• 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!

The Recent Louisiana Abortion Decision: No Worries. Truth and Righteousness ALWAYS Prevail

Mashmont said:
Very sorry women are treated that way in your non-Christian leftwing world. In my RCC world, women willingly and happily choose to raise families and are the leaders in fighting abortion. We have strong content women here. Love them.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion, which in mine has zero credibility. Personally, I think more women in your "RCC world" are very discontented, and mistreated and possibly abused by their spouses than you are comfortable admitting. Thankfully, I don't have to join that world, and I never will.
 
Yet, you are unable to use your words to debate your opinions.

Like a screaming targer , I'm right, you're wrong, if it's wrong for a man to behave in that manner, what makes you doing the same thing..... right?
I don't believe when your discussing someone else's life.... you or I have any rights, over the existence of that life.
But I would apreaciate you dissecting my submission, that would be constructive.
 
Mashmont said:
I thought you didn’t believe in God
Click to expand...

More uninformed nonsense I see, these values are not merely religious but universal. Always have been since before your religion was thought up.
 
Provided, the tennant lives within the law, oats his/her rent, the lease cannot be terminated, as its basic contract law, regardless which country one resides

With respect, a child that's not viable and or detrimental to a womans health can be terminated, but that's not as some implies an acceptable contraceptive method.
That's love and protection and an horrific decision for a loved one to make! But it's based on love, not butchery.
 
Highlanders said:
I don't believe when your discussing someone else's life.... you or I have any rights, over the existence of that life.
Click to expand...

Again, a woman does have -- and should always keep -- the right to make private medical decisions for her own life. That includes her right to have an abortion if she doesn't want to stay pregnant and give birth. Whether or not you approve of that particular decision (abortion) is irrelevant.

That means you don't get to make such decisions for anyone but yourself. If you aren't the woman who is pregnant, it isn't your decision.
 
Mashmont said:
So you're basically saying abortion is OK because it's not against the law. That's asinine, of course, and it is the entire reason for this debate. We are saying it should be illiegalized because it is morally wrong. You're saying abortion should be legal because it's legal.

Anti-women? Most women call themselves pro-life and not pro-choice, meaning I am pro-women and you are anti-women.
Click to expand...

More reading difficulties I see, raping violates the law and another PERSON's personal integrity (and right to not being raped). It is ridiculous that we have to spell out things like this to you.

And yes, only someone who does not like women or their rights equates the right to choose with raping.

40zgl9as.jpg
 
Peter King said:
More reading difficulties I see, raping violates the law and another PERSON's personal integrity (and right to not being raped). It is ridiculous that we have to spell out things like this to you.

And yes, only someone who does not like women or their rights equates the right to choose with raping.

View attachment 67286340
Click to expand...

Abortion violates another person's personal integrity far worse. It is ridiculous I have to spell things like this out to you.

Since the majority of women are pro-life and not pro-choice, why do you not like women?
 
OceanBlues1 said:
In other words, you have no reliable statistics to back up your previous claim. I didn't think so. :lamo
Click to expand...

"Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life," 2018-2019 Demographic Tables

Women: Pro-choice 43%; Pro-life: 51%

Don't you feel foolish now?
 
Mashmont said:
Little babies in the womb are completely defenseless. This is obvious. And yes, I am concerned about protecting boys and girls from the high and increasing rate of sex abuse in the godless public school system. I have never heard you express concern about that, however. Why haven't you?
Click to expand...

There are no babies in the womb, that gestates in the womb is a ZEF. That is obvious.

And still ignoring the sexual abuse epidemic in your church by pointing somewhere else, classic catholicism.

And schools might have problems with that, but it is not the systemic avalanche of child rapists and a church that protects, hides and redistributes such priests so that they could do the same in some other area.

All sexual abuse of children is abhorrent, but schools do not make the idiotic claim that they are perfect and their "religion" is perfect. That is your organizations claim to fame.
 
Mashmont said:
Wow. You just doubled down calling women farm animals. What a shame you don't see women as human beings.
Click to expand...

More untruths, must be some new ten commandments out there that read "though shall bear false witness on the internet".

Whoops there goes your post

:failpail:
 
Peter King said:
There are no babies in the womb, that gestates in the womb is a ZEF. That is obvious.

And still ignoring the sexual abuse epidemic in your church by pointing somewhere else, classic catholicism.

And schools might have problems with that, but it is not the systemic avalanche of child rapists and a church that protects, hides and redistributes such priests so that they could do the same in some other area.

All sexual abuse of children is abhorrent, but schools do not make the idiotic claim that they are perfect and their "religion" is perfect. That is your organizations claim to fame.
Click to expand...


We;ve been over this 100 times. Merriam Webster's definition of 'child' includes 'unborn persons'. Also, according to MW 'baby' is synonymous with 'child'. But I understand why you feel you must divert over trivial nomenclature.
 
Peter King said:
More untruths, must be some new ten commandments out there that read "though shall bear false witness on the internet".

Whoops there goes your post

:failpail:
Click to expand...

I didn't. You compared women to farm animals.
 
OceanBlues1 said:
Again, a woman does have -- and should always keep -- the right to make private medical decisions for her own life. That includes her right to have an abortion if she doesn't want to stay pregnant and give birth. Whether or not you approve of that particular decision (abortion) is irrelevant.

That means you don't get to make such decisions for anyone but yourself. If you aren't the woman who is pregnant, it isn't your decision.
Click to expand...
So because you have a gun in your hand, or a big stick, it's your decision regarding someone else's life.... I'd call that thuggery, bullying, certainly not reasoned logical discussion, but butcher.... yes. But that's where you and I will always differ, but I won't be required to meet my maker with blood stained hands, stating, it was my right, it's my body, it's my right to discard my humanity, it's okay to murder my child..... because.... I'm a mother, it's my womb. The word hypocrisy readily springs to mind.
 
Mashmont said:
Well there you go. You figured it out. A woman likewise has no moral right to invade the baby’s body. She had no right to maim and kill the child.
Click to expand...
What baby? What child? There’s no baby or child being aborted.
 
Highlanders said:
Provided, the tennant lives within the law, oats his/her rent, the lease cannot be terminated, as its basic contract law, regardless which country one resides

With respect, a child that's not viable and or detrimental to a womans health can be terminated, but that's not as some implies an acceptable contraceptive method.
That's love and protection and an horrific decision for a loved one to make! But it's based on love, not butchery.
Click to expand...

Yah.

"Landlords can terminate a lease with proper notice if tenants don’t keep their end of the contract, which is called terminating “with cause.”

"A landlord might want to terminate a lease early “with cause” for a variety of reasons, including unpaid rent, new occupants you didn’t give permission to add, a pet when there’s a no-pet policy, or if the tenant’s dealing drugs or violating the lease in any other way."

(My emphasis - More @ Can a Landlord Terminate a Lease Early to Sell the Property or Move In?)

The US is a different country.
 
southwest88 said:
Yah.

"Landlords can terminate a lease with proper notice if tenants don’t keep their end of the contract, which is called terminating “with cause.”

"A landlord might want to terminate a lease early “with cause” for a variety of reasons, including unpaid rent, new occupants you didn’t give permission to add, a pet when there’s a no-pet policy, or if the tenant’s dealing drugs or violating the lease in any other way."

(My emphasis - More @ Can a Landlord Terminate a Lease Early to Sell the Property or Move In?)

The US is a different country.
Click to expand...

Contract law is the same in every country.
Provide the tenant abides by the lease, please note yet again, abides by the lease, the lease cannot be terminated. END.

Contract law.

When the womb has been outsourced, its rented out for lease period.END.

No, if it’s not in the lease
Lease. And I quote from your link.
You might not have had the foresight to know that you would sell during your tenant’s lease term, or that you’d want to move in. That means you probably didn’t put an early termination clause in the lease that your tenant agreed to and signed. If that’s the case, then you can’t kick your tenant out without cause. Period. End of story.
End quote
As I said, contract law
 
Last edited:
Highlanders said:
I quote:- If a woman morally believes that her responsibilities to others in her life, that it's more important to give everything to kids or elderly or disabled or others in her life instead, to uphold her obligations and commitments to employer, church, community, society, it's completely right.

Abortion is the antithesis of giving, morality, responsibility, obligations community, commitment and society.

But you carry on deceiving yourself, perhaps you need to to justify the unjustifiable.

Flushing, a raspberry, more words to avoid calling it a baby, but again obviously to deflect from its actual function and purpose of a womb, creation.
Aah, natural behaviours, a mothers instinct, creating, nurturing, loving, or in certain cases, not at that moment as it isn't convenient, kill it, we can call it a raspberry to ease our conscious.
But then family rules my life, and as I'm not materialistic nor interested very much in money, I place my values on other things.
I'm not judging you, I detest the thought you think its natural and a right.
You lease a flat to a bad tenant, you are forced by law to allow the lease to expire before removing tenant. Your womb is no different.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are judging. Judging, and posting laughably stupid analogies.
 
And I'm free, I'm free fallin'

Mashmont said:
We;ve been over this 100 times. Merriam Webster's definition of 'child' includes 'unborn persons'. Also, according to MW 'baby' is synonymous with 'child'. But I understand why you feel you must divert over trivial nomenclature.
Click to expand...

Take it up with the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade, 1973. They're the ones who set the usage, & the legal language, following US legal usage. I'm sure the good folks @ MW are pleased for the favorable mention, but they have no standing in federal court, let alone the Supreme Court. (& neither do you, BTW. If you want to mount a legal effort against Roe, I'd advise against it. @ the very least, consult a lawyer beforehand.)

If you want to argue definitions, you have to use the actual legal definitions. Or simply be shot down time after time ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom