‘Handmaid’s Tale Wasn’t Supposed to Be a Roadmap’

[FindersKeepers]

What's to paraphrase? You are free to look up the actual bills and refute her voting record. But I completely understand why you wouldn't trust a site like Conservative Review. What lib would?

That's a whole lot of going down a rabbit hole, since they didn't see fit to even give us the bill number.

I'm not interested. Just looking at their chart, it shows she vote (according to them) more conservative than not.

It's puts her in a politically moderate range.

I have no issue with that.

I'm not too fond of her support for Ukraine, but she's like many in that sense.

[countryboy]

That's a whole lot of going down a rabbit hole, since they didn't see fit to even give us the bill number.

I'm not interested. Just looking at their chart, it shows she vote (according to them) more conservative than not.

It's puts her in a politically moderate range.

I have no issue with that.

I'm not too fond of her support for Ukraine, but she's like many in that sense.

She's a brand new Congress person, she has only cast 21 votes, but I understand why you're not interested in her voting record, since she supports your own personal sick, twisted, narrative. A grade of "C" or "B" would put her in the moderate range, she is not a moderate. She is a RINO. And of course you have no issue with that. What lib would?

[FindersKeepers]

She's a brand new Congress person, she has only cast 21 votes, but I understand why you're not interested in her voting record, since she supports your own personal sick, twisted, narrative. A grade of "C" or "B" would put her in the moderate range, she is not a moderate. She is a RINO. And of course you have no issue with that. What lib would?

Find a valid site and I'll take a look.

That one's not valid, but I have no interested in hunting down the bills. When any site conveniently leaves something vital out, there's usually a reason for it. It's usually meant to manipulate minds.

[Chris]

As noted and expected, you have no argument or any defense for your obvious hypocrisy, except to keep crying foul. There is no hypocrisy in my argument because I don't start with an absolutist argument and then sabotage it with an exception. You can't ride two horses at the same time Chris.

As demonstrated the hypocrisy exists only in your rewrite of my argument: "Forgive me for actually making your argument slightly more reasonable..."

[Chris]

There is no strawman, Chris. You've been shown that many times now. You're position is ethically untenable and you know it.

The rest of us who've been following these threads know it as well.

You have shown no hypocrisy in my reasoning. Like Who, you have to rewrite my argument to find it, but then that's your argument.

[CCitizen]

So let's see... Save unborn lives versus win election.... Yea, that's a tough one....

1) Sadly, anti-abortion stance may cost elections to Republicans. That will hurt everyone.

2) Prior to about 16-20 weeks, the life is only potential.

I do not think sin can be legally prohibited. Most people commit thousands of sins.

[Chris]

1) Sadly, anti-abortion stance may cost elections to Republicans. That will hurt everyone.

2) Prior to about 16-20 weeks, the life is only potential.

I do not think sin can be legally prohibited. Most people commit thousands of sins.

1) Then people ought to reprioritize.

2) According to medical doctors and biologists, life begins at conception.

3) Murder is against the law.

[FindersKeepers]

1) Then people ought to reprioritize.

2) According to medical doctors and biologists, life begins at conception.

3) Murder is against the law.

1) Perhaps you're the one who needs to re-prioritize.
2) Life is present before conception--in both the sperm and egg, and in their hosts.
3) Attempting to control the body of another is slavery.

[Chris]

1) Perhaps you're the one who needs to re-prioritize.
2) Life is present before conception--in both the sperm and egg, and in their hosts.
3) Attempting to control the body of another is slavery.

1) As I've stated, I hold life more important than winning elections.

2) Not a unique living human being. Why must you play word games?

3) So your advocacy for controlling the body of the unborn, to the point of killing it, is akin to slavery? If I physically restrain you in order to prevent you from harming me or another, I'm making you a slave? Why the word games?

[The Booman]

Ah the Handmaid's Tale, another worn out cliche.