Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

How to silence Richard Mourdock

Page 9 of 10 [ 150 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Nov 2012, 3:20 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
DerStadtschutz wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Fox News is trying to make the Republicans look bad

The Republicans are bad. Fox News actually tries to cover for them most of the time.


While that is a true statement, BOTH political parties are bad.


For a Fox News viewer, the world is divided between Good and Evil. "Conservatives", "Republicans" and Rupert Murdoch stand for all that is wholesome and awesome in the universe. "Liberals" and "Democrats" represent all that is rotten. There is no deviating from this basic chimeral story line, no matter what actually happens, nor where the truth truly lies.*


* I'm awaiting kudos for my clever play on words.


:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.

In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!



DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

01 Nov 2012, 3:24 pm

I was angry when I was talking about who Fox News was trying to smear so I messed up and said "Republicans" instead of "Democrats".

Sorry


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

01 Nov 2012, 3:34 pm

Has this been posted yet?
http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/



DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

01 Nov 2012, 3:53 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


Underhanded? Do you mean liberal?

Quote:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!

What?


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

01 Nov 2012, 4:06 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

01 Nov 2012, 5:56 pm

Give him a roofy gag him and drop him off in the middle of nowhere!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


DerStadtschutz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,467

01 Nov 2012, 7:55 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blUTIUxh-Mk[/youtube]



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Nov 2012, 8:21 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.


Name actual conservatives that work in the other media outlets then...



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

01 Nov 2012, 10:12 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.


Name actual conservatives that work in the other media outlets then...


Stephen Colbert



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Nov 2012, 1:35 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.


Name actual conservatives that work in the other media outlets then...


Stephen Colbert


Stephen Colbert is a comedian is actually left of center at best, he's more Conservative than Jon Stewart but he's not Conservative by a longshot.



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

02 Nov 2012, 1:48 am

DerStadtschutz wrote:
ScrewyWabbit wrote:

Second, we get back to exactly who owns a woman's body? In your scenario above, a woman is forced to use her body to play host to what will end up being someone else's child for 9 months (which, by the way, in and of itself tends to be disruptive to work and school).


There's also the fact that if she was raped, there's that constant reminder for 9 months, if not longer. No, the child isn't at fault for the rape, but I don't think it's right for her to be FORCED to give up her body to the child of a rapist either.

I just thought of something else too. Just because an egg gets fertilized, that doesn't mean it gets implanted in the uterus. Sometimes they get flushed out with the period along with all the blood and everything else. So by the logic of a lot of people in this thread, technically in those cases, a woman aborted her pregnancy, even though it wasn't by choice whatsoever. How do you feel about that, and what does your god have to say about it?



I do have sympathy for the mother who is raped. I would make exceptions for that, but that would not stop me from wanting to end government subsidies of abortion. The issue of a raped woman is used as a smoke screen, and you are prepared to live with all of the abortions that are non-raped take place? You are speaking as if the body within hers is not a human being and does not have rights, which is fine, but we need to be honest about what we are declaring.

If one values the life of the unborn at all, one would move to ban all or most abortions via state funding, and then move to make exceptions for victims of rape. What we have in real life is not wanting any end of federal subsidizing of abortion, and victims of rape is entirely a smoke screen. Just admit, I don't think zygotes have any rights, and be honest about it.

Life begins at conception. If that life is terminated naturally, that is fine, by mechanisms in the body. Morality is not involved. When it is ended purposefully by the human, then morality comes into play when we have a choice over the matter, and how we then choose to go about it.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

02 Nov 2012, 1:49 am

ScrewyWabbit wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
It isn't just a mantra removed from reality, if anything, it is a reaction to the 90% of abortions done out of convenience, be it an unplanned accident that interferes with school or work, or the man doesn't want the child, or other reasons.


You make it sound as if people just go in for an abortion willy-nilly, as if its no big deal. I've known women who have had an abortion - I assure you, none of them took that decision lightly, none of them were not emotionally traumatized to one degree or another by their decision, and from what I could tell, not one of them would ever want to have to be in a similar situation again.

When you say "unplanned accident that interferes with school or work", that's exactly the point - Now mom and maybe dad cannot focus on school or their career, and as a result they tend to be worse off economically (never mind having to take on the expense of raising a child) than they otherwise would be.

MarketAndChurch wrote:
To frame this as an issue of the mother being forced to keep an unwanted child is a cheap cop out, especially when we can end all abortions today and offer up babies for adoption for the next few years, and you still would not meet the demand here in the US of childless couples who are not able to have children of their own.


There's a couple of problems with this line of reasoning. First, its not as if orphanages are devoid of unwanted children today - despite this supposed overwhelming demand to adopt. This is true not just in the US, but in Africa, China, etc.

Second, we get back to exactly who owns a woman's body? In your scenario above, a woman is forced to use her body to play host to what will end up being someone else's child for 9 months (which, by the way, in and of itself tends to be disruptive to work and school).





Economics does not determine morality, values do. If the mother and father value life of the unborn and their rights to it, they will give it up for adoption. If they do not, and value economic pursuits, then they won't.

There is a premium placed on children who are still babies. As the baby becomes a toddler, it begins to loose its value in the adoption market, and surely as it grows. Parents looking to adopt want the experience, and will pay top dollar for a newborn. Orphanages are filled with children who are unwanted by the first set of adopters, but there are still a huge market for adoption for non-newborns.

Being a "host" of a child that was a mistake, unplanned, or the product of a rape is making this entirely about the mother, with no consideration for the other human body who she will be giving birth to. Again, if she values life of the unborn and their rights to it, she will see will weight the two, and most likely take the baby to term.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


DerStadtschutz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,467

02 Nov 2012, 1:53 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:

I do have sympathy for the mother who is raped. I would make exceptions for that, but that would not stop me from wanting to end government subsidies of abortion. The issue of a raped woman is used as a smoke screen, and you are prepared to live with all of the abortions that are non-raped take place? You are speaking as if the body within hers is not a human being and does not have rights, which is fine, but we need to be honest about what we are declaring.

If one values the life of the unborn at all, one would move to ban all or most abortions via state funding, and then move to make exceptions for victims of rape. What we have in real life is not wanting any end of federal subsidizing of abortion, and victims of rape is entirely a smoke screen. Just admit, I don't think zygotes have any rights, and be honest about it.

Life begins at conception. If that life is terminated naturally, that is fine, by mechanisms in the body. Morality is not involved. When it is ended purposefully by the human, then morality comes into play when we have a choice over the matter, and how we then choose to go about it.


smokescreen? I was just asking a question because I was curious what you thought about it. Would you stop making me out to be some evil person just because I don't agree 100% with your position?



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

02 Nov 2012, 1:55 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
MarketAndChurch wrote:
we can end all abortions today and offer up babies for adoption for the next few years, and you still would not meet the demand here in the US of childless couples who are not able to have children of their own.



Excess demand for babies to adopt would put upward pressure on prices. If more people were willing to pay a sufficient amount of money, to compensate women for their time, effort and services, then more women would be breeding babies to sell to prospective adoptive parents.



Babies have a high price on them because so few white couples, which constitute the majority of American couples, who are childless, have any access to white babies birthed by white mothers who wanted to see the baby through. You usually have to find a decent setup and prices can range anywhere from 10,000 on the low end and up. Most don't even wait for that option because it is practically non-existent, expensive, or fully booked, and go for babies overseas.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


The_Walrus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,878
Location: London

02 Nov 2012, 6:44 am

Inuyasha wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.


Name actual conservatives that work in the other media outlets then...

George Will? Mary O'Grady? Marc Morano? Joseph Rago? Michael Barone? Michelle Malkin? Rush Limbaugh?



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

02 Nov 2012, 7:12 am

The_Walrus wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:

If you bothered to ever watch Fox News in the past, you'd know they also bash Republicans when they pull something underhanded.


:roll:

Yes, I know. Fox News is presently bashing Gov. Christie for not continuing to bash President Obama after the President's response to the storm that hit New Jersey. That's all that it takes.

They also did a fair amount of Romney bashing, until it became clear that the Magic Mormon was going to be their candidate.

Inuyasha wrote:
:roll:
In fact Fox News probably has more Liberals working for them than all the other networks have Conservatives COMBINED!


You've played fast and loose with your statistics before, but this whopper certainly isn't worth taking any effort at fact-checking.


Name actual conservatives that work in the other media outlets then...

George Will? Mary O'Grady? Marc Morano? Joseph Rago? Michael Barone? Michelle Malkin? Rush Limbaugh?


Maybe they aren't quite mean and ignorant enough to be called true "Conservatives."