I think we are about to see a lot of abortion visuals from the pro-life crowd.

FAUlty Gator

HR Legend
Oct 27, 2017
28,654
31,862
113
Limbs, faces, heads, etc. being ripped off of fetuses and forcing Dems to defend it. There’s a reason the pro-choice crowd doesn’t want brochures of that stuff being handed out to patients or billboards of it on highways. And I get it. Arms, faces and legs signify “human being” to most people. I’m guessing we are gonna be seeing more of that stuff than we’ve ever seen before.

I could be wrong. But I imagine the campaign is coming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkFan1298

IA_HAWKI

HR MVP
Dec 1, 2021
1,264
2,262
113
14914341.jpg
 

kwik44

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Mar 6, 2003
9,366
6,151
113
The visual of a forceps detaching each single limb is what gets me. Freaking disgusting.

Here's an interesting video.

 
Last edited:

Keehawk

HR All-American
May 24, 2011
4,235
3,718
113
Won't make a difference. There was video released a few years ago of them selling dead baby parts and the left was fine with it because they weren't being sold for a profit. As if the profit is what was wrong with that situation.
 

blhawk

HR All-American
Oct 30, 2001
4,881
6,017
113
Won't make a difference. There was video released a few years ago of them selling dead baby parts and the left was fine with it because they weren't being sold for a profit. As if the profit is what was wrong with that situation.
No. The left is completely disgusted by the exploitation of one the toughest and often most desperate decisions someone can make by manipulative little bitches like yourself, doobs. Mostly for political purposes. You turds aren't nearly as bothered by starving and diseased/dying actual human kids as you vote against their meal programs and strip away their parent's health care. Tons of disturbing images of that that shouldn't be exploited either, simpleton. Eat shit
 
Last edited:

FlickShagwell

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jun 16, 2003
39,317
63,252
113
Omaha, NE
Limbs, faces, heads, etc. being ripped off of fetuses and forcing Dems to defend it. There’s a reason the pro-choice crowd doesn’t want brochures of that stuff being handed out to patients or billboards of it on highways. And I get it. Arms, faces and legs signify “human being” to most people. I’m guessing we are gonna be seeing more of that stuff than we’ve ever seen before.

I could be wrong. But I imagine the campaign is coming.
They need to rub pictures of the Sandy Hook crime scene in gun nuts’ faces then. It would be every bit as tasteless.
 

binsfeldcyhawk2

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 13, 2006
22,977
29,797
113
I had to watch an abortion (not live you sickos) in my ninth grade Biblical Literature class. It’s something I still can’t eradicate from my brain 40+ years later. Gruesome.
I’m pro choice but don’t mind limitations….

That said I don’t ever want to see “the sausage getting made”. Maybe I should….but really don’t want to.
 

kwik44

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Mar 6, 2003
9,366
6,151
113
No. The left is completely disgusted by the exploitation of one the toughest and often most desperate decisions someone can make by manipulative little bitches like yourself, doobs. Mostly for political purposes. You turds aren't nearly as bothered by starving and diseased/dying actual human kids as you vote against their meal programs and strip away their parent's health care. Tons of disturbing images of that that shouldn't be exploited either, simpleton. Eat shit
Yep, don't care about our own, yet no prob Bob sending 10's of billions overseas at the moment.
 

FAUlty Gator

HR Legend
Oct 27, 2017
28,654
31,862
113
Yeah. Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves.
Unless at the last minute mom decides she wants it aborted. Then it’s the left (especially in Virginia) that is OK with killing the baby. Poor kids, can’t catch a break either way.
 

Huey Grey

HR Legend
Jan 15, 2013
47,424
66,629
113
Rs have been putting out these images for decades. I imagine the amount of impact they can have is already close to being maxed out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlickShagwell

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,269
38,413
113
Unless at the last minute mom decides she wants it aborted. Then it’s the left (especially in Virginia) that is OK with killing the baby. Poor kids, can’t catch a break either way.
Where is this possible? I'm betting if it is it involves threats to the mother if it does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3boysmom

FAUlty Gator

HR Legend
Oct 27, 2017
28,654
31,862
113
Where is this possible? I'm betting if it is it involves threats to the mother if it does.
You don’t remember the big hubbabaloo with the lady politician from Virginia who put forward the bill that would kill a live baby?
 

globalhawk

HR All-American
Dec 16, 2003
4,209
4,479
113
Unless at the last minute mom decides she wants it aborted. Then it’s the left (especially in Virginia) that is OK with killing the baby. Poor kids, can’t catch a break either way.
You better have something to back this up.
 

FAUlty Gator

HR Legend
Oct 27, 2017
28,654
31,862
113
You better have something to back this up.
Weird how you didn’t ask Bio for something on his “Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves” post. But are demanding proof of something that has actually happened in response.

You need to either pay more attention or quit ignoring shot when Dems do it. I’m tired of educating you every time I post about something that has already been in and out of the news and on here. Where do you think the term “infanticide” has been heard lately?

Here’s some nuggets…




The controversy has centered on a provision concerning third-trimester abortions. Under current Virginia law, in order for a patient to terminate a pregnancy in the third trimester, three doctors must certify that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause the patient’s death or “substantially and irremediably impair” her mental or physical health. The new bill would reduce the number of doctors to one, and remove the “substantially and irremediably” qualifier — abortions would be allowed in cases where a mother’s mental or physical health is threatened, even if the damage might not be irreversible.

The bill began inspiring outcry among abortion opponents nationwide after its sponsor, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, said in a committee hearing on Monday that it would technically allow abortion until the point of birth, if a doctor agreed it was necessary.

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Some took Northam’s comments as an endorsement of infanticide. “In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) in a statement on Wednesday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 86Hawkeye

globalhawk

HR All-American
Dec 16, 2003
4,209
4,479
113
Weird how you didn’t ask Bio for something on his “Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves” post. But are demanding proof of something that has actually happened in response.

You need to either pay more attention or quit ignoring shot when Dems do it. I’m tired of educating you every time I post about something that has already been in and out of the news and on here. Where do you think the term “infanticide” has been heard lately?

Here’s some nuggets…




The controversy has centered on a provision concerning third-trimester abortions. Under current Virginia law, in order for a patient to terminate a pregnancy in the third trimester, three doctors must certify that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause the patient’s death or “substantially and irremediably impair” her mental or physical health. The new bill would reduce the number of doctors to one, and remove the “substantially and irremediably” qualifier — abortions would be allowed in cases where a mother’s mental or physical health is threatened, even if the damage might not be irreversible.

The bill began inspiring outcry among abortion opponents nationwide after its sponsor, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, said in a committee hearing on Monday that it would technically allow abortion until the point of birth, if a doctor agreed it was necessary.

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Some took Northam’s comments as an endorsement of infanticide. “In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) in a statement on Wednesday.
What percentage of infants are born DURING abortion?
 

globalhawk

HR All-American
Dec 16, 2003
4,209
4,479
113
Weird how you didn’t ask Bio for something on his “Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves” post. But are demanding proof of something that has actually happened in response.

You need to either pay more attention or quit ignoring shot when Dems do it. I’m tired of educating you every time I post about something that has already been in and out of the news and on here. Where do you think the term “infanticide” has been heard lately?

Here’s some nuggets…




The controversy has centered on a provision concerning third-trimester abortions. Under current Virginia law, in order for a patient to terminate a pregnancy in the third trimester, three doctors must certify that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause the patient’s death or “substantially and irremediably impair” her mental or physical health. The new bill would reduce the number of doctors to one, and remove the “substantially and irremediably” qualifier — abortions would be allowed in cases where a mother’s mental or physical health is threatened, even if the damage might not be irreversible.

The bill began inspiring outcry among abortion opponents nationwide after its sponsor, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, said in a committee hearing on Monday that it would technically allow abortion until the point of birth, if a doctor agreed it was necessary.

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Some took Northam’s comments as an endorsement of infanticide. “In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) in a statement on Wednesday.
FYI - You are a crybaby
 

Huey Grey

HR Legend
Jan 15, 2013
47,424
66,629
113
Weird how you didn’t ask Bio for something on his “Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves” post. But are demanding proof of something that has actually happened in response.

You need to either pay more attention or quit ignoring shot when Dems do it. I’m tired of educating you every time I post about something that has already been in and out of the news and on here. Where do you think the term “infanticide” has been heard lately?

Here’s some nuggets…




The controversy has centered on a provision concerning third-trimester abortions. Under current Virginia law, in order for a patient to terminate a pregnancy in the third trimester, three doctors must certify that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause the patient’s death or “substantially and irremediably impair” her mental or physical health. The new bill would reduce the number of doctors to one, and remove the “substantially and irremediably” qualifier — abortions would be allowed in cases where a mother’s mental or physical health is threatened, even if the damage might not be irreversible.

The bill began inspiring outcry among abortion opponents nationwide after its sponsor, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, said in a committee hearing on Monday that it would technically allow abortion until the point of birth, if a doctor agreed it was necessary.

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Some took Northam’s comments as an endorsement of infanticide. “In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) in a statement on Wednesday.
I don't get it. A doctor still had to sign off in your example and the health of the mother had to be factored in. This seems completely reasonable to me. What was unreasonable was requiring three doctors to sign off on it. That is overkill.
 

globalhawk

HR All-American
Dec 16, 2003
4,209
4,479
113
I don't get it. A doctor still had to sign off in your example and the health of the mother had to be factored in. This seems completely reasonable to me. What was unreasonable was requiring three doctors to sign off on it. That is overkill.
He didn't read the articles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL

Keehawk

HR All-American
May 24, 2011
4,235
3,718
113
No. The left is completely disgusted by the exploitation of one the toughest and often most desperate decisions someone can make by manipulative little bitches like yourself, doobs. Mostly for political purposes. You turds aren't nearly as bothered by starving and diseased/dying actual human kids as you vote against their meal programs and strip away their parent's health care. Tons of disturbing images of that that shouldn't be exploited either, simpleton. Eat shit

Yeah. Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves.
Drink x2
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,269
38,413
113
Come up with some new material. Or, better yet, just STFU. It's clear that you've got nothing to respond with so you try to trivialize the comment rather than address the fact that the opposition to every program that could help kids become productive members of society always come from Republicans.
 

joelbc1

HR King
Gold Member
Sep 5, 2007
71,626
36,385
113
you can’t always get what you want!
Limbs, faces, heads, etc. being ripped off of fetuses and forcing Dems to defend it. There’s a reason the pro-choice crowd doesn’t want brochures of that stuff being handed out to patients or billboards of it on highways. And I get it. Arms, faces and legs signify “human being” to most people. I’m guessing we are gonna be seeing more of that stuff than we’ve ever seen before.

I could be wrong. But I imagine the campaign is coming.
It is the only effective weapon these right-wing morons have! Understand, 65-75% of Americans believe abortion should be available to all citizens. Only the phuquin' wing-nuts and evangelical Christians who care nothing about babies after they are born support this change (if made by the SC).
 

Keehawk

HR All-American
May 24, 2011
4,235
3,718
113
Come up with some new material. Or, better yet, just STFU. It's clear that you've got nothing to respond with so you try to trivialize the comment rather than address the fact that the opposition to every program that could help kids become productive members of society always come from Republicans.
Any time anyone says BuT ThEy DoNt cArE AbOut ThE kid AfTeR they're BorN gets a drink because it's ****ing stupid to not acknowledge the fact that Christians and Christian organizations give tons and TONS of money and time to take care of the needy. So drink your drink and stfu.
 

Keehawk

HR All-American
May 24, 2011
4,235
3,718
113
It is the only effective weapon these right-wing morons have! Understand, 65-75% of Americans believe abortion should be available to all citizens. Only the phuquin' wing-nuts and evangelical Christians who care nothing about babies after they are born support this change (if made by the SC).
That number is made up
 

joelbc1

HR King
Gold Member
Sep 5, 2007
71,626
36,385
113
you can’t always get what you want!
That number is made up
CNN poll, 1/22:
69% "keep as is"
30% outlaw abortion.......
a Gallop poll, 5/20...
80% believe abortion should be legal to some degree and Roe v. Wade be kept intact....
PEW has a couple of polls...one by age grp. and both polls show roughly the same numbers....about 60-40 for abortion/Roe v. Wade...

NOW,,,,,the numbers as to the "morality" of abortion are much closer.....(and you can put me into that catagory, too....I find the act reprehensible but I find the right to decide much more sacred to a constitutional republic)........I truly believe this a decision for the mother and her physician to make.......Now, if the individual state wants to find the father (DNA testing is damn near fool=proof) and have him actively support the child I might consider a change of mind....but we all know this is never going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu1jreed