https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/politics/abortion-roe-v-wade-supreme-court/index.html
No more killing of human fetuses for your mistakes of opening them legs (excluding rape, threats of death).
Red state problem. It will suck for every guy in a red state who can't afford to fly whoever they knocked up to a blue state to get an abortion.
shareExactly. Many of those out of work baby daddies will be spending time behind bars when they can’t pay support. Then there’s people like Broidy/ Hannity.
shareBroidy?
Uh, you know that wasn't really Broidy's mistress he knocked up for an abortion right?
Yes he had a vasectomy twenty years ago. That’s why I said Broidy / Hannity. The truth will come out, and I think it’s Hannity kid since Hanbity was most worried when his name came out in public.
shareAh, sorry I didn't pick up that's what you're implying. Interesting since I hadn't considered that angle, it's possible you're right. But unless more evidence emerges that points to Hannity in my opinion there's really no doubt it was Trump.
Trump's the one with the history of cavorting with Hef in his mansion. Playmate Shera Bechard had previously been Hef's girlfriend and it was Trump that had this mysterious falling out with Hef in 2016. She also looks a little too much like Ivanka to believe Trump passed up on the opportunity to hit that.
Meanwhile Hannity has no history cavorting with playboy playmates. From all that is known he's been squeaky clean in his private life while his Fox colleagues were getting slammed with sexual harassment lawsuits. We do know Broidy has a history of trying to bribe government officials for contracts and in a previous case against him for bribing the NY comptroller board he made hush money payments to the mistress of an official he was bribing.
And how could Hannity have rewarded Broidy (who from what I can tell, is of similar class of wealth as Hannity) for being his fall guy? What we do know is that Broidy's been richly rewarded with 600 mil in security contracts from peddling his current inside proximity to Trump sealed about a month after Bechard had her abortion. It appears to me that Broidy gladly took the fall for Trump in exchange for being positioned to cash in on sums far above and beyond his more "modest" Hannity level 50-100 mil net worth if even that.
One last thing to consider, it was that shady lawyer Keith Davidson again of the unholy Cohen-Davidson liaison who (mis)-represented McDougal and Stormy that also represented Bechard. Their longtime MO had been about keeping Trump mistresses quiet and Davidson was reported to have reached out to Cohen on Bechard. How would he even know to talk to Cohen about Hannity?
Something shady is indeed going on, and Avenatti will get to the bottom of it.
It could be T-rump as the baby daddy, but my instinct goes with Hannity. He was way to scared and nervous on TV that night, couldn’t even talk straight. If your only “ innocent” connection to Cohen is real estate advice during a ten minute conversation, why so scared on TV? Me thinks he’s the baby daddy - even though he promotes himself as a good ol Irish Catholic boy who would never cheat on his wife, let alone convince his mistress to have an abortion. It would end his career.
As for a deal with Briody to be his fall guy? I think Hannity has much more powerful connections in the GOP, and was able to advance Broidy within the party -very favorably.
T-rump on the other hand wouldn’t care at all. Another humiliating slap in the face to Melania-and that’s what it’s all about.
Oh, I don't for a second believe Hannity employed Cohen over innocent real estate advice.
But it could have really been anything that he needed a thuggish fixer to help him do that would have made him plenty nervous about being exposed.
And actually I do think Trump would care because Bechard had her abortion in the Fall of 2017, which would imply an active affair paying her rent and putting her up as reported that Broidy did while Trump has been actively serving in office.
I think that throttles the scandal to an entirely different level. The fallback justification of evangelical leaders over why they don't condemn Trump compared to Bill Clinton is because his affairs were in the past while Clinton carried on while he was serving. This would absolutely destroy that last moral vestige of why they treat Trump differently. It's not definite they'd bail on him, but he'd have to know there was some risk he'd lose support from his staunchest religious followers if an ongoing affair was exposed, which would be enough for him to care about it not getting out. He still denies the Stormy and McDougal affairs to this day.
Actually the 600 mil in security contracts that Broidy secured was from the UAE as reported in the Times from pitching himself alongside George Nader as point men and influence peddlers as part of Trump's Middle East envoy. He also had Saudi contracts lined up that dumped him after the story got hot. But my take is the UAE kept their contract with Broidy partly as a favor for Trump in their continuing efforts to buy influence. No way Hannity's GOP connections could have landed Broidy that gig.
I didn't know the abortion was so recent - thought it was a few years ago, and that makes a huge difference.
shareWomen who get abortions are overwhelmingly urban and liberal. It's their problem.
sharelolz. You sound very naive. I'm quite sure women in whatever rural stickville you reside in get abortions too.
You'll just never hear about it because they aren't typically going to be eager to share such personal info with those that will judge them for it like you.
More fear mongoring from the demokkkrat media. They have no platform, so they have to push the “woman’s right to choose” crap.
Abortion will never be banned.
Even if Roe Vs Wade is overturned, it would just go back to the states. Over half the states would keep it. California would provide all abortion and transportation services for free to anyone who wants them. Anything to kill more unborn babies.
Abortion has been the cornerstone of every demokkkrat platform from dog catcher up for 30 years. Taking this issue out the grey area and allowing voters to decide its fate takes once and for all, takes it out of the demokkkrat campaign playbook. Can’t have that happen.
Its been the cornerstone of every Republican platform for the last 45 years. What's your point?
shareWrong. Reagan rarely talked about abortion. Trump was always pro choice.
Name a demokkkrat who’s made the national stage that was pro life. There aren’t any. Because the abortion card is mandatory for the pro killing of unborn babies party.
Wrong as usual. It doesn't matter how much Reagan "talked" about it. Both parties adopted abortion into their official platforms in 1976. Reagan did so because he was interested in strongly courting the evangelical block for the run he was eyeing. So in spite of liberalizing abortion laws while gov of California he made a purely political calculation for evangelical support that Goldwater had warned against. Today we suffer the consequences.
Get your facts straight.
But Bob Dole, who was trying to win support from conservatives in his bid to become Ford’s running mate, realized that a strong antiabortion platform plank could conciliate Reagan delegates and gain approval from Catholics and social conservatives. With memories of his own successful pro-life reelection strategy fresh in his mind, Dole met with representatives of Ellen McCormack’s Democratic presidential campaign in order to find out what they would accept in a platform plank on abortion, and he then worked with Senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), a sponsor of a “human life amendment,” to draft a platform plank that opposed abortion in much more strident language than the president had originally desired. Helms, who considered abortion to be “murder,” was one of the earliest conservative Republican converts to the pro-life cause; by 1976, he had already written an antiabortion article for Human Events and had been a featured speaker at national pro-life rallies, so he was well versed in the language of the right-to-life movement. He was also a staunch Reagan supporter. By enlisting Helms’s support in drafting the antiabortion platform plank, Dole helped to mollify conservative Republicans, Reagan delegates, and pro-life activists, all of whom had been reluctant to support the president.
IIRC, I believe it came out that Patti Reagan had an abortion in her early 20s when her dad was Governor in California. This came out during his presidential campaign in 1980. I believe his team tried to squash it, but he and Nancy kept quiet. I don’t think Patti ever denied it. Nancy always referred to her in private as a disappointment in their family, though.
shareexcluding rape
If this is approved I hope it's only state-by-state and not national or there will be a revolution for sure.
shareEven if Roe v Wade is overturned federally, the worst that can happen is that it will be up to the states to decide.
If you don't live in a state dominated by religious anti-abortion ideologues in government, then you don't have anything to worry about.
This will primarily effect the poor and disenfranchised in those backwater states who won't be able to afford to travel to a progressive state to get an abortion and will get saddled with kids they can't afford and/or can't care for.
"This will primarily effect the poor and disenfranchised in those backwater states who won't be able to afford to travel to a progressive state to get an abortion and will get saddled with kids they can't afford and/or can't care for"
Or possibly doing some pretty dangerous things.
This is what is said about birth control pills, but there is not one single woman in the world who will have a baby just because no one would buy birth control pills for her. People change their behavior. Even if a woman had a baby, she would put it up for adoption if she could not afford it.
I see liberals talk about gun control the same way as if they have never even heard of a gun before. You have never met a poor person?
Nope can't say I have.
But what I do have is compassion and sympathy for any child born to a mother unprepared mentally or fiscally to become a parent, especially if they're given up for adoption to become a ward of the state.
I just wish we could prevent people from crossing state lines to get an abortion. If a state wants to go back to the Middle Ages, then we should force everyone that lives there to abide by those archaic rules. Of course, that would mean democrats would win every election if all red states made abortion illegal. The only way an abortion ban works is if people are allowed to avoid the rules, which makes the whole thing pointless.
I mean, they even admit that abortions should be allowed for cases of rape. Is the fetus a human life or isn't it? Rape doesn't change that. It's obvious this is being done for votes, not ideology.
A more humane approach would be to only accept those that change party stances. Some would cross state lines to get said abortion and still remain loyal to the party that put them in that position in the first place as with any party that goes against what they need/want.
shareThe other option would be for them to find some at home doctor which isn't sanitary or could hold some fake license due to malpractice or whatnot. Basically going to the black market to get abortions done.
shareThat will definitely be a consequence for sure.
It happens all the time in those hardcore Catholic Central and South American pseudo-theocracies where abortion is illegal.
Desperate women and girls do desperate things to avoid the public shame of unexpectedly getting pregnant in those environments. Attempted self-abortions using clothes hangers or even the extreme measure of punching themselves in the gut is not unheard of.
A Cnn source... so we know the opposite is true.
share[deleted]
So I assume this means that you meant to have a child with that hooker you openly admitted to sleeping with? I just want to make sure you are practicing what you preach.
Keep in mind people this is a guy who claims to be a principal of a school. Read his posts and it is quite apparent this guy is out of his mind.
[deleted]
I have to be entertained. You provide entertainment 24/7.
Also people this is one of those that believes in the war on drugs even though it has been a complete failure.
Answer a simple question if weed was legalized tomorrow would you smoke it?
Reported for calling someone a "moron".
share[deleted]
So that means you reported hippo for his insults as well correct?
shareHe was responding to your far more vile insults.
shareSo you didn’t report UltimateHippo?
Of course he did not report him. He acts as if he is so offended but lets get down to the real reason. Him and UltimateHippo are both extremist right wing people which refuse to hear another point of view. I do not lean to the right like he does therefore now he reported me. Read through UltimateHippo's posts he constantly refers to people as all kinds of various insults yet ThreeTenToYuma has never said a word. It is because UltimateHippo is right wing therefore he gets a free pass to do whatever he pleases.
Kind of like how Trump gets a free pass to do the things that Obama would have been raked over the coals for. I think it is foolish to be totally biased to any side. Thing is I am all for calling a person on the carpet if they do something wrong but it needs to work on both ends of the spectrum. People like UltimateHippo will give Trump a free pass because it is a guy from his team. Quite sad that people like this can't be reasoned with.
I’ll start reporting UH. Don’t you worry! Lol
shareSo you respond to your problems by tattling to the moderators? That’s real mature
shareRemember your supporter ThreeTenToYuma started the reporting stuff. I think we figured him and his supporters should be held up to the same standards that they are pushing onto others. Thank him for that.
shareI didn't report anyone, why would you report me when I didn't do anything to you?
shareI am going to apply the same logic you did against me. Since you did not correct him and tell him not to do that to me you agree with him. Start behaving yourself and coming up with actual reasonable points without spitting out insults. Any further insults that come from you will be reported same goes for ThreeTenToYuma.
shareI am not responsible for ThreeTen's actions, he probably figures that sense the left is so into censorship he'd give you a taste of your own medicine. Just saying....
shareThen I am not responsible for complaints I did not make against TDKR. Remember when you held complaints I made against TDKR against me when I did not even make them? You said well you did not correct them therefore you agree with them.
Well now I am playing the same way. Since you did not correct him you agree with him.
I have never reported anyone on here. He is the one playing that game. So if I am going to be held to a standard so is the other side period. I do not believe in censorship of any kind. Notice how he did not report you when you made an insult. He did not because if you are on his side of the equation you get a free pass to do whatever you please.
I think reporting to moderators is a childish thing to do regardless if you are left or right. However since he started it I can play that game as well.
Well it sounds like this is something the two of you need to sort out.
shareOh we did do not worry. Since he wants to play by those rules everyone will be held by those same standards including you. Therefore no more wishing for people to die and calling them various insults. Mind your tongue from now on.
shareEh, I'm not going to worry, the moderators don't appreciate it when people report posts that are a simple disagreement. Chances are they will get tired of your nonsense and just ban you.
shareReported for multiple insults.
shareOh good! You did count UltimateHippos multiple insults and reported him.
I’ll do the same and he will have multiple reports on his multiple insults!
Gee this is fun.
Wrong. I reported moviefanatic505.
shareSo you only believe in censorship for those you disagree. Typical conservative hypocrite. Can't say I'm surprised.
sharePreaching to the choir. It is because they have no means to debate therefore now they want to silence you. I am open to debate any extreme right wing on here. It is so easy to dismantle their points it is down right comical.
shareOk, I took care of the conservative one so we have an even scorecard! Thanks for telling us how easy it is to report posts that make us cry!!
shareI'm sorry but until laws are enacted that tell men what they can do with their sexual organs and sperm, this is none of yours or anyone else's business. Do you include incest in there, or is that a sacred cow? The point here is that this is a personal, private discussion between a woman and her healthcare provider and NO ONE ELSE. No one knows an individual woman's need for it and you don't have the right to demand. The right to a woman's sexual autonomy and her right to her own womb has been codified into Canada's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Ireland just downvoted restrictive laws regarding abortion because according to their ruling it, "interfered with the rights and freedom of women to exercise their own free will over their bodies." Slam dunk I'd say. The World Court agrees with that. A woman is not a brood mare. Her womb is not a battlefield. Ironic that Christians and other religious zealots want to protect a fetus, but not the mother who carries it. That whole "the life of the baby over the life of the mother" is stupid. A mother can have another baby, a baby cannot have another mother. Further these religious zealots are all for babies, but not for giving children who are already here afterschool programs, school lunches, textbooks, pencils, programs that provide diapers, bottles, formula, breastfeeding assistance, ongoing care for mothers and babies.... and while your pontificating on the "opening of them legs" how about the hypocritical Christian men who when they impregnate their mistresses, are the first to drive them mistresses to an abortion clinic to abort them thar fetuses so their hypocrisy keeps hidden?
shareWhat do you think about child support and male circumcision then?
I think you are not a liberal. You are a corporatist. That's why you injected a "health care provider" into the decision making. This is the same thing feminist did to birth control pills by keeping them illegal over the counter. They want others to pay.
Since I'm not religious...hence Jewish, I don't believe in male circumcision. If insurance companies pay for Viagra, then they must also pay for the pill and any contraceptives women need or use. See the correlation there? Seems religious society is all about the erection, but not about the women taking responsibility through providing necessary aids to avoid pregnancy. So here's something for you..... Do you know The Pill isn't always used for contraception? It's used for other necessary needs such as controlling the period. My dad was a nut who thought if you used The Pill you were a slut. He found mine and suddenly started pulling out the "no daughter of mine is going to be a slut" and proceeded to toss my pills in the garbage. Problem was I wasn't using the pills at 12 for contraceptives. I was using them because MY FAMILY DOCTOR was worried about a severe anemic problem I was developing due to my 14 day periods and excessive bleeding. See that's something men don't know or care about. I was missing weeks of school due to being tired all the damn time. My mom would tell my dad I was sick and that was the reason I was staying home. This continued for almost a year. I had to repeat a year because of how badly I was bleeding. Having to carry heavy pads to school in those days was bad because there was a stigma attached to that. Without those pills I would have probably died due to the excessive bleeding. Yet my dad thought me a slut. So in the end if erectile aids such as Viagra is provided through insurance companies, quid pro quo should go to the pill, diaphragm, female condoms..... See how that works?
shareNo. You are medically ignorant. Viagra is not a male corollary to female birth control. Anabolic steroids are and are severely illegal. Birth control pills would be illegal too if it were not for feminist special treatment since they pollute the public water supply and make amphibians transgender. Your doctor took advantage of the rigged system and your medical ignorance to prescribe you a very harmful form of estrogen like estradiol in a pill instead of a more appropriate less harmful form of estrogen like estriol in a shot, still neither addresses cause.
Also nobody is required to buy viagra insurance just like nobody is required to buy diabetes insulin insurance. We are only required to buy insurance for politically correct things like alcoholism, AIDS, psychotherapy, and birth control pills, and even of those there is still copayment except for birth control pills which are given a special exemption among special exemptions! There is nothing comparable. It is not even health care and is not insurance. Suicide is not insurable for example.
You did not understand my post was about how feminists have made birth control pills expensive, low quality, and inaccessible. Just because they are free to you you do not see that pharmaceutical corporations are profiting. I want birth control pills to be sold over the counter like cough drops. You want a woman to submit to the authority of a nice expensive male doctor who decides for her. I think maybe you should also have a circumcised if you want to be equal to a male since males are circumcised. See how that works?
No, you are incorrect. I didn't say that The Pill was equal to Viagra. I said that insurance companies will pay for Viagra but they will not pay for The Pill, which technically is the same in terms of what it does. It helps a woman's menstrual cycle as Viagra HELPS a man's erection. And shut up about the "feminist" crap. This isn't about feminism, it's about equal rights. If a man gets to have his erectile dysfunction paid for by insurance companies due to health issues, so should women who need The Pill for their issues such as excessive bleeding as I pointed out in my post. And shut up again about the "pharmaceutical" companies. They get just as rich on the sale of Viagra and other medications.
"You want a woman to submit to the authority of a nice expensive male doctor who decides for her."
Nice one. What "authority"? What like she can't make a decision for her lil own self? Quit with the infantalization. Women KNOW what they want. I have a male doctor because I like him. My male doctor's wife, also a doctor, works with him. I had my choice of him or her.... I chose him. See that word in there CHOSE/CHOICE. Shocking I know.
"I think maybe you should also have a circumcised if you want to be equal to a male since males are circumcised. See how that works?"
You just lost the argument. Why? bringing something into it that doesn't belong. I see mommy and daddy didn't teach you where the clitoris is. See how that works? Feminists haven't made the pill expensive. Insurance companies and those aforementioned pharmaceutical companies have made it expensive. Tinfoil hat wearers, where do they come from?
One further note here in Canada we have socialized medicine. My doctor is paid by the country and my tax money. He's not expensive, he's considered family. His duty is to me as his patient, not to pontificate like some sanctimonious moron.
For sure a woman has every right to her own body and what they want to do with it. The line gets clouded though once she herself introduces another life/being into herself which is what the conservative stance is I think. Basically you're free to do what you want with your body as long as it doesn't involve someone else which a fetus/baby would be. Sort of like if your parents were abusing you, human services would intervene, take you away into foster care, arrest the parents, and not just leave you hanging for dear life.
The real argument here is that no liberal can really point out which stage a fetus is considered not a human. Cognitive dissonance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCSZYJywQPM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUd6Z_zyXZM
For me if the life of the mother is at stake then the life of the fetus if it's deemed necessary through the mother's doctor to abort at any stage is allowable. There is no "real" argument because if I'm pregnant and I'm killed or die, that baby inside me dies. See how that works? That baby is reliant on my body and my blood stream for its life. Cognitive dissonance my ass. It's about men and religious women trying to control something that is none of their business. Here's something to ponder, I hate religion. But I'm not going to stand outside a mosque, church, or synagogue and yell and scream my fool head off at anyone who enters because of that hatred. I say they're allowed to do whatever they want to do within their own lives as long as it doesn't impact with my life.... Ergo, religious nutbars standing outside a WOMEN'S HEALTH CLINIC carrying signs and other shit because they think they have the right to intercede in a woman's business with HER DOCTOR.
True story here, my elderly mother was in the hospital here in Canada for a health issue due to her aging. I was visiting her one day and I was leaving the hospital grounds and there was a "display" of the pro-life idiots waving their placards with disgusting images on them. Here in Canada it is illegal for them to protest outside of clinics and hospitals that provide abortion services. So I'm on my way out and there is this guy ahead of me on the sidewalk who approaches one of these nuts and says to the one man there that it's none of his business what happens with a woman and her doctor/body. This group of protesters of eight had small children with them, yet they have horrific images of aborted fetuses on huge placards. This guy says to the pro-choice guy that his children don't need to see the product of his delusions and that they should have those children removed for exposing them to these images. He said, "If I did that to my kid children's services would take my kid from me...." Yet pro-choice hypocrites are allowed to get away with it. This guy asked me my feelings and I more or less told him and them what happens in my body is my business. He thanked me for being a clear headed woman.
That baby is reliant on your man's wallet.
share"no liberal can really point out which stage a fetus is considered not a human"
Except no religious conservative anti-abortion ideologue can either.
They can claim to, but they're basing their beliefs on blind faith that human life begins at conception.
How can anything be more cognitive dissonant than a belief based on blind faith?
At least the secular view acknowledges the difficulty in determining when to consider a fetus human and leaving it up to the mother to decide herself within the first two trimesters. Because after all, it is her body.
Human life is set in motion once the sperm and egg join together to form a zygote. It's biology.
share"Human life set in motion" is a nebulous term seeing how advances in genetic engineering and cloning have made it possible for every cell in your body to potentially become a fully developed human being. So what's your point? Every time you scratch your ass you're participating in a genocide of cells or what you'd call "human life set in motion". You're just being silly treating a single cell like it should be afforded full protections of a human because a single cell by definition is not human life. It's a cell. Within a few days a zygote becomes an embryo. An embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst while there are 150,000 cells in the brain of a fly. It is morally and ethically indefensible to treat an embryo as a human because it's a biological fact blastocysts don't even have brains. This is biology.
shareWhat a hollow sentiment. Human fetuses count as a human life, but not if they were created by rape? What kind of twisted logic is that? It's obvious this is about garnering votes from stupid religious people, and not on an actual belief system that values fetuses and embryos as human lives.
shareA fetus is a human if a man murders a pregnant women. That is actual hypocracy rather than proposed hypocrisy, but liberal children cannot get back at mommy + daddy for making them go to Church by protesting that.
shareNot in all states and certainly not in all cases. In the case of murdered actress Sharon Tate, the Manson defendants Tex Watson, Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkel were not charged with the death of Tate's baby. Tate was 8 1/2 months pregnant at the time. Scott Peterson was charged with the death of Connor Peterson because the laws had been changed in California but they're very strict. The fetus has to be viable, meaning able to live outside its mother's womb on its own and breathe on its own for a murder charge to be filed. If it cannot breathe on its own and live on its own free and clear of the mother, then murder cannot be charged.
shareThank you for the information. I am somewhat pro-abortion because I want for abortion to be manditory if a woman is single or on government benefits except that this could never work. For the same reason the free school and health care have made us fat and stupid. I think we would end up where everyone is made to be on government support so that no one could have kids. I also want abortion to put people into jail if they cannot afford it so they can work off the cost. It is not fair for me to pay for your body. But this California law sounds sickening to me. Imagine a husband has his pregnant wife murdered and he loses his wife and his child to be. The child would have a whole life ahead of it and should be valued highly.
shareOkay as a rape victim I can say had I become pregnant by my rapist, that would have been a lifetime of being connected to the guy who violated me. Sorry but that's not for you to decide. And adoption still has that connection in that the "child" can seek me out later on and then know they were a product of rape. No kid needs that in their lives. Life is hard enough as it is. They are only human lives if they can exist from conception free and clear of a womb. Since they can't, then it's a woman's choice.
shareWow. You totally missed the point like an idiot. You somehow read what I wrote and assumed I was pro-life. A pro-lifer isn't going to call republicans out on cheesing votes while simultaneously calling religious people stupid.
This was my point: If you believe a fetus is a human life, then you absolutely cannot support the "murder" of one even in the case of rape. Everyone who supports abortion in the case of rape or incest is 100% pro-choice, as am I, but many of these so-called pro-lifers try to have it both ways to get the votes of stupid people. That was my only point.
Wow dude, I usually like your posts but this is pretty harsh toward someone on the same side of an argument as you that simply misunderstood you.
shareYou whine about all the reporting going on and now you whine about being too harsh. I guess you're here for that sweet spot.
shareWhen did I whine about all the reporting going on?
Edit to add that I have never whined or complained about any reporting on this board. Think you have me confused with someone else.
Also I dont know if you edited your post to Prometheus or not but I could've sworn it told her to learn to fuckin read which is what I thought was most harsh (although i didn't see the need to call her an idiot either). If you didn't actually edit the post maybe it's me who needs to learn to fuckin read lol
shareComplaining about it just creates problems two fold. First, it summons the board's resident snowflake ThreeTen to report it whether it's report-worthy or not. Second, it derails the conversation. Since you brought it up, I edited it because I figured it would draw ThreeTen to report it. Didn't matter. Long after I edited it, he still reported. He didn't even see the original post as he was way too late to the game. I highly doubt you agree the current state of the post should be deleted by mods. Yet that's what this type of discourse invites him to attempt. With that type of character trolling the forum, as well as the inevitable derailment of the conversation, I just don't see how complaining about it was worth it.
shareI would argue calling someone an idiot derails a conversation because it no longer becomes about the issue and just devolves into name calling like over half the threads on this board. Do whatever the fuck you want man, my criticism was actually meant in a friendly way because I usually like your posts and that one seemed unlike you. Or maybe I just haven't been paying attention which I've been known to do.
From where I stand Prometheus and you should be allies in your beliefs but instead of politely explaining that she misunderstood you, you call her an idiot who needs to learn to fuckin read. Sorry if that strikes me as odd behavior but that was my read on it.