Protect children from churches
- Thread starter dbjork6317
- Start date
You supported Biden and the Democrats who brought in hundreds of thousands of children to be used as sex slaves, slave labor , human body parts donors along with turning them into criminals
CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR SUPPORT OF THAT TO ME
It seems to me that your hectoring about the "moral decay being normalized by the Left" paints with a pretty broad brush. Same thing for your assertion that "Christianity is rooted in truth, life and order ... none of which align with what today's Left promotes."
I'm in church most every Sunday, and I would consider myself left of center. How about we not lecture you on how God operates and you extend us the same courtesy?
Hundreds of thousands of imported sex slaves? Who knew?! (Well, my guess is that Cheeto knew. He has made it a habit to import wives, and (like his best friend Jeff Epstein), he no doubt relishes the whole idea of multiple sex slaves.)wow
Here are the facts:
The Biden Administration ended DNA testing program on May 31st, 2023. This was confirmed in a memorandum issued by DHS... not a rumor or mischaracterization. Memo: End of DNA Testing Contract
Trafficking experts, whistleblowers, and public testimony confirm this was a minor policy shift—it eliminated a key safeguard. Human traffickers exploited the absence of DNA verification and HHS tracking failures. According to a DHS OIG report covering 2019–2023, ICE transferred nearly 448,820 unaccompanied children to HHS. But the agency also admitted that 291,000 children were not issued Notices to Appear (NTAs) in court, while another 32,000 failed to appear at scheduled hearings. Management Alert - ICE Cannot Monitor All Unaccompanied Migrant Children...
From FY 2019–2023, DHS transferred over 448,000 unaccompanied alien children (UACs) to HHS... yet more than 291,000 were never issued court notices and 32,000 failed to show up for hearings. ICE lost accurate addresses for over 31,000 children, hindering any ability to monitor them. The vast majority of these gaps occurred under the Biden administration. Homeland Security Committee
During a 2024 congressional hearing, whistleblower Tara Rodas testified to the Border Security Subcommittee that children were placed in the hands of criminal cartels, forced into labor, even had organs forcibly harvested, due to vetting failures and tracking breakdowns. ORR’s leadership was accused of stonewalling investigations. Homeland Security Report
Independent experts including Alicia Hopper and others testified about children being exploited in agriculture, manufacturing, and even organ harvesting schemes with minimal or no oversight. A Senate roundtable led by Senators Grassley, Cassidy, and Johnson highlighted these findings. Biden-Harris Administration Failure To Protect Migrant Children
Sitting in a church doesn’t make you a Christian... just like supporting the modern Left doesn’t make you one either. In fact, it’s impossible to reconcile genuine faith in Christ with the current Democratic agenda. You can’t stand for biblical truth while endorsing the murder and mutilation of children, the erosion of protections for women, the breakdown of the nuclear family, and the open celebration of moral decay. The two are fundamentally incompatible.
Let me get this straight... @Weapon_X wants us to believe that the Democrats have an express agenda designed to harm/molest/kill children, and so an omniscient God picked this guy to deliver the women and kids from evil?
- bragged about grabbing strange women by the *****
- bragged about standing in dressing rooms at teenage beauty pageants
- bragged about kissing random teenage beauty pageant contestants
- hung out with Epstein for decades
- told magazine that Epstein was great and shared a similar taste for young women
- wrote a pervy personal birthday note for Epstein's book that Ghislaine Maxwell put together
- signed copy of his own book to Epstein telling him that he was a great person
- said he wished child sex trafficker Maxwell well
- said on tv that it was too early to tell if his newborn daughter had his wife's boobs
- said that if his daughter wasn't his daughter, they'd probably be dating
- when asked on tv what he and his daughter had in common, he answered that they both liked sex as he sat next to her
- adjudicated sex abuser (judge actually used term rapist)
- married three times and cheated on all three wives
- banged pornstar while wife was home with newborn son
- 24 years old when his third wife was born
- said on radio that not getting venereal diseases was his "personal Vietnam"
- multiple accusations of sex abuse
- first wife wrote in autobiography that he raped and beat her
- said EJC was "not his type" as a defense, then in videotaped deposition mistook EJC for his second wife
Thanks for telling me (and others here) what does and does not make someone a Christian. Your sitting in judgment of the religious faith or morality of others is pretty entertaining.
And where are these "children" being "murdered and mutilated?" Where is your evidence of this? Where are these "erosions of protections for women" that you say are being caused by "the Left?" I DO see serious erosions of a woman's right to bodily autonomy, but that is coming from you and your fellow Trump Cultists.
