• 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!

On the Fourth of July

SmokeAndMirrors said:
I hear ya. I do.

But I think the inflammatory nature of of it -- the whole "you people should feel lucky you're even allowed to speak" attitude -- deserves addressing. We have a right to speak out for women 365 days a year.
Click to expand...

But I would say addressing the inflammatory nature of it would be in condemning the use of something like the 4th of July to make a cheap political point, instead of engaging in the very debate she intended and fueling the fire.


**** why do I ever come to this sub....
 
the_recruit said:
But I would say addressing the inflammatory nature of it would be in condemning the use of something like the 4th of July to make a cheap political point, instead of engaging in the very debate she intended and fueling the fire.

**** why do I ever come to this sub....
Click to expand...

Well, to my thinking, the day of the year matters naught, and where it is still subject to public opinion whether women are people, it matters even less. Some "independence day," in a culture where we still debate whether women are people. Particularly to someone who would automatically association Independence Day with abortion, as the OP did.

I respond to attacks on women's right to speak, and this is one. The day of the year doesn't make it less of an obligation.

Why do you come here? Couldn't tell ya. But I can tell you why I do: there are few other areas where the autonomy of a person is in question.
 
choiceone said:
When you finally figure out that the last line is the key to the message: honor is sacred and lives are not, and you can't have honor if you don't have liberty.
Click to expand...

It's our duty to make the government protect human rights.

These guys risked their lives for liberty. Meanwhile, you're out there trying to destroy other people's liberty
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. You don't have the liberty to steal or rape or kill or ... or... Whenever you do, the government isn't doing its job and it is being destructive of those ends.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I think that was kinda thwarted by posting it in the abortion forum and calling pro-choice protesters "nasty." Maybe it's just me...
Click to expand...

Actually the OP said "nasty signs."

But since I've seen more of these signs, especially the one with the 10 year old holding a sign about ****ing, then we can most assuredly extend that to the people themselves.

That kid's mother is scum, period. No class whatsoever. A sad sack excuse of a human being. There's always been a bit of disdain and derision for Austin and UT students but I don't think I've ever seen reasonable cause to hold them in this low of esteem.
 
JayDubya said:
You don't have the liberty to steal or rape or kill or ... or...
Click to expand...

Then an embryo or fetus does not have the liberty to steal a woman's blood nutrients or oxygen or to use some of her tissue to make its placenta or to keep its body parts inside her sex organs without her consent.
 
choiceone said:
Then an embryo or fetus does not have the liberty to steal a woman's blood nutrients or oxygen or to use some of her tissue to make its placenta or to keep its body parts inside her sex organs without her consent.
Click to expand...
Yes it does, because it only exists because of acts of the woman.
 
choiceone said:
Then an embryo or fetus does not have the liberty to steal a woman's blood nutrients...
Click to expand...

Parents have an obligation to provide for their kids.

There is no such theft. And in any event, since you're so big on legality, the act of getting nutrition from one's mother is not a crime and is not classified as theft.

After your posts I hasten to remind you of such, lest you start to think you should grab a suckling infant and dash its head to protect its mother from "robbery" or "rape" or something.
 
CRUE CAB said:
So you are proud to live in a nation where the unborn are thought so little of?
Click to expand...

Like most pro-birthers...you talk as though a conception is virtually, if not completely, a divine act. As though god is creating biological vessels to transplant souls that he, she, or it created. Is this your beliefs about a conception?

What is so extremely important to you personally...about a conception in Kansas, London, Sydney, Tokyo, etc...?

What do these "human lives" as you refer to (a zygote, embryo, fetus)...really and truly mean to you that you are "passionate about them"?

I've stated this before to you, but let me do it again. "MOST" conceptions are brought to full-term. And those that are not...isn't about the lack of care about a early stage conception...as it is way more related to so many reasons and impacts that they have on those who conceive....WHICH YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE.

