aquapub
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 7,317
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- America (A.K.A., a red state)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
aquapub said:Echoing one of the most familiar idiotic assertions ever to become mainstreamed in American culture, a less than enlightened handful of pro-abortion hysterics disrupted a press conference of the anti-abortion group, "Concerned Women For America," (I think that name is correct) with fake blood splashed all over their pelvic regions chanting some mindless drivel about women getting hurt if abortion "rights" aren't protected.
The idiotic assertion is that we should keep abortion legal because, for this and only THIS would-be crime, we are going to care about the well-being of the assailant more than that of her victim. No other law works this way. You don't legalize bank robbery just because robbing banks the illegal way might get bank robbers hurt.
Logic, consistency, principle, direction....It all gets discarded when it gets in the way of what liberals want.
Engimo said:I understand what you are saying, but the undeniable fact of the matter is that abortion has existed in this country since its inception, and they will occur whether or not they are legal. When abortions are illegal, women who wanted them were forced to have them performed in unclean, dangerous ways that often got them killed or made them sick.
aquapub said:Logic, consistency, principle, direction....It all gets discarded when it gets in the way of what liberals want.
Felicity said:Or maybe they'll decide not to have one...Or maybe they will be more careful about when and with whom they have sex. Or maybe a little bit of "personal responsibiltiy" will seep back into our society.... Just an alternative.
I'd say a woman is more personally responsible for her situation of "getting pregnant" than the fetus is for being conceived.
Numbers of dead babies, man--it's the numbers! 4,000 abortions A DAY!!!! 48 MILLION since Roe-v-Wade! So wrong!Engimo said:Except we have history that shows us that this doesn't happen. Abortions will occur, legal or otherwise, it's simply inevitable.
Felicity said:Numbers of dead babies, man--it's the numbers! 4,000 abortions A DAY!!!! 48 MILLION since Roe-v-Wade! So wrong!
And that's the point--bank robberies happen too...even though it's illegal...does that mean it was wrong to make a law that says bank robbing is illegal..no.Engimo said:*shrug* I don't consider fetuses to be children, but that was not the point I was making.
All I am saying is that abortions are going to happen - regardless of whether or not they are legal.
Felicity said:And that's the point--bank robberies happen too...even though it's illegal...does that mean it was wrong to make a law that says bank robbing is illegal..no.
I grow tired of your pubescent jabs. You are nearly a woman--start acting like one.vergiss said:Stupidest analogy I've heard in a long time.
Felicity said:I grow tired of your pubescent jabs. You are nearly a woman--start acting like one.
vergiss said:I have an excuse for my stupidity. :lol:
Felicity said:I grow tired of your pubescent jabs. You are nearly a woman--start acting like one.
RightatNYU said:Mod Mode
And the age of people matters in this debate because.....?
Let's stay focused on relevant topics, like the one above.
/Mod Mode
Felicity said:What is this?
I suggest someone "grow up" and I get "mod mode"??? I have been called a "scumbag liar" here and no "mod mode" popped up...(not by vergiss by the way). Relevant to this particular thread and what prompted my response that you quote above--the opinion of an analogy being "stupid" is as relevant as the opinion that the opinion of the analogy is pubescent but you have no comment about that?:roll:
I'd be reporting steen every other post. :roll:RightatNYU said:There's a difference between calling an analogy stupid and attacking a person because of their age. One is making an argument, albeit not in the most appropriate manner, whereas the other is not furthering anything but a pointless argument.
And as to your complaint, we highly encourage you to report any post which you feel is attacking you in the manner you mentioned. In the lower left corner of each post there's a triangle you can click to report any bad posts to the mods so we can deal with it. Try as we might, we don't see all bad posts, and if we don't see it, we can't handle it. So don't take our failure to act as a tacit approval of the attack made on you.:2wave:
I see the distinction the mod pointed out between calling a THING stupid and calling a PERSON immature. (although technically, I was calling your "jab" pubescentvergiss said:Calling someone a liar or stupid is an insult, and thus not entirely appropriate, but is not a personal attack.
Felicity said:I see the distinction the mod pointed out between calling a THING stupid and calling a PERSON immature. (although technically, I was calling your "jab" pubescent) If you are defending steen--he calls PEOPLE liars (and all sorts of other stuff) without evidence (and every other post) and point blank called me and JP Freeman "scumbags". So your statement above is wrong. Calling a "person" a liar or stupid is in fact "person"al attack.
Okay...that's really a difference...thanks for clearing that up for me.:lol:vergiss said:No, dear. A personal attack is an attack which makes reference to something specific about that individual.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?