Navaros #fundie

Navaros #fundie imdb.com

Then how come 99-100% of your fellow darwinists are crazy and love to kill? Especially unborn babies, who they've killed billions of and continue to do so on a daily basis.

So since you are not crazy and you are against killing, or so you say, then my questions to you are:

1. Like I just asked, why are 99-100% of your fellow darwinists crazies who love to kill?

2. Do you yourself support the mass killings of unborn babies as long as those killings are labeled with a false label euphemism in order to pretend that they are not murders? [Common false label euphemisms that darwinists use to "justify" murdering babies include "abortion," "fetus," "choice," "reproductive rights," women's rights" etc.]

3. Will you renounce those 99-100% of darwinists who are evil crazy baby killers?

27 comments

old comment by Swede

There are no "darwinists", any more than there are "einstenists" or "priestleyists".
There are only rational people who accept science, and irrational people like you who refuse to do that.

Christians and atheists, cretinists and realists, have about as many abortions per capita.

1. I don't love to kill. A couple of days ago, I even opened the window and let out the wasp that had just stung me (the sting is still painful, btw). I'm against war and the death penalty, and I have a hard time eating meat if I can tell that it is a body part (e.g. a whole chicken).

2. I think it's better to remove non-sentient humans-to-be, than bringing unwanted (and sentient) children into the world to grow up in the street or in orphanages.
Abortion, fetus and embryo are all scientific concepts. Choice, reproductive rights and women's rights are all politically agreed concepts. None of them are the least bit false.

3. Most baby killers seem to be fundies who'd rather pray the disease away, than seek medical care, thereby killing the baby, or the ones refusing to vaccinate their kid, thereby killing many babies.
[Common false label euphemisms that cretinists use to "justify" removing women's reproductive rights include "baby" instead of the scientifically correct "embryo" or "fetus".]

old comment by Anonymoose 69.420

1. Because you're attacking a strawman?

2. Why do you care about these hideous, parasitic "unborn babies" that look more like xenomorph children than anything?

An embryo is not a human - and therefor not illegal to "kill" - until it can survive outside of the mother's womb and physically disconnected from the mother via the umbilical chord. When abortions are possible and won't kill the mother, the embryo is just a parasitic collection of cells incapable of feeling pain and definitely incapable of any sentient thought.

3. No, because according to you, I AM an evil crazy baby killer darwinist.

Of course, if you knew what any of those words mean.

Moral of the story:

EMBRYOS ARE NOT BABIES. IF YOU SAW A HUMAN EMBRYO, YOU WOULD RETCH AT THE TINY, PARASITIC ABOMINATION.

old comment by Some Guy Passing Through

Killing is so much fun though! I don't know about my fellow darwinists, but I favor tearing my victim's throats open with my teeth just like nature intended!

Or possibly not, because of the whole secular humanist morality thing...

Also, Ecclesiastes 3:19 (New International Version)

"19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless."

Are you going to call killing animals murder, or admit to some degree of difference between one type of killing or another, thus contradicting your big book of stupid? (answer: Neither! Not the KJV version, so will be completely ignored!)

Navaros #fundie imdb.com

27 comments

Confused?