VP Pence to speak at March for Life tomorrow (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 18, 2024, 12:43:42 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  VP Pence to speak at March for Life tomorrow (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: VP Pence to speak at March for Life tomorrow  (Read 1163 times)
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,234
Georgia


« on: January 26, 2017, 10:26:45 PM »

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.
Logged
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,234
Georgia


« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2017, 11:21:04 PM »

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.

Where did you get this (or did you come up with it)?  Also, permission to put this in my signature?

You have my permission.

I made it up but it was based on common arguments for keeping abortion legal (many of which are used regularly on this forum).
Logged
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,234
Georgia


« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2017, 08:48:37 PM »

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.

Except do you have an analogy for someone who rapes a woman or if the abortion would save the life of the mother if the infant can't be saved? I didn't think so.

In the case of rape I still support the right to life.  The child should not be killed for the crimes of the father.

In the case of abortion to save the life of the mother, in that extremely rare circumstance it is justified.
Logged
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,234
Georgia


« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2017, 08:50:47 PM »

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.

Lumps of flesh that literally can't think are apparently equivalent to people. But of course its okay to drive an actual person to suicide because they're trans and you refuse to accept that they're real.

Well, at what point does the fetus magically cross the line into humanity?  Also, I've never condoned bullying transgender people, so I fail to see why you brought it up.
Logged
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,234
Georgia


« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2017, 09:33:14 PM »

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.

Lumps of flesh that literally can't think are apparently equivalent to people. But of course its okay to drive an actual person to suicide because they're trans and you refuse to accept that they're real.

Well, at what point does the fetus magically cross the line into humanity?  

http://www.lemauricien.com/article/abortion-fact-fiction-and-humanity

About 24 weeks is when any form of though begins.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

People like you tend to believe that kind of thing...

I don't think that thought is a good determinant of life.  For instance, people in comas are not denied their humanity.  Nor do we deny the humanity of people with dimensia.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.034 seconds with 12 queries.