• 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.

Pro-lifers are blasphemers

blogger31 said:
I'm sorry you are right I was not accurate in that post. You would have despised the folks for saying that because now their daughters won't put out for you. Well if those are not lame excuses, what stops someone from using those excuses after the child is born.
I was making a joke about when I was 17, cause if you know a 17 year old guy, and he's presented with a situation where he could've gotten laid, but he got **** blocked by anyone, he despises them. Develop a sense of humor, you'll live longer.
NEWS FLASH! NEWS FLASH! This just in....doctors have learned that anything living, that is killed ceases development. More to come as this story develops.:shock:
But humans can survive air. This thing ceases to develop because of air. That's not alive as far as I'm concerned.
So just for the actor and actors, as long as they are the only ones getting hurt? So rape is cool then as long as it is behind closed doors. I mean the woman is an actress in the rape, albeit not willing. We could apply that standard to child abuse and spouse abuse. I mean again we have an actor, albeit unwilling I am sure. Of course you are right let's not get on that guy in LA for doing heroin, I mean he only has kids that see it, are exposed to his habit, and are having their childhood's ruined by it, but it's in his home and it is really none of our business is it.
Alright, the first two are bullshit analogies, and I really hope you know it, because if not you're just not smart. By actor and actors, I mean like if one dude is doing heroin, or if two people are doing heroin. A woman is not a participant in the rape, she's a victim, and if you can't draw that line, I'm amazed you can find the floor from your bed.
As far as the kids go, there are lots of things parents can do that can ruin the kids's lives without them being illegal. You can call the kid a ******, or a bitch, or worthless, that's still legal, and that would still ruin the child's life. And doing heroin in front of your kids hurts your kids if used irresponsibly, and thus would merit losing ones kids, similarly to emotional abuse.
I really have difficulty believing that you're dumb enough to actually believe any of those were acurate interpretations of what I was saying.
Again, it all comes down to responsibility. In abortion there is another person being hurt whether you want to believe that or not.
That's a matter of opinion, do you understand that?
 
jamesrage said:
Why should I care?Because a pregnate teenager means mother who will be on welfare and food stamps sucking up tax payer dollars.
If she decides to murder the baby that means the tax payer more than likely will foot the bill for the government sanctioned murder.
Boo ****ing hoo, a half a cent of your money will half to go to help someone else. You know the vast majority of welfare goes to corporations, and yet here you are ******* and moaning about less money than it would take to get a piece of Bazooka Joe. You know the war has cost the average household $2,000, I don't see you ******* and moaning about Bush's irresponsibility in not checking out the intelligence (or more likely fixing the intelligence) because he wanted to kill people, but here you are, ******* and moaning about sex.
It really does sound like the words of someone who hasn't been laid (and REALLY REALLY needs to).
 
galenrox said:
Man, if all the 17 year old girls I knew in high school had folks telling them to close they're legs I would've DESPISED THEM ALL!
Like, I really don't see why all of you have such a problem with sex? I really can't figure out why anyone would have a problem with it! I mean, it's a good time, it's something to do, why not?
Here are my theories on why you all hate sex so much:
1)Can't get laid, pissed off that other people can
2)Bible says it's bad, cause Jesus honestly cares SO MUCH about what I do with my dick

I really just don't get it! She's got a boyfriend, it's not like she's ****ing random dudes at truck stops, she's having sex with her boyfriend, and I'll tell you what, that's a lot more responsible than I was when I started having sex! But even if she was, so what? Why should you care, I mean, in the ****ing least bit, what makes you think that what goes on in someone else's bedroom/car/bathroom/kitchen/living room/hallway/front porch/elevator, or inside someone else's uterus is AT ALL your business?
Well spoken. With all of the conviction of a mangy mongrel in heat.
:lol:
 
galenrox said:
I was making a joke about when I was 17, cause if you know a 17 year old guy, and he's presented with a situation where he could've gotten laid, but he got **** blocked by anyone, he despises them. Develop a sense of humor, you'll live longer.

But humans can survive air. This thing ceases to develop because of air. That's not alive as far as I'm concerned.

Alright, the first two are bullshit analogies, and I really hope you know it, because if not you're just not smart. By actor and actors, I mean like if one dude is doing heroin, or if two people are doing heroin. A woman is not a participant in the rape, she's a victim, and if you can't draw that line, I'm amazed you can find the floor from your bed.
As far as the kids go, there are lots of things parents can do that can ruin the kids's lives without them being illegal. You can call the kid a ******, or a bitch, or worthless, that's still legal, and that would still ruin the child's life. And doing heroin in front of your kids hurts your kids if used irresponsibly, and thus would merit losing ones kids, similarly to emotional abuse.
I really have difficulty believing that you're dumb enough to actually believe any of those were acurate interpretations of what I was saying.

That's a matter of opinion, do you understand that?

That's strange before you got all defensive because I was inaccurate, there was no mention of a joke then. It appears we have a story change here.

Air is deadly?

Hey you said actors, a child is an actor in abuse, only an unwilling one. Now that you speak of it I can't find the floor from my bed I have been in this bed my whole life.:roll:

Oh I see so since there are other ways to ruin a kids life, why not throw one more into the mix. I think I covered most of my thoughts on this on the other thread.

That another human is being hurt during an abortion? No my friend that is what we in the real world call a fact. The only thing that is opinion is whether the human being hurt is allowed protection. But hey you are from Iowa I will let you slide on that one.
 
Boo ****ing hoo, a half a cent of your money will half to go to help someone else. You know the vast majority of welfare goes to corporations, and yet here you are ******* and moaning about less money than it would take to get a piece of Bazooka Joe. You know the war has cost the average household $2,000, I don't see you ******* and moaning about Bush's irresponsibility in not checking out the intelligence (or more likely fixing the intelligence) because he wanted to kill people, but here you are, ******* and moaning about sex.
It really does sound like the words of someone who hasn't been laid (and REALLY REALLY needs to).


Just like a scumbag liberal wanting to divert any attention away from the topic.
Did they teach you that in debate 101,if someone beleaves that personal restraint should be exercised accuse them of not getting any?"(oh **** he is not agreeing with)HE'S NOT GETTING ANY!",grow the **** up and quit actiing like some spoiled littlle brat who can not get his way.

The topic of this thread is abortion,not wether or not you agree or disagree with Bush's policies,remember not everyone is a scumbag liberal like you.
If you want to bash Bush, then open another thread,you can make all the retarded accusations that you want in that thread.

By the way you kiss your mother with that mouth or did you dad just beat the living snot out of you every day?(I know how to get off topic too)
 
How about a brief respite to regain some decorum in this thread.

Name the author of the following quote and win a salute from me:

"While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized – the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

"On the question of the individual's freedom of choice there are easily available birth-control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire. ...

"When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception."
 
Fantasea said:
How about a brief respite to regain some decorum in this thread.

Name the author of the following quote and win a salute from me:

"While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized – the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

"On the question of the individual's freedom of choice there are easily available birth-control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire. ...

"When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception."


Amazingly enough - Ted Kennedy
 
Fantasea said:
How about a brief respite to regain some decorum in this thread.

Name the author of the following quote and win a salute from me:

"While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized – the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

"On the question of the individual's freedom of choice there are easily available birth-control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire. ...

"When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception."

Barney Rubble?
 
jamesrage said:
Oh the stupid liberal tactic.


Who made you the spelling police?

Firstly, your sexual failure has nothing to do with my political leanings. You're not married, therefore if you were sexually satisfied you'd realise that you would not want your children being born everywhere. Secondly - simple coherance.
 
edb19 said:
Amazingly enough - Ted Kennedy
:good_job:

I salute you.​

However, Mr. Kennedy is not unique. A number of Democrats, Al Gore included, switched sides when it became both politically correct and expedient for Democrats to do so.

It is said that every man has his price. With ordinary men, the price is usually in dollars. With politicians who yearn to serve in perpetuity, the price is always in votes.

Just one more reason that term limits at the federal level makes sense.
 
Fantasea said:
:Just one more reason that term limits at the federal level makes sense.​


Term limits would be my dream come true. Of course, I'd also like to see serving in congress become a part time job (as it was at the beginning of the country) and congressional staffs cut. These men and women need to live in the real world :2brickwal

Once can always hope.
 
vergiss said:
:lol: Someone's sexually frustrated and bitter.

It's "pregnant", by the way.

:naughty Here you go again, do we need to post all your mistakes as well. You are not exactly immune to typos now are you?
 
blogger31 said:
:naughty Here you go again, do we need to post all your mistakes as well. You are not exactly immune to typos now are you?

As I said: there are accidental mistakes (such as a finger slipping and putting a "c" where there should be a "v") which are genuine typos - and then there is willful ignorance (such as "u" to mean "you", or "pregnate" to mean "pregnant").

Sheesh, just because I want to improve people's literacy skills and stop them from raping the English language.
 
vergiss said:
As I said: there are accidental mistakes (such as a finger slipping and putting a "c" where there should be a "v") which are genuine typos - and then there is willful ignorance (such as "u" to mean "you", or "pregnate" to mean "pregnant").

Sheesh, just because I want to improve people's literacy skills and stop them from raping the English language.

OH I see your mistakes are accidents while everyone else is just plain stupid eh?:roll: Your mistakes are only typos and everyone else just doesn't have the mastery of the language that you do. :rofl
 
blogger31 said:
OH I see your mistakes are accidents while everyone else is just plain stupid eh?:roll: Your mistakes are only typos and everyone else just doesn't have the mastery of the language that you do. :rofl

What, so if I were to talk all OMG lyk dis!!11!!! you wouldn't see anything wrong with it? :lol:
 
blogger31 said:
That's strange before you got all defensive because I was inaccurate, there was no mention of a joke then. It appears we have a story change here.
Me mentioning me when I wass 17 and wanting sex, if you don't see the humor, you must lead a fairly misearble life.
Air is deadly?
Fetuses (fetii?) cease to develop once subjected to air. That's not life in my opinion.
Hey you said actors, a child is an actor in abuse, only an unwilling one. Now that you speak of it I can't find the floor from my bed I have been in this bed my whole life.:roll:
I don't really get what you're getting at here.
Oh I see so since there are other ways to ruin a kids life, why not throw one more into the mix. I think I covered most of my thoughts on this on the other thread.
No, I'm saying that just because some people might misuse something doesn't justify saying no one else can use it. I don't have any kids. None of my friends have any kids. Why shouldn't they be allowed to use these substances?
That another human is being hurt during an abortion? No my friend that is what we in the real world call a fact. The only thing that is opinion is whether the human being hurt is allowed protection. But hey you are from Iowa I will let you slide on that one.
You in the real world where you don't need science, you just need religious belief to form fact? I don't know if you've looked up on things recently, but as far as fetuses go there's a thing called viability, after which abortions are now illegal. This would of course leave a time called previability, before the fetus can continue to develop outside of its mother's womb. At that point it is not considered a human and not considered alive, legally speaking, at that is also my personal belief, and many others's personal beliefs.
And you know that over half the nation is pro-choice according to US News and World Report (I'm pretty sure, I'll check it out), so thus you are the one in a minority fringe group on this, while we in the real world consider science to be important instead of emotional boo hooing.
 
