89Hen wrote:It's hyperbole... (and you know it)Chizzang wrote:It's true... (and you know it)
so it's kind of NOT hyperbole
exactly.Wedgebuster wrote:TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
it's funny you should say that about me - because, and especially on this issue... I'm not a true believer at all. I am a died-in-the-wool pragmatist. I have my core values, but I see many paths to the same goal and a lifetime in campaigns has taught me the importance of not making the perfect the enemy of the good.
I frankly wish none of this discussion was necessary - I don't like the idea of abortion either - I'm just a realist who knows that no legislation banning it would ever end it anyway. moreover, i think the biggest sin we commit is wasting our time and energy trying to find common ground on the answer to abortion legal? yes or no. when what we should be focused on is the common and shared feeling that what we really ought to be doing is reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies - which would drive the number of abortions down as a result.
Planned parenthood?
Barber shops and airports? You're a smart guy. You know what hyperbole is.Chizzang wrote:89Hen wrote: It's hyperbole... (and you know it)
I'll find them:
Cornell and Yale both did studies in the late 80's so it's been a while but it's amazing...
80-ish percent men - if pregnant - wanted the "right" to decide
90-something percent of women were for mens right to decide if only men got pregnant
AMAZING...
89Hen wrote:Barber shops and airports? You're a smart guy. You know what hyperbole is.Chizzang wrote:
I'll find them:
Cornell and Yale both did studies in the late 80's so it's been a while but it's amazing...
80-ish percent men - if pregnant - wanted the "right" to decide
90-something percent of women were for mens right to decide if only men got pregnant
AMAZING...
My apologies...I was looking for an opposite to 89Hen on the liberal side and instantly thought of TTBF when I thought of liberal...I've read your statements and you were the worst one I could have chosen out of the CS "liberal crowd" with regards to this issue...my apologies again...TwinTownBisonFan wrote:it's funny you should say that about me - because, and especially on this issue... I'm not a true believer at all. I am a died-in-the-wool pragmatist. I have my core values, but I see many paths to the same goal and a lifetime in campaigns has taught me the importance of not making the perfect the enemy of the good.Appaholic wrote:
You must be a glutton for punishment.I admire your tenacity. It's been my experience that you have 2 camps with regard to volatile issues such as abortion: the True Believers (yourself, TTBF) who know they are right, could find no common ground & don't want to find common ground with purveyors of the opposing view and wouldn't change their mind if their life depended upon it....and then you have the people like Chizzang, Cluck U and myself who can see the inconsistency & validity in both arguments but don't care either way as it does not directly affect us..
Good luck with that...
I frankly wish none of this discussion was necessary - I don't like the idea of abortion either - I'm just a realist who knows that no legislation banning it would ever end it anyway. moreover, i think the biggest sin we commit is wasting our time and energy trying to find common ground on the answer to abortion legal? yes or no. when what we should be focused on is the common and shared feeling that what we really ought to be doing is reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies - which would drive the number of abortions down as a result.
Has any legislation or law ever ended any activity?TwinTownBisonFan wrote:I'm just a realist who knows that no legislation banning it would ever end it anyway.
np man - i'm the standard bearer for the donk side of things generally... reasonable assumption to make.Appaholic wrote:My apologies...I was looking for an opposite to 89Hen on the liberal side and instantly thought of TTBF when I thought of liberal...I've read your statements and you were the worst one I could have chosen out of the CS "liberal crowd" with regards to this issue...my apologies again...TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
it's funny you should say that about me - because, and especially on this issue... I'm not a true believer at all. I am a died-in-the-wool pragmatist. I have my core values, but I see many paths to the same goal and a lifetime in campaigns has taught me the importance of not making the perfect the enemy of the good.
I frankly wish none of this discussion was necessary - I don't like the idea of abortion either - I'm just a realist who knows that no legislation banning it would ever end it anyway. moreover, i think the biggest sin we commit is wasting our time and energy trying to find common ground on the answer to abortion legal? yes or no. when what we should be focused on is the common and shared feeling that what we really ought to be doing is reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies - which would drive the number of abortions down as a result.
SuperHornet wrote:Typical of libs. Put the burden of proof on conservatives. That's always the M.O., isn't it.
Killing is OK during a just war when following the rules of war. Killing is OK when called for by a jury of one's peers or a judge after a proper conviction of murder or other death-penalty-associated crime. Abortion does NOT qualify.
Any person who has a mind and enjoys their freedom wants to question why things are the way they are...and how to make things better. It is how we advance as a society. The Church, of course, refers to their members as their "flock", so its little wonder sheeple like you get their panties in a bunch when someone asks you to provide an answer. 
you and i agree on virtually nothing (including, very likely what constitutes satisfying this burden of proof...) but in this case I agree with this sentiment.Of course I am going to put the burden of proof on someone who wants to deny me and my wife an opportunity to make a personal decision.
