• 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!

South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murder of

Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
Your point was invalid. You are comparing a ****ing legal medical procedure to a child in development to the murdering of a fully grown adult. Do you honestly not see how ridiculous that is?
Click to expand...

I hear that in WW2 the Germans conducted a number of "medical procedures" also.....
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Blackdog said:
And there it is again. Your "it's legal" is not a valid argument. You are also trying to ignore the fact allot of people consider the baby as worthy of protection. So a child say 8 months along, still in development is not worthy of protection under the law? Do you not see how ridicules your argument is?

Again it is nothing but a fallacy based on popularism. It is legal therefor it is right does not cut it in the area of debate. Considering the amount of overturned laws, this should be a well known fact.
Click to expand...

They're also not taking into account what the existing SD law is. They think everywhere is California.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
However constitutionally, at this point in time, the law doesn't.

Until that changes, we should not be passing laws that allow people to kill abortion doctors for performing a legal procedure.
Click to expand...

Does not matter and has nothing to do with my point or argument. I don't see the law as a problem as I don't see it passing in it's present form.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

jamesrage said:
If was legal to kills gay then I am pretty sure you would be advocating killing those trying to kill gays instead of uttering the 'but its legal' line as though it was some sort defense like you do with monsters who kill babies.
Click to expand...

Here, I'll be open and honest with you.

If your hypothetical, idiotic, unconstitutional law actually was in place then I'd fight legally for it to be overturned, I would not kill a gay person, I would try to speak against the action, I would try to defend a gay person from someone trying to kill them. And I would have to accept my punishment if in that defense I broke the law myself.

However I would not push for a law to legalize the killing of someone whose job it was to kill gay people, because such a law would be almost as abysmal and wrong as the law I have a problem with in the first place.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
It's interesting that "pro-life" only applies when you want it to.
Click to expand...

:lol: I'm not pro-life. Never was.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

jamesrage said:
Your refusal to answer the question reveals that you don't give two ****s about the legality of it and therefore would do the same thing that a handful of pro-lifers are doing if it became legal to kill gays. Having read abortion threads you abortionists don't give two ****s about the legality of abortion either. So sitting there but its legal is a completely dishonest tactic.
Click to expand...

Why would pro-lifers kill gays? Seriously, have you really lost the plot that much?
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
Here, I'll be open and honest with you.

If your hypothetical, idiotic, unconstitutional law actually was in place then I'd fight legally for it to be overturned, I would not kill a gay person, I would try to speak against the action, I would try to defend a gay person from someone trying to kill them. And I would have to accept my punishment if in that defense I broke the law myself.

However I would not push for a law to legalize the killing of someone whose job it was to kill gay people, because such a law would be almost as abysmal and wrong as the law I have a problem with in the first place.
Click to expand...

Good answer.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Blackdog said:
And there it is again. Your "it's legal" is not a valid argument. You are also trying to ignore the fact allot of people consider the baby as worthy of protection. So a child say 8 months along, still in development is not worthy of protection under the law? Do you not see how ridicules your argument is?
Click to expand...

Nice stretch for the appeal to emotion, but in general a fetus/child 8 months along is protected under teh law in most states as that's 3rd trimester.

However, this law would allow someone to kill an abortion doctor for giving an abortion to a woman who was 2 months along. Whether or not you believe it to be a child, fully qualified for every bit of rights as a full grown adult, under the law the procedure being done is legal and someone should not be justifiably killed for performing a legal procedure. If you have a bad law that "kills" a "person" the solution is not to create another bad law to "kill" a "person".

Again it is nothing but a fallacy based on popularism. It is legal therefor it is right does not cut it in the area of debate. Considering the amount of overturned laws, this should be a well known fact.
Click to expand...

Its not even an argument of "its legal thus its right" its "legal thus its legal" and people shouldn't be killed for doing legal things.

As was stated in a previous thing. It may not be "right" that a person stealing bread from someone whose well off is "illegal"...but its still illegal. The law isn't always about what necessarily is "right" based on an individuals morality.
 
Last edited:
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
I hear that in WW2 the Germans conducted a number of "medical procedures" also.....
Click to expand...

Ah, so abortion doctors are now nazis? Good lord... :doh
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
Nice stretch for the appeal to emotion, but in general a fetus/child 8 months along is protected under teh law in most states as that's 3rd trimester.

However, this law would allow someone to kill an abortion doctor for giving an abortion to a woman who was 2 months along. Whether or not you believe it to be a child, fully qualified for every bit of rights as a full grown adult, under the law the procedure being done is legal and someone should not be justifiably killed for performing a legal procedure. If you have a bad law that "kills" a "person" the solution is not to create another bad law to "kill" a "person".



Its not even an argument of "its legal thus its right" its "legal thus its legal" and people shouldn't be killed for doing legal things.

As was stated in a previous thing. It may not be "right" that a person stealing bread from someone whose well off is "illegal"...but its still illegal. The law isn't always about what necessarily is "right" based on an individuals morality.
Click to expand...

When you actually reply to what I said in context we will have a discourse. You are ignoring what I was responding to for the most part to respond to my statement out of context.

As far as the law itself goes I have said nothing at all about it one way or the other.

Can't make it any clearer for you man.

PS You are comparing a ****ing legal medical procedure to a child in development to the murdering of a fully grown adult.

Now why don't you address this comment that I responded to.
 
Last edited:
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
No, the fear the law because it could get them killed.
Click to expand...

I seen reading these abortion threads for years. Anything that treats a unborn child as person they oppose. Many of them oppose late term abortion bans,They oppose ultrasounds, they oppose pre-abortion counseling, waiting periods and they opposed partial birth abortion ban. This new propose law in SD is no different.



What I don't agree with is LEGALIZING something that is wrong to do as a solution to something that is wrong to do. I don't believe in two wrongs making a right.
Click to expand...

Its legal to kill someone attempting to rape or kill someone, or burglarize a home.

Because this issue is not nearly as clear cut as murder, rape, or various other crimes.
Click to expand...

Its pretty much clear cut if you view that a child in the womb deserves the same legal protections and right to life as any innocent person outside of the womb.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
Ah, so abortion doctors are now nazis? Good lord... :doh
Click to expand...

I wonder what their founding mother would have to say....

"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

Sounds about right.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
Here, I'll be open and honest with you.

If your hypothetical, idiotic, unconstitutional law actually was in place then I'd fight legally for it to be overturned, I would not kill a gay person, I would try to speak against the action, I would try to defend a gay person from someone trying to kill them. And I would have to accept my punishment if in that defense I broke the law myself.

However I would not push for a law to legalize the killing of someone whose job it was to kill gay people, because such a law would be almost as abysmal and wrong as the law I have a problem with in the first place.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't push for a law that legalizes using lethal force against someone attempting to kill a gay person?
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
I wonder what their founding mother would have to say....

"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

Sounds about right.
Click to expand...

And with every post you continue to look more and more ridiculous and absurd. You and your ilk are complete lunatics who have seriously lost the plot. I don't give a rat's ass if I get gigged for this or not, but that is really all I can say about your nonsense.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

jamesrage said:
Its legal to kill someone attempting to rape or kill someone, or burglarize a home.
Click to expand...

All are cases where someone is illegally performing an action.

That is significantly different than someone LEGALLY performing an action.

Its pretty much clear cut if you view that a child in the womb deserves the same legal protections and right to life as any innocent person outside of the womb.
Click to expand...

Yes, extremists do think its pretty simple. They also think bombing buildings is perfectly justifable and is nothing at all similar to terrorism. :roll:
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
And with every post you continue to look more and more ridiculous and absurd. You and your ilk are complete lunatics who have seriously lost the plot. I don't give a rat's ass if I get gigged for this or not, but that is really all I can say about your nonsense.
Click to expand...

I just can't take you seriously with that avatar.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
All are cases where someone is illegally performing an action.

That is significantly different than someone LEGALLY performing an action.



Yes, extremists do think its pretty simple. They also think bombing buildings is perfectly justifable and is nothing at all similar to terrorism. :roll:
Click to expand...

Oh, you have examples of ordinary citizens blowing up buildings as a means of self defense. Very good. Links plz.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

jamesrage said:
You wouldn't push for a law that legalizes using lethal force against someone attempting to kill a gay person?
Click to expand...

No. I'd push for the law making it legal to kill a gay person to be overturned, but I would not push for a law legally allowing people to kill someone for performing a legal action.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
Oh, you have examples of ordinary citizens blowing up buildings as a means of self defense. Very good. Links plz.
Click to expand...

I said "bombing buildings in self defense"? Link plz.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
I just can't take you seriously with that avatar.
Click to expand...

And I can't take you seriously after you actually tried to compare abortion doctors to nazis.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Zyphlin said:
I said "bombing buildings in self defense"? Link plz.
Click to expand...

Oh so it's that you're completely off-topic...and here I thought you were indulging a short tangent.

I'm not sure how you can read...
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to provide that the use of force by a pregnant woman for the protection of her unborn child is an affirmative defense to prosecutions for certain crimes.
Click to expand...
...and get "ZOMG teh worldz gonza ends they bombin R aborshunz oh noes!!1"...but that's exactly what you've don here.

You're being very irrational.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
Oh so it's that you're completely off-topic...and here I thought you were indulging a short tangent.

I'm not sure how you can read...

...and get "ZOMG teh worldz gonza ends they bombin R aborshunz oh noes!!1"...but that's exactly what you've don here.

You're being very irrational.
Click to expand...

Pot, meet kettle.
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
And I can't take you seriously after you actually tried to compare abortion doctors to nazis.
Click to expand...

Well if we're not going to take each other seriously then we may was well have a party. Dead baby joke anyone?
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Dr_Patrick said:
Pot, meet kettle.
Click to expand...

So you're calling us both black....or that we're used to cook meals....or that we both have a thin layer of copper at the bottom and a firm yet comfortable rubber grip?
 
Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

Jerry said:
Oh so it's that you're completely off-topic...and here I thought you were indulging a short tangent.
Click to expand...

Oh, so you're talking out your ass and are now back peddling. .

No Jerry, my comment was in reference to statements such as these:

jamesrage said:
People who murder abortion providers or bomb abortion clinics do so to prevent those people from performing more abortions or to try to prevent that place from performing more abortions.
Click to expand...

Note not "To keep them from aborting my child" but simply to prevent them from performing them in a general sense. Advocating bombing abortion clinics simply to "prevent" abortions in a general sense and acting as if somehow this is significantly different then the justifications people have for terrorist actions.

By the way, I may be crazy or perhaps "irrational", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that piece of legislation is longer than 2 sentences long and thus its possible to have issues with it beyond a simple 2 sentence synopsis. Maybe that's all IRRATIONAL of me to believe. :roll:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom