• 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!

Republicans for POTUS, 2016 Edition

jhmd2000 said:
How would one "guarantee" child care? What does that mean?
Click to expand...

Not a perfect example, but the bottom two rungs of Maslow's hierarchy of needs (physiological and safety) would be a good place to start. What I am getting at is the idea that the kid, who had no say in any of this, should be guaranteed a minimal quality of life. Fed, clothed, sheltered, and medically cared for with no exception.

Which, Ya know, is something I think we should guarantee every citizen in this country (because we could) but that's another argument and gets off topic.
 
Wrangor said:
No, you fall into my second category in that you don't see abortion as murder. If you did you wouldn't define abortion as a woman's medical choice. There are only two sides.

Pro-life: Abortion is murder (that's me)

Pro-choice: Abortion is a surgical procedure on a woman (you and all the other pro-choicers that are decent human beings)

I guess you could add the third choice, but I doubt there are many in this category (or atleast I hope it is a small population) - Abortion is murder but I am ok with murdering little babies.
Click to expand...

wakephan09 said:
Or, perhaps, a legitimate third choice:

Anti-abortion and pro-choice: abortion is a surgical procedure on a woman (i.e. not murder), but the voter is still anti-abortion for whatever personal reason(s).
Click to expand...

Wrangor said:
Why would you be anti surgical procedure on someone else's body? Are you anti appendectomy as well? It makes no sense. Either it is surgery or it is murder which is it? I don't understand. Explain your personal reasons to be against someone else having an elective surgery (well over 90% of abortions are elective and not scenarios where the mothers life is at risk).
Click to expand...

NB: I'm not quite sure why you are addressing your posts to me in the second person. I haven't suggested that any of these responses are my own personal beliefs.

A voter might be pro-choice because they believe that women should have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, yet still believe that abortion is distasteful or inappropriate or morally wrong (for any number of reasons other than MURDER, for God's sake) or for whatever reason a choice that he/she would not make themselves.

Or, hell, someone might be anti-abortion simply because a fetus is in their understanding a proto-human -- viz. NOT a human, but will someday become one.

You don't see how someone might share both of those stances without being a hypocrite? Your absolute categories are unhelpful for the conversation, and it is that sort of thinking that makes productive debate impossible.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Or we could talk about philosophical models some more.
Click to expand...

stock-footage-fashion-model-thinking.jpg
 
wakephan09 said:
NB: I'm not quite sure why you are addressing your posts to me in the second person. I haven't suggested that any of these responses are my own personal beliefs.

A voter might be pro-choice because they believe that women should have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, yet still believe that abortion is distasteful or inappropriate or morally wrong (for any number of reasons other than MURDER, for God's sake) or for whatever reason a choice that he/she would not make themselves.

Or, hell, someone might be anti-abortion simply because a fetus is in their understanding a proto-human -- viz. NOT a human, but will someday become one.

You don't see how someone might share both of those stances without being a hypocrite? Your absolute categories are unhelpful for the conversation, and it is that sort of thinking that makes productive debate impossible.
Click to expand...


You either see it for the human that it is or you don't. Sorry if that makes your "productive" debate impossible.
 
Right ^. His categories are false because there is nothing distasteful about a woman performing an elective procedure on her own body. It is a false choice that people propose because it makes them feel better about something they know is wrong.

A living being is terminated in pregnancy. Either it is human or it isn't. If it isn't you shouldn't have any issues with it. It is no different than removing a tumor. If it is you have absolute disgust for the practice. The reason there is little room for healthy debate is because there is no real Middle ground. There are no half measures in the 90%+ of cases that are elective abortions. I am fine with some leeway if the mothers life is in danger as at that point you are weighing life for life. But abortion for the large majority of women is choosing convenience over the life of a defenseless child.

PH says that conservatives haven't given up on Roe v. Wade and he is right. And we will never give up until the legalized destruction of innocent children is overturned. His false choice of being anti abortion but pro life is just silly and transparent.

/end rant
 
Wrangor said:
Right ^. His categories are false because there is nothing distasteful about a woman performing an elective procedure on her own body. It is a false choice that people propose because it makes them feel better about something they know is wrong.

A living being is terminated in pregnancy. Either it is human or it isn't. If it isn't you shouldn't have any issues with it. It is no different than removing a tumor. If it is you have absolute disgust for the practice. The reason there is little room for healthy debate is because there is no real Middle ground. There are no half measures in the 90%+ of cases that are elective abortions. I am fine with some leeway if the mothers life is in danger as at that point you are weighing life for life. But abortion for the large majority of women is choosing convenience over the life of a defenseless child.

PH says that conservatives haven't given up on Roe v. Wade and he is right. And we will never give up until the legalized destruction of innocent children is overturned. His false choice of being anti abortion but pro life is just silly and transparent.

/end rant
Click to expand...

When Wrangor is on, he's fantastic.
 
EagleDeac said:
You either see it for the human that it is or you don't. Sorry if that makes your "productive" debate impossible.
Click to expand...

How is this possibly unclear?

For the voter in this hypothetical situation, women's right to choose is paramount. He/she is still disgusted by abortion and wouldn't themselves have an abortion.

Hence, he/she is pro-choice, anti-abortion.
 
It would seem that even when we agree (abortion = bad) we can still argue. Impressive.

Wonder what would have happened with the abortion issue had Connecticut simply not banned birth control.
 
wakephan09 said:
How is this possibly unclear?

For the voter in this hypothetical situation, women's right to choose is paramount. He/she is still disgusted by abortion and wouldn't themselves have an abortion.

Hence, he/she is pro-choice, anti-abortion.
Click to expand...

So that person would be ok with murder. I guess you have made your point. THat person would also be scum to put women's rights above the life of a child.
 
For the anti-abortion crowd, if the fetus is a human life, when did it become so?
 
It is totally possible to be anti-abortion without considering the procedure to be an act of MURDER.
 
Wrangor said:
So that person would be ok with murder. I guess you have made your point. THat person would also be scum to put women's rights above the life of a child.
Click to expand...

You just aren't getting it, Wrangor. Re-read my earlier comment (and note, this is your language/phrasing):

wakephan09 said:
Anti-abortion and pro-choice: abortion is a surgical procedure on a woman (i.e. not murder), but the voter is still anti-abortion for whatever personal reason(s).
Click to expand...

This hypothetical voter does not believe that abortion is murder. The fetus is not a child.
 
Wrangor said:
THat person would also be scum to put women's rights above the life of a child.
Click to expand...

And this, Wrangor, is where the Christian right is really, really, wrong. You would call a person is "scum" for putting the rights of a living, breathing human being over the life of an unborn fetus?
 
DeacinBama said:
So you'd be okay with terminating a pregnancy before the heart beats, which is circa the fifth week of gestation?
Click to expand...

No, I would not be "okay" with it. I believe life begins at conception. I can see the argument before a heartbeat, even if I don't agree with it.
 
wakephan09 said:
You just aren't getting it, Wrangor. Re-read my earlier comment (and note, this is your language/phrasing):



This hypothetical voter does not believe that abortion is murder. The fetus is not a child.
Click to expand...

So why are they against abortion? Why does that person care about a surgical procedure to remove a parasite? You keep saying they are pro choice but anti abortion. Why don't they approve of that surgical procedure in other women's bodies to remove something that isn't human?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top