I just don't like mitt Romney
- Thread starter Archbob
- Start date
GhostWriter16
Deity
OK, so if its really so unimportant, why not compromise on it with conservatives (Who do believe it is murder, and thus do seriously think its important) in exchange for some other issue that you guys do think is important?
Whether it deserves to be important depends on what you believe about it.
Few Conservatives believe its murdah though
Just crackpots like Nadine Dorries believe its murdah but they are so unimportant that no-one cares.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Well, I'm not sure precisely what issues are considered more important to liberals, or to Cutlass in particular. It is true that, as WindFish says, most of them are talking heads. I, for the record, do truly believe that it is murder.
But I do wonder, if abortion is so unimportant to liberals, why on earth are they so insistent on Roe v Wade?
Quackers
The Frog
Nadine Dorres is a patriot. Although I do dislike her haughty style I love it when she criticises Cameron. Always hits the right note.
Mad Nad is a loony.
Quackers
The Frog
Your just being extra critical of her because she is a woman. Bigot.
GhostWriter16
Deity
I wasn't so much saying "Compromise on abortion" so much as I was saying "Why don't the liberals give up on abortion (Let the conservatives pass essentially any law on it) and in return, the conservatives should give up some issue that liberals consider important. " Like, for instance, national recognition of gay marriages, or something.
Admittedly, no conservative other than probably Ron Paul would ever make such an agreement if they had the power.
If you want to talk about compromises directly related to abortion, perhaps ban abortion completely but provide free non-abortive contraception. Yet another one certain hypocritical conservatives would never agree to.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
That's not compromise. I see now why you dodged the question, you were being disengenous.
Again, you aren't interested in any compromise so stop pretending. It's your way or no way, but oh yeah, liberals should therefore give up their positions in the interest of 'compromise'.
GhostWriter16
Deity
You missed what I was saying in the first place
I was suggesting (In the first place) that if abortion was such an unimportant issue, why not be willing to give it up in exchange for the other side giving up some other issue.
Those few of us that actually still care about human life cannot in good consceience allow its destruction.
I was suggesting (In the first place) that if abortion was such an unimportant issue, why not be willing to give it up in exchange for the other side giving up some other issue.
Those few of us that actually still care about human life cannot in good consceience allow its destruction.
Murky
Deity
What I don't understand about supposed "Pro-Life" conservatives is their willingness to go to war and destroy the environment. If you really cared so much about protecting life you should be strongly opposed to both.
You missed what I was saying in the first place
I was suggesting (In the first place) that if abortion was such an unimportant issue, why not be willing to give it up in exchange for the other side giving up some other issue.
Those few of us that actually still care about human life cannot in good consceience allow its destruction.
Yet you're okay with Capital punishment and murdahing women who get abortions.
GhostWriter16
Deity
You know what, connecting peace with being pro-life makes a lot more sense than connecting anti-death penalty with pro-life. While the death penalty (Usually, unless the justice system makes a mistake) only has to do with killing people who have committed heinous crimes, both war and abortion ultimately do destroy innocent lives.
I would say that, in rare cases, war is a necessary evil. In rare cases, abortion is also a necessary evil, and my standards for both are mostly the same, I believe in war only if it will ultimately save more lives, and I believe abortion should be legally accepted only when it saves the mother's life.
There's a bit of nuance when it comes to genocide. Even if Hitler hadn't attacked us, taking him out would ultimately have saved more lives than not. So even if we were the technical aggressors, well, its kind of like using lethal violence to protect a person that's not yourself. That's usually considered OK as well. If someone were trying to kill my next door neighbor, I'd be justified in, if necessary, using lethal violence to protect them. If I were the President I would, thus, if necessary, be acceptably able to use lethal violence to protect the Jews in Germany.
It gets more nuanced, however, when innocent soldiers start getting killed.
I will say that my opinion on war has changed pretty drastically lately. WWII was the last one my country fought that I really consider worth the time. Before that, the War of 1812 was the last acceptable one (Note: the Civil War wasn't acceptable either, even if arguably fought against ourselves.) And then the Revolution of continents against the consent of those that live there. Self-determination. If you don't want to get killed, don't try to control other people's rights. Any British soldiers that were killed were on King George's head.
But yeah, I'm generally against interventionist or aggressive wars.
Quackers
The Frog
If we assume an indvidiual is pro-capital punishment and is pro-life that is not contradictory. Just take a brief moment, to ASSUME (i know it's hard) that a feotus is a LIVING HUMAN, ok i'm not trying to brainwash you just believe it's true for this post 
. Now what has the feotus done to deserve to be aborted? The answer?: Nothing. It hasn't done anything.
Now, with a murderer - he is guilty of a crime. He has taken away somebody elses life - he deserves death for his actions.
Now you see the difference between the feotus and the prisoner? One is guilty of a serious crime, the other is guilty of nothing. I'm happy for someone to disprove me on this.
. Now what has the feotus done to deserve to be aborted? The answer?: Nothing. It hasn't done anything. Now, with a murderer - he is guilty of a crime. He has taken away somebody elses life - he deserves death for his actions.
Now you see the difference between the feotus and the prisoner? One is guilty of a serious crime, the other is guilty of nothing. I'm happy for someone to disprove me on this.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
OK, so you'd also oppose any busts of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, or Franklin Roosevelt then?
5 chairs
If we assume an indvidiual is pro-capital punishment and is pro-life that is not contradictory. Just take a brief moment, to ASSUME (i know it's hard) that a feotus is a LIVING HUMAN, ok i'm not trying to brainwash you just believe it's true for this post
Now, with a murderer - he is guilty of a crime. He has taken away somebody elses life - he deserves death for his actions.
Now you see the difference between the feotus and the prisoner? One is guilty of a serious crime, the other is guilty of nothing. I'm happy for someone to disprove me on this.
original sin yo
Murky
Deity
Sorry to switch topics, but here's yet another reason not to like Mitt Romney. He's proud of the fact that his company Bain capital exploited Chinese workers. Says 95% of life is settled for you if you're born in America.
Link to video.
Link to video.
Similar threads
