• 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!

Why Aren't We Celebrating This?

Misterveritis said:
Should it be?
Click to expand...

That is the dilema. At the heart of this issue are two seperate Rights and if one of those Rights even exist. You must first answer if the unborn have a Right to life from the moment of conception. Then you must decide who's Rights supersede the other's Right if the unborn is determined to have the Right to live.
 
Mason66 said:
I read what you said and that is what you said. Go back and read what you posted.

You post a lot of words with very Little meaning in all of your posts. You can keep your name calling and your superiority complex to yourself, if that is possible.
Click to expand...

So you are either a liar or illiterate. Either way you are completely wrong.
 
ChezC3 said:
No, I thought I lived in a world where childhood ends and people mature into adults.
Click to expand...


You think a lot of things that are not reality. Just because you think something should be a certain way does not make it reality.
ChezC3 said:
But, people want to be treated like children forever.
Click to expand...

No one said that. Even children do not want to be treated like children. No you are just spouting against reality. Some people are just not ready financially, mentally, or willingly to have a child. Our purpose in life is not procreation despite your confused and warped view that is all we are good for. You want the government to start telling those people to procreate and you make many problems. The people who cannot afford a child are not going to just magically get extra money with the child, and in a capitalist society where there are mopre people than jobs that can afford children you are pretty much making problems. If the people are not mentally prepared for the responsibility of having a child then they should not have one simply because you think they are just baby machines. If they do not want a child your views that it is all they are good for really are just going to lead to things like resentment and abuse of the child. People are perfectly capable of being meaningful parts of society, living good and fullfilled lives, and being happy without children even though you seem to feel that is not possible.

Like I said, just because you think it is so does not make it so. If one wants to think of an immature attitude it is thinking that their belief is reality despite clear evidence it is not, and jumping into something like parenthood because of some stupid holiday without thinking of the actual consequences. Those are childish and irresponsible points of view, and it seems you may be projecting. It is a problem you share with many neocons despite your insistence you are not one. I am just looking at reality here.

ChezC3 said:
It's no wonder nanny state is here to wipe your ass for you, you've shown you aren't capable of handling these types of important responsibilities yourselves.
Click to expand...

And you still claim you are not a neocon while spouting their lines like clockwork even when they do not apply.
 
tererun said:
You think a lot of things that are not reality. Just because you think something should be a certain way does not make it reality.
Click to expand...

Oh but it does, you can remain as a proponent of those weak in will and low in character, that's your reality, revel in it...

No one said that. Even children do not want to be treated like children. No you are just spouting against reality. Some people are just not ready financially, mentally, or willingly to have a child. Our purpose in life is not procreation despite your confused and warped view that is all we are good for. You want the government to start telling those people to procreate and you make many problems. The people who cannot afford a child are not going to just magically get extra money with the child, and in a capitalist society where there are mopre people than jobs that can afford children you are pretty much making problems. If the people are not mentally prepared for the responsibility of having a child then they should not have one simply because you think they are just baby machines. If they do not want a child your views that it is all they are good for really are just going to lead to things like resentment and abuse of the child. People are perfectly capable of being meaningful parts of society, living good and fullfilled lives, and being happy without children even though you seem to feel that is not possible.
Click to expand...

You're not grasping a simple concept, it's called self control, I can see you want to wallow in the mire like pigs in heat, not respecting yourself nor others, but other seek to push us past the guttural stages of development.
Like I said, just because you think it is so does not make it so. If one wants to think of an immature attitude it is thinking that their belief is reality despite clear evidence it is not, and jumping into something like parenthood because of some stupid holiday without thinking of the actual consequences. Those are childish and irresponsible points of view, and it seems you may be projecting. It is a problem you share with many neocons despite your insistence you are not one. I am just looking at reality here.
Click to expand...

The immature attitude is to make excuses for poor decision making. You're far removed from reality, I hate to tell you...


And you still claim you are not a neocon while spouting their lines like clockwork even when they do not apply.
Click to expand...

I'm not. No matter how many times you say it...:neener
 
hah abortion has NOTHING to do with having kids
The Russians are right, while we destroy the family
and the Chinese limit most couples to one child policy
they know the only way to win is to be around tomorrow!

Go Rooskie's!
 
ChezC3 said:
So you're a bachelor I take it...;)
Click to expand...

Yes. But if I were married I would get sex too, especially if I have a wife at her sexual peak. You see, you have to get a freaky wife that likes to do it. Have morning sex, lunch break sex, then going to bed sex. Why lose out on money when you can improvise on obtaining this goal and making money at the same time?!
 
ChezC3 said:
No, it's copping out.

It's not open to debate, it is a cold, hard, scientific fact. Want me to end it now for you? None of us would be here today unless someone allowed us to live pass the time that others want to pretend we weren't alive.

Then women shouldn't be giving out her body carte blanche unless she's ready to accept the consequences with her partner...
Click to expand...

So because you don't like having to defend your own asinine remarks, it's "not open to debate"? Who on earth do you think you are, dude? :lol:

What makes you think I believe I was entitled to my mother's body? I don't. I care not in the least if I had never existed. I mean, even if I wanted to, how could I possibly? Do you read the stuff you write?

Ah, yes, the old standard: any woman who has sex is simply a slut and deserve to have her body harmed and used by force of law.

Say it with me, everyone:

And this is why I don't believe them when anti-choicers say they care about women.
 
Last edited:
SmokeAndMirrors said:
So because you don't like it, it's "not open to debate"? Who on earth do you think you are, dude? :lol:
Click to expand...

I'm C3, nice to meet ya! :2wave: It's not open for debate because it is irrefutable.

What makes you think I believe I was entitled to my mother's body? I don't. I care not in the least if I had never existed. I mean, even if I wanted to, how could I possibly? Do you read the stuff you write?
Click to expand...

I was just about to ask you that very same question.
Ah, yes, the old standard: any woman who has sex is simply a slut and deserve to have her body harmed and used by force of law.

Say it with me, everyone:

And this is why I don't believe them when anti-choicers say they care about women.
Click to expand...

I know, respecting women and asking them to respect themselves to not objectify women and show them they don't have to objectify themselves, that is soooooooooo wrong of me...:roll:

You wanna be a hussy? Fine, you don't have to kill anyone to do it.
 
ChezC3 said:
I'm C3, nice to meet ya! :2wave: It's not open for debate because it is irrefutable.

I was just about to ask you that very same question.

I know, respecting women and asking them to respect themselves to not objectify women and show them they don't have to objectify themselves, that is soooooooooo wrong of me...:roll:

You wanna be a hussy? Fine, you don't have to kill anyone to do it.
Click to expand...

Apparently not, because here I am refuting it, and you haven't been able to come back at me with ANYTHING except to simply repeat that it's "irrefutable." :lol:

Yup, women who have sex (so, you know, basically all women) are hussies. The anti-choice really care about women and children. And I have a bridge to sell you.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Apparently not, because here I am refuting it, and you haven't been able to come back at me with ANYTHING except to simply repeat that it's "irrefutable." :lol:
Click to expand...

:roll:

So, all of us are not here because someone let us live pass the point where others find it acceptable to take a life? You're really wanting to refute this? and how exactly are you refuting this? By saying "No"? WOW you really showed me...

Yup, women who have sex (so, you know, basically all women) are hussies. The anti-choice really care about women and children. And I have a bridge to sell you.
Click to expand...

Well, hello Aunt Sally...:2wave:
 
Kal'Stang said:
That is the dilemma. At the heart of this issue are two separate Rights and if one of those Rights even exist. You must first answer if the unborn have a Right to life from the moment of conception. Then you must decide who's Rights supersede the other's Right if the unborn is determined to have the Right to live.
Click to expand...
The right to life requires life. Defining it away does not change it. When rights must be balanced the legislatures are the right place for decisions to be made.
 
Misterveritis said:
The right to life requires life. Defining it away does not change it. When rights must be balanced the legislatures are the right place for decisions to be made.
Click to expand...

Bold: If it was that simple then we would all be vegetarians....or eating rocks? The question wasn't "what is life". The question was whether the unborn, from conception on, has the right to life. Simply being alive does not mean you have a right to life. If it was then we would not be able to kill animals as they too would have the Right to Life.

But in the abortion debate there is no "balance". There are either laws that allow abortion. Or there are none. In both cases someone's (assuming that the unborn have a right to life) Right will be fully violated.
 
ChezC3 said:
Skip work, have sex: Russians celebrate 'day of conception' as sporting community continues to criticise Putin's anti-gay legislation - Europe - World - The Independent

Why are we as a nation caught up in the culture of murdering the unborn rather than celebrating life?

America might have won the Cold War, but we're losing the cultural war miserably...
Click to expand...

So, is this thread about celebrating a day denoted in one Russian region for baby-making in light of Russia's demographic problems?

Is it lamenting we do not ourselves have any such day?

Is it bitching about abortion, seeing as you snuck in that part about murdering the unborn.

Is it about that completely unsavory legislation signed into law in Russia that holds people we be fined for "promoting" gay sex?
 
I missed the OP calling abortion "murder" well let me sidebar the statement about murder here.

I had sex with this female from school some three weeks ago. I didn't use a condom and of course you can assume the end result. I suggested or I should say we decided to use the 72 hour abortion pill.

So my question is she and I murders because we decided this?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Bold: If it was that simple then we would all be vegetarians....or eating rocks? The question wasn't "what is life". The question was whether the unborn, from conception on, has the right to life.
Click to expand...
For some people everything must be spelled out. Are you such a person?

Simply being alive does not mean you have a right to life.
Click to expand...
It seems you are. Every living thing has a right to life. I was referring to the subject of humans killing unborn humans. You cannot escape by defining an unborn human life away.

If it was then we would not be able to kill animals as they too would have the Right to Life.
Click to expand...
Every living thing has a right to life.

But in the abortion debate there is no "balance". There are either laws that allow abortion. Or there are none. In both cases someone's (assuming that the unborn have a right to life) Right will be fully violated.
Click to expand...
I see. All or nothing.

Have a nice day.
 
Hypersonic said:
I missed the OP calling abortion "murder" well let me sidebar the statement about murder here.
I had sex with this female from school some three weeks ago. I didn't use a condom and of course you can assume the end result. I suggested or I should say we decided to use the 72 hour abortion pill.

So my question is she and I murders because we decided this?
Click to expand...

What does your conscience tell you?
 
ChezC3 said:
I don't know what you call the premeditated taking of life where you come from, but here, it's Murder. 1st degree Murder.
Click to expand...

Gotta question how many children have you adopted? Or do you not give a **** about them after they are born. The thing I don't understand about pro lifers is they fact there are unwanted children that need to be adopted in this country and by in large people like you do nothing. At the very least I will give Bachmann some credit here her family at the very least walk the walk on the issue.
 
greengirl77 said:
Gotta question how many children have you adopted? Or do you not give a **** about them after they are born. The thing I don't understand about pro lifers is they fact there are unwanted children that need to be adopted in this country and by in large people like you do nothing. At the very least I will give Bachmann some credit here her family at the very least walk the walk on the issue.
Click to expand...

People like you ask a question and don't bother with a reply, you've already got your self righteous fingers of indignation wagging almost as fast as your gums are flapping...

Kill a kid hug a tree that's the Unthinking Left's motto...

hypocrites the lot of ya...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom