• 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!

House GOP drops controversial abortion bill ahead of Roe v. Wade anniversary

Lursa said:
No anger. This is about the millionth time I've cut and pasted this stuff and I've seen it all before.

You also need a dictionary for' strawman' because ALL those things are integrally a part of the discussion if you have any ability to consider women at all. Apparently you dont. So there's no way that you have any High Ground here.

Edit: btw, you might notice that while I provide information and examples, you only provide insults, nasty comments disrespecting women and their lives, and denials. No actual facts to support your denials of my posts. Like where I said abortion was a responsible option. Just got another retreat back to 'see, it's all about convenience.' I bet you say that all the time when you think about your taxes going to welfare, huh?
Click to expand...

I have the high ground because I don't condone killing unborn children for convenience...That's a fact.
 
j-mac said:
Oh for Christ's sake....Bye bye now J....have a good one. :2wave:
Click to expand...

translation: you were right agent J, you actually did NOT call this an equal rights issue and i made the mistake of thinking that but instead of admitting my mistake and showing a POST with with integrity ill just deflect. ALso i still have nothing to counter the fact that this is a rights issue so instead of further deflecting ill just gonna run away.

bye, thanks J-mac, you already made my day good so you also do the same:2wave:
 
j-mac said:
I have the high ground because I don't condone killing unborn children for convenience...That's a fact.
Click to expand...

LOL I dont believe there is a single fact in that sentence.
 
j-mac said:
I have the high ground because I don't condone killing unborn children for convenience...That's a fact.
Click to expand...

so that gives you the high ground over who? and what facts is that based on?

did someone tell you they like killing unborn for convince?
 
Lursa said:
LOL I dont believe there is a single fact in that sentence.
Click to expand...

you would be 100% correct, the whole sentence is 100% OPINION and its not even supportable opinion.
 
JayDubya said:
What is ironic, and tone-deaf, is your signature, given who and what you are supporting.

They obviously don't matter that much to you.
Click to expand...

Stop playing the race card! ;)

Bob Blaylock said:
Not that I think one must be the same sex as someone whose right one wishes to defend; but if there was any validity to that, then surely it matters that approximately half of the innocent victims of abortion are male. So even if you deny that a man may care about the lives of all the precious girls who are tragically slaughtered in this savage manner, that still leaves us with a valid concern for the lives of all the boys who fall to the same fate.
Click to expand...

They sure are precious to y'all until they crawl out of the vagina. Then all of a sudden they're problems. Especially if they are children of color.

j-mac said:
Mmmmmk, you first.
Click to expand...

I propose a middle-ground solution: Live and let live. Willing immigrants came to this great nation for a legitimate purpose. Why not capitalize on that and help bring them on board?

Lursa said:
Abortion is very responsible. Birth control fails, married people have sex, use bc, but can still have another pregnancy they cant afford, single couples still waiting...never have sex but bc fails? THey are all just irresponsible?

As I wrote, abortion is a very responsible option. What is not responsible is having a kid you cannot afford and expecting others to pay for it. Or taking the path of least resistance...which is doing nothing and remaining pregnant...and smoking and drinking and doing drugs because you really dont care. Or it enables them to give the attention and financial resources they do have to the kids they already have and living in a more secure place.

And you are fantasizing about unborn that you are not even aware of except in the abstract manufactured to use as a bludgeon against women ...there are no millions of murdered children. THat is something that you choose to personalize and fantasize about. Great...the unfounded angst is all yours.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. A woman who gets pregnant and knows she is in no position to raise a child should have the freedom and the means to terminate that pregnancy. And she should be able to do so without the judgmental eyes of those who despise her freedom to do so. A disproportionate number of these people are Christians, and they would be wise to read their entire Bible, not just the bits and pieces that suit their agenda.
 
Lursa said:
And there definitely isnt one in that sentence!^^^



:lamo
Click to expand...

Lursa, he is a boy who cannot wrap his ego around the fact that your body is yours and yours alone to control. At the end of the day, that's what this argument is all about.
 
The offspring one creates are not part of one's body.

As usual, we can always count on the pro-aborts to concoct moronic straw men fallacies.
 
Always good to talk about killing the innocent for their own good, whilst claiming high ground.
 
