Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ireland to drop 8th ammendment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Bow View Post
    I notice in all these tweeks very few members mention the womans right to choose........never mind girls you are just required to lay back and enjoy it...in the mean time all the macho males will parade around struting their manly stuff........
    No!

    She has a right to say NO!

    This is the best birth control method, and a means to prevent murder.

    The male has an equal responsibility, and ability to say NO!.

    Roll the dice, be prepared to accept the consequence.....but don't expect the unborn innocent to suffer the consequences of irresponsibility.
    "It's like shooting rats in a barrel."
    "You'll be in a barrel if you don't watch out for the fighters!"

    "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
    Sergei(son of Igor) Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Bow View Post
      I notice in all these tweeks very few members mention the womans right to choose........never mind girls you are just required to lay back and enjoy it...in the mean time all the macho males will parade around struting their manly stuff........
      The problem is that at some stage (12 weeks, 24 week, later?) she is carrying another person so she isn't just choosing for herself, she is choosing for that other person as well.

      Pregnancy lasts for 9 months. Parenthood is for life. Therefore the issue is parenthood, not pregnancy. If she gets to choose whether or not she wants to be a mother then should the man get to decide whether or not he gets to be a father?

      There were very few "Stop policing my Body" type slogans and posters during the campaign as both sides realised that it was more complex, not nuanced, than that.

      Only 10% of voters said that religious views influenced their choice so this was not about "Catholic Ireland" although I do appreciate that it is an easy headline for lazy editors and writers looking at this from afar.
      "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
      validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
      "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

      Comment


      • #33
        Why do those who are pro abortion always assume that to be pro life you have to be especially religious?
        C150k abortions are carried out in the UK every year. The vast majority are not cases of rape or incest or where the child is almost certain to be born dead. They are done because the children are inconvient.
        "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Surrey View Post
          Why do those who are pro abortion always assume that to be pro life you have to be especially religious?
          C150k abortions are carried out in the UK every year. The vast majority are not cases of rape or incest or where the child is almost certain to be born dead. They are done because the children are inconvient.
          Most of those who voted Yes would not be pro abortion (you are showing your prejudices). It is usually the least worst of some painful choices if chosen and it's unlikely that many, if any women would want to be in that position in the first place but they would like to decide if they are.
          Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
          Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

          Comment


          • #35
            I guess I am the only one that is consistent.
            I favor the death penalty AND abortion.

            The threat of the Death Penalty is one hell of a great deterent, and just the threat of it breaks a good many cases in practice.

            And I don't see how having more unwanted, neglected, poverty-stricken and/or abused kids growing up to be A-holes makes this a better world.

            So, as far as all this goes.... meh.

            On to more interesting things.
            "Why is the Rum gone?"

            -Captain Jack

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
              I guess I am the only one that is consistent.
              I favor the death penalty AND abortion.

              The threat of the Death Penalty is one hell of a great deterent, and just the threat of it breaks a good many cases in practice.

              .
              If it's such a great deterrent why does the USA have the highest murder rate in the advanced world?
              Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
              Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by MarkV View Post

                If it's such a great deterrent why does the USA have the highest murder rate in the advanced world?
                Did I mention the US specifically?
                No, YOU did.

                Oh, the "advanced world"?
                What did you pare that down to, half of the EU and 3 other places?

                The problem here is it takes about 20 years to enact that penalty and everyone knows it, the whining lawyers always seem to be able to get them Life w/o parole instead by threatening to drag it out even longer.

                As I have said, keeping the most evil scum on the planet alive is a very high priority for the Left.
                "Why is the Rum gone?"

                -Captain Jack

                Comment


                • #38
                  Left is consistent. Right on the other side claims to be "pro-life" while supporting guns and destruction of social security. More miserable kiddies gunning down each other, yeah ?
                  There are no Nazis in Ukraine. Idiots

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                    I guess I am the only one that is consistent.
                    I favor the death penalty AND abortion.

                    The threat of the Death Penalty is one hell of a great deterent, and just the threat of it breaks a good many cases in practice.

                    And I don't see how having more unwanted, neglected, poverty-stricken and/or abused kids growing up to be A-holes makes this a better world.

                    So, as far as all this goes.... meh.

                    On to more interesting things.
                    No, you aren't. I favor both, and would restrict abortion to the first trimester of pregnancy. After that, too late except in extreme and exceptional cases. I'd also eliminate child support from a non-married male who caused the pregnancy since I'm sure the "It's a woman's right to choose" is in play here. She wants full responsibility for the child before birth, she can have full responsibility afterwards.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Emtos View Post
                      Left is consistent. Right on the other side claims to be "pro-life" while supporting guns and destruction of social security. More miserable kiddies gunning down each other, yeah ?
                      I see no inconsistency on the Right about that. On the other hand the Left is full of inconsistencies on these subjects.

                      Guns are an inanimate object like a hammer or a smartphone. The issue isn't guns, it is crime and how it's to be handled. The Left says this is the state's responsibility and the individual has no right to self-defense. If you are murdered, the state will seek the criminal and punish him for that crime. Your death is a statistic. The Right says owing weapons is right as is self-defense. Use them wisely or the state will punish you for not doing so.
                      So, the Left's position is insane. Without a right to self-defense, by whatever means necessary, you are vulnerable to criminals and the state cannot guarantee your protection. The state puts you in a position of potentially being killed or injured or becoming a criminal if you try to prevent that. Insane.
                      The Right says we let you have the means to protect yourself but you have to exercise individual responsibility. That is reasonable.

                      The Left supports abortion on demand but also says it only involves the woman... until the child is actually born and then all of a sudden it's the man involved's responsibility to support the child he got no say in. Insane and illogical.
                      The Right says no abortion (at the extreme) and it is the couple's responsibility to support the child. That's logical and consistent.

                      The Left says the State will provide for you what the State thinks you need. One of those things is a living via social security or the equivalent. The Right says you are responsible to make sure you have the means to live in society. Which is less crazy? Thinking that some soulless government entity of faceless bureaucrats will do a better job of providing for you or doing it for yourself?

                      The Left thinks it can force humanity to be altruistic and act like a mindless herd. That's insane.
                      The Right thinks people are individuals and will act in their best interests and do the same with those around them. That's reasonable.

                      The Left is insane.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                        I see no inconsistency on the Right about that. On the other hand the Left is full of inconsistencies on these subjects.

                        Guns are an inanimate object like a hammer or a smartphone. The issue isn't guns, it is crime and how it's to be handled. The Left says this is the state's responsibility and the individual has no right to self-defense. If you are murdered, the state will seek the criminal and punish him for that crime. Your death is a statistic. The Right says owing weapons is right as is self-defense. Use them wisely or the state will punish you for not doing so.
                        So, the Left's position is insane. Without a right to self-defense, by whatever means necessary, you are vulnerable to criminals and the state cannot guarantee your protection. The state puts you in a position of potentially being killed or injured or becoming a criminal if you try to prevent that. Insane.
                        The Right says we let you have the means to protect yourself but you have to exercise individual responsibility. That is reasonable.
                        Guns are built for the purpose of killing. It's their primary goal. Giving an easy access to guns means that the number of killings will increase. It will kill much more people than it will save. The Left doesn't deny the right of self-defense, by make access to guns harder it makes it less probable that you will have to use it.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The Left supports abortion on demand but also says it only involves the woman... until the child is actually born and then all of a sudden it's the man involved's responsibility to support the child he got no say in. Insane and illogical.
                        The Right says no abortion (at the extreme) and it is the couple's responsibility to support the child. That's logical and consistent.
                        Where did you seen that ? The Left never claimed that it's the man's responsibility to support the child. The Left always supported the equality for man and woman. Thanks to Left, women get rights and possibility to work, so they can support the child by themselves.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The Left says the State will provide for you what the State thinks you need. One of those things is a living via social security or the equivalent. The Right says you are responsible to make sure you have the means to live in society. Which is less crazy? Thinking that some soulless government entity of faceless bureaucrats will do a better job of providing for you or doing it for yourself?
                        If the State cannot help you, then what is the point of the state ? A tool must work otherwise it's not needed. A member of society is expected to help other members in case of need and be helped in his turn. Don't doing so will destroy the society with large parts of population being segregated.

                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The Left thinks it can force humanity to be altruistic and act like a mindless herd. That's insane.
                        The Right thinks people are individuals and will act in their best interests and do the same with those around them. That's reasonable.

                        The Left is insane.
                        Actually humans are social animals. If there is nobody to push the humanity in a good morale direction, we will turn the society back to slavery or feudalism. This is the great dream of the Right.
                        There are no Nazis in Ukraine. Idiots

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Emtos View Post

                          Guns are built for the purpose of killing. It's their primary goal. Giving an easy access to guns means that the number of killings will increase. It will kill much more people than it will save. The Left doesn't deny the right of self-defense, by make access to guns harder it makes it less probable that you will have to use it.
                          Flamethrowers are unregulated in the US. Guns are simply a tool, nothing more, nothing less. They aren't manufactured for any particular purpose. Your argument is "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." That's a massive logical fallacy. It amounts to circular reasoning.
                          The Left does deny a right to self-defense. It varies by nation and locality, but on the whole the Left tries to criminalize defending yourself.

                          https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...-uk-is-illegal

                          http://www.commonsensepost.net/2016/...-self-defense/

                          http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18002220


                          Where did you seen that ? The Left never claimed that it's the man's responsibility to support the child. The Left always supported the equality for man and woman. Thanks to Left, women get rights and possibility to work, so they can support the child by themselves.
                          What planet do you live on? If a woman has a child, and has that child is in a nation were abortion is legal, but it is solely her right to choose to have or not have an abortion, does a man who is not her legal spouse but is determined to be the father of that child have any say in whether an abortion will occur, or in the support of that child afterwards?
                          I went through this $h!+ with one of my step kids. In the end, I absolutely creamed, demolished, destroyed, the woman involved and got my step son sole custody of his child. In fact, she currently owes him in excess of $20,000 in child support he'll probably never see. So, don't go telling me the crap you're trying to push above.

                          If the State cannot help you, then what is the point of the state ? A tool must work otherwise it's not needed. A member of society is expected to help other members in case of need and be helped in his turn. Don't doing so will destroy the society with large parts of population being segregated.
                          The state should be limited to doing stuff you can't do on your own, like fight wars against other states. Since when should the state by your paternal caretaker? Why should the state be responsible for you instead of you being responsible for yourself? The only parts of society hurt by such a system are the stupid and lazy.

                          Actually humans are social animals. If there is nobody to push the humanity in a good morale direction, we will turn the society back to slavery or feudalism. This is the great dream of the Right.
                          So? Humans also aren't altruistic for the most part. Trying to make them so is a fail situation. On the other hand, most humans are reasonably social and considerate of others. If they weren't we'd never have risen to form societies. Trying to impose altruism and morality on society beyond a certain point is a certain fail situation. But, the Left tries to do just that.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                            Flamethrowers are unregulated in the US. Guns are simply a tool, nothing more, nothing less. They aren't manufactured for any particular purpose. Your argument is "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." That's a massive logical fallacy. It amounts to circular reasoning.
                            The Left does deny a right to self-defense. It varies by nation and locality, but on the whole the Left tries to criminalize defending yourself.

                            https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...-uk-is-illegal

                            http://www.commonsensepost.net/2016/...-self-defense/

                            http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18002220
                            All tools are manufactured for a purpose. Otherwise why buy something without a purpose ? All objects were designed for one or several purposes. Pieces of art can be treated separately but even them have a purpose. Regarding your cases, I don't remember that the Left was in the government of Britain.


                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            What planet do you live on? If a woman has a child, and has that child is in a nation were abortion is legal, but it is solely her right to choose to have or not have an abortion, does a man who is not her legal spouse but is determined to be the father of that child have any say in whether an abortion will occur, or in the support of that child afterwards?
                            I went through this $h!+ with one of my step kids. In the end, I absolutely creamed, demolished, destroyed, the woman involved and got my step son sole custody of his child. In fact, she currently owes him in excess of $20,000 in child support he'll probably never see. So, don't go telling me the crap you're trying to push above.
                            It's different from one country to another. You're pushing the idea that there is some universal case and that is pushed by the left. It's false. Fathers also get more rights if you didn't noticed.

                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            The state should be limited to doing stuff you can't do on your own, like fight wars against other states. Since when should the state by your paternal caretaker? Why should the state be responsible for you instead of you being responsible for yourself? The only parts of society hurt by such a system are the stupid and lazy.
                            Because there are situations when people cannot be responsible for themselves for a reason or another. We can compare Western Europe and US in terms of chances to become homeless, the medical costs and others. In all domains US is long behind Europe. When people know that the state will help them in case of need, it makes the society stronger and the individuals better.

                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                            So? Humans also aren't altruistic for the most part. Trying to make them so is a fail situation. On the other hand, most humans are reasonably social and considerate of others. If they weren't we'd never have risen to form societies. Trying to impose altruism and morality on society beyond a certain point is a certain fail situation. But, the Left tries to do just that.
                            It's not a fail situation. We can see that a majority of people get normal lives only when a social-oriented state appeared. Where it didn't, the society is still in a much worse shape.
                            There are no Nazis in Ukraine. Idiots

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Btw, reading the stuff from New American, I understand how insanity looks like.
                              There are no Nazis in Ukraine. Idiots

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Emtos View Post
                                There is no lives if they aren't born. Nor the word "innocent" has any meaning.
                                How can this be if a person who kills a pregnant woman can be charged with murdering two people?
                                Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
                                Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X