• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did you know that Republicans don't want to outlaw abortion?

steen said:
As such, everything else is irrelevant.

You sound like a nihilist, that is, if you are not already.
 
steen said:
What nonsense. "Murder" is the illegal killing of a person. So merely having it be "human life" doesn't make it murder, your prolife, revisionist linguistic hyperbole none withstanding.
]

If I am understanding your logic correctly, according to you, the only time something is murder is if it is made illegal by the government of the person doing the killing. By this logic than, things like the events of the Holocaust should not be considered murder, because they were made legal by those doing the killing. Is this what your suggesting?
 
Axismaster said:
You sound like a nihilist, that is, if you are not already.
Not at all. But there is simply no point in arguing with outright liars and emotionally histrionic posters.
 
oracle25 said:
]If I am understanding your logic correctly, according to you, the only time something is murder is if it is made illegal by the government of the person doing the killing.
Bingo. I recommend you for your step in ibcreasing your literacy.
By this logic than, things like the events of the Holocaust should not be considered murder, because they were made legal by those doing the killing. Is this what your suggesting?
Ah, that old claim. First show that the killing of jews was actually legal per german law!

No? As I said....

But if a country passes a law that it is legal to kill redheads, then yes in THAT country the killing of redheads is not murder? Perhaps you were not aware of the meaning of the word you spread like so much manure?
 
steen said:
Not at all. But there is simply no point in arguing with outright liars and emotionally histrionic posters.

I'm sorry your heart is so hardened against the murder of 3500 innocents daily. Tell me this though, are you against the death penalty? Because if you are, how can you be pro-abortion too? To be pro-life on one thing you have to be pro-life on all things.
 
Axismaster said:
I'm sorry your heart is so hardened against the murder of 3500 innocents daily.
More loads of lying crap. But I am saddened that you are so eager to impose slavery on women and show your ignorance of the English language.
Tell me this though, are you against the death penalty?
Yes, I oppose the killing of persons.
Because if you are, how can you be pro-abortion too?
I am not pro-abortion.
To be pro-life on one thing you have to be pro-life on all things.
But then, I am pro-Choice.
 
Oh, so because something is legal in a country it is automatically right?

So lets just say the Bush administration passed a law that said all liberals must be killed. Would you consider that right?

Or what about death penalty? Do you support it? if not, why?
 
oracle25 said:
Oh, so because something is legal in a country it is automatically right?
Not at all. Before you so dishonestly tried to change the subject, we were talking about the meaning of the word "murder." We were not talking about right or wrong, but rather about your dishonest use of terminology.
So lets just say the Bush administration passed a law that said all liberals must be killed. Would you consider that right?
Nope. But that is irrelevant to the meaning of the word "murder." What is wrong? Are you so desperate to now change the subject away from your deceptive misrepresentation that you now are grasping for just about any subject you can imagine to not have to admit that you were wrong? How lame and pathetic.
 
Axismaster said:
To be pro-life on one thing you have to be pro-life on all things.
Hey...that's brings us back to that stem cell thing....you ought to think about that one if it is the use of embryonic stem cells rather than adult or umbilical cord stems cell research you support.
 
Felicity said:
Hey...that's brings us back to that stem cell thing....you ought to think about that one if it is the use of embryonic stem cells rather than adult or umbilical cord stems cell research you support.

The idea that embryonic stem cells are human life has always made me chuckle.
 
steen said:
Not at all. Before you so dishonestly tried to change the subject, we were talking about the meaning of the word "murder." We were not talking about right or wrong, but rather about your dishonest use of terminology.
Nope. But that is irrelevant to the meaning of the word "murder." What is wrong? Are you so desperate to now change the subject away from your deceptive misrepresentation that you now are grasping for just about any subject you can imagine to not have to admit that you were wrong? How lame and pathetic.

Actually we were discussing wether abortion is right or wrong. Therefore, it is you who changed the subject off of abortion and onto the definition of murder. I think you and I both know that when we say "murder" we mean the cruel taking of a persons life.

Also, even if we were discussing a strict definition of murder, your argument would seem to imply that because (by legal definition) something would not be called "murder" it would therefore be right. Which is the whole premiss of you argument. You will no doubt accuse me of twisting your words (which you seem to always do when you are backed into a corner) but we both know the truth.
 
oracle25 said:
Actually we were discussing wether abortion is right or wrong.
Nope. We were discussing your lying use of the term "murder."
I think you and I both know that when we say "murder" we mean the cruel taking of a persons life.
but that would STUILL be dishonest because the embryo or fetus are not eprsons. So you are now saying that you weren't lying, because you instead were lying?

That's just plain dumb.
Also, even if we were discussing a strict definition of murder, your argument would seem to imply that because (by legal definition) something would not be called "murder" it would therefore be right.
Nope, now you are lying again. I did not say one word about "right." Do you HAVE to lie in every post?
Which is the whole premiss of you argument.
Nope, that's another lie.
You will no doubt accuse me of twisting your words (which you seem to always do when you are backed into a corner) but we both know the truth.
The truth is that you sure lie a lot.
 
Axismaster said:
If we lie a lot, then you have lied every time!
Nope. Please provide documentation for your false claim. I provided documentation of my factual observation of the lying, so now it is your turn
 
steen said:
Nope. Please provide documentation for your false claim. I provided documentation of my factual observation of the lying, so now it is your turn

I think the truth speaks for itself, and the truth is that we win this debate because GOD is on OUR side and not your abortionists. I think that if God says, it is. Now, you may worship Darwin, but I won't budge on this.
 
Axismaster said:
I think the truth speaks for itself, and the truth is that we win this debate because GOD is on OUR side and not your abortionists. I think that if God says, it is. Now, you may worship Darwin, but I won't budge on this.
Impressive. Four falsehoods or lies in 3 lines. You are exceeding yourself.;)
 
Axismaster said:
The idea that embryonic stem cells are human life has always made me chuckle.
It's not the stems cells darlin' it's HOW THEY ~GET~ the stem cells. You have to have a dead embryo to get embryonic stem cells. Where did you THINK they got them from?
 
steen said:
Nope. Please provide documentation for your false claim. I provided documentation of my factual observation of the lying, so now it is your turn

Please go back, read every single thing you have posted in this thread in sequence. And then you may see how your argument is so contradictory it would make John Kerry's head spin.
 
oracle25 said:
Please go back, read every single thing you have posted in this thread in sequence. And then you may see how your argument is so contradictory it would make John Kerry's head spin.

I think he is retreating to that old "you liars" strategy. It shows we have him under a rock.
 
Typical liberal response. Deny your own words and than claim the opponent is lying about you.
 
oracle25 said:
Typical liberal response. Deny your own words and than claim the opponent is lying about you.

Hey, let's mischaracterize the actions of a single person and then project them on to an entire group of people! That's accurate!
 
It's actually something I've observed in many liberals I've debated, though it' not true for them all....
 
Steen says Oracle is perpetuating lies to him. That is what Steen are doing to pro-lifers like me and him. Trying to justify his morally bankrupt positions on abortion by calling us pro-life people liars. Same old snark.
 
oracle25 said:
It's actually something I've observed in many liberals I've debated, though it' not true for them all....

That's great. Many conservatives do the exact same thing. Last time I checked, debate tactics are not dictated by political ideology.
 
No, but it is something I see more often in liberals. True that some conservatives use such tactics but not many that I can see.
 
Back
Top Bottom