Comments by "upabittoolate" (@upabittoolate) on "Fox News - MLK Pro-Life Conservative" video.

@StigRossi The facts are that MLK had a metric ton of women but none ever came up with his illegitimate babies. Also, his writing scarcely talks about abortion. He died 5yrs before Roe V Wade. There's nothing wrong with being pro-life. There's something wrong with creating legislation that limits a woman's right to not be pregnant. Also, a zygote, a blastula, an embryo & a fetus are different. You may belive that a fetus is a life but let's be honest, it can't live outside the womb.
1
He's an imbecile, Walt. I think you're only spinning your wheels with that guy. I'm gonna ignore him & I suggest you do the same.
1
It doesn't make a difference if you reject it or not. The only thing that's important are the facts. The fact is that if it's not viable, you can't talk about life because the notion of life has distinctly quantifiable & qualifiable properties. As for aborting until birth, that's not for you or me to decide. That's between a patient & her provider. It's not my body... OR yours.
1
1, you have NO data to support a claim about how Blacks voted. 2, if you knew how they kept Black people from registering to vote, you'd know how silly your argument sounds. Thurmond, since we're using him for litmus paper, was SPECIFICALLY a "States Rights" guy. Can we argue about his politics? No. C'mon. Nevertheless, there's STILL no data to support any claims of MLK being registered as a republican. Like I said before, you can actually SEE his voter registration card at the motel/museum.
1
@XSC3 Also, I didn't say he was pro-choice beause he had some hoes. I sad that it's arguable that he wasn't exactly anti-abortion when it came to 1 of his hoes getting preggers. Again, I don't understand why that's a logical leap for you guys. (smh)
1
@XSC3 So now you're arguing apples & paper clips? Logic fail. We're not talking about killing offspring. We're talking about ending a pregnancy in the stages when the embryo isn't viable outside the womb. I'm not sure why people don't understand such a simple nuance.
1
@dEdGrimley I wans't jumping on you, my friend. I was simply sharing an idea or 2. It's easy to assume he was pro-life simply because he was a minister. But the truth about his life tells a different narrative.
1
It's not a philosophical argument. It's a remedial, biological principal. If your lungs can't don't work because 1, they can't absorb oxygen & 2, there's no diaphragm to create the suction to even get the air into them, you can't live. If you can't turn food into sugar then into ATP because you haven't developed the mitochondrial DNA, you can't live. If your vital organs collapse because you've no bones, you can't live. If your integument can't fight off a fungus, you can't live. Are you high?
1
@JPfromFlint You need to read up on your history. Most Black people weren't even voting in those days; especially not in the South. And if you think Blacks were voting for Strom Thurmond or Barry Goldwater, you won't be allowed to talk anymore. So that premise won't work. Like I said, you can actually see MLK's WALLET at the museum. There is NO record of MLK being registered as a republican. Perhaps you're confusing the 1960s with the 1860s.
1
@mueygringo Wow! You stalked me through 9, different vids. You're trying to troll I suppose. But you fail epicly. umadbro.
1
@sammaggie234 If King were alive today, he'd've lived to see many of his plans brought to fruition. It's arguable, by that premise, that families would be stronger.
1
@cadman2300 You're absolutely correct.
1
@Wgivens93 He was LIGHT YEARS from being conservative. But you can't waste energy or facts on a conservative. I've even heard some nonsense about him being registered as a republican. That's hilarious because that's a record that can actually be pulled. Hell, you can actually see his voter registration card at the museum. Hilarious.
1
@dEdGrimley He certainly didn't walk the conservative walk. Given the facts that King was quite drinker, smoker (Salems) & party animal and that he had a bunch of women but somehow, none of them ever came up pregnant, I challenge (even doubt) your postulate about him being socially conservative or pro-life. Yes, the religious doctrine requires people to pretend to be pro-life but I've yet to read anything he's said about abortion. That's probably because he died 5yrs before Roe v Wade.
1
That's a unique question & I see what you're doing but it's not going to work. A fetus is not viable to sustain life on its own. ie, if you were able to deliver a fetus, it'd die in a matter of minutes. Hence there's little quantity of life & essentially no quality of life.
1
@XSC3 I never said he was pro-choice. I said that it's very likely that his dalliances led to unwanted pregnancy. You can't really argue that. The absence of proof is not proof of absence. Furthermore, he said that a woman's body is hers to decide for. Again, you can't argue that either.
1