Triggered: Stories to make you mad.

Started by cdtm922 pages
Originally posted by Surtur
What do you mean, are you talking about when it comes to abortions he said if a girl is pregnant by an older man abortion is more acceptable?

He was talking about the teacher with a minor, when a reporter asked him if it would make any difference if their sex's were reversed.

He essentially said, hell yeah, it would make a difference. An older man with a minor is much worse then this woman with a young stud.

Originally posted by cdtm
He was talking about the teacher with a minor, when a reporter asked him if it would make any difference if their sex's were reversed.

He essentially said, hell yeah, it would make a difference. An older man with a minor is much worse then this woman with a young stud.

Yeah that's b*tch slap worthy BS. Either a teacher f*cking someone younger is okay or it's not. Whether the teacher has a dick or vagina is irrelevant. Same goes for the student.

Originally posted by cdtm
The critical difference:

It doesn't cost the state nearly as much to fund abortion clinics, as it does to take care of someone else's kid.

That's all they really care about, making sure anyone but them is on the hook. (And to be fair, they do a shit poor job of it, when forced to.)

If a man wants it aborted and she wants to keep it, he should be free and clear.

Like Surt said: his money, his choice.

If she decides to keep it, her becoming a charge of the state (welfare) is her fault, not the man's.

Originally posted by cdtm
He essentially said, hell yeah, it would make a difference. An older man with a minor is much worse then this woman with a young stud.

I agree and I outlined the biological reasons why.

It's medical science, b*tch. Can't get around it.

Originally posted by Surtur
'My money, my choice': Comedian Dave Chappelle tells audience that if women have a right to 'kill' their babies, men can 'abandon 'em'

Oh shit, great point. His money, his choice. Boom. Can't argue against it if you are pro choice.


I've been saying this for a while now kek.

If the life of the state is involved then it becomes an issue. That's America's law of the land.
The courts are bound to rule on this.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If a man wants it aborted and she wants to keep it, he should be free and clear.

Like Surt said: his money, his choice.

If she decides to keep it, her becoming a charge of the state (welfare) is her fault, not the man's.

Bingo, his money his choice. Ain't no arguing against it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If a man wants it aborted and she wants to keep it, he should be free and clear.

Like Surt said: his money, his choice.

If she decides to keep it, her becoming a charge of the state (welfare) is her fault, not the man's.

Yeah, but this is the government we're talking about. They could care less about right and wrong, they just care about who foots the bill.

That's why they pressure mothers to find someone, ANYONE, to label as the father. It's the same reason a non biological, unmarried sugar daddy could be legally on the hook.

Actually at the core we're talking about pro choice people who spout this "her body her choice" stuff. I'm guessing most of them would not be on board with "his money his choice" and it wouldn't be because of government spending. It'd be because they legit feel he owes it to the woman and child he didn't want(but she doesn't owe life to the child, weird).

Originally posted by Surtur
Actually at the core we're talking about pro choice people who spout this "her body her choice" stuff. I'm guessing most of them would not be on board with "his money his choice" and it wouldn't be because of government spending. It'd be because they legit feel he owes it to the woman and child he didn't want(but she doesn't owe life to the child, weird).

That's because you can no more legally make a woman abort without consent then you could remove a kidney.

But there are no such protections against forced child support.

It's not fair, but it's pragmatic of the government to force the dude to pay up wherever they could, while hoping the mother decides to sort the problem out by visiting a local PP clinic.

And if they agree with it I don't want to hear a peep about equality, etc.

There is some equality bill the left are whining over, Taylor Swift whined over it. That's a big "no" because this ain't equality lol.

Legalities aside, you simply can't agree with "her body her choice" and be against "his money his choice" without being a hypocrite.

Try to have an open mind about what I say.
Isn't the right to abort really about the mothers connection to the child and herself and her unborn agreeing on the abortion.
The union of sex of the three of the people Father, Mother and Child.

If you wanna abort go for it, you just shouldn't feel you have the right to abort but also the right to have the kid and demand money from the guy even if he didn't want the kid. Momma can't have all the power and then once the kid pops out suddenly now it's everyones problem.

"If you can kill this motherf*cker I can at least abandon him". Bwahaha, Chappelle is f*cking killing it with the truth bombs in his latest stand up special on netflix 😆

"And if I'm wrong, maybe we're wrong". Boom. No wonder snowflakes are so up in arms over his latest special. Fee fee's being stomped all over with cold hard truths that are also funny and point out their absurd hypocrisy? Dayum.

I am against abortion. Some try to kill kids like in Moses day.
It's a real issue. I think talking is a good idea.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
I am against abortion. Some try to kill kids like in Moses day.
It's a real issue. I think talking is a good idea.

Not against nor for it.

But I do think responsibility or lack of it plays a big part.

Then again, Sanger wanted to wipe my kind from the US, and years after her death, her legacy carries on. And we say Hitler was evil.

I feel like if one person can shirk responsibility, why not both?

I have yet to see anyone give me a valid reason why momma can shirk it, but not papa. Anyone care to try? This will be good 🙂

Originally posted by SquallX
Not against nor for it.

But I do think responsibility or lack of it plays a big part.

Then again, Sanger wanted to wipe my kind from the US, and years after her death, her legacy carries on. And we say Hitler was evil.

The eugenics movement was very much supported by the left. One of the last laws forcing sterilization of "feeble minded" people was pushed by a statist judge (Oliver Wendell Holmes, if I'm not mistaken), and was on the books until the 1970's.

There is a bust of Sanger in the Smithsonian.

Why has the left not demanded it get taken down?

The Breath of life should never be snuffed out.
I called my congress women once to protest taking people off life support.
It is inherantly wrong.