What does MM stand for?

Miles Mathis?

Mo money?

>While on Meet the Press, Chuck Todd asked Hillary:

"When or if does an unborn person have Constitutional Rights?"

She replied, "That is not something that exists. The unborn person does not have Constitutional Rights"

The ethics of Personhood: Hillary referred to the baby as an "unborn person while in the same breath states that the "unborn person does not have Constitutional Rights. Either the baby is a blob with zero rights, or the baby is a person with rights.

This subject isn't allowed on the internet. You should know that :/

A source for your comment would be appreciated. You dont expect people just to believe you when you say Hillary said something do you?

[deleted]

I'm not saying that it isn't true...I'm saying that if you are gonna come in here and say that Hillary says "that the Constitutional right to Life does not apply to babies in the womb", and "supports termination up to the minute of delivery", you had better list some evidence or you are just gonna look like a nut.

Furthermore, claiming hearsay is proof, as the OP is obviously doing here, is counter productive to exposing the truth, if in fact it is true.

And before you assume otherwise, No...I am not a fan or shill of Hillary....

I don't know why you wrote your comment like that. The person didn't claim to have spoken directly with her. She has said:

"There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother."

And no, before you ask, she didn't get on the phone and say it to me personally.

Is the person misconstruing her meaning? I don't know. It would seem to me if the pregnancy was in its latest stages and the mother was in danger, then they'd try to deliver the baby rather than abort it?

In that respect, her saying she would support abortion in those circumstances is rather odd. Even suggesting abortion beyond the first semester is a bit weird to me. I'm sure there are some rare circumstances that people could bring up where it makes sense, but as a general position, it seems a bit fucked.

All i was suggesting is that the OP should have listed some source with his statement. Simply saying that someone said something isn't evidence of anything. If HC really has made these comments, i would expect to see a link to a news article where shes is being quoted or a video of her saying it so there is no doubt.

You dont expect people just to make false statements in their titles do you?

No...but I don't simply give people the benefit of the doubt either, especially when it comes to unidentified strangers on the internet, and even more so when said strangers are telling me that someone else did or said something that I would dislike or disagree with. Its called critical thinking, and everyone should do it.

The quotes been given and you are still at it.

As for demanding links to important policies of presidential candidates, at what point does it become ignorance on your part?

Still at what? The OP did not give us shit except a comment with no fucking source to back it up. I asked for one...AS I SHOULD HAVE...and some random reader posted one.... So why are you suggesting that am I ignorant? Because I think its appropriate to provide evidence along side ones public accusation? Or because you make the assumption that I am just someone too lazy to research shit myself? Or the assumption that I even plan to vote...

Here is the actual quote by the way...
Q:“When or if does an unborn child have constitutional rights?”

A:"Well, under our laws currently, that is not something that exists. The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights. Now, that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support. It doesn’t mean that you don’t do everything possible to try to fulfill your obligations. But it does not include sacrificing the woman’s right to make decisions."

Now...tell me why the OP just didn't post that....( really not hard to understand why if you are paying attention) then tell me why you are hounding me for telling an OP to do the right fucking thing.

You dont expect people just to believe you when you say Hillary said something do you?

Thats not asking for a source. And yes, when a candidate for president holds a position and someone brings it up online, I would assume that OP expected to be believed about it.

If you are unaware, then it is ignorance. Ignorant of you to challenge them.

Wow, now you managed to google it. Now tell me why you just didn't do that in the first place?

At some point, not knowing common knowledge is ignorance and pestering a user for a source on common knowledge is harassment.

Did you reach that point? I believe so. Just as you believe you haven't.

That you think you SHOULD HAVE demanded a link and quote to common knowledge is beyond me.

Read my comments before you replay man...i asked for a source.

Asking for a source is not challenging someone....its asking for a source....and providing a source is suppose to happen if you expect to be taken seriously...

I didn't google it...i clicked the link that someone other than the op provided....a link that has a different statement than what the op provided...( id also like to add that that reporter did a shit job. He asked the wrong question...and after getting a shitty answer to a shitty question...he failed to ask the proper follow up question....)

I haven't been pestering the OP....i have been replying to your retarded statements.....

Calling this topic common knowledge is another assumption on your part...

as for your pathetic attempt to jab me with irony in the ""The DNC Rules Are Suspended, If Hillary Drops Out The Second Candidate With The Highest Number Of Delegates Gets The Nomination"" thread...no...i don't expect them to believe me without posting a source. But if you really want a source for my comment....just watch ANY FUCKING INTERVIEW OR WHATEVER OF HILARY FOR THE LAST 10 FUCKING YEARS.....saying that "Hilary wants to be President badly" and that "she supports termination up to the minute of delivery" are two very fucking different things. So why don't you pull your head out of your ass before you start trying to crack wise boyo.

Lastly...I'm done arguing with you...reading your words is like watching a dog play in traffic and i just get take it anymore....

You didn't ask for a source, though did you?

You asked, according to your own language, a "retarded question".

Does OP expect to be believed? Obviously OP did.

Should OP be expected to believed? Yes, because Hillary has stated it.

You want to be a rhetorical anal retentive asshole, but don't like it so much when it comes back at you? Hypocrite.

http://giphy.com/gifs/high-quality-points-hrs-x2ifyKU82zY4g
http://giphy.com/gifs/maggie-q-asian-women-asianwomen-l2SqhQvdtl7K0yBck
http://giphy.com/gifs/election2016-yes-donald-trump-you-got-it-dude-l0MYIH1uwQf49mSFq

Thought you were done?

The correct answer, several posts back would have been:

"yes, asking if he thought we believed him was a bit retarded. Obviously he did and it accomplished nothing, my bad, I was being a rhetorical cunt.

Also, asking for a source was a bit pointless, since I had no intention of actually discussing the issue once one was provided anyways."

"A source for your comment would be appreciated. You don't expect people just to believe you when you say Hillary said something do you?"

That was my original comment.
Asking for a source was necessary because the OP did not and still has not provided one.

"Hellree says that the Constitutional right to Life does not apply to babies in the womb - and supports termination up to the minute of delivery; if any proof is needed of her ethos of "no right to exist" - there it is."

That is the OPs ACCUSATION. The burden of proof falls on the accuser.

"Yeah...pretty sure Hillary Will drop dead before she drops out of the race. That bitch wants it BAAAADDD. lol"

That is my OPINION about Hilary based on what I have seen and heard from her , and you asking for a "source" was retarded.

"since I had no intention of actually discussing the issue once one was provided anyways."

Still haven't seen a source that mirrors the OPS accusation and no....its difficult to discuss the topic when some chode keeps telling me that Im ignorant and or some sort of asshole for thinking that an OP should provide source material when publicly and anonymously slinging accusations at people.

You suck at this by the way....

Still haven't seen a source that mirrors the OPS accusation and no

I quoted her, which can mean exactly what OP said, in my first comment to you. Source: Hillary Clinton, person in question.

So...

when some chode keeps telling me that Im ignorant and or some sort of asshole

You'll find I never insult people unless they have done so to me.

Even then, I usually don't.

As for calling you out on the source request, two points.

First, it wasn't necessary to ask it in such a rude manner.

2nd, source requests in this sub roughly are followed:

40% by a down vote for providing it.

50% by an attempt to debunk the sort using a variety of logical fallacies

8% by a valid debunking

2% by productive conversation.

As such, whenever the request appears too be for the 90% of non-valuable input that derails the thread, i will call the user out. Hence my username.

This sub is inundated with such derailments and I will do what I can to change that.

Please stop projecting and say something useful or cease and desist.

All I've said is useful to anyone paying attention. I've even had people message me about our "debate" telling me that you are a troll and or willfully ignorant.

As for your percentages...I have no doubt that you pulled them out of your ass, considering you have repeatedly bent the truth, ignored logic and etiquette, and made wild assumptions about me.

Have you even considered that I asked for a source because I have never heard or read her say what the OP quoted her saying? maybe i was a little rude in my first comment, but that doesn't change the fact that its the accusers burden to provide evidence or that I was diligent in asking for source material. To suggest that your word, an anonymous poster on an internet thread, is evidence enough for a topic such as this one, is asinine.

The ONLY person who has been derailing this thread is YOU. Whether you are doing it willingly, or due to ignorance, I really don't know. but if you want me to stop replying to your backwards comments...just shut the fuck up.

It's not when it is common knowledge. It should be common knowledge in an election year, if it's not, then you should spend the same amount of time that it took to write a snarky comment googling it.

And then you could have added something, but you never had that intention.

People messaging you? Lol.

its the accusers burden to provide evidence

It's not an accusation, Hillary has declared it publicly. It's one of the policies she's running for president on. See, the meaning of ignorance is not knowing something. Ignorance is fine; vocal, rude ignorance...not so much.

or that I was diligent in asking for source material

You were being a dick for no other reason than to be a dick. Let OP vent, it does you no harm.

just shut the fuck up

You aren't going to cry are you? Don't cry. If you cry, then you have to go to your room until you stop...

Nope im not gonna cry...and apparently you aren't gonna stfu..so ill rebut again...

The "knowledge" was apparently not common enough because I hadn't, AND STILL HAVEN'T seen any source material mirroring what the OP said.

The OP is not "venting" he is accusing someone of saying something to sway the minds of people. In an election year....

"You were being a dick for no other reason than to be a dick"

There you go making wild assumptions about me again....I in fact, was curious about the topic, and that's why i asked for the source material. Could i have googled it? Absolutely...but if i did that for every fucking post without source material, i would spend the majority of my time doing what other people should be doing. And since the OP's comment was so inflammatory, I figured, a slight jab to his lack of etiquette was justified.

Now...are you done? Or will your ego not allow you to stop while you are behind?

AND STILL HAVEN'T seen any source material mirroring what the OP said.

Hillary Rodham Clinton said:

"There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother."

at the very end...

of the third trimester...

are you going to require a source for when the:

very end

of

the third trimester

is?

Are you next going to be arguing over the meaning of "is"?

You can play all the nonsensical games that you like. You clearly have no interest in productive discussion.

Let's see what's next

"There can be" then there's a "but", in other words, the ability to abort isn't limited to the

very end

of

the third trimester

So, she does not limit it to any time in the pregnancy. I am interesting in hearing a legitimate reason why they would need to choose to abort a baby beyond the "very end" of the "third trimester".

Perhaps there are very good reasons, but I haven't though of one.

I in fact, was curious about the topic, and that's why i asked for the source material.

Asked, solicited, requested. i.e. you are putting the onus on others. I have provided you with a direct quote, and you are not satisfied. So not only putting the onus on others, but choosing to ignore it when delivered.

But are you putting the onus on others as a "curious" supplicant?

No. You were rude, and came across as derisive. Not how I usually think of a "curious" supplicant.

And since the OP's Hillary's comment was so inflammatory,

FTFY

At the very end

of the third semester

but not even limited to

the very end of the third trimester.

edit: Here is a baby born before the end of the third trimester:

http://www.lilaussieprems.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/image2223.jpg

This is what she is saying she agrees can be aborted, without restriction.

Dude..I'm sorry...but YOU ARE NOT A CREDIBLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION....you are an anonymous poster on an internet thread. Instead of so gracefully using your quotations button, why don't you just link the source of your quote?

And for the record, in case it isn't clear to your clouded mind, I'm not here to debate with you on whether abortion is a bad thing or not, or even if Hilary supports it. I'm here debating you about providing source material when you publicly accuse someone of something BECAUSE you refuse to concede the point that its THE PROPER THING TO DO!

And just in case you are SOME NUT attacking me because you think I approve of abortion, let me state for the record that I DO NOT. I think abortion is just a new speak word for murder, and that there are few things more despicable in society than the murder of a child. However, I'm not going to just accept what some random anonymous posters say about someone, no matter how despicable of a person they are, WITHOUT SOME FUCKING EVIDENCE. So chew on that for a while, become enlightened, and then write me and the readers of this debate an apology for being such a tunnel visioned, irrational, unobservant pleb of a commentator...I assure you your apology will be accepted when you offer it...

you are an anonymous poster on an internet thread

So are you dipshit.

Respect. Want it? Give it.

Unto to others as you would have them do onto to you.

You want people to take your demands seriously, but don't take their replies seriously.

You are the reason the world sucks. But you can stop.

LMFAO...yeah...i realize i am an anonymous poster on the internet....I also realize that as an anonymous poster on the internet, if i'm going to accuse someone of doing or saying something in one of my posts, i should provide some source material to back up my accusation....It's REALLY not hard to understand if your brain is working correctly...

"A source for you comment would be appreciated" only a fool would consider that a demand instead of a request.

"You are the reason the world sucks"
I disagree. I think it is those of you who irrationally engage in conversation and self justify attacking others because you lack either the mental capacity or humility to admit when you are wrong, that makes the "world suck".

"There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother."

HRC

ok ok ok....tell me the truth....do you not know how to link something in a comment and are just to ashamed to admit it? Or are you seriously this oblivious to what our debate is about?

Or are you just trolling?

"There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother."

HRC

Ok...i think you have gone full retard and should seek medical attention.

See, at first, when I saw some of your other comments, I was like, this guy isn't half bad.

But being a stubborn fuckwit makes a stubborn fuckwit.

OP was right. I prove it in my first comment. And you are being a lil shite.

This is you
http://67.media.tumblr.com/6547a1f9b70192c11cc92027a4aef9b4/tumblr_inline_o6mnjbDfZU1r9f3kz_500.gif

The only thing that you have proved is that you have no idea what the topic of our conversation is about, that a democracy is an inherently flawed system of governance because mentally challenged people like you have a voice in one, and that you continue to publicize your stupidity just so you can have the last word...

There should have been no first word from you.

This is the point. You have added nothing.

I have added....

"One should produce source material (evidence) when making accusations"

You have added

"One should not produce source material (evidence) when making accusations"

You have added;

I have been given a direct quote and suddenly act like I can't speak English or use a web browser, nor do I ever admit to my mistakes, but push forth all the more when I know I'm wrong.

http://giphy.com/gifs/dumb-are-you-serious-SEp6Zq6ZkzUNW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y69tkCbeC5o

Exactly....now you're getting it. Stop being that fat girl. I will consider that an apology and accept it. Have a good day bud. o/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE

You dont expect people just to believe you when you say Hillary said something do you?

Thats not asking for a source. And yes, when a candidate for president holds a position and someone brings it up online, I would assume that OP expected to be believed about it.

If you are unaware, then it is ignorance. Ignorant of you to challenge them.

Wow, now you managed to google it. Now tell me why you just didn't do that in the first place?

At some point, not knowing common knowledge is ignorance and pestering a user for a source on common knowledge is harassment.

Did you reach that point? I believe so. Just as you believe you haven't.

That you think you SHOULD HAVE demanded a link and quote to common knowledge is beyond me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y69tkCbeC5o