0atcake.bsky.social
(19) (any pronouns) 🔓|💫|🗺️|🌷|🌈🍓|🥄🌹|☂️🧠|🌲🍀
2,243 posts
95 followers
23 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
you know what they say. if it walks like a nazi, talks like a nazi, looks like a nazi, and salutes like a nazi...
comment in response to
post
i always find it funny when fat, lazy americans go against basic biology and common medical knowledge to convince themselves they're healthy.
comment in response to
post
any scapegoat that'll take the attention away from the billionaire nazis taking money away from child cancer patients, eh?
comment in response to
post
no, no, i agree, trust the nazi billionaires. it's actually the charities and the families that rely on them that are the sick criminals!
comment in response to
post
wow! guess that really affected your critical thinking, with you voting for the billionaires who cut coverage and consumer protections for people with pre-existing conditions. get better soon, nazi bootlicker. ♥️
comment in response to
post
oh, so we're not just cutting funding to child cancer patients, we're calling them liars! i would expect nothing less from the nazi party of family values.
comment in response to
post
oh, are we playing the "invasive questions asked as a deflection" game? how many times have you survived cancer, and what chronic conditions and disabilities were you born with?
comment in response to
post
these families are suffering because they live in a country without universal healthcare that's ruled by nazi billionaires who will strip them of what little charity funding they receive.
trust me, the last thing cancer patients want is less regulations.
comment in response to
post
so you went from "this is false" to "well it's true, but those kids deserved it."
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
firstfocus.org/resource/tar...
comment in response to
post
we have to cut funding for the child cancer patients so we can fund child cancer patients !(which we won't actually do)
comment in response to
post
firstfocus.org/resource/tar...
comment in response to
post
people: musk is taking funding away from child cancer patients
magats: but hunder bidem!!!1!!
comment in response to
post
what a shitty thing to say about struggling families. you can always count on the magats to work against the people.
comment in response to
post
firstfocus.org/resource/tar...
comment in response to
post
"holding men accountable is gay"
comment in response to
post
you're not the sharpest spoon in the drawer
comment in response to
post
we both know you won't.
comment in response to
post
oregon and Washington have high vaccination rates, which is why they're not in deep shit like Texas. :)
comment in response to
post
is anyone surprised that the trump supporter got upset over men being held responsible?
comment in response to
post
in the US, retard is a slur and the people who use it are typically on the same side as the worm-brained nazis.
comment in response to
post
americans will blame their obesity on everyone but themselves.
comment in response to
post
taking pain meds without pain is inherently bad and going on steroids without corresponding hormones issues is also inherently bad.
comment in response to
post
This is not good for America. A draft dodger is punking Generals who fought and sacrificed for this nation.
THIS IS HOW WE REPAY THEM?
It’s time for:
SUSTAINED BOYCOTTS of businesses that stand with Trump.
VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS IN LOCAL, state and midterm election.
CLEAN TGE HOUSE.
comment in response to
post
"reality" is whatever you see on kremlin news, eh? 🤣
comment in response to
post
what's so hard to understand? conservatives have to share their platforms with nazis and pedos in order to feel safe. anytime a nazi or pedo gets blocked, they start whining about echo chambers.
comment in response to
post
not wanting to have a baby is enough reason not to have a baby. women shouldn't need a "right reason" to avoid being forced to have men's babies.
comment in response to
post
Wendy Williams, the notorious liar whose career revolves around controversy? the same attention whore who drank herself into a stupor? you're really just proving my point.
abortions are expensive, painful, and incredibly hard to get. no one is using them as birth control.
comment in response to
post
again, this just supports my point. according to your cult, you can safely violate children as long as they are not "pre-menstrual females."
comment in response to
post
so islam supports pedophilia as long as the children being violated are pubescent.
am I wrong? is the "age of maturity" in your cult not determined by puberty?
comment in response to
post
laughing about violating consent again?? do you do anything else?
comment in response to
post
yes, you sleep like a baby violating women's consent and forcing them into non-consensual reproductive acts, don't ya?
comment in response to
post
yes, you find the violation of women's consent very funny, we get it.
comment in response to
post
so the correct answer was "you just don't want to acknowledge that truth because it doesn't paint your rhetoric in a good light."
comment in response to
post
every. single. time. we get to the concept of consent you back out of the argument. it's because you know that your rhetoric relied on the violation of women's consent. we haven't "talked enough," you've avoided the question enough.
comment in response to
post
no healthcare should be illegal. it should be up to the patient and the doctor as to whether or not a procedure is considered necessary.
I know you hate to hear that, but women deserve to have their consent respected and doctors deserve to have their knowledge respected.
comment in response to
post
Europe is a collection of dozens of countries with different laws and regulations and the idea of a "european model" is inane and inaccurate.
but considering your answer wasn't just, "yes," we can determine that your ideology still involves violating the consent of women.
comment in response to
post
that's wrong? so you support women being able to get abortions, even when their life isn't at stake?
comment in response to
post
later term abortions are less than 1% of all abortions, and they're only done in life or death situations, aka miscarriages.
you focus on such a tiny percentage of abortions, because your ideology revolves around dishonesty.
comment in response to
post
so are you denying that these abortion laws are forcing women to give birth to children they do not want?
or do you just not want to acknowledge that truth because it doesn't paint your rhetoric in a good light?
comment in response to
post
but you're okay with violating women's consent and forcing them to have men's babies. please try to retain this point.
comment in response to
post
decades ago, we also thought that women were household objects. it makes sense that you're viewing this from the perspective of people living in an era where women weren't considered equal.
fetuses do not feel in the womb, they are unconscious.
comment in response to
post
these aren't "later term abortions," they are miscarriages, and they're extremely rare.
the fetuses are not babies.
your ideology revolves around dishonesty and misinformation.
comment in response to
post
and I obviously noticed that you manage to make up some lame copout every time I point out that your rhetoric inherently requires violating women's consent and forcing them to have babies. why is that?
comment in response to
post
yet when it comes to fetuses, suddenly you forced-birthers are all for forcing people to give up their lives and bodies and consent for the sake of the "life" of a fetus.
it's not about saving lives, its about controlling women. (2)
comment in response to
post
the "life" of an unfeeling and unthinking lump of cells is not worth violating women's consent.
if someone needs a heart transplant, you can't force someone to give up their heart. if someone requires a blood transfusion, you can't force someone to donate blood to them. (1)