[AngelAssassin]

Originally Posted by Karma ↗

Not true. Divorced twice. First husband a complete controller and cheater. Second turned out to be a massive liar. Destroyed me. I loved them.

I’m sorry to hear that you had two bad husbands… I also divorced twice. Two cheaters.

[Karma]

Thank you for sharing that Angel. We are not ALL bad. Lol.

[Karma]

Originally Posted by akyan ↗

They have faults and so do you. No one is perfect. I compromise all the time in my relationships specially if the girl is young, dumb, and immature, I would say there are some serious failures in compromising if two divorces are involved.

When you’ve compromised everything you can and THEY refuse to compromise at all it doesn’t work.
You have no real clue.

[Killgaad]

Originally Posted by Sum1234 ↗

You dumb fucking bitch, you fucking said it. THE UNBORN CANT CONSENT SO WHY DO YOU NOT ALSO APPLY THAT TO LIFE. YOU DONT CONSENT TO LIFE OR DEATH DUMBASS. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO'S FAULT DEATH IS ARE MURDERS AND THOSE WHO CREATE LIFE. YOU CANT MURDER WHATS NOT ALIVE. STUPID BITCH STFU ABOUT POLITICAL CORRECTNESS YOU REPUBLICUNT.

My, Oh, my... The all-caps monster!

The fact that you crazy-glued your triggered, puss-filled, swollen masturbatory toe to the all-caps key—surely gives you much pined-for credibility, huh?

Don't worry, I have compassion for you—since you obviously cannot consent to English.

P.S. Your nonsensical argument constitutes a 'flawed analogy' fallacy; but indubitably, you're too stupid and uneducated to know that.

I forgive you for calling me a Republican.

I'm actually a Socialist and a National—not necessarily in that order.

[Killgaad]

Sum1234

You say the 'foetus' is not alive? (God, I hate that fucking word, 'fetus.)

You're an idiot—the child has a heartbeat, moron.

Of course it's alive.

Even if it didn't have a fully-formed brain—and it doesn't—it does not mean it's not alive.

I mean, look at you! You evidently have no brain—and *you're* alive, against all odds!

Case in point.

[Sum1234]

Originally Posted by Killgaad ↗

My, Oh, my... The all-caps monster!

The fact that you crazy-glued your triggered, puss-filled, swollen masturbatory toe to the all-caps key—surely gives you much pined-for credibility, huh?

Don't worry, I have compassion for you—since you obviously cannot consent to English.

P.S. Your nonsensical argument constitutes a 'flawed analogy' fallacy; but indubitably, you're too stupid and uneducated to know that.

I forgive you for calling me a Republican.

I'm actually a Socialist and a National—not necessarily in that order.

I was going to explain how the flawed analogy fallacy requires an assumption in the analogy to qualify, not just being an analogy you disagree with lmao, but I won't because national socialist is how neo nazis self identify and you literally just name dropped a fallacy you don't understand then devolve into petty insults. Just because you type calm doesn't make the content of your statement correct lmao.

[Killgaad]

Do you realize many of my posts are satire?

[Killgaad]

Speaking of assumptions... you assume a lot— and you don't understand the practical applications of the definition.

What are you even talking about?

My political velleities are of an artistic and literary nature, btw..

As for your objection, the other fellow [II]assumed[/I] the child is not alive—but he/she is. He also assumed "you" (one/'me') can't consent to 'death'—false. (People always consent to death—in suicides.) People can also consent to life (even though another's)—as when parents choose life, and refuse to perform an abortion. It is true, the unborn child cannot consent at that time, but once he becomes self-aware, in most cases he would not consent to his near‐miss 'killing,' at a time in the past—even if his pondering of the possibility of death before birth is considered a posteriori.