Republicans succeed in ploy to increase unsafe abortions

Post Reply New Topic

Oh really? Please explain how lowering taxes will lead to increased government revenue.

I'll be waiting for you to rewrite the entire system of mathematics as humans know it to say that less money taken in is more money taken in.

It's not about the government making money it's about commercial growth (jobs, trade, etc.).
I guess to you, though, government is the sole source of all prosperity and happiness.


Keep waiting.

Actually I prefer small government and I'd like them to leave me alone.

However, if the government can't make money, the country will cease to exist. Do you ever use roads? They cost money to maintain you know. So does the military, school system, justice system, research industries (fuelled by government grants)... they will just go away.

Why not look at countries that followed your ideal of "just stimulate job growth", countries where companies go in, make employees essentially slaves working in terrible conditions. African countries tend to get this, most third world countries do. Would you like America to become a third world country? That's what it leads too

In other words, the same trickle-down economics that failed under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II.

Republicans seem to have forgotten that the point of businesses succeeding involves them paying their workers a healthy wage so the workers can become part of the middle class. Instead, they apparently believe business has the right to pay starvation wages, with no benefits so executives can live in luxury. And when the workers complain, they're either guilty of class envy, or they're a bunch of damn commies.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Abacacus wrote:

Apparently not:

Abacacus wrote:
“You mean like when Conservatives get asked about their opinion on welfare or socialised medicine?”

This indicates that you like them running your life and taking lots of money out of your pockets to do it with.
So much for small government, eh......

Leave me alone=don't f**k with my rights.

The government doesn't run my life at all, nor would I want them.

Don't put words in my mouth, it makes you seem unintelligent.

Hey, I just quoted what you said earlier. Go back two pages and look at it yourself if you don’t believe me.

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! It is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.
- George Washington


Hey, but don’t pay no mind to that gibberish; it only came from a dumb Virginia farmer.

Quoted what I said and then added to it with things I did not say.

As I said, don't put words in my mouth.

The quoted part IS what you said.
I don't put words in peoples mouths. In your case I don't even need to since you f*ck yourself up good enough without it.

QFT.

I get exasperated by this debate. This is due to my fundamental world-view. I don't regard life as a miracle; I regard it as an accident. My main self-appointed purpose in life is to minimise suffering. The fact that people who empathise with an embryo more than they do with a sentient being are allowed to take the moral high ground on this issue disturbs me. It does not compute.

Every time someone posts an anti-abortion argument, I feel like doing this: This is because I feel there must be something up with my brain; I can't get it to generate much sympathy for a foetus, especially compared to a self-aware being that can suffer.

Please, quote where I said I wanted the government to run my life.

I'll be waiting.

My apologies.


Unfortunately in your case, not everyone is a vegetarian or shares your view on killing animals for any reason. I honestly don't know what to think when it comes to whether animals are sentient beings. I think given the evidence we have to allow at least for the possibility of sentience in the animal kingdom beyond humanity. And for whatever reason humanity (with exceptions, such as yourself of course) does not assign the same moral prohibition or value on animal life as it does its own. I'm willing to reason that animals may be sentient beings like humans are. And I'd also reason that sentience is not sufficient in determining whether deliberately destroying human life, and that means for any stage of development, can or ought to be acceptable.


Human life is human life, and all human life should be respected and protected equally. It shouldn't matter whether it is a newly implanted embryo or an elderly end-stage cancer patient.


Zefs have what humanity they have at varying levels of development. They are still human, and as long as they are human they are worth protecting. Once a zygote becomes self-sustaining within the womb, it is an individual being. You have no evidence that even single cells are incapable of feeling pain. An amoeba can respond to environmental stimuli. Single-cell organisms have internal structures that function in the same ways as multi-cellular organs in larger organisms. I'm not a microbiologist of course, but it would seem to me given the structure of single-cell organisms that they are just as equipped for life--to include a lower-level sensory mechanism. The potential for quasi-consciousness within single cells does lie within the realm of possibility, and I would hypothesize that consciousness occurs even at that level regardless of whether we recognize it or not.

You do not know, therefore, that an embryo cannot feel pain or suffer. It would be better to afford them the same protection as any human life.

Easy for you to say. You are not paying for their upkeep.

ruveyn

I pay plenty. Currently I'm paying for three--two born and one unborn. It's reasonable to assume they were all embryos at one point. I do my share.

Granted, I'm not personally equipped to grow them and push them out. It just so happens my wife is in full agreement with me on this. Her views on abortion go to an extreme that even I can't handle. She is of the opinion that rape/incest or threat to the life of the mother are not even excuses for abortions, whereas I tend to value the life of the mother over the life of the children. If something horrible happened to my daughter, I'd strong-arm my wife if I had to in making sure that Hannah was aware of her options and could make a well-informed decision. I would not be quite so understanding if she was prone to sneaking out of the house at night. Come to think of it, maybe I should start cleaning those old shotguns NOW...

Hello all. I've been thinking, there is really no reason abortion should be illegal, ever. Regardless of the discussion about humanity.

The prime question is why do we punish homicide? (I am including murder and non-criminal homicide here). It has nothing to do with biblical law.

1. To prevent murderers from committing more crimes.
2. So that people being killed don't suffer unnecessarily.
3. So that people that like the person being killed don't suffer.
4. So that people that depend economically on the person being killed receive proper compensation (talking about lawsuits on medic negligence, accidents caused by human mistake, etc).

An early embryo has no capability to suffer, there goes 2. If abortion happens again, the only one affected is the female getting the abortion, so 1. wouldn't make sense. For (3), there really was no capability to begin loving this embryo and the closest person to doing so is making the decision to end it. (4) is the opposite case, the embryo is a financial burden.