• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional [W:167:202:330]

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

You can't extend your personal problems and your seemingly generic hatred for existence onto other people. Your misery is yours alone, and you should probably realize that most people find life precious.

I dont know what your stance is but im guessing its prolife and then maybe a exception for the extreme risk of the mother life and you want all other abortions banned.

If not please feel free to correct me.

and if that is your stance you cant use the "you hold life precious" argument because it completely fails.

You hold the life of the ZEF precious, not life in general.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

thats a very long post and in the end Lursa is factually right, nothing is being forced on you. This fact wont change. Attacking her, trying to insult her and using deflections wont change it either. Please stick on topic.

I certainly don't expect you to comprehend what was being said, so to put it succinctly; your comments are unwelcome so please mind your own business.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

1.)It IS the stopping of a human beating heart, EVERY TIME.
2.) Just because it's been justified down as a birth control option
3.) doesn't mean it's not Murder.

1.) nope 100% false. Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy. Some happen naturally, some happen super early some happen and the ZEF lives because it was after viablity and thats why there are laws for those situations.

so no, not "every time" and no thats not what "abortion" itself does

2.) also complete false birth control prevents pregnancy, abortion by default is not birth control

3.) yes it factually is not murder. SOrry you cant just ignore the definition of words and make up your own.
 
Last edited:
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

I certainly don't expect you to comprehend what was being said, so to put it succinctly; your comments are unwelcome so please mind your own business.
More deflections and failed insults/attack dont change the facts. PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC.

the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

More deflections and failed insults/attack dont change the facts. PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC.

the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.

I answered your post directly, perhaps you've a deficiency in reading comprehension as well.

I'll type real slow, Please..........................mind......................your..................own........................business.

Get it?

Got it?

Good.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

1.)I answered your post directly
2.), perhaps you've a deficiency in reading comprehension as well.
3.) I'll type real slow, Please..........................mind......................your..................own........................business.
4.)Get it?
5.) Got it?
6.)Good.

1.) no you factually did not answer the question
2.) another another off topic deflection and failed insult
3.) see #2
4.) see #2
5.) see #2
6.) see #2


PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC and defend your false post

the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

1.) no you factually did not answer the question
2.) another another off topic deflection and failed insult
3.) see #2
4.) see #2
5.) see #2
6.) see #2


PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC and defend your false post

the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.


3. Baiting/Flaming/Trolling - To bait someone in a general sense is to make a comment with a purposeful intent to coerce some form of response from the individual. In some cases this device can be a useful tool of debate, eliciting responses to highlight a point or reveal an underlying truth concerning someone’s argument. However, in other cases the intent of the bait is less focused on debating. “Flamebaiting” is making statements intended to cause an angry or emotional response/flame from the person. Another form of baiting is known as “derailing” or “thread-jacking”. This is deliberate act of making statements with an aim of diverting the topic of a thread significantly from its main focus. These negative forms of baiting constitute a rules violation that can potentially lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

"Originally, flame meant to carry forth in a passionate manner in the spirit of honorable debate. Flames most often involved the use of flowery language and flaming well was an art form. More recently flame has come to refer to "any kind of derogatory comment no matter how witless or crude."[google] In a forum with sensitive topics such as this, derogatory flaming is bound to happen. Common sense will prevail, yet this is not an invitation to flame. e.g. "You stupid *****ing moron," is completely unacceptable and could lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

Trolling is a diversionary tactic of those who “deliberately exploit tendencies of human nature or of an online community to upset people” or those “who post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages” to disrupt normal on-topic discussions. [Wikipedia]. Ignorance, bias, and genuine dissent are not trolling, though at times they may appear similar due to the disingenuous nature of some trolls. Trolling is not allowed and can potentially lead to the suspension of posting privileges.

4. Don't Be A Jerk (DBAJ) - This simply means what it sounds like.


I won't warn you again.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

3. Baiting/Flaming/Trolling - To bait someone in a general sense is to make a comment with a purposeful intent to coerce some form of response from the individual. In some cases this device can be a useful tool of debate, eliciting responses to highlight a point or reveal an underlying truth concerning someone’s argument. However, in other cases the intent of the bait is less focused on debating. “Flamebaiting” is making statements intended to cause an angry or emotional response/flame from the person. Another form of baiting is known as “derailing” or “thread-jacking”. This is deliberate act of making statements with an aim of diverting the topic of a thread significantly from its main focus. These negative forms of baiting constitute a rules violation that can potentially lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

"Originally, flame meant to carry forth in a passionate manner in the spirit of honorable debate. Flames most often involved the use of flowery language and flaming well was an art form. More recently flame has come to refer to "any kind of derogatory comment no matter how witless or crude."[google] In a forum with sensitive topics such as this, derogatory flaming is bound to happen. Common sense will prevail, yet this is not an invitation to flame. e.g. "You stupid *****ing moron," is completely unacceptable and could lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

Trolling is a diversionary tactic of those who “deliberately exploit tendencies of human nature or of an online community to upset people” or those “who post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages” to disrupt normal on-topic discussions. [Wikipedia]. Ignorance, bias, and genuine dissent are not trolling, though at times they may appear similar due to the disingenuous nature of some trolls. Trolling is not allowed and can potentially lead to the suspension of posting privileges.

4. Don't Be A Jerk (DBAJ) - This simply means what it sounds like.


I won't warn you again.
Since none of those rules apply, so far as I can tell, he's fine.

What?

My opinion on the rules is as valid as yours.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

3. Baiting/Flaming/Trolling - To bait someone in a general sense is to make a comment with a purposeful intent to coerce some form of response from the individual. In some cases this device can be a useful tool of debate, eliciting responses to highlight a point or reveal an underlying truth concerning someone’s argument. However, in other cases the intent of the bait is less focused on debating. “Flamebaiting” is making statements intended to cause an angry or emotional response/flame from the person. Another form of baiting is known as “derailing” or “thread-jacking”. This is deliberate act of making statements with an aim of diverting the topic of a thread significantly from its main focus. These negative forms of baiting constitute a rules violation that can potentially lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

"Originally, flame meant to carry forth in a passionate manner in the spirit of honorable debate. Flames most often involved the use of flowery language and flaming well was an art form. More recently flame has come to refer to "any kind of derogatory comment no matter how witless or crude."[google] In a forum with sensitive topics such as this, derogatory flaming is bound to happen. Common sense will prevail, yet this is not an invitation to flame. e.g. "You stupid *****ing moron," is completely unacceptable and could lead to a suspension of posting privileges.

Trolling is a diversionary tactic of those who “deliberately exploit tendencies of human nature or of an online community to upset people” or those “who post inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages” to disrupt normal on-topic discussions. [Wikipedia]. Ignorance, bias, and genuine dissent are not trolling, though at times they may appear similar due to the disingenuous nature of some trolls. Trolling is not allowed and can potentially lead to the suspension of posting privileges.

4. Don't Be A Jerk (DBAJ) - This simply means what it sounds like.


I won't warn you again.

ONCE AGAIN please stay on topic and stop with the failed insults and deflections

op topic the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

ONCE AGAIN please stay on topic and stop with the failed insults and deflections

op topic the info you posted was wrong and she is right.
Abortion being legal doesn't force anything on you, this fact will not change.

if you disagree simply, keep it civil and provide the FACTUAL evidence to support your false claim.
After reading the conversation in question, I have to disagree with you in part.

Abortion being legal IS forcing someone who believes abortion is wrong to accept something against their will.
Legally, at least.
Nothing false about that.

Edit: For myself, I believe it is wrong, but I also believe forcing women to carry children against their will is wrong.

So we have two wrongs here, and we've decided to err on the side of the one that came first (the women).
That doesn't (in my mind) make it right...but it is legal, and the best we can do for the moment.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

After reading the conversation in question, I have to disagree with you in part.

1.)Abortion being legal IS forcing someone who believes abortion is wrong to accept something against their will.
2.Legally, at least.
3.) Nothing false about that.

1.) this is 100% false, "acceptance" isnt forced in the least, not even one bit

this thread is proof

is abortion legal? yep

does he "accept" it? nope

2.) has nothgin to do with "acceptance"

3.) yes that is false


does making freedom of speech force you to "accept" everything somebody says? nope
how about freedom of religion? because im a christian are you forced to accept Christianity? nope
does not outlawing premarital sex force all those people with religion that its wrong to accept it? nope
etc etc

acceptance cant be forced


people still dont accept that women and minorities are equal and they still dont accept interracial marriage etc.

you are free to disagree but the fact is nothing is forced, he doesnt have to have an abortion and he factually doesn't accept that its right.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Difficulty with reality ? A miscarriage and a abortion are two separate things.

One happens most of the time due to natural occurrences, the other is murder, justified down through left wing talking points and is used as a form of birth control.

So you took it out of context originally and still do not understand what I wrote. I never compared them to each other.

Nevermind. I cant dumb it down further.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

1.) this is 100% false, "acceptance" isnt forced in the least, not even one bit

this thread is proof

is abortion legal? yep

does he "accept" it? nope

2.) has nothgin to do with "acceptance"

3.) yes that is false


does making freedom of speech force you to "accept" everything somebody says? nope
how about freedom of religion? because im a christian are you forced to accept Christianity? nope
does not outlawing premarital sex force all those people with religion that its wrong to accept it? nope
etc etc

acceptance cant be forced


people still dont accept that women and minorities are equal and they still dont accept interracial marriage etc.

you are free to disagree but the fact is nothing is forced, he doesnt have to have an abortion and he factually doesn't accept that its right.

You are factually wrong in at least one case. The prespective father is forced to accept in the case where the prespective mother gets an abortion. And just a nitpick, but not all abortion is legal.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

She did before she was killed.

Can't prove your contention that abortion is irresponsible, eh? No surprise.

Not my contention. Perhaps you should read my posts instead of guessing my positions.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

You are factually wrong in at least one case. The prespective father is forced to accept in the case where the prespective mother gets an abortion. And just a nitpick, but not all abortion is legal.

wrong. The father doesn't have to accept it. He just can't do anything to stop it
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Lol, I love the fact that you constantly cry about people being rude and the fact that you attack anyone that disagrees with you. lol, I can only imagine how thoroughly wretched you must be to deal with in day to day life.

Where have I "constantly complained" about people being rude?

If I am 'miserable' (and I'm not), you must be 10x as miserable.



lol, so what, you want a medal? But the fact is I never presented their experience as some universal. I only cited it to counter your claim

What claim???? I never made any claims on how others feel.



I'm not sure what that has to do with your claims about adoption, and unfortunately for you, ignoring the very central issue to a debate isn't a means to win it

Maybe you should read for comprehension then.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

wrong. The father doesn't have to accept it. He just can't do anything to stop it

Not how the term acceptance was being used here.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

After reading the conversation in question, I have to disagree with you in part.

Abortion being legal IS forcing someone who believes abortion is wrong to accept something against their will.
Legally, at least.
Nothing false about that.

Edit: For myself, I believe it is wrong, but I also believe forcing women to carry children against their will is wrong.

So we have two wrongs here, and we've decided to err on the side of the one that came first (the women).
That doesn't (in my mind) make it right...but it is legal, and the best we can do for the moment.

How is it being forced on anyone else? Their body is not involved. How are they affected?

Murder as legally designated is not illegal because it offends anyone or because the act 'forces something imaginary' on others. Murder is illegal because it deprives someone of their right to life. So the whole 'it's being forced on me' doesnt work.' It's no different than gay marriage or smoking pot or playing video games...NONE Of those things affects anyone else. You may not like those things....and no one is FORCING you to do them. But they do not affect you.

We all have to live around a million things we dont like, behavior, laws, beliefs. So? There is no protection FROM that. Those things are actually PROTECTED, it's called personal liberty and free will.

Ha, I'm starting to feel like I'm describing The Handmaid's Tale....where everyone is safe because of "Freedom FROM", not "Freedom TO."
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

You can't extend your personal problems and your seemingly generic hatred for existence onto other people. Your misery is yours alone, and you should probably realize that most people find life precious.

ALLOT of people come from dysfunctional families and rough childhoods. You should stop using whatever you experienced in the past as a template for your present and future existence.

I am not miserable and I don't hate my existence. Your crystal ball is broken.

When making decisions for MY body and it's contents, I will use any criteria *I* choose. You don't get to tell me what to do or not do.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Y1.)ou are factually wrong in at least one case. The prespective father is forced to accept in the case where the prespective mother gets an abortion.
2.) And just a nitpick, but not all abortion is legal.

1.) 100% false

why? because he isnt forced to accept anything at all

what actually happens is the law defends her right to her body and not to be forced to risk her life against her will, thats actually what happens

and he doesnt have any power to stop it and infringe on her rights but he doesnt have to "accept" anything

in fact years later if it bothered him i bet he still wont "accept" it unless he choose too

2.) correct and meaningless to the conversation
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

wrong. The father doesn't have to accept it. He just can't do anything to stop it

100% correct
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

How is it being forced on anyone else? Their body is not involved. How are they affected?

Murder as legally designated is not illegal because it offends anyone or because the act 'forces something imaginary' on others. Murder is illegal because it deprives someone of their right to life. So the whole 'it's being forced on me' doesnt work.' It's no different than gay marriage or smoking pot or playing video games...NONE Of those things affects anyone else. You may not like those things....and no one is FORCING you to do them. But they do not affect you.

We all have to live around a million things we dont like, behavior, laws, beliefs. So? There is no protection FROM that. Those things are actually PROTECTED.

Ha, I'm starting to feel like I'm describing The Handmaid's Tale....where everyone is safe because of "Freedom FROM", not "Freedom TO."

Once again, abortion does affect at least one more person than the one making the decision to abort - the father.
 
Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Now cows are people ???

That's got to be one of the most desperately inane excuses for murder I've ever heard.


Where did I ever say cows are people?

Abortion is not murder. Murder is the ILLEGAL killing of a person by a person. If it's legal, it CANNOT be murder.
 
Back
Top Bottom