• 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!

Felony charges for 2 who secretly filmed Planned Parenthood

nota bene said:
I stood outside a PP clinic for 15 years, calamity, as part of a peaceful, prayerful, silent protest. I never said a single word. I never once heard anybody, save the occasional "sidewalk counselor saying, "It's not too late--would you talk to me?" (and the people and their PP escorts ignored them and just kept walking), say a single word. People simply stood and prayed.

I hope you aren't simply repeating second-hand lore.
Click to expand...

I have driven by PP protesters on Newtown Road for every single day for many years here in Virginia Beach, and they never say a word to people going by other than hello, or giving a friendly wave when a horn honks at them. I can't speak for other PP protester groups, but the ones on Newtown Road have never shouted any slogans or caused any chaos during the years I have observed them. I know one of the protesters well enough to chat with when I see him down the road at the 7-11 getting his coffee, and I always jokingly ask him if he's got the next watch.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I have driven by PP protesters on Newtown Road for every single day for many years here in Virginia Beach, and they never say a word to people going by other than hello, or giving a friendly wave when a horn honks at them. I can't speak for other PP protester groups, but the ones on Newtown Road have never shouted any slogans or caused any chaos during the years I have observed them. I know one of the protesters well enough to chat with when I see him down the road at the 7-11 getting his coffee, and I always jokingly ask him if he's got the next watch.
Click to expand...

Sadly, this is not a fact that some people want to believe because it doesn't fit their preconceived narrative.
 
nota bene said:
Sadly, this is not a fact that some people want to believe because it doesn't fit their preconceived narrative.
Click to expand...
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THEY ARE EXHORTING THEIR VIEWS OR NOT; the simple fact that they oppose abortion is all the evidence needed to prove their views flawed. Simply because they cannot offer even one Objectively Valid rationale to oppose abortion in this day and age, yet they oppose it anyway.
 
FutureIncoming said:
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THEY ARE EXHORTING THEIR VIEWS OR NOT; the simple fact that they oppose abortion is all the evidence needed to prove their views flawed. Simply because they cannot offer even one Objectively Valid rationale to oppose abortion in this day and age, yet they oppose it anyway.
Click to expand...

There is certainly no arguing with someone who believes that someone who disagrees with him has an inherently flawed view.
 
nota bene said:
There is certainly no arguing with someone who believes that someone who disagrees with him has an inherently flawed view.
Click to expand...
THE PROOF IS IN THE DATA. Do you have any data showing that unborn human life is as special as abortion opponents claim? NOPE! Therefore the claim is flawed. Simple Logic! Your claim about "inherently flawed" is thus proved flawed, because Data and Logic are all that are needed to find a flaw --no presupposition needed! Remember, I've compiled a thorough list of as many anti-abortion arguments as I could find, and then detailed the flaw or flaws in each one. If you can present an anti-abortion argument I haven't encountered, I might in my own mind presuppose it to be flawed, entirely because of experience, but I won't say it is flawed before finding an actual flaw.
 
FutureIncoming said:
THE PROOF IS IN THE DATA. Do you have any data showing that unborn human life is as special as abortion opponents claim? NOPE! Therefore the claim is flawed. Simple Logic! Your claim about "inherently flawed" is thus proved flawed, because Data and Logic are all that are needed to find a flaw --no presupposition needed! Remember, I've compiled a thorough list of as many anti-abortion arguments as I could find, and then detailed the flaw or flaws in each one. If you can present an anti-abortion argument I haven't encountered, I might in my own mind presuppose it to be flawed, entirely because of experience, but I won't say it is flawed before finding an actual flaw.
Click to expand...

Oh, just go ahead and say that it's flawed; your mind's already made up. And be sure to say it in all-caps too because this makes your opinions solid facts. ;)
 
FutureIncoming said:
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THEY ARE EXHORTING THEIR VIEWS OR NOT; the simple fact that they oppose abortion is all the evidence needed to prove their views flawed. Simply because they cannot offer even one Objectively Valid rationale to oppose abortion in this day and age, yet they oppose it anyway.
Click to expand...

It's wrong to kill innocent human beings in aggression; you cannot justify it.

Initially that was a a challenge to provoke a debate and discussion in which pro-aborts would theoretically make good faith efforts efforts to try to justify it.

It has become a statement of demonstrable fact - you and your peers cannot justify it.
 
nota bene said:
Oh, just go ahead and say that it's flawed; your mind's already made up. And be sure to say it in all-caps too because this makes your opinions solid facts. ;)
Click to expand...

Please stop pretending that your mind is not already made up. It is dishonest and, besides, you are fooling no one
 
nota bene said:
Oh, just go ahead and say that it's flawed;
Click to expand...
I'M NOT THAT DISHONEST. Abortion opponents, however, seem to think that it is honest to make claims they cannot support with any evidence whatsoever.

nota bene said:
your mind's already made up.
Click to expand...
ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF EXPECTING AN ANTI-ABORTION ARGUMENT TO BE FLAWED. But "expecting" something is not the same thing as being correct --just ask any woman who was "expecting" a birth, but got a miscarriage instead.

nota bene said:
And be sure to say it in all-caps too because this makes your opinions solid facts. ;)
Click to expand...
THE ALL-CAPS THING IS DELIBERATE. And here is why.
 
sangha said:
Please stop pretending that your mind is not already made up. It is dishonest and, besides, you are fooling no one
Click to expand...

Two differences between you and me, sangha, are that I don't feel the need to go after others personally as you've done here and that I am respectful of the oppositional point of view on abortion because I once held it.
 
FutureIncoming said:
I'M NOT THAT DISHONEST. Abortion opponents, however, seem to think that it is honest to make claims they cannot support with any evidence whatsoever.


ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF EXPECTING AN ANTI-ABORTION ARGUMENT TO BE FLAWED. But "expecting" something is not the same thing as being correct --just ask any woman who was "expecting" a birth, but got a miscarriage instead.


THE ALL-CAPS THING IS DELIBERATE. And here is why.
Click to expand...

By golly, that's as good a justification as any.
 
JayDubya said:
It's wrong to kill innocent human beings in aggression; you cannot justify it.
Click to expand...
IT IS WRONG TO CONFUSE ABORTION WITH KILLING INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS --YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY IT. I keep asking you when you will stop **lying** about the harmful actions that Objectively, Measurably, are done by unborn humans, and yet you keep right on lying. Tsk, tsk!

AND I keep on asking you to provide some Objectively Verifiable evidence that unborn humans qualify as "beings", yet you constantly fail to do that, too. Tsk, tsk!

JayDubya said:
Initially that was a a challenge to provoke a debate and discussion in which pro-aborts would theoretically make good faith efforts efforts to try to justify it.
Click to expand...
A LOADED STATEMENT IS AS BAD AS A LOADED QUESTION. Both include erroneous assumptions (detailed above) that the presenter expects the victim to swallow without question. NOPE! You have yet to offer any evidence, much less proof, that unborn humans qualify as either "innocent" or "beings" --and until you do offer such evidence your statement is totally irrelevant to the Overall Abortion Debate!

JayDubya said:
It has become a statement of demonstrable fact
Click to expand...
STILL WAITING FOR EVEN ONE OF THOSE TWO "FACTS" TO BE DEMONSTRATED. Well???

JayDubya said:
- you and your peers cannot justify it.
Click to expand...
WE DON'T NEED TO, simply because your statement has nothing whatsoever to do with the Overall Abortion Debate, unless and until you provide the evidence or proof requested above.
 
nota bene said:
By golly, that's as good a justification as any.
Click to expand...
NO IT IS NOT JUSTIFICATION TO CLAIM AN ANTI-ABORTION ARGUMENT IS INHERENTLY FLAWED. I simply stated that I have experience that leads me to reasonably expect a new anti-abortion argument to be flawed, but I know better than to claim it is flawed before actually identifying at least one flaw.

MEANWHILE, throughout this little discussion between us, you have yet to offer any rationale to oppose abortion in this day-and age. If I assume that all your rationales are among those about which I've identified flaws, then that assumption could lead to the conclusion that all your rationales to oppose abortion are flawed. But that is not the totality of what I originally stated several messages ago. Here:
the simple fact that they oppose abortion is all the evidence needed to prove their views flawed. Simply because they cannot offer even one Objectively Valid rationale to oppose abortion in this day and age, yet they oppose it anyway.
Click to expand...
I LINKED THE ASSUMPTION/CONCLUSION TO ACTUAL DATA --or, rather, the lack of Objectively Valid data presented by abortion opponents.
 
Last edited:
FutureIncoming said:
NO IT IS NOT JUSTIFICATION TO CLAIM AN ANTI-ABORTION ARGUMENT IS INHERENTLY FLAWED. I simply stated that I have experience that leads me to reasonably expect a new anti-abortion argument to be flawed, but I know better than to claim it is flawed before actually identifying at least one flaw.
Click to expand...

I was referring to your justification for using all-caps. :roll:

By the way, the article you linked is about determining e-mail authorship. Debate Politics is a political message board, and your post authorship isn't in doubt.;)
 
FutureIncoming said:
THE ALL-CAPS THING IS DELIBERATE. And here is why.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article? Because using that article as to why you type in all-caps makes no sense. It was about determining who wrote anonymous emails based on their writing styles. So.......
 
nota bene said:
I was referring to your justification for using all-caps. :roll:
Click to expand...
OK, I ADMIT I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. However....

nota bene said:
By the way, the article you linked is about determining e-mail authorship. Debate Politics is a political message board, and your post authorship isn't in doubt.;)
Click to expand...
Josie said:
Did you read the article? Because using that article as to why you type in all-caps makes no sense. It was about determining who wrote anonymous emails based on their writing styles. So.......
Click to expand...
The identification techniques are quite generic. Such techniques have been used in the past to identify whether or not a new-found manuscript was actually written by the famous author that whoever found the manuscript claimed had written it. I've posted stuff in a number of places on the Internet, sometimes under my real name, and I'd like to keep my identity here separated from my identity elsewhere.
 
FutureIncoming said:
OK, I ADMIT I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. However....


The identification techniques are quite generic. Such techniques have been used in the past to identify whether or not a new-found manuscript was actually written by the famous author that whoever found the manuscript claimed had written it. I've posted stuff in a number of places on the Internet, sometimes under my real name, and I'd like to keep my identity here separated from my identity elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Ironically, by adopting this unusual style, you're more likely to be identified. Kind of like those who use fanciful colors or are guilty of ellipses abuse or who sign off with a particular smiley or signal phrase.
 
nota bene said:
Ironically, by adopting this unusual style, you're more likely to be identified. Kind of like those who use fanciful colors or are guilty of ellipses abuse or who sign off with a particular smiley or signal phrase.
Click to expand...

I think he means that elsewhere he doesn't type like that so his real name cannot be matched to his username here. I guess. Or something.
 
nota bene said:
Ironically, by adopting this unusual style, you're more likely to be identified. Kind of like those who use fanciful colors or are guilty of ellipses abuse or who sign off with a particular smiley or signal phrase.
Click to expand...
I DON'T USE THIS STYLE UNDER MY OWN NAME. In theory, that should make a difference.
 
nota bene said:
Two differences between you and me, sangha, are that I don't feel the need to go after others personally as you've done here and that I am respectful of the oppositional point of view on abortion because I once held it.
Click to expand...

Gee, another pack of lies. What a surprise!!

Do you really think anyone is fooled by you claiming you do not go after others personally in a sentence that begins with "Two differences between you and me"? By starting your post that way, you made it clear that going after me personally was the only thing you were going to do.

You *DO* go after others personally and you have been extremely disrespectful of other peoples opinion. You have even had the gall to attack someone who disagrees with you because "they made up their mind" even though you too have made up your mind (Please do not fool yourself into believing I did not notice how you do not even try to deny having made up your mind)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with making up your mind and you know it. To attack someone for doing something you do and know is fine is hypocritical and dishonest.

Now here is where you pretend to take the high road and run away because you know how dishonest it was to attack someone for doing the same thing you do
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom