TreeBeard

If you can’t understand the useage and definitions of words, and the fact that ‘they’ has been used as a singular since the 14th century, you may need some remedial schooling before you’re able to carry on a conversation about the definition of ‘they’. In simpler terms: pick up a bloody dictionary because you don’t seem to understand simple English.

You mischaracterize what MAID is insinuating that it is some bureaucrat deciding who dies. That’s simply stupid.

No, I would leave it between the woman and her doctor. No need for any government intervention whatsoever.

How long do you think it takes for charges to be pressed and these trials take? Months at a minimum? Years? So you want to wait years before a woman can abort? As I said earlier…. You’re missing any sense of how this could ever apply to the real world.

And if they are, you blame them!

I don’t care…. It’s between a woman and her doctor. There are plenty of medical “restrictions “ already in place in Canada on when and how to perform abortions. I certainly have nothing of value to add to a medical procedure any more than my opinion on when to amputate a leg. Then rapes will go up 4000%. Do you give them lie detector tests? It’s like you give zero thought to how any of this would work in the real world.

He’s comparing boot camp to what happened the the Deputy PM. Sounds like trying to justify bad behaviour by blaming the victim. That’s far from respecting women.

So a doctor and/or police, as long as the woman tells them she was raped would be enough for her to get an abortion? Do you give the woman a lie detector test? Your moral viewpoint equates to: murdering babies is ok sometimes. Murdering babies just because a woman is raped…. How do you people live with yourselves? That’s no excuse to murder babies! Next you’ll be allowing abortions on demand! It’s a slippery slope, y’know….

Answer the question…. Does a rapist need to be found guilty before an exception can be made and the woman can abort?

Yes…. people can and do change the meaning of words all the time. LOL. That’s what descriptive and not prescriptive means. seriously? This is the first you’re hearing of this?? LOL Well, back in the 14th century, it was used thusly. from Google: The Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf. I have no idea about the case you’re referring to, but I bet that guy was a real piece of shit who mentally abused his kid because he hates liberals and communists.

Summary: women, stop being such weaklings and thinking things like laws should protect you. It’s every person for themselves. Luckily, we’ve come a long ways in society since the 1800s…. well…. Not @Army Guy or this idiot who did the freaking out.

Well, we’re the same…. I just can understand why a woman would want an abortion for many reasons beyond rape. And I don’t judge her. But, for the rape exception, does someone have to be found guilty first?

So, you think abortion is murder…. and you think it’s ok for a woman to murder her baby as long as she was raped.

And if there is a lack of evidence of rape, but someone still did the raping, you would force a woman to carry a fetus. Do you think there should even be an exception for rape?

On your gender point - You’re comparing apples and bowling balls. It’s a nonsensical post. Who cares what gender someone identifies as? You’re free not to accept it, just like you’re free to tell two guys that, in your opinion, they’re not really married. But…. They’re still actually married. ? 2nd point - Anyone can change the language. Words are descriptive and not prescriptive. They change all the time spurred by the common usage by many different people.

You’re right. Totally silly hyperbole. There’s so much to criticize with those dummies that hyperbole is unnecessary.

A delete function would be helpful to get rid of accidental duplicates, or to merge posts after the fact.

Would you offer up your daughters to a mob to be sexually assaulted like Lot did to save some angels from being sodomized? I wouldn’t…. What do you think of Lot’s actions?

You’re right. That was the other guy. Since the government will not get out of the business of regulating marriage, do you think it should be open to gay people?

What precisely does this mean?

Duplicate

Why are you obsessed with what consenting adults do sexually?

Ok. Sounds good to me. But, you weren’t advocating that. You were advocating social engineering by the state by removing liberty from people YOU feel don’t deserve it based on some moral grounds.

No need. Supply addicts with free drugs. They’ll stop stealing my stuff…. They’ll need less emergency services… cops won’t need to be chasing them all over town as they steal as a means to feed their habit…. Save money on healthcare and policing… I do know that what we’re doing now has never worked.. so I’m willing to set aside my moral disgust with their behaviour and my moral indignation at these bums getting free stuff and just give them what they need for the greater good.

They definitely still are whacky conspiracy theories…. The FBI is out to get you…. It’s the new bogeyman of the conspiracy theorists. It used to be the CIA…. and for some here, it still is the CIA…. (Ask @Dougie93 about how the CIA is controlling Trudeau, or something).