I think that statistically speaking a uniformed American soldier in Iraq is much safer than a baby in the womb at a Planned Parenthood office.
I realized this as I thought how odd it is that Liberals whine about the loss of 2,500 soldiers (as though they care) in a time of war, who bravely volunteered their lives to protect our way of life, but don't blink about TENS OF MILLIONS of murdered babies.
Feel free to disagree and show everyone what a wacko you are, or let me know if I've overlooked something in my reasoning.
2006-06-16 08:43:39 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"Yep" ... I didn't overlook anything. Not every baby going into Planned Parenthood is mudered and not every soldier in war is killed. I specifically stated that the soldier has a better chance of surviving.
2006-06-16 08:47:06 · update #1
What an EXCELLENT
INTELLIGENT
POINT!
That was a great thought. One that a Liberal could never get.
KEEP up the GOOD fight...FIGHT THEM!!!
WE WILL WIN!!!!
Liberals hate us!!! I LOVE that!!!
PLEASE keep posting...never let them get you down!!
2006-06-16 08:53:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
FYI, Planned Parenthood also does prenatal care and examinations. This is something you overlooked.
So I'd say the American troops in Iraq are far more at danger.
Oh wait I just got it-you actually think you're intelligent! OH! OK. Thanks for my laugh of the day. I've been waiting for it.
2006-06-16 08:45:57 · answer #2 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
actually we did ok getting out of Vietnam. The in demand image of the Marine superb from a helicopter skid replaced into from at the same time as the NVA invaded the US Embassy in Saigon, at the same time as the city finally fell--lengthy when we pulled our troops out. believe me, the facilities plan for each contingency they could imagine of. They already have withdrawals planned at countless degrees of % and urgency. and many grunts have their personal plans to guard the Airport and commandeer some thing which will fly. All they desire are the orders to carry those withdrawals out.
2016-10-14 05:39:29 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A fetus can only be aborted within the first two trimesters of a pregnancy. The fetus at that stage is not a human being. It is a cluster of cells completely dependent upon the mother for survival.
2006-06-16 09:01:01 · answer #4 · answered by anonymous 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I got a crappy grade in stats, but I'm sure your odds are correct.
Another thing, isn't it ironic it's called "Planned Parenthood" when almost everyone there is there because they are entering into "Unplanned Parenthood?" If they planned it, there really wouldn't be a problem.
2006-06-16 08:47:02 · answer #5 · answered by obviously_you'renotagolfer 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I just love it when assclowns like "crippled plaything" write stuff like that. Newsflash for you ... newborn babies are "completely dependent upon the mother for survival" as well.
2006-06-16 11:51:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
freedom of choice take that away and we are left with what. I understand some call it murder but who are we to judge you and other pro lifers are not GOD get over it.
2006-06-16 08:49:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you are absolutely correct and I applaud you saying this!!!! I wish more people thought like us!
2006-06-16 08:47:02 · answer #8 · answered by hailtotheredskins1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You've got a huge point there dude.
2006-06-16 09:03:57 · answer #9 · answered by zorahudson@sbcglobal.net 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very Interesting.......as for Wacko....Buddy ...you are the one that came on here with this question.....
2006-06-16 08:52:34 · answer #10 · answered by celine8388 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