collectivemike Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 okay this is where the terminology is important Jill in New York thinks its ok to kill her 10 week old infant because it "doesnt have free will or thought". because this is actually infanticide Right? There's a rhetoric problem in here. It's important for people to realize that if all abortions are legal, people will be out there killing their infants left and right. While smoking cigarettes, drinking Mountain Dew and defacing church steeples. That's the next logical step from allowing a woman to do what she wants with her body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 okay this is where the terminology is important Jill in New York thinks its ok to kill her 10 week old infant because it "doesnt have free will or thought". because this is actually infanticide And I argue that abortion is as well. So Paul, are you saying it is ok for me to just kill my father because he abused, molested, raped, and made my overall life worse? You dont agree with murder so you wont do it, but if I agree with it, it is ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjb2k1 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 can it survive outside my womb? then it's a baby. there's my line. that said, i've never had an abortion, and i hope like hell i'll never have to make that choice. but that is my CHOICE, and as of 1973 it is my right, as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 where did I ever deny that people abuse the system? I dont disagree there are people who abuse the system, but just because some do doesnt mean all should not be granted the right to control of their own body. I started bringing this all up because someone didnt understand how Romney is against womens rights, and guess what, if Romney gets elected, women will LOSE THEIR RIGHT to their own body. It wont be a matter of if the man and woman discuss it and decide to not have it because IT WILL NOT BE AN OPTION AT ALL. Whether its "moral" to have an abortion or not, is it "moral" to bring a child into an unstable or unhealthy "family"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillhole Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 A good number of people on this boards parents made the wrong choice by going through with their pregnancies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 A good number of people on this boards parents made the wrong choice by going through with their pregnancies. WHO!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
collectivemike Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Sorry man, I meant Mike T, I didnt realize you were mike too, I think of you as Collective Confusion Dude. And yes, Irene is anecdotal, but Mike T said give him one case of it happening, so I did. As far as when would rape/death come into play, I honestly dont know, and that is why I know abortion will never will be banned. How do you draw the line of who is raped enough (the girl who got pregnant when she drank at a frat party vs the random stranger rape) or even begin to prove they were raped. When is death come into play of it being severe enough for the mother to die and not have the child be stable to live on its own? As far as it being a piece of the mother, I dont believe that. I believe it is a human being that is using a host to survive. If you (crude and graphic simplified example) have a tapeworm that you shit out, is it part of you that came out or is it another species? Fetus' have brains that work and hearts that beat just like tape worms (I assume that they have hearts and brains, I could be wrong about the worm). Got it - I was confused for a second, I thought we were being pretty civil haha. Anyway we're just on complete opposite ends of the spectrum here. We're not going to find common ground. Saying someone needs to be "raped enough" (by your standards, a male who's never gone through anything REMOTELY like pregnancy and childbirth) to get an abortion is pretty offensive and backwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Got it - I was confused for a second, I thought we were being pretty civil haha. Anyway we're just on complete opposite ends of the spectrum here. We're not going to find common ground. Saying someone needs to be "raped enough" (by your standards, a male who's never gone through anything REMOTELY like pregnancy and childbirth) to get an abortion is pretty offensive and backwards. I hope you realize that I wasnt saying that, but supposing that someone would eventually bring that up as a contention to it being legal for rape only. I would never say that there is some point of "enough" or not when it comes to rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjb2k1 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 so, to swing this back to topic, tonight's debate. foreign policy. let's argue about that instead of my uterus! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Woah, we were arguing about your uterus only? I would have changed my whole tactic about this then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjb2k1 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Woah, we were arguing about your uterus only? I would have changed my whole tactic about this then. i wanted to feel important so i've made it entirely about me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjb2k1 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 honestly though, i really hope i don't have to sit through 1.5 hours of "what happened in libya was a terrorist attack" "no it wasn't" "yes it was" "it's your fault" "no it's yours" etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 What I dont get about that whole situation (and I may be wrong cause I havent payed much attention to it) but I was under the impression that it was a group of radicals that attacked the embassy and not really a part of the Libyan Government attacking us. I look at it like if a militia from Michigan went into Canada and burned a church down, would I think we should be attacked by Canada because of that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 What I dont get about that whole situation (and I may be wrong cause I havent payed much attention to it) but I was under the impression that it was a group of radicals that attacked the embassy and not really a part of the Libyan Government attacking us. I look at it like if a militia from Michigan went into Canada and burned a church down, would I think we should be attacked by Canada because of that? a US Ambassador was killed, its not the same as burning down a church. might want to read up on what happened before you make that analogy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjb2k1 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 there is a slew of stuff being printed today saying that a CIA building inside the consulate was the real target Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 im really curious to see what Romney shows up tonight. of the three debates, this is probably his weakest area, especially with his trackrecord of outsourcing businesses to China and all that. oh, and his bumbling of his trip in Israel, and how he's stated how he wont backdown with Iran... and now Iran wants to talk with the US... will he change his rhetoric? probably Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 a US Ambassador was killed, its not the same as burning down a church. might want to read up on what happened before you make that analogy. As I said, I wasnt well read on it and may have been wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 As I said, I wasnt well read on it and may have been wrong. yeah, i understand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzersonKillwell Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I've been lurking this thread and posting here an there. I'm just going to put it out here and say I think if everyone could avoid the whole "You should do your research..." or "If you knew anything about this..." type shit you might have a more productive conversation. I'm not saying you should tolerate misinformation, just stop assuming other people don't know as much as you. I know that is an Internet staple. But I think it is usually counterproductive, you can make an argument without imply the other person is stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
collectivemike Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 a US Ambassador was killed, its not the same as burning down a church. might want to read up on what happened before you make that analogy. To be fair, he's got a point. In both cases it wasn't the government of responsible for the event, it was a group of radicals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 To be fair, he's got a point. In both cases it wasn't the government of responsible for the event, it was a group of radicals. I realize that, me just nitpicking, but he is trying to compare killing a human to burning down an inanimate object Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 but really, what we'll probably see if Romney try to relate everything happening internationally to domestic issues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I realize that, me just nitpicking, but he is trying to compare killing a human to burning down an inanimate object I appologize, I meant that the church was filled with people, I left that part out of the sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I appologize, I meant that the church was filled with people, I left that part out of the sentence. well then, I think that person deserves a medal just kidding or am i Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/opinion/krugman-the-secret-of-our-non-success.html?_r=1& Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.