Who slonking eggs here?

Who slonking eggs here?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I slonk 8 every morning

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    6 a day every day

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Be the free people place
    >Tell people what to do and how to be moral

    What did the US mean by this?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Dunno, lots of pro-life gays on this website

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Clarence "The womb isn't a tomb" Thomas.

        Also 7 a day, 4 in the morning, 3 before going to sleep.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >murder should be legal because you can choose not to do it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You have to stop advocating for the murder of unborn children

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >be the confederation of free people places
      >remove a rule that tells all 50 members how to behave
      >all 50 members of your club can now make their own decision
      >this is less free than you setting the rule for them

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Some of the 50 members restrict rights
        >This is somehow more free

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          it is. Stop drinking onions

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Says less free is more free
            >Puts an imposition on me

            America moment

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, it is. Deal with it, Eurofag. God bless America!

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              It's the United STATES of America not "The Country of America" you dumb son of a bitch.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >no actually if we force the world to do what i want we're more free than if we let locals decide their own laws

              Ok retard

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I want to do a thing
                >NO! I say you can't with the power vested in me by muh locals
                >But trust me this means that you are free

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I want to do a thing
                What thing? What is it exactly you want to do? Could it possibly be that the thing you want to do is literally murdering a baby?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Well, in my opinion, it's already a baby, so what you're doing is MURDER

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Trust the science chud, it’s only a baby after it exits the womb! 5 seconds prior to it exiting the womb it’s not technically a baby because Bill Nye the Science guy said so and basically he’s really smart and science is never wrong or used to push a political agenda for any reason

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Brings up science

                Who gives a fuck? I just don't want muh locals or some old satanic pedos telling me what I can and can't do. Why do you want to control other people in the free people place by culture or law so badly?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry sweetheart guess you're going on a road trip. Better luck next time :,^(

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Statist
                >Loses the debate
                >Relies on the state to make things he doesn't like go away

                Many such cases!

                >tell IST autist that there are certain things he can’t do, such as murder or rape people
                >he spazzes out and demands to know why you want to control him so badly
                Dude you are borderline retarded. Room temp IQ or lower

                >It's murder when I say it's murder
                >It's violence when I saw it's violence
                >White people staring at me is violence and rape!!

                You'll all deserve to be outbred because you think like automatons

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm an athiest, debate me

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'll have to ask muh locals if I'm allowed to first :'(

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry that the state won't enforce the rule you like mr.lolbert

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If the state is allowed to make impositions on people, we should just do universal healthcare because it's popular, it will save everyone money, and it will disenfranchise predatory insurance companies and therefore save lives

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'd rather my tax money didn't go to the extremely expensive healthcare neccesitated by obesity. If the US wasn't full of fatties and morons i would be all for socialism of every kind.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It doesn't matter what you'd rather because it's popular (muh locals) and the state is allowed to make impositions. If you don't like it you can leave

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >it will be voted in in two weeks
                Interesting fan fiction

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >ctrl + f "two weeks"
                >1 of 1 match

                ?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ok? Cool?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Lolbert complaining that the federal government literally just shrunk its powers and is on track to shrink itself more
                Many such cases. Every lolbert wanna talk the talk about decentralized governance over top-down control, but don't no lolbert wanna actually have local political processes.

                Slonk some eggs and raise your test, you need.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >State just restricted personal freedom

                No trust me bro, it's a different part of the government bro, it's actually more free even though you can do less. It just works bro truuuuuust

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The Feds should address your grievances with your State government for you
                Why are you such a statist bootlicker, anon? Crying daddy fed to save you is pretty gay.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Appeal to process

                We're talking philosophically. The US just restricted personal freedom. Is the US the free people place or is it just another state?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The US just restricted personal freedom.
                The SCOTUS just restricted the Federal Government's power to set rules for the States. You're mad about it because you're a bootlicker who wishes your big strong centralized Fed daddy would keep taking care of your role in your State's rulemaking process on your behalf.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >set rules

                The government wasn't restricting a personal freedom and now it is. You're getting so weird about it. If the federal government guaranteed that you wouldn't have your rights infringed and the state government said that they would infringe your rights then the federal government is doing the right thing and the state government isn't

                I don't know what the you are talking about "the free people place." it is very simple though- the people ratified a contract in 1787. Obey it and defend it, maybe start with actually fucking reading it- or be prepared for the law of the jungle. It is actually a very simple proposition. That contract never involved incorporation of the BoR to the states. If you don't like it ratify a duly enacted amendment or shut the fuck up lol.

