• 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!

Democrats - Murderers of Children

You realize that US-Saudi relations have endured through a dozen US administrations and crimes literally tens of thousands of times greater than the murder of a single journalist, even during recent administrations?

You know... I'm not getting sucked in. This thread is about recent legislative activity re abortion, and that's what I'm here to discuss.

If you want to discuss US foreign policy as it relates to Saudi Arabia, I strongly recommend you create a thread on it. Do some research on what the house of Saud has and hasn't done over the past sixty years, and what Uncle Sam has overlooked out of political self-interest. If Mr. Kashoggi's murder concerns you, I guarantee you the research will turn your hair white.

I recently started a thread on the Asian politics board about the worsening depravity and despotism in China. That could use some fresh blood. Feel free to stop by there too.

The reality of life is that evil exists and generally speaking evil normally makes its way to the top in the form of leadership of a nation as having power and the opportunity to get rich is a magnet for them. In addition, the world population continues to grow, meaning more evil people and more opportunities for those in power.

The only way this will end is with a world-wide catastrophe that kills 90% of the population and those that are left will have to "work together" for the benefit and life of all and not just of one.

Talking about it does not offer much in the way of a solution as words (bringing it to attention) are not as powerful as they once were. At this time, the only efforts that can accomplish something is in electing someone that by nature of being the President of the most powerful nation in the world can be heard above millions. If someone like Lincoln, Jefferson, Churchill, Roosevelt or Kennedy is found and is elected, then maybe things may change. Otherwise, God will have the final word.
 
Republican- the most dishonest idiots

Sorry, as usual, right wingers have to make stuff up instead of argue what is actually being said. it's not about killing a born child, but the doctor not being forced to provide extraordinary measure for a kid who has no quality of life, no chance of longterm survival, and would be suffering.

I know many religious people worship an asshole that loves his people suffering and being tortured, but the rest of use don't have to follow that

Right, and what makes you or Dems and their twisted worldview the master deciders of quality of life? That's purely subjective. I have no quality of life compared to the millionaires out there. They have no quality of life compared to the billionaires. They have no quality of life compared to the 1%. Like 60% of the world has an absolutely **** life full of suffering, illness, and poverty compared to us in the West. So are we all of a sudden going to draw a line and say that the people we see as lessers deserve to die?

Not while I'm alive. You can do everything to push us back to the Dark Ages or WWII but expect to be met with resistance. Absolutely sickening from a party supposedly all about inclusion and tolerance...except if you're not as physically, mentally, or financially capable as them, then you go to the dumpster because your quality of life isn't good enough to buy you human rights.
 
Last edited:
Why not? It's certainly not without legal precedent.

Many defendants have been tried for exhibiting reckless disregard for human life, despite not killing anybody. In such cases, the ex ante record of fact establishes with certainty that no person was killed. Yet the defendant is held liable when the prosecution proves he wasn't reasonably certain his actions wouldn't cause grave harm. How much more indictable would such a man be when the record of fact can't establish that nobody was killed.

There are a number of problems with what you are proposing. For starters:
1) What are you calling a "person"?
2) How do you propose to prove that there was intent to harm the "person" defined by 1)?

If viable human embryos are routinely destroyed, or the risks of spontaneous abortion aren't comparable to the risks associated with normal pregnancy, then yes: in a morally upright world, such technology would be banned.

The purpose of IVF is generally to allow people not able to conceive and carry a child to term to do so, so it would seem that by definition the process is going to exceed the risks of spontaneous abortion found during "normal" pregnancy. So, you would need to ban the process for many. My 15 year old nephew would not exist in that world.

It seems that a good bit of what you want runs afoul of this:

Amendment 4 legal definition of Amendment 4

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Most people don't want the government monitoring and/or controlling their body or the bodies of their loved ones.
 
<alt>doxygen and Luckyone: Your comments deserve thoughtful replies, but I'm out of time for today, and possibly tomorrow. Hold those thoughts.
 
Wow, talk about a click-bait title "democrats, murderers of children'. I think you've just won the 'most ignorant of 2019' thread of the year prize with this thread starter.

