Posted on 03/16/2011 5:38:50 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
I'll try, however, to answer your query.
...Charlie Manson (the he) gets to pick the women for his spawn, regardless of their willingness. (the what)
Charles Manson is in prison and doesn't get to do much of anything, much less choose women for his spawn.
And as far as willingness goes I'm sure that if any members of the Manson Family were still able to bear children they would willingly do so. He wouldn't have to force anybody.
Aside...your anal fixation is disturbing.
I also think we were correct in dropping nukes on Japan, despite the innocence of most everyone killed.
Who verifies it? Who verified any President’s credentials? Does it even happen?
Well look at that. You don't know the answers but you do know the questions to ask.
Have some more rope.
What part of that is not easily to be understood?
Zero's the president until Jan 2013 or until a majority of the House and 67 senators say he isn't (hint to D'Onofrio and Dr. Taitz: the Nine don't count). That's the reality, and the birfers who are stuck on stupid and say otherwise soil themselves with their drool and distract from the policy debate.
To win in 2012, we need a guy with a clue. The clue-challenged birfers are unwitting tools of Obama! Col. West, on the other hand, knows how to keep his eye on the ball.
I’m using Charlie Manson as an example. THere are thousands just like him roaming free. And the little 14 year old neighbor girl that he covets has to bear his child if he’s “bold” enough to decide he needs to rape her? You’re nuts.
Yes, we’ve heard your view that nobody is responsible for verifying the qualifications of a prospective POTUS.
No, thank you. You stand your ground like nobody on this forum. I wish we had more like you.
Your equating of killing in a just war and the killing of completely innocent children of our own nation is noted.
How many pregnant women were killed, along with their babies?
THere are thousands just like him roaming free.
I doubt it. Charlie was pretty unique.
And the little 14 year old neighbor girl that he covets has to bear his child if he’s “bold” enough to decide he needs to rape her?
You have the audacity to call me nuts with such outlandish hyperbole?! Simply amazing!
Let's turn this around.
So the unborn child has to be murdered in the womb to ease our collective guilt that rapists exist in our society despite our contempt of such criminal acts?
By the way, I have a half sister who was the product of the rape of my mother in a hospital. Thankfully, that was a few years before Blackmun and his black-robed cohort dehumanized human children, and she wasn’t considered evil “spawn” and eradicated like you would advise.
She was raised by a Christian family who loved her and she has raised three children of her own, one of whom has served in the United States Air Force. She also has a beautiful grandson.
But, according to you, it would have been fine to have wiped out that entire blood line because there was a criminal in the family tree.
You’ll have choice. Your wife can carry Charlie’s kid.
Go read up on just war, and then get back to me.
A criminal in the family tree. Probably just a horse thief or a dope peddler, right?
If we're going for the absurd then I want to play too!
Your reading comprehension is at a low ebb tonight.
Well if they were, you’d volunteer to be a human shield, apparently. Have at it next time we drop a hellfire onto a taliban safe house.
If you want the Charlie Mansons of the world to populate your family tree, have at it.
I have. Long before you knew what it was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.