Planned Parenthood - GD worthy: let's anger half this board and have some fun with numbers - Page 6

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Planned Parenthood - GD worthy: let's anger half this board and have some fun with numbers (Page 6 of 8)

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:30:15 AM EDT

[#1]

Quote History

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

View Quote

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:31:17 AM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:
OP can't grasp the fact that people who oppose abortion see it as the murder of children. Pointing out that it's actually a neat little eugenics program isn't going to change their minds, because they probably dont think eugenics is that great an idea anyway.

In the same way that people who oppose genocide would still oppose it even if you had a bunch of graphs and statistics about how rounding up and exterminating this particular group of people would save us all a lot of money and be a net benefit to society.

View Quote

Well put.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:32:11 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

View Quote

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:33:29 AM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:36:13 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
So, a guy shot up an abortion clinic yesterday. The wrongs of unwanted pregnancy termination - an AR15.com favorite topic. And now for the gun owners who sort of think the other side: First a couple graphics:

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ldah6rdp6ukvngoyqi1fcg.gif

https://gerardnadal.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/stats_by_year.jpg

http://www.fairus.org/images/content/US_Population.jpg

So, a little math.... Let's pick... 1985. compare abortion rate to population, and that's about 1.5MM abortions (jeepers).

And let's cross reference violent crime today (when people are near their crime potential prime), and... if it were 1980's crime rate (before mid 1970's abortion had an affect on prime crime year aged population), that's 50 violent crimes/yr/1000 people. So today's population is 310,000,000, so... that should be about 15 million violent crimes (obviously other factors are at play, but big number). Today's actual violent crime is closer to 4.6 million. So.... if the "abortion prevents violent criminals" argument holds water (Unwanted/beaten kids more likely to be criminals - I know, that's just crazy talk), then that's about 10,000,000, violent crimes not committed this year (obviously claiming all of those is a stretch).

Yesterday's shooting of an abortion clinic, was annoying. A white guy with an assault rifle shooting up cops and others at a clinic, so that antigun law pressure goes up, and I can be victimized 15 years from now by his unwanted miracles? Screw him. The fact that Conservatives insist that the very people they want killed as adults, be forced to be born against the mothers-will like a scene out of Aliens, is the craziest juxtaposition in the entire conservative political platform.

This isn't a case of "well she should have been more careful", as I'm not interested in easy abortion for the convenience of the idiot mother. I just don't want me or mine funding and then getting victimized by some POS miracle spawned from idiot mother who's obviously predisposed to outright killing it.

View Quote

Your own graphs don't support your point.
From 1973 to 1981 the graphs show a massive jump in abortion numbers but the violent crime rate actually goes slightly up.
Then as abortions start dropping we see the violent crime rate start falling.

If these two things are related, which they might not be, it would actually show that the fewer abortions the lower the violent crime rate.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:38:27 AM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:40:07 AM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to murder, and I morally object to decision of others to murder.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding murder.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:40:54 AM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:

Your own graphs don't support your point.
From 1973 to 1981 the graphs show a massive jump in abortion numbers but the violent crime rate actually goes slightly up.
Then as abortions start dropping we see the violent crime rate start falling.

If these two things are related, which they might not be, it would actually show that the fewer abortions the lower the violent crime rate.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, a guy shot up an abortion clinic yesterday. The wrongs of unwanted pregnancy termination - an AR15.com favorite topic. And now for the gun owners who sort of think the other side: First a couple graphics:

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ldah6rdp6ukvngoyqi1fcg.gif

https://gerardnadal.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/stats_by_year.jpg

http://www.fairus.org/images/content/US_Population.jpg

So, a little math.... Let's pick... 1985. compare abortion rate to population, and that's about 1.5MM abortions (jeepers).

And let's cross reference violent crime today (when people are near their crime potential prime), and... if it were 1980's crime rate (before mid 1970's abortion had an affect on prime crime year aged population), that's 50 violent crimes/yr/1000 people. So today's population is 310,000,000, so... that should be about 15 million violent crimes (obviously other factors are at play, but big number). Today's actual violent crime is closer to 4.6 million. So.... if the "abortion prevents violent criminals" argument holds water (Unwanted/beaten kids more likely to be criminals - I know, that's just crazy talk), then that's about 10,000,000, violent crimes not committed this year (obviously claiming all of those is a stretch).

Yesterday's shooting of an abortion clinic, was annoying. A white guy with an assault rifle shooting up cops and others at a clinic, so that antigun law pressure goes up, and I can be victimized 15 years from now by his unwanted miracles? Screw him. The fact that Conservatives insist that the very people they want killed as adults, be forced to be born against the mothers-will like a scene out of Aliens, is the craziest juxtaposition in the entire conservative political platform.

This isn't a case of "well she should have been more careful", as I'm not interested in easy abortion for the convenience of the idiot mother. I just don't want me or mine funding and then getting victimized by some POS miracle spawned from idiot mother who's obviously predisposed to outright killing it.

Your own graphs don't support your point.
From 1973 to 1981 the graphs show a massive jump in abortion numbers but the violent crime rate actually goes slightly up.
Then as abortions start dropping we see the violent crime rate start falling.

If these two things are related, which they might not be, it would actually show that the fewer abortions the lower the violent crime rate.

That would be because the criminal aged people don't start showing showing up for about 15 years.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:44:00 AM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

Your own graphs don't support your point.
From 1973 to 1981 the graphs show a massive jump in abortion numbers but the violent crime rate actually goes slightly up.
Then as abortions start dropping we see the violent crime rate start falling.

If these two things are related, which they might not be, it would actually show that the fewer abortions the lower the violent crime rate.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, a guy shot up an abortion clinic yesterday. The wrongs of unwanted pregnancy termination - an AR15.com favorite topic. And now for the gun owners who sort of think the other side: First a couple graphics:

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ldah6rdp6ukvngoyqi1fcg.gif

https://gerardnadal.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/stats_by_year.jpg

http://www.fairus.org/images/content/US_Population.jpg

So, a little math.... Let's pick... 1985. compare abortion rate to population, and that's about 1.5MM abortions (jeepers).

And let's cross reference violent crime today (when people are near their crime potential prime), and... if it were 1980's crime rate (before mid 1970's abortion had an affect on prime crime year aged population), that's 50 violent crimes/yr/1000 people. So today's population is 310,000,000, so... that should be about 15 million violent crimes (obviously other factors are at play, but big number). Today's actual violent crime is closer to 4.6 million. So.... if the "abortion prevents violent criminals" argument holds water (Unwanted/beaten kids more likely to be criminals - I know, that's just crazy talk), then that's about 10,000,000, violent crimes not committed this year (obviously claiming all of those is a stretch).

Yesterday's shooting of an abortion clinic, was annoying. A white guy with an assault rifle shooting up cops and others at a clinic, so that antigun law pressure goes up, and I can be victimized 15 years from now by his unwanted miracles? Screw him. The fact that Conservatives insist that the very people they want killed as adults, be forced to be born against the mothers-will like a scene out of Aliens, is the craziest juxtaposition in the entire conservative political platform.

This isn't a case of "well she should have been more careful", as I'm not interested in easy abortion for the convenience of the idiot mother. I just don't want me or mine funding and then getting victimized by some POS miracle spawned from idiot mother who's obviously predisposed to outright killing it.

Your own graphs don't support your point.
From 1973 to 1981 the graphs show a massive jump in abortion numbers but the violent crime rate actually goes slightly up.
Then as abortions start dropping we see the violent crime rate start falling.

If these two things are related, which they might not be, it would actually show that the fewer abortions the lower the violent crime rate.

The hypothesis is that 15 years post RvW we should begin see a drop in crime.

Read the article I posted to see why the paper is full of shit.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:44:37 AM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:48:11 AM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to murder, and I morally object to decision of others to murder.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding murder.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to murder, and I morally object to decision of others to murder.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding murder.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

I don't see any difference between the two comparisons given. Mister is obviously against murder, but if someone else is doing the murdering then that's totally up to them, and their free will. As long as it's the other person doing the murdering. His hands are washed. Pontius Pilate.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:48:35 AM EDT

[#12]

Most people accept that killing children is wrong. That's the easy part. It then becomes a question of when life begins.

A) some say every sperm wasted is killing a child (e.g. the masturbation is a sin crowd, or the birth control is a sin crowd)
B) some say life begins when sperm meets egg
C) some say life begins when the offspring is viable outside of the mother's body
D) some say life begins at birth

Everyone will have an opinion here, but you know what they say about those

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:48:42 AM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

Is a life not a life?

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:49:17 AM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:
Too much logic.

I take the politics out of the argument. I don't approve of the double standard. On one hand if someone kills a prego woman often they are charged with two counts of murder. Prego women have an extra "level of protection" in terms our "feels". Yet many people don't care if that women decides to kill her fetus. I personally don't approve of abortion but then i think about saving a shitty childhood experience from that child. Maybe that is me trying to justify by preventing pain on that child.

Abortion is horrible for all involved. The parents have to deal with deciding to willingly end the life of their offspring, the fetus is denied life, the healthcare staffers have to deal with the emotions, and i have to listen to libs say its about women's health (instead of properly labeling it and not hiding behind a fancy name that hides the truth)

View Quote

The part is red is absolute bullshit.

How shitty would a childhood experience have to be before you'd be willing to go put a bullet in the kid's head and tell him/her "it's for the best" or "I'm doing this for you" right before you pull the trigger? Here's a novel idea. Why not ask them how they feel about it before you pull the trigger? How many of those kids would disagree with you on whether their life, no matter how shitty it appeared to you, was still worth living to them?

But yet you think preemptively making that call for the unborn child because you think you MIGHT know what that child's life MIGHT be like somehow qualifies as mercy to that unborn child?

Kids who are raped and abused and neglected STILL WANT TO LIVE. That's how precious life is. You aren't being merciful. You're just telling yourself that because it's more convenient than trying to carry the burden as a society for protecting and raising these kids. But that's what it boils down to. We don't want the burden, so we look the other way while someone else does the dirty work and we're secretly glad they do it. But we don't want to acknowledge and own the moral implications of that relief, so we try and act like the murders of convenience are actually mercy killings.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:49:20 AM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Most people accept that killing children is wrong. That's the easy part. It then becomes a question of when life begins.

A) some say every sperm wasted is killing a child (e.g. the masturbation is a sin crowd, or the birth control is a sin crowd)
B) some say life begins when sperm meets egg
C) some say life begins when the offspring is viable outside of the mother's body
D) some say life begins at birth

Everyone will have an opinion here, but you know what they say about those

View Quote

What does science say?

"The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote: "Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."

Just saying.

You anti-science?

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:54:15 AM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

Your entire response is bullshit and we all know it. Resorting to absurd implications isn't doing you any favors. If you were really comfortable with the nonsensical dichotomy you would have answered the question a long time ago.

If you're this ill equipped to have a discussion and so scared of answering questions, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. It's not a creepy question as it related to where you draw the line in the child's development.

As it was so well put by JamesTheScot:

Quoted:
Consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:56:25 AM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:
Arfcom loves to preach MYOB. So when it comes to a women and her unborn, why don't you people just MYOB? It literally has not a god damned thing to do with you, at all. You praise the killing of Muslim on muslim in the ME, but can't accept a woman terminating her fetus because she is incapable of taking care of a child, who will likely turn out to be one of the people that give you reasoning to carry a firearm at all times. If she has an accidental miscarriage, is that because God willed it?

View Quote

Do you preach MYOB when your neighbor's house is being broken into or when you see someone being beaten to death in a parking lot?

What does that have to do with you?

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:56:28 AM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:

Your entire response is bullshit and we all know it. Resorting to absurd implications isn't doing you any favors. If you were really comfortable with the nonsensical dichotomy you would have answered the question a long time ago.

If you're this ill equipped to have a discussion and so scared of answering questions, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. It's not a creepy question as it related to where you draw the line in the child's development.

As it was so well put by JamesTheScot:

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

Your entire response is bullshit and we all know it. Resorting to absurd implications isn't doing you any favors. If you were really comfortable with the nonsensical dichotomy you would have answered the question a long time ago.

If you're this ill equipped to have a discussion and so scared of answering questions, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. It's not a creepy question as it related to where you draw the line in the child's development.

As it was so well put by JamesTheScot:

Quoted:
Consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

Either that or disregarding science on when life begins. Oh well. I guess some life is more equal than others.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:56:51 AM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:

I don't see any difference between the two comparisons given. Mister is obviously against murder, but if someone else is doing the murdering then that's totally up to them, and their free will. As long as it's the other person doing the murdering. His hands are washed. Pontius Pilate.

View Quote

Incorrect.

Posted: 11/29/2015 1:59:45 AM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:

What does science say?

"The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote: "Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."

Just saying.

You anti-science?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Most people accept that killing children is wrong. That's the easy part. It then becomes a question of when life begins.

A) some say every sperm wasted is killing a child (e.g. the masturbation is a sin crowd, or the birth control is a sin crowd)
B) some say life begins when sperm meets egg
C) some say life begins when the offspring is viable outside of the mother's body
D) some say life begins at birth

Everyone will have an opinion here, but you know what they say about those

What does science say?

"The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote: "Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."

Just saying.

You anti-science?

I didn't say anything about religion in my post

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:03:08 AM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:
Your entire response is bullshit and we all know it. Resorting to absurd implications isn't doing you any favors. If you were really comfortable with the nonsensical dichotomy you would have answered the question a long time ago.

If you're this ill equipped to have a discussion and so scared of answering questions, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. It's not a creepy question as it related to where you draw the line in the child's development.

As it was so well put by JamesTheScot:

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:
Your entire response is bullshit and we all know it. Resorting to absurd implications isn't doing you any favors. If you were really comfortable with the nonsensical dichotomy you would have answered the question a long time ago.

If you're this ill equipped to have a discussion and so scared of answering questions, maybe you should just shut the fuck up. It's not a creepy question as it related to where you draw the line in the child's development.

As it was so well put by JamesTheScot:

Quoted:
Consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

I don't need to make that distinction. I am opposed to abortion of all types.

How is determining where to draw the line at child development for reasons of abortion even relevant?

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:06:03 AM EDT

[#22]

"Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of killing unwanted babies, it’s just that the idea of letting women make a decision doesn’t sit well with me.”

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:10:13 AM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:

If the parents are forced to have these unwanted babies, most will go on the dole or otherwise be supported by the state.

Parents should be responsible for supporting their offspring, not society, so yeah if a parent has so many kids that they can't support them, I am in favor of letting nature take it's course.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
The human body itself has very little inherent value, the human mind is what has value.
A mind has to be cultivated and grown, without that humans are just like any other animal, and just as disposable.

That might be the most evil things I have ever read here on Arfcom. What determines whether or not a mind is "cultivated"? Does it mean they have to see the world like you do? By what standards do we judge one's mind? And who determines that? You? The government? That kind of thinking leads us down a very dark road.

Incidentally...Mr. "Locke" 556:

To love our neighbor as ourselves is such a truth for regulating human society, that by that alone one might determine all the cases in social morality.

- John Locke

It's simple, we stop redistributing wealth from the successful to the unsuccessful. Nature will take care of the rest.

What the fuck does that have to do with abortion? People that reap the consequences for their own actions are one thing. But to imply that a human life has no value before it has made any decisions, or has even had the chance to mature to the extent they know right from wrong...that's evil.

Does your point of view, i.e. the worthessness of a person, extend to very small children? Are their lives worthless? They also haven't had a chance to learn right from wrong. Are you saying we should simply let them starve to death? That allowing nature to take its course in that respect is perfectly acceptable?

I get that their parents may be worthless. But their parents have had a chance to make their own decisions. Holding a baby to that standard is ridiculous. If you want to fight communism, the first step is not to emulate them and accept the premise that everyone's life who doesn't conform to your idea is worthless. History has plenty of examples that show us where your philosophy (and I'm being overly generous to call it that) leads.

If the parents are forced to have these unwanted babies, most will go on the dole or otherwise be supported by the state.

Parents should be responsible for supporting their offspring, not society, so yeah if a parent has so many kids that they can't support them, I am in favor of letting nature take it's course.

So then why not let the child live, and then you can terminate those who do go on the dole and allow those that don't to live and become productive members of society? I mean, if you do it that way you only kill the ones that are burdensome and you allow the ones that aren't (and are such good survivors that they beat the odds -which would benefit the gene pool) to go on and reproduce.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:14:57 AM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:

How is determining where to draw the line at child development for reasons of abortion even relevant?

View Quote

Wow. The fact that you actually typed that question....well I guess in a way you just answered my question. You are one clueless motherfucker.

You win. I withdraw the question. It is clear that you haven't understood a fucking thing that has been said here.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:15:52 AM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:

The freedom to murder a zygote cell, while not a choice I'd make, is pretty awesome.

Freest country in the world.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

freedom to murder, well thats certainly a novel idea.

The freedom to murder a zygote cell, while not a choice I'd make, is pretty awesome.

Freest country in the world.

Why isn't it a choice you'd make?

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:28:12 AM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:

Wow. The fact that you actually typed that question....well I guess in a way you just answered my question. You are one clueless motherfucker.

You win. I withdraw the question. It is clear that you haven't understood a fucking thing that has been said here.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

How is determining where to draw the line at child development for reasons of abortion even relevant?

Wow. The fact that you actually typed that question....well I guess in a way you just answered my question. You are one clueless motherfucker.

You win. I withdraw the question. It is clear that you haven't understood a fucking thing that has been said here.

Seeing as we share the same moral opposition to abortion, I don't understand how your scenario was even relevant.

You're engaging me as if I support abortion then question my reading comprehension...

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:29:50 AM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:

Why isn't it a choice you'd make?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

freedom to murder, well thats certainly a novel idea.

The freedom to murder a zygote cell, while not a choice I'd make, is pretty awesome.

Freest country in the world.

Why isn't it a choice you'd make?

Welcome to reading the thread.

I morally object to abortion, however I do embrace the concept of freedom that allows individuals to draw their own moral distinctions.

And I love America.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:34:00 AM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:
"Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of killing unwanted babies, it’s just that the idea of letting women make a decision doesn’t sit well with me.”

View Quote

NUKE THE MIDDLE EAST!

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:42:17 AM EDT

[#29]

Murder.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:43:11 AM EDT

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:

Welcome to reading the thread.

I morally object to abortion, however I do embrace the concept of freedom that allows individuals to draw their own moral distinctions.

And I love America.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

freedom to murder, well thats certainly a novel idea.

The freedom to murder a zygote cell, while not a choice I'd make, is pretty awesome.

Freest country in the world.

Why isn't it a choice you'd make?

Welcome to reading the thread.

I morally object to abortion, however I do embrace the concept of freedom that allows individuals to draw their own moral distinctions.

And I love America.

I love America too. I put my life on the line in a combat MOS to defend America and the Constitution. That every American will have "The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:48:31 AM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:

I love America too. I put my life on the line in a combat MOS to defend America and the Constitution. That every American will have "The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

View Quote

Thank you for your service.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:49:18 AM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:

Following your path has led to further socialism, the equal sharing of misery. In a free market society, there is enough wealth and motivation to help the less fortunate. While it may come off as psychopathy, it's quite the opposite, doing the right thing for the right reason. What you propose is doing the wrong thing for the right reason.

“There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.”

~Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm just sort of staring at my computer screen quizzically right now.

You've been doing that to the tune of 6k+ posts in less than a year. I know you wanted to be edgy, but instead you just came across like a sociopath.

Ok, so you don't have a response. I kinda figured you wouldn't. But look at the bright side. The majority of folks don't operate on some pseudo-intellectual bullshit criteria when it comes to determining the value of human life.

That's good news for people who are unintelligent and incapable of empathy...and that read a science fiction book by a nutjob in Greensboro, NC and thought it represented anything but a fictional distraction. Because people like that have a serious malfunction.

But no one is saying their life is worthless. So you're safe. For now.

Following your path has led to further socialism, the equal sharing of misery. In a free market society, there is enough wealth and motivation to help the less fortunate. While it may come off as psychopathy, it's quite the opposite, doing the right thing for the right reason. What you propose is doing the wrong thing for the right reason.

“There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.”

~Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Funny, I'd argue that there is no worse tyranny than to weigh the value of another human being's life against its relative inconvenience to you.

Don't put Heinlein on a pedestal. While I generally agree with him, statements like you quoted are chock full of exaggeration and over generalization. He's a wonderful author and very capable of making whatever he's selling sound intelligent.

But thinking that compulsory taxation is the worst tyranny man can do to man is nonsense and likely says more about the relative peace, comfort and security he enjoyed when he wrote it. First world problems indeed.

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:02:25 AM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:

Catholic no less. Amazing how perspective changes once that dot turns blue. All that righteous rhetoric goes out the window in a hurry.

It's actually kind of fascinating. And as a dude not involved in any of the cases, it was eye opening.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
good Christian girls have abortions duh

Catholic no less. Amazing how perspective changes once that dot turns blue. All that righteous rhetoric goes out the window in a hurry.

It's actually kind of fascinating. And as a dude not involved in any of the cases, it was eye opening.

How was that fascinating?

You were surprised that people make selfish decisions in their own life even when they might espouse self-sacrifice in general?

If you truly understood Christian doctrine, you'd expect that. And you wouldn't be surprised when a self professed Christian does it too.

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:07:20 AM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:

Yes. Of course we treat infants and children differently than adults. What the fuck is wrong with you? They are innocents. When an adult makes a shitload of bad decisions in their lifetime and they reap the consequences, that's the way it goes. I'm a hell of a lot more apt to help a child than an adult for that reason.

WHAT. THE. FUCK.

NO. I am NOT going to force a stranger, or you, or the man in the moon to do a FUCKING THING FOR ANYONE. Charity. Read that word again. CHARITY. How many times have I said it now? That is not the same thing as redistribution.

Let me say this, AGAIN, as clearly as possible. Forcing people to support others is wrong. That's what the fucking liberals want to do. We can morally compel people to do all kinds of shit. We can morally compel people to put the toilet paper on the hanger the right way. We can morally compel people to help a drowning person. We can morally compel people to Christmas carols, attend funerals, return a lost item, etc.

But we can not and should not LEGALLY compel people to do those things. Or to help a starving child. People can choose to do jack shit. We can also call them assholes. But we should never sick the IRS or some government asshole on them because they choose not to support the less fortunate.

I'm in favor of getting rid of ALL entitlements because I think that private organizations can do a better job.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I can read just fine, especially your condescending, arrogant tone. So children and infants should be judged differently than adults?

Yes. Of course we treat infants and children differently than adults. What the fuck is wrong with you? They are innocents. When an adult makes a shitload of bad decisions in their lifetime and they reap the consequences, that's the way it goes. I'm a hell of a lot more apt to help a child than an adult for that reason.

Quoted:
So you're ready to force strangers at gunpoint to help children and infants but not adults, right?

WHAT. THE. FUCK.

NO. I am NOT going to force a stranger, or you, or the man in the moon to do a FUCKING THING FOR ANYONE. Charity. Read that word again. CHARITY. How many times have I said it now? That is not the same thing as redistribution.

Let me say this, AGAIN, as clearly as possible. Forcing people to support others is wrong. That's what the fucking liberals want to do. We can morally compel people to do all kinds of shit. We can morally compel people to put the toilet paper on the hanger the right way. We can morally compel people to help a drowning person. We can morally compel people to Christmas carols, attend funerals, return a lost item, etc.

But we can not and should not LEGALLY compel people to do those things. Or to help a starving child. People can choose to do jack shit. We can also call them assholes. But we should never sick the IRS or some government asshole on them because they choose not to support the less fortunate.

I'm in favor of getting rid of ALL entitlements because I think that private organizations can do a better job.

Dude, just ignore him.

He's just building a strawman.

You said over and over you don't support compulsory giving. But he insists that you have to even if you deny it and then goes on to argue against it.

No reason to even respond to someone like that.

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:07:50 AM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:
But thinking that compulsory taxation is the worst tyranny man can do to man is nonsense and likely says more about the relative peace, comfort and security he enjoyed when he wrote it. First world problems indeed.

View Quote

Despite the fact that C-4 didn't read the thread worth a damn, he and I are actually in agreement. I'm not sure if he has figured that out yet though.

Either way, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that point. It isn't compulsory taxation, as taxation is a power the Constitution allows the government to have, that I disagree with.

What concerns me is what those taxes are used to fund. Compulsory taxation for the purpose of our mutual defense, or for critical infrastructure is one thing. Funding a dysfunctional entitlement system that encourages people to completely disregard the notion of being productive isn't working out so well for us.

As I said earlier, I don't think government is the best mechanism for helping those in need. Private charities are better. And if we didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support a bloated entitlement system, we'd have a lot more available to help those in need without the literal "gun to our head", as C-4 put it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:30:31 AM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

No shit. I heard you the first time.

But you won't state WHY you are morally opposed to it, which is what you have repeatedly been called out on in this thread.

At this point I don't see a discussion with you getting anywhere. Restating your position isn't the same as defending or explaining it.

You are obviously smart enough to have a thought process which informs your position, but for some reason you won't put it out here for examination.

I think we both know why you won't wade into those waters.

So why are you even bothering with this thread?

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:37:33 AM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

At this point your obsession with this scenario involving killing a partially birthed baby and a woman strangling a newborn have me cringing.

The frequent and repetitious rate that you introduce this scenario leads me to suspect that you've got some serious issues.

Nah, you're saying that because you don't want to answer the question. Ok, so you aren't comfortable doing that. As I said before, it might be time to reconsider your position if you're that scared to respond.

No, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that you're so obsessed with some scenario where a person is forced to describe the difference between killing a partially birthed baby versus a woman strangling her newborn, that it has gotten creepy.

I share the same moral opposition to abortion as you, yet you keep presenting this perverse scenario for discussion.

It makes me suspect that you're masturbating to my responses.

That's lame.

You are so trying to cop out.

So now you won't explain where you draw your lines on when it's OK or not to kill an infant because you're feeling icky and creeped out by the those who are calling you out?

Please. Just scurry on home with your tail tucked between your legs. You're not saving face by trying this tactic. You're looking even worse.

I can handle someone disagreeing with me. But you're just being a coward. If you're going to throw your $0.02 in, be willing to defend it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 3:49:26 AM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:

Welcome to reading the thread.

I morally object to abortion, however I do embrace the concept of freedom that allows individuals to draw their own moral distinctions.

And I love America.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

freedom to murder, well thats certainly a novel idea.

The freedom to murder a zygote cell, while not a choice I'd make, is pretty awesome.

Freest country in the world.

Why isn't it a choice you'd make?

Welcome to reading the thread.

I morally object to abortion, however I do embrace the concept of freedom that allows individuals to draw their own moral distinctions.

And I love America.

I know you morally object to abortion. You keep saying it.

But why do morally object to abortion?

Posted: 11/29/2015 4:04:26 AM EDT

[#39]

Quote History

Quoted:

Despite the fact that C-4 didn't read the thread worth a damn, he and I are actually in agreement. I'm not sure if he has figured that out yet though.

Either way, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that point. It isn't compulsory taxation, as taxation is a power the Constitution allows the government to have, that I disagree with.

What concerns me is what those taxes are used to fund. Compulsory taxation for the purpose of our mutual defense, or for critical infrastructure is one thing. Funding a dysfunctional entitlement system that encourages people to completely disregard the notion of being productive isn't working out so well for us.

As I said earlier, I don't think government is the best mechanism for helping those in need. Private charities are better. And if we didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support a bloated entitlement system, we'd have a lot more available to help those in need without the literal "gun to our head", as C-4 put it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
But thinking that compulsory taxation is the worst tyranny man can do to man is nonsense and likely says more about the relative peace, comfort and security he enjoyed when he wrote it. First world problems indeed.

Despite the fact that C-4 didn't read the thread worth a damn, he and I are actually in agreement. I'm not sure if he has figured that out yet though.

Either way, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that point. It isn't compulsory taxation, as taxation is a power the Constitution allows the government to have, that I disagree with.

What concerns me is what those taxes are used to fund. Compulsory taxation for the purpose of our mutual defense, or for critical infrastructure is one thing. Funding a dysfunctional entitlement system that encourages people to completely disregard the notion of being productive isn't working out so well for us.

As I said earlier, I don't think government is the best mechanism for helping those in need. Private charities are better. And if we didn't have to pay so much in taxes to support a bloated entitlement system, we'd have a lot more available to help those in need without the literal "gun to our head", as C-4 put it.

I think we are probably splitting hairs here a bit and trying to find disagreement where none exists. And Heinlein in his quote didn't differentiate between money involuntarily taken to support the welfare state or national defense. I was just pointing out that I don't think that forced charity is the greatest tyranny man can do to man. Is it tyranny? Yes. The worst kind? Not even close in my book. Odd to me that in a day when ISIS supports the beheading of the infidel that people would run that Heinlein quote up the flag pole.

Posted: 11/29/2015 4:11:05 AM EDT

[#40]

Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

Posted: 11/29/2015 4:40:14 AM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:
Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

View Quote

This

No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind on the subject...so just quit already

Posted: 11/29/2015 5:02:56 AM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:

This

No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind on the subject...so just quit already

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

This

No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind on the subject...so just quit already

That's not how this works. Lives are on the line in this situation, and it's innocent lives at that. People's minds can be changed and persuaded. Look at XCRmonger. She used to be pro-choice. She's changed her mind on it.

Posted: 11/29/2015 5:25:09 AM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:

That's not how this works. Lives are on the line in this situation, and it's innocent lives at that. People's minds can be changed and persuaded. Look at XCRmonger. She used to be pro-choice. She's changed her mind on it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

This

No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind on the subject...so just quit already

That's not how this works. Lives are on the line in this situation, and it's innocent lives at that. People's minds can be changed and persuaded. Look at XCRmonger. She used to be pro-choice. She's changed her mind on it.

Well shit...I guess I gotta go change her mind back to the right way of thinking. brb

Posted: 11/29/2015 5:32:58 AM EDT

[#44]

Of course, we could always just try punishing the guilty more severely rather than determine in advance which group of people is more likely to commit a criminal act and "weeding them out.".

Posted: 11/29/2015 11:02:55 AM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:

Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

View Quote

Mine hasn't budged in at least 40 years, and at my age I doubt that I will ever hear a new argument that could change my position.

I stand with the small but durable majority that says abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances.

Posted: 11/29/2015 12:04:11 PM EDT

[#46]

Quote History

Quoted:

No shit. I heard you the first time.

But you won't state WHY you are morally opposed to it, which is what you have repeatedly been called out on in this thread.

At this point I don't see a discussion with you getting anywhere. Restating your position isn't the same as defending or explaining it.

You are obviously smart enough to have a thought process which informs your position, but for some reason you won't put it out here for examination.

I think we both know why you won't wade into those waters.

So why are you even bothering with this thread?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

I've already stated that I'm morally opposed to abortion, and I morally object to decision of others to have an abortion.

What I do support is the concept that we as Americans, are free to make our own moral distinctions regarding abortion.

I think that, that level of individual freedom is a good thing.

No shit. I heard you the first time.

But you won't state WHY you are morally opposed to it, which is what you have repeatedly been called out on in this thread.

At this point I don't see a discussion with you getting anywhere. Restating your position isn't the same as defending or explaining it.

You are obviously smart enough to have a thought process which informs your position, but for some reason you won't put it out here for examination.

I think we both know why you won't wade into those waters.

So why are you even bothering with this thread?

So now I'm required to quantify my own morality? Lol.

Posted: 11/29/2015 12:15:28 PM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:

http://www.reactionface.info/sites/default/files/images/tumblr_lo2zqb6h5P1qzsyre.gif

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't agree with abortion, so I won't get one.

I love freedom. Freedom is scary.

If we live in a society where people are free to abort pregnancies, well, I think that is just dandy.

"Freedom" does not include the freedom to murder an innocent.

Nice sidestep of the issue. Unborn life is or is not worthy of legal protection based upon whether it is or is not human life. Trying to drape your pro-choice stance in the flag of individual liberty is intellectually disingenuous.

Think of it this way. Why do you disagree with abortion? Is it the risk of side-affects or complications for the mother from the medical procedure? Of course not. The thing we find unsettling about abortion is the very nature of the thing...the termination of what would near universally be considered sacred life once born. You disagree with it because you know in your core that it's wrong.
So if there isn't a moral problem with doing that to a fetus, why in the hell would you not agree with it? Why not have as many of them as possible? Why not have unprotected sex and use abortions as birth control? If there isn't anything wrong with it, then there isn't anything wrong with it.

State whether your view of personal liberty allows for the destruction of another human being's life by you for your own personal convenience, benefit or whim.

If it doesn't, then consider what it is about your libertarian philosophy that puts so much stock in whether or not the human life has passed through the birth canal before you are morally constrained from killing it.

http://www.reactionface.info/sites/default/files/images/tumblr_lo2zqb6h5P1qzsyre.gif

Nailed it. what I see is a lot of intellectual cowardice.... stop with the equivocating,and take a stand, one way or the other.

Posted: 11/29/2015 12:20:55 PM EDT

[#48]

Quote History

Quoted:

Seeing as we share the same moral opposition to abortion, I don't understand how your scenario was even relevant.

You're engaging me as if I support abortion then question my reading comprehension...

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

How is determining where to draw the line at child development for reasons of abortion even relevant?

Wow. The fact that you actually typed that question....well I guess in a way you just answered my question. You are one clueless motherfucker.

You win. I withdraw the question. It is clear that you haven't understood a fucking thing that has been said here.

Seeing as we share the same moral opposition to abortion, I don't understand how your scenario was even relevant.

You're engaging me as if I support abortion then question my reading comprehension...

Posted: 11/29/2015 12:27:14 PM EDT

[#49]

Quote History

Quoted:

Well shit...I guess I gotta go change her mind back to the right way of thinking. brb

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Has anyone's mind been changed yet?

This

No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind on the subject...so just quit already

That's not how this works. Lives are on the line in this situation, and it's innocent lives at that. People's minds can be changed and persuaded. Look at XCRmonger. She used to be pro-choice. She's changed her mind on it.

Well shit...I guess I gotta go change her mind back to the right way of thinking. brb

some like the idea of abortion because it relieves them of the responsibility of where they put their dick.

Posted: 11/29/2015 2:30:16 PM EDT

[#50]

Quote History

Quoted:

Nailed it. what I see is a lot of intellectual cowardice.... stop with the equivocating,and take a stand, one way or the other.

View Quote

So a person can't be personally opposed to abortion and also support the concept of individual freedom to determine one's own moral distinctions regarding abortion?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Planned Parenthood - GD worthy: let's anger half this board and have some fun with numbers (Page 6 of 8)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us