Winners only.

[Jimi77]

Your constitutional argument shows your "work" for dhs was as far removed from any law enforcement work. Let me guess, uscis and you're an adjudications "officer."

Any law enforcement officer with real arrest authority or anyone with a criminal justice background knows better than to try piece meal the gibberish you just did.

No I wasn't law enforcement, luckily our discussion of abortion rights has nothing to with law enforcement...

 

[Jimi77]

This one is really hypocritical beyond belief.

We can rip a baby out limb by limb but you can’t refuse a needle!

Ironically this particular issue cuts both ways.

 

[RobGMN]

Says the guy who is 100% sure everyone in the US has the same opportunity as everyone else.
We do, that's why we live here.

Wrong. The lost lawsuits prove you are wrong. Citizens are intentionally denied opportunity. They sue. A court decides that they were indeed deprived of opportunity. Your claim is false.

The guy who thinks 99.4% of millions cannot be a whole number.
Not once did I make that claim.

Your "proof" that the news reports of "more than 99% were vaccinated" was a lie:
"How do you vaccinate part of a person? As in there is 1 person he is 99.4% vaccinated. Justify that." You could not understand or believe the statement that the number of people vaccinated could be more than 99%, but less than 100%.

The guy who thinks gender is sex.
Words have more than one meaning and can describe more than one thing. Before you speak, make sure we are talking about the same thing.

You don't get to make up definitions to suit your needs. Gender is not simply penis or v@gina, even though YOU feel that it is.

The guy who thinks you cannot have monoleaf springS.
Never said that either.

You sure did. I specifically pointed out that you can have a box full of individual monoleaf springs, and you argued against it. You also argued against Sloride for having a set of monoleaf springs on a vehicle. You also said the OED and Eastwood Spring got the definition wrong, and that General Motors calls a spring composed of more than one leaf "mono leaf" (which is not only wrong, but you failed to provide any proof of).
"Here is a god damn fact. General Motors calls it a fuucking monoleaf spring when the spring is one spring no matter how many pieces it consist of." And then you tried to backpedal by saying you post incorrect **** just to get a rise out of me and SloRide. Weak.

The guy who thinks you can’t calculate a percentage of any quantity less than 100.
That was your statement when you were "speaking for me" and trying to insult me.

Nope. I used 90 M&Ms as a sample quantity in discussing percentages and a majority that was less than 50%. You argued that the calculations required 100 M&Ms to figure percentages.

The guy who thinks an average is a number used for nefarious purposes.
It sure can be.

You said "are", not "can be". You also argued that an average does not actually exist (prior to explaining the "nefarious purpose" theory)." "average is only useful for lazy people simplifying numbers or for nefarious means" .

That rape does not happen unless he witnesses it.
Never made that claim either. Man, you are on a roll today.

You said it and I can quote it. Even your compatriots said you were wrong.
"I don't "demand" to see rape. I said if I didn't see it then I cannot convict based on hearsay." Also demonstrating you don't know what "hearsay" means.

The guy who thinks sexual identity is not controlled by the brain.
Again, never made that claim.

Afraid you did. Your words: "The brain is not a factor in sex."

The guy who thinks he is just as much an expert as anyone in any field.
If I have the same knowledge and obtained it the same way, I ask you what makes them an expert and not me. You couldn't figure that question out so you went back to your usual dumb ****.

So you admit your intelligence is so limited that you have to ask if there is a difference between you and say, Charles Darwin? Yeah, you definitely don't know what you don't know. That's a sign of low intelligence.

That sex is ONLY for procreation.
Never made that claim.

Actually, you made it twice, in two different posts. "When it comes to sexual intercourse we are no different than wild animals as it is for the same thing, reproduction." "Sex IS biologically just for reproduction."

And on, and on, and on.
A complete dope trying to suggest others are dumb.
Ironic.

You have listed several of your outright lies... let me guess, you won't back them up with factual proof either will you. Mind you your interpretations are not factual proof.


Feel free to point out which of these quotes of your words is a "lie". Or did you mean that you were lying when you posted all these things? [/QUOTE]

 

[Buck]

Ironically this particular issue cuts both ways.

Who’s body is the baby’s? What determines the difference between a baby’s body in the womb vs being in the outside air that determines the human rights for the baby?

 

[ThxOne]

Says the guy who is 100% sure everyone in the US has the same opportunity as everyone else.
We do, that's why we live here.

Wrong. The lost lawsuits prove you are wrong. Citizens are intentionally denied opportunity. They sue. A court decides that they were indeed deprived of opportunity. Your claim is false.

The guy who thinks 99.4% of millions cannot be a whole number.
Not once did I make that claim.

Your "proof" that the news reports of "more than 99% were vaccinated" was a lie:
"How do you vaccinate part of a person? As in there is 1 person he is 99.4% vaccinated. Justify that." You could not understand or believe the statement that the number of people vaccinated could be more than 99%, but less than 100%.

The guy who thinks gender is sex.
Words have more than one meaning and can describe more than one thing. Before you speak, make sure we are talking about the same thing.

You don't get to make up definitions to suit your needs. Gender is not simply penis or v@gina, even though YOU feel that it is.

The guy who thinks you cannot have monoleaf springS.
Never said that either.

You sure did. I specifically pointed out that you can have a box full of individual monoleaf springs, and you argued against it. You also argued against Sloride for having a set of monoleaf springs on a vehicle. You also said the OED and Eastwood Spring got the definition wrong, and that General Motors calls a spring composed of more than one leaf "mono leaf" (which is not only wrong, but you failed to provide any proof of).


The guy who thinks you can’t calculate a percentage of any quantity less than 100.
That was your statement when you were "speaking for me" and trying to insult me.

Nope. I used 90 M&Ms as a sample quantity in discussing percentages and a majority that was less than 50%. You argued that the calculations required 100 M&Ms to figure percentages.

The guy who thinks an average is a number used for nefarious purposes.
It sure can be.

You said "are", not "can be". You also argued that an average does not actually exist (prior to explaining the "nefarious purpose" theory)." "average is only useful for lazy people simplifying numbers or for nefarious means" .

That rape does not happen unless he witnesses it.
Never made that claim either. Man, you are on a roll today.

You said it and I can quote it. Even your compatriots said you were wrong.
"I don't "demand" to see rape. I said if I didn't see it then I cannot convict based on hearsay." Also demonstrating you don't know what "hearsay" means.

The guy who thinks sexual identity is not controlled by the brain.
Again, never made that claim.

Afraid you did. Your words: "The brain is not a factor in sex."

The guy who thinks he is just as much an expert as anyone in any field.
If I have the same knowledge and obtained it the same way, I ask you what makes them an expert and not me. You couldn't figure that question out so you went back to your usual dumb ****.

So you admit your intelligence is so limited that you have to ask if there is a difference between you and say, Charles Darwin? Yeah, you definitely don't know what you don't know. That's a sign of low intelligence.

That sex is ONLY for procreation.
Never made that claim.

Actually, you made it twice, in two different posts. "When it comes to sexual intercourse we are no different than wild animals as it is for the same thing, reproduction." "Sex IS biologically just for reproduction."

And on, and on, and on.
A complete dope trying to suggest others are dumb.
Ironic.

You have listed several of your outright lies... let me guess, you won't back them up with factual proof either will you. Mind you your interpretations are not factual proof.


Feel free to point out which of these quotes of your words is a "lie". Or did you mean that you were lying when you posted all these things?

It was so peacefully quiet when I sent you on that quest. You good now? You done finding **** that still doesn't prove you right because you can't comprehend what you read?

 

[ThxOne]

Here Rob... Comprehend this:

"That sex is ONLY for procreation.
Never made that claim.

Actually, you made it twice, in two different posts. "When it comes to sexual intercourse we are no different than wild animals as it is for the same thing, reproduction." "Sex IS biologically just for reproduction."

Do you understand this? Does this register in your brain? Can you read this????????

 

[RobGMN]

It was so peacefully quiet when I sent you on that quest. You good now? You done finding **** that still doesn't prove you right because you can't comprehend what you read?

Nice try, but just another one of your complete failures. Take a shot of vodka, it'll make you feel smarter while you get dumber.

 

[ThxOne]

Nice try, but just another one of your complete failures. Take a shot of vodka, it'll make you feel smarter while you get dumber.

I will get right on that... in the mean time, burn your GED... it is doing you NO good.

 

[RobGMN]

Here Rob... Comprehend this:

"That sex is ONLY for procreation.
Never made that claim.

Actually, you made it twice, in two different posts. "When it comes to sexual intercourse we are no different than wild animals as it is for the same thing, reproduction." "Sex IS biologically just for reproduction."

Do you understand this? Does this register in your brain? Can you read this????????

"just for reproduction."
Do you not understand what "just for" means? It means a sole purpose. "This piece of candy is here JUST FOR Bobby". This means the sole purpose the candy is there is for Bobby. Not Billy. Not Joey. JUST FOR Bobby.
When you say sex is JUST FOR reproduction, you are saying reproduction is the sole purpose.

Is English not your primary language? That would be a good explanation for you constantly posting things you do not seem to understand, then trying to create new meanings for it.

 

[YourNameHere]

 

[Jimi77]

All of them, by your standards.
COVID vax had far more research and testing than any of the vaxes us adults got as children.

Covid and the Covid Vax were more researched, studied and followed than anything in the history of mankind. Really the only thing we don't know is long term and only time will provide those answers. If current trends stay in place, it looks like the long term effects of Covid will be worse than the long term effects of the Vax.

Fast tracking a vax isn't new. They did the same with the Polio vaccine.

Something that often gets overlooked in the Covid debate is that although the vax wasn't great against Omicron, it was effective against the deadlier Delta variant creating the opportunity for these less deadly variants to be the dominate strains. Go Science!!!

 

[ThxOne]

"just for reproduction."
Do you not understand what "just for" means? It means a sole purpose. "This piece of candy is here JUST FOR Bobby". This means the sole purpose the candy is there is for Bobby. Not Billy. Not Joey. JUST FOR Bobby.
When you say sex is JUST FOR reproduction, you are saying reproduction is the sole purpose.

I really don't know how you completely ignore the largest text in that post. You have got to be the dumbest liberal I have ever interacted with. The word Biologically is in fact the most important part of that statement and you ignored it outright. No wonder you listen to these idiots in the government and so blindly follow them. You're a dumbasss. No if's and's or butts about it. You are mentally gone.

 

[Jimi77]

Seriously?!

You just defended experimenting on children, (that caused death) without parental consent, while KNOWN drugs existed that would have safe and effective. You are f u kd in the head.

You are no better than Mengele and you brag about working for DHS. Your clearance needs an obvious second review.

No I didn't defend experimenting on children without parental consent.

 

[RobGMN]

I really don't know how you completely ignore the largest text in that post. You have got to be the dumbest liberal I have ever interacted with. The word Biologically is in fact the most important part of that statement and you ignored it outright. No wonder you listen to these idiots in the government and so blindly follow them. You're a dumbasss. No if's and's or butts about it. You are mentally gone.

So you DIDN'T mean the "just for" part?
You feel no one is smart enough to comprehend you. Perhaps the problem is that you can't articulate a thought properly. People shouldn't HAVE to figure out what you WANT to convey. Just articulate it properly instead.

 

[Jimi77]

Who’s body is the baby’s? What determines the difference between a baby’s body in the womb vs being in the outside air that determines the human rights for the baby?

That's the million dollar question. We all draw that line where we see fit as individuals. Personally, I'd prefer not to draw that particular line for others or at least my lines would come with a lot of latitude. Furthermore, there is no question that woman's body is indeed her body.