Science > Abortion > MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts.
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" |
| Date: |
06 Jul 2006 01:12:47 AM |
| Object: |
MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:32:30 -0400,
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
---
RRR Cult lemmings.
Dumber than dirt. America's own version of the Taliban.
Selfishly, hatefully, and mindlessly supporting sociopathic
agendas that seek to destroy vital personal liberties of
millions of people. (That's as dumb as it GETS!!!)
And constantly proving that to everyone.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 07:33:02 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE! wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:32:30 -0400,
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 08:33:18 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE! wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:32:30 -0400,
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Yes, that's a strange idea indeed, and since it's not what Craig was
saying, it's a Winndbag Original(tm). Thanks for sharing your demented
thoughts, satan, err, I mean Winndbag.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 09:11:41 AM |
|
|
Pr0r3p wrote:
rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Yes, that's a strange idea indeed, and since it's not what Craig was
saying, it's a Winndbag Original(tm). Thanks for sharing your demented
thoughts, satan, err, I mean Winndbag.
Why don't you give us your interpretation of what Craig was saying,
Pr0r3p?
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 10:18:03 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Pr0r3p wrote:
wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Yes, that's a strange idea indeed, and since it's not what Craig was
saying, it's a Winndbag Original(tm). Thanks for sharing your demented
thoughts, satan, err, I mean Winndbag.
Why don't you give us your interpretation of what Craig was saying,
Pr0r3p?
I don't have the time or patience that's required to educate you and
I'm not going to delve into what would ultimately be nothing more than
a lesson in futility attempting to do so, Winndbag.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 09:34:13 PM |
|
|
Pr0r3p wrote:
rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:
Pr0r3p wrote:
rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Yes, that's a strange idea indeed, and since it's not what Craig was
saying, it's a Winndbag Original(tm). Thanks for sharing your demented
thoughts, satan, err, I mean Winndbag.
Why don't you give us your interpretation of what Craig was saying,
Pr0r3p?
I don't have the time or patience that's required to educate you and
I'm not going to delve into what would ultimately be nothing more than
a lesson in futility attempting to do so, Winndbag.
Wonderful, maybe I can educate you.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 10:45:58 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Pr0r3p wrote:
wrote:
Pr0r3p wrote:
wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
Now this is a very strange idea, that it is better to follow Satan,
produce unwanted children, kill them by abortion, and then say you have
done nothing wrong than to live a moral life, have children inside
marriage, and kill no one.
Yes, that's a strange idea indeed, and since it's not what Craig was
saying, it's a Winndbag Original(tm). Thanks for sharing your demented
thoughts, satan, err, I mean Winndbag.
Why don't you give us your interpretation of what Craig was saying,
Pr0r3p?
I don't have the time or patience that's required to educate you and
I'm not going to delve into what would ultimately be nothing more than
a lesson in futility attempting to do so, Winndbag.
Wonderful, maybe I can educate you.
No thanks, I prefer to deal in reality.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are some of the world's most IGNORANT louts. |
06 Jul 2006 01:20:50 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:32:30 -0400,
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
---
RRR Cult lemmings.
Dumber than dirt. America's own version of the Taliban.
Selfishly, hatefully, and mindlessly supporting sociopathic
agendas that seek to destroy vital personal liberties of
millions of people. (That's as dumb as it GETS!!!)
And constantly proving that to everyone.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: If your child's head falls off the tabletop, sue your abortionist for psychological damage to your child in having his head more than a few inches from his chest |
05 Aug 2006 06:18:48 PM |
|
|
Craig wants you to kill your own kids in the womb wrote:
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth.
So like magic, they just appear out of thin air?
And when the kids are kicking their mother's belly while
she's sitting there wondering what her kids will be like
when they grow up, and you tell her they don't actually
exist because "I said so, therefore they don't exist",
she should believe you and cram a vacume grinder into
their skull and suck her kid's brains out... just because
they "don't exist"?
Her child is the same child he was seconds before he moved
a few inches during birth, regardless of him being ground up
seconds later on his birthday due to his mother's uncaring
ignorance and disgust at being the mother of her own children.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Help to make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" |
|
| Title: Re: If your child's head falls off the tabletop, sue your abortionist for psychological damage to your child in having his head more than a few inches from his chest |
06 Aug 2006 01:03:06 AM |
|
|
The Bible Leaves Anti-Choice out in the Cold!
"Chris" said ---
"Sperm OR ova will never be anything more than sperm or ova
until they perish."
To which I (Craig Chilton) pointed out ---
"That's one if the BIGGEST *lies* of the Anti-Choicers, in their
sheer desperation to squirm out of seeing sperm and ova as EQUAL
in "defensibility" (or LACK thereof) to the z/e/f stages. The PROOF
that your statement just now is 100% bullcrap is all around us. More
than 6,000,000,000 times over. Every person alive today, and every
person who EVER lived, was once in the form of a sperm and ovum
that had not yet met, that simply carried out THEIR specific role of the
reproductive process. If ANY person's sperm OR ovum were to have
been killed while IN that stage -- Stage ONE of the reproductive
process... then THAT particular person would NEVER have been
born. As I pointed out before, EVERY sperm and ovum is a POTEN-
TIAL person... JUST as every zygote, embryo, or fetus is only a
POTENTIAL person.
"It's a VERY good thing that the Bible...
-- says NOT ONE WORD against abortion.
-- NEVER *defends* human entities prior to birth (except for the
single passage in which a fetus is regarded as PROPERTY,
and which includes the CONDONING of slavery).
-- reserves ALL of its defenses of human life for entities that
have been BORN (i.e., ACTUAL people).
-- makes it quite clear in its passages dealing with *birthrights*
that PERSONHOOD begins at BIRTH.
"Because if it DIDN'T, that would not only have denied an
enormously-valuable REMEDY to tens of millions of women, thus
wrecking their well-being, relegating them to second-class-citizen
status, and depriving them of countless of their future opportunities --
should society's laws in the USA have aligned with Biblical precepts,
as it usually does -- but it ALSO would constrain us to be EQUALLY
respectful of sperm and ova as we would have to be of the z/e/f
stages. Because ALL of those stages of the reproductive process
are comprised of HUMAN LIFE, each entity of which is a POTENTIAL
person. ALL of them: sperm, ova, zygotes, embryoes, and fetuses.
And since DOING that would be utterly *impossible*, it would just
have to be one of those Biblically-ordained things that almost NO
one attempts to do. Such as "keeping the Sabbath day holy."
"As it stands -- *as* the Bible was *written* -- IF such hardship
ever again WERE to be forced upon women, it would be SOLELY
the doing of callous, hateful, frequently-ignorant, and often-deluded
PEOPLE -- acting on their OWN with absolutely NO Biblical backing
or authorization whatsoever. IF abortion EVER again were to be
denied to women, the Bible would be BLAMELESS for that social
upheaval, injustice, and cataclysm. The hatefulness and bigotry
would be of entirely HUMAN origin.
"Anti-Choicers -- you're out in the cold on this one!
"And FORTUNATELY for millions of American women, MOST
Americans want *nothing* to do with the Anti-Choice agenda, and
when put in a position where they could actively support it, they
REJECT it out of hand. As Washington State and Colorado proved
in the 1998 general election, when they *both* soundly DEFEATED
the proposed 'partial-birth' abortion bans that Anti-Choice had
wangled onto the ballot as referenda."
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Where common sense and intelligence combine,
a fair-minded egalitarian is ALWAYS the result. RRR
Cult lemmings always lack either one or the other, or
both, of those two elements.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "c-bee1" |
|
| Title: Re: If your child's head falls off the tabletop, sue your abortionist for psychological damage to your child in having his head more than a few inches from his chest |
06 Aug 2006 02:50:07 AM |
|
|
"John P. Boatwright" <name@For-God.net> wrote in message
news:44D526BC.10B9@For-God.net...
Craig wants you to kill your own kids in the womb wrote:
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth.
So like magic, they just appear out of thin air?
And when the kids are kicking their mother's belly while
she's sitting there wondering what her kids will be like
when they grow up, and you tell her they don't actually
exist because "I said so, therefore they don't exist",
she should believe you and cram a vacume grinder into
their skull and suck her kid's brains out... just because
they "don't exist"?
Her child is the same child he was seconds before he moved
a few inches during birth, regardless of him being ground up
seconds later on his birthday
Cite?
p.s. Cowardly response redirect fixed.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: If your child's head falls off the tabletop, sue your abortionistfor psychological damage to your child in having his head more than a fewinches from his chest |
06 Aug 2006 02:09:26 AM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright wrote:
***** with the followup groups again and I start writing to your ISP
about spamming. Take your medicine like a big boy or don't post.
--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres and marital rape convictions:
1126361838.764032.231...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
As I said, the marriage agreement includes reasonable expectation of
sexual exchange. This is why John Bobbitt never did a day of time in
the slam for "marital rape" while his crazy wife ended up in a mental
facility.
"Marital rape" is a crime in all fifty states (since 1993), as is
prostitution. The difference is that no one is ever convicted of it.
She was then shown an article on a convicted marital rapist....
1126754651.184485.72...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
The reason there is only one marital rape
conviction in the entire country right now (from Nebraska no less,
where even consenting wives are considered rape victims) is because the
marriage vow "I promise to love you" doesn't mean "I promise to say I
love you".
She was then shown SEVERAL articles on several marital rape convictions.....
1126802761.173860.316...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
I wouldn't refer to anyone in that article except for the children as
"victims." Maybe to you, everyone is a victim, but a woman who
deliberately marries an abusive man and then lets him in the house is
not a victim.
1126850910.636846.121...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
In case you missed my subtle, unspoken point, it is that many women are
devious, backstabbing succubi; entrapment and false rape charges are
just two of their many sick games.
1126926843.336393.273...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Rape is still not OK under any
circumstances.
Neither is falsely accusing your husband of raping you, and neither is
marrying a man and then refusing to put out.
1126982127.985900.178...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
SO when you deliberately take your clothes off for a rapist, it goes
against all common sense. A lot of things can be read into the action
by the courts and the rapists. You make yourself into a victim on
purpose.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Reasoned Insanity" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that Craig is a loony moron. |
06 Jul 2006 03:37:00 PM |
|
|
Evidence of what? You haven't proven any of your assertions. You have
provided evidence that you don't seem to like to back up what you say.
"Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
wrote in message news:ecapa2dvj8mo84qrald6f2hn3fvdrvc5f3@4ax.com...
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 20:32:30 -0400,
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
---
RRR Cult lemmings.
Dumber than dirt. America's own version of the Taliban.
Selfishly, hatefully, and mindlessly supporting sociopathic
agendas that seek to destroy vital personal liberties of
millions of people. (That's as dumb as it GETS!!!)
And constantly proving that to everyone.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that Craig is a loony moron. |
06 Jul 2006 03:52:07 PM |
|
|
[[[ READERS: Just FYI, the ACTUAL subject header of
the thread is:
MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are
some of the world's most IGNORANT louts.
Thanks, "Reasoned Insanity," for this reminder of
just how DISHONEST and DESPERATE you RRR
loons truly are. ]]]
"Reasoned Insanity"...
...*** moronically and gutlessly *** wrote the following
GARBAGE about my post, below -- without taking on ANYTHING
point-by-point.
And thus we have yet *another* example that proves
the CORRECT subject header of this thread.
You said:
"Evidence of what? You haven't proven any of your
assertions. You have provided evidence that you don't
seem to like to back up what you say."
So as usual, you are nothing but a mindless TROLL... seeking
"evidence" of the OBVIOUS. (LOL!!! What a tool.)
___________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Do not feed the |
/ O O\ | trolls. Thank you. |
/ \ | --Mgt. |
/ \ \|__________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\__/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _ ||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |__ _ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
(Post that he DUCKED) ---
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!"
<xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted little LOSER, John Wentzky wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" wrote:
Hateful & Deluded Loon, John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Pr0r3p" <pr0r3p@yahoo.com> wrote:
John Wentzky wrote:
"Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
Bigoted MORON, John Wentzky wrote:
[ ... ]
ALL *children* have been BORN, doltish loon.
If ALL children have been born then that would
mean that no more children will be born.
You're a stupid ***** who obviously has reading
comprehension problems.
That's not what he meant, you illiterate fucktard.
It is what he wrote.
"ALL *children* have been BORN,"
You really believe that line?
SENSIBLE people having working brains would have NO
trouble comprehending and believing that **FACT**.
In the context of his reply to your posting, yep. It means
that children have to be born to be considered children.
Or to paraphrase that, in the course of the reproductive
process, live BIRTH is required for the transition, at that
moment, from mere RPE* to child.
* RPE = Reproductive Process Entity. (Gamete, zygote,
embryo, and fetus, in that order of progression.)
[ ... ]
Denial is your specialty, ask me if I'm surprised you
denied the truth.
"All children have been born."???????
Why were children born today then?
Why will children be born tomorrow?
[ ... ]
How about THIS, then, dimwit, just to fine-tune it ---
-- EVERY child that currently EXISTS has been born.
[[[ READERS: Points that Wentzky omitted (DUCKED)
follow, between the ### ---> <---### symbols. ]]]
###--->
-- EVERY child that ever HAS existed *first* was BORN
in order to **become** a child.
-- EVERY child that will ever exist in the future will
*first* be BORN in order to *become* a child.
-- BIRTH is the *prerequisite* for BEING a child.
-- NO mere human Reproductive-Process-Entity (RPE)
has ever been a child PRIOR to birth.
-- The following analogy is 100% true:
acorns : oak trees :: human RPEs : children
<---###
[[[ READERS -- *Now* we get to stand back and laugh
at that bigoted little sociopath as he tries to lyingly
wriggle OUT of all of those FACTS. That's his style. ]]]
You mean there are no children in existence today that will be
born later today or tomorrow or later?
There are RPEs in existence today that will reach the
point of birth. And at that moment they will go from being
mere RPEs to children/infants/babies.
You mean these children do NOT even exist at all before they
are born?
NO *children* exist BEFORE birth. PERSONHOOD *begins* at
birth. As the Bible makes quite clear in MANY ways:
(1) All human life that it defends has been BORN.
(2) *No* RPEs are defended as *people* anywhere in the
Bible. The *only* time that a fetus is defended is as
PROPERTY... in a passage that *condones* SLAVERY.
(Ex. 21:20-25)
(3) The passages that ascribe immense importance to:
-- BIRTH order
-- BIRTHrights
-- First-BORNS
Where do they come from then?
The first stage when ANY (and every) person first exists
is when his/her gametes (sperm and ovum) first exist at
the same time... thus having the sum of that person-to-be's
complete DNA. If either of those were aborted at THAT stage,
it would be just as decisive a termination as it would be at any
of the later three stages. That unique *potential* person
would never be born. (JUST like zygotes, embryoes, and
fetuses, gametes TOO are all:
-- unique
-- *potential* people
-- alive.
And -- funnier than hell -- you Anti-Choice/RRR Cult loons
make MONUMENTAL hypocrites of yourselves by NOT defending
the **quadrillion** (1,000,000,000,000,000) potential people
that are aborted DAILY, worldwide, at that stage.
Why is there a nine month gestation if they do NOT even
exist before they are born?
Only mere *RPEs* are gestated for ANY period of time.
PERSONHOOD *begins* at birth.
Why are you so bigoted against every person that has
ever been born?
[[[ READERS: People don't GET much more mentally-
challenged than Wentzky and still be able to type,
as he has just again made so very OBVIOUS. So,
lest anyone misunderstand -- this post was NOT
fro Wentzky's benefit. He's 'WAY to dense (and
too dishonest) to comprehend it and admit that
it is 100% factual. I wrote this response for the
benefit of any fence-sitters who may read it, so
the can see the relevant facts for themselves,
AND so they can see just how incredibly IGNOR-
ANT one has to be, just to BE a lemming of the
RRR Cult.]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
---
RRR Cult lemmings.
Dumber than dirt. America's own version of the Taliban.
Selfishly, hatefully, and mindlessly supporting sociopathic
agendas that seek to destroy vital personal liberties of
millions of people. (That's as dumb as it GETS!!!)
And constantly proving that to everyone.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vandar" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that Craig is a loony moron. |
06 Jul 2006 06:29:56 PM |
|
|
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE! wrote:
[[[ READERS: Just FYI, the ACTUAL subject header of
the thread is:
MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are
some of the world's most IGNORANT louts.
Thanks, "Reasoned Insanity," for this reminder of
just how DISHONEST and DESPERATE you RRR
loons truly are. ]]]
"Reasoned Insanity"...
...*** moronically and gutlessly *** wrote the following
GARBAGE about my post, below -- without taking on ANYTHING
point-by-point.
Why would anyone bother to address anything you post until you can back
it up with some supporting evidence?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE!" |
|
| Title: Re: MORE Evidence that Craig is a loony moron. |
06 Jul 2006 08:55:55 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:29:56 GMT,
"Vandar" <vandar69@yahoo.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton -- Help to Make the USA Bigotry-FREE! wrote:
[[[ READERS: Just FYI, the ACTUAL subject header of
the thread is:
MORE Evidence that RRR Cult lemmings are
some of the world's most IGNORANT louts.
Thanks, "Reasoned Insanity," for this reminder of
just how DISHONEST and DESPERATE you RRR
loons truly are. ]]]
"Reasoned Insanity"...
...*** moronically and gutlessly *** wrote the following
GARBAGE about my post, below -- without taking on ANYTHING
point-by-point.
Why would anyone bother to address anything you post until
you can back it up with some supporting evidence?
You mean the evidence that you ADMITTED you hadn't
even READ 99% of, dummy? THAT evidence?
<<< Sheeeesh! >>>
Damned if you aren't as bone-IGNORANT as "Reasoned
Insanity," and in the same way. Are you his clone, or twin
brother, or something?
See my OTHER response to you tonight, for the answer
to your question, in the thread entitled,
RESOURCE POST: The Big CON: "Religious Right"
as Bush's "Base!" HERE are the **Facts.**
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