And how do you think Jesus would treat gay people and immigrants? You know, WWJD? Recall that Jesus regularly dined with gentiles, tax collectors, and prostitutes. My guess is that Jesus would not be supportive of the cruelty that Trump operatives frequently impose (often with unabashed glee) on these already marginalized groups. Something is wrong with that, but you appear content to ignore it.
Classic projection. You accuse others of judging while writing an entire paragraph questioning someone else’s faith, morals, and values. The irony is rich.
As for evidence: over one million abortions a year in the U.S.... most supported, funded, and protected by the modern Left. If that’s not state-sanctioned murder of children in the womb, what is? And mutilation? We’re talking about minors being encouraged... sometimes without full parental consent... to undergo irreversible surgeries and hormone treatments. That’s real, that’s happening, and it’s not just fringe... it’s policy in blue states.
Erosion of protections for women? Let’s start with the destruction of women’s sports by forcing biological males into competition. Or how about letting men into women’s prisons, bathrooms, shelters and safe spaces? Ask any actual feminist with integrity if that feels like “progress.”
Calling abortion “women’s bodily autonomy” is not only unbiblical... it’s a manipulative strawman and a dog whistle for the uninformed. It ignores the moral weight of ending a separate, innocent life and cloaks it in euphemisms to avoid confronting the reality of what’s actually being defended.
And since you brought up Jesus... yes, He dined with sinners. But He never affirmed sin. He told the woman at the well, “Go and sin no more.” He didn’t say, “Live your truth.” He welcomed all, but He also called them to repentance. That’s the part many forget when trying to twist scripture into political slogans.
So spare me the cherry-picked theology and moral relativism. If you’re going to invoke Jesus, do it honestly.
Weapon_X: I'm really getting a big kick out of your posts. Crazy as all get out, but entertaining. The pomposity level is just off the charts.
Always wonder how folks who believe in an omnipotent God and think He hates abortion square the fact that as many as 20% of pregnancies don't make it past the first trimester naturally. Seems like God is ok with terminating pregnancies.
So your @yoshi121374 explaining YOUR SUPPORT for child exploitation is to stick your head up @dpic73 ‘s armpit and going into denial and using dpic73 for approval
Either you are for child exploitation or against it
I see you and dpic73 find a common cause and ground to defend
carry on
I see you don’t get out much and read the fake liberal news or lack of coverage of real events on this site
I would like to say I have NO direct knowledge of child brothels so my facts are NOT eyes on
My information only comes from Law Enforcement and you know how corrupt they can be
Shame that you discount the abuse of hundreds of thousands of children and even more vulnerable adults
Speaks to your integrity, compassion and Values
Last edited:
What a stupid post. How about you leave me out of this and we all take this to another thread. The OP has been very clear in the past that he wants this thread to be about the topic only.
Congratulates @tboonpickens with your razor sharp wise beyond your years analysis of moral values and conundrums have disqualified the entire world population from serving as US president except you and the TI CABAL OF TDS FOLKS in here who rage, hate, fear monger, incite or encourage incivil discord
Only you guys have the WISDOM to handle the beast of the US GOVERNANCE
I commend you for being God’s CHOSEN CHILDREN TO LEAD Americans to the light
When you say to me
What a stupid post
I totally agree with you that @tboonpickens @yoshi121374 and yourself @dpic73 share common moral values of simply agree with one another as thats you guys SAFE SPACE
It is definitely stupid to think ONLY CHURCHES are a thread to children living in a safe nuturing environment
It’s the PEOPLE STUPID who are the problem
BAD PEOPLE ARE EVERYWHERE
If you have children please make every effort to love and protect them as they are precious and NOT FARM ANIMALS to be used for an adults pleasure
DOES THIS CONFORM TO YOUR REQUIRED STANDARDS TO REPLY TO @yoshi121374 the OP
Last edited:
@LafayetteBear Just curious about the IN CHURCH EVERY SUNDAY remark
Once you do the duty or however you term it to attend church do you leave the four walls and then
Do you follow the principles to GO AND DO GOOD WHILE YOU CAN the other 167 hours left in the week!
Or are you a one-hour Sunday pew only Christian?
Just asking for friend!
I fully agree with your sentiment that "It is the PEOPLE STUPID who are the problem," although I have to say that you certainly managed to mangle the English language with that sentence. Keeping in mind that "people stupid" are the problem, I have a few additional comments regarding your post:
1. "What a stupid post" should have been surrounded by quotation marks.
2. In the third sentence of your post, it should have been "you" rather than "yourself."
3. In the third sentence of your post, "share common moral values of simply agree" does not make English sense.
4. In the third sentence of your post, it should have been "that's," not "thats."
5. In the third sentence of your post, "you guys SAFE SPACE" does not make English sense. The word "your" would have sufficed as a substitute for "you guys." But if you insisted on "you guys," at least you should have followed "guys" with an apostrophe to indicate the possessive use of that word. And if you've gathered by now that the third sentence of your post was a complete disaster, you are definitely starting to learn something.
6. In the fourth sentence of your post (the sentence that starts with "It is definitely stupid"), you managed to misspell "nurturing." The red line under the word "nuturing" should have clued you in that something was amiss.
7. In the penultimate sentence of your post, you should have inserted a comma after "children" and an apostrophe in "adult's."
Al of that being said, I have to agree with your editorial viewpoint (i.e., that bad people can be found everywhere, not just in churches). Good people can be found just about everywhere, too. (OK, maybe not Nazi rallies, but almost everywhere.)
I'm on my church council and serve my church in other volunteer capacities, so I end up spending, on average, about 5-6 hours a week on church activities. I get the gist of your question, however. You disagree with my political viewpoint, so you are intimating that it somehow prevents me from "doing good" when I am not in church, thereby making my membership in church hypocritical. If that is in fact your opinion, my guess is that nothing I say here is gonna disabuse you of it. I WILL say that although I disagree with much of your political thinking, I do not question your religious faith or commitment. That is between you and your Maker.. I might add that I have no issue with atheists, either. I do not agree with them, but this is a free country and I feel no compulsion to tell them what to believe.
Let me ask you something. Do you believe that the Ten Commandments should be posted in courthouses or public classrooms? Do you believe that public funds should be used to support parochial schools? ,
You are questioning someone’s faith... you’re just hiding behind faux humility to do it. Claiming others have no authority to speak on morality while you posture as the moral referee is textbook hypocrisy. Christians are called to judge righteously (John 7:24), to speak truth, and to discern right from wrong... not stay silent to avoid offending modern sensibilities. Quoting “remove the log from your eye” while ignoring your own moral posturing is the textbook definition of hypocrisy. If you want to silence people from calling out sin under the guise of humility, you’re not defending faith... you’re shielding compromise.
Your entire premise is dead wrong and impossible to reconcile with faith in Jesus. Both modern science and the Bible agree that life begins at conception. That’s not a “belief,” it’s a biological fact affirmed by embryology and Scripture (Psalm 139:13–16, Jeremiah 1:5). And your “it’s just a fetus” line is laughably ignorant. Fetus is a Latin word that simply means “young one” or “offspring.” It doesn’t mean “clump of cells”... it literally refers to a developing human being. Using clinical terms to dehumanize the unborn doesn’t change what they are: a distinct, living person made in God’s image. Jesus would never condone the idea that “bodily autonomy” justifies ending the life of “the least of these.” Euphemisms and majority opinion don’t turn moral evil into righteousness. You can try to dress it up however you want, but you’re arguing against science, against Scripture, and against the heart of Christ Himself.
And your flippant dismissal of the irreversible mutilation of children via gender ideology? That isn’t “rabid hatred” of trans people. It’s basic moral clarity. When minors are being fast-tracked into hormone blockers, sterilization, and double mastectomies without full parental consent... or even with ideological coercion... it’s not “fringe,” it’s policy in places like California, Oregon, and Washington. You don’t have to agree with the moral concern, but pretending it’s not real just shows you’ve checked out of reality altogether.
Your cherry-picked theology is embarrassing. Jesus ate with sinners, yes... but He didn’t affirm sin. He called them to repentance. He flipped tables, confronted corruption, and never once preached moral relativism. So spare us the faux-spiritual lectures. If you’re going to invoke Jesus, don’t butcher His message to prop up a political ideology that celebrates what He died to redeem.
You’re not the moral authority here. You’ve just been comfortably wrong for so long, you confuse pushback with judgment.
Two logical fallacies in one post... impressive. Definitely avoid an actual debate. You’d be outmatched from the start.
I disagree with many of your beliefs, both political and religious. But expressing disagreement is not "posturing as a moral referee." I make no claim to infallibility, religious or otherwise. I'll leave those kinds of claims to you. You want to "call out sin" and do so "uncompromisingly?" Go for it, Caiaphas. I'll be watching with amusement.
Aren't you and your colleagues from Operation Rescue due for your regular stint picketing outside your local Planned Parenthood facility?
All that needs to be said was posted by Weapon_X. Just a moment ago....you glossed over it and evidently do not have the discernment to acknowledge it is packed with truth..
Jesus is Lord my brother in Christ
I liked his post...it was filled with truthSo now you're genuflecting to both Trump and Weapon_X? Awesome. You go, brother.
It's getting exhausting engaging with you, as you clearly flood the zone to shut down any conversation by posting walls of text with no nuance thats incredibly one sided. But there is so much misinformation, or BIASED information in this entire post I can't help myself.
I think alot of issues that liberals have with MAGA is that its a complete and utter reversal of everything Evangelicals taught about Christ, Christianity, Christians in Politics, Compassionate Conservatism, and leaders with integrity, starting from the Moral Majority in the 80's and 90's. You can spin it however you want, but most of what was preached from the pulpit about politics for decades, has been almost completely abandoned by Evangelicals in their embracing the MAGA movement. They argued that the "degradation of society" by the non-Christian policies of the left and the democrats for decades, only to elect, repeatedly, administrations and leaders who were non-Christian and abandoned the majority of the things Evangelicals preached from the pulpit in the 80's/90's/00's.
Of course, MAGA has coopted alot of Evangelical talking points/views (abortion, for one, which we'll get to), but has abandoned the majority of what Evangelicals stood for on a moral, sociological, spiritual perspective in politics.
This is why there is often a backlash against Christians who support Trump/Maga- it just doesn't compute for people who grew up with Evangelicals/the Republican party advocating for things that are in complete opposition to MAGA and its ideology, at least in a moral/spiritual sense. So the left got berated for alot of things in a moral sense, that Maga now embraces.
This one is ROUGH homie. I'm sure you can find ~some~ modern science to back up the idea that life begins at conception. However, its fringe and not the consensus. You are simply projecting your theological and faith based views on science, and so would any "data" you send to back up your opinion.
At the end of the day, your view of abortion, life at conception, and the unborn is faith based on scripture. But everyone does not, nor should they believe that. That's why it's called faith. Liberals do not advocate for abortion because they ALL believe that they are killing a life. In fact, I'd argue at least (spitballing here) that more than 90% simply believe that life doesn't start at conception. And modern science in fact backs this up, if you take the faith based piece out (with the caveat that believing in science is also faith based, but another topic for another day).
So the constant attack of "the left kills babies" is simply false. That's like, your opinion man. And it's not theirs. So feel fine to believe what you do, based on faith. And let them believe/and advocate for what they believe in; that life doesn't start at conception, and thus, the life and the body and the choice of the woman matter more. Because they aren't killing babies; its just cells. You can be as mad as you want about that, vote against it, but again, thats just your opinion based on faith, and not what they believe. At all.
While many democrats politicians advocate and vote/make policies for this, I'd just argue this isn't a mainstream argument for the left. The percentage of liberals who believe that children should be able to go through any kind of gender reversal before 18 is low. Like shockingly low. Cite California, Oregon, Washington, whatever, but this is not a popular belief nor one that is advocated for in CHILDREN by the majority of the left.
This hypocrisy is all that is being pointed out.
I think alot of issues that liberals have with MAGA is that its a complete and utter reversal of everything Evangelicals taught about Christ, Christianity, Christians in Politics, Compassionate Conservatism, and leaders with integrity, starting from the Moral Majority in the 80's and 90's. You can spin it however you want, but most of what was preached from the pulpit about politics for decades, has been almost completely abandoned by Evangelicals in their embracing the MAGA movement. They argued that the "degradation of society" by the non-Christian policies of the left and the democrats for decades, only to elect, repeatedly, administrations and leaders who were non-Christian and abandoned the majority of the things Evangelicals preached from the pulpit in the 80's/90's/00's.
Of course, MAGA has coopted alot of Evangelical talking points/views (abortion, for one, which we'll get to), but has abandoned the majority of what Evangelicals stood for on a moral, sociological, spiritual perspective in politics.
This is why there is often a backlash against Christians who support Trump/Maga- it just doesn't compute for people who grew up with Evangelicals/the Republican party advocating for things that are in complete opposition to MAGA and its ideology, at least in a moral/spiritual sense. So the left got berated for alot of things in a moral sense, that Maga now embraces.
