Drowning

Wait, wait..."Jizzing himself" is an un-christian thing to do, so lets just say he's making "Judas Jelly".

Judas Jelly isn't very christian either, I think he would be making "Jesus Juice"

Yes, but masturbation is a supposed sin, so Judas Juice works better.

*Jelly

*psst* Hi *psst* Oh hey, yeah, um, don't want to ruin your little rant there but um, have ever had a biology lesson? Yeah cause, um, twins, are created by two eggs being fertilised at once, y'know at the same time. Its not possible for twins to have two separate fathers.
Unless they were test tube babies and both implanted at the same time.

So, now i'm finished correcting your simple mistake. Go take your shitty argument elsewhere to someone who might give a shit.

BUT WHAT ABOUT CASES OF SUPERFOETATION?!

This I have not heard of. Enlighten me?

Very rare, usually happens within the first couple of weeks of the first egg being fertilised. A second is then fertilised. Probably due to the mother having hormone imbalances so her body still releases another egg. As I said VERY rare; but possible. Quite common in cats, though.

Two eggs at DIFFERENT times. WEEKS apart. Not two in the same month or whatever.

Having a hard time finding that article, cunt?

Wow calm down buddy, no need to get so mad. When did you become a doctor?

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Superfoetation Here you go!

I'll admit that, I've never heard of in human beings, good show I learned of a new medical anomaly. That still doesn't disprove the existence of faternal twins.

Please do a google search of "ovulating multiple eggs"

What you are suggesting is impossible, it is however possible to ovulate multiple eggs.

A woman cannot ovulate more than once during each cycle, therefore she cannot get pregnant more than once during a cycle. Multiple ovulation can occur and is when two or more eggs are released in a single cycle. Both eggs are released during one 24 hour period and are responsible for the birth of fraternal twins. It is believed that this may occur in as many as 5-10% of all cycles but does not result in that many twins due to a type of miscarriage referred to as the “vanishing twin phenomenon.”

Source
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/gettingpregnant/ovulationfaq.htm

Please, prove me wrong, present one article that says otherwise. It should be readily available since its a "biological fact" and you surely didn't just pull everything that you are saying straight out of your ass.

www.medindia.net/news/Mother-Deliveries-Babies-Minutes-Apart-but-They-are -Not-Twins-27229-1.htm

This example aren't different fathers but it's theoretically possible for it to happen

No need to get your knickers it a twist, lad.

Wow you guys are fucking stupid. Did you seriously all just thumb someone up for saying there was no such thing as faternal twins?

I was referring to dizygotic twins, not identical, you fucking brain dead moron, yea they exist.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Identical-fraternal-sperm-egg.svg

And it is ENTIRELY possible for twins to be fathered by two different men, it happens with feral kittens all the time and is nowhere near unheard of in human beings the term is Superfecundation

that's only if it is legitimating twinning

actually 2 separate fetuses can be created through 2 separate sperms

Yes in two separate occasions, and once the first egg is fertilised no other eggs are released so no other eggs can be then fertilised again. It is only once the child is born that ovulation will take place and a second child can be potentially created.

pst...Fraternal twins are from two diffrent sperm.

pst... Why are we whispering, its the internet, our voices aren't actually producing sound here

Not always, when there is a male and female that is two different sperm since the dude decides the gender of the baby.

I don't understand why this comment has negative thumbs.. they are.. people are dumb.

and lets be honest, people had abortions even when they were illegal, they just went to back street butchers and had a tendency to die in the process

that fetus does not only belong to the mother people tend to forget about that. In the act of rape with no consent then it does and the decision to abort is 100% yours. However in a consensual act you will need both the fathers and the mothers decision. It is my opinion that if the father doesn't agree to an abortion then it should be illegal for her to get one.

The fetus isn't in the body of the father brilliant one. If it was then it would be a different story, I fully support the right of a father seahorse to choose lol.

The fetus is in the body of the mother, therefore it is HER choice to remove it from HER body.

yeah but that fetus is made up of 50% of the mothers genes and 50% of the fathers genes. Why does the father get 0 say in his child's life. also this is just my opinion im not try to convince anyone against their own

It doesn't matter the fetus could be the mother's clone or the father's clone, or made up of completely alien genes, the fetus's genetic material don't matter! What matters is that the fetus is INSIDE of the mother. It doesn't matter if its a rock, its her right to get it removed!

well now were getting into opinions, and to me it does matter you can't say you are right just like i can't say i am it is all a matter of opinion.

Are you trying to argue that her uterus isn't her property? Why does it have the right to rent space in her uterus if she is not a willing landlord??

well for that metaphor it is my belief that by consenting she is legally becoming a willing landlord. Obviously in acts or rape or other non consensual situations that is not the case and she is the sole decider. Also this is just my opinion on the matter I would like you to show me the same respect I'm showing you

So, if precautions where taken does that mean that they have waved the fetus's right to live inside of her? Such as, a broken condom or a forgotten pill, then do rights to your own body return?

consequence of actions they still have the right to abort but it must be a decision made by both parties. I'm done with this I've told you my opinion on the subject all i really wanted to so from the start i don't feel like getting into an argument about abortion so good day

Abortion on demand is just another way of protecting the stupid from the consequences of their actions. Allow people to be careless and they will do so.

The argument against abortion is connected to natural rights as protected under the Constitution. Your natural rights cannot be violated by another's actions, and this is the basis of the pro-life argument. Any rights the mother has cannot trump the fetus's right to life. Your can fit it into a parasitic analogy, but in consensual cases the mother knew exactly what could happen and accepts the risks.

Now obviously there are cases of rape and medical issues where the mother's rights would be violated and logically the outcome is different.

In short, people need to be responsible for their actions. There are so many types of birth control and contraception to the point where getting pregnant (excluding previously mentioned cases) is likely the result of carelessness and stupidity. I'll never get why this society works so hard to protect the stupid from their own actions and then complains about how they're too many stupid people.

par·a·site   [par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
noun
1.
an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

I'm sorry I didn't realize that it was the right of the government to decide whether a pregnancy was conceived out of "stupidity" and that the proper punishment for such is to give birth to a child that you potentially do not have the means to care for properly.

No need to get mad dude. I'm just explaining the other side of the debate. There's no need to misconstrue what I said. It's not a matter of the government deciding anything, it's a matter of you willingly taken part and then having to live with the consequences. There's consequences for every action we take, it's part of life.

And in that lies the biggest reason why people support abortion; they want to have sex without any potential consequences. People are lazy and take the easy way out, it's only natural.

Since Roe V. Wade essentially confirmed the right to have an abortion, that's the way it is. But that doesn't mean we should encourage it and make it a routine thing. We should encourage people to be smart so they don't have to destroy that life in the first place.

(Also, there's another means of getting rid of a child; it too begins with an "a").

>Someone makes a sound and logical statement
>The internet thumbs them down
>mfw

good, we dont want a viva pinata pro here neways.

Who said the government would pay for contraceptives

They are covered under Medicaid and other public health and family planning services

I'd rather have that then nigger babies dying on the street everyday

im a socialist... and this argument makes me cringe...

Because not having state education worked so well in the past few thousand years of human history. Humans actually started getting educated once state education started. Before that education would be considered a privilege.

Most modern socialist governments support freedom of religion, or oppose religion.

Not having state enforced equality resulted in a fuckton of racism from large business and government. That quote is also saying that the racism laws that stopped segregation should of never happened.

Also humans naturally want sex dumb fuck. Humans are going to fuck if you like or not, and if they can't afford advanced forms of contraception they will get pregnant and fuck up their life.

So pretty much fuck you.

"Because not having state education worked so well in the past few thousand years of human history. Humans actually started getting educated once state education started. Before that education would be considered a privilege."

The past few thousand years the State oppressed, controlled, and prevented education, and before that, no one really thought about that.
Education really started once the Government eased their control. Most Universities were private, not state owned or funded during the Age of Reason.

"Most modern socialist governments support freedom of religion, or oppose religion. "
The quote refers to general socialism, not the specific type of socialism that has taken route in Europe during the last half century. And still, most modern socialist governments do not have high approval for religion, and persecute it.
The government opposing religion is the same as no religion.

"Not having state enforced equality resulted in a fuckton of racism from large business and government. That quote is also saying that the racism laws that stopped segregation should of never happened. "
State enforced equality hasn't stopped people from being racists, its just made taken away more of their freedom. Its ridiculous that the Government is allowed to tell you aren't allowed to turn someone down for a job based on personal preference.
While the quote indicates that there shouldn't have ever been laws that prevented segregation, its also indicating that there shouldn't have been laws to enforce segregation.

Humans in western countries are easily able to afford their own contraception, but they'd rather spend their money on iPhones and the like.

People are so fucking stupid. Holy shit.

Governments were shit before. Private corporations are shit now. How hard is that to figure out?

Privatizing everything won't fix your problems.

Governments are not the same. You can't just say "FUCK GOVERNMENT, AMERIKUA WAS FOUNDED BY PRIVATE BUSINESS." That is not how it works. Not every single government is the same. Not every socialist government is the same.

Did you actually read my post? Or was this in reply to something else?

You consider every single past government the same as the current governments. Governments are not the same as before and you can't just say every single government is bad when they do not even come close to each other. You are considering things that are nearly opposites the same thing. Ill go through this one by one though.

Private universities did not increase education for the entire population. Private university existed in ancient times. They increased education for those who could afford it. The entire educated population went up after public education.

Just because a government opposes religion does not mean they have to outlaw it. I can say that I think religion is bad and causes people to move away from critical thinking, but that doesn't mean I want it outlawed.

You seriously think its okay for businesses to turn down people for a job for invalid reasons? Did you even think this through for half a second? You realize that will make people homeless or extremely poor due to something they didn't have control over? The racism laws that caused "forced equality" are required. America is supposed to be about equal opportunity for all.

I'd like to hear your explanation for why American education is terrible, yet we spend the most on education.

By state enforced equality, he likely means things like affirmative action.

You have no right to make me pay for your birth control. Also, condoms aren't that expensive. It's your fault if you don't protect yourself and then have a child.

Also this post wasn't even about state funded contraception, it was about politicians wanting to straight out ban birth control.

No it wasn't.
it was a parody of Akin's rant about abortion in cases of Rape.

You realize that Akin was making that speech to gain support to ban birth control?

Also he is a republican.

Derp.

1 - His speech was to tell people that he doesn't believe the government should give people birth control, not that birth control should be outright banned.
2 - He is a republican, but not all republicans share his beliefs.
The Pope is technically christian, but that doesn't mean all Christians share his beliefs.

Most republicans do.

Assuming everyone can afford birth control is fucking stupid. Condoms are cheap, that's fine. If you were older then 13 you would know that's not the only form of birth control.

I am older than 13, I realize that condoms are not the only form of birth control.
And no, Akin is an extremist when it comes to this area, most republicans (I am talking about civilians, not lobbyists or politicians) do not share his belief.
And I for one share the idea that the individual should pay for their own birth control.

Why do you consider yourself a republican if your leaders don't share the same views as you?

And why should you be forced to pay for birth control if you can't afford it? You realize birth control is used for more then just stopping pregnancy right?

People really need to know what they are talking about before they start talking shit about it. Just because some guy on Fox said something doesn't make it true. Study the subject and learn about it before forming a opinion.

1 - I'm not even American.
2 - If you can't afford birth control, then you probably can't afford a child, and therefore you should probably not be having sex.
3 - Well, the term Birth Control actually means, pregnancy prevention, I know what you mean, where the different drugs also are used to treat other things.

Wasn't saying that to you in general, just saying that people should not consider themselves republicans if they do not have the same views of the republican leaders.

As said before, birth control is more then just having sex and condoms. It is used for other things and the medical birth control can be expensive.

fucking 10/10 logic right here

its actually just todd akins stance

my dad is a hardcore republican and even he thinks Todd Akin is a bag of dildos

It's ONE republican's stance. Not all republicans. You'd be wise to know the difference.

It's a parody of Todd Akin and the Republican party's position on rape.

Oh. Silly me. You mean THIS cokcmongler?

Yes, he's the one.

what the fuck people

This is a joke, they are making fun of Mitt Romney's stance on abortion, and make a good point

Dude, that's funnyjunk on any controversial post. They're all "experts" on the subject (which is usually an opinion based subject where there couldn't possibly be experts) when really they just get their knowledge from Wikipedia.

It's a play on Mitt Romney's stance on abortion and rape.

How am I being a douche bag for being ill-informed? I just tried to help clear up someone's misunderstanding. You're the one being a douche bag by hiding behind anonymous so you don't have to take any backlash.

it's not just his, it's the entire Tea Party's

so this pic is a parody on it ?

Yes. It's comparing the absurdity of his ideas to something you can't argue, drowning.

well im gonna vote for Obama then

there is so much potential when it comes to a new baby being born. sure it can be good or bad, but at least that baby will have a choice to do so

It's only coincidence that you two are best friends, and I'm glad you are. Abortion is there for people who really can't afford a baby. Sure you can give them away, but then your stuck thinking your child is out there, and your not raising him or her. Also the person may not be ready to endure the pains of carrying a child with them for 9 months. For some it's just easier to get rid of the baby and move on. Not bashing your comment, or anything but just wanted to make you aware of why someone would abort a child.

Yeah he's black but his parents are white so I figured skin color is determined by parents (lol i was 7). Anyways I've also met a woman who was concieved from an 8 man rape (met her at a prolife convention) she has the same attitude. But the idea that you'd rather kill your baby just so you don't have to worry instead of feeling good that you gave that kid a chance to grow up in with a family who wants him doesn't make sense to me.

And I understand, all I'm saying is the choice should be there. If you take away a choice, you take away a freedom. You know what I mean.