Dear Perry:
I recognize that you may not be aware of all of the writings of the Apostles. You state that the Bible does not deal directly with abortion, that is correct. However, when were the books of the Bible established? Were they established by the Apostles? I realize that being uneducacted you may not recognize that the Apostles did not establish the books of the Bible and it was not until 325 at the Synod of Carthage that the Books were first discussed as to what should be in the Bible. This was confirmed in 381 by the Bishops of the Church. Yet, the Apostles did write against abortion in the didache in approxiamtely 50 to 60ad, when the Church moved from Jerusalem to Antioch. It dealt with it directly and not in a round about way. Chapter two verse two is my point of reference in the Didache. That is why oppostion to abortion goes back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church today says in section 2272 of the Catechism "Cooperation with abortion is automatic excommunication.." So recognize that the Apostles wrote against abortion and the Church today opposes abortion. You see one can not advocate, support abortion and be a Christian. One in short has already walked away from Christ. I hope that you can recognize that by being a proabortion advocate you are not a Christian. This is the teaching of the Apostles and the Church.
 
ScottMarian said:
Dear Perry:
I recognize that you may not be aware of all of the writings of the Apostles. You state that the Bible does not deal directly with abortion, that is correct. However, when were the books of the Bible established? Were they established by the Apostles? I realize that being uneducacted you may not recognize that the Apostles did not establish the books of the Bible and it was not until 325 at the Synod of Carthage that the Books were first discussed as to what should be in the Bible. This was confirmed in 381 by the Bishops of the Church. Yet, the Apostles did write against abortion in the didache in approxiamtely 50 to 60ad, when the Church moved from Jerusalem to Antioch. It dealt with it directly and not in a round about way. Chapter two verse two is my point of reference in the Didache. That is why oppostion to abortion goes back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church today says in section 2272 of the Catechism "Cooperation with abortion is automatic excommunication.." So recognize that the Apostles wrote against abortion and the Church today opposes abortion. You see one can not advocate, support abortion and be a Christian. One in short has already walked away from Christ. I hope that you can recognize that by being a proabortion advocate you are not a Christian. This is the teaching of the Apostles and the Church.


Very well said, I would have to agree that being a proabortion advocate that you are not a Christian. Not trying to get too religious on you here, but the main facet of Christianity is faith and by having an abortion you are showing no faith at all.
 
ScottMarian said:
Dear Perry:
I recognize that you may not be aware of all of the writings of the Apostles. You state that the Bible does not deal directly with abortion, that is correct. However, when were the books of the Bible established? Were they established by the Apostles? I realize that being uneducacted you may not recognize that the Apostles did not establish the books of the Bible and it was not until 325 at the Synod of Carthage that the Books were first discussed as to what should be in the Bible. This was confirmed in 381 by the Bishops of the Church. Yet, the Apostles did write against abortion in the didache in approxiamtely 50 to 60ad, when the Church moved from Jerusalem to Antioch. It dealt with it directly and not in a round about way. Chapter two verse two is my point of reference in the Didache. That is why oppostion to abortion goes back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church today says in section 2272 of the Catechism "Cooperation with abortion is automatic excommunication.." So recognize that the Apostles wrote against abortion and the Church today opposes abortion. You see one can not advocate, support abortion and be a Christian. One in short has already walked away from Christ. I hope that you can recognize that by being a proabortion advocate you are not a Christian. This is the teaching of the Apostles and the Church.
Welcome aboard.

I do not disagree with a single word you wrote. However, my experience has been that abortion cannot be discussed on religious grounds because the point of the discussion moves rapidly from the subject of abortion to the subject of religion and accusations of forcing one's religious beliefs on another.

I much prefer to discuss abortion on the basis of scientific and medical fact. Human life is a well documented biological process which begins at conception. The abortion advocates cannot rebut that kind of argument. They are limited to opinions based upon emotion or concerns of privacy.
 
galenrox said:
Fetuses (fetii?) cease to develop once subjected to air. That's not life in my opinion.
Is there any foundation for your opinion? If so, what is it. If there is no foundation, what validates your opinion in the face of the research findings of biologists, scientists, fetologists, genetecists, and other professionals which completely disagrees with you?
You in the real world where you don't need science, you just need religious belief to form fact? I don't know if you've looked up on things recently, but as far as fetuses go there's a thing called viability, after which abortions are now illegal.
This statement is incorrect. In the US, an abortion on demand may performed at any time up to the moment of natural birth. There is absolutely no time, or other restraint. You may wish to do a google search on the words 'partial birth abortion'.
This would of course leave a time called previability, before the fetus can continue to develop outside of its mother's womb. At that point it is not considered a human and not considered alive, legally speaking, at that is also my personal belief, and many others's personal beliefs.
Considered is simply another word for "opinion". Where is the fact? You use the expression, "my personal belief". Again, where is the fact?
And you know that over half the nation is pro-choice according to US News and World Report (I'm pretty sure, I'll check it out), so thus you are the one in a minority fringe group on this,
And every four years, about half of the nation turns out to be on the wrong side of an election; so what does the opinion or belief of half the population prove?
while we in the real world consider science to be important instead of emotional boo hooing.
Since you say you have science on your side, kindly lay out your scientific proof which justifies the aborting of nearly fifty million children since Roe v. Wade.

If you are unable to furnish scientific proof, then you will be stuck with plain, old, unfounded personal opinion, won't you?
 
ScottMarian said:
Dear Perry:
I recognize that you may not be aware of all of the writings of the Apostles. You state that the Bible does not deal directly with abortion, that is correct. However, when were the books of the Bible established? Were they established by the Apostles? I realize that being uneducacted you may not recognize that the Apostles did not establish the books of the Bible and it was not until 325 at the Synod of Carthage that the Books were first discussed as to what should be in the Bible. This was confirmed in 381 by the Bishops of the Church. Yet, the Apostles did write against abortion in the didache in approxiamtely 50 to 60ad, when the Church moved from Jerusalem to Antioch. It dealt with it directly and not in a round about way. Chapter two verse two is my point of reference in the Didache. That is why oppostion to abortion goes back to the Apostles and the Catholic Church today says in section 2272 of the Catechism "Cooperation with abortion is automatic excommunication.." So recognize that the Apostles wrote against abortion and the Church today opposes abortion. You see one can not advocate, support abortion and be a Christian. One in short has already walked away from Christ. I hope that you can recognize that by being a proabortion advocate you are not a Christian. This is the teaching of the Apostles and the Church.

Sheesh, don't worry about leaving judgement up to God himself. No, obviously what you and your obscure Catholic dogma decides must be fact. Frankly, I'm sure God would find it rather insulting that you dare try and be him.

Felt up any choirboys lately?
 
Vergiss:
You are correct in that I should not have quoted the catechism but rather the magisterium which predates any denomination. The Catechism is derived from the magisterium. Yet, quoting the Apostles and the magisterium should not make you think that I am judging but rather what Christianity has taught for two thousand years. Yes, I realize that within the last one hundred to two hundred years we have seen an explosion of cults that make up baloney as they go along and the uneducated do believe anything that sounds good.
One can certainly find a modern day cult that says killing of a baby through abortion is an acceptable behavior, while still pretending that you can be a Christian. Yet there will be eternal consequences to that decision. Vergiss I really do not care what your lack of education is but realize being stupid is not a get out of hell free card. Philippians 2:12.

Again, vergiss your last comment of touching an altar boy well we do have a problem in that we have ordained men to the Priesthood who never should have been ordained. My sin on the area? Well lets see. I once kissed my grandfather when my mother made me. Yet, other than that I have no sin in that area. No you resort to insults in that you realize you have no logical argument and are incapable of presenting any rational rebuttal.
 
Not stupid - Jewish. So shut the hell up.
 
Vergiss
Your response just indicates that the Jewish people are not completely void of uneducated idiots. So go get your high school degree and pretend that you have half a brain.
 
Back
Top Bottom