I know that he uses ‘Pocahontas’ sometimes with Elizabeth Warren,” said Porecco. “He said, ‘well does that offend you when I use that?’ And I told him no, it doesn’t offend me.” |
Warren calling the use of that name "racist" is totally bazaar, if she was truly an Indian, then it wouldn't be racist to call her a name of another Indian. It would be like calling Jesse Jackson "Al Sharpton", where is the racism in that? It doesn't exist,,,,,,,,,,,,,, unless of course she wasn't an Indian, then maybe so.
Also, for $60 and a cheek swab, she could send in a sample to DNA.com and put the entire thing to rest, but she won't do it.
The elephant in the room that the main stream media doesn't like to talk about, Warren's cultural appropriation with unproven evidence, to get ahead. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9118 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
"elephant in the room" ....RU kidding? OMG , we are really screwed....I could care less about Liz Warren...If there was an "elephant", or any other large animal in the room, it would be the President, who continues to debase the office by engaging in sophomoric rhetoric, and tweet like a 13 year old. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another one bites the dust.
Today has to be one of the happiest days in Ann Curry's life. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|