Jump to content
270soft Forum
Rodja

If i were President

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

So I guess we have our two radical crazies on each side of the abortion debate racing to outdo each other on gender issues.

The fact that you consider the concept of a woman's sovereignty over her own personal body as "radical" and "crazy" speaks volumes for your own twisted ideology...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Patine said:

The fact that you consider the concept of a woman's sovereignty over her own personal body as "radical" and "crazy" speaks volumes for your own twisted ideology...

Did you ever ask a pregnant woman "How's your body?". It's clear people think of the baby as a seperate entity and that it is and should thus be treated as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

Did you ever ask a pregnant woman "How's your body?". It's clear people think of the baby as a seperate entity and that it is and should thus be treated as such.

Ah, another unanimous opinion shared by all with no polling or proof quoted by @NYrepublican - because he just knows! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Ah, another unanimous opinion shared by all with no polling or proof quoted by @NYrepublican - because he just knows! 

I don't think you'll dispute that people ask "How's the baby?' instead of "How's your body?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

I don't think you'll dispute that people ask "How's the baby?' instead of "How's your body?"

But, there is a dispute over whether the well-being, rights, and propriety of the fetus versus the woman while the woman is pregnant takes precedent and priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

But, there is a dispute over whether the well-being, rights, and propriety of the fetus versus the woman while the woman is pregnant takes precedent and priority.

And it is a reasonable view to believe that barring excruciating circumstances the right of the fetus to not be murdered take precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Patine said:

The fact that you consider the concept of a woman's sovereignty over her own personal body as "radical" and "crazy" speaks volumes for your own twisted ideology...

I consider allowing only half of the nation to make a choice that affects all of us radical and crazy, I call dismissing the rights of the voiceless and downtrodden as they are slaughtered radical and crazy, and yes, I consider the fact that the life of unborn children is often an afterthought regarding their own genocide, radical and crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

And it is a reasonable view to believe that barring excruciating circumstances the right of the fetus to not be murdered take precedent.

I believe the woman's rights should take full precedent until the child fully becomes a completely separate, independent lifeform on it's own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

I consider allowing only half of the nation to make a choice that affects all of us radical and crazy, I call dismissing the rights of the voiceless and downtrodden as they are slaughtered radical and crazy, and yes, I consider the fact that the life of unborn children is often an afterthought regarding their own genocide, radical and crazy.

Genocide? Do you even know what the word means, or are you just throwing it around thoughtlessly like a buzzword for shock effect, like the faux Christian preachers and the manipulative and lying pundits you quote and seem to admire love to do as a tactic all the time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

I believe the woman's rights should take full precedent until the child fully becomes a completely separate, independent lifeform on it's own.

If it is defined then why is it wrong for someone who's paying for someone in care for a coma in the hopes that they'll wake up to pull the plug and kill him if he's dependent on him to live?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

If it is defined then why is it wrong for someone who's paying for someone in care for a coma in the hopes that they'll wake up to pull the plug and kill him if he's dependent on him to live?

It's not the same thing. Bad analog!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Genocide? Do you even know what the word means, or are you just throwing it around thoughtlessly like a buzzword for shock effect, like the faux Christian preachers and the manipulative and lying pundits you quote and seem to admire love to do as a tactic all the time?

No, I call the slaughter of 70 million unborn, and a eugenics campaign launched my Planned Parenthood very much a loud and clear genocide of our future, and especially the future of the black population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

No, I call the slaughter of 70 million unborn, and a eugenics campaign launched my Planned Parenthood very much a loud and clear genocide of our future, and especially the future of the black population.

Eugenics? 70 million? Deliberate campaigns? Is this Steve Bannon, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter, or another unhinged, paranoid, crackpot, lying, manipulative, and possibly undiagnosed schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

@Patine , I support abortion, but even I admit that the baby is a separate being from the mother.

But not FULLY separate and autonomous enough to have rights that supersede and override it's mother's during pregnancy. It is not fully separate and autonomous in this way as a lifeform until it is actually born.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Eugenics? 70 million? Deliberate campaigns? Is this Steve Bannon, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter, or another unhinged, paranoid, crackpot, lying, manipulative, and possibly undiagnosed schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?

No, that's what the founder of planned parenthood said lmao: "We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population"

https://libex.smith.edu/omeka/files/original/d6358bc3053c93183295bf2df1c0c931.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

No, that's what the founder of planned parenthood said lmao: "We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population"

https://libex.smith.edu/omeka/files/original/d6358bc3053c93183295bf2df1c0c931.pdf

A founder's vision is not always relevant to the current vision of affairs. Andrew Jackson founded the U.S. Democratic Party, but you'd NEVER know that to see the party today...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Eugenics? 70 million? Deliberate campaigns? Is this Steve Bannon, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter, or another unhinged, paranoid, crackpot, lying, manipulative, and possibly undiagnosed schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?

Excuse me, I meant 60 million, that was my error. But that doesn't change its severity, and that's only 61 million abortions on record, states like California and New York, and they are the top two states for abortions have much looser reporting laws and many states did not require reporting until 1973, so there have been ostensibly tens of millions of more than the hard and fast 60 million figure. And yes, Margaret Sanger was a noted Eugenicist who founded Planned Parenthood on a campaign to cull black reproduction, she also spoke at Klan rallies. Not to mention Planned Parenthood commits 38% of the nation's abortions while performing less than 1% of the nation's Pap Smears, less than 2% of manual breast exams, and no mammograms. Lay it on top that in line with Sanger's goal is the fact that black babies are disproportionately aborted by as much as 25-30 points in accordance with their share of the population. This is a well-documented fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

A founder's vision is not always relevant to the current vision of affairs. Andrew Jackson founded the U.S. Democratic Party, but you'd NEVER know that to see the party today...

Right because I'd support Andrew Jackson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

Awaiting an answer here.

First of all, I also believe in euthanasia when life has no hope for recovery and is guaranteed to be nothing but pain and suffering, or just a vegetable mind. Secondly, those who care people in a coma are trained medical professional who devote their lives and careers to palative and extensive care as a career. Not every woman who becomes pregnant chooses to become pregnant, is healthy enough to be pregnant, should be a mother, or can afford to raise a child (or even pay for hospital maternal ward fees or coverage). THAT'S difference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Excuse me, I meant 60 million, that was my error. But that doesn't change its severity, and that's only 61 million abortions on record, states like California and New York, and they are the top two states for abortions have much looser reporting laws and many states did not require reporting until 1973, so there have been ostensibly tens of millions of more than the hard and fast 60 million figure. And yes, Margaret Sanger was a noted Eugenicist who founded Planned Parenthood on a campaign to cull black reproduction, she also spoke at Klan rallies. Not to mention Planned Parenthood commits 38% of the nation's abortions while performing less than 1% of the nation's Pap Smears, less than 2% of manual breast exams, and no mammograms. Lay it on top that in line with Sanger's goal is the fact that black babies are disproportionately aborted by as much as 25-30 points in accordance with their share of the population. This is a well-documented fact.

Well, 61 million deliberate, innocent deaths is very small potatoes compared to the innocent, civilian deaths caused by various means, quite deliberately, through active volition or inactive negligence or refusal to fulfill reasonable government duties, caused since 1973 by the hard-right Republican politicians and other leaders in their monstrous, but glowingly justified, agendas domestically and abroad. In fact, the number I'm speaking of staggering dwarfs 61 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04, lets say that you successfully prohibited abortion with an amendment. What do you do to stop people from obtaining one illegally? People who are determined to get one will certainly get one no matter the cost, like they do with illegal drugs. Illegal abortions are extremely unsafe, and can cause infections, and damage to internal organs, and cause death. I agree that abortion is one of the greatest sins in the world, and anybody who does it for convenience is a piece of shit, but outlawing it will not do anything. If they're going to get one anyways, wouldn't it be better that it is safe, and handled by a medical professional?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...