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:you and i agree on virtually nothing (including, very likely what constitutes satisfying this burden of proof...) but in this case I agree with this sentiment.Of course I am going to put the burden of proof on someone who wants to deny me and my wife an opportunity to make a personal decision.
Do you like bacon?TwinTownBisonFan wrote:you and i agree on virtually nothing (including, very likely what constitutes satisfying this burden of proof...) but in this case I agree with this sentiment.Of course I am going to put the burden of proof on someone who wants to deny me and my wife an opportunity to make a personal decision.
It is a personal decision.89Hen wrote:Cluck U wrote:a personal decision.
You can say it 1000x and it's not going to be true. So if my wife and I are awoken each night by the sound of our drunken neighbor coming home and it's making our life miserable, it's our personal decision to kill him. Gotcha.Cluck U wrote:It is a personal decision.89Hen wrote:
it's nice and easy when it's laid out all nice and neat. life, however... rarely works that way. should a rape victim have give birth to the child that results from that crime? should a daughter who was a victim of incest? in your black and white world where "it's just murder" where do those gray areas fit? or is it just "tough shit" because 89Hen says so?89Hen wrote:You can say it 1000x and it's not going to be true. So if my wife and I are awoken each night by the sound of our drunken neighbor coming home and it's making our life miserable, it's our personal decision to kill him. Gotcha.Cluck U wrote:
It is a personal decision.
I don't believe a fetus is equal to a live human being until it is able to live outside the womb, so to me you can say those situaitons are equal 1000X and it's not going to be true.89Hen wrote:You can say it 1000x and it's not going to be true. So if my wife and I are awoken each night by the sound of our drunken neighbor coming home and it's making our life miserable, it's our personal decision to kill him. Gotcha.Cluck U wrote:
It is a personal decision.
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:exactly.Wedgebuster wrote:
Planned parenthood?
Much respect to you. You're the most level headed motherfucker here.this.Cluck U wrote:I don't believe a fetus is equal to a live human being until it is able to live outside the womb, so to me you can say those situaitons are equal 1000X and it's not going to be true.89Hen wrote: You can say it 1000x and it's not going to be true. So if my wife and I are awoken each night by the sound of our drunken neighbor coming home and it's making our life miserable, it's our personal decision to kill him. Gotcha.
And I noticed you ignored the other part of the equation...you want to force (make illegal) births on people who do not want to have a baby, yet you don't give two shvts about what happens to that baby after it is born.
Odd.
Cluck U wrote:I don't believe a fetus is equal to a live human being until it is able to live outside the womb, so to me you can say those situaitons are equal 1000X and it's not going to be true.89Hen wrote: You can say it 1000x and it's not going to be true. So if my wife and I are awoken each night by the sound of our drunken neighbor coming home and it's making our life miserable, it's our personal decision to kill him. Gotcha.
And I noticed you ignored the other part of the equation...you want to force (make illegal) births on people who do not want to have a baby, yet you don't give two shvts about what happens to that baby after it is born.
Odd.
I thought you gave up liquor?D1B wrote: Hen's, along with the rest of social darwinist conks here, entire political philosophy is a result of a shared hatred of poor women with too many children. Especially black women.
Yeah, my tidy little notion of protecting babys.TwinTownBisonFan wrote:it's nice and easy when it's laid out all nice and neat. life, however... rarely works that way. should a rape victim have give birth to the child that results from that crime? should a daughter who was a victim of incest? in your black and white world where "it's just murder" where do those gray areas fit? or is it just "tough shit" because 89Hen says so?
just wondering how far you'd like to extend your tidy little notion.
Viability is not a great way to draw a line in the sand because it moves. Full term is 37 weeks. It wasn't that long ago that viability was not much lower than that, now it's around 22 weeks. Imagine what it may be in 10, 20, 30 years. Furthermore, no baby can survive outside the womb without assistance.Cluck U wrote:I don't believe a fetus is equal to a live human being until it is able to live outside the womb, so to me you can say those situaitons are equal 1000X and it's not going to be true.
And I noticed you ignored the other part of the equation...you want to force (make illegal) births on people who do not want to have a baby, yet you don't give two shvts about what happens to that baby after it is born.
Odd.
Meh, he's not drunk, just stupid.Cluck U wrote:I thought you gave up liquor?D1B wrote: Hen's, along with the rest of social darwinist conks here, entire political philosophy is a result of a shared hatred of poor women with too many children. Especially black women.
