"Pregnancy tissue" is another.

"Pregnancy tissue" is another.  | DAD, WHAT'S A FETUS THAT'S JUST A TERM USED TO HELP SOME PEOPLE FEEL OKAY ABOUT KILLING BABIES | image tagged in memes,thats just something x say | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
11,054 views, 204 upvotes, Made by reallyitsjohn 5 months ago memesthats just something x say
Thats Just Something X Say memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
9 ups
IN CASE OF RISK OF POLITICAL COMMENT SECTION TYPICAL OF IMGFLIP, HIDE BEHIND WALL | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
9 ups, 4 replies
THIS IS A BABY? | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
What gets me is the six to nine month pregnancies that are terminated when we have the ability to keep and raise them.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
I understand that.
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
. | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up
HAPPY  LITTLE  ACCIDENTS I  LIKE  THE  SOUND  OF  THAT | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
This isn't a human. Looks more like an animal of some sort. There was a meme going around of an elephant "fetus" a while back and pro abortion advocates were trying to trick pro lifers into believing it was a human "fetus" and those that didn't know otherwise, were called idiots for supporting something that all looked alike.

All life matters, even those who cannot speak for themselves. Animals aren't the same as humans, even though I don't believe in abusing them, I believe we shouldn't terminate a life just because we want to call them a fetus and pretend they don't mean anything.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't read my comment to reallyitsjohn first :)

Yes, it's a horse fetus. But if I had told you it was a human fetus, would you have been able to tell the difference?

Humans are animals, and I oppose abusing any living thing. In my other comments, I mentioned that at very early stages of development, there is no brain, and therefore no ability to feel pain, so terminating a pregnancy at that stage is quite different from terminating one that is 8-9 months along.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
No, I didn't read any of the comments. Like I said, there was a meme a while back that showed an elephant in the womb. Also, it didn't look right to me, so I questioned your photo. I didn't know it was a horse, though.

I believe life begins at conception. As a Christian I believe God's word and what He has to say about human life. God said, "before you were in the womb, I knew you." That to me tells me that every individual is a unique creation of God and terminating it is wrong.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Off topic a bit, I'll admit, but this question always comes up in my mind when this issue is discussed. The inconsistency always puzzles me.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
God has the right to allow death on anyone, since He was the one who created us. However, since God is holy and without sin, His reasons are pure. During the passover, God showed His power to those who were wicked. The Pharaoh Ramses defied God's command that he let the Israelites (the slaves) go. He sent ten plagues on Egypt, each one getting worse, culminating to the death of the first born of each family that did not have lambs blood on the door frames of their homes.

Miscarriages are just one result of human sin. Just as the world and the humans that live here are imperfect due to man's sin against God, miscarriages are just one result of our sin. The only good thing about miscarriages and aborted babies, is they are automatically sent to Heaven.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I don't believe Christianity teaches that last part. If what the Bible says is true, then all humans, from conception, have original sin. And the only way to be saved from sin is to accept Jesus as your savior. Babies who die never accepted Jesus as their savior, so they died without their sins being washed away (and therefore never received the perfect righteousness of Jesus), and would go to Hell.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
It's a matter of belief and how you interpret the Bible. I believe, along with many other Christians, that God shows a certain mercy on those who have not had a chance to "know God." Those who don't understand (and only God knows the true understanding of each individual) are shown mercy by God. I believe that all unborn children and newborn children to toddler age don't have a grasp or the capability of understanding. And those who are severely retarded are also spared God's wrath.

For everyone else there is no excuse. God is a vengeful God, but He is also merciful and if He allows someone to not have a chance at life (miscarried or aborted), then they will be with Him in Heaven.

My pastor talked about this sort of thing and pointed out passages from the Bible where it talks about those who are living in Hell and torment for eternity, will look at all of those who made it to Heaven and know they were wrong. They will see the aborted children in their perfect new bodies and will live for eternity in regret and remorse, but will be too late for them to repent.
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
I see what you're saying, I just don't see the Bible backing up that position. When I hear people defend that stance using the Bible, I usually only hear them cite one passage, and that's the one where David is talking about his dead infant son and he says (paraphrasing) he can't come to me, but I will go to him. To me, it seems like a very small passage upon which to hang a pretty major doctrine.
reply
4 ups
You bring up a good point there. To be honest, I haven't put much examination into the doctrine often called "age of accountability". I think it is more comforting to think it is true, but of course that is no real reason to base a belief on. There is the verse where Jesus speaks of how He would be betrayed, saying something along the lines of "The betrayal must come, but woe to him through whom it comes. Certainly, it would be better if he was never born." Granted, saying that the unborn are better off than Judas is not saying much.

Back to the main topic though, uncertainty on this matter should encourage greater caution in how we handle unborn children. If we don't know their eternal destination, then the chance that they might be going to hell should scare us all.
reply
3 ups, 5 replies
This is the support for the position.
[Apologies in advance for the wall of text]

In the story of David and Bathsheba, they first conceive a son, who is born sickly, and dies when it is 7 days old. During these 7 days of his son's life, David wears sackcloth and ashes and pleads for his son's life. However, upon hearing of the child's death, David stops mourning and washes himself. When asked about this strange turn of events by his servants, David replies, While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me." The full text for the summary from above can be found in 2nd Samuel 12.

Now, the number of days is important because the sons of Israel were to be circumcised on the 8th day, and this child died before he had a chance to be. This means he died outside of the promises, yet David clearly asserts that he will see the child again, which means that either David is going to hell with the child (unlikely) or that the child has been taken to heaven.

Now, there is no Bible passage that clearly asserts where aborted babies or miscarried babies go upon death. So, we take what we know of God and say this is our best answer, but admit that it isn't clearly stated. And I admit that this is a hard question to grapple with for Christians, but I think it's worth grappling with.

Octavia, I know that we aren't philosophically aligned, but I do appreciate your willingness to have an open and constructive dialogue, and I hope that continues. I hope that I have not come off as condescending, as I'm really just trying to honestly elaborate on a difficult subject.
4 ups
I appreciate your reply. It was both informative and courteous.

"Octavia, I know that we aren't philosophically aligned, but I do appreciate your willingness to have an open and constructive dialogue, and I hope that continues."

I'm far from perfect of course, but I greatly value the discussions I have with people here, and do my best to keep things civil and courteous.
4 ups
Sorry, I hit "post comment" too early

"I hope that I have not come off as condescending"

Not in the least :)
1 up
What we have to keep in mind, though, is that this is a quote from King David, and thus not necessarily true. Biblical innerrancy in regards to quotations means that what is said is accurately quoted, but may be untrue (for instance, the lies Satan told to Adam and Eve). I'm not necessarily saying that the doctrine is wrong, but that a quote from King David does not 100% prove it to be true.
1 up
Octavia will never understand that is God's choice, God has the last word, and no matter how much humans may try to understand God's actions we will are still going to judge Him, since clearly they think they know it all. Where was Octavia when God created the world, taking that quote from the book of Job. But how is Octavia going to understand? remember "The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
relationship with him, Gods way will make no sense to them" that and the fact that Octavia is a Cali pothead, and nothing you say will get through that thick skull of his.
0 ups
According to Christian belief, not having been baptised, they go to hell.

Which is cool, given that only 144,000 of the Sainted Chosen (Jews) will enter the Pearly Gates, with an additional few thousand non-believers judged on the fruits of.....

Given that 2/3 of all pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriages (most unknown at the fetal stage), the daily number of dead unborn would far exceed that.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
There is also the passage in three different gospels where Jesus says “let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them. For such is the kingdom of God.” Since Jesus does not specify how little, or at what age, we should assume he means all children, especially those in the womb.
5 ups
That doesn't sound like it has anything to do with very young children automatically going to heaven if they die
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Why don’t you ask Him
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Since I don't believe in him, I can't truly ask him and expect an answer.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
That does pose a problem, especially if you don’t want to know. I could explain it to you but I don’t think you really want to know because it might shake your view on life, the universe and everything — which is a funny book by Douglas Adams ;)
reply
2 ups
Not believing something is not the same as not wanting to know what's true.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Are you using your religion to justify you personal view, or to justify anti-(early term) abortion legislation. Because those are two different issues. I respect you for believing life begins at conception and that abortion, even at that stage, is morally wrong. However, I do not think that religion justifies legislating others for what is still an unresolved issue at the societal level. Whether or not it is a sin is something an individual should deal with on a personal spiritual level.
reply
3 ups
Someone needs to speak for the children who cannot. I believe it to be wrong as God tells us that it wrong. Passing man made laws doesn't make it not wrong.