And in the U.S. 61% of abortions occur during the first 9 weeks, which means that the development of that conception is about the size of a kidney bean or less. The balance of the MAJORITY of abortion or performed in 12 weeks or less. These stages of development does not allow the fetus to have the physical elements to have a anything other than a very, very primitive brain, nor can it feel pain, or have any ability to be self-aware.

These abortions 20 weeks and up amount to 1.5% due to a defective fetus or that the woman's health or life is in jeopardy.

You act as though all abortions are performed on a fetus that is so developed that it has physical and mental characteristics of nearly a born child. That is simply not the truth. And this ongoing lie from pro-birth that most abortions are merely for birth control or on demand is NONSENSE.

Stop talking nonsense and start producing facts.

And by the way...you have no clue as to the consequences to humanity has all of the conceptions that were aborted would have yielded...had they been born. It's impossible to know those outcome. And there's no way to know how many would have naturally aborted....and if you think god is in control...that god may well have intervened by encouraging such abortions...for god's reasons.

You simply don't have the intellect to know all of these things...and nobody does.
 
Last edited:
the_recruit said:
To make it an abortion thread. Which I don't like.
Click to expand...

Change the channel...go to a different thread...turn off your computer. No forum or thread is created based on whether or not you personally like it.
 
CRUE CAB said:
So you are proud to live in a nation where the unborn are thought so little of?
Click to expand...

I am proud to live in a nation that allows women to make medical decisions in consultation with their doctors without the govt. interfering.
 
Superfly said:
Meh. You might have an argument if there was no such thing as birth control. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I do have an argument. BC is irrelevant to my argument. BTW, in case you didn't know, all contraception has a failure rate.
 
Scrabaholic said:
I do have an argument. BC is irrelevant to my argument. BTW, in case you didn't know, all contraception has a failure rate.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be irrelevant. A simple matter of taking 1 pill a day gives you a 99% chance that you won't have to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
 
Superfly said:
It shouldn't be irrelevant. A simple matter of taking 1 pill a day gives you a 99% chance that you won't have to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
Click to expand...

Not everyone can take the pill, including myself. There's a list of contraindications.

And 99 isn't 100, is it?
 
JayDubya said:
Parents have an obligation to provide for their kids.

There is no such theft. And in any event, since you're so big on legality, the act of getting nutrition from one's mother is not a crime and is not classified as theft.

After your posts I hasten to remind you of such, lest you start to think you should grab a suckling infant and dash its head to protect its mother from "robbery" or "rape" or something.
Click to expand...

A woman is not legally a mother until she gives birth. Hence, the unborn getting nutrition from the woman without her expressed consent is in fact doing something that can be legally classified as theft.

And FYI, there is no suckling infant that its own legal mother cannot take away from her breast and put down into its crib and provide formula in a bottle instead, and there is no biomother that cannot give up her suckling infant for adoption and thereby end her status as someone from whom the infant can legally take nutrients without asking beforehand..
 
Scrabaholic said:
Not everyone can take the pill, including myself. There's a list of contraindications.

And 99 isn't 100, is it?
Click to expand...

Right, Scrab. If a couple uses 99% effective bc and never makes a mistake, if they have sex on average once a week, which is well below the average for couples in their first several years, the chances are that they will get pregnant before the second year is up.
 
choiceone said:
A woman is not legally a mother until she gives birth.
Click to expand...

Objectively, scientifically, a mother is a mother before she gives birth. I'm not surprised to see you making comments that are at odds with reality.
 
JayDubya said:
Objectively, scientifically, a mother is a mother before she gives birth. I'm not surprised to see you making comments that are at odds with reality.
Click to expand...

You can repeat that a million times, but to your fellow English speakers whose dialect includes such expressions as "mother-to-be," "prospective mother," and "I'm going to have a baby," your remark will remain hilarious.
 
choiceone said:
You can repeat that a million times, but to your fellow English speakers whose dialect includes such expressions as "mother-to-be," "prospective mother," and "I'm going to have a baby," your remark will remain hilarious.
Click to expand...

You can laugh at your own lack of education if you want; point in fact, it wouldn't surprise me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom