• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Planned Parenthood Attack

Of course not.

I do think that if there were facilities around the country legally slaughtering two-year-olds there would be widespread protests. People would interrupt their day-to-day lives in order to achieve a political end to such a slaughter. Furthermore they would support any policy which worked towards preventing the slaughter. Such a movement would be at a minimum on the scale of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.

The fact that there is no such widespread protest movement and the fact that many "pro-life" individuals continually oppose policies that would vastly reduce the number of abortions (i.e. comprehensive sex education and birth control) suggests that most people can recognize at least some difference between a fetus and a two-year-old child.

I think pro-life people are very sincere. I think so much so that they have done harm to their political party of choice and the electability of their candidates. For the most part, this group is not much of the protest march type. They are trying to work within the system. Many are single issue voters.

Personally, I think republicans would have better election chances if the term abortion was never uttered, but for many republicans it is the single most important issue. Just because they do not believe passing out condoms would help does not mean they are insincere.
 
This is a Presidential candidate folks. Not an anonymous internet poster. Say something crazy, get applause, get called on it, walk in back saying there's just not enough info yet, but I'm just saying....It's a circle of people trying to out crazy each other for PR and saying whatever they want, true or not. Cruz said it in a fairly demonstrative full response, yet a lot of the raw information isn't in yet, so we can't say anything definitively....there isn't enough information out there was his point? He fucking said it.....ugh

Seems like modern political rhetoric is struggling to adapt to the speed at which public information is shared.
 
I think pro-life people are very sincere. I think so much so that they have done harm to their political party of choice and the electability of their candidates. For the most part, this group is not much of the protest march type. They are trying to work within the system. Many are single issue voters.

Personally, I think republicans would have better election chances if the term abortion was never uttered, but for many republicans it is the single most important issue. Just because they do not believe passing out condoms would help does not mean they are insincere.

Insincere? No. But they're clearly not simply concerned with reducing the number of abortions.
 
I think pro-life people are very sincere. I think so much so that they have done harm to their political party of choice and the electability of their candidates. For the most part, this group is not much of the protest march type. They are trying to work within the system. Many are single issue voters.

Personally, I think republicans would have better election chances if the term abortion was never uttered, but for many republicans it is the single most important issue. Just because they do not believe passing out condoms would help does not mean they are insincere.

I just don't buy it. A small percentage are for sure. A much larger percentage may sincerely believe that life begins at conception but their actions (or lack thereof) suggest that at some level they don't truly understand what that belief means.
 
I just don't buy it. A small percentage are for sure. A much larger percentage may sincerely believe that life begins at conception but their actions (or lack thereof) suggest that at some level they don't truly understand what that belief means.

That's pretty condescending, no?
 
I think pro-life people are very sincere. I think so much so that they have done harm to their political party of choice and the electability of their candidates. For the most part, this group is not much of the protest march type. They are trying to work within the system. Many are single issue voters.

Personally, I think republicans would have better election chances if the term abortion was never uttered, but for many republicans it is the single most important issue. Just because they do not believe passing out condoms would help does not mean they are insincere.

No it just means they are stupid. FWIW I think most #prolife supporters believe that comprehensive sex education and easy access to birth control would drastically reduce the number of abortions. Maybe I am giving them too much credit.
 
What Democratic politician said that they wanted dead cops? Or even came close to that level of hateful rhetoric?


What are you even talking about?

Apparently THIS video is not to be believed. Dems have a very complicated relationship with Youtube videos.

In what world is that a response to my questions?


Are you high? Because you aren't making any god damn sense.


My post was addressed to someone else. There are things in the world that aren't about you. Yes, there is such a thing.


Your post quoted me. Not somebody else. If you misused the quote feature then that would help clear up my confusion.


198d4m.jpg
 
That's pretty condescending, no?

Perhaps. But the only three options I see are:

1. #pro-life supporters sincerely believe that life begins at conception and understand what that belief means but absent some gnashing of the teeth and backdoor attempts to restrict abortion seem to be ok letting a million people a year be slaughtered in their own backyard.

2. most #pro-life supporters hold a religious belief that life begins at conception but aren't really sure about it. They recognize that they feel differently about the murder of a 12 week old fetus than a 2-year old baby but can't really explain why. They support restrictions on abortion partly out of a sense of moral/religious duty and partly because they think women who get abortions are sexually irresponsible.

3. most #pro-life supporters sincerely believe that life begins at conception but have put zero thought into the logical consequences of such a belief. (Edit: FWIW I think this could be said about an equal number of #pro-choice supporters)

I suspect that it is some combination of #2 and #3 (with #2 being more prevalent, I hope).
 
Last edited:
It's not condescending to say it is stupid to believe that easier access to birth control would have no impact on the number of abortions.

So if you disagree with the allowed position on the issue of abortion, you are either a) stupid, b) a murderer by proxy or c) both. #nuanced
 
Dear DV7,

Did you have a problem with the original statement of MysteryMen? Did you notice any limitation to "politicians" in his allegation?

Thanks,

jhmd2000
 
i've yet to understand why y'all still get wrapped up arguing with jh and junebug

they have no interest in anything other than #lawyering and #trolling

Seriously.
 
So if you disagree with the allowed position on the issue of abortion, you are either a) stupid, b) a murderer by proxy or c) both. #nuanced

No.

If you have thoughtfully considered the issue and determined that life begins at conception and that abortion is therefore murder that's a perfectly legitimate position to hold. I would just expect to see some genuine outrage and action on behalf of your fellow man being slaughtered by the millions.

If you disagree with the following logical argument:

easier access to birth control leads to
higher use of birth control which leads to
fewer pregnancies which leads to
fewer abortions

unless you can refute one of the premises or the logical connection between them, then yes you are stupid.
 
No.

If you have thoughtfully considered the issue and determined that life begins at conception and that abortion is therefore murder that's a perfectly legitimate position to hold. I would just expect to see some genuine outrage and action on behalf of your fellow man being slaughtered by the millions.

If you disagree with the following logical argument:

easier access to birth control leads to
higher use of birth control which leads to
fewer pregnancies which leads to
fewer abortions

unless you can refute one of the premises or the logical connection between them, then yes you are stupid.

What is the name of the poster you believe disagrees with the logical argument you set forth?
 
Dear DV7,

Did you have a problem with the original statement of MysteryMen? Did you notice any limitation to "politicians" in his allegation?

Thanks,

jhmd2000

I think that if you take his statement as being literal in blaming every Republican then his statement is obviously wrong. His point would have been said better if he said that the rhetoric about the PP videos, especially by Carly Fiorina, fanned the flames of hatred towards PP and perhaps gave a psycho like this guy the excuse they need to go shoot up a PP location. Emotionally charged words matter and people running for POTUS should understand that and choose their words more carefully.

But no, this isn't on all Republicans in the United States. That would be a crazy statement.
 
There isn't one that I'm aware of.

However knowell (and you apparently) believe that disagreeing with the logical argument I set forth does not make one stupid.

Okay, there isn't anybody who thinks that. We're getting somewhere. This nonexistent person is, indeed, stupid.

Why did you feel compelled to then add the last 20 words of your post? Upon what evidence?
 
Of course not.

I do think that if there were facilities around the country legally slaughtering two-year-olds there would be widespread protests. People would interrupt their day-to-day lives in order to achieve a political end to such a slaughter. Furthermore they would support any policy which worked towards preventing the slaughter. Such a movement would be at a minimum on the scale of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.

The fact that there is no such widespread protest movement and the fact that many "pro-life" individuals continually oppose policies that would vastly reduce the number of abortions (i.e. comprehensive sex education and birth control) suggests that most people can recognize at least some difference between a fetus and a two-year-old child.

Do you think that Obama's use of drones in the Middle East has resulted in the death of innocent people? How many times this year have you marched against it?
 
Back
Top