Go, girl... student changes speech

BMS

Well-known member
More falsehoods. What you say is untrue, both regard g my position and the position of trans issues, which have nothing to do with abortion.
You agreed to the statement that transwomen are men and pages later said some are women. No falsehood there, and that is what I pointed out.
And the gender identity ideology does deny the biological sex, its observable reality when the male sex is allowed into the female sex space under the banner of 'gender' That is exactly what it does. That is exactly what it does when a lesbian by definition isn't attracted to a 'transwoman' because he is biologically a man and lesbians who are biologically women are attracted to other biological women.
Your ideology doesnt work

What about it?
Its controversial, and in the light of your previous claim that there is no issue and the matter was settled. This was just July this year, so its not settled and remains controversial. Indeed more than 800 medical professionals urged the withdrawal of the amendment. And a poll at the time found that only 1% of women wanted to see the time limit for abortion extended above 24 weeks and only 1% of women wanted to see the time limit for abortion extended through to birth. The same poll found that 70% of women wanted to see the abortion time limit reduced to 20 weeks or below. The poll also found that 91% of women favour a total and explicit ban on sex-selective abortion.

How does that fit with your position that the foetus doesn't have any rights? If for you the foetus doesn't have any rights why not have abortion up to birth?

The concept of zero was invented 2000 years ago and is currently taught in primary school. The number two is greater than and different from zero.
Here is more of the waffle that no- one disputes
If A has some rights and B has zero rights, then B has different rights from A.
what rights, does a foetus without any rights, have?
Once again what you say is nonsense.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
You agreed to the statement that transwomen are men and pages later said some are women. No falsehood there, and that is what I pointed out.
And the gender identity ideology does deny the biological sex, its observable reality when the male sex is allowed into the female sex space under the banner of 'gender' That is exactly what it does. That is exactly what it does when a lesbian by definition isn't attracted to a 'transwoman' because he is biologically a man and lesbians who are biologically women are attracted to other biological women.
Your ideology doesnt work
Your argument is nonsense. Just the fact that some lesbians are attracted to, even married to transwomen, is enough to show that you are talking through your hat. Assuming that you are sitting on your hat, that is.
[
Its controversial, and in the light of your previous claim that there is no issue and the matter was settled. This was just July this year, so its not settled and remains controversial. Indeed more than 800 medical professionals urged the withdrawal of the amendment. And a poll at the time found that only 1% of women wanted to see the time limit for abortion extended above 24 weeks and only 1% of women wanted to see the time limit for abortion extended through to birth. The same poll found that 70% of women wanted to see the abortion time limit reduced to 20 weeks or below. The poll also found that 91% of women favour a total and explicit ban on sex-selective abortion.
Exactly. There is widespread agreement with the status quo. Very few people support the amendment you refer to, which is going nowhere. Neither will there be a reduction to 20 weeks, as the science doesn't support it and this too was booted into the long grass when Cameron was PM. Sex selection is already illegal as a reason for the termination of a pregnancy.

How does that fit with your position that the foetus doesn't have any rights? If for you the foetus doesn't have any rights why not have abortion up to birth?
Because in my view, and that of many others the unborn should be treated as a person once they are capable of surviving birth. That after all is why there is a limit of 24 weeks.
what rights, does a foetus without any rights, have?
Once again what you say is nonsense.
Zero rights. Which is a different number of rights to some rights. edit personal attack
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
They have only been supposedly torn to shreds in the minds of people who can't articulate why they think they have been torn to shreds.
Much like you have done.
It has never been torn down. Not even once. I have kept every reply to the comments I provided. There has been some objections, gnashing of teeth and insults aimed at me, but not a single cogent objection.

It's depravity to think that killing a child is anything short of murder.


One doesn't. have to believe in God to recognize murder.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
It has never been torn down. Not even once. I have kept every reply to the comments I provided. There has been some objections, gnashing of teeth and insults aimed at me, but not a single cogent objection.
Wrong.
Let's introduce a totally made up misrepresentation bearing no resemblance to any pro-choice argument ever made.
I have never seen an argument for abortion based on size, so this is a complete red herring. In the spirit of which, I would point out that the vast majority of abortions happen when the foetus is smaller than a grain of rice, and with the same cerebral capacity.
A foetus is not a person at an early stage of development, just as an acorn is not a little tiny tree.
Leaving aside for one moment the question of whether the foetus is a human being, the importance of the location is that it is inside the body of the mother, whose status as a human being is not in question. What is more the foetus can cause harm, sometimes very serious harm to the mother. The only person who can permit this situation to continue is the mother. Forcing her to go through an unwanted pregnancy and risk harm is contrary to her human rights, rights to which the foetus is not entitled.

The point of dependency is that the foetus, and only the foetus, is totally dependent on one sole person. If you can find a way to remove the foetus from the womb and care for it some other way, then I would be content to ban abortion tomorrow. The aim of an abortion is to end the pregnancy. It is the pregnancy that is terminated. Put some church funds into find a way to do that without killing the foetus, and you can claim your Nobel prize.

Abortion is justified by the decision, upheld in courts and legislatures throughout the world, that the foetus is not a person. There are several reasons given why this is so., but roughly they boil down to two. Firstly, the foetus is not a person because it is not viable. It cannot survive outside the womb as an independent entity. The second reason given is that to be a person requires a degree of sentience, which is absent in the foetus. Personally, I find the first reason more persuasive. Neither reason is addressed by your ludicrous SLED acronym.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Your argument is nonsense. Just the fact that some lesbians are attracted to, even married to transwomen, is enough to show that you are talking through your hat. Assuming that you are sitting on your hat, that is.
[

Exactly. There is widespread agreement with the status quo. Very few people support the amendment you refer to, which is going nowhere. Neither will there be a reduction to 20 weeks, as the science doesn't support it and this too was booted into the long grass when Cameron was PM. Sex selection is already illegal as a reason for the termination of a pregnancy.


Because in my view, and that of many others the unborn should be treated as a person once they are capable of surviving birth. That after all is why there is a limit of 24 weeks.

Zero rights. Which is a different number of rights to some rights. edit personal attack
The response is mentally deranged garbage. If you think a lesbian has 'married, a 'transwoman' then the 'transwoman' must be a woman, because if its a man it cant by definition be a lesbian.
Now remind me again how a man or a woman might decide to be a 'transwoman' or 'transman' ? So that shows everyone how contradictory your baseless claims are.

Secondly the examples I gave show that abortion is a controversial topic and your opinion is baseless and without evidence.

Thirdly, you were asked why you would be against abortion up to birth seeing as you dont consider the unborn had rights. Your response has simply repeated your view that rights should only be given to the born and doesnt answer thr question. Same with sex selection. If you say the unborn had no rights you have no right to be prejudice against sex selection.
 
Last edited:

BMS

Well-known member
But we have heard your opinion and its full of bias and incorrect statements. Pro-choice abortion is not legal in every country and this has been pointed out to you over and over again yet you still peddle the propaganda.
The laws around the world are as you state largely based on sentience or survivability. That means in most countries pro-choice abortion is illegal after 12 weeks. You support the law in the UK that allows abortion up to 24 weeks, which would be illegal in a majority of countries.
Your motivation is for the mother to be allowed to kill her offspring if she wants to not that the law is right.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Yet another reason to flee public schools. Imagine murder is now acceptable.

I don't know the future, but I see a day coming when abortion/murder will no longer be legally acceptable. What will she do now? Run to Canada, Mexico, Europe? Good luck with that.
Absolutely we have a great mentally deranged indoctrination and grooming going on. Its producing a generation of people intolerant of reality and full of vindictive hatred.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member

The speech that high school valedictorian Paxton Smith pulled from inside her graduation gown was not the one she had shown the school. So she took a deep breath before launching into it, wondering whether she would be allowed to share her thoughts about Texas' new restrictive abortion law.


"I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights," Smith said in her speech at the graduation ceremony for Lake Highlands High School in Dallas.


Despite swapping her text, Smith finished her speech and got a rousing cheer from her classmates and staff. In the days since her address on Sunday, video of the event has gone viral, and Smith has been praised for speaking her mind. (You can read a full transcript of her speech below.)


"I have dreams, and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does," Smith said. She later added, "And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us."




Smith concluded her speech by stating, "We cannot stay silent."


Her remarks came less than two weeks after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed new restrictions into law that ban abortion as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected — as early as six weeks.


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks

National


The Governor Of Texas Has Signed A Law That Bans Abortion As Early As 6 Weeks


As Smith noted, many women do not realize they're pregnant at six weeks. The law does not allow exceptions for cases of rape or incest.


The senior had intended to use her speech to talk about TV and the media, but, she said, "it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state."


Smith says she has received hundreds of messages of support, as videos of her graduation speech were widely shared across social media. In many ways, the speech went better than she anticipated, especially since the school had raised the possibility of remarks being cut short if they diverged from the approved script.


"I thought that the microphone was going to get cut off a couple minutes in, but it didn't," Smith told local TV station WFAA in Dallas.


In a statement released to local media, the Richardson Independent School District, which includes Lake Highlands, says that students choose their own messages to share at graduation. But noting that Smith's speech was not approved and "not in the podium book" of remarks for the event, the district says it will look at ways to prevent similar switches from taking place in the future.


Smith's father, Russell Smith, tells the Lake Highlands Advocate that he's proud of his daughter.


"It was something that she felt was important, and she had the nerve, determination and boldness to put herself out there and say her piece," he said. "So few people demonstrate this level of maturity and poise, regardless of age."




The text of Smith's speech, as transcribed by NPR:


I'm not usually very good at expressing my gratitude for the people that I care about. But I would like to say "thank you" to Coach. I think he's had a bigger role in my life than he realizes. [deep breath]


OK.


As we leave high school, we need to make our voices heard. Today, I was going to talk about TV and media and content, because it's something that's very important to me. However, under light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in the state.


Recently, the Heartbeat Bill was passed in Texas. Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest.


Six weeks. That's all women get. And so before they realize — most of them don't realize that they're pregnant by six weeks — so before they have a chance to decide if they are emotionally, physically and financially stable enough to carry out a full-term pregnancy, before they have the chance to decide if they can take on the responsibility of bringing another human being into the world, that decision is made for them by a stranger.


A decision that will affect the rest of their lives is made by a stranger.


I have dreams and hopes and ambitions. Every girl graduating today does. And we have spent our entire lives working towards our future. And without our input and without our consent, our control over that future has been stripped away from us. [applause]


I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail, I am terrified that if I am raped, then my hopes and aspirations and dreams and efforts for my future will no longer matter. I hope that you can feel how gut-wrenching that is. I hope you can feel how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken away from you.


And I'm talking about this today — on a day as important as this, on a day honoring 12 years of hard academic work, on a day where we are all gathered together, on a day where you are most inclined to listen to a voice like mine, a woman's voice — to tell you that this is a problem, and it's a problem that cannot wait.


And I cannot give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights. A war on the rights of your mothers [cheers], a war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your daughters.


We cannot stay silent. Thank you.


[cheers, applause]

Good for her! Standing up to stupidity.
Yes, the incoherent ramblings of an 18 year old girl who hasn't thought critically about the issue, clearly has a lot of growing up to do, and would not know logic if a logic text book hit her on the head.

We have all said and done stupid things in our teen-age years. Hopefully she will grow up some day and look back on this moment of her life and cringe at her utter stupidity.

And this idea that she is some brave bastion for women's rights is ludicrous. She spoke to a largely liberal, secular, atheistic, humanistic audience who holds her views.

Brave would be for a pro-life valedictorian to give a talk against abortion at a place like UC. Berkeley, or Swarthmore.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Yes, the incoherent ramblings of an 18 year old girl who hasn't thought critically about the issue, clearly has a lot of growing up to do, and would not know logic if a logic text book hit her on the head.

We have all said and done stupid things in our teen-age years. Hopefully she will grow up some day and look back on this moment of her life and cringe at her utter stupidity.

And this idea that she is some brave bastion for women's rights is ludicrous. She spoke to a largely liberal, secular, atheistic, humanistic audience who holds her views.

Brave would be for a pro-life valedictorian to give a talk against abortion at a place like UC. Berkeley, or Swarthmore.
I'm all for freedom of choice. It's when they make these decisions that I have a problem. Make the choice not to have a baby BEFORE conception occurs rather than afterwards.

I'm actually a bit surprised that the left hasn't come around to openly condoning sterilization as some sort of sign of women's liberation. At the very least get those tubes tied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS

GeneZ

Well-known member
This immoral and deluded girl needs to repent on her filthy ideas. Unless she repents she will be valedictorian in hell.
What an idiotic speech.
You would have said that about Saul before he became Paul...

We can judge their deeds, but not the person. That judgment is solely the Lord's prerogative.

He told/warned us not to judge. We are free to evaluate their deeds.
 

Iconoclast

Well-known member
You would have said that about Saul before he became Paul...

We can judge their deeds, but not the person. That judgment is solely the Lord's prerogative.

He told/warned us not to judge. We are free to evaluate their deeds.
That is why I said she needs to repent.
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
That is why I said she needs to repent.
Fist she needs to understand what the Lord warned about judging.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others,
you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."


Mat 7:1-2

God does not need our help in judging others.
 

BMS

Well-known member
You would have said that about Saul before he became Paul...

We can judge their deeds, but not the person. That judgment is solely the Lord's prerogative.

He told/warned us not to judge. We are free to evaluate their deeds.
Though he did tell us to judge what is right. In the most cited passage in Matthew 7 Jesus describes how disciples can remove each others errors, it doesnt mean dont judge but means dont judge hypocritically.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Fist she needs to understand what the Lord warned about judging.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others,
you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."


Mat 7:1-2

God does not need our help in judging others.
See my post and read all of the passage Matt 7 in context. She does need to repent
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
Though he did tell us to judge what is right. In the most cited passage in Matthew 7 Jesus describes how disciples can remove each others errors, it doesnt mean dont judge but means dont judge hypocritically.


The meaning you are searching for is to evaluate. When we evaluate something, we in that sense judge.

Jesus condemned those who judged and condemned others. That's God's job. Not ours.
 

BMS

Well-known member
The meaning you are searching for is to evaluate. When we evaluate something, we in that sense judge.

Jesus condemned those who judged and condemned others. That's God's job. Not ours.
Yes but be careful about judge and condemn. Jesus judged the adultery the woman was caught in as sinful, but did not condemn her. He also told her to leave her life of sin. Did that judge her or her actions?
So yes ...
John 3:17 "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
but also
Matthew 11:20"Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent."
 

GeneZ

Well-known member
Yes but be careful about judge and condemn. Jesus judged the adultery the woman was caught in as sinful, but did not condemn her. He also told her to leave her life of sin. Did that judge her or her actions?
So yes ...
John 3:17 "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
but also
Matthew 11:20"Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent."


Only God can condemn 101.
 
Top