ttbn,

Well, you gave civil-ish discourse a go for a bit there, and it was a nice change.

Now, it seems you're back to your good Christian self with the hurling of insults and making baseless assertions about the content and accuracy of my replies because you have no answers to them.

Just as Jesus would do.

Unless, of course, you can explain to me exactly why my “beliefs” are “wacko”?

http://j.gifs.com/vb20nr.gif

ttbn,

Talking about empty heads?

An open mind is not the same as an empty head.

And, judging others as being empty-headed when your
own is like the Bermuda Triangle doesn't make you
any smarter or give you any cred.

Try again.

"Yes, debunked. The courts found that the footage was deceptively edited to create a misleading narrative."

Well that's just not true. The courts found no such thing but Planned Parenthood made that assertion. Which is why the unedited footage was also released which showed the exact same discussions about selling foetal body parts. Still its not surprising that you fell for this since, as we've seen, you always accept, fervently and with alacrity, anything the authorities tell you to believe.

So you reject evidence of late term murders because as a percentage of (what? exactly) they are in your view, rare. I wonder if the dead kids would agree that their deaths were inconsequential?

I call for the government to enforce the law of murder and you think I'm calling for more laws. What a dill!

"So, you’re not going to tell me why I’m wrong about your misrepresenting or Northam’s words?"

You make an unresearched, unsupported, unsupportable assertion and then demand that I disprove the mere assertion.
Did you know that the third moon of the second planet in the Alpha Centuri system is made of strawberry yoghurt. I'll leave you to disprove it.

__________________________________________________________________-

Paul wrote: "How are you going with that 60,30,10, Reuters lie you posted."

Its always cute when Paul demands evidence for something he doesn't want to be true, given that he (1) wouldn't know evidence if it hit him in the arse and (2) has specifically said he refuses to provide evidence for his daffy claims.

Still to prove how much better I am than him.... http://tiny.cc/gkamzz

Mhaze,

You're still dodging the main points with deflections and exaggerations. Let’s break it in a way that will hopefully make doing this more difficult for you:

Footage and courts:

You claim that the courts didn’t find the footage to be deceptively edited, but that’s exactly what happened. The heavily edited videos you’re referring to were discredited because they misrepresented the conversations.

Releasing "unedited" footage afterward doesn't undo the damage caused by the selectively edited version, nor does it change the fact that these conversations were framed to mislead. If the case is as airtight as you claim, why did multiple investigations (including Republican-led ones) find no wrongdoing?

You’re still clinging to a debunked narrative, and it's telling that you choose to ignore the outcomes of multiple legal investigations.

Late-term abortions and murder:

You continue to incorrectly refer to the rare cases of late-term abortions as "murders," but again, these are highly regulated medical decisions involving severe fetal anomalies or threats to the mother’s life.

You can toss around inflammatory language all you want, but the law and medical ethics don’t support your argument that these are murders. And no one is saying these deaths are "inconsequential" - they’re tragic, but that doesn’t mean they’re routine, nor does it justify your oversimplified framing.

Government enforcement of laws:

You claim you’re just asking for the government to enforce murder laws, but the fact is, these cases aren't breaking those laws. Late-term abortions are regulated, and murder laws are enforced. What you’re advocating for is the further policing of deeply personal medical decisions.

Northam’s words and your deflection:

Your example of strawberry yoghurt on a moon is a weak analogy and doesn't apply here. Northam’s words were clear and involved difficult, medically complex situations. You took his words out of context to suggest he was advocating for the killing of newborns, which is simply untrue, you’re yet to provide any credible evidence showing that my interpretation is wrong.

If you're going to continue with this argument, at least engage honestly with the facts instead of throwing out conspiracy theories and wild analogies.

G'Day John,

"If you're (mhaze) going to continue with this argument, at least engage honestly with the facts instead of throwing out conspiracy theories and wild analogies."

Please remember mhaze is a devout Trumpster, and like The Dangerous Doctor Donald himself, lying and conspiracy theories comes naturally to both of them.

"Releasing "unedited" footage afterward doesn't undo the damage caused by the selectively edited version,"

The unedited version wasn't release "afterward", but was in fact released concurrently. The edits were simply to remove periods where nothing happened. You're just making this stuff up as you go, aren't you?

Which makes your admonition to " at least engage honestly with the facts" rather hilarious.