                If you opt for the jungle- not only will you contend with the violence of the state but also the violence of everyone else. Some might say that it perfect freedom.

                If the contract said you had to lick Shaniqua's pussy for 8 hours a day 5 days a week, would you agree that the you need to obey and defend it?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The government
                Statism has fried your brain so badly that you still reflexively talk about "the government" as one amorphous entity, instead of properly as a divided and decentralized *set* of entities exercising localized and representative power.

                There is no cogent or coherent way to say, "Well, I like small govs, but if biggov does something I like better on some particular issue then I'm a biggov supporter for the day, but don't get me wrong I'm still totally team smallgov". You just love the taste of leather because Daddy threw you a bone and you have no real firm principles about how government should work, simple as.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Everything not enumerated in the constitution is up to each individual state there's your firm principles

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Life liberty and pursuit of happiness good
                >Except when the set of entities takes the derivative of the set of equilibriums that are consistent with the Schrodinger-Schwartshield ratios that innumerate the supersymmetry of the third dimension

                Just don't infringe?

                Luckily the contract does not say that, and if it did, hypothetically, I would opt for the law of the jungle.

                I've told you three times now that you have two options: 1. Live by the rules of the contract or 2. Opt for the law of the jungle.

                Why is your tiny mind incapable of grasping this choice? It is extremely simple.

                So just admit that there's nothing special about the US and it's fundamentally as statist as North Korea because the government can make impositions

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Did NK duly ratify their own governing documents?

                So you agree that you have two options- obey the duly ratified contract or opt for the law of the jungle? Have I advocated anything other than this ITT?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, I agree that's how states like the US, North Korea, and China operate. I just think it's kind of sad that there's no government that advocates for personal freedom

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No I asked you a question bozo- did NK people duly ratifiy their governing system?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'll have to ask the locals if I'm supposed to answer in the affirmative or negative to that question. I'll be back later

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                K keep me posted.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Just don't infringe?
                Who's responsible for enacting laws that do not infringe in your locality, and why do you think that daddy fed should do it for you? Because you lick boots as long as the big strong man wearing them occasionally throws you a bone.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >NOOOOOooooooooooooo it's complicated! You can't just have life liberty and pursuit of happiness! You have to let me decide about your medical care!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If you actually cared about those supposed rights you would be campaigning for your state to codify those rights in your state constitution according to the rules set out for amending the state constitution. Why do you not do this?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                How is killing someone "care"?
                You guys always tell these lies, look up any mass media, they call it "reproductive rights" even though it's obvious that reproduction has to already have occurred to be able to kill a child, so it has nothing to do with reproduction and calling killing your own child a "right" is insane, a right that comes from where?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >NOOOOOOOOoooooo you dont understand i HAVE to live a hedonist life consequence free!!!!!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >NOOOOOOOOooooooooooo you can't just live a hedonist life consequence free!!!! I don't think it's right!!!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, that's how it works. Eat like shit and don't work out, you get fat.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Should liposuction be illegal because you don't like it?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                AND THE LAAAAAAAND OF THE FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeee

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Paying money for liposuction is a consequence. You would feel ashamed of your posts if you were as good as a normie.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >NOOOOOOOOOOooooooooo I can't preserve my own liberty in conversation and cooperation with my local polity through a smaller and more directly representative local government, I need the feds to do it for me!!!!!!!
                This is called bootlicking.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >preserve my own liberty in conversation and cooperation with my local polity through a smaller and more directly representative local government

                Is the reason I must be involved in your healthcare

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Call your representatives and attend some meetings. Oh wait, you won't - you think the feds should do that for you. Because you've accepted that it's their government instead of yours in exchange for Roe's Viability Rule. Liberty!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Luckily the contract does not say that, and if it did, hypothetically, I would opt for the law of the jungle.

                I've told you three times now that you have two options: 1. Live by the rules of the contract or 2. Opt for the law of the jungle.

                Why is your tiny mind incapable of grasping this choice? It is extremely simple.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >tell IST autist that there are certain things he can’t do, such as murder or rape people
                >he spazzes out and demands to know why you want to control him so badly
                Dude you are borderline retarded. Room temp IQ or lower

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not gonna type the same thing again, see [...]

