I'm not the one saying women are useless. Women are saying they are useless.
You may get an argument from the ones who think they are multi purpose!
I'm not the one saying women are useless. Women are saying they are useless.
So you are AOK with a wolf cull then .I don't differentiate between human and other life forms. I don't see humans as being any more important than any other. We kill billions of animal and plant life without thought. I don't hold abortion any different than killing a cow or a chicken. I have no emotional attachment to any of it. All life is sacred but it is not up to me to decide who is right or wrong in any of this. That responsibility lies with the one making the decision and performing the action.
If they could think for themselves they'd be able to raise a child without batting an eyelash.
yeah, really interesting reveals on some peopleWhen a nickel in the vacuum rings,
A soul from purgatory springs.
Cleanliness is next to godliness, Sal.
And how about trophy hunting of grizzly bear do you have an opinion on that ?
That I have to disagree with, We've raise three and am in the process of raising two more and sometimes you are batting more than eyelashes. Just between peer pressure, the internet and their own inherent stubbornness, your work is cut out for you. For a woman alone it would be formidable.
or the living room rug, that's a little different, go ahead and hang the horns on the wall, but they don't make you a better man!
You kill an animal for a "rug" only and leave the meat to rot, then that is no different than just hanging the antlers "on the wall". Unless we are talking about a carnivore cull(wolves, coyotes, etc.), but Bear, Deer, Elk, Moose, etc, you damn well better be eating that meat.
All part of life.
I thought I mentioned "food".
Now having said that if if the animal is for some practical use like food, clothing or the living room rug, that's a little different,
But sometimes an insurmountable part. -![]()
here's what you said....with my emphasis.
The "or" makes it exclusive, not inclusive. What you wrote means a Living room rug alone is good enough reason to kill an animal.
Nothing is "insurmountable".
You're a pain in the A$$, Gerry. I never said if it was to be used for the living room rug it couldn't be used for food too. I'm the last person that agrees with meat being left to rot.
Then you would support a law prohibiting late term abortions aside from the reasons you have mentioned. As they do not occur you would clearly support such a restriction.The title of this thread should be "This poll is not based on ethics - it is based on political mischief".
.
Once again, late-term abortions in Canada are not performed by licenced doctors on whim but because the foetus is not viable, the life of the mother is imperilled, or both.
,
How do you figure? I'm pro-choice, by which I mean "it's up to woman that's pregnant, and none of your, my, or anybody else's damn business."You really do make a good point. "Pro-choice" is just another phrase meaning "fence sitting". -![]()
I love the way folks invoke the "old days" in the abortion debate. If anybody DARED to inquire into whether James Madison's daughter may or may not be expecting, married or not, he'd meet them at the door with a horse-pistol in hand.Those opposed to abortion, per se, use late-term abortions to agrue ad absurdum to silence those who point out nuance in the debate. Are you arguing that Trudeau or the NDP favour gratuitous late-term abortions?
Goober?
Those opposed to abortion, per se, use late-term abortions to agrue ad absurdum to silence those who point out nuance in the debate. Are you arguing that Trudeau or the NDP favour gratuitous late-term abortions?
Goober?
Then write what you mean.
JT has already made it perfectly clear that he has no problem with a woman getting an abortion whenever and for what ever reason.