Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > Halls of Lordaeron

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-22-2014, 04:00 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default Abortion Thread

http://www.scrollsoflore.com/forums/...&postcount=267
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdWunclerIII
There is no scientific evidence that a fetus -in the mother's womb- is a human being.

There is no objective scientific answer for whether or not a fetus is a human being, so we basically have to give the benefit of the doubt to women, who are indisputably humans with rights.
"Human" does actually have a biological definition. You can cling to personhood and make up whatever definition you please, but "human" is an actual term for our species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_development_(biology)

I accused you of denying personhood to certain humans. Your answer was to say that the prenatal human is in fact not a human. But that's just wrong. Fertilization is the earliest stage of a human's development. Do you... do you want me to find a stronger source that verifies a human is in fact a human, at this stage of development?


EDIT: If this thread gets locked too, then should the discussion go in the Politics or the Justice thread?

Last edited by BaronGrackle; 01-22-2014 at 04:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-22-2014, 04:19 PM
Ashendant Ashendant is offline

Elune
Ashendant's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portugal
Posts: 15,557
BattleTag: Ashendant#2130

Default

Ugh someone closed the abortion thread and it already spilled over to the Feminism and Politics thread.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-22-2014, 04:25 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashendant View Post
Ugh someone closed the abortion thread and it already spilled over to the Feminism and Politics thread.
It did what?
(looks around)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warlock View Post
http://www.mediaite.com/online/jesus...bout-abortion/

She says “using religion to dictate legislation is un-American, but it’s happening”.... as she sits with Jesus trying to dictate abortion legislation...
Oh. Oh... that's Warlock. I see.

EDIT: Sarah Silverman is neither my biology nor my philosophy textbook.

Last edited by BaronGrackle; 01-22-2014 at 04:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-22-2014, 05:30 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Since this is page one I'll just get my main ideas out of the way.

Kids are hard as fuck to raise. It is one of if not the greatest burdens of adulthood. It is, of course, incredibly rewarding, but it takes a huge amount of perseverance, determination, time, and money. It takes planning. It's not something to be taken lightly, it is a huge deal.

So if some young teenage or college aged girl gets knocked up I completely stand by their right to abort it. It's the best fate for the girl and for their child. If the child is kept the mother has to completely stop their education to raise them and get multiple jobs to support them. They may even need their parents to get involved to help, which is a huge burden on them. Either way the child grows up missing a parent for a large chunk of time because they'll be working. It's not a healthy environment.

It's even worse if the child is put up for adoption. We have over 430k kids in foster care. Almost 20k of those foster kids, that's about 20%, never settle down and just end up aging out of the process. Only 25% ever settle down with one family. Another 20% wait 5 years or more to get adopted. It's a awful and psychologically damaging thing for a child to go through, especially since it takes place during the critical period of bonding and growing. A lot of foster kids are noted as being short tempered, angry, and host to numerous mental problems.

Beyond that, think of the mother. Their life is now in shambles, they can't further their education or their career, they have to settle. It's even worse if they're alone. If it's a rape child that's even more horrendous. To deny them an abortion is heinous.

I don't accept the fetus as a person. It is living completely off of its mother's nutrients. Essentially it's a parasite. I don't care that its a future human. Most humans on earth right now are treated like shit and they're grown adults. I've never seen a better way to put it than this comic:


And most importantly of all, it's not up to us what happens to the child. It's the mother's. Aren't conservatives all about free choice and being free of government constraints? Aren't we allowed to further our own destinies? By denying the mother the right to choose what happens to her child you are being hypocritical and downright oppressive. Why should one's life be determined forever because of what some fuckers over in Washington decide? It's disgusting. It's the mother's choice. Let HER choose.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-22-2014, 05:45 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
Since this is page one I'll just get my main ideas out of the way.
You made a lot of important points. But if you made those points about a newborn (or possibly about a fetus who's started developing his/her brain, depending on your ideology), then they would not be enough to convince you to terminate the child in question. Because you recognize that a newborn is a person.

That's why the personhood question is the primary one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
I don't accept the fetus as a person. It is living completely off of its mother's nutrients. Essentially it's a parasite.
So you wouldn't agree with the "brain beginnings = personhood", argued in that last thread earlier?

Do you go up to birth itself, when the umbilical cord is cut, before you say the human is a person?

Last edited by BaronGrackle; 01-22-2014 at 05:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-22-2014, 05:55 PM
Ashendant Ashendant is offline

Elune
Ashendant's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portugal
Posts: 15,557
BattleTag: Ashendant#2130

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
So you wouldn't agree with the "brain beginnings = personhood", argued by Ashendant?

Do you go up to birth itself, when the umbilical cord is cut, before you say the human is a person?
I'm just gonna say that while I do believe that sapience grants personhood, that doesn't mean that a fetus in any stage(even if a person), forfeits the women rights.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-22-2014, 05:58 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Quote:
You made a lot of important points. But if you made those points about a newborn (or possibly about a fetus who's started developing his/her brain, depending on your ideology), then they would not be enough to convince you to terminate the child in question. Because you recognize that a newborn is a person.

That's why the personhood question is the primary one.
Really I kinda prescribe to the old, old school ways. I don't really count them as a full blown person until they reach the age of two. That means they've survived the hardest time period of childhood. I do consider them a human being at birth, just not an actual individual. I'm kind of having a hard time expressing that. I acknowledge their living and being, but don't accept them, I guess?


Quote:
So you wouldn't agree with the "brain beginnings = personhood", argued by Ashendant?

Do you go up to birth itself, when the umbilical cord is cut, before you say the human is a person?
I differentiate humanity and personhood. When the umbilical cord is cut and the baby is breathing on their own I count them as a full blown human being. I just don't count them as a person.


Unrelated, but another "big" point I should add:
If someone wants to abort their child because they're "the wrong gender" I would let them. Why? Because in the first place those people shouldn't even be fucking parents. Those people are awful. I think it's better to let the child never have to think cognitively and suffer than to allow them to be born to parents that don't love them.
Now, if they list "wrong gender" as the reason for wanting an abortion I would ideally tell them to fuck themselves and throw them in the slammer, but who is going to list that as their reason except to some backstreet alley abortionist? The abortion is the better thing to do, compared to birth imo, since it's going to happen anyways.

But that's not a legal issue, just a moral one. Fuck those people.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:05 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashendant View Post
I'm just gonna say that while I do believe that sapience grants personhood
And I still contest that the newly-brained or the newborn has sapience. Sure, they have brain waves. So do cats.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
Really I kinda prescribe to the old, old school ways. I don't really count them as a full blown person until they reach the age of two. That means they've survived the hardest time period of childhood. I do consider them a human being at birth, just not an actual individual. I'm kind of having a hard time expressing that. I acknowledge their living and being, but don't accept them, I guess?
So... does that mean you're in favor of legal abortion up to the age of 2 years?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:09 PM
Ashendant Ashendant is offline

Elune
Ashendant's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portugal
Posts: 15,557
BattleTag: Ashendant#2130

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
Now, if they list "wrong gender" as the reason for wanting an abortion I would ideally tell them to fuck themselves and throw them in the slammer, but who is going to list that as their reason except to some backstreet alley abortionist? The abortion is the better thing to do, compared to birth imo, since it's going to happen anyways.

But that's not a legal issue, just a moral one. Fuck those people.
I sounds kinda douchy of me but I agree with a wrong gender abortion if they have the excess of one gender and none of the other (like already having 2 girls and want 1 boy or vice versa).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:17 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
So... does that mean you're in favor of legal abortion up to the age of 2 years?
Once the child is born the mother will keep them, almost guaranteed. They went through with the birth and they'll usually keep them. At that point the people wanting the kid dead are usually the father or parents. So no, I don't support it.

This is one of the very few times I support adoption over abortion. Killing the child at age 2 is cruel because at that point the child is fully aware. I don't consider them a person until that second birthday, but it's still morally wrong to kill them at age 1 because they are thinking cognitively at that point.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:24 PM
Eagan Eagan is offline

Eternal
Eagan's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,136

Default

This is something that seems pointless to discuss. As far as I'm concerned, pragmatism is in order. There is no point getting bogged down in "what is a life" and "what is personhood", as those questions won't ever be resolved between different parties.

From a pragmatic perspective, there are many good reasons why someone might want an abortion. If that's the case, why should we get bogged down in principle, especially considering that these principles are not a consensus position? If it has many pragmatic benefits, without causing much harm, why prevent it? Allow people who want an abortion to get one for a justifiable reason. If you've got principles that make you feel as if this is unconscionable, then don't get one.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:28 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
Once the child is born the mother will keep them, almost guaranteed. They went through with the birth and they'll usually keep them. At that point the people wanting the kid dead are usually the father or parents. So no, I don't support it.
That's your reason? So, it would be undone if you ever encountered a mother who did want to do away with her pre-2-year-old child?

Quote:
This is one of the very few times I support adoption over abortion. Killing the child at age 2 is cruel because at that point the child is fully aware. I don't consider them a person until that second birthday, but it's still morally wrong to kill them at age 1 because they are thinking cognitively at that point.
You can sedate anyone and kill them painlessly, so that shouldn't factor in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagan View Post
This is something that seems pointless to discuss. As far as I'm concerned, pragmatism is in order. There is no point getting bogged down in "what is a life" and "what is personhood", as those questions won't ever be resolved between different parties.