This one is ROUGH homie. I'm sure you can find ~some~ modern science to back up the idea that life begins at conception. However, its fringe and not the consensus. You are simply projecting your theological and faith based views on science, and so would any "data" you send to back up your opinion.
At the end of the day, your view of abortion, life at conception, and the unborn is faith based on scripture. But everyone does not, nor should they believe that. That's why it's called faith. Liberals do not advocate for abortion because they ALL believe that they are killing a life. In fact, I'd argue at least (spitballing here) that more than 90% simply believe that life doesn't start at conception. And modern science in fact backs this up, if you take the faith based piece out (with the caveat that believing in science is also faith based, but another topic for another day).
So the constant attack of "the left kills babies" is simply false. That's like, your opinion man. And it's not theirs. So feel fine to believe what you do, based on faith. And let them believe/and advocate for what they believe in; that life doesn't start at conception, and thus, the life and the body and the choice of the woman matter more. Because they aren't killing babies; its just cells. You can be as mad as you want about that, vote against it, but again, thats just your opinion based on faith, and not what they believe. At all.
While many democrats politicians advocate and vote/make policies for this, I'd just argue this isn't a mainstream argument for the left. The percentage of liberals who believe that children should be able to go through any kind of gender reversal before 18 is low. Like shockingly low. Cite California, Oregon, Washington, whatever, but this is not a popular belief nor one that is advocated for in CHILDREN by the majority of the left.
Liberals only do this, cuz like, MAGA really isn't very Christ like, which was the Republican calling card for decades. Going back to point one, but the left is very used to evangelicals wanting their politicians to do all you said, but also for Evangelicals/republicans to want them to embody the sermon on the mount, the call to make disciples of all nations (not this weird isolationism MAGA advocates for), the call to be a blessing to the nations, to not lie/steal/cheat, to not commit adultery, etc. These things MAGA rejects or embraces depending on when and how they want to.
This hypocrisy is all that is being pointed out.
I didn’t “flood the zone.” I responded to shallow talking points with substance... and if that’s too much for folks, maybe the problem isn’t the length, it’s the fact folks keep coming unarmed to a real debate. When truth is uncomfortable, some people dismiss it as one-sided rather than engage with it honestly. You’re not tired of the discussion... you’re tired of watching your folks losing it.
Your entire framing hinges on nostalgia for a version of Evangelicalism that prioritized tone over truth. The “compassionate conservatism” you idolize often folded under pressure, preaching morality while losing the culture war one concession at a time. MAGA didn’t abandon Christian values... it simply stopped pretending that soft language and polite politics were enough to defend them. The backlash isn’t about morality... it’s about discomfort. Discomfort with a movement that refuses to apologize for protecting life, defending truth, and calling sin what it is. You don’t get to redefine Christianity just because a blunt, unapologetic movement challenges your cozy, compromised version of it.
You’re just flat-out wrong on the science. The consensus in embryology is clear: life begins at conception... when a unique human organism with distinct DNA is formed. That’s not theology, it’s biology. Standard medical textbooks like The Developing Human by Moore & Persaud and Langman’s Medical Embryology state explicitly that human development begins at fertilization. That new organism isn’t a clump of random cells... it’s a genetically distinct human life at its earliest stage. You can disagree on moral grounds, but don’t pretend science is on your side. You’re not arguing science vs faith... you’re arguing ideology vs fact.
Your claim that most liberals reject gender care for minors doesn’t align with reality.
In California, Democrats passed SB 107, making the state a “trans sanctuary”, explicitly protecting access to puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery for transgender youth under 18... even shielding providers from out-of-state bans. California SB 107
Washington State courts upheld laws allowing minors to receive gender-affirming care without parental notification starting at age 13. SF Chronicle
Similar protections exist across progressive states, and California’s Attorney General has even warned hospitals they could face legal and funding risks for denying such care.
Polling shows Democrats overwhelmingly favor laws protecting gender care access, with ~70% of Democrats supporting protections and only about 30% opposing across multiple surveys. Pew Research Center
So yes, this isn’t fringe... it’s supported by mainstream Democratic leadership, legislation, and a clear majority of party voters.
You’re mistaking political packaging for spiritual authenticity. The Left didn’t abandon evangelicals because of some principled stand on the Sermon on the Mount... they abandoned them long before MAGA for standing on biblical values like life, marriage, and truth. If you think the Left suddenly discovered moral clarity because Trump had flaws, you’re not serious. Yes, Trump is imperfect... so was David, so was Paul... but policies matter. Protecting the unborn, defending religious liberty, securing borders, and rejecting gender ideology are not “un-Christlike.” They’re moral imperatives. The real hypocrisy is pretending the party that champions abortion, celebrates sexual confusion, censors dissent, and redefines truth has any moral high ground to stand on. Christ didn’t call for sanitized politics... He called for truth in all things. And truth exposes double standards, especially when they’re cloaked in faux moral outrage.
Again, you're repackaging your opinion and faith as fact. That's fine, we all do it. Like I said, fine if you feel like it's a cop out cuz I really don't care, but I don't have the energy to put my masters of theology hat on and go line by line. Just not worth it, and I'm about a half of decade out from having to try and educate the narrow minded and it's been very freeing so I'm not gonna rope myself back into it.
But understand it might be worth reading a little more into opposite views. The world isn't as black and white as you think, and your faith and opinions, your sources and worldview aren't fact.
This topic was a perfect one to point that out, but I'll let you decide whether or not you wanna get a little better read or not. I don't have any interest rebutting but the one thing I'll say is this: no one is nostalgic for evangelicals from the 90s and the left definitely never gaf about evangelicals either since about that time. It's just simple hypocrisy and should be pointed out.
Watch out, Tigres88. Looks like Weapons_X came armed to this debate. See below for how "well armed" he was/is. BTW, make sure to expand this post, as some of it does not appear unless you do.
Other information on the internet concerning Keith Moore indicates that he worked for (and was paid by) the government of Saudi Arabia, and that he approved Quranic explanations of how life begins, which Quranic explanations predated the invention of the microscope and stated that "man is created from ***** itself, as a fluid which is placed in the womb for a known term, and undergoes various further stages of development, with the fetus being a mass of 'congealed blood.' " A mass of "congealed blood?" Sure sounds like a pre-born baby to me! Awesome authority there, Weapon_X! Thanks for citing it.
Edit: I cannot believe it, but this Board's software censored the word sem*n (rhymes with seaman). Thought I should add this edit to clarify that.
Last edited:
Lol I'm not worried about it. His points are easily debunked and his sources of course are suspect. Not worth my time.
Just want to reiterate that literally no one is nostalgic for evangelicals from the 90s (and no one really likes them in 2025 either).
The republican party has just almost completely flipped in a few decades, and that's easy to point out, and the hypocrisy us glaring- but such is life. Political Parties always do it so whatevs
Last edited:
Appreciate the skepticism, but let’s stick to what’s relevant. Dr. Keith Moore’s collaboration with Saudi institutions doesn’t invalidate the core scientific consensus he contributed to. His work in The Developing Human, a widely used embryology textbook, is cited by medical schools worldwide... not for its theological implications, but for its detailed, peer-reviewed explanation of embryonic development. The consensus across modern biology, embryology, and medicine is that life begins at conception... when a unique human DNA sequence is formed. That view is supported by sources far beyond Moore, including the American College of Pediatricians and numerous embryology texts (e.g., Langman’s Medical Embryology). If your concern is with ancient religious interpretations, that’s a separate issue... but it doesn’t discredit the biological definition of when life begins, which is rooted in observable science, not theology.
The dichotomy whereby Republicans are willing to kick and scream for a random collection of cells that bears no semblance to anything human while simultaneously cutting SNAP benefits/Headstart programs/USAID and absolutely refusing to budge on common sense gun reform as school children get slaughtered in their classrooms is one of life's most obvious "they're really just full of ****" pleasures. And also let's obsess over a random group of cells in someone else's body while screaming that climate change is a hoax while ******* over future generations of actual humans.
Five logical fallacies in one post... impressive. That would get you laughed out of a serious debate. Congrats… it takes real talent to be that dumb. But I digress...
Calling unborn human life a “random collection of cells” isn’t just misleading... it’s scientifically false. Embryology confirms that human life begins at conception with unique DNA and a continuous developmental process. Dismissing that as meaningless ignores both biology and ethics. You can advocate for protecting unborn life and still hold reasonable views on social spending, safety, and environmental stewardship... those aren’t mutually exclusive. Bundling unrelated political positions into one angry rant may feel cathartic, but it’s intellectually lazy. If you want to challenge pro-life arguments, start by engaging with them honestly... because mocking strawmen isn’t the same as making a point.