[quote]Oleena wrote:
I wouldn’t consider it my equal[/quote]
Why does someone need to be considered your equal to deserve protection or rights?
If I get enough people together and convince them you aren’t our equal (lets say because you are a woman, and I am a man), should I be able to do whatever I want with you?
I don’t consider most young children my equals. They don’t have the same kind of awareness and understanding that I do. Does that mean they are not worthy of protection?
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So you never have to look up to the top, again and again after there has been quote after quote? Plus you have still yet to answer, where is this supposed rule? I am honestly asking!
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
But where is this rule you speak of? And see how easily you can identify which portion I say? Watch out I might have to clean this up! O M G !
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Down here. At the bottom. Where it should be.[/quote]
[/quote]
The different font color isn’t identification enough? I’m not being hostile, you’re just wrong and a bad person for it.[/quote]
[/quote]
No its not, because if you read a longer post where several people have quoted each other it is no longer in a specific order.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[/quote]
I think I understand your anger. It must sting to realize you’re the tool of collectivism.
You mean people would have to understand the actual event? Or please phase differently.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
"So you can understand what you are saying when you are pro-choice, I simply ask three things: one, what are the unborn?
Secondly, what makes humans valuable in the first place? Are they valuable intrinsically or are people only valuable because of some acquired property?
And third, what is our duty? "
These question’s answers will in no way help you reduce abortion because you need large amounts of people to buy into the same answer, and you are not going to get anywhere close to the same answer from even small groups to those questions.[/quote]
I honestly ask Olee, please describe the event that christens rights upon an individual.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
The truth is, if someone was able to pull a fetus out at 4 weeks and suspend it right there at that stage for the rest of it’s life, I wouldn’t consider it my equal in terms of being a living human. If they pulled it out a two weeks, and kept it alive for 30 years at the two week stage, I really wouldn’t consider it an equal in terms of deserving of rights. It seems to me that a great ape or a dolfin would have hundreds of times more awareness and right to life than a two week fetus being suspended at that stage for 30 years. This may seem like a straw argument because fetuses have the potential to grow, but many on here are arguing that even without potential taken into consideration, a fetus deserves equal rights. This is my argument that it doesn’t. [/quote]
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[/quote]
I think I understand your anger. It must sting to realize you’re the tool of collectivism.[/quote]
holy shit you’re unreal…you do understand that if a person isnt a conservative that they arent necessarily libertarians or if you dont support the right that doesnt mean your a leftist…there are people in between that support both sides of the argument…you sound like those brainwashed propaganda pushing tools on fox news blaming the left and libertarians for everything thats wrong with society
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[/quote]
I think I understand your anger. It must sting to realize you’re the tool of collectivism.[/quote]
I am not angry.
But if the choice is left or right wing collectivism I would indeed choose left wing collevtivism.
If I need to be a slave, I would rather be a slave with lenient masters.
Mak - these are YOUR words, unedited except to highlight and underline the words YOU typed and are key to your argument. See quote box below -
Alcohol and tobacco are choices, I whole heartily agree. Hence the prohibition of alcohol failed so miserably, because they are CHOICES.
People like yourself who believe the murder of a defenseless child is a choice, that is because you are being willfully ignorant, you and the people who are pro-choice. How and why do you think the Germans massacred the Jews with such fervor, and with with the majority of the population being on board? Because they were as willfully ignorant about a population of human beings. I am grateful the era is behind us yet now you believe the slaughter of an embryo is justified because the screams are silent in your ears. The screams of the human beings are silent therefore you try and justify their slaughter? What the fuck Mak?
Yes you provided a different method of birth control. Yet there are loopholes big enough in your theory, I could drive a hummer through them. Yet when one child is massacred that is somehow justified because there was a fewer number, in theory. Yet Chile has successfully banned abortion for over TWO decades and you still want to jump and down, ranting 'I AM right! Your comeback was calling me a snowflake? Hate to ruin your slander but each child in the embryo stage is a unique snowflake and you want to kill them? Seriously Mak?
So because abortion is acceptable, please tell me when rights are christened upon an individual? An eight inch voyage down a canal? Well that simply cannot be the case because many children are born via a caesarean and at times even very premature. Do you agree a child doesn’t have rights until they are a few months old? If this or the previous is the case please provide verifiable, irrefutable evidence. If you would like any evidence from me, please ask. Each line you question, please.
[quote]ramrod63 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[/quote]
I think I understand your anger. It must sting to realize you’re the tool of collectivism.[/quote]
holy shit you’re unreal…you do understand that if a person isnt a conservative that they arent necessarily libertarians or if you dont support the right that doesnt mean your a leftist…there are people in between that support both sides of the argument…you sound like those brainwashed propaganda pushing tools on fox news blaming the left and libertarians for everything thats wrong with society[/quote]
Glad to hear from the partisan moderate.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let me guess, we need to spend a couple billion a year to find that one 12 year old who hasn’t heard of contraception. “Education.” Perhaps you mean mailing off a supply of rubbers to our children monthly, with instructions on alternative sex such as dry-humping.
