WarrenPeace

258 posts

WarrenPeace banner
WarrenPeace

WarrenPeace

@WarrenPeace_75

Chats nonsense about terrible TV shows, football, music and enjoys annoying Tories

Bristol innit MIND Inscrit le Ekim 2021
2.2K Abonnements711 Abonnés
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Meter_Pannion @Rocky22ars @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP Foster wasn't a 'near birth viable fetus' case and you know it. Using it to pretend women can legally end a term pregnancy is you being disingenuous yet again Decriminalising her removes Victorian offences it doesn’t make the act lawful.
English
0
0
0
5
James McMurdock MP
James McMurdock MP@JMcMurdockMP·
I dont think being overly emotional is particularly helpful when it comes to matters of the law but for the first time since becoming an MP I am genuinely sad about what parliament has done. I am sad because I know what the consequences will be. I am sad because I know nervous first time parents might give way to doubt and opt out of parenthood and how the reality of that means they'll be denied the greatest gift life will ever give them and instead inherit a life of monstrous guilt. I am sad because, now, healthy babies will be destroyed. I am really sorry that the UK has legalised full term abortion. For what it's worth, I voted NO. I am going to squeeze my children a little tighter and thank the universe a little more than normal this morning. You cannot become unpregnant. You just become the parent of a child you killed. That is the reality of life. We must face it. My babies.
James McMurdock MP tweet media
ben weller 🪴 ✟@flowerpotweller

The House of Lords have voted narrowly in favour of allowing abortion up-to-birth in England & Wales. The only solace is that one day they will meet Jesus.

English
446
1.1K
6.6K
387.1K
Miles Messervy
Miles Messervy@Meter_Pannion·
@WarrenPeace_75 @Rocky22ars @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP I haven't said that it does any of those things. I asked a question- should a woman carrying a child, just prior to birth, be permitted to destroy that unborn child by herself? If not, what rule, law or other enactment now prevents her from doing so?
English
1
0
0
14
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Meter_Pannion @Rocky22ars @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP It clearly is hard, that clause stops prosecuting the woman under Victorian abortion laws. It doesn’t legalise lateterm abortion, and it doesn’t touch homicide, safeguarding or medical regulation. You’re treating not an offence for her as the act is permitted They’re not the same
English
1
0
1
18
Miles Messervy
Miles Messervy@Meter_Pannion·
@WarrenPeace_75 @Rocky22ars @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP "For the purposes of the law related to abortion, including sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy".
English
1
0
0
26
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Rocky22ars @Meter_Pannion @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP You're asking why she wouldn't be charged under laws the amendment literally removes. That's not legalising abortion to birth it's ending the criminalisation of the woman. Every other law still applies. Your logic doesn't.
English
1
0
0
52
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Meter_Pannion @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP The amendment stops women being prosecuted for ending their own pregnancy. It doesn't legalise late term abortion, and it absolutely doesn't affect the law once a baby is born. You're confusing decriminalisation of the woman with permission for the act, they're not the same thing
English
1
1
4
147
Miles Messervy
Miles Messervy@Meter_Pannion·
@WarrenPeace_75 @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP If a pregnant woman took steps, by herself, the day before her due date, to kill her viable foetus, would this legislation prevent her being prosecuted? If not, explain which offence she would have committed.
English
2
0
0
188
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Meter_Pannion @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP You’ve totally misunderstood the legislation. It doesn’t allow ‘killing a foetus up to birth’. It clarifies exemptions for medical emergencies, not elective late‑term abortions. If you’re going to make sweeping claims about Parliament, at least read and understand the bill first
English
1
1
17
227
Coolio Iglesias
Coolio Iglesias@mickeymack1·
45 years old today. Holy shit 🤯🤣
Coolio Iglesias tweet media
English
43
4
152
3.2K
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@Fazzanelli @Heather22311814 @EssexPR @UKLabour @UKParliament It's just typical faux anger and lies, yet they believe grifters rather than looking at the truth x.com/i/status/20345…
Frances 'Cassandra' Coppola@Frances_Coppola

OK, I am bored with this lie now. Here are the facts. - Abortion remains illegal after 24 weeks gestation except in certain rare and exceptional circumstances - Supplying pills to terminate a pregnancy remains illegal after 10 weeks gestation - Abortion still requires two doctors' signatures to be performed legally - Women seeking terminations must still meet one of the criteria set out in the 1967 Abortion Act - Forced abortion remains a crime - Anyone, including medical professionals, who helps a woman obtain an abortion outside the law is liable for prosecution. In short, "abortion up to birth" HAS NOT been legalised. What the new law does is prevent women from being criminalised for ending their own pregnancies without medical help - a hugely risky practice that women only do if they are desperate. Parliament recognises that these women need care and support, not draconian punishment. Importantly, the new law also protects women who have suffered late miscarriages or stillbirths from being prosecuted for their loss and potentially spending years in jail for what is a tragedy, not a crime. bills.parliament.uk/publications/5…

English
0
0
0
10
Adam Brooks AKA EssexPR 🇬🇧
Adam Brooks AKA EssexPR 🇬🇧@EssexPR·
I’M ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED IN OUR PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM. There are now no legal consequences against any woman that induces her own abortion up to FULL TERM… for ANY reason. SICK. DEMONIC INFACT
English
408
1.1K
8.3K
78.8K
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@bezmendil Klopp laughing on the sideline.....I'll give you a minute
English
0
0
0
15
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
Can't believe Klopp on the sideline laughing last night...🤔🤔😂😂
English
1
0
1
88
Cezar23
Cezar23@chuckfav·
Article 82 is clear, and it states if the team leaves the ground which is the venue without the referee permission, not the pitch, before the end of the game, and Senegal did not leave the ground but the pitch and they stayed put and completed the game. So Cafonline appeal decision has failed the test.
English
4
1
7
2.9K
Melissa Reddy
Melissa Reddy@MelissaReddy_·
Senegal have further merit in arguing CAF’s Appeal Board applying Article 84 for the forfeit is incorrect. The wording of Article 84 is clear - ‘The team which contravenes article 82 AND! article 83’ … will lose its match by 3-0. There can be no accusation of Senegal contravening Article 83.
Melissa Reddy tweet media
Melissa Reddy@MelissaReddy_

Senegal are likely to argue that they did not abandon the game, the match was completed by the referee’s whistle. They can say Article 82 was misapplied because the game continued under the same circumstances and reached its natural end. The referee allowing Senegal back on the pitch and Morocco happily continuing the game will be used to state the match - and result - was valid. As the final was completed, they can argue the integrity of the game was upheld. They can also claim changing the winner of a completed final is an extreme overreach by the Appeal Board. And that the punishment for a delay - not a refusal to play as they finished the game - is excessive.

English
163
979
3.5K
412.6K
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
#jeremyvine Is there anything that Farage could do that Carol Malone wouldn't excuse?? He could shit on her front room rug while she was sat watching TV and she'd find a way to apologise for him...fucking pathetic 🙄
English
0
0
8
115
David Baddiel
David Baddiel@Baddiel·
Some may be surprised by how all the men in @louistheroux 's Manosphere doc turn out to be antisemites, but it follows from their logic. First, obviously, Jew hatred is clickbait, but more importantly, these men promote versions of themselves as brave mavericks unafraid to stick it to the feminised liberal Establishment - and as such, they need an embodiment of power to kick against - one that they, in their I-don’t-give-a-fuck performance, are smashing through. They need the myth of the Matrix. They begin with women as the control but soon they move on to Jews, who provide a darker mythology of control for them to perform being not-controlled by.
English
640
125
1.4K
1.5M
WarrenPeace
WarrenPeace@WarrenPeace_75·
@caffyhank @ImNotRealLad Mumps can lead to viral meningitis, its a terrible illness, my twin had Meningococcal meningitis when we were 6, it left him with brain damage and learning issues. He was lucky to survive it
English
1
0
1
98

Découvrir

@Meter_Pannion @Rocky22ars @ZoeJardiniere @JMcMurdockMP @mickeymack1 @vecchio_uomo @Fazzanelli @Heather22311814