Maybe it’s time to protect a woman’s right to choose with the second Amendment.

I’m afraid sex with Paul Ryan would be like reading Ayn Rand; he would be really santimonious, demanding, self-righteous, hypocritical; he would be a selfish lover, with no ability to compromise, communicate, or be receptive to feedback. In the end he would pat himself on the back after he finished himself off, while…

Fox News Spin: Black Live Matter Riot Ends in Shooting.

A true Ayn Rand fan will write something incredibly sanctimonious that waxes prosaic, and is overly detailed as well and needlessly verbose bordering on redundant.

Even after that hissy fit; he can still get it.

Because maybe rape shouldn’t be carelessly bandied about as a threat with the implication that the victim deserves it.

Bet you a nickel we get a combo rape apologist, Pinkam’s law, and gun rights.

Does that mean you’ll suck my cock and let me eat your ass.

Because women have no right to their bodies and should be dictated to with no autonomous rights.

Because to you women are not different than life support machines and have no right to their bodies.

Who would have thought that a prurient, passive aggressive, attack on a c level executive of a competitor by a tabloid would cause such a hub bub?

Yes; and gay marriage does not violate those in any way. What KIm Davis is doing on the other hand is violating those things; she is using her office and elected position to establish Christian Dogma as the law of the land and as the ultimate authority.

What you really mean “Speration of church and state only matters when I say it matters.”

Are machines individuals? Are machines people; or are you just saying that women aren’t really people and not entitled to their autonomy? You argument is irrational because both life support and your vat are not people. The only way your argument holds up is if you deny that women have a right to their own bodies; no…

Sepration of church and state is enshrined into the constitution; and that’s the law of the land; funny how conveniently you forget that; “religious freedom” laws are an attempt to destroy that and threaten to bring true Sharia Law to America; separation of church and state is the only thing standing between us and…

Of course it’s relevant legally speaking, because it speaks to her character. It serves to inform the court as to whether or not she’s lying, or can be trusted.

Nice desperate tap dance but you didn’t reply to my argument so I’ll pose it as a question. By using your definition of life; why do you not support kidney’s right to life, amputations should be illegal because body parts have right to life, masturbation should be banned because there is potential life there?

My…

What you really mean “Speration of Church and State means Christians get to shove their beliefs down everyone elses throats and no one can do anything about it; now shut up and take it.”

Well she’s not here you are. You answer the question as if you were her. How is putting you name on one thing that is contrary to one’s religion any different than all the other thing you’ve put you name on that are contrary to your religion?