From a pragmatic perspective, there are many good reasons why someone might want an abortion. If that's the case, why should we get bogged down in principle, especially considering that these principles are not a consensus position? If it has many pragmatic benefits, without causing much harm, why prevent it? Allow people who want an abortion to get one for a justifiable reason. If you've got principles that make you feel as if this is unconscionable, then don't get one.
From a pragmatic perspective, there are lots of people whose death would improve the world. If I shoot a drug dealer down the street who has no family, then where's the harm?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-22-2014, 06:38 PM
Eagan Eagan is offline

Eternal
Eagan's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,136

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
That's your reason? So, it would be undone if you ever encountered a mother who did want to do away with her pre-2-year-old child?



You can sedate anyone and kill them painlessly, so that shouldn't factor in.



From a pragmatic perspective, there are lots of people whose death would improve the world. If I shoot a drug dealer down the street who has no family, then where's the harm?
That would be taking the law into one's own hands, which, of course, a just society cannot permit, and violates near-universal principles that vigilante justice is bad.

Regardless, the drug dealer is conscious, and furthermore, a citizen of the state. One cannot kill a citizen of the state, as that violates law, violating another near-universal principle. A foetus or embryo is not yet a citizen of the state, or a recognised entity verified by another state or body, according to both tradition and law, and hence, has no protection.

A foetus or embryo is not afforded this protection because it is commonly accepted, and has been for centuries, that an unborn human is not yet a person, that is, not yet living, nor conscious of the environment in which it finds itself. States are developed by persons for persons, and hence, have no business dealing with non-persons. The state determines the definition of the "person".

Of course, this definition could change, as it has, however, I am not in favour of such a change for pragmatic reasons. That is why I find it pointless to discuss. You will quite easily be able to poke holes in my "argument" if you could call it that, from a principled perspective. I'm not going to try and defend it on that level, because you will never see it my way, just as I shan't see it yours.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-22-2014, 07:53 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,015

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagan View Post
One cannot kill a citizen of the state, as that violates law, violating another near-universal principle. A foetus or embryo is not yet a citizen of the state, or a recognised entity verified by another state or body, according to both tradition and law, and hence, has no protection.
Ah. We'd only be able to target non-citizens, I suppose.

Quote:
A foetus or embryo is not afforded this protection because it is commonly accepted, and has been for centuries, that an unborn human is not yet a person, that is, not yet living
"Not yet living", you say.

I'm going to give you a moment to recant of that ridiculous claim.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-22-2014, 08:03 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
That's your reason? So, it would be undone if you ever encountered a mother who did want to do away with her pre-2-year-old child?



You can sedate anyone and kill them painlessly, so that shouldn't factor in.
Let's say that a women goes through labor, has their baby, and decides that it's best for the baby to die rather than to be adopted or raised by themselves. It's not really an abortion anymore, but I would allow it. So long as it's a painless death it's fine by me. That said, I highly doubt a case like this would come up.

I do believe it's immoral to kill a toddler, though. From age 2 on that child has already begun to think cognitively and has their own personality, their own being. They are a true person. To kill them then is murder.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:41 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

If abortion isn't wrong than how can we justify any sort of morals and say anything is wrong? If a fetus isn't a human then how do we justify the worthiness of any human life from infancy to seniors? I don't think many of you realize how you can justify pretty much anything if you are determined enough too. It doesn't mean you should. That is where introspection comes in.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:45 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,118

Runes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
If abortion isn't wrong than how can we justify any sort of morals and say anything is wrong? If a fetus isn't a human then how do we justify the worthiness of any human life from infancy to seniors? I don't think many of you realize how you can justify pretty much anything if you are determined enough too. It doesn't mean you should. That is where introspection comes in.
If it's okay to force a lady to give birth, why isn't it okay for people to force healthy people to donate organs?

People are dying right?
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:47 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
If abortion isn't wrong than how can we justify any sort of morals and say anything is wrong? If a fetus isn't a human then how do we justify the worthiness of any human life from infancy to seniors? I don't think many of you realize how you can justify pretty much anything if you are determined enough too. It doesn't mean you should. That is where introspection comes in.
I'm sorry, I thought conservatives valued free-will and independence? Am I missing something here? Aren't you trying to push your morals on everyone else?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:51 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
If it's okay to force a lady to give birth, why isn't it okay for people to force healthy people to donate organs?

People are dying right?
No one is forcing women to give birth. People want to stop them from terminating their off-spring after they forced into the world. Why wouldn't morally conscious people want to stop this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
I'm sorry, I thought conservatives valued free-will and independence? Am I missing something here? Aren't you trying to push your morals on everyone else?
The same reason the abolitionists forced people to stop owning slaves. Your freedom ends as soon as it infringes on another person's freedom. In this case it is the most important freedom of them all. The right to life.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:55 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,118

Runes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufin View Post
I'm sorry, I thought conservatives valued free-will and independence? Am I missing something here? Aren't you trying to push your morals on everyone else?
In her opinion this is akin to slavery and thus everyone needs to change.

Nevermind any indications that having anti-abortion laws will only make abortions unsafe.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
No one is forcing women to give birth.

People want to stop them from terminating their off-spring after they forced into the world. Why wouldn't morally conscious people want to stop this?



The same reason the abolitionists forced people to stop owning slaves. Your freedom ends as soon as it infringes on another person's freedom. In this case it is the most important freedom of them all. The right to life.
1. That is literally exactly what is happening.

Quote:
a Texas lawmaker told a woman who made the difficult choice to terminate a non-viable pregnancy that she should have carried the fetus to term anyway — even though an MRI had already revealed that he was missing a large part of his brain and didn’t have much chance of survival.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013...abortion-bill/


2. Because 'saving' a life only to pay no attention to it after it's born is -more- reprehensible to me.

3. I stand by the bodily autonomy argument. You cannot infringe on the mother's right to her body.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-22-2014, 09:57 PM
PajamaSalad PajamaSalad is offline

Elune
PajamaSalad's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Undisclosed location in the Universe.
Posts: 42,139

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
In her opinion this is akin to slavery and thus everyone needs to change.

Nevermind any indications that having anti-abortion laws will only make abortions unsafe.
The bolded is a better argument but I am still extremely skeptical. The amount of abortions since Roe Vs Wade is very high(over 50 million) and in some states like North Dakota they only have one abortion clinic. The culture and society boycotts doctors that perform them and they protest at them and that kills all their business. It is almost de-facto forbidden.

The DoD bans abortions except in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother on military bases. Tricare will not pay for it even if you go off base. I think this potential issue is over blown.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-22-2014, 10:03 PM
Eagan Eagan is offline

Eternal
Eagan's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,136

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
"Not yet living", you say.

I'm going to give you a moment to recant of that ridiculous claim.
"Living" in the sense of "experiencing", that is, living in a human sense, and not in a mechanical sense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
If abortion isn't wrong than how can we justify any sort of morals and say anything is wrong? If a fetus isn't a human then how do we justify the worthiness of any human life from infancy to seniors? I don't think many of you realize how you can justify pretty much anything if you are determined enough too. It doesn't mean you should. That is where introspection comes in.
We can't say anything is "really wrong". We don't have answers to these questions, never have, and never will. That's why it is pointless to get bogged down in what is "right" and "wrong". We can't justify any morals, nor can we justify the worthiness of any human life. These are things left to God, it seems, as humans haven't had much luck figuring such stuff out. We should not worry about justification and thinking. Instead, we should just go with our guts. That's as close as we can get to God's decision-making, as it is an innate part of us we can't suppress. Differently people's guts say different things, but nevertheless, it seems most true to God's creation if we all do what our God-given intuitive sense asks us to do.

Last edited by Eagan; 01-22-2014 at 10:09 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-22-2014, 10:16 PM
Omacron Omacron is offline


Omacron's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 34,372
BattleTag: Omacron#1477

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
If abortion isn't wrong than how can we justify any sort of morals and say anything is wrong?
If their effects are contrary to their intentions and/or demonstrably a net negative for society.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-22-2014, 10:19 PM
Rufin Rufin is offline

Eternal
Rufin's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,630
BattleTag: Rufin#1220

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
The same reason the abolitionists forced people to stop owning slaves. Your freedom ends as soon as it infringes on another person's freedom. In this case it is the most important freedom of them all. The right to life.
Because the removal of a parasite that will live its own wretched and tortured life after halting the life of its mother is the same as slavery. Right.

Which is more valuable? A blank slate that needs to be taught everything and costs thousands of dollars to be even raised somewhat succesfully at the cost of their mother's own acceleration, or someone already past the critical period, already taught, already on their way to a succesful life in society?

Are you willing to make that gamble? Do you want to go to the ghetto and tell me all those single mothers working three jobs are better off now with their children than they would be without them? Is society better off with all the unwanted children roaming the streets? I thought you said that street gangs were one of the largest problems for inner city crime?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpokeking View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pajamasalad View Post
Shut up your nipples are useless.
I'm a bit slow, but it's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-22-2014, 10:31 PM
Erthad Erthad is offline

Elune
Erthad's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stromgarde
Posts: 9,549
BattleTag: Erthad #1438

Default

A fetus is not a parasite. Stop using buzz words.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
barongrackle is right!, inappropriately named, morally indefensible, not done yet, population control

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.