Phys251 said:
I propose a middle-ground solution: Live and let live. Willing immigrants came to this great nation for a legitimate purpose. Why not capitalize on that and help bring them on board?
Click to expand...

When they come here legally, and assimilate to the culture, speak the language, and support themselves just like I do, then fine, I have no problem with them.
 
Phys251 said:
Lursa, he is a boy who cannot wrap his ego around the fact that your body is yours and yours alone to control. At the end of the day, that's what this argument is all about.
Click to expand...

Her body is hers to control...If she had done that prior to conception that would have been the responsible thing to do.
 
Phys251 said:
Stop being so hypersensitive
Click to expand...

:) I'm not. I'm pointing out that your post was divorced from reality, and an attempt to project negative motivations on those with whom you disagree. That's why I responded with the flip side of that coin, so that by instantly rejecting the assignment of your motives, you could recognize how foolish your original statement was.

:( sadly, the effort seems to have failed, as you have proven impervious in this particular to new information.

The "pro-life" movement is full of hypocrisy; am I supposed to sugarcoat that somehow to make y'all feel better? No. Not gonna happen, especially when one considers what y'all are pushing for. Stop expecting us to just be nice, because y'all sure as hell aren't.
Click to expand...

:lol: Okay. Sure.

Why not? What business does a couple have bringing 7, 8, 9 or more kids into this world?
Click to expand...

The same as they have bringing 2 or 3? What is less moral about the 4th kid than the 3rd?

On the economic side, we barely manage replacement rate, and that's only because we have a few more productive families and immigrants. If we want to keep all those nice safety net programs that depend upon future generations of workers to pay for them, we need to make sure we remember to produce future generations of workers.

Unless they're super-rich--and one must note that super-rich couples practically never have this many kids any more--this is going to create problems that spill over into society at large. Now I'm not advocating a mandatory cap on the number of children--far from it--but let's stop kidding ourselves that having a ton of kids is a good thing.
Click to expand...

:shrug: depends on what kind of society you want to live in when you are old. Overlay the countries that are in financial trouble in Europe with the ones with the lowest birthrates... you'll find quite a lot of overlap. In Greece, for example, every 100 grandparents is trying to support themselves off of 42 grandkids. It's pretty tough to make that math work. In Japan they've reached the point where the Treasury Minister is telling old people that they need to just go home and die. We need kids, and we need plenty of them, and we need to make sure they get raised as best we can.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
When they come here legally, and assimilate to the culture, speak the language, and support themselves just like I do, then fine, I have no problem with them.
Click to expand...

Then it's time for us to start speaking Cree, Cherokee, Seminole, etc. Now.

j-mac said:
Her body is hers to control...If she had done that prior to conception that would have been the responsible thing to do.
Click to expand...

What you are doing is called slut-shaming. She has every right to **** as many men or women as she likes without the fear of getting pregnant. And you and the other "pro-lifers" want to rip that freedom out from under her.

Again, you are a male arguing over a women's issue. It's amazing how males want to dominate this discussion when it has comparatively little to do with them. I wonder why that is?
 
cpwill said:
:) I'm not. I'm pointing out that your post was divorced from reality, and an attempt to project negative motivations on those with whom you disagree. That's why I responded with the flip side of that coin, so that by instantly rejecting the assignment of your motives, you could recognize how foolish your original statement was.

:( sadly, the effort seems to have failed, as you have proven impervious in this particular to new information.



:lol: Okay. Sure.



The same as they have bringing 2 or 3? What is less moral about the 4th kid than the 3rd?

On the economic side, we barely manage replacement rate, and that's only because we have a few more productive families and immigrants. If we want to keep all those nice safety net programs that depend upon future generations of workers to pay for them, we need to make sure we remember to produce future generations of workers.



:shrug: depends on what kind of society you want to live in when you are old. Overlay the countries that are in financial trouble in Europe with the ones with the lowest birthrates... you'll find quite a lot of overlap. In Greece, for example, every 100 grandparents is trying to support themselves off of 42 grandkids. It's pretty tough to make that math work. In Japan they've reached the point where the Treasury Minister is telling old people that they need to just go home and die. We need kids, and we need plenty of them, and we need to make sure they get raised as best we can.
Click to expand...

cpwill, based on your posts, I think you and I could have some good conversations if you would just. Stop. The. Pettiness. Seriously, nearly every time I try to engage you, you almost immediately descend into it. It doesn't make your side look good. If you truly have the moral high ground here, then start acting like it and stop acting like you want to have an argument like kids on the playground. And yes you are being hypersensitive. You are doing what 99.99% of conservatives do: They love to dish out the hate and rhetoric, but the minute it is returned in even the slightest degree, they immediately throw a hissy-fit. Prove me wrong with your responses. You have done an exceedingly poor job in both this thread and other threads where I have tried to constructively engage the opposition. And no, constructive engagement does not mean we just have to roll over and take it. If you're gonna dish it out, then you need to take it in return. Can you?

Now, to the discussion--I note that you did not offer any evidence against the hypocrisies of the "pro-life" movement. May I take that as evidence that you cannot refute them, or were you simply awaiting specific examples of this hypocrisy?

From a macroscopic point-of-view, the number of children people have is a complex issue, but in general, financial independence of women and birthrates tend to be negatively correlated. That is one of the things that greatly concerns women's rights advocates; women's financial freedom and reproductive freedom tend to go hand-in-hand. However, you are right about one thing: If we go to the opposite extreme, and have very small families, then supporting the elderly is going to get a lot harder. And I do not know what the solution is. I do think that we need to make it a lot easier on families to raise children, to give them the support that they need and deserve to do it. I agree with your implication that this is a societal problem, and we are going to have to manage this on a societal level.
 
Phys251 said:
Then it's time for us to start speaking Cree, Cherokee, Seminole, etc. Now.
Click to expand...


No, this is the United States of America...No longer is it the separate Indian nations of the times before we settled, so however unfair you think that is, tough crap, we are here now and our country is established. If you want to not live in such an unjust situation, we understand and will miss your citizenship....Safe travels ....

What you are doing is called slut-shaming. She has every right to **** as many men or women as she likes without the fear of getting pregnant.
Click to expand...

No, it's called biology...You know if you do one thing, another will happen....Regardless of your emotional appeal to change the language, it is a fact of biology.

And you and the other "pro-lifers" want to rip that freedom out from under her.
Click to expand...

I couldn't give two craps who she or any other woman ****s, not including my wife, and daughter...however, if this woman is exercising her right to ****, then she should recognize that what she is doing is creating life...It's irresponsible period.

Again, you are a male arguing over a women's issue. It's amazing how males want to dominate this discussion when it has comparatively little to do with them. I wonder why that is?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it has little to do with them til they want to keep the child, then it has everything to do with them...Oh, and it has quite a bit to do with them while the sheets are being tossed....So, yeah....There's that...
 
Phys251 said:
cpwill, based on your posts, I think you and I could have some good conversations if you would just. Stop. The. Pettiness.
Click to expand...

You. Are. The. One. Who. Started. It. Post. 98.


:shrug: I have no problem having good, serious conversations. It's why I come here. But when people make petty statements like that one, well, I make fun of them for it, and they have it coming. It's no better than the dumber conservatives who are convinced that Obama is out there secretly trying to destroy America.

If you truly have the moral high ground here, then start acting like it and stop acting like you want to have an argument like kids on the playground.
Click to expand...

:shrug: I do have the moral high ground in this debate, which is why I am able to make the adult point that both sides generally come to this their positions with good intent, and you are not.

And yes you are being hypersensitive. You are doing what 99.99% of conservatives do: They love to dish out the hate and rhetoric, but the minute it is returned in even the slightest degree, they immediately throw a hissy-fit. Prove me wrong with your responses.
Click to expand...

Okedoke. 1. Show where I have thrown a hissy fit over this other than just pointing out that you were being an idiot and 2. show where I'm dishing out the hate. The only time I did so was blatantly ironically in order to demonstrate to you the ridiculousness and childishness of your position.

You have done an exceedingly poor job in both this thread and other threads where I have tried to constructively engage the opposition. And no, constructive engagement does not mean we just have to roll over and take it. If you're gonna dish it out, then you need to take it in return. Can you?
Click to expand...

Evidently you cannot. Because as soon as I responded to you in kind, you started to complain :).

