Jump to content

Spankytoes

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2,218
  • Joined

Posts posted by Spankytoes

  1. 1 hour ago, Mole said:

    This discussion always tends to focus on competing rights in the abstract rather than the real cost in lives. I'm personally not interested in the philosophical discussion of when legal personhood is reached, but I consider the staggering numbers of abortions performed since Roe vs. Wade a dark reflection on our culture and social values. This is distinct from the legal right to such a procedure, which reflects a mixed bag of values. It's sad that we have so many unwanted pregnancies and it's sad that so many women see abortion as their best option. It's a reflection of our values and it goes well beyond who holds the rights trump card.

    I consider myself prolife, but I can't understand why the prolife movement is so fixated on philosophy rather than the human cost.

    If I were King, I'd divert money from the defense budget and pay or provide college scholarships to at risk women to stay on birth control. I'd pay them to carry their pregnancies to term and make adoption as easy as possible. On a small scale, I'd be a full blown redistributing commie. 

     

    @bad_teammate

    it isn't defensiveness about a position but a deep dislike of disingenuous and uncritical thinking. Your posting here thrives on this. It's less that I disagree with your conclusions and more that you take the worst route possible to reach them.

    @Mole Cost in what respect? There are hundreds of thousands of kids in America available for adoption at this very moment. Who do you think subsidizes their living expenses? You estimate that is less money than the one-time small token sum for abortions that are partially funded by PP? The irony is the amount of red tape one has to go through to willingly adopt a child and care for it. Yet, if you open up your sloppy drunk gash on $1 beer night, we're going to go ahead and deem you a fit parent because "abortion is murder"...and you are a whore that needs a crying scarlet letter. It's an absolutely hypocritical argument Pro-Lifers make on every facet of a decision that has no bearing on their lives. But, as with issues like gay marriage, it's outraged fueled by religious fervor disguised as concern for someone they have never met.

  2. Are the pro-lifers here also against circumcision? Obviously, this isn't an apples to apples comparison as you believe that abortion is murder. I'm just curious if a body altering religious practice performed on an actual birthed baby, that has legal rights and no say so in the matter, is OK. Where do we draw the line for parental rights versus physical violence and "murder"? 

    If we are going to go down the "what-if" rabbit hole, then we have to touch on the religious aspect of medical practices. Should a doctor let a baby die because her parent's refuse blood transfusions as Jehovah's Witnesses when clearly the baby cannot declare their beliefs? Why is "Religion is protected" applied towards this scenario but not towards consented assisted suicide due to humanitarian reasons? That seems pretty contradictory that parents are allowed to make medical decisions for their own child but a person of sound mind that consents for an assistant suicide isn't allowed to let their caretaker arrange a dignified exit. Why are we allowed to "pull the plug" on a life that is still breathing but are advocating to force women to have babies like it's an imposed criminal consequence for the action of getting laid? How do you justify birth control through a religious aspect when you are directly contradicting "God's plan" like the bulletproof glass on the Pope-Mobile? Why should you have any say in that decision?

    Finally, how many of y'all claimed your unborn child as a dependent on your Federal taxes? How did that work out for you? 

  3. On 4/24/2018 at 10:56 AM, po elvis said:

    moral of the story is black people do nothing wrong, and if anything involves a black person, it needs to make national headlines and we can all argue about it for a week.

    A-fucking-men. Contain this shit to a megathread. We get it, some people are racist pricks and the “victims” are always polite citizens of color that did nothing to antagonize the situation in any way. There are dozens of nationals headlines a year to show the imperialistic racism still dominating this country.

  4. 1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

    Well that puts you in what I think is an incredibly minority position. Nobody should be purely utilitarian on stuff like this, but I'm pretty sure 99.9999% of people would consider it morally just to kill one person in order to save more than fifty million others.

    To be fair, it’s a bullshit question. There are millions of people that think Obama and Trump have had direct impacts on millions of lives for the worse. No sane person would assasinate the sitting President, even if the vast majority of deaths are titled “collateral damage”.

  5. 3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

    And even if it does, we will still have safe and legal abortion in the United States of America. Women in the backward states will just have to suffer.

    Or travel to a state that will accommodate them. CA and NY aren’t ever getting rid of abortion.

  6. 13 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

    Well shit, since SCOTUS said it, I guess we should pack up and go home. 

    [/Plessy v Ferguson]

    I am well aware of the shit the Supreme Court made up in Roe. 

    Are you also aware that abortion was legal in some states prior to the Federal decision? 

  7. 11 hours ago, Txzen said:

    I don't disagree that London and Paris are cities which in many ways completely embody the international perception of what the country is. But saying London is England or Paris is France is just silly. You can't understand either country if you limit yourself to those capitals. 

    Sure you can. What more is there to “understand”? 

  8. 25 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

    So killing a 9 month old fetus is cool since it isn’t life?

    No. The law says you can’t. Whether you believe that life begins at conception or at birth is irrelevant. The law states that abortions are legal. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed this decision. Further, unless it’s your partner, it has no affect on your life whatsoever.

    Kind of like why we still have unlimited guns for all and keep arguing the merits of such when violence and mass shootings are so rampant. The Constitution guarantees your right. Gun owners don’t want to be restricted because ‘Mercia. What I think is meaningless.

    • Like 1
  9. 5 hours ago, DoobieWah said:

    So can we agree that abortions should be forbidden after say twelve weeks?

    I would consider that a vast improvement over the current situation.

    Why do you care? Not your decision. Not your money. Not your problem. There’s nothing to debate.

    I think it’s child abuse to force your kids to be indocturined into religion or to circumcise them. But it doesn’t matter what I think.

  10. 2 hours ago, naija said:

    would you do Costa Rica over Venice

    Yes, but I’m not an Italy guy. Costa Rica has more action, scenery and activities. Venice can truly be seen in a day. 2 if you want to stroll. There are no cars so you’re either hoofing it or taking water taxis. If you’re going in summer, it’s crowded, hot and the canals become sewers. We stayed at the Boscolo, which is somewhat isolated from the tourists, and enjoyed it. Huge rooms and beautiful hotel grounds.

    It’s not as romantic as it is portrayed. Unless you want to break the bank for a private gondola, you’ll be sharing with 8 other people in a pack of 10 with a mafioso singing. Worth it to cross off the list but 4 days is too many unless you’re taking side trips. The train station is impressive.

×
×
  • Create New...