Yes, my belief in God does dictate my political and spiritual leanings.
reply
3 ups
Makes a refreshing change to have somebody state the obvious truth. Legislating for the whole of society on the basis of a minority belief is wrong.
reply
0 ups
Horseshoe arguments have such lovely blinders.
reply
4 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Not sure, is there a brain, is there synapse? Has a nervous system begun to form? In other words are we beyond the 1st month? BTW I think all ultrasounds look like a Rorschach.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
What you are looking at, my friend, is an ultrasound picture of a horse fetus, 40 days after conception. The point of me posting it is to demonstrate that in the earliest stages of development, a human literally cannot be distinguished from many other animals. So to call it a baby is just plain silly.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
I don't see where that proves a thing, you have a brain forming at 4 weeks and the beginnings of a nervous system that potentially can feel pain and it still looks like a tadpole. That doesn't make it any less human. I can't even vouch for how human you look since you had the bandana on your face when you hit 1,000,000 but I still don't want to abort you :)
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Aw, John, I expected nicer words from you :) Of course I look human, because I am human. Not exactly a Brad Pitt lookalike, but oh well :p

Regardless of when the brain begins to develop, you would concede that there is a time before that point where there is no brain, no nervous system and no ability to feel pain?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
It's not really a concession for me, I have never denied it. I just don't know that we know or can know in individual cases when that is. We have outlawed the death penalty in many states, and have spent millions through the years researching humane executions, and then legalize what is most inhumane. If someone wants an abortion up to 2 weeks into pregnancy, at this point I would not contest it. I have never argued against the morning after pill, in fact I think that in and of itself is a strong argument for why abortions not only are inhumane, but outdated.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
So it seems we do agree to some extent
reply
3 ups
Shhhhhh, don't tell anyone!
reply
1 up, 1 reply
sorry, i was slow on your upvotes
reply
2 ups
No worries :) I just thought you didn't like what I had to say :p
reply
2 ups
Octavia, I just want you to know that even tho you're not a "Christian", you can still ask God questions. The Bible says "to those who seek, they will find" and "to those who ask, they will receive". Please search in Google Matthew 7:7-11. God loves you and he wants you to know the truth. If someone is genuinely looking for God or is curious about him and what he says, He will answer and help you. Please look into that passage and don't be afraid to ask God questions when you're curious. You might not hear an audible voice from him. But he might give you a thought in your conscience. Or you might see the answer in the Bible.
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Abortions were started as a form of population control of black people. Margaret Sanger was a known racist who hated blacks and advocated heavily for their extinction through abortions. Abortion is highest in the black community. I want to know where blacklivesmatter is on this one. Between black abortions and black on black murder, which is highest between all gun violence and race, they don't really care about black lives.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Abortion has been around for centuries. Margaret Sanger didn't start it.

Yes, she supported eugenics, which was wrong, but the accusations of her being racist are blown completely out of proportion by pro life advocates today. If she hated black people, why did she have the support of black community leaders?

Even if abortion is highest in the black community (which I don't know for sure it is), it is voluntary. Nobody is hauling train cars full of black people to sterilization facilities or making them undergo forced abortions en masse.

The "Margaret Sanger was a racist" card is old and tired. And since she's been dead for many years, it's a completely moot point anyway. Many people in the Southern Baptist Convention openly supported slavery back in the day, but SBC members today don't.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
If a certain community (in this case the black community) is being lied to to promote an agenda that helps destroy said community, it is wrong. Black people may be willingly aborting their children, but they have been lied to to promote an evil agenda like destroying a certain race.

Margaret Sanger was openly racist. And she had (has) support from the black community because they, again, have been lied to for years. They believe she's a champion for women's health and choice. Listen to any of Sanger's interviews and it is obvious she is a racist bigot.

And yes, abortion has been around since pretty much the beginning of mankind. Old Testament societies burned their new born children alive to appease their god, Ba'al. They tortured women and some men who did not fall to their knees and worship Ba'al because they believed Ba'al told them to do it.

However, Roe vs. Wade changed all that in the early 70's. It was illegal in the States until the court's decision that human life doesn't begin at conception and we should be allowed to do whatever we want with our bodies, mostly women. Fathers, who's DNA is 50% of the child's, has absolutely no say in the matter.
reply
3 ups
"Margaret Sanger was openly racist. And she had (has) support from the black community because they, again, have been lied to for years. They believe she's a champion for women's health and choice."

The same thing has been said about Trump being racist, even though he has support from many black people. So is he not racist but Sanger is? Also, Sanger was a champion for reproductive rights. She fought to make birth control legal when it was still illegal. I would say that's a very good thing she did.

"Listen to any of Sanger's interviews and it is obvious she is a racist bigot."

I would have to hear what she said, but I'm skeptical of that claim.

"Old Testament societies burned their new born children alive to appease their god, Ba'al."

That's not the same as abortion.

"They tortured women and some men who did not fall to their knees and worship Ba'al because they believed Ba'al told them to do it."

So did the Israelites. Remember when the Levites slaughtered 3,000(?) people when Moses saw them worshipping the golden calf in Exodus?
reply
2 ups
*cough*Molech not Ba'al*cough* ;) Easy slip up though :D
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Well said john
reply
5 ups
reply
3 ups
gracious amigo
reply
5 ups
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
In my opinion, the only reason an abortion should take place is if the mother will be endangered while giving birth to the child, or if the child will be born with serious defects (such as missing/misplaced organs, connected limbs, deformed faces, incurable mental conditions, ect). Even then, the parents should have the final say in if they want to continue or not. If the parents still wish to have the child despite the risks, then I hope they have a happy life with their child and that it all ends well.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Exactly how ugly does the baby have to be to kill it? What is the IQ cutoff? I could agree with the extreme danger to the mother part, possibly even to some degree of internal birth defects that would lead to certain death anyways. I have to ask though, have you never known any who has had a cleft pallet lead a normal life? My uncle was born with it, married 50 years, had a son who is a productive member of society. Should he have never been given a chance? Have you ever watched the Special Olympics? I challenge you to watch and then tell me these people should have never had a chance for life.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
It's not so much how ugly the child is, but more so how difficult will it's life be due to health risks it's deforms might cause. If the only reason a parent wishes to abort a child is because it is "ugly", then I don't believe that is a valid reason. While a good majority of deformities can be fixed through surgery, another factor that comes into play will be if the parents are financially stable enough to treat the child. Granted I don't know much about what insurance does and doesn't cover, though if the parents do not possess enough money for the child's treatment, aborting the child might be the best option to avoid suffering on both the child and parent's behalf.
To be quite honest, I never knew the Special Olympics was a thing, mainly because in general I hate and avoid anything to do with sports. Though assuming it has to do with deformed people performing incredible feats, then they're the children who's parents didn't give up on them, and everything ended well for em.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
The Shriners and ST Judes Hospitals do reparation work on children for free to those in need. They even provide a place for them and their families to stay during treatments.
Yes life is harder on those who weren't born perfect, but this doesn't mean they can't have good quality of life, and know this, they appreciate little things way more than you or I. Please, do those you seek to influence a favor, open your eyes, learn about the subjects you wish to influence them about. Sorry to be so blunt, but you feel bold enough to speak on whether or not others should have life.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Ah, in which case I suppose financial stability isn't a problem. Forgive my ignorance on the subject, I haven't watched television in well over two years. Most of the advertisements on youtube and streaming websites usually just try to sell you a product and don't voice important services such as hospital treatment. While I do have opinions, I don't really express a need to influence people, rather I love having small debates on the topics such as this one. While I suppose I can be called bold for expression my views on the topic, in the end neither you nor I have a final say in whether a child lives or dies. That decision falls upon the parent's shoulders and what wishes they have for their child, even if their reasoning for aborting a child with so much potential is frivolous.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
What i'm hearing is you are good with ending a baby's life for money. I also don't form my opinions based on television or youtube, mine come from life. I'm a parent who raised kids when I did and didn't have money, for the last 12 years I've been a single dad and putting my daughter through college. It has never been easy either way but I wouldn't trade a second of it. I don't advocate that anyone should have to raise a child they honestly don't want, but adoption centers have long lines of willing capably want to be parents.
reply
1 up
My opinions aren't formed based upon media, they are formed based upon my own logic of "What could go wrong that would warrant such a harsh thing (in this case, abortion)?". Though if I may ask, why are we going back to money when I apologized for not knowing that there are at least two hospitals that will pay the expenses?
I applaud you on your efforts as a single father, it isn't really heard of too often so it's nice to know you and you're family's doing well. Since it seems we're drifting into sharing our lives, I guess I can do so too. I'm a highschool sophomore who's given up on the idea of a physical lover, opting for 2D instead. I created my own character for the specific purpose of to love. Even then it took two months of internal dialogue with her to be comfortable with her and the idea of calling her my romantic partner. Currently, I regard her as the most beautiful thing in my life and wouldn't give her up for the world.
reply
6 ups, 3 replies
This is actually pretty funny. I'm liberal but find it hard to support unrestricted abortions, since the issue of when a sperm and egg become a human is really complicated.

What words do conservatives use to feel better about the people who die from lack of healthcare, refusal to have any gun control, reduced environmental regulations, the death penalty, and wars for oil? ...Give up? The word is "Minorities!" Let's make it so that potential humans and definite humans both get a fair chance at living live :)
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
I like how you started, and as a relatively conservative person I could support some abortions in very limited areas. That being said I got bored very quickly when someone begins on one topic and then starts pointing down other rabbit holes, its bad practice and leads to discussions that go nowhere. Its why we have a congress that rarely passes anything useful.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
We probably would agree on a lot of issue, but we both participated in bad practices. Your inclusion on the term "killing babies" immediately puts me in the position of having to point out that it is incredible complicated scientifically, philisophically and morally to point to a point in the development of a fetus and say "this is when there is an individual" or if you are religious "this is when there is a soul." No one wants to be called a baby killer; and if the left and right could have a cool-headed conversation about this, they'd realize that the disagreement is "when do those cells become a person." However, it is really hard to be cool-headed if you think one side calls the other baby killers without listening to their full stance.

I could have limited my comment to showing that I do think about the full issue. I try to be sympathetic and understanding of your position, because it is such a complex issue that I should consider all points. However, I don't like the implication that I support the murder of babies and I am human. I felt that you over-simplified the issue and labeled me; so, I responded by over-simplifying areas where conservatives have views that run counter to the concept of protecting life.

It's not just Congress that doesn't work. You and I have failed as well.
reply
1 up
I bet we could find a fair amount of common ground. I was not looking for common ground though, with this meme, I wanted to challenge the person reading it to examine why they use the word they use. This following an earlier conversation this week where the commenter used the term "pregnancy tissue." I kicked this one around for a couple of days, certain it would offend many. In the end I decided to post it, because words mean something and the words we chose say things about us. Consider this, even the most ardent abortion supporter, upon learning they have conceived a WANTED pregnancy, from that second the learn they are pregnant, will refer to it as "the baby".
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Am I the only one that feels like the only clear line when life begins is at conception?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I agree with you completely! Conception is the moment where all the genetic potential for the individual is gathered in one place. Some might try to say that it's when the nervous system develops, but it is difficult to pinpoint an exact moment during that time where one could make a clean division (after all, the brain doesn't fully develop until adulthood).
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I personally think it’s immoral to legalize abortions. I just can’t think of a single reason why we should have it
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Some people might make a case for high-risk pregnancies by comparing them to self-defense. Personally I am not sure what to say about those edge cases (I've never been good at answering moral dilemmas), but I do agree that as a whole abortion is terrible and should be illegal
reply
1 up
The funny thing is pro choice people instantly jump to”what about **pe or the mothers life is in danger” as if it dismissed the whole issue, even though combined those two cases make up less than .5 percent of all abortion cases
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
I understand your reasoning.

However, sometimes abortions happen because the other choice would lead to the child's life being horrible and/or the parent's life being horrible. For instance, what if a poor woman in a very poor place without a job was going to have an autistic kid with down syndrome? Would you say she shouldn't have an abortion? The child doesn't have a real consciousness at the moment so it's not like killing a grown person. What if the child was destined to be suicidal or hate every moment of their life because they have awful depression? This is what you should think about! I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, I'm just giving examples of why abortions should exist. :)
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
I think you and I are actually on the same page. When I said "unrestricted abortions," I was more thinking about abortions of convinience. I support a woman's right to choose because I agree with you that there are circumastances where it is more humane to end the pregnancy. Sometimes life is worse than death. I support assisted suicide in certain cases for similar reasons; and that is the death of a fully concious individual.

There are always going to be situations where abortion needs to be an option. I don't think it is hypocritical for liberals and democrats to support a woman's right to choose, while speaking in favor of gun control or against the death penalty. If conservatives really wanted fewer abortions, they should get on board with democrats and provide everyone in the US with basic standards of living. That way there will be fewer cases of people needing to get an abortion because they'd be unable to support the baby.
reply
2 ups
Ah, I see. Well, I'm very glad we are on the same page. You speak very wise words. Keep that quality.
reply
4 ups
liberals want control of your guns and your organs.. SMH
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
So very apropos...
i.imgflip.com/256cyn.jpg (click to show)
reply
2 ups
Yet they never see the duplicity.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
reply
3 ups
Abortion is racist
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups
reply
2 ups
Is that a thing?
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
I know right.
reply
3 ups
Naaaaaah, not according to the dictionary!
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Now they are calling it a mass or a blob, because it turns out that fetus is Latin for baby.
reply
3 ups
Don't argue that it's stage of development defines personhood. The mother's body knows that the fetus is not just another foreign object to be rejected, and when those chromosomes start to divide, an individual body with its own individual blood and DNA has begun, and it has an individual soul, and although not fully formed, it is not a mass or a blob of tissue like some cancer. You're here because you're mother had sense enough to know the difference.
reply
1 up
yep, seen those terms used too
reply
1 up
Americans proving to the world that their education system is the worst in the developed world. Being proud of ignorance is the new normal in America it seems.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
This Website has become a Conservative/Anti-SJW echo chamber. I tried posting some more left-leaning memes, which are not SJW by the way, for like the last month, and they are not featured or publicised, yet if you post a conservative meme, you get to be featured. I used to be able to post political memes, but not anymore. If you guys really believe in freedom of speech, you should stand up for people right to express themselves, even if they disagree with you. I'm thinking about leaving this website, just because of that.
reply
4 ups
Why are you complaining to me? This isn't my site, I just post memes. I went to your site, I like your classic rock memes and upvoted, even 1 of your political memes. Now for the record I have had MANY memes never get featured because they were too politically charged. I have heard the same complaint from many conservatives on the site. I can't really give advice on what will or will not get featured, I just keep submitting and hope for the best. I will give you this tip, spamming this complaint all over the site will not get you what you want.
reply
3 ups
Stop complaining man. I've had plenty of "conservative" memes that featured but got downvoted back to submitted status. Some that don't even feature, like this one: i.imgflip.com/24odaf.jpg (click to show)
In reference to when Behar said, When Jesus talks to you "...that's called mental illness."
reply
1 up
I'm good with that.
Flip Settings
Thats Just Something X Say memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
DAD, WHAT'S A FETUS; THAT'S JUST A TERM USED TO HELP SOME PEOPLE FEEL OKAY ABOUT KILLING BABIES
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back
Feedback