• 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!

Can either side give up something so that an intelligent discussion can take place?

Last edited:
Not at 100% of cost or without paying monthly premiums and annual deductibles. BTW, Medicare does not cover "all" kinds of elective medical procedures - it (partly) covers some of them.

Maybe I should have said “already covers different kinds”. And I’m fine with partial coverage.
 
Maybe I should have said “already covers different kinds”. And I’m fine with partial coverage.

Are you also fine with Medicare's per person premiums of $1,600/year? Which would be $534/month ($6,400/year) for a 4 person household.
 
Until it's born. Then you can put it in cages without basic necessity for months and months on end. Or you can cut any safety net it might need. Or you can impose the death penalty on it. Etc.

Enough of the faux righteous self-puffery.

The death penalty is moral, abortion is not.

Regardless of whatever your perception of detaining minors is, it is not the same as killing them.

So you go to pathetic Whataboutism
 
Neither side is logically consistent in what they believe and support. Do you want a productive conversation started between both sides? What are some of the most egregious beliefs each side holds that they might give up in order to make intelligent discussion possible?

Do phrases like "utilitarian evil to justify their degenerate lifestyles" foster intelligent discussion?
There is no intelligent discussion, that assumes both sides are morally equal. I won’t have an “intelligent discussion” about genocide and the merits of that.

The only time the pro-life position is illogical is when they try to compromise with baby killers. Let’s be clear, abortion is evil, it is justifiable for no reason at any time period.
 
All innocent life.*

*Unless it's an immigrant, muslim, or member of any other undesirable group.

Really, Who in the pro-life movement is advocating murder of immigrants and Muslims?

Maybe pro-life warrior Barack Obama who droned a bunch of Muslim kids at a wedding? Or known pro-lifer Killary Clinton who legalized black African slavery in Libya? (Where slave markets now sell migrants by the tibia haha)
 
Are you also fine with Medicare's per person premiums of $1,600/year? Which would be $534/month ($6,400/year) for a 4 person household.

Nope. But I would be cool with implementing increased taxes on billionaires to bring those premiums down. I’d also be fine with eliminating premiums entirely and simply paying for the whole thing out of taxes.
 
Is it possible for pro-choice, and anti-abortion people to make compromises that might make possible an intelligent and realistic discussion with the possibility of creating workable laws about women's reproductive role? If so, what beliefs could each side give up?

There is little, if any, possibility for rational discussions with anti-abortion people, at least the ones that want to ban abortion for other people. No problem if they don't want to have an abortion.

But those that want to ban abortion don't have logical and factual arguments. Their so called "arguments" are often lies, emotional, and semantics, and they often don't have valid reasons other than they think its murder, to want to ban abortion. They are not realistic. They also don't do much to address the root cause of abortions, or do much to help those who have no home that they want born so much, and they don't think of the ramifications of banning abortion, and the horrible health consequences of banning abortion.

What are pro choice people supposed to give up? For compromise, I would be OK with setting a limit on when abortions could electively be chosen, like ok fro first 2 trimesters, unless for medical reasons.

Pro choice people aren't forcing anti abortion people to have abortions. anti abortion people are trying to ban people who may want or need an abortion from getting it. So not sure what pro choice people need to give up

No, one side is logically consistent in defending all innocent life and the other is beholden to utilitarian evil to justify their degenerate lifestyles
Yeah, defend innocent life, unless they are black, hispanic, muslimi, basically anybody non-white, anybody not a christian, homosexual, poor, basically anybody who is born, then its don't care about them, kill them, lock them up, take away rights, etc etc etc.
 
Until it's born. Then you can put it in cages without basic necessity for months and months on end. Or you can cut any safety net it might need. Or you can impose the death penalty on it. Etc.

Enough of the faux righteous self-puffery.

Completely different issues from abortion anyway. People that are executed are considered adults. People in cages have committed crimes.
 
Until it's born. Then you can put it in cages without basic necessity for months and months on end. Or you can cut any safety net it might need. Or you can impose the death penalty on it. Etc.

Enough of the faux righteous self-puffery.

The death penalty is moral, abortion is not.

Regardless of whatever your perception of detaining minors is, it is not the same as killing them.

So you go to pathetic Whataboutism

You really do not understand how moronic it is to try to create the appearance of "winning" an exchange about morality by declaring that Your Lordship considers something "moral"?

:lol:
 
You really do not understand how moronic it is to try to create the appearance of "winning" an exchange about morality by declaring that Your Lordship considers something "moral"?

:lol:

It’s in fact the only smart way to argue. I have the objective truth, you have relativistic invention that you will change whenever you change your position.
 
It’s in fact the only smart way to argue. I have the objective truth, you have relativistic invention that you will change whenever you change your position.

Your 'truth' depends on something completely subjective: your belief in a mythical being that cannot be proven to exist.

Soooooo, that's the opposite of 'objective'.
 
Nope. But I would be cool with implementing increased taxes on billionaires to bring those premiums down. I’d also be fine with eliminating premiums entirely and simply paying for the whole thing out of taxes.

I have no doubt that you would be fine paying less (or nothing at all) and forcing someone else to pay more taxes to make that happen. Get real.
 
There is little, if any, possibility for rational discussions with anti-abortion people, at least the ones that want to ban abortion for other people. No problem if they don't want to have an abortion.

But those that want to ban abortion don't have logical and factual arguments. Their so called "arguments" are often lies, emotional, and semantics, and they often don't have valid reasons other than they think its murder, to want to ban abortion. They are not realistic. They also don't do much to address the root cause of abortions, or do much to help those who have no home that they want born so much, and they don't think of the ramifications of banning abortion, and the horrible health consequences of banning abortion.

What are pro choice people supposed to give up? For compromise, I would be OK with setting a limit on when abortions could electively be chosen, like ok fro first 2 trimesters, unless for medical reasons.

Pro choice people aren't forcing anti abortion people to have abortions. anti abortion people are trying to ban people who may want or need an abortion from getting it. So not sure what pro choice people need to give up


Yeah, defend innocent life, unless they are black, hispanic, muslimi, basically anybody non-white, anybody not a christian, homosexual, poor, basically anybody who is born, then its don't care about them, kill them, lock them up, take away rights, etc etc etc.

Nobody in the pro life movement is advocating genocide against any of those people.

You are so desperate to justify your evil position you’ll make anything up.
 
Your 'truth' depends on something completely subjective: your belief in a mythical being that cannot be proven to exist.

Soooooo, that's the opposite of 'objective'.

^^^ look at Lursa the devout Christian
 
^^^ look at Lursa the devout Christian

I do believe in God...on faith. And I believe wholly in His Message of compassion, forgiveness, peace, and brotherly love.

I dont need to prove anything to anyone to believe and follow that. Nor am I, according to the Lord, supposed to force my beliefs on anyone else...just share them.
 
Many do support use of contraceptives but their hypocrisy rises up anyway because they object to the "entitlements" of using taxpayer $$ to subsidize that BC...even when it saves them much much more $$ in the long run AND also reduces the number of abortions. :doh

Those people cannot, in all honesty, call themselves fiscal conservatives.
 
What exactly is illogical or inconsistent, or illogically inconsistent about being pro-choice???

Because the choice to have an abortion is the only one they are interested in protecting and advancing.
 
Because the choice to have an abortion is the only one they are interested in protecting and advancing.

That's beyond ignorant. It's a flat out lie.

The word "choice" should give you a clue.
 
Any compromise that outlaws abortion should be dismissed
 
That does not make someone a "Christian". As the Bible says "Even the devil believes and trembles".

/James 2:19 - Bible Gateway

I am a Christian, it's not up to you to decide.

And since you just denied I am, based on my (trying to) following His Word, one would question if you are?
 
Nobody in the pro life movement is advocating genocide against any of those people.

You are so desperate to justify your evil position you’ll make anything up.

Idiotic one line deflection with no facts, no logic, no reasoning (more horrible trolling).

compared to an actual argument, where I point to reasonings behind my position. Whether you agree or not, at least I can provide reasoning for my position instead of stupidly throwing out statements like they are fact with nothing to support them
There is little, if any, possibility for rational discussions with anti-abortion people, at least the ones that want to ban abortion for other people. No problem if they don't want to have an abortion.

But those that want to ban abortion don't have logical and factual arguments. Their so called "arguments" are often lies, emotional, and semantics, and they often don't have valid reasons other than they think its murder, to want to ban abortion. They are not realistic. They also don't do much to address the root cause of abortions, or do much to help those who have no home that they want born so much, and they don't think of the ramifications of banning abortion, and the horrible health consequences of banning abortion.

What are pro choice people supposed to give up? For compromise, I would be OK with setting a limit on when abortions could electively be chosen, like ok fro first 2 trimesters, unless for medical reasons.

Pro choice people aren't forcing anti abortion people to have abortions. anti abortion people are trying to ban people who may want or need an abortion from getting it. So not sure what pro choice people need to give up


Yeah, defend innocent life, unless they are black, hispanic, muslimi, basically anybody non-white, anybody not a christian, homosexual, poor, basically anybody who is born, then its don't care about them, kill them, lock them up, take away rights, etc etc etc.
 
Because the choice to have an abortion is the only one they are interested in protecting and advancing.

:doh Because it supports individual CHOICE

Meaning one's beliefs/opinions are not forced on anyone else. No one else need compromise because of our position.
 
Back
Top Bottom