• 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!

Mitt Romney, may have profitted from Abortions

mac said:
I didn't bash you for your discrimination. I simply pointed out that you are discriminating. Which is true, you are.
Click to expand...

and by your own logic & comments, so are YOU.

how do you reconcile such a hypocritical position?
 
mac said:
I answered that. Because all humans should be treated equally, including an equal right to life. That equality should not be based on subjective reasoning.
Click to expand...




Why should all humans be treated equally? Treating all humans equally should not be based on subjective reasoning. Can you objectively reason out why all humans should be treated equally?
 
Thunder said:
and by your own logic & comments, so are YOU.

how do you reconcile such a hypocritical position?
Click to expand...

There is nothing hypocritical about it. My discrimination (and societies) "against" children and their right to drive, vote, etc does not negate that you are discriminating against the human ZEF based on subjective criteria. Why are you having such difficulty understanding plainly written english?
 
mac said:
There is nothing hypocritical about it. My discrimination (and societies) "against" children and their right to drive, vote, etc does not negate that you are discriminating against the human ZEF based on subjective criteria. Why are you having such difficulty understanding plainly written english?
Click to expand...

so if you support discrimination against children, why even accuse me of discrimination against ZEFs?

you clearly have no problem with discrimination against other human beings, so its pointless for you to accuse me of the same thing.
 
Thunder said:
you believe that children deserve less rights that adults.

that is discrimination, something that you supposesdly condemn.
Click to expand...

That's not the point. You said animals don't have rights. That's not true.
 
mac said:
Based on what?



I understand that that is your opinion. I disagree.
Click to expand...


Can you explain why we ought to value human life? That was the question I asked in the post you are responding to.
 
Thunder said:
I have already proved that you do NOT believe this, as you clearly accept discrimination against younger persons.
Click to expand...

You didn't prove this, you are taking my statement in a superficial manner. The right to life should be equal among all humans.
 
Dezaad said:
Why should all humans be treated equally? Treating all humans equally should not be based on subjective reasoning. Can you objectively reason out why all humans should be treated equally?
Click to expand...

You answered your own question. The right to life of all humans should not be based on subjective criteria. The only objective fact is that they are human, all else is subjective and is prone to change. As it has so often in the past.
 
mac said:
A human is any organism in the species homo sapien. The human ZEF is clearly a human. Person, as you use it, is simply a mechanism for discrimination as it has been so often in the past.
Click to expand...


You keep trying to make the point that ZEFs are human organisms that are created during a sexual act between two members of the homo sapien species. How could they be otherwise?


Nature removes about 20% of ZEFs (AKA miscarriage).

How many are terminated by Divine Intervention?

And ..What is the total number of pregnancies each year (in the U.S.)? Of that number what is the percentage of those pregnancies are aborted?

The world population is growing at a rapid pace. All of the abortions around the planet hasn't proven to cause negative effects on humanity. And you can't prove it to be otherwise.

Finally...what gives you, are any person, the right to dictate how a women chooses to manage their reproductive roles simply because of circumstance of birth they must be provide a portion of their body to allow for the gestation period of a ZEF when a woman believes that carrying to term the ZEF is detrimental to her well-being?

Back to square one, Mac. We'll never agree.
 
mac said:
Right. The concept of person is little more than a mechanism of discrimination.
Click to expand...

FYI, this is where this red-herring about "discrimination" all began.

The irony being that YOU admit to supporting discrimination against homo sapiens that are children.

it was silly for you to use that term..and now you understand why.
 
Removable Mind said:
You keep trying to make the point that ZEFs are human organisms that are created during a sexual act between two members of the homo sapien species. How could they be otherwise?


Nature removes about 20% of ZEFs (AKA miscarriage).

How many are terminated by Divine Intervention?

And ..What is the total number of pregnancies each year (in the U.S.)? Of that number what is the percentage of those pregnancies are aborted?

The world population is growing at a rapid pace. All of the abortions around the planet hasn't proven to cause negative effects on humanity. And you can't prove it to be otherwise.

Finally...what gives you, are any person, the right to dictate how a women chooses to manage their reproductive roles simply because of circumstance of birth they must be provide a portion of their body to allow for the gestation period of a ZEF when a woman believes that carrying to term the ZEF is detrimental to her well-being?

Back to square one, Mac. We'll never agree.
Click to expand...

The lifespan of an organism does not define it's existence...all organisms die of a plethora of causes. This is irrelevant to the discussion. What is irrelevant is the intentional intervention in the lifespan of an organism, aka killing it. The growth of the world population is irrelevant to the argument. "Culling the herd" is simply not an acceptable approach to controlling human population. Lastly, It is not my goal to control women. It is my goal to see an end to the unjust deaths of millions of humans.
 
Thunder said:
FYI, this is where this red-herring about "discrimination" all began.

The irony being that YOU admit to supporting discrimination against homo sapiens that are children.

it was silly for you to use that term..and now you understand why.
Click to expand...

It's not silly, it's the best descriptor of your approach to the argument. Other discrimination occurring for different reasons doesn't negate your discrimination.
 
mac said:
It's not silly, it's the best descriptor of your approach to the argument. Other discrimination occurring for different reasons doesn't negate your discrimination.
Click to expand...

but if we both believe in discrimination against homo sapiens, why even bring it up?

seems rather pointless to bring up something that we both engage in.
 
Thunder said:
so you don't support families being able to pull the plug on folks who are braindead?
Click to expand...

I don't see a reason why terminating life support, and allowing nature to run it's course, has anything to do with what we are talking about. Artificially extending life is not the same as terminating life, obviously.
 
Thunder said:
but if we both believe in discrimination against homo sapiens, why even bring it up?

seems rather pointless to bring up something that we both engage in.
Click to expand...

Because you are discriminating between two groups of humans. Are you not?
 
mac said:
I don't see a reason why terminating life support, and allowing nature to run it's course, has anything to do with what we are talking about....
Click to expand...

it strips a human being of the right to life.

and I take it from your attempt to disregard mentioning of it, that you support such practises.

again, this is an example of discrimination against homo sapiens that you support.

you believe that in certain circumstances, homo sapiens can be deprived of life..as do I.
 
mac said:
You answered your own question. The right to life of all humans should not be based on subjective criteria. The only objective fact is that they are human, all else is subjective and is prone to change. As it has so often in the past.
Click to expand...

Is your exclusion of other 'facts' pertinent to this matter objective?
 
A nothingness story.

Or a person could declare Michelle Obama profited from abortions when she was paid $250,000 a year to encourage African-American women to go to a clinic that arranged abortions.

The partisan desperation to try to find some shocker about Romney is of petty little minds.
 
joko104 said:
A nothingness story.

Or a person could declare Michelle Obama profited from abortions when she was paid $250,000 a year to encourage African-American women to go to a clinic that arranged abortions....
Click to expand...

we support abortion rights.

Conservatives don't. that's the issue here.
 
I don't think that's true of all conservatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom