• 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!

West Bank teen arrested in rape and murder of 8-month-old

Again: If the teen in the OP had cut off the infant's arms and legs and used a drill to empty the skull, that would make everything OK?

The closeness in age between the two make them very smiler.
No. One was a child outside the womb who was beaten for crying. The other is a doctor who killed fetuses in the womb. This is not an abortion thread.
 
Again: If the teen in the OP had cut off the infant's arms and legs and used a drill to empty the skull, that would make everything OK?

The closeness in age between the two make them very smiler.

No, the difference in age is irrelevant. The logical difference is what occurred during that time frame. Or, more accurately, what occurred for one, but did not occur for the other.

You have every right to want to dishonor the poor child in this situation by pursuing a political agenda, but at the same time, I have every right to think it is disgusting to do that.

Regardless of what one believes about Tiller, there exist appropriate places to make the discussion and there exist innaprpriate one's that weaken your argument to the point of irrelevancy.T

Hijacking a thread about a baby that was murdered to pursue a political agenda only informs me that you don't actually give a **** about the babies. You only care about preaching from the pulpit of moral superiority. That weakens your arguments to the point of irrelevancy.

In order to regain that position of relevancy, you must prove to me that you care more about the babies than you do about the agenda. Hijacking threads such as this does the opposite.
 
No, the difference in age is irrelevant. The logical difference is what occurred during that time frame. Or, more accurately, what occurred for one, but did not occur for the other.

You have every right to want to dishonor the poor child in this situation by pursuing a political agenda, but at the same time, I have every right to think it is disgusting to do that.

Regardless of what one believes about Tiller, there exist appropriate places to make the discussion and there exist innaprpriate one's that weaken your argument to the point of irrelevancy.T

Hijacking a thread about a baby that was murdered to pursue a political agenda only informs me that you don't actually give a **** about the babies. You only care about preaching from the pulpit of moral superiority. That weakens your arguments to the point of irrelevancy.

In order to regain that position of relevancy, you must prove to me that you care more about the babies than you do about the agenda. Hijacking threads such as this does the opposite.

What agenda? :lol:

You have to prove to me that I even have an agenda to begin with ;)

Over the last few weeks in particular I've been linking relevant material from one thread into another. This but one single occasion. I brought up Tiller in Inferno's gun thread suggesting that if Tiller carried, he might still be alive. I Also linked Chevydriver's personal story of when his family was assaulted by a skin head in that same gun thread. I've been linking other threads back into Inferno's "why do males have an abortion opinion" thread for quite a while now. This is by far nothing new.

But only NOW do I get accused of having an agenda.

I would have thought you could come up with a better debate tactic than that.

The age of the 2 victims being so close is why I see relevance. You don't agree, and that's fine, you are welcome to your own opinion. However, some of us, including the guy who started this thread, see a connection.
 
Last edited:
What agenda? :lol:

You have to prove to me that I even have an agenda to begin with ;)

Over the last few weeks in particular I've been linking relevant material from one thread into another. This but one single occasion. I brought up Tiller in Inferno's gun thread suggesting that if Tiller carried, he might still be alive. I Also linked Chevydriver's personal story of when his family was assaulted by a skin head in that same gun thread. I've been linking other threads back into Inferno's "why do males have an abortion opinion" thread for quite a while now.

But only NOW do I get accused of having an agenda.

I would have thought you could come up with a better debate tactic than that.

The age of the 2 victims being so close is why I see relevance. You don't age, and that's fine, you are welcome to your own opinion. Some of us, including the guy who started this thread, see a connection.

Well, considering that this topic has absolutely zero to do with abortion or the Tiller issue, I'd say it's clear that you have an agenda. Why not start your own thread on Tiller if the issue is so important to you, rather than derailing this one?
 
Well, considering that this topic has absolutely zero to do with abortion or the Tiller issue, I'd say it's clear that you have an agenda. Why not start your own thread on Tiller if the issue is so important to you, rather than derailing this one?

Have you even tried holding a different conversation on this thread?

You made a comment on the OP, but have you been trying to hold another discussion here that I am somehow interfering with?

Looking over the last few pages, you haven't, so no debate of yours is suffering any damage.

You just don't don't like what I and others have to say.
 
Have you even tried holding a different conversation on this thread?

You made a comment on the OP, but have you been trying to hold another discussion here that I am somehow interfering with?

Looking over the last few pages, you haven't, so no debate of yours is suffering any damage.

You just don't don't like what I and others have to say.

I have no qualms with your views on abortion and Tiller. I really could care less. And it is a good topic worthy of discussion, but you are currently derailing this thread based on an absurd and very thin connection that only you and a few others see.
 
If the crime had happened 8 1/2 months earlier, not only would this teen be seen as a hero by 'the left', but you the criminal for condemning the act.



Yes, we on the left love those who rape and murder fetuses!! :confused: I sometimes wonder how conservatives can be so stupid, and yet still function in society!!
 
Yes, we on the left love those who rape and murder fetuses!! :confused: I sometimes wonder how conservatives can be so stupid, and yet still function in society!!

If you have no problem with hundreds of "fetuses" that is 21-37 weeks having their limbs being cut off and head drilled into and killed why would you have a problem with one 8 month old baby being killed and rape?
 
Last edited:
If you have no problem with hundreds of "fetuses" that is 21-37 weeks having their limbs being cut off and head drilled into and killed why would you have a problem with one 8 month old baby being killed and rape?

Meh, it's so hard to decide where to post this to since any thread with "baby" in the title automatically steers towards abortion rights.

In any case, aside from the obvious differences between what an unborn fetus should have...

Is there or is there NOT a pretty significant difference between the rape and murder of an 8 month old and legal optional choice of a woman to abort her fetus.

I mean, besides the fact that, oh I don't know- one was definitely alive and the other could still have been stillborn. Besides the fact that one was legal and the other was illegal. Besides the fact that one had rape involved and the other didn't. Besides the fact that Rapist/Murderer A chose to end the life of a toddler and Doctor B did what he was legally obligated to do and what Paying Customer C paid him to do (this is a capitalistic society right?).

I don't understand why Doctor B should be justifiably murdered even though he wouldn't be "murdering fetuses" without the consent of Paying Customer C. I don't really think he enjoys "murdering fetuses" but we all do work our jobs to get money right? Why should Tiller be the target of violence when he's doing what is legally his right to do? Why shouldn't these insane psychopath confused Pro-life (irony?) murderers go after the women who choose to have the abortions? Why don't they use the same scare tactics on them?

Can we agree that, if ANYBODY (which I don't agree with, as I'm pro-choice) is to be morally blameworthy for these actions, shouldn't it be the women who make the decisions to go see the big bad abortion doctors? Also, if the Tiller killer instead killed the women who went to go see Tiller, would he be getting as much support from some pro-lifers as he is now?
 
What agenda? :lol:

You have to prove to me that I even have an agenda to begin with ;)

Over the last few weeks in particular I've been linking relevant material from one thread into another. This but one single occasion. I brought up Tiller in Inferno's gun thread suggesting that if Tiller carried, he might still be alive. I Also linked Chevydriver's personal story of when his family was assaulted by a skin head in that same gun thread. I've been linking other threads back into Inferno's "why do males have an abortion opinion" thread for quite a while now. This is by far nothing new.

But only NOW do I get accused of having an agenda.

Yes, it's not new, but it's the first one that I've seen from you that had such a weak connection.

If your reference in this thread had been only regarding Obama's vote against the lifesaving-measures bill, I would really have had no comment, as to me, that particular reference would be perfectly relevant (birth occurs in both scenarios).

That being said, I will retract the comments I've made. I'll explain the reasoning for this later in this post.

I would have thought you could come up with a better debate tactic than that.

I don't know where you'd get that idea from. :lol:


The age of the 2 victims being so close is why I see relevance. You don't agree, and that's fine, you are welcome to your own opinion. However, some of us, including the guy who started this thread, see a connection.

The part you bolded is why I'm retracting the comments. Seems to me that if the guy who started the thread agrees, I should probably STFU. ;)
 
I have no qualms with your views on abortion and Tiller. I really could care less. And it is a good topic worthy of discussion, but you are currently derailing this thread based on an absurd and very thin connection that only you and a few others see.

You can't accuse me of derailing the thread when there was never another train on the track but this one.
 
Meh, it's so hard to decide where to post this to since any thread with "baby" in the title automatically steers towards abortion rights.

In any case, aside from the obvious differences between what an unborn fetus should have...

Is there or is there NOT a pretty significant difference between the rape and murder of an 8 month old and legal optional choice of a woman to abort her fetus.

I mean, besides the fact that, oh I don't know- one was definitely alive and the other could still have been stillborn. Besides the fact that one was legal and the other was illegal. Besides the fact that one had rape involved and the other didn't. Besides the fact that Rapist/Murderer A chose to end the life of a toddler and Doctor B did what he was legally obligated to do and what Paying Customer C paid him to do (this is a capitalistic society right?).

I don't understand why Doctor B should be justifiably murdered even though he wouldn't be "murdering fetuses" without the consent of Paying Customer C. I don't really think he enjoys "murdering fetuses" but we all do work our jobs to get money right? Why should Tiller be the target of violence when he's doing what is legally his right to do? Why shouldn't these insane psychopath confused Pro-life (irony?) murderers go after the women who choose to have the abortions? Why don't they use the same scare tactics on them?

Can we agree that, if ANYBODY (which I don't agree with, as I'm pro-choice) is to be morally blameworthy for these actions, shouldn't it be the women who make the decisions to go see the big bad abortion doctors? Also, if the Tiller killer instead killed the women who went to go see Tiller, would he be getting as much support from some pro-lifers as he is now?

At this point I wish our resident Baby Eating Monster would show up and give us his opinion on how while neither child may be of use to society, each should meet a humain end well within the lines of the law if it is to be disposed of.
 
The part you bolded is why I'm retracting the comments. Seems to me that if the guy who started the thread agrees, I should probably STFU. ;)

I love ya bro, no hard feelins.

Let's go have a drink :party
 
This is the way I have always felt.

I would still have strict punishment applied to minors but I would not try a minor as an adult reguardless of the crime. I would just make harsher punishment for minors that commit the worst crimes.

No, there's limits and expected behaviors. A seventeen year old knows perfectly well that it's a crime to kidnap anyone, it's crime to rape anyone, it's a crime to beat anyone, and it's crime to kill anyone. And he's old enough to know that it's worse crime when that "anyone" is a baby.

So stake him out on an anthill naked and paint his balls with honey, the walk away. His parents, if they're not too embarassed for having created such a thing, can come by in a week to collect whatever's left.
 
No, there's limits and expected behaviors. A seventeen year old knows perfectly well that it's a crime to kidnap anyone, it's crime to rape anyone, it's a crime to beat anyone, and it's crime to kill anyone. And he's old enough to know that it's worse crime when that "anyone" is a baby.

So stake him out on an anthill naked and paint his balls with honey, the walk away. His parents, if they're not too embarassed for having created such a thing, can come by in a week to collect whatever's left.

I don't support prison violence, but I'm not going to be sorry for him if someone shanks him while he's handing out pamphlets at the door to the prison's chapel.

If we put him in my incinerator, we will always know where he is and what he's doing. My incinerator actually has an outstanding track record. Not one single offender who has been place inside it has repeated their offense. Not even one.

Also, while in my incinerator, I personally grantee that he will not be shot, stabbed, raped, brutalized by police or guards, at all.
 
Helping Pro-Choice see the Tiller murder from the other side :cool:

I mean, come on, everyone is going to agree with the OP, so there's not much else we could do with this thread.

Then you should have done nothing with it.

There's plenty that can be done with this thread from the OP and not this absurd irrelevant tiller crap. Push your tiller to windward until your boat capsizes, so long as it's not on this thread, jeez.

Issues raised on this thread:

Matter of majority. Is Tough Guy Baby Raper old enough to understand what he did wrong and is thus properly subject for trial as an adult.

I say "of course".

Should the defense arguments that TGBR is suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome, effects from drugs, a bad childhood, teen-age angst, etc etc etc make me puke etc, relevant to his crime.

No. Of course not. If he killed the kid, execute him.

Should he be sentenced to capital punishment?

No, since capital punishment isn't applied reliably. Instead, send him to prison as a baby raper and killer and make sure the guards tell the inmates how old the baby was.

Inmates have their own courts and don't give appeals.

If you want to babble abortion, there's an entire forum for that, isn't there?
 
Then you should have done nothing with it.

There's plenty that can be done with this thread from the OP and not this absurd irrelevant tiller crap. Push your tiller to windward until your boat capsizes, so long as it's not on this thread, jeez.

Issues raised on this thread:

Matter of majority. Is Tough Guy Baby Raper old enough to understand what he did wrong and is thus properly subject for trial as an adult.

I say "of course".

Should the defense arguments that TGBR is suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome, effects from drugs, a bad childhood, teen-age angst, etc etc etc make me puke etc, relevant to his crime.

No. Of course not. If he killed the kid, execute him.

Should he be sentenced to capital punishment?

No, since capital punishment isn't applied reliably. Instead, send him to prison as a baby raper and killer and make sure the guards tell the inmates how old the baby was.

Inmates have their own courts and don't give appeals.

If you want to babble abortion, there's an entire forum for that, isn't there?

Ah so you want to make this about capitol punishment.
 
Ah so you want to make this about capitol punishment.

No.

I want to discuss the issue at hand, which I presume is what to do with such a creature, who, btw is different from Tiller, who operated from purely pecuniary motives.

I expect that what I'm posting is much much closer to the intent of the OP than the BS you trawled in.
 
No.

I want to discuss the issue at hand, which I presume is what to do with such a creature, who, btw is different from Tiller, who operated from purely pecuniary motives.

I expect that what I'm posting is much much closer to the intent of the OP than the BS you trawled in.

While the author may also be interested in discussing your angle, he was interested in mine :2wave:

We're all going to agree that the teen is scum, that the act was wrong...so...what's left to discuss?
 
Last edited:
At this point I wish our resident Baby Eating Monster would show up and give us his opinion on how while neither child may be of use to society, each should meet a humain end well within the lines of the law if it is to be disposed of.

Care to explain how that answers my questions or addresses the point of my post? I spoke to those who support the pro-lifers, mostly. I would also take a well-thought out response from pro-choicers. However, baby-eating-monsters? I'm not sure how that addresses any points and I don't even think DP.com has any of those.
 
Care to explain how that answers my questions or addresses the point of my post? I spoke to those who support the pro-lifers, mostly. I would also take a well-thought out response from pro-choicers. However, baby-eating-monsters? I'm not sure how that addresses any points and I don't even think DP.com has any of those.

View Profile: Korimyr the Rat

See his Custom User Title?
 
At this point I wish our resident Baby Eating Monster would show up and give us his opinion on how while neither child may be of use to society, each should meet a humain end well within the lines of the law if it is to be disposed of.

The rapist is what, seventeen? He's a grown man and shouldn't expect our sympathy for his crimes because of his age. But you are right, there is neither reason nor excuse to give in to our desire to make him suffer because he "deserves" it. Just put him down, quick and clean, and try not to think too hard about what he did that necessitated it.

Also, there's nothing in the story to indicate there was anything wrong with the victim before this broken thing violated and murdered him. There was no imposition against the murderer, no biological or financial burden placed upon him, and the baby was not only viable but already born and thriving. Healthy babies are probably the most important resource any society has, and ought to be guarded jealously against those who would steal them or destroy them.
 
While the author may also be interested in discussing your angle, he was interested in mine :2wave:

We're all going to agree that the teen is scum, that the act was wrong...so...what's left to discuss?

What I posted.

There's a list of differences about what to do from here.

Of course, I did not list "petition The Messiah for a Lazarus Intervention", that's always a possibility, and then perhaps the seventeen year old monster wouldn't be a murderer. But I don't hold out much hope of that. As far as I can tell, The Messiah is more interested in apologizing for things the United States hasn't done, in rescuing his banker friends, and playing CEO of a multinational car company, something he doesn't have the skill to do, just like his presidency.

But that's really not the topic.

Abortion isn't related to the topic, no, not in any sensible way.

What is related to the topic is what to do with the maggot if we're not allowed to put it between two boards and step on the top one.
 
Back
Top Bottom