You’re of the type who broke our moral culture in the first place. You’ve no real voice in this topic. You and the ephrems of the west have failed. You destroyed the family. You destroyed our demographic future. You destoyed communities of poor, and of the recently liberated. You destroyed prudence. You destroyed self-control. You destroyed public expectations and valuable social tools such as shame. Yet, you still think you have anything of any value to add? You’ve nothing to offer but vile and despicable ‘solutions’ to problems created by your own leftist claptrap. No thanks. [/quote]
Let me ask a more simple question. As a social libertarian, I too am probably somewhat “responsible” for all these horrors of which you speak. But libertarianism has always, ALWAYS preached personal responisibility.[/quote]
Libertarianism is more repugnant than leftism. At least the leftist understood what the breakdown of the traditional family, morals, and norms would bring. And they argued for it, used it, and cheered it on. Can’t say they’re stupid.
Meanwhile, libertarians are still repeating the same stupid social liberalism mantra. Congrats, you helped the left shape the perfect culture, the most needy of citizens, for an enduring nanny state. One which can’t be reigned in by any real measure–even in the face of soaring deficits. Libertarianism was still-born when it tried to merge social liberalism with market liberalism. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Libertarians talk out of both sides of their mouth, for no more than 10 seconds (if that) about morality and shameful behavior. “Well, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. But if you’re going to, don’t let anyone make you feel bad for doing it! Hyuck-hyuck!” The smallest government will always be possible with a prudent and highly conservative people. No less. Libertarianism is the indirect big-government philosophy of the incredibly short-sighted and stubbornly ignorant.[/quote]
Glad that you were ablr to burn your own strawman.
Must have felt good.
[/quote]
I think I understand your anger. It must sting to realize you’re the tool of collectivism.[/quote]
I am not angry.
But if the choice is left or right wing collectivism I would indeed choose left wing collevtivism.
If I need to be a slave, I would rather be a slave with lenient masters.
[/quote]
Don’t fear, then. You’ll most certainly get your preference.
I personally am neither particularly religious nor particularly political and am very much a “shades of gray” kind of guy. That being said I have a very difficult time following a rational line of thought that says that a fetus is not a person but only a lump of tissue. I mean, no one in their right mind would attempt to comfort a woman who had just had a miscarriage by saying “Don’t worry, it’s just a conglomerate of cells that are no longer viable, no biggie.” That would be cruel and absurd. However that reasoning seems to work on a national level regarding abortion. I honestly don’t get it, and as such I can’t help but believe that we are intentionally ending human lives, wholesale. I don’t know how to engage in a sober, reasonable discussion about how we might reduce the number of lives ended through education, contraception etc.
I also realize that it is extremely difficult to change or even consider changing the current legislation on the matter because it would require making some admissions that no one is prepared to make. I mean the only reason to disallow completely discretionary abortions is if fetuses are in fact people to some degree and how can we say that now, given how many we’ve “terminated”. Not to mention the fact that it is extremely convenient to have the option. I don’t know what the answer is, but it is an awful damn mess, that’s for sure. I know several women who have had abortions over the course of their lives, and I could not in good conscience call them murderers to their faces… Shit, I don’t know but it is definitely a mess.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Mak - these are YOUR words, unedited except to highlight and underline the words YOU typed and are key to your argument. See quote box below -
Alcohol and tobacco are choices, I whole heartily agree. Hence the prohibition of alcohol failed so miserably, because they are CHOICES.
People like yourself who believe the murder of a defenseless child is a choice, that is because you are being willfully ignorant, you and the people who are pro-choice. How and why do you think the Germans massacred the Jews with such fervor, and with with the majority of the population being on board? Because they were as willfully ignorant about a population of human beings. I am grateful the era is behind us yet now you believe the slaughter of an embryo is justified because the screams are silent in your ears. The screams of the human beings are silent therefore you try and justify their slaughter? What the fuck Mak?
Yes you provided a different method of birth control. Yet there are loopholes big enough in your theory, I could drive a hummer through them. Yet when one child is massacred that is somehow justified because there was a fewer number, in theory. Yet Chile has successfully banned abortion for over TWO decades and you still want to jump and down, ranting 'I AM right! Your comeback was calling me a snowflake? Hate to ruin your slander but each child in the embryo stage is a unique snowflake and you want to kill them? Seriously Mak?
So because abortion is acceptable, please tell me when rights are christened upon an individual? An eight inch voyage down a canal? Well that simply cannot be the case because many children are born via a caesarean and at times even very premature. Do you agree a child doesn’t have rights until they are a few months old? If this or the previous is the case please provide verifiable, irrefutable evidence. If you would like any evidence from me, please ask. Each line you question, please.