Yeah, but the base can't get enough, can they? It's actually funny to watch. But then I live in Canada, and virtually none of these people could get enough points to move here, we have too many immigrants from places like Mexico and the Phillipines who would be far ahead of them.

It's always best to watch the insane clown show from a distance. :2wave:
 
By legalizing late third term abortions Democrats have legalized the killing of full grown babies. That is Infanticide. This is not a debate, its a fact.
 
By legalizing late third term abortions Democrats have legalized the killing of full grown babies. That is Infanticide. This is not a debate, its a fact.
Actually theres ZERO facts in your claim at all when it comes to the hilarious and retarded lie of infanticide :)


but let me help you, they had too, a person with connections is looking to expand his restaurant chain called Fetus Frtters . . . without more stock this couldnt happen so this is what is being done. Have you ever had any? they are delicious! hmmmmm hmmmmm MMMMMMMM
 
By legalizing late third term abortions Democrats have legalized the killing of full grown babies. That is Infanticide. This is not a debate, its a fact.
Actually theres ZERO facts in your claim......

It is ALL fact; it is not a claim. It is a fact that by legalizing late third term abortions Democrats have legalized the killing of full grown babies. Is is a fact that this is Infanticide.

Facts don't care about your feelings.
 
1.) It is ALL fact; it is not a claim.
2.) It is a fact that by legalizing late third term abortions Democrats have legalized the killing of full grown babies.
3.) Is is a fact that this is Infanticide.
4.) Facts don't care about your feelings.

1.) no its not definitions and facts prove you wrong
2.) nope, thats not what has happened at all
3.) see Number #1
4.) 100% correct hence why your feelings are losing to facts and losing bad LMAO

your hilarious and retarded claim of infanticide fails again :)

dont forget to try some fried fitters!!! they are coming to a town near you soon!!!
 
......facts prove you wrong........

I am not arguing with a low-information person like you who is obviously ignorant of reality. Everything I said is correct, whether you think so or not.
 
I am not arguing with a low-information person like you who is obviously ignorant of reality. Everything I said is correct, whether you think so or not.

LMAO :lamo
translation: your lies failed and got destroyed so you are trying (and failing) to deflect. Nobody honest, educated and objective is buying your false claims.

when you cant support your failed lies and make them true please let us know, thanks!
 
Firast this:

Dems Defend Infanticide
Senate Democrats block bill to keep newborns alive
Dems Defend Infanticide

Now this:

Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure
Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure

The bill fell short on a procedural vote, 53-44, despite lobbying efforts by anti-abortion groups and support from President Donald Trump. Sixty votes were required to proceed on the measure.
The vote came after Democrats have pursued legislation on the state level to increase access to abortion during the later stages of pregnancy.

Why are Democrats Baby-Murderers



Let me ask you a question, oh great master of the boogeyman.....


If you had a wife, or daughter, or niece, and she was raped, and she wanted to abort that fetus, would you deny her that constitutional right, if you could?


It's a yes or no answer.
 
You know, friend, everyone is being very tough on you, and I think it's unfair. Clearly you're just suffering a little from misunderstanding. I think the following will prove very helpful to you for future posts - this was a really good one, it just missed the mark a little, in terms of demonstrating you know the first thing about what you're talking about. Please observe the following, paying special attention to the differences:









So, rather than Baby Murderers, I think you wanted to say Fetus Murderers. Except Fetus Murder isn't really "murder", because of the following:



Given that abortion is legal, it can't be murder.

So, maybe what you meant to say was "Democrats are not breaking the law, and therefore are law abiding citizens in this topic, so I should probably mind my own ****ing business, and let people mind theirs, within the context of the law, and not make a difficult decision for everyone into a cheap partisan dig...because that's gross".

Maybe? :) Just a little? C'mon....



THe OP knows this. The best way to deal with trolls is not to feed them.
 
There are a number of problems with what you are proposing. For starters:
1) What are you calling a "person"?
2) How do you propose to prove that there was intent to harm the "person" defined by 1)?
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this.

Re (1): A person--a human being--is any soulful, sentient creature with human faculties or the potential to attain such a state. Self awareness and consciousness are two of the most fundamental but least understood phenomena known to man. Although scripture doesn't tell us what "we" are exactly, or how our consciousness (more generally, our spirit, our persistent record of life) becomes intertwined with the crucibles that are our minds and bodies, it does tell us that "we"--our fundamental human essence--is present when we're in the womb.

To the areligious, who don't consider scripture authoritative, I argue that we clearly don't know enough about what "we" are, metaphysically, to disregard the possibility that whatever it is possessed by you and me that makes us human was possessed by us as early as we were conceived. And considering the sheer gravity of so many lives ending in a nascent state, I furthermore argue that it's unconscionably reckless to disregard such a possibility. Ergo, scripture or no, abortion cannot be considered a moral practice.

Re (2): One doesn't have to prove intent when convicting a man of reckless disregard for human life. Indeed, if a prosecutor believed he could prove intent, the defendant would more likely be charged with murder or attempted murder.

Reckless disregard simply means the defendant doesn't care whether his actions may end or severely harm human life, which (insofar as I can see) is precisely the state of mind of areligious couples who abort their offspring. They don't know whether or not they're killing a human being--their own child--and they don't care.

Most people don't want the government monitoring and/or controlling their body or the bodies of their loved ones.
I'm sure the hundreds of millions of aborted children might have something to say about it, but of course they're all dead.
 
Firast this:

Dems Defend Infanticide
Senate Democrats block bill to keep newborns alive
Dems Defend Infanticide

Now this:

Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure
Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure

The bill fell short on a procedural vote, 53-44, despite lobbying efforts by anti-abortion groups and support from President Donald Trump. Sixty votes were required to proceed on the measure.
The vote came after Democrats have pursued legislation on the state level to increase access to abortion during the later stages of pregnancy.

Why are Democrats Baby-Murderers

Conservatives like yourself would get more traction with your posts if you better understood English.
 
Firast this:

Dems Defend Infanticide
Senate Democrats block bill to keep newborns alive
Dems Defend Infanticide

Now this:

Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure
Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure

The bill fell short on a procedural vote, 53-44, despite lobbying efforts by anti-abortion groups and support from President Donald Trump. Sixty votes were required to proceed on the measure.
The vote came after Democrats have pursued legislation on the state level to increase access to abortion during the later stages of pregnancy.

Why are Democrats Baby-Murderers

The Washington Free Beacon is one reason you people on the right are so hateful. Their lies and misrepresentations are nothing more than fodder that feeds your passion of hate. It's shameful just to link any article by the Washington Free Beacon and if I were a vengeful person I would be countering with left-leaning fringe articles that are filled with conspiracy theories negative to Trump. The Washington Free Beacon is extremely based favoring the right and negligible factual reporting and print misleading and false claims.

Put on your critical thinking cap just for 1 minute and take this statement into consideration. "Senate Democrats voted to ensure that babies who survive abortion can die without care". Do you, in your heart of hearts, really believe that statement? That statement has been abbreviated and simplified in order to be inflammatory and to rise passions of hatred. I'll explain this bill and why this statement is a lie. Late term abortion has always been the political weapon of choice for Republicans.

During the 2016 campaign, Trump claimed that Hillary Clinton was "in the ninth month you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother.” In the State of Virginia where this bill was introduced, in the final trimester, state law requires three physicians to certify that a continued pregnancy would either kill a woman or "substantially and irremediably" damage her mental or physical health. If a mother's life is threatened by going forward with a live birth, then the baby would be taken out of her body, after the baby is removed and the danger to her life is remedied, doctors and medical personnel are compelled by both moral and legal obligation to provide life-saving care for that infant. The law focused on the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a nonviable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor.

Dr. Kristyn Brandi, Director of Physicians for Reproductive Health, said she had never heard of a case of a child born after a failed abortion attempt. “This is a part of the false narrative around this bill and abortion later in pregnancy." Even if a child were to be born after an abortion attempt, she said, laws already exist to protect the baby. In 2002, Congress passed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which guaranteed to infants born at any stage of development full legal rights.
 
Back
Top Bottom