Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

cpeter1313 wrote:

No, I'm one of those atheists who don't celebrate any holy day. I'm also one of those literate people who don't celebrate made-up holidays.
<quoted text>

OH! Umm...err... I suppose I should return that St. Swithens Day card I got for you huh?

St. Swithin's day if thou dost rain
For forty days it will remain
St. Swithin's day (15 July) if thou be fair
For forty days 'twill rain nae mair.

Dr S Freud wrote:

<quoted text>
I like Elsie. She's funny, interesting and articulate. I like Foo. She's funny, strongwilled and well read.
You are a clown.

LOL, I'm sure that it would be the opinion of any intelligent and rational person that you just shot your credibility all to hell in one fell swoop with that.Of course I say that as though you haven't done that every time you post as Ladilulu.

As I said, how about posting something sensible and truthful for a change?

lil Lily wrote:

The amount of my postings is directly proportionate to the amount of senseless postings made by the pro-choice idiots. If they have an issue with how many posts I made; all my posts were in reply to the posts I read, and all to me, or to someone else about me posted by fools.
It's my pleasure to reply and prove just how stupid these people are, on topic or off.

ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Lynniekins, you ARE losing your f'kn mind. And its damn funny to watch your melt-downs! LOL!!

Now KICK that OCD into high gear bitch! HIGH KICKS! But dont throw that old back out! LOLOLOL!!

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, hello, Ladilulu. Nice of you to make an appearance.
How about posting something sensible or truthful for a change?

When will you?

Dr S Freud wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes you are a fool, but at least you are finally researching your biggest problem. It's a first step!

LOL! Pity she's blind to her own issues huh? But hey, its good for us, she's amusing, and predictable as hell!

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL, I'm sure that it would be the opinion of any intelligent and rational person that you just shot your credibility all to hell in one fell swoop with that.Of course I say that as though you haven't done that every time you post as Ladilulu.
As I said, how about posting something sensible and truthful for a change?

Poor thing! You can't take it that other people are liked and have real intelligence while you have to try and convince people with your bullshit ego trips. Sorry Sweetie, but no matter how many times you write about your supposed smarts and superior comprehension it just isn't true at all. Sorry, Sweetie, but you're still just a pathetic > uneducated >frumpy > old liar > hasbeen doormat. And most everyone here knows it.

LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:

<quoted text>
ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Lynniekins, you ARE losing your f'kn mind. And its damn funny to watch your melt-downs! LOL!!
Now KICK that OCD into high gear bitch! HIGH KICKS! But dont throw that old back out! LOLOLOL!!

Isn't Lynne~Lily a hoot!

I LOOOVE to watch her strut!*I'm so smart! Smart people love me! I'm better than everyone! I'm a certifiable genius!*

Most everyone knows the real truth!!! LOLOLOL!

LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL! Pity she's blind to her own issues huh? But hey, its good for us, she's amusing, and predictable as hell!

Like the way dirty people can't smell their own bad stink! LOL!! She's funny to watch and fun to laugh at!!

lil Lily wrote:

No, let's be more specific, so Bitner can't weasel out of it with semantics.
Bitner, you claimed I "pretended to quote" you and that's a lie. I didn't pretend to quote you, I paraphrased what you said. Paraphrasing isn't "pretending to quote".

Paraphrasing is restating or rewording, which unequivocally keeps the same context of the underlying subject.

You do neither restate, nor reword. You obfuscate the subject, then sell it as being what the person the words of whom you're puportedly "paraphrasing," stated.

You're as much of a scholar, and make as much sense as your honorary medical and legal degrees Lynniekins.

lil Lily wrote:

<quoted text>
Your spelling is off. I've been HOT today, as I am on all days in dealing with you boneheads.

Poor desperate, pathetic little liar. You have never in your life been hot. Ever.

I stated,~When the fact is; c-section is what treats eclampsia and saves the woman AND her child.~(of course meaning DELIVERY treats eclampsia and c-sections are performed if a vaginal delivery isn't possible), and said because Petey had said LTA's are performed for women with eclampsia.

He tried to claim an LTA is only used as a life saving procedure, for conditions that threaten a pregnant woman's life, "like eclmapsia". We're talking late term here, and Petey said a late term abortion is how a pregnant woman with eclampsia is saved. Are we clear here? Pete said that killing the fetus is the way to save a woman from eclampsia.

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/abortion/T833...

cpeter1313 wrote
<quoted text>
#219209
Friday Feb 17, 2012
No, you don't treat eclampsia with a c-section.

~~~~~
Actually, yes you do, if vaginal delivery isn't possible.

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/abortion/T833...

cpeter1313

#219273
Friday Feb 17

Caesareans are performed only when all other means have failed:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1 ...

By no means is it the standard or common treatment for eclampsia.

~~~~
Petey's now seeing he was wrong and trying to distance himself for his "LAT" stupidity, by trying to imply I was wrong in anything I said about how eclampsia is treated.

I never said it was the "standard procedure". What I said was that an LTA isn't how eclampsia is treated, because Petey claimed that's a condition for which LTA's are necessary.

cont. in next post

realkatie wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, I'm sorry to remind you of what you've obviously forgotten dearheart. I do not have to prove my innocence with your false claim I called Doc a liar. That's the accuser's job. I already know I'm right. But it's fun watching you spin :)

We always knew you were calling me a liar. Now here's the proof that you actually used the word......

Post #194362

"Doc, here you are LYING about Bitner's position. She does believe in others' rights to choices.

"How can one believe in the concept of choice if they DO NOT believe in the right to one of the choices ?"
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833 ...

-----

C'mon.....tell the truth. You really can't be pro choice without supporting the right to abortion...can you ?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833 ...

-----

Next time I'm out searching old posts, I'll pull the ones where you claim Bitner can't be prochoice because she doesn't support abortion. And that IS what she's claimed. That she supports women's rights to choose, but does not support any individual act itself."

Did you say you knew you were right ???

~Not during "the act of giving birth" as in definition and 1.

LiIrabbitfoofoo wrote:

<quoted text>
ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Lynniekins, you ARE losing your f'kn mind. And its damn funny to watch your melt-downs! LOL!!
Now KICK that OCD into high gear bitch! HIGH KICKS! But dont throw that old back out! LOLOLOL!!

LOL Hey Toots, you might want to learn the difference between "meltdowns" and someone showing how easily ignorant fools can be OWNED.

Conservative Democrat wrote:

<quoted text>
Paraphrasing is restating or rewording, which unequivocally keeps the same context of the underlying subject.
...

An ignorant fraud like you can't school me. I know exactly what parpahrase means and that's exactly what I did with what Bitner said. I didn't quote her as she claimed. What I stated WAS "unequivocally" keeping in "the same context" of what she said.

Do you even know what the parpahrasing I did was, bonehead, or are you doing as all pro-choicers do and blindly jumping in not having any clue?

Doc Degall wrote:

<quoted text>
We always knew you were calling me a liar. Now here's the proof that you actually used the word......
Post #194362
"Doc, here you are LYING about Bitner's position. She does believe in others' rights to choices.
"How can one believe in the concept of choice if they DO NOT believe in the right to one of the choices ?"
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833 ...
-----
C'mon.....tell the truth. You really can't be pro choice without supporting the right to abortion...can you ?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/abortion/T833 ...
-----
Next time I'm out searching old posts, I'll pull the ones where you claim Bitner can't be prochoice because she doesn't support abortion. And that IS what she's claimed. That she supports women's rights to choose, but does not support any individual act itself."
Did you say you knew you were right ???

lol. VERY well done.

They can't run from their own words posted. We CAN and DO find what was posted and prove they've lied.

Oh, and Doc just OWNED Katie. lol

You boneheads are so outta your league.

realkatie wrote:

<quoted text>
Definitely not, but you can. You are missing the point, the big picture. I ASKED Doc if he had accidentally or purposefully left off "right" in some of his posts to Bitner regarding her personal perspective of reproductive civil rights.

You never asked me any such question.

This after he went after for more than a year on this topic.
I ASKED him a question he did not answer, instead he chose to accuse me of calling him a liar (without actually using those exact words according to you both) rather than acting like a decent human being.

Now we know you DID use the word. Liar.

That initial unanswered question became HIS accusation of me calling him a liar.

No it wasn't. Because you never asked. These posts were the basis of my accusation.....

#192873
#193709

Want more ?!?!?

Post #191909:

"You continue to insist Bitner "supports abortion" when you've been corrected many, many times Bitner "supports THE RIGHT to have an abortion" or even simpler, Bitner "supports women's rights TO CHOOSE an abortion." Why you keep wanting to claim this equates to Bitner "supports abortion" is beyond me.

For an armchair attorney, nuance is lost on you, Doc.
Are you done yet?"

HE (and you by extension since you've taken up his dirty work) needs to prove his flimsy claim is true. THIS is done by YOU (or he if you're tired of his doing his hard labor for him) showing I did what you claim in the initial posts -- not after I was irritated beyond belief at his ability to nitpick a split hair into a thousand brittle pieces.
I am bored beyond belief with this topic. Bitner believes what she believes and has every right to as a human being and citizen of the USA. I believe what I believe and have every right to as a human being and a citizen of the USA. You and Doc have every right to believe what you believe as a human being and citizens of the USA.
What you don't have the right to do is nitpick me to death when others I love are actually dying. Got it? There is more to this life than your opinion.

Flimsy claim ???

Of course you're bored. What idiot who has been shown to be a liar making false accusations would want to continue the onslaught ?

pbfa wrote:

<quoted text>
Poor desperate, pathetic little liar. You have never in your life been hot. Ever.

Homophobe.

lil Lily wrote:

Oh, and Doc just OWNED Katie. lol
You boneheads are so outta your league.

Stick a fork in that liar......she's done.