YouFound_Lxam

There are plenty of situations where the baby can survive but the mother dies. You would still allow abortion in that case even though the mother chose to have sex (assuming she wasn’t raped)? You would be denying the babies right to live. Why would the mothers life be worth more than the babies in this situation?

The value of human life is circumstantial. It will always be that way. The extent in which we look at the circumstances will keep changing though. 

Also, does it really matter thinking that the guy who’s about to attack your family has value just before you blow his head off?

I was showing you how incoherent your view on abortion is.

So you are equating morality and legality?

Alright, abortion is automatically good then because it’s legal. 

How do you distinguish between an inherent value of a human life and the value you impose on it? And why are you for abortion being illegal except for cases where it is a threat to the mothers life? She chose to have sex, right? Assuming she didn’t get raped. 

That’s how I’ve viewed your argument. And I know it makes no logical sense. 

Yeah, so let’s leave the idea that illegal = bad and legal = good. 

The point is valid. Making something illegal doesn't necessarily decrease instances of it. Prohibition is a solid example of that.

I find this to be very dependant on what we deem alive. At what point do we determine a fetus is alive? Or are talking of the mere potential for life being equal to life?

Do you cry every time you step on an ant? Do you really think the morning after pill is worse than the pork you eat? You have to give a better argument than that.

You’ve just been saying abortion is bad because the government should come for them.

Just because something is illegal doesn’t make it automatically and ethically wrong.

It doesn’t tie into free speech, because I just explained that the government is the only authority that can stop you from having the ability to express your views.

No one owes you a platform and your views are not being silenced, the problem is that no one wants to hear what you have to say. And it is the right of the rest of society to decide they do not want to hear it.

Can you please explain what in earth you are talking about?

You haven’t argued why abortion/morning after pill are wrong in and of themselves.

 You’re just using the threat of the government as to why they should be wrong.

Making abortion illegal and unsafe is a threat to the mothers life regardless.

Be honest, you don’t care about women and young girls.

You would be focused on preventing these circumstances in the first place if you were genuine. 

Maybe focusing on better healthcare and/or looking at expenses of raising children.

Don’t you want a healthy nuclear family?

You’re using government coercion as the criteria of why abortion/morning after pill should be a bad decision. 

You claim to want to protect free speech, but it is only your personal freedom of speech you want to protect and of those who agree with you. When the rest of us speak out against your views, and that public outcry amounts to enough pressure that companies determine it is in their best interest to ban you, that is not an attack on free speech. That is two sides both expressing their views, and one side winning the battle decisively. If you are bothered by this then then the solution is to be more persuasive. If you can’t, then either you are wrong or the rest of society is wrong. Either way, your views within this society will be detrimental to you because it does not align with what the society you live within considers acceptable.

The only thing that can defeat this phenomenon is an authority powerful enough to silence the majority of voices within the society it holds power over. We decided a long time ago that this outcome was not acceptable, which is why the government cannot interfere with what society considers acceptable speech.

Nothing “the left” is doing violates any of this, so your assertion that the left is trying to become that authority is pure fiction. 

So the women or girl is the one waving the cash around and the government/corporations are the robber in this analogy? I’m kind of confused. 

Are you saying it should be illegal to walk down the street because you might get hit by a car?

You know who should be teaching you this? Your father. Example is a always a better teacher than speech.

I oppose life in jail for ANY crime because I don’t want tax dollars feeding murderers and rapists.

Charging for manslaughter doesn’t make sense; if abortion was banned, abortionists wouldn’t perform abortions which means the female is going to have to perform her own abortion.

All abortions are premeditated.  1 in 6 women have gotten a premeditated abortion.  If you know 60 women, 10 of them about got a premeditated abortion.  But I don’t support making the penalty for abortion life in jail or the death penalty because it’s not pragmatic.

It is possible (and happens a lot) where you follow every rule for consensual sex and still end up pregnant.  Birth control reduces abortions; it doesn’t eliminate them.  YOU shouldn’t be having recreational sex.

Lots of things have risks and consequences. you’re not saying anything fundamental.

And they teach that at school, that Christians are real.

The only entity that has the power to determine what you are “allowed” to say is the government, so if your allegation does not include the government it has nothing to do with free speech.

If it was an abortion derived from a pregnancy made from consensual sex, the penalty for first degree murder is life in jail or the death penalty.  It’s a nonstarter to put 1/6 females to death for abortion.

If you know 60 women (you probably know more), then 10 of them would be put to death. Abortion should be tried as 5th degree murder, so the penalty can be light but proportional.

I have no issue with telling women (and men) that they shouldn’t have vaginal sex unless they want a kid.  But I also think if you tell women to not have sex and you have sex with women, it’s hypocritical.  So I hope your a virgin because if not, women have sex because of YOU.

I am a virgin and proud of it.  I encourage people to wait until they want a kid to have sex, and I try and not watch porn.  But when 97% of America has recreational sex, pro lifers need to come to terms with that.

Now, can you actually equate abortion and drunk driving, why are they fundamentally similar? Also you said you were okay with the morning after pill, correct?

White supremacy doesn't exist, it's just that black people are inferior cause they didn't have no daddy to take em to monster truck rallies and stuff like that.

So you’re fighting the good fight against an imaginary boogeyman to stop them from some unknown plot to cause some unknown damage. Ok.

You still didn’t address the central point. This issue, even taken to its most extreme logical end (which you have already done) has nothing to do with free speech.

Now you’re talking about men dressing up in drag. Please make up your mind.

A man does not need makeup and a dress to do whatever he wanted to.

Is was talking about the anti-LGBTQ movement.

Movements that are intellectually legitimate base themselves on actual trends in our society, not on a handful of occurrences within a population of over 300 million people.

Transgender student…” - ok, we can stop there. I asked you for evidence that trans women should be regarded as pedophiles, so not only was your first article immediately disqualifying as it was a story of one person, but it has nothing to do with sexual assault. She was arrested for punching two other girls in the face, probably because they were talking shit to her. I really hope you have something better.

Oklahoma trans gender student…” - not reading this, another one off and a complete waste of time.

The next as article claiming story hour “admits” to grooming kids is just plain stupid. Apparently “grooming” on the political right is being defined as teaching kids that the LGBTQ community exists. In a way this really says more than you’ve said in this entire thread. It really speaks to the right’s bigotry here that the very idea of teaching our kids to accept the community would be categorized along with child abuse.

The rest of your articles are about library books which has nothing to do with this subject except the last one which is another YouTube video. Not watching that until you can show that you even understand what kind of evidence it would take to support your claim.

"The LGBTQIA+ movement is more like a religion" is a correct claim, since the movement has it's belief system, its moral system and it's followers. It has idols, and it tries to spread it's belief on others in similar way like a religion.

You mean Jesus didn’t have blonde hair and blue eyes? But all the ancient paintings of him show him looking like that. Lol

Anyone with a brain knows that Jesus most likely looked like one of the 9/11 highjackers. But don’t tell the Pope that.

B. Just the culture of blacks

Don’t forget that half of all marriages end in divorce, including white people marriages. That means kids, white kids growing up in homes with no father around, at least not every day. I get the impression your father doesn’t live with you.

Yes, systemic racism, that is racist policies and laws enforced by the authorities, the people in power, - marginalized black people just because they were black. 

And that’s why black people have struggled in this country for the last 200 years. It’s not because they are an inferior race of humans. It’s not because of their culture. It’s not because Jesus is white and that’s just how Jesus wanted things to be. It’s racism. It’s people like you. Stupid, ignorant people.

It’s not because of their culture

THE VOTER ID LAW IS AN EXAMPLE OF LAWS DESIGNED TO FAVOR WHITES OVER BLACKS. BECAUSE ITS HARDER FOR BLACKS TO GET AN ID.

WHY? BECAUSE THEY ARE POOR. THEY DONT OWN A CAR. THEY HAVE LESS MONEY. THEY DONT GET PAID TIME OFF. THEY WORK 3 JOBS TO EARN A LIVING. THEY CANT AFFORD TO RETIRE.

Yes, they do. You’re just too stupid to understand it. The politicians are literally admitting they are passing laws to make voting harder for blacks and they are proud of it.

So you do admit the government will be forcing women to carry to term. Why are you having a hard time admitting that?

Nothing about the concept of free speech includes being free from your neighbor telling you you’re an ass for the things you said.

You are stupid. I spelled out the only two possible reasons that could explain how a group that large could have such poor results.

The left: Put them in a woman’s prison!  Transwomen are women.

The right: Put them in a men’s prison!  Protect out girls!

Me: I don’t care if you think transwomen are men or women.  I don’t want tax dollars feeding prisoners; we spend $182 billion a year on our prisons.  Give the prisoner lashings!  That’s your punishment.

What part of illegality don’t you understand? It means little if it isn’t enforced.

Ya genius, there are several examples in this one article.

JC you are stupid. The voter ID laws are designed to make it harder for black people to vote.

I’m saying black people, as a statistical group in the United States, have not been as successful as other groups in America. 

Now you can believe one of two reasons for this historical fact that has been observed and documented since the country’s founding.

Either black people are an inferior race of human beings OR black people have been marginalized in our society by systemic racism.

The racists believe it’s the former but they also think there would be nothing wrong with the later.

Every nation has a certain level of privacy. To what level is North Korea required to be transparent?

2. Yeah, I agree North Korea engages in human rights violations. I was simply saying that, in a world where we buy that North Korea is simply not getting a fair shake by Western media, what are they supposed to do besides say "we're ok"?

I can give you several. Here’s an article that cites numerous examples of Republican politicians bragging that voter ID laws and other initiatives will help prevent people from voting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/some-republicans-acknowledge-leveraging-voter-id-laws-for-political-gain.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

“In April of this year, Representative Glenn Grothman, Republican of Wisconsin, predicted in a television interview that the state’s photo ID law would weaken the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the state in November’s election”

“the Republican leader of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, Mike Turzai, predicted during the campaign that the voter ID law would “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”

“Scott Tranter, a Republican political consultant for Mr. Romney and others, called voter ID laws — and generating long lines at polling places — part of his party's tool kit”

You are the perfect young/future Republican voter - you’re a dummy.

So, first of all… straight men do not go and get their bodies surgically altered to look like women so that they can go have sex with women. That’s just stupid.

And spare me your one anecdote that I’m sure you can find if you search the Internet hard enough since we live in a country of well over 300 million people and a world of over 8 billion. We’re talking about political movements and public policy.

Second and more importantly, I have been asking you to support your assertion that trans women should be regarded as pedophiles despite the fact that the studies and real life all seem to tell us the opposite. Can you do that, or will you finally admit that this “sexual grooming” narrative the right has been peddling is pure bullshit fear mongering?

Not at all. I spent a lot of my formative years questioning the beliefs of my parents and my grandparents and my aunts and uncles. I didn't trust my mum and dad more than my grandparents, I didn't trust them more than my aunts. I questioned all their teachings, I was fortunate that my family taught me to question and were clear in explaining that the beliefs they held were to be questioned. The flaw in your argument is that the child would be confused on who to trust. My point is that just because their are multiple points of view being presented to a child doesn't have to be confusing. 

In your world. You’re willing to use the government to force women to carry to term, not acknowledging incentives. 

your naïve, or willfully ignorant. Examples are in the news on a regular basis. Sometimes politicians say the quiet part out loud and admit they passed laws to make it hard for certain people to vote in a way that favors Republican candidates. 

It’s calling them disadvantaged, which is what they are. They have less money, less resources, less education, less connections, and so on.

I bet you could think of a lot of things that are easier to do when you have money and all these other advantages. You’re just a kid, without a license or a car, so it’s harder for you to get things done. If you didn’t have support from family then that would make things harder too. If you didn’t have a computer and an internet connection, then harder still. Then let’s say the state legislature closed down the DMV closest to your house and now it’s a 2 hour 3 transfer bus ride to get near the closet DMV. But they are only open during the day, and if you don’t work you don’t get paid. Get the picture?

Many sources, I learned from both my parents, my grandparents, friends of the family my aunts and uncles. I learned that people have different perspectives, beliefs and ideas. My father for example was an atheist, while my mother was a deist. My grandmother on my mothers side was a spiritualist while my grandmother from my father's was a christian (as were a couple of my aunts). All of these people were present for my childhood (with work I spent much of my time with my grandparents and aunts for example).