• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Conservative refuse to admit these facts are true

Lursa

Tenacious
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
68,083
Reaction score
39,832
Location
Outside Seattle
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Sorry your in a few cities comment came first. You dont get to blurt statements and then expect them to go unchecked. You need to tell us how many cities you were factually referencing when you said "a few".
Nope...I answered your questions...you cant answer mine and it's obvious...

But since you asked AFTER, I'm happy to follow up AFTER you answer my question.

Why wont you? Why not answer *if you really want the basis for my 'few' claim* you would :mrgreen: Because that's the only way you'll get it.

So you dont really want me to source it...you just want to avoid answering a question you cannot answer :mrgreen:


I love it...you keep highlighting your own failure!

Now:

please provide the ratio of peaceful protesters to rioters?

That line of moms trying to stop the federal thugs was very peaceful.​

post 369 for reference

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
 

Lursa

Tenacious
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
68,083
Reaction score
39,832
Location
Outside Seattle
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
you said yes in a few. That indicates you know the number and have the citation. You have dodged for pages to try and get out of the mess your yapper got you in. You said a few cities but as your posts clearly show, you actually have no idea. You just blurted in a typical leftist fashion. Something that sounds good to a lefty who doesnt require facts.
No...that's a lie or very deep misunderstanding of the English language. If I had the number I would have posted it. A 'few' is a generalization and as such an opinion.

Do you disagree with my opinion?

If you do, I dont care. You asked for an answer and you got it.

Oh so the nightly riots are not actually happening? Its a yes or no.
Then you moved the goal posts....to avoid answering my question:

Now:

please provide the ratio of peaceful protesters to rioters?

That line of moms trying to stop the federal thugs was very peaceful.​

Because you cannot. I know you'll go on with this forever...because that's how much you are afraid of being seen as wrong on the Internetz. Well, each time you repost it...you show that you cant answer it. :shrug: I'm not wrong on anything...I dont feel the need to prove my 'opinion' of a few right or wrong...I have more self-esteem than that.

Everytime you repost this...you keep highlighting your own failure :mrgreen:

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
These are true facts about abortion. Why won't pro-life advocates admit they are true?

*95% of women did the right thing by getting an abortion
Five years after abortion, nearly all women say it was the right decision, even those who struggled to make the decision supported the abortion years later.
*Anti-abortion women are the largest % of women getting abortions:
The majority of abortion patients indicated a religious affiliation: Seventeen percent identified as mainline Protestant, 13% as evangelical Protestant and 24% as Roman Catholic, while 8% identified with some other religion. Thirty-eight percent of patients did not identify with any religion. The proportion of women who identified as mainline Protestant declined by 24% since 2008, whereas the proportion with no affiliation increased by 38%�.
*Women who get abortions are responsible people:
85% of the women getting abortions have either part-time or full=time jobs.
45% are married or in stable relationships
59.3% have one or more children already
42.4% are aged 25 to 35
64% have attended college or have have a degree
66% plan to have children when they are financially able to provide necessities for them, and/or in a supportive relationship with a partner so their children will have two parents
64 % are using birth control: (rhythm and withdrawal are not considered birth control because their failure rate is so high).
*Women get abortions for very good reasons
The family can't financially support a child at this time.
The woman has responsibilities to work, parents, school or other children.
“I am too immature to raise a child�
Denying abortion in cases of unwanted pregnancies creates children that grow up with huge social problems.
*Conservatives created the marriage destroying legislation of aid to single mothers only.

Oops! We’re lost. | UC San Francisco
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/140517NCJRS.pdf
Females in the US Workforce
Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and Changes Since 2008 | Guttmacher Institute
Aid to Families with Dependent Children - Wikipedia
How did we get to a discussion about whether or not protests are peaceful or not? The question is why don't conservatives accept facts.
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
you can stack up as many statistics as you like.... it doesn’t make murdering innocent people for the sake of convenience moral!
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Murdering innocent people is not the topic.
Of course it is. They laid out a number of statistics about people’s opinions. About how their life was better “or worse” after they ended the life of another human being. Then said why don’t conservatives ever consider these facts about abortion. How is this conversation NOT about murdering innocent people? I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t have the legal right to do it.... but if we are going to discuss it. Let’s be honest about what we are discussing.
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Of course it is. They laid out a number of statistics about people’s opinions. About how their life was better “or worse” after they ended the life of another human being. Then said why don’t conservatives ever consider these facts about abortion. How is this conversation NOT about murdering innocent people? I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t have the legal right to do it.... but if we are going to discuss it. Let’s be honest about what we are discussing.
Being honest would include not using the word murder or unborn babies or any of the other grizzly and judgmental words anti-abortion advocates choose to use against the pro-choice position of legal, safe, private, professional abortions.
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Being honest would include not using the word murder or unborn babies or any of the other grizzly and judgmental words anti-abortion advocates choose to use against the pro-choice position of legal, safe, private, professional abortions.
No.... being honest, means being honest. Just because the words hurt some people’s feelings or make their claims harder to support. Doesn’t change reality. In the USA you can have “legal, safe, private and professional abortions”. I don’t dispute any of those things. It’s reality, but it doesn’t change the fact that murdering an unborn child is the end result of all abortions. I’m still willing to have the discussion of wether it is or isn’t moral... or wether it should or shouldn’t be legal... or wether the federal government should or shouldn’t pay for it... I’m fine discussing all that. But I’m not going to help you win your argument by pretending that children aren’t human beings and that killing them isn’t murder.
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In the USA you can have “legal, safe, private and professional abortions”. I don’t dispute any of those things. It’s reality, but it doesn’t change the fact that murdering an unborn child is the end result of all abortions. I’m still willing to have the discussion of wether it is or isn’t moral... or wether it should or shouldn’t be legal... or wether the federal government should or shouldn’t pay for it... I’m fine discussing all that. But I’m not going to help you win your argument by pretending that children aren’t human beings and that killing them isn’t murder.
A discussion is not possible of you call abortion murder. Murder is illegal and immoral. End of discussion.
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
A discussion is not possible of you call abortion murder. Murder is illegal and immoral. End of discussion.
LoL. I agree murder is immoral and should be illegal. I don’t think you want to use what’s legal in the USA for a basis on your argument. Because we have a pretty terrible track record of allowing horrible things.
 

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
436
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Calling abortion murder is an appeal to emotion, and only a roadblock to furthering meaningful discussion and compromise on the topic, in the same way calling someone disagreeing with the tactics a racist, Nazi, white supremacist, white nationalist, etc.
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Calling abortion murder is an appeal to emotion, and only a roadblock to furthering meaningful discussion and compromise on the topic, in the same way calling someone disagreeing with the tactics a racist, Nazi, white supremacist, white nationalist, etc.
Again. I’m willing to discuss if it is or isn’t moral... if it should or shouldn’t be legal.... if the federal government should or shouldn’t pay for it. Im
Fine with all that. If someone will make an actual point.. I’ll discuss it, but I’m not going to pretend that a child isn’t a human. And I’m not going to pretend that killing it for the sake of convenience isn’t murder. you wanting me to not use those worlds is an appeal to emotions. If you truly have the moral conviction that babies aren’t human and that you can end them if you want to simply because they are geographically located inside your body. Then that’s fine. Let’s discuss it. But you can’t seriously expect me to only use the words you approve of to do it.
 

Scrabaholic

Smarter than the avg bear
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
19,981
Reaction score
15,089
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Of course it is. They laid out a number of statistics about people’s opinions. About how their life was better “or worse” after they ended the life of another human being. Then said why don’t conservatives ever consider these facts about abortion. How is this conversation NOT about murdering innocent people? I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t have the legal right to do it.... but if we are going to discuss it. Let’s be honest about what we are discussing.

I think you need to take your own advice. Murdering innocent people is ILLEGAL and nobody is trying to change that.

Abortion is not murder, nor are zefs people. FACT.
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Again. I’m willing to discuss if it is or isn’t moral... if it should or shouldn’t be legal.... if the federal government should or shouldn’t pay for it. Im Fine with all that. If someone will make an actual point.. I’ll discuss it, but I’m not going to pretend that a child isn’t a human. And I’m not going to pretend that killing it for the sake of convenience isn’t murder. you wanting me to not use those worlds is an appeal to emotions. If you truly have the moral conviction that babies aren’t human and that you can end them if you want to simply because they are geographically located inside your body. Then that’s fine. Let’s discuss it. But you can’t seriously expect me to only use the words you approve of to do it.
OK. I'll play the game on your terms. Killing is done for convenience, abortion is murder, a child is human, babies are human too and geographical location determines if you can kill them both. (eye roll)

Murdering a human child or baby should be legal because all statistics show that an unwanted child has very little chance of growing up to be a contributing member of society and will in almost all cases either end up in foster care, homeless, in jail, mentally disturbed or addicted. It seems unfair to the human child and unfair to the taxpayers to make a human child be born only to be unloved and uncared for. Unfair treatment of a human baby or child is not moral behavior.

Current law is that the government doesn't pay for murdering a human child or baby. Most murders are paid for though contributions by people who believe that murder is OK if the geolographical location of the human child is correct. Planned Parenthood receives 1/3 of it's budget from millions of such believers in murder of human children. There are many other private clinics completely funded by murder advocates. Private funds have also been set up by murder advocates to help women pay for murdering their human child when its geological location is inconvenient.

Killing is done for convenience. I agree. A human baby or child according to its geographical location can be killed for convenience sake. Convenience is defined and determined by family resources: financial, emotional, social, medical and psychological. It is determined by the mothers mental stability, emotional growth, age, professional, educational and family responsibilities and the number of children she already cares for. Convenience is also determined by the fathers mental stability, emotional growth, age, professional, educational and family responsibilities and the number of children he already cares for. Convenience is determined by community resources available to the family: day care, medical facilities,, schools, safety of the neighborhood, transportation, jobs, police protection and social services.
Convenience is determined by whether the wages the mother, father, family earn can support a human child or human baby with the safety, stability, love and care every human baby and child deserves to grow up with in order to be a contributing member of society. Convenience is an important reason for either keeping a human child or human baby or legally murdering it.

The Bible, the law, the Constitution, the science of embryology, have nothing to say about the murder of human children located by geographically specific places. If religion, law and science do not care if you murder your child, why should I be sticking my nose into your private business and telling you what you can and can't do with your human child. I cannot tell you to murder your child or let it live. I can't tell you how many human children you can have. I can't tell you when you can have human children. I can't tell you how to educate your child. I can't tell you how to raise your child or the culture or philosophy or religion you choose to teach your child. I cannot tell you where you can take your child live or vacation or study or eat or pray.

I do not understand why I can't tell you what to do with your child but you can tell me what to do with my child.
 

Dayton3

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
6,942
Reaction score
1,031
Location
Smackover, AR.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Murdering a human child or baby should be legal because all statistics show that an unwanted child has very little chance of growing up to be a contributing member of society and will in almost all cases either end up in foster care, homeless, in jail, mentally disturbed or addicted.
Offer proof from an unbiased source or it isn't true. You claim "all statistics" so it should not be difficult to provide proof.
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Offer proof from an unbiased source or it isn't true. You claim "all statistics" so it should not be difficult to provide proof.
I've posted that at least 3 times. It is now a DIY project
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,947
Reaction score
20,579
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Abortion is not a conservative or liberal issue. Only mindless partisan hacks see it that way.

Nothing in the OP addresses the belief of those of the opinion that a fetus is an unborn child with exactly the same right to life as anyone who has been born.
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,947
Reaction score
20,579
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The women themselves were polled, after. It is their opinions, but the accumulation of those opinions is that women believe that abortion at that time was the right thing for their lives.

So overall, it's factual that that % of women believe that. Yes?
Belief does not make anything right, particularly self serving beliefs.
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,947
Reaction score
20,579
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am pro choice, but my opinions have changed:

1. I have a problem with partial birth abortion - which means killing the fetus just prior to birth - as a matter of human dignity. The only exception is if the birth will seriously harm the mother or the fetus is not viable upon birth.

2. I do not believe prolife has anything to do with wanting to control or have power over women, nor to force women to have babies they don't want. It has to do with believing a fetus is a child and children should not be killed for reasons of convenience. They believe if a woman does not want the child, put the child up for adoption - with huge adoption waiting lists.

While I do not agree with prolife, I respect their motives.
 

Integrityrespec

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
7,070
Reaction score
2,532
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
These are true facts about abortion. Why won't pro-life advocates admit they are true?

*
95% of women did the right thing by getting an abortion
Five years after abortion, nearly all women say it was the right decision, even those who struggled to make the decision supported the abortion years later.
*Anti-abortion women are the largest % of women getting abortions:
The majority of abortion patients indicated a religious affiliation: Seventeen percent identified as mainline Protestant, 13% as evangelical Protestant and 24% as Roman Catholic, while 8% identified with some other religion. Thirty-eight percent of patients did not identify with any religion. The proportion of women who identified as mainline Protestant declined by 24% since 2008, whereas the proportion with no affiliation increased by 38%�.
*Women who get abortions are responsible people:
85% of the women getting abortions have either part-time or full=time jobs.
45% are married or in stable relationships
59.3% have one or more children already
42.4% are aged 25 to 35
64% have attended college or have have a degree
66% plan to have children when they are financially able to provide necessities for them, and/or in a supportive relationship with a partner so their children will have two parents
64 % are using birth control: (rhythm and withdrawal are not considered birth control because their failure rate is so high).
*Women get abortions for very good reasons
The family can't financially support a child at this time.
The woman has responsibilities to work, parents, school or other children.
“I am too immature to raise a child�
Denying abortion in cases of unwanted pregnancies creates children that grow up with huge social problems.
*Conservatives created the marriage destroying legislation of aid to single mothers only.

Oops! We’re lost. | UC San Francisco
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/140517NCJRS.pdf
Females in the US Workforce
Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and Changes Since 2008 | Guttmacher Institute
Aid to Families with Dependent Children - Wikipedia
These are all opinions. Abortion is taking a live, plain and simple. If you don't believe that then there is no use talking to you about what is wrong with abortion.
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,947
Reaction score
20,579
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's not an argument. It's a statement of fact given in the links below (except the on from UC SF which is apparently no longer available). 95% of women say abortion was the right thing to do. The opinion is not mine. It's the opinion of 95% of women who have had abortions.
As previously noted, I have no doubt that 95% of slave owners thought owning slaves was the right thing.
 

joko104

On Vacation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
56,947
Reaction score
20,579
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
But how about those over 65 and the other at-risk people? Are you in favor of opening up everything for the economy, knowing that so many more of those people will die?
Wow, talk about a completely irrelevant comparison.

95% of those who don't wear masks are doing the right thing - because that's what they believe so it's a fact. Right?

I am in favor of opening up the economy and less people will die if we do. Contrary to the beliefs of some, covid-19 isn't the only cause of death.
 

weaver2

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2019
Messages
5,892
Reaction score
3,558
Location
Oregon
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
These are all opinions. Abortion is taking a live, plain and simple. If you don't believe that then there is no use talking to you about what is wrong with abortion.
They are not opinions they are statistics from competent and reliable sources. Abortion is ending life. The women who abort have determined that the family has greater needs to be met in order to survive than has the fetus. A family of already born people has a legal right to choose to survive rather than be impoverished or destroyed by the addition of a child or another child that they cannot support. Whether you approve of abortion or not it is not your right to tell other families what they can and cannot do to survive.

"Moral disapproval alone is is an improper basis on which to deny rights. Fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote, they depend on the outcome of no elections". Vaughn Wallace, Judge: 9th Circuit Court
 

John_Galt

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2020
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
If all these reasons are morally justified, why We do stop at children? Once people are no longer “contributing members of society” once they are “homeless, drug addicts, criminals, mentally ill, etc” why shouldn’t we apply the same logic and same moral justification to kill them? You just provided all the moral reasons to do so..... and before you say because it’s illegal. So was abortion in almost every state before Before 1973 when roe vs wade was wrongly decided. And indeed in a lot of states it’s still a crime to abort a child for simple convenience. But no one Prosecutes it because precedent has been set. “I don’t want to make abortion illegal via the federal government. I want to allow states to decide for themselves how to handle it. We do that with most nuanced issues.... except abortion because of the incorrect ruling of roe vs wade”.

I’m not here to try and argue or change people’s minds, people don’t change their minds anymore, everyone lives in an echo chamber. I’m just honestly curious to learn why most people support aborting healthy children but are against...,.. say the death penalty. I personally believe that a lot of women have truly been convinced that the debate isn’t about murdering children... but that it’s about “women’s rights”. If this was about making contraceptives, Birth control, IUD’s, etc. illegal... then yes. That’s a woman’s rights issue. once someone is pregnant, the debate is about 2 people not 1.

and I don’t accept “oh just keep your nose out of what I do with my child”. No.... that’s what people used to say about their slaves as well! You don’t get to commit crimes against humanity and say “well, the letter of the law says I can do it, so ha”! The Point of debate is suppose to be a war of ideas and open dialogue. where we find out if there is actual merit or mortality to the idea.
 
Top Bottom