- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Common sense solution to the abortion problem
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:35 pm to LSUFanHouston
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:35 pm to LSUFanHouston
What is or is not possible should not affect what you think ought to be, which is really what our internet discussions are about, since none of us really control policy.
0
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:35 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
You and I both know that will never happen.
You’re all over the place. You’re playing with theory in one post and then jumping back to pragmatics in the next. You aren’t disciplined enough for this argument. Go read someone who’s done it better than you and reformulate.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:36 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
. But don't force all of us to pay for decades for the stupid decisions of a few.
Err, abortion is legal now and we are paying for decades right now.
But if it’s just about money then let’s kill off all the old, the feeble, the special needs folks and save a bunch of money.
And if that doesn’t save enough, we can cull the population. We could give aptitude tests. Kill off the bottom 10, 20 per cent perhaps.
Where do we stop?
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:36 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
So, as long as it would be cheaper for society to end someone's life, you are okay with it?
The decision for a person to end their own life is not mine to make, nor is it mine to tell them they cannot.
You know, small government and all.
quote:
Fiscal conservatism still operates within a boundary of one's morals.
Not really. That fallacy is why we have the financial issues we have.
quote:
You've seriously just argued that the only way to be a fiscal conservative is if you are morally okay with genocide.
I'm not saying we should kill people for political purposes. Point is invalid.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:37 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The decision for a person to end their own life is not mine to make, nor is it mine to tell them they cannot.
Said completely without irony in an abortion thread.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:38 pm to the808bass
quote:
No. You’re now allowing for morals in the question which you’re conveniently disallowing in the abortion question. It’s not whether or not they concur. Fiscally, it’s cheaper to shoot them all. Sorry if that offends you.
No. What I am allowing is that each person's morals should guide their own decisions.
If a person wants to have a baby out of wedlock and ends up on welfare for 18 years, so be it. That's THEIR decision.
What you and others want to do, is impose YOUR morals on OTHERS.
Why is this so hard for social conservative to understand?
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:40 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
What I am allowing is that each person's morals should guide their own decisions.
Yeah. That’s a moral judgment on your part. It’s the principle of self-determination which is so much a part of the fabric of our society you are excused that you didn’t realize it’s a moral judgment.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:40 pm to the808bass
quote:
Said completely without irony in an abortion thread.
Bingo. He is arguing that the fiscal decision operates outside the world of morals, yet the key part of the decision is a moral decision on when exactly someone's life begins and is no longer able to be terminated by someone else.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:41 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
No. What I am allowing is that each person's morals should guide their own decisions.
Sounds awesome, let's have a private law society that will actually make people put their money where their mouth is.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:41 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
What you and others want to do, is impose YOUR morals on OTHERS.
Do you believe abortion should be legal up until the point the baby is actually birthed?
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:41 pm to the808bass
quote:
You’re all over the place. You’re playing with theory in one post and then jumping back to pragmatics in the next. You aren’t disciplined enough for this argument. Go read someone who’s done it better than you and reformulate.
I'm sorry I'm so far over your level of thinking that you can't keep up. Let me sum it up for you.
1) Aborted babies lead to reductions in government spending and crime. This has been proven.
2) No one should be forced to have an abortion. No one should be denied having an abortion.
3) To the extent that you want to take that same "idea" to elder care / terminal illness, the same rules apply... so...
4) Someone who is on medicaid and terminal and ends their life will save money for the fisc
5) No one should be forced to end their life, and no one should be denied the chance to end their life.
We are moving fast so I can understand how you got confused.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:42 pm to pwejr88
quote:
Or don’t have sex until you’re in love
People fall out of love all the time. This won’t solve anything.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:43 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
5) No one should be forced to end their life, and no one should be denied the chance to end their life.
When does someone become capable of being protected from others forcing their life to be terminated?
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:43 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
I'm sorry I'm so far over your level of thinking that you can't keep up.
You can’t carry my brain’s jock strap, Lennie.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:47 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Do you believe abortion should be legal up until the point the baby is actually birthed?
Legal? Yes. I thought that was pretty clear.
In my "perfect world", no one would have an abortion because no one would have to have an abortion, because all conceptions would occur between two loving married people who are ready to have a baby and can support said baby.
That's not realistic. Neither is forcing your morals on others.
I don't care if you abort.
I don't care if you end your life.
I don't care if you smoke weed.
I don't care if you gamble.
I don't care if you drink.
I don't care if you own a gun or 500 guns.
As long as your decisions don't affect my life - I don't care what you do.
You know, freedom, small government, etc.
The real irony is the social conservative who stand in front of an American flag screaming about individual freedom while actively supporting policies that limit individual freedom.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:48 pm to the808bass
quote:
You can’t carry my brain’s jock strap, Lennie.
You think with your lower head? No wonder you are having trouble with this topic!!!
That explains it!
I'm sorry... I'm sure there is a babe thread on the O-T you can look at
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:49 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Step2: USE A CONDOM, BIRTH CONTROL, OR PLANB IF YOU DO WANT TO HAVE A CHILD.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:50 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Legal? Yes. I thought that was pretty clear.
I don't think once should ever assume its clear that anyone is okay with killing a baby up to the point it actually leaves the birthing canal.
From that point of view, even after the baby is birthed, it is no more or less likely to be a drain on society, it is no more or less dependent on the mother. Why can't it be killed at that point?
quote:
As long as your decisions don't affect my life - I don't care what you do.
You know, freedom, small government, etc.
Oh I get it. I'm trying to figure out at what point you actually determine someone's life is their life and what the qualifying action is that creates that.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 4:55 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Oh I get it. I'm trying to figure out at what point you actually determine someone's life is their life and what the qualifying action is that creates that.
Well, when the baby leaves the birth canal, it's considered "born", gets a birth certificate, the umbiblical cord is cut, etc.
So I would say that's as good a point as any that one's life is their life.
If we are going to argue that babies are independent "alive" individuals, shouldn't their birth certificates reflect the date of conception? And their first birthday be 12 months after that.
Posted on 5/17/19 at 5:04 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Well, when the baby leaves the birth canal, it's considered "born", gets a birth certificate, the umbiblical cord is cut, etc.
So I would say that's as good a point as any that one's life is their life.
So, as a small government fiscal conservative, the government is partly responsible for the determination that your life is now your life? That makes sense. I mean expanding on your logic, if the umbilical cord has not been cut, the baby is still part of the mother. Should just be able to still kill it since it is not its own individual quite yet.
What about when a baby is killed via a car crashing into the mother's vehicle? Are you for getting rid of the laws that charge that person with manslaughter or murder? I'm just trying to figure out the full scope of your opinion here as it is one i've never seen before.
ETA: I know i'm taking this to the logical extreme here, but in that case, if the baby is just about to crown, and the mother stabs it or whatever, it's not murder to you? Baby has not left the mother at all, has not been "born" yet.
This post was edited on 5/17/19 at 5:07 pm
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News