• 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

It also needs to be mentioned that it is illegal for the mother to have an abortion after the 20th week without it being necessary to protect the mothers life. In this case, the decision for an abortion to occur is done by the doctors involved and not by the mother or politicians.

The earliest premature baby was born at 21 weeks and that is why it is presently illegal to have an abortion after 20 weeks. As such, this discussion is pure biased garbage.
Your counterargument here is an anachronism.

The legislation being put forward in Virginia doesn't require the abortion to be "necessary to protect the mothers [sic] life", nor even necessary to prevent physical harm. Abortion can occur up to the very moment of birth. There's no injunction "after 20 weeks". Watch the interview with the bill sponsors if you don't believe me.

Legislators are slowly but surely tearing down the barriers you're now taking for granted.
 
What do any of these things have to do with infanticide?
But to violently put to death a fully-formed baby, inches away from living, breathing, crying? And the term of pregnancy nearly complete? How can any parent, doctor, or lawmaker live with such innocent blood on their hands? How can such an act be rationalized, legal or not?

It's inhumane. Do you understand what inhumane means? Doesn't your generation have any empathy gene just like Trump doesn't? Don't you have even a shred of human decency in your body that you can ignore the raping of small kids who don't even speak English and all that after the forced pulling them out of the arms of their mothers? You really don't think that's bad? What about all these thousands of children being trapped in detention centers in the desert that will never see their mother, father or brothers and sisters ever again because "oops" the U.S. government can't find them.

When an abortion is performed it is not a fully formed human being, it's at a stage of development, approximated 20 weeks in which the fetus cannot feel pain and has no emotions. Science has shown that a fetus does not feel tactile pain until the third trimester, or 27 weeks. The neurons that carry pain signals is that the system isn't developed until the third trimester of pregnancy.

So please, don't give me your pseudo-empathy or try to equate the two, they aren't the same. You righties are grasping the lie that babies are aborted moments before birth and that's a goddamned lie that Trump and Fox are perpetuating. It's simply not true and you could prove that to yourself by a simple google search. But I will do it for you just this one time assuming you won't google the truth because you do not want the truth.

First of all, let's define 'late term' abortions. The abortion you're referring to simply is not done, is not legal, is a lie;

"But to violently put to death a fully-formed baby, inches away from living, breathing, crying? And the term of pregnancy nearly complete?"


“Late-term” abortions are generally understood to take place during or after the 21st to 24th week of gestation, which is late in the second trimester. That gestational period roughly corresponds to the point of “fetal viability” or when a fetus might be able to survive outside the womb with or without medical assistance. However, there is no precise medical or legal definition of “late-term,” and many doctors and scientists avoid that language, calling it imprecise and misleading. They say “late-term” may imply that these abortions are taking place when a woman has reached or passed a full-term pregnancy, which is defined as starting in the 37th week.

How common is the procedure?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 1.3 percent of abortions were performed at or greater than 21 weeks of gestation in 2015. In contrast, 91.1 percent were performed at or before 13 weeks and 7.6 percent at 14 to 20 weeks.


Can a woman really get an abortion 'moments before birth’?


The idea that new legislation under consideration or that passed in several states would allow this to happen made headlines after a video of Virginia Del. Kathy Tran (D-Fairfax) went viral. In the 30-second clip, a Republican asked Tran whether a woman in labor would be allowed to have an abortion, and she answered yes. Tran later said she misspoke and that such a procedure would not be allowed: “Clearly, no, because infanticide is not allowed in Virginia, and what would have happened in that moment would be a live birth.”

Do you see yet how you have been manipulated into believing that a baby can be aborted 'moments before birth'. It's simply idiotic to ever believe such a thing, it would be MURDER and ILLEGAL!!

But why aren't you concerned about the kids in detention? Why aren't you screaming about the independent contractor who was sub-contracting from the US government and had a holding facility in Florida where he hired people right off the street to work with little kids. These kids are vulnerable as all hell and those people took advantage of that vulnerability. Many children were raped and sexually assaulted by these people they hired. It's true, look it up, happened in Florida. Then there were two children that died in DHS custody.

Put yourself in the place of one of their parents of in the mind of one of those little kids. How will they ever recover from the immense trauma caused by our government? The simple answer is never. They will be emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives. No, you may not be burning down churches but you're doing something far more evil and egregious by supporting these practices being done by our own government. You are as guilty as those German people during WW2 that watched as train loads of Jews were taken to the concentration camps and exterminated.
 
Last edited:
It's a form of insanity, as Mr. Shapiro points out--that ten centimeters between the inside of the birth canal and out should decide for some whether killing an infant is acceptable or unconscionable.

I don't profess to understand it.

At this point in time, the best any of us can do is impress upon every woman as well as every man unwilling to support a woman he's impregnated the enormity of the act they're committing. That they are in fact sacrificing their children and offspring. Some may hear and understand.

We can't hate these people. They're deceived. They've been raised their entire lives in a society that worships the self, even to the point of child sacrifice. We need to love them, admonish them, entreat them, work with them to change their hearts and minds, in spite of this great evil.

Judgment is left to God, Who knows the heart, to Judge whom He will and forgive whom He will. Our job is to instruct, admonish, remove temptation, and lead by example, without malice or hypocrisy.

That is something usually stated by someone who believes that some mythical picosecond that sits between "conception" and "not yet conception" is the line between legal and illegal, moral and immoral, nothing and "person".

It's all crazy - face it.
 
Your counterargument here is an anachronism.

The legislation being put forward in Virginia doesn't require the abortion to be "necessary to protect the mothers [sic] life", nor even necessary to prevent physical harm. Abortion can occur up to the very moment of birth. There's no injunction "after 20 weeks". Watch the interview with the bill sponsors if you don't believe me.

Legislators are slowly but surely tearing down the barriers you're now taking for granted.

I understand given that the bill is only to protect children where the mothers wanted abortion but the baby was born anyway. I personally would vote for it. Nonetheless, the Democrats seem to think the bill is attempting to open the door against abortion in general and they do have a point.

The cases where this applies are so infinitesimally small that it is likely the bill is more about politics than about saving lives. As such, I still disagree with the OP as this is not really about the Democrats being baby killers given that it would only save 1 or 2 lives (out of millions) but could come at the cost of getting rid of the accepted abortion bill that gives women the right up to 20 weeks to get an abortion.

Unfortunately these days it is more about politics than what is right or wrong. When Trump becomes more human and decides that one life is more important than politics (which clearly he has not shown so far), then perhaps the Democrats will do the same. Unfortunately, when in Rome, you need to follow Roman rules and here the rules set by Trump is that politics and getting your own way even if laws are broken, is the important thing. This bill is not really about saving lives but about getting an advantage.
 
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

I thought it was because babies illegally vote for Republicans.
 
I understand given that the bill is only to protect children where the mothers wanted abortion but the baby was born anyway. ... The cases where this applies are so infinitesimally small that it is likely the bill is more about politics than about saving lives.
Even so, a life is a life, and I see no downside or unjust imposition.

That is something usually stated by someone who believes that some mythical picosecond that sits between "conception" and "not yet conception" is the line between legal and illegal, moral and immoral, nothing and "person".
It may well be at some later picosecond. All I know is that the moment of conception--the genesis of the first living cell--is the earliest picosecond "person" could begin, and I'm not in the habit of shooting bullets into black boxes that may or may not contain human beings.

It's inhumane. Do you understand what inhumane means? Doesn't your generation have any empathy gene just like Trump doesn't? Don't you have even a shred of human decency in your body that you can ignore the raping of small kids who don't even speak English and all that after the forced pulling them out of the arms of their mothers? You really don't think that's bad? What about all these thousands of children being trapped in detention centers in the desert that will never see their mother, father or brothers and sisters ever again because "oops" the U.S. government can't find them.
If there's murder and rape of children taking place in detention centers, I agree it's unconscionable. Moreover, it violates our laws. It's a profound evil, I agree.

It doesn't justify abortion, and it isn't the topic of discussion in this thread.

When an abortion is performed it is not a fully formed human being, it's at a stage of development, approximated 20 weeks in which the fetus cannot feel pain and has no emotions.
Irrelevant. A man in a medically-induced coma can't feel pain and has no emotions. He's nevertheless a human being (regardless of what the law says, has said, or may say in future) with human potential, and to take his life without just cause is a profound moral wrong.

While we live in a society where elected officials contend to separate legal from illegal, human from inhuman, such heuristics are a false and (fortunately) temporary thing. There remains the Great Law, the only law that ultimately matters, no less immutable than the law of gravity, which proscribes in part that i) the child in the womb (as we all once were) is a human being, and ii) that the slaying of a human being having committed no offense worthy of death is sine qua non unlawful, i.e. murder.

If your sole concern is about preventing emotional and physical suffering of the child (or fetus, if you prefer) being killed, you're missing the point.

Suppose a stray bullet from a drive-by shooting hits you in the back of the head, killing you instantly. You suffer no pain. You suffer no emotional distress. At no point do you even become aware anything is amiss (at least in this life). It wasn't the intent of the shooter to cause you harm. Ergo was no moral wrong committed? Does your life and your unlived potential have no inherent value?

Surely you have value. You are a human being. The fact that you can be killed without pain, distress, or awareness is of no consequence.
 
Republicans= murderers of intelligence
 
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 1.3 percent of abortions were performed at or greater than 21 weeks of gestation in 2015. In contrast, 91.1 percent were performed at or before 13 weeks and 7.6 percent at 14 to 20 weeks.
If such abortions are so rare, the prohibition shouldn't be cumbersome.

The idea that new legislation under consideration or that passed in several states would allow this to happen made headlines after a video of Virginia Del. Kathy Tran (D-Fairfax) went viral. In the 30-second clip, a Republican asked Tran whether a woman in labor would be allowed to have an abortion, and she answered yes. Tran later said she misspoke and that such a procedure would not be allowed: “Clearly, no, because infanticide is not allowed in Virginia, and what would have happened in that moment would be a live birth.”

Do you see yet how you have been manipulated into believing that a baby can be aborted 'moments before birth'. It's simply idiotic to ever believe such a thing, it would be MURDER and ILLEGAL!!
Firstly, taking a delegate at their word in a deposition isn't "being manipulated". If she later amended her statement, I'll take that into consideration. A reference would be nice.

Secondly, my concern is whether the bill permits any child who'd otherwise be born alive (i.e. viable outside the womb) to be aborted, not merely "moments before" natural birth. The Virginia bill does clearly permit third-trimester abortions and is more permissive than present-day standards. If Del. Tran later walked back on moments-before-natural-birth abortions, that is some comfort.

But why aren't you concerned about the kids in detention? Why aren't you screaming about the independent contractor who was sub-contracting from the US government and had a holding facility in Florida where he hired people right off the street to work with little kids. These kids are vulnerable as all hell and those people took advantage of that vulnerability. Many children were raped and sexually assaulted by these people they hired. It's true, look it up, happened in Florida. Then there were two children that died in DHS custody.
I am concerned about these things. I haven't been on DP long, but I'll very likely wind up discussing them at some point.

I'd be surprised if you found any reasonable person who isn't concerned about children being raped or murdered in DHS custody, assuming they're convinced the crimes are real.

No, you may not be burning down churches but you're doing something far more evil and egregious by supporting these practices being done by our own government. You are as guilty as those German people during WW2 that watched as train loads of Jews were taken to the concentration camps and exterminated.
On what basis do you, o internet commentator who doesn't know me from Adam, accuse me of supporting "train loads of [illegal migrants being] taken to the concentration camps and exterminated"?

If your contention is that sending illegal migrants to detention centers for deportation back to their nations of origin is tantamount to the systematic slaughter of millions of Jews in WWII, by all means make your case in a thread dedicated to the subject. If one doesn't exist, create it. I'm sure plenty of people will be eager to discuss.
 
Last edited:
Wow

You Righties really would like a one party State, freaking scary !!

Absolute scumbags. They are pretty much the same as the Taliban, except we have law and order protecting us from their insantiy. They would be the people behind a situation lime "The Handmaid's Tale."
 
Absolute scumbags. They are pretty much the same as the Taliban, except we have law and order protecting us from their insantiy. They would be the people behind a situation lime "The Handmaid's Tale."

Are you so sure, Trump seems to be crapping on the Constitution and his supporters applaud.
 
Even so, a life is a life, and I see no downside or unjust imposition.


It may well be at some later picosecond. All I know is that the moment of conception--the genesis of the first living cell--is the earliest picosecond "person" could begin, and I'm not in the habit of shooting bullets into black boxes that may or may not contain human beings.


If there's murder and rape of children taking place in detention centers, I agree it's unconscionable. Moreover, it violates our laws. It's a profound evil, I agree.

It doesn't justify abortion, and it isn't the topic of discussion in this thread.

Irrelevant. A man in a medically-induced coma can't feel pain and has no emotions. He's nevertheless a human being (regardless of what the law says, has said, or may say in future) with human potential, and to take his life without just cause is a profound moral wrong.

While we live in a society where elected officials contend to separate legal from illegal, human from inhuman, such heuristics are a false and (fortunately) temporary thing. There remains the Great Law, the only law that ultimately matters, no less immutable than the law of gravity, which proscribes in part that i) the child in the womb (as we all once were) is a human being, and ii) that the slaying of a human being having committed no offense worthy of death is sine qua non unlawful, i.e. murder.

If your sole concern is about preventing emotional and physical suffering of the child (or fetus, if you prefer) being killed, you're missing the point.

Suppose a stray bullet from a drive-by shooting hits you in the back of the head, killing you instantly. You suffer no pain. You suffer no emotional distress. At no point do you even become aware anything is amiss (at least in this life). It wasn't the intent of the shooter to cause you harm. Ergo was no moral wrong committed? Does your life and your unlived potential have no inherent value?

Surely you have value. You are a human being. The fact that you can be killed without pain, distress, or awareness is of no consequence.

Abortion is a woman's LEGAL choice. DEAL WITH IT
 
If such abortions are so rare, the prohibition shouldn't be cumbersome.


Firstly, taking a delegate at their word in a deposition isn't "being manipulated". If she later amended her statement, I'll take that into consideration. A reference would be nice.

Secondly, my concern is whether the bill permits any child who'd otherwise be born alive (i.e. viable outside the womb) to be aborted, not merely "moments before" natural birth. The Virginia bill does clearly permit third-trimester abortions and is more permissive than present-day standards. If Del. Tran later walked back on moments-before-natural-birth abortions, that is some comfort.


I am concerned about these things. I haven't been on DP long, but I'll very likely wind up discussing them at some point.

I'd be surprised if you found any reasonable person who isn't concerned about children being raped or murdered in DHS custody, assuming they're convinced the crimes are real.


On what basis do you, o internet commentator who doesn't know me from Adam, accuse me of supporting "train loads of [illegal migrants being] taken to the concentration camps and exterminated"?

If your contention is that sending illegal migrants to detention centers for deportation back to their nations of origin is tantamount to the systematic slaughter of millions of Jews in WWII, by all means make your case in a thread dedicated to the subject. If one doesn't exist, create it. I'm sure plenty of people will be eager to discuss.

I didn't accuse you of supporting "train loads of [illegal migrants being] taken to the concentration camps and exterminated"? What I said was that you and others like you turn a blind eye to inhumanities, just as those in Germany had done.
 
Even so, a life is a life, and I see no downside or unjust imposition.

In a perfect world I would agree with you 100% but in Trump's world that kind of thinking does not apply. Trump shrugged off the death of journalist Kashoggi in the hands of the Saudi's because of economics, the 2 unnecessary meetings with a despot (Kim Jung-un) who has killed millions of his own people just to stay in power and where Trump treated him as a friend and someone to be respected, the handling of asylum seekers where several children have died because of mismanagement by the government, and not to mention the hate crimes that have been committed and that Trump has not criticized as such.

So in comparison, it cannot be said the Democrats are baby killers because whoever says it would have to call the Trump Administration executioners of humanity.

[/QUOTE]
 
Even so, a life is a life, and I see no downside or unjust imposition.

It may well be at some later picosecond. All I know is that the moment of conception--the genesis of the first living cell--is the earliest picosecond "person" could begin, and I'm not in the habit of shooting bullets into black boxes that may or may not contain human beings.

There is no "moment" of conception. It is not instantaneous. It is a process which can take hours or longer in extreme cases.

It's all well and good that you live your life treating any and every possible instance of conception as a possible human being, but you can't force others to live that way, if for no other reason than the fact that you cannot tell them when the "moment" did or did not occur. Medically and biologically, there is no "human being" at that stage. It hasn't reached zygote yet.

I'm curious whether or not you think IVF should be banned.
 
If such abortions are so rare, the prohibition shouldn't be cumbersome.


Firstly, taking a delegate at their word in a deposition isn't "being manipulated". If she later amended her statement, I'll take that into consideration. A reference would be nice.

Secondly, my concern is whether the bill permits any child who'd otherwise be born alive (i.e. viable outside the womb) to be aborted, not merely "moments before" natural birth. The Virginia bill does clearly permit third-trimester abortions and is more permissive than present-day standards. If Del. Tran later walked back on moments-before-natural-birth abortions, that is some comfort.


I am concerned about these things. I haven't been on DP long, but I'll very likely wind up discussing them at some point.

I'd be surprised if you found any reasonable person who isn't concerned about children being raped or murdered in DHS custody, assuming they're convinced the crimes are real.


On what basis do you, o internet commentator who doesn't know me from Adam, accuse me of supporting "train loads of [illegal migrants being] taken to the concentration camps and exterminated"?

If your contention is that sending illegal migrants to detention centers for deportation back to their nations of origin is tantamount to the systematic slaughter of millions of Jews in WWII, by all means make your case in a thread dedicated to the subject. If one doesn't exist, create it. I'm sure plenty of people will be eager to discuss.

COTO, the first thing you need to do before calling Democrats baby killers is try to support the idea that Trump is not a sociopath and that he cares about anyone's life. As long as you have someone running the country that doesn't care about anyone other than his supporting base, and even then only while they support him, cannot make any point about someone else having to care.

Being a critic of one inhumanity when facing a president that has shown hundreds of cases of inhumanity himself, is hypocritical. The one that is supporting inhumanity at every opportunity needs to be addressed first, before anyone else is addressed.

Your OP, which addresses one inhumanity but does not address the bigger inhumanity that Trump has shown, shows you to be hypocritical to the max.
 
Republicans are terrorists.
 
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
Maybe you forgot to link it . . .do you have a link to any bill that factually defends infanticide and or is for baby murdering?

please post it now, thanks!
 
Obviously because all those aborted babies were going to grow up in conservative Republican families. Why else would Dedmocrats support killing babies? Abortion is the best way to keep the conservative influence in society down.

Jesus. I can't keep it up with a straight face. Stupidity should be painful, that might cut down on the ****wit decibel level here.

Magaret Sanger did not start movements to sterilize women for their health. She was motivated by a desire to curb population growth as well as making some effort to weed out babies with less than optimal chances of being valuable contributions in an ideal society of top producers. Hitler was on board with her in some of those ideas. What Sanger started later grew into the modern Planned Parenthood efforts to curb human population growth and to weed out undesirables. It is not about women's health so much but is more correctly a drive to achieve social engineering goals.
 
COTO, the first thing you need to do before calling Democrats baby killers is try to support the idea that Trump is not a sociopath and that he cares about anyone's life.
I don't countenance the OP calling Democrats "baby killers". Foremost because not all Democrats are pro-choice, and even among pro-choice Democrats, most don't comprehend that the choice they're pro- is the choice to kill a human being. As I see it, "baby killer" should be reserved for individuals who aren't deceived by legal or semantic arguments, who know and understand that what they're doing is killing a child.

Parents who'd elect to kill a baby born alive after an unsuccessful abortion would qualify, but I refuse to believe the majority of Democrats would commit such an act, even if certain Democratic legislators would see it legalized.

Generally speaking, I don't think in terms of "Democrat" and "Republican" when speaking of Americans. I categorize people in terms of ideology, not party affiliation.

As long as you have someone running the country that doesn't care about anyone other than his supporting base, and even then only while they support him, cannot make any point about someone else having to care.
I don't support Pres. Trump. I didn't vote for him. I'm not an American and I have no party affiliation.

I criticized your president on many occasions on my old forum, particularly for his (mis)handling of Syria, his mismanagement of America's finances, and certain unpresidential conduct. If I feel that criticizing him here is germane and conducive to productive debate, you'll see me criticizing him on this forum too. Bear in mind that the reason I left my old forum is because the only activity left there was ceaseless arguing over Pres. Trump.

I don't know about you, but I can count on one hand the number of Trump-related message board discussions I've digested that weren't both futile and insipid. I want to debate ideas, not quibble over which politician is worse and why.

Being a critic of one inhumanity when facing a president that has shown hundreds of cases of inhumanity himself, is hypocritical. The one that is supporting inhumanity at every opportunity needs to be addressed first, before anyone else is addressed.
I have better things to do with my time, and so do you.

If you want to while away your hours obsessing over the man and fruitlessly butting heads with his supporters, they're your hours to waste. If ever you succeed in convincing a Trump supporter to shift their opinion one iota, send me a PM. I'm quite fond of witnessing miracles.
 
It's all well and good that you live your life treating any and every possible instance of conception as a possible human being, but you can't force others to live that way, if for no other reason than the fact that you cannot tell them when the "moment" did or did not occur.
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.

I'm curious whether or not you think IVF should be banned.
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.

Presently I'm just hoping legislators will back away from legalizing full-blown infanticide.

In a perfect world I would agree with you 100% but in Trump's world that kind of thinking does not apply. Trump shrugged off the death of journalist Kashoggi in the hands of the Saudi's because of economics, the 2 unnecessary meetings with a despot (Kim Jung-un) who has killed millions of his own people just to stay in power and where Trump treated him as a friend and someone to be respected, the handling of asylum seekers where several children have died because of mismanagement by the government, and not to mention the hate crimes that have been committed and that Trump has not criticized as such.
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.

I didn't accuse you of supporting "train loads of [illegal migrants being] taken to the concentration camps and exterminated"? What I said was that you and others like you turn a blind eye to inhumanities, just as those in Germany had done.
You don't know what I have and haven't turned a blind eye to, sir.

In this thread, it suffices that I haven't turned a blind eye to changes in abortion laws.
 
I don't countenance the OP calling Democrats "baby killers". Foremost because not all Democrats are pro-choice, and even among pro-choice Democrats, most don't comprehend that the choice they're pro- is the choice to kill a human being. As I see it, "baby killer" should be reserved for individuals who aren't deceived by legal or semantic arguments, who know and understand that what they're doing is killing a child.

Parents who'd elect to kill a baby born alive after an unsuccessful abortion would qualify, but I refuse to believe the majority of Democrats would commit such an act, even if certain Democratic legislators would see it legalized.

Generally speaking, I don't think in terms of "Democrat" and "Republican" when speaking of Americans. I categorize people in terms of ideology, not party affiliation.


I don't support Pres. Trump. I didn't vote for him. I'm not an American and I have no party affiliation.

I criticized your president on many occasions on my old forum, particularly for his (mis)handling of Syria, his mismanagement of America's finances, and certain unpresidential conduct. If I feel that criticizing him here is germane and conducive to productive debate, you'll see me criticizing him on this forum too. Bear in mind that the reason I left my old forum is because the only activity left there was ceaseless arguing over Pres. Trump.

I don't know about you, but I can count on one hand the number of Trump-related message board discussions I've digested that weren't both futile and insipid. I want to debate ideas, not quibble over which politician is worse and why.


I have better things to do with my time, and so do you.

If you want to while away your hours obsessing over the man and fruitlessly butting heads with his supporters, they're your hours to waste. If ever you succeed in convincing a Trump supporter to shift their opinion one iota, send me a PM. I'm quite fond of witnessing miracles.

Well, call me surprised as I did not expect such a response from someone I felt was a Trump supporter.

By the way and responding to your last paragraph, obsessing over Trump and fruitlessly butting heads with his supporters is not a waste of time simply because:

1) He runs the country and can cause untold harm on it. Fighting for a cause is never a waste of time. If it was, we would not be a free country. All battles are hard and often against huge odds.
2) Obsessing over the man has caused me to learn much as I have had to research everything in order to support my comments and knowledge is one of my goals in life.
3) It improves my debating skills which in turns makes me a better person as far as stating my beliefs, thoughts and ideas.
4) It keeps me alive because at age 73 and being retired, my purpose in life is no longer economical or protection of my family but to use my lifelong experience to teach others about the hard lessons that I have learned in life.

Miracles do occur. After all, Trump getting elected was a disaster/calamity which is the opposite of Miracle. In that case, the Devil won so now we do need a Miracle to reverse the damage.
 
Back
Top Bottom