                Nobody is aborting foetuses 5 seconds before delivery

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If no one is doing it then why are leftoids passing laws to allow it?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                They're not, retard

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                They are, the new york lawyer admitted to it
                >Would this bill allow abortion right after delivery
                >"It's complicated we have to take into consideration the wishes of the woman, etc."
                >But would it?
                >"... yes"

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Like 95% of abortions happen around 5 weeks. You are a slave to 4chan propaganda. Sad!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >literally murdering a baby
                >literally
                It's not though

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It is though

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Lol

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It should be legal to murder your own baby up to like 6 months after birth. They're literally still subhuman at that point and it's no loss to just snuff it out, unlike a fully-formed human with some investment in the world.
                Circumcision should be illegal, meanwhile.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wouldn't it be less effort just to dumb the bastard off at a church or something at that point?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Children raised in circumstances other than a household with at least one loving parent (and that's being generous) who actually wants and can afford to raise them invariably turn out to be dregs who would have been better off being smothered in infancy.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Don't pretend you give a fuck about society its just embarrassing.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I do care about society. Here's a stat for you: despite being 13% of the population, morons make up a third of abortions. Over half, yes, HALF, 51% of moron babies are aborted, every single one of them with no future other than criminality and vice. Abortion gets rid of more dumb violent moron thieves, murderers, rapists, whatever you care to list than anything else we've ever tried, for cheaper than anything else we've ever tried. So the next time you think about "muh poor baybee being murdered :~~*", don't think of a plump white Gerber baby with a loving family and a happy future of gratefully giving back to society if only he were allowed to live. Think of a little moron turd, a little brown cancer cell being lysed before it can grow into a big moron tumor spending his entire childhood and adult life sucking off the government teat, in school or in prison or in the hospital, only to turn around and blame us whiteys for all his problems. And he'll be right, in a sense, because all of it could have been mercifully avoided, no pain, no fuss, right before it all started, if it weren't for soft-hearted mush-brained little fucks like you.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                God bless you anon

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Perhaps the incompleteness which seems to accompany those children who are born out of wedlock could rightly be thought of as a form of "miscarriage."

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Oh no you'll have to drive an hour to do it because your local population voted against it.

                Truly democracy is dead

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The problem is the states that want to make it illegal to travel to get an abortion or illegal to help someone in state get one when your out of state. In my view that kinda stuff is pretty pernicious and undermines some of the compromises that allows nations (and also international relations) to accommodate diverse political views with descending into conflict. Ultimately your laws need to stop at you borders and attempting to overreach in this way is exactly the sort of thing that can lead to crisis that breads conflict.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, they don't. You made that up and as if that wasn't bad enough, what you made up is explicitly prohibited by the constitution. You cannot be prosecuted for smoking weed in Colorado when you go back to Utah.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          "right to abortion" is a trick of language
          What is really at stake is "reproductive rights" IE the right of women to NOT have children.
          This right is not under threat in any State.
          A woman can abstain from sex or use a combination of birth control + menstrual cycle monitoring to reduce the risk of pregnancy to essentially nil.
          A woman resident in a state that has banned abortion is still free to travel to another state to have the procedure performed. They still have the ""right"" to have an abortion, they just can't force the community they live in to tolerate it.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            But the constitution says that women have a right to consequence free sex. Checkmate, incel.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              They could have sex without risk of impregnation.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >morons kill other morons because they want to
      >White women fucks dogs because they want to

      The USA IS free, fag

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You are not immune to the propaganda.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      lefties really chose the most bizarre hill to die on

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >leaving it up to the states to choose aka allowing citizens to vote for how they want to law to work is worse than allowing some federal judges, that are picked by whatever retarded president is in charge at the time, decide
      your brain on chudism

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The government is allowed to tell you what you can and can't do in the free people place
        >But somehow it's good when the illegitimate power is shuffled around from one pedophile to another
        your brain on statism

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You're the one voting retard. If you don't want pedos picking your laws, just stop molesting kids.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          one is voted in, the other is not. voting is statist now?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine thinking freedom means having no moral constraints.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Actually anon, we put your moral constraints in the care of our new HR manager, Shaniqua garden gnomeburg

        You're the one voting retard. If you don't want pedos picking your laws, just stop molesting kids.

        one is voted in, the other is not. voting is statist now?

        >Actually anon, we had all muh locals vote on it and we've decided that you no longer have a right to be married to your wife. From now on, your job is to lick Shaniqua garden gnomeburg's pussy for 8 hours a day

        It's illegitimate power even if you voted the person in

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >i'm a gay with a tiny dick
          Why are you telling us this?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Muh locals said I had to

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >i like eating shit and i have aids

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Actually anon, muh locals voted and your claim that you like the shit that you're eating isn't believable. Looks like you'll have to be in the gulag

                That's horrible anon. If only a federal judge said so, then you'd have true freedom.

                If only the state were only exercising its legitimate power and then the state would have kept it's nose out of my business and I wouldn't have to tell you all about my itsy bitsy dick. That'd probably be more what true freedom looks like

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Incorporation to the states was an illegitimate doctrine. The reconstruction amendments were not duly enacted.

                This is clearly an exercise of state police powers (public health and morality). If you think your rights are being violated you must take this before the State Supreme Court in the state you are domiciled- who may or may not have the ability to overturn a duly enacted law of the state legislature.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nerd shit

                Less personal freedom = less personal freedom simple as

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Society

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Are you advocating anarchy or monarchy? I'm not sure

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm just trying to figure out if the US is the free people place or if it's just another place where the state can make impositions

                The only thing standing between you and the fucking jungle is that contract we ratified in 1787 and if you don't want to obey it then you need to be ready for the law of the jungle- either option is fine by me.

                I thought the thing that made the US so special was it was supposed to be the free people place. Nobody is surprised when you say that the state is threatening violence if you don't listen to their impositions. I just thought America was supposed to be special or in any way unique

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know what the you are talking about "the free people place." it is very simple though- the people ratified a contract in 1787. Obey it and defend it, maybe start with actually fucking reading it- or be prepared for the law of the jungle. It is actually a very simple proposition. That contract never involved incorporation of the BoR to the states. If you don't like it ratify a duly enacted amendment or shut the fuck up lol.

                If you opt for the jungle- not only will you contend with the violence of the state but also the violence of everyone else. Some might say that it perfect freedom.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That contract never involved incorporation of the BoR to the states
                It didn't until the 14th ammendment. The problem with Roe is that one of the 'protections' the SC decided anti-abortion laws violated was the right to privacy, which is only implied in the constitution. Adding an ammemdment to that effect would, with one stroke, restore Roe, preserve gay and interracial marriage, and ensure continued acccess to birth control. It would also render the entire surveillance state blatantly unconstitutional so it won't happen anytime soon

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The 14th amendment did not follow the Article V procedures for passing an amendment- instead it was essentially passed at gun point by state governments that were in no way duly elected according their state laws.

                So yes, if you want to incorporate the BoR you will need to REpass the 14th except actually obey Art V this time. Got it? Just obey what Article V says- is that so complicated?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I appreciate the argument you're making, and as an autist at heart I agree with your reasoning vis-a-vis reconstruction, but that ship sailed a century ago. Not even the lads over at the Heritage Foundation are still debating the legitimacy of the 14th. Moreover, even if you somehow nullified it, there would be an immediate constitutional convention to bring it back. Keeping it in place is one of the few things the left and the right can both agree on.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Look fella an amendment that was not duly ratified is simply not a valid amendment no matter how many years go by with deluded people pretending it is. The 14th isn't even actually a real amendment. It is a fake amendment because in order to be a real amendment it must be duly enacted according to Art. V. Simple as.

                And I'm not even weighing in on whether I do or don't support the ideas in the 14th amendment I'm just demanding that it be duly ratified. If people realized it was not duly ratified tomorrow and got together to repass it the right way (if such a thing is even possible these days) then I would at least admit it was a valid amendment- until then it is simply reality that it is not valid.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The only thing standing between you and the fucking jungle is that contract we ratified in 1787 and if you don't want to obey it then you need to be ready for the law of the jungle- either option is fine by me.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              That's horrible anon. If only a federal judge said so, then you'd have true freedom.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >be free person
      >get dismembered in the womb
      better luck next time bucko

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >be free person
        >must rent out your space to someone else for free

        better luck next time bucko

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >have sex
          >get preggo
          >want to violate non-agression principle via murder
          >can't
          kek, I love the USA

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      UN charter of human rights article 3 includes the right to be born get fucked you moron gay

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Do you think the US should ratify the UN's rights of the child as well?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The US already signed and ratified it, along with 192 countries my moron. Not to mention the founding documents that reference the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 62% of biologists agree life begins at conception as well so it's a no-brainer

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >globohomo charter of moron rights includes the right of every moron to be born, if in a white country to stay, if in a moron country to flee to a white country, and in either case to be fed, clothed, and housed on the white man's dime without ever being compelled to give back in the form of labor or servitude
        Not surprising.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the constitution says we can have abortions
      >no it doesn't
      >REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE STOP INFRINGING ON MUH FREEDUMBS THIS IS LITERALLY NAZI GERMANY btw we should ban guns :*~~*~~*~~*~~)

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Accusing the person who wants to maximize freedom of wanting to ban guns

        Absolute NPC dialog option

        Paying money for liposuction is a consequence. You would feel ashamed of your posts if you were as good as a normie.

        Having an abortion is a consequence

        [...]
        [...]
        [...]
        kys frogposter

        u first

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Being thrown from a rooftop to your death is a consequence of homosexuality

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Only when muh locals decide to infringe on your freedoms

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Freedom of sodomy doesn't mean freedom from consequences chud

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              You should get anally raped

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Good. I'm glad my neighbors and me pick our laws. Mad about it? Too bad

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Paying for a moron's lifetime of gibs is a consequence of not letting it just be aborted.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Wow you did it hoe vs spade got reinstated anon well done

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Perhaps you'd like to hear some tik tok dances that will help fight back?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          the person who wants to maximize freedom of wanting to ban guns
          9/10 times thats true yes, with the 1/10 doing absolutely nothing to preserve their gun ownership rights. sucks to live in a 2 party system but that's what we're stuck with.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Abortion wouldn't even be an issue if the US brings back a strong family culture and gets rid of most welfare.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      That's racist

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >le let the democratic party get away with COMICALLY rigging an election guy
    yooo, so based. based black guy amirite!?

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >6 raw egg yolks mixed with raw milk in a mason jar and an egg white omelette for breakfast
    Feels biblical

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What an absolute whore, how many souls did she obliterate?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Hormonal birth control should be outlawed.

      These people are legit polluting the planet's water supply. Imagine being so entitled to care-free-sex that you think it is right to pollute all the people and critters' water?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        how do you feel about climate change?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I agree that the climate changes.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            that's so fucking convenient

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              It is a fact of historical record that the climate changes m8.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Someone explain Protestants obsession with abortions when the Bible has zero mention of them and even has a verse stating that you should be cursed with a miscarriage if you become pregnant out of wedlock. Are Christians stupid? Do they think abortions are a new thing?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Are you suggesting that only out of wedlock pregnancies should be aborted or are you saying we should let God handle something he said he would handle? Are you suggesting we are God?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I’m not suggesting it. The Bible literally says it

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Right you moron- if we go by what the Bible says then it is God's business to abort out of wedlock fetuses.

          Where in that do you get the idea that any roastie can do it too? Are you actually mentally challenged?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Your interpretation is flawed. It is not God’s business to give every woman a miscarriage. We do God’s work and God says woman shouldn’t have children outside wedlock which in turn means we should carry out his will if necessary

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              According to you the Bible literally says out of wedlock women will get miscarriages.

              It does not say all women who want to abort theor fetus are allowed to do so? Can you find me the passage that says that lol?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I already covered there is no passage stating abortion is wrong or against God’s will and that God allows fetuses to die outside wedlock. The amount and prevalence makes no difference. That is the original point

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                So you agree it is not wrong to ban it then?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I do not agree based on the argument that it is the word of God to not get abortions. I partly agree on the sentiment that irresponsible men and women should be liable for their own actions

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I think inherent in the teachings of the Bible involving the sanctity of sex between married man and woman, the underlying sin involved with sex-for-pleasure out of wedlock etc, the sanctity and purpose/design of marriage and miracle of life, etc etc. and on and on it is crystal clear how the Christian is to approach abortion.

                I played along with you so that you would admit there is no teaching in the Bible commanding that abortions shall be legal or that we should even be democracies in the first place. You agreed and in doing so you played yourself. Literally like arguing with a child.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It is not crystal clear when God himself states that fetuses out of wedlock will be miscarried. How do you defend the “sanctity of life” when God sends armies to specifically kill pregnant women and their unborn children multiple times in the Bible? Your arrogance is funny though since there are much more clear rules on that than there is on abortions.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Satan can quote scripture as well. Get behind me Satan.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If God says it then Satan quotes it, who is truly the evil one?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The one arguing in bad faith and is trying to crowbar a new meaning into it. You fucking dishonest retard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >trying to crowbar a new meaning
                >desperately attempting to find anything in his power to claim god said abortion bad
                Again, arrogance is much more punishable than bad faith arguing. Continue on and we’ll see you in Hell. I’m sure the things you’ve posted over the years will surely take you there with your arrogant attitude

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                God also condemns people's soul to hell for eternity? So why are you bitching if his creation operates in a way where a fetus may- in his judgment- die before being brought to term? Did he command that you would have the responsibility to decide such a thing or take matters into your own hands? Can you show me where he did so?

                God is the creator of the universe, and thereby all life- this creator is the sole arbiter of life. You are not god, some roastie is not god, and some guy in a lab coat is not God no matter how much you would like them to be.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Tell that to the crusaders, or hell your local constable

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Those people may indeed have to answer for what they do one day just as the young roastie who could not keep her legs closed out of wedlock may.

                I suspect the difference is that the roastie will most likely answer for it at the White Throne and most of those you mentioned will probably answer for it at the Seat of Christ.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If God is the sole arbiter of life, then by definition any death that happens is preordained by Him. Man is incapable of controverting the wishes of an omnipotent Creator.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                As the creator of the entire universe God is necessarily the sole arbiter of life- however, we will also all be judged for what we do on this earth. If your premise were true- there would be no need for judgment would there? Corinthians and Revelation make it explicitly that we will however fave judgment.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >need
                >God
                God doesn't have a need for judgment. You have a need to be judged, because God exists and has created you. This proceeds regardless of whether your actions are capable of flouting the will of God (which they are not, only His love and salvation).

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Look I realize you have a tiny mind but try explaining to me why there would be a judgment if everything we do is ok because we are the creation of God?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >child rape is good actually

                Hot take bro, you tell em

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Because that is the way God wills it to be. Ironic your accusing me of small-mindedness when you try to encompass God's inside your own because you're too feeble-headed to glimpse the divine scope of His brilliance.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                So you actually believe that God's judgment should not deter us from doing anything because he created us in the first place?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Including child rape right?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                What about homosex or women preachers?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I believe the prospect of God's judgment should deter any right-thinking individual from doing certain things, but I don't believe that intervening in anyone else's life to save them from themselves is expressive of any desires but your own. God's will, however, will show through in the outcome of any such efforts.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                God's commandment to earthly authority is to punish the wicked and protect the righteous.

                Explain this.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Your judgments of who is "wicked" or "righteous" are your own and only your own, therefore your following or not following of any such commandment remains an expression of your own wilfulness.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes and I think given the teachings in the Bible concerning the design and sanctification of marriage, coitus, and childbirth- that abortion is in fact manifestly wicked. As such- in a republic where the people constitute the sovereign, I should behave politically on these grounds in accordance with God's commands to earthly authority.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I have no problem with that. I just want you to be clear on where you stand vis-a-vis God's will versus your own.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                So you finally admit I win?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not the one who started arguing with you. I just wanted to clarify a point.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Lol ok m8

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I eat hard boiled eggs most mornings and am gearing up to try egg drop soup. Was thinking about getting some chickens cause I love the bastards, but I want to make sure I can eat enough eggs and not waste food like an asshole.

    Every abortion takes a life.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Bidensisters… Cornpop won

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Based Biden miming his approval rating

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Leg day… not even once

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I rarely take eggs cuz the way my school scrambles eggs isn't tasty to me

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Slonking is when you drink whole, raw eggs

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Oh ew, I'll never do that. Don't you guys care about salmonella

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    King Clarence, our King Clarence. Respect.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Got a kek from me

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Dozen a day minimum

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    imagine being "pro-death", that's fucking psychotic bro

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm pro moron death. You have a problem with that?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        have a nice day then

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I want to make women live in the world they think they live in.

Your email address will not be published.