[/quote]
Experts attribute the decline in hospitalizations due to abortion during this period to the increased use of sterilization and antibiotics by illegal abortion providers, the increased availability of the abortifacient drug misoprostol, and the increased use of contraception.
– on Chile
So all they’ve done is teach illegal providers to do it safer or use non-surgical means. And the rest is due to… OH SHIT CONTRACEPTION USE?
Also, you are still missing the point, quite idiotically highlighting the wrong parts of what you decide to quote. I am pointing out that once something is ingrained into society, you are not going to get rid of it. You babble about Chile when they did it more than twenty years ago. It is not twenty years ago anymore. If you are to stupid to understand a very simple concept, then I’m done talking with you.
I have also not provided different methods of birth control, I’ve merely pointed out what is already there and advocated for advancements in male contraception.
I call you a snowflake, because it is glaringly obvious you want to be one. I want to kill embryos? That’s all you can muster? I offer something to steadily decrease abortions, and you say I want to kill them?
Nice.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
The only reason abortion would be allowed in this country, if the mother has a terminal reason AND there are two doctors who agree the child’s life needs to be snuffed out.[/quote]
Also this is a blatant lie. If you want to champion a country for its laws, learn the laws.
It was only before the ban that any woman whose life was in danger could ask to get an abortion, if she had the approval of two doctors. Abortion isn’t even allowed in cases of rape or incest. But you’d like that, wouldn’t you?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Experts attribute the decline in hospitalizations due to abortion during this period to the increased use of sterilization and antibiotics by illegal abortion providers, the increased availability of the abortifacient drug misoprostol, and the increased use of contraception.
– on Chile[/quote]
YOU think that you have to be the answer? Few problems 1) Have you ever been there and helped a woman to get an illegal abortion? I doubt it. I studied abroad there last year for four months. Of all the natives I met, I never heard any back alley options available, not that I was looking. I still have their contact info and I will ask them. 2) Is there any possibility banning abortion works? Or are people just scammin’ the system with misoprostol?
Remind me again where I have a problem with education? I do have a problem with contraception that aborts the fetus that has yet to implant in the uterine wall. Big difference there stud. But thank you for placing ideas in my post, let alone something I never said. 3) So ‘back alley abortions’ will cease and desist because you offer a male contraception? Do you honestly believe, let alone understand the words you type?
[quote]Also, you are still missing the point, quite idiotically highlighting the wrong parts of what you decide to quote. [/quote] Do you understand the POINT you describe and the adjectives YOU use? Apparently not. [quote]I am pointing out that once something is ingrained into society, you are not going to get rid of it.[/quote] But you want to educate them? Where is this NOT a contradiction? [quote]You babble about Chile when they did it more than twenty years ago. It is not twenty years ago anymore. If you are to stupid to understand a very simple concept, then I’m done talking with you.[/quote] You cite all these hypothetical problems as an argument because abortion is integrated, yet never have you cited a problem in Chile that exists because of the ban.
My apologies because I understand the English language, “birth control is an umbrella term for several techniques and methods used to prevent fertilization or to interrupt pregnancy at various stages” taken from wiki. Change the page if you feel so inclined and justified.
[quote]I call you a snowflake, because it is glaringly obvious you want to be one. I want to kill embryos? That’s all you can muster? I offer something to steadily decrease abortions, and you say I want to kill them?
Nice.[/quote]
I hate to surprise you, abortion results in the slaughter of an embryo, a fetus or a child. Insert what ever applicable adjective you would like, the results DO NOT change there buck o’.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Also this is a blatant lie. If you want to champion a country for its laws, learn the laws.[/quote]
My Bad, I actually set foot in the country versus reading a page.
There you go again, placing my views in your head, again you are mistaken.
Never once have you told me how NZ has implemented your ideas into their legislation. Yet you claim so much knowledge on you part. With no experience I might add, why is this the case?
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
self important drivel[/quote]
Done with you. You lied about Chiles abortion laws, you can’t read simple sentences, and you continually resort to emotion.
So you HAVE set foot in Chile? I have yet to hear back from my friends in Chile, yet you feel justified in spreading ignorance and NO solution to ending abortion? Interesting.
Where again is emotion I spread? Oh I care about ALL STAGES OF LIFE! You claim this is a bad thing? Well, I could care less about a guy in NZ and his ranting.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
in place of KD79s words, Mak claims self important drivel[/quote]
Done with you. You lied about Chiles abortion laws, you can’t read simple sentences, and you continually resort to emotion.[/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So you HAVE set foot in Chile?[/quote]
No, but I know enough to look up their laws before making false claims about them.
So you know all huh Mak? I will post after I hear back from my friends in Chile. I thought I understood the language well enough, yet my fault.
Your stance is for abortion and claim it does not involve killing a life. Yet you do NOT understand embryology. Interesting.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So you HAVE set foot in Chile?[/quote]
No, but I know enough to look up their laws before making false claims about them.[/quote]