Now, to the discussion--I note that you did not offer any evidence against the hypocrisies of the "pro-life" movement.
Click to expand...

:shrug: I don't see where the pro-life movement is, in fact, lying about their desire to reduce abortions. Are there hypocrites out there? :shrug: Sure. We even have a special word for hypocrites: we call them "people".

However, if you have any evidence that the millions of members of the Pro-Life movement, are, in fact, all involved in some grand conspiracy to hide our true intents, well, gosh, that'd be interesting to see.

From a macroscopic point-of-view, the number of children people have is a complex issue, but in general, financial independence of women and birthrates tend to be negatively correlated. That is one of the things that greatly concerns women's rights advocates; women's financial freedom and reproductive freedom tend to go hand-in-hand. However, you are right about one thing: If we go to the opposite extreme, and have very small families, then supporting the elderly is going to get a lot harder. And I do not know what the solution is. I do think that we need to make it a lot easier on families to raise children, to give them the support that they need and deserve to do it. I agree with your implication that this is a societal problem, and we are going to have to manage this on a societal level.
Click to expand...

And that is why I think expanding the child tax credit is wise policy. I think additionally that offering parents school choice, and other tools that enable them to raise their children in the best manner possible with the fewest barriers thrown up in their way is good governance.

But the reason that you leap upon the correlation between "women's financial independence" and "birthrate" is because you are assuming single-parenthood. If you want women to be well-supported in raising healthy children, the single best thing they can have is not cash, but a husband. Government performs miserably when it tries to take over the support (both financial and social) that a successful family and social network provide.
 
Lursa said:
Wow, this country was founded on so much more. The thought of involuntary socialism disgusts me, and to want and expect EVERYONE to live like that and just in order to take choice away from women, to subject EVERYONE to a much lower standard of living? *shudder*
Click to expand...

The thought of involuntary socialism disgusts me as well. But not as much as having a public policy of mass murder. If you have to ask me to either stand in a bread line or kill a child, well, where's the end of the line.

I think you make a fantastic point. Instead of just desiring to reduce women or families that cant afford more kids and must live in poverty and unsafe neighborhoods (hey even welfare doesnt get you out of there) you would prefer to condemn EVERYONE to live that way! Everyone would actually have to accept the same consequences that you desire to force on women. Good point indeed. Actually it is more fair. Not completely of course.

All because you believe the unborn are as important as the born. Well, that's your opinion and it's fairly common. I dont. And I dont believe condemning all people to a society of lackluster mediocrity for the unborn....it's called quality of life over quantity.
Click to expand...

:shrug: Okay. Then put your money where your mouth is. Take an assault rifle, head to your nearest public housing neighborhood, and "do some good" by blowing the youngest kids you can find into kingdom come before they have to suffer through living too much.




However, before you do that, you may want to consider whether or not your standards are incredibly out of whack with the global and historical norm. Our poor live better lives than kings used to, and better lives than most the world today.

inequality.png


Heck, plenty of our lower-income families are in the global top 1%. 1%ers, and you're talking about how their lives are so miserable it's better if they just die. :roll:
 
j-mac said:
No, this is the United States of America...No longer is it the separate Indian nations of the times before we settled, so however unfair you think that is, tough crap, we are here now and our country is established. If you want to not live in such an unjust situation, we understand and will miss your citizenship....Safe travels ....
Click to expand...

I have noticed a common theme to most racist arguments: They ultimately boil down to "might makes right."

Inb4 you ask me why your argument was racist or fiercely deny it.

No, it's called biology...You know if you do one thing, another will happen....Regardless of your emotional appeal to change the language, it is a fact of biology.

I couldn't give two craps who she or any other woman ****s, not including my wife, and daughter...however, if this woman is exercising her right to ****, then she should recognize that what she is doing is creating life...It's irresponsible period.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the desire for a man to control a woman's sexuality. Newsflash: It is her body. Not yours. Why do so many males not get this? Why do they feel so threatened by a woman who is in full control of her own sexuality? Are they afraid that they're not going to be the lucky man that she allows to **** her brains out? There's nothing rational about this. Both women and men would be happier in a sex-positive society. But many people are much too afraid to let this happen yet.

Yeah, it has little to do with them til they want to keep the child, then it has everything to do with them...Oh, and it has quite a bit to do with them while the sheets are being tossed....So, yeah....There's that...
Click to expand...

It takes two to have a baby. If the woman is responsible, then so is the man. And she has a much more difficult role to play, so it only makes sense that she should have at least a little more say in the matter. (You can at least be man enough to admit that, right?)
 
cpwill said:
I do have the moral high ground in this debate
Click to expand...

You can just stop right there. Protip: Never, ever, ever say something like that. If you really did have said high ground, then you would not need to trumpet it. It would speak for itself. Humility speaks more loudly than does arrogance.

But who am I kidding. You're just another conservative who fits John Dean's description to the T: "Not surprisingly, the very conservatives who love to hurl invective against the ranks of their enemies prove to have the thinnest of skins when the same is done to them." --Conservatives Without Conscience
 
Phys251 said:
I have noticed a common theme to most racist arguments: They ultimately boil down to "might makes right."

Inb4 you ask me why your argument was racist or fiercely deny it.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now I am a racist eh?....Good grief....how much did you pay for that indoctrination from Ward Churchill?

Exactly, the desire for a man to control a woman's sexuality. Newsflash: It is her body. Not yours. Why do so many males not get this? Why do they feel so threatened by a woman who is in full control of her own sexuality? Are they afraid that they're not going to be the lucky man that she allows to **** her brains out? There's nothing rational about this. Both women and men would be happier in a sex-positive society. But many people are much too afraid to let this happen yet.
Click to expand...

Logical fallacies will not help you in this argument...You think it is fine to murder over a million unborn children per year because it convenient to do so for all involved, and I think that is quite twisted....

It takes two to have a baby. If the woman is responsible, then so is the man. And she has a much more difficult role to play, so it only makes sense that she should have at least a little more say in the matter. (You can at least be man enough to admit that, right?)
Click to expand...

It does take two....and yes the woman does have a tough job in carrying and delivering a child into the world....Does that mean that we should all just stand by and let the murder of the unborn go without so much as a whimper? Hell no.... But, it isn't me that will have to answer in the end to that...My conscience is clear.
 
Phys251 said:
You can just stop right there. Protip: Never, ever, ever say something like that. If you really did have said high ground, then you would not need to trumpet it.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Here's a hint. Call it a pro tip if you like. :) Don't implicitly claim to have the moral high ground and then hike your dress over your head when others respond in kind.

Here's another hint: people have the ability to read, and realize when you say things like "stop right there", but cut out everything before that because you don't wish to respond ;)

Seriously. Do you have an ability to discuss this topic without constant projection?

It would speak for itself. Humility speaks more loudly than does arrogance.
Click to expand...

Ah. That must be why your posts where you deride entire other groups of people, claiming to speak for their inmost thoughts, and morally dismissing them as cretins are so very, very, very.... well, "small".

But who am I kidding. You're just another conservative who fits John Dean's description to the T: "Not surprisingly, the very conservatives who love to hurl invective against the ranks of their enemies
Click to expand...

:) Oh, you mean invective like:

Phys251 said:
You and I both know that the "pro-life" movement is not at all about preventing abortions. It never has been, and it never will be....
Click to expand...

Phys251 said:
No. Not gonna happen, especially when one considers what y'all are pushing for. Stop expecting us to just be nice, because y'all sure as hell aren't.
Click to expand...

Phys251 said:
You are doing what 99.99% of conservatives do: They love to dish out the hate and rhetoric, but the minute it is returned in even the slightest degree, they immediately throw a hissy-fit.
Click to expand...

etc.?

prove to have the thinnest of skins when the same is done to them." --Conservatives Without Conscience
Click to expand...

:lamo

Oh

The Irony






I tell you what. Since you don't seem to want to respond to this section:

cpwill said:
Okedoke. 1. Show where I have thrown a hissy fit over this other than just pointing out that you were being an idiot and 2. show where I'm dishing out the hate. The only time I did so was blatantly ironically in order to demonstrate to you the ridiculousness and childishness of your position.
Click to expand...

Let's see if you can achieve a simpler standard:

Can you cite for me posts in this thread where I have seriously attempted to deride or describe the pro-choice movement as you have above?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom