• 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!

Late Clash on Abortion Shows Conservatives’ Sway

Communism is not "optimal" from an idealistic standpoint or any other standpoint. There is absolutly nothing to recomend it.

Looking a Communism in a pure form, of course it's optimal. Folks working together with everyone's needs being met. Of course this kind of utopia is completely unrealistic.



Funny you should say that!

I happened to be at the Berlin Wall during its destruction and following an afternoon of futile chipping away at concrete I mentioned to my wife that soon the Left would be calling Communism "right wing", just as they did with Nazism.

You aren't the first one to suggest that Communism is right wing though, I first heard of it about four years after the wall came down. Still, it's a good shot at historical revisionism.

I didn't suggest that Communism is right wing. Do try to debate what I am saying and NOT what you want me to have said. What I said is that Communism TURNS INTO fascism, which is a right wing ideology.

Oh, and Nazism has always been right wing, for the most part.
 
Oh I see. You're willing to talk about irreversible comatose patients when it suits you and you're not when it doesn't. I mean, even you know that the life of an irreversibly comatose patient and a normal human being are not equal. You just don't want to admit it because it gets in the way of your argument.

Quite the opposite. I said "irreversible comatose patients" had nothing to do with what we were discussing, and indeed it doesn't. I never mentioned them because they aren't relevant to the conversation.

I don't need the lecture on helping people. Many conservatives on this board have already told me that I and other liberals are too idealistic in our expectations for taking care of people.

I don't think you are idealistic at all, and its the same with most Leftists. They would rather "the rich" pay the government to look after people rather than volunteering to it themselves.

No. Please explain how you got this from my argument.

You were discussing "wholly dependents" in a most negative way. In fact you attempted to justify their death.

Okay - unscientific moral judgment. Muslim women? What are you even talking about?

I'm talking of your mention and supposed support of women's rights. Do you not read your own posts?


If only that were true.

So there is no difference between life and death? That's quite a bold statement, and one suggestive of deep religiosity.
 
Looking a Communism in a pure form, of course it's optimal. Folks working together with everyone's needs being met. Of course this kind of utopia is completely unrealistic.

Quite right. But millions treated it as though it was realistic and as a result tens of millions died and many tens of millions more had their lives ruined. And this worst horror in modern times was aided and abetted by the Leftists.


I didn't suggest that Communism is right wing. Do try to debate what I am saying and NOT what you want me to have said. What I said is that Communism TURNS INTO fascism, which is a right wing ideology.

Communism doesn't 'turn into' anything. It is what it is. That's being realistic.

Oh, and Nazism has always been right wing, for the most part.

Sure, after the war was over and Communism propaganda took over. Then anyone who didn't follow the Communist line was "right wing" and dangerous. Or "fascist".That propaganda, separating the political world into two groups, and ignoring the middle, is still in use by Leftists today.
 
Could it just be something as cynical as a need for cannon fodder, or abjectly poor people desperate for even peasant level wages?
Unfortunately, one of life's greatest pleasures has its downsides! As long as we have been around, and all the advances we have made, people still don't realize that if you have unprotected sex, there may be some consequences.

Because I sure see a lot of activity in support of sex leading to offspring, while also witnessing a complete liquidation of all support systems for those children after birth.
Yep, the party that claims to be so concerned for the welfare of the unborn, display many characteristics of someone that doesn't care for humans once they are here, at least not poor or maybe even middle-class humans!

Is the human race just incapable of seeing multiple sides of an issue, or is it just a result of the constant barrage of persuasion techniques?
It is called narrow mindedness. Seeing something only from one perspective and failing to acknowledge valid points from any other side.

I mean seriously, this thread is filled with "liberals don't care about people" statements from people who claim liberals are unrealistic about society caring about people.
It is my opinion that Liberals, even those that don't believe in God, have more empathy for others than the ones that claim they do. Abortion seems to be one topic where they are able to claim "caring" without having to spend a dime. As you can see, they have made sure that not one penny from tax payer's money goes toward anyone's abortion. Never mind, the people that are on welfare and have no health insurance, they can fend for themselves the best way they can, as they would like to do away with welfare and HCR, because that may actually cost them something.

Personally, I believe ther are far too many people on the planet as it is, and therefore bringing more people into it is madness. I advocate incentives to sterilization and even voluntary, incentivized eugenics. (Genetic disorders, etc.)
I do not go for those extremes, but I'm all for programs that will educate people that have no idea what happens when you have sex. But, we have seen that they even want those programs eliminated. Everyone should be born with the knowledge, I guess.
So while I don't advocate for abortion as birth control, I do believe that accidental/unwanted pregnancies should be abortable for both the survival of the species as well as the quality of life of the fetus in question.
As a Christian, I would not have an abortion for myself regardless of my circumstances, but I realize that not all people share my beliefs and we do have a law that is in place that allows women to use that option. I have a feeling that many that choose abortion for convenience do it because they may not have the means to take care of an infant, but it seems that is not of concern for those who are against abortion. It appears that they are in favor of removing any programs that might have changed someone's mind, almost as if their mantra is "you made your bed, now lay in it"!

And for reference, I believe in reincarnation and a multitude of lives, a philosophy precisely as valid as any other, so my cosmology does not necessarily make abortion a sin.
I believe that we will always have to provide for abortions because there will always be cases where the woman's life is at risk, where the infant is so deformed and will not live anyway and puts the mother's life at risk if birthed. Then there is also rape and incest. I cannot imagine what it would be to carry a child of a criminal, so I will not even make any assumptions as to how someone in that situation should feel. It certainly is not something as simple as what that moron from Ariz (Angle) tried to imply - "make lemonade out of lemons"! And, as long as the law falls under the privacy issue, we will never know how many abortions are really necessary and how many are for convenience. That is why I support education and support instead of just expecting people to do what some group thinks is the right thing.

This is just another of those places where people are never going to agree.
Once it became a political issue, it took a new life of its own - I don't think all of it is about the fetus anymore.
 
You asked me this."Really? Every inhumanity known to man? Please provide examples and statistics showing that the collective "left" supports them".

And i mentioned where the Left, Communists, committed every atrocity known to man. And the Left in the democracies supported them.
See CC's comment on Communism.

Now you are on to Americans "wiping out" the Native Americans, which would come as a surprise to the many Native Americans still around. Or Slaves? Freed by Republicans and kept in chains by the Democrats and the internment of Japanese by a left wing Democrat. Don't know much about his-tory! Don't know much bi-ol-o-gy.
I LOVE IT when Republicans bring this up. The best part of the "Republicans freed the slaves" argument is that Republicans, as we know them now, didn't actually free the slaves.

First we have the realigning election of 1932:
See more here:Realigning election - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then we have the realigning process of the racist south from 1948-1964:
In 1948, Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites against integration looked for political accommodation for their views....With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party.
History of the United States Republican Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In other words, all the racists who opposed black rights in the Democratic Party moved to the Republican Party by the 1960s.

Nonetheless, nothing you said has anything to do with abortion so back to the topic.
 
See CC's comment on Communism.

Why see his when we are having the conversation? Speak for yourself.

I LOVE IT when Republicans bring this up. The best part of the "Republicans freed the slaves" argument is that Republicans, as we know them now, didn't actually free the slaves.

Well "as we know them now" , there are no slaves to be freed.
 
It seems then that the problem is solved. If it is that small they won't miss it and the funding of abortions can cease.

Everyone wins!

Unfortunately you miss the whole point. It is small that it won't make that much difference in our budget, but it is huge in the help it provides.

Planned Parenthood did more than provide abortions - but I guess those that are so narrow minded cannot see the forest for the trees. Abortions will not cease, we will probably have more now that counseling will not be available.

I don't see that anybody has won here. They didn't reduce the deficit/debt by much by taking away the funding for these programs, but they are making it more difficult for people that are already at a disadvantage. But, hey, we know the Republicans are all about the "people"!
 
Quite right. But millions treated it as though it was realistic and as a result tens of millions died and many tens of millions more had their lives ruined. And this worst horror in modern times was aided and abetted by the Leftists.

No. What it became was not Communism. It was fascism. It was aided and abetted by those of greed, both leftists AND rightists. Denying this is denying reality.


Communism doesn't 'turn into' anything. It is what it is. That's being realistic.

Communism always turns into fascism. That's being realistic.



Sure, after the war was over and Communism propaganda took over. Then anyone who didn't follow the Communist line was "right wing" and dangerous. Or "fascist".That propaganda, separating the political world into two groups, and ignoring the middle, is still in use by Leftists today.

Nazi's hated Communists long before the war was over. It is you that is practicing revisionism. Right wingers try to turn anything "evil" into something "leftist". Nothing more than silly propaganda.
 
Unfortunately you miss the whole point. It is small that it won't make that much difference in our budget, but it is huge in the help it provides.

"In the help it provides"? Is that a euphemism for abortion?
Planned Parenthood did more than provide abortions - but I guess those that are so narrow minded cannot see the forest for the trees. Abortions will not cease, we will probably have more now that counseling will not be available.

Perhaps there could be counseling where a profit motive is not involved.

I don't see that anybody has won here. They didn't reduce the deficit/debt by much by taking away the funding for these programs, but they are making it more difficult for people that are already at a disadvantage. But, hey, we know the Republicans are all about the "people"!

Yes, each time it's just a few million here or a few billion there but soon it all begins to add up. Each group wants their pet projects to continue but want to cut the pet programs of others. Perhaps some real leadership is required.
 
The most radical social conservative elements, really terrorists amongst us, have tried to bring America to its knees. They failed but they were far too close to succeeding.

Oh, I get it. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is a terrorist. Makes sense.
 
Quite the opposite. I said "irreversible comatose patients" had nothing to do with what we were discussing, and indeed it doesn't. I never mentioned them because they aren't relevant to the conversation.
Sure, they're relevant. Because they prove your assumption that all life is equal irrelevant. If all life was equal then the life of comatose patients and regular people would be treated the same - they're not.

I don't think you are idealistic at all, and its the same with most Leftists. They would rather "the rich" pay the government to look after people rather than volunteering to it themselves.
I didn't say you - I said conservatives - you're an "Independent". One day liberals are idealistic, the next we're uncaring baby killers. My point is that your comments about "the Left" are irrelevant.

You were discussing "wholly dependents" in a most negative way. In fact you attempted to justify their death.
Clearly you projected that. Here is my original comment about the dependent issue:

Either there is life or there isn't life.

No, unfortunately, that's not how it works. A person in a irreversible coma is some version of "alive" as well. The fact that a fetus is wholly dependent on the mother for life is another reason why your statement is simplistic. Let's also throw in the fact that having a heartbeat does not denote having the mental functions that most us associate with "life". Etc.

This isn't negative relative to the fetus at all. It's negative relative to you because it makes the definition of life more complicated.

I'm talking of your mention and supposed support of women's rights. Do you not read your own posts?
Exactly. Nothing I have or haven't said about Muslim women contradicts my support of women's rights - in fact, they are also based on the right to choose. This, again, has nothing to do with abortion. You're just trying to attack me because your points are failing. If you attack me, at least get it right.

So there is no difference between life and death? That's quite a bold statement, and one suggestive of deep religiosity.
I didn't say that. You want me to have said that - too bad life doesn't work that way.
 
Oh, I get it. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is a terrorist. Makes sense.

Pay no attention, mac. It was a stupid comment made by a hack. The statement completely lacked logic.
 
Why see his when we are having the conversation? Speak for yourself.
Because it's ridiculous to have a conversation about something as irrelevant and nonsensical as your assertion that "the Left is responsible for all the inhumanities in the world".
 
That is so comical, considering the fact that the Republican party goes all out for "fetuses" but doesn't give a damn about them once they are born.

How many times do you have to be told how immature, false, and completely unfounded that statement is?
 
"In the help it provides"? Is that a euphemism for abortion?
Like I said, abortion is not the only thing on their agenda.


Perhaps there could be counseling where a profit motive is not involved.
Oh, I'm sure the Reps will be all for it!
rotfl.gif



Yes, each time it's just a few million here or a few billion there but soon it all begins to add up. Each group wants their pet projects to continue but want to cut the pet programs of others. Perhaps some real leadership is required.
Yeah, like that humongous "Pet program" where we help other countries become "Democratic"?
 
LOL...yep...that's the popular definition, but I went beyond that. I went into the reason people created the term "grey area".

You didn't go "beyond" anything. You went into making up things. I'm not interested.
 
How many times do you have to be told how immature, false, and completely unfounded that statement is?

How many times do you have to be told that "I am ignoring your comments"?
 
How many times do you have to be told that "I am ignoring your comments"?

You just replied, what is is that you are ignoring?

You have a blindly partisan bias against Republicans and combined with your lack of integrity, allows you to cast all sorts of falsehoods on the GOP. You're dishonest. Accept it.
 
No. What it became was not Communism. It was fascism. It was aided and abetted by those of greed, both leftists AND rightists. Denying this is denying reality.

Well, they called it Communism at the time, or Socialism, but calling Communism "Fascism" is rather rare. In fact this might be the first time I've heard that.

Greed, huh? And it came as a surprise that people wanted more than what they had at the time? I think you'll find that that condition has existed for many generations and is stil with us today. In fact people are still asking the government for more, despite there being nothing in the kitty. That's greed..

Nazi's hated Communists long before the war was over. It is you that is practicing revisionism. Right wingers try to turn anything "evil" into something "leftist". Nothing more than silly propaganda.

The existence of Communism and its horrors is not "propaganda", nor is the fact that they were supported by Leftists everywhere. It is all well documented. And that is clear to right wingers, middle of the roaders, and former left wingers. Its only the committed Leftists who still cling to the ridiculous notion that Communism was some sort of noble enterprise rather than the international tragedy it really was.
 
You just replied, what is is that you are ignoring?

You have a blindly partisan bias against Republicans and combined with your lack of integrity, allows you to cast all sorts of falsehoods on the GOP. You're dishonest. Accept it.


I replied because it is apparent that you didn't get it when I first told you.

You have a way of making everything personal, and immediately tell people they are full of whatever. You are welcome to your opinion about me, but that doesn't mean that my assumption about the Republican party is wrong. The Party is going all out for the "fetus" while throwing the people under the bus. What part of that don't you get?

And, don't bother replying, because I won't be responding to your comments after this.
 
You didn't go "beyond" anything. You went into making up things. I'm not interested.

I didn't make anything up. The whole purpose of the grey area is to justify a decision that isn't 100% compliant with one's moral values.
 
I didn't make anything up. The whole purpose of the grey area is to justify a decision that isn't 100% compliant with one's moral values.

The grey area doesn't have a "purpose". The grey area is a reality that we have named. The entire field of ethics is devoted to this.
 
Last edited:
Well, they called it Communism at the time, or Socialism, but calling Communism "Fascism" is rather rare. In fact this might be the first time I've heard that.

If I call a goat a dog, it's still a goat. The regimes acted as fascist regimes regardless of what they called themselves.

Greed, huh? And it came as a surprise that people wanted more than what they had at the time? I think you'll find that that condition has existed for many generations and is stil with us today. In fact people are still asking the government for more, despite there being nothing in the kitty. That's greed..

This is why Communism doesn't work in it's purest form... or socialism... or libertarianism.

The existence of Communism and its horrors is not "propaganda", nor is the fact that they were supported by Leftists everywhere. It is all well documented. And that is clear to right wingers, middle of the roaders, and former left wingers. Its only the committed Leftists who still cling to the ridiculous notion that Communism was some sort of noble enterprise rather than the international tragedy it really was.

Nothing more than ridiculous rightwing propaganda. There is nothing wrong with Communism. Problem is, there has never been a truely communistic society. Always turns to fascism... a rightwing ideology.
 
Back
Top Bottom