Where on the political spectrum do you lie? (Mods: Please don't move!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenyth

Abortion is a VERY touchy subject indeed. It is certainly nothing to be taken lightly! I am a man, so I don't think I'm well qualified to make a valid moving statement one way or the other. I will tell you this though, as a new father. When you study in depth a baby's development in the womb, it strikes you pretty hard just how soon a fetus becomes a tangible human being. After a child is born it also quickly becomes apparent how precious children really are. I also don't know of any who have had abortions that don't regret it to some degree later in life, especially when they decide to start a family and have children. It's a decision that has a very good chance of haunting you the rest of your existance. Humor and wit are all good and fun, but please, in reality, don't ever take something like this lightly. Don't ever take birth control responsibility lightly either. Guys, this is the most control you have over pregnancy, so I suggest you use it. I know I wouldn't want an abortion on my conscience! As a man, you may find yourself forced into it because it's not your body carrying the baby!


Fatherly lecture over..................... :smiley9: God, when did I get old?

---

I'm not going to argue this point any more.. Good post Kenyth although i don't agree with all of it, very well thought out.

kenyth, you are right that the abortion issue is a difficult one and I've struggled with it myself over the years. I continue to be personally pro-life because I cannot justify the termination of a pregnancy as simply being a "choice". On the other hand, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade would be the national equivalent to the Rodney King verdict in Compton in terms of igniting the culture war into a full-blown mushroom cloud. Furthermore, the inevitable (and expensive) consequences of a prohibition against abortion stands in sharp contrast to today's political climate where the majority has little or no concept of a collective good and seems to believe their entitled to a new round of tax cuts every year no matter what the current state of financial or geopolitical affairs might be.

While I personally agree with your birth control argument, you have to bear in mind that a very high percentage of those who are most opposed to abortion believe that birth control is a form of abortion. If abortion were to be outlawed, which I don't see happening since keeping the issue indefinitely alive yields a gravy train of votes for Republicans, you can bet that a large sector of the pro-life community would make the criminalization of birth control their next priority.

Amanda I must say you are very well spoken. While I do not agree with your stance on abortion supporting choice while being pro-life. Cost for not allowing it except in certain circumstances could be fixed by the Death Penalty. I am a strong believer in the DP and think if you murder(not Killers. Soldiers, police, and people defending themselves and others(aggressively or defensibly) Kill) someone you deserve to die and I do not care if your mentally ill. You have to be to murder someone.

I do not believe keeping someone in prison for more than ten years is worth it. At that point they are more than a drain on society. Death with a one week turn around. Yes some innocents will die but crime labs are much better now and fewer and fewer innocents are getting convicted. The argument about what if it was me or my family member isn't up to par. It would be awful but I still believe that it is better to do what is good for the many than good for the one.

As to the money. Once the prisons are cut down to a lower population you would have your income for the new born's.


My opnion on abortion has change with having kids of my own. Third and most of second trimester it's plain murder.



And Mike I now see where that comment in the Marrying thread came from. While I am anti-abortion to a point Amanda did a better job debating then you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diesel Grinch

Amanda I must say you are very well spoken. While I do not agree with your stance on abortion supporting choice while being pro-life. Cost for not allowing it except in certain circumstances could be fixed by the Death Penalty. I am a strong believer in the DP and think if you murder(not Killers. Soldiers, police, and people defending themselves and others(aggressively or defensibly) Kill) someone you deserve to die and I do not care if your mentally ill. You have to be to murder someone.

I do not believe keeping someone in prison for more than ten years is worth it. At that point they are more than a drain on society. Death with a one week turn around. Yes some innocents will die but crime labs are much better now and fewer and fewer innocents are getting convicted. The argument about what if it was me or my family member isn't up to par. It would be awful but I still believe that it is better to do what is good for the many than good for the one.
As to the money. Once the prisons are cut down to a lower population you would have your income for the new born's.


My opnion on abortion has change with having kids of my own. Third and most of second trimester it's plain murder.



And Mike I now see where that comment in the Marrying thread came from. While I am anti-abortion to a point Amanda did a better job debating then you.

---

nothing is that black and white. DP with a one week turn around?! my uncle is in prison for murdering his daughter's meth addict boyfriend who was coming to his house to kill her, which he was verballly threatening as he walked towards my uncle. he pointed a gun at him and told him to leave his property or he would be shot. he got three feet from my uncle's door and my uncle blew his head off protecting his daughter from a crazed meth addict who had been up for over a week. it was not self defense because he was unarmed and he had not entered the house. he's serving his 7th year of 12 right now. does he deserve to die?


and about the 'better to do what is good for the many than good for the one.' maybe we should kill everyone who has aids, or any other contagious desease. that'd be good for the many, right? yeah, it may suck if you your loved ones have it, but at least no one else will get it.

Drake by what you have told me your uncle got a raw deal. Justice and the law are two different animals. He broke the law but was just in what he was doing. I think I would have gotten more years because I would have empty the clip in him and reloaded. In my own little world your uncle would have never been tried. Since my above post is my little world he wouldn't die. But that guy who robbed the 7-11 for 10 bucks and happens to get over 10 years would be dead. The corporate head who sold stock illegally and got 15 years would be dead. The guy caught pissing in public and got 10 years 1 day would be dead.


The dieses thing is reaching. Doing something on purpose and catching something is different. If someone spread it on purpose then they would be dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drake

nothing is that black and white. DP with a one week turn around?! my uncle is in prison for murdering his daughter's meth addict boyfriend who was coming to his house to kill her, which he was verballly threatening as he walked towards my uncle. he pointed a gun at him and told him to leave his property or he would be shot. he got three feet from my uncle's door and my uncle blew his head off protecting his daughter from a crazed meth addict who had been up for over a week. it was not self defense because he was unarmed and he had not entered the house. he's serving his 7th year of 12 right now. does he deserve to die?


and about the 'better to do what is good for the many than good for the one.' maybe we should kill everyone who has aids, or any other contagious desease. that'd be good for the many, right? yeah, it may suck if you your loved ones have it, but at least no one else will get it.

---

No Drake, he doesn't deserve to die, he deserves a medal. That bussiness of having to wait until they actually get IN the house needs to be tempered with the facts about the condition of the person who was killed, as well as the physical abilities of the shooter, in my oppinion. Is there no way he can be parolled early? Damn, I hate to see someone in prison for protecting his family, that sucks bro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealPurobrat

No Drake, he doesn't deserve to die, he deserves a medal. That bussiness of having to wait until they actually get IN the house needs to be tempered with the facts about the condition of the person who was killed, as well as the physical abilities of the shooter, in my oppinion. Is there no way he can be parolled early? Damn, I hate to see someone in prison for protecting his family, that sucks bro.

---

he's up for parol in a year, i think. there was even two witnesses. but he couldn't afford a lawyer. he's a poor coonass from way south louisiana. he had a court appointed lawyer. so, i'm sure that didn't help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diesel Grinch

Amanda I must say you are very well spoken. While I do not agree with your stance on abortion supporting choice while being pro-life. Cost for not allowing it except in certain circumstances could be fixed by the Death Penalty. I am a strong believer in the DP and think if you murder(not Killers. Soldiers, police, and people defending themselves and others(aggressively or defensibly) Kill) someone you deserve to die and I do not care if your mentally ill. You have to be to murder someone.

I do not believe keeping someone in prison for more than ten years is worth it. At that point they are more than a drain on society. Death with a one week turn around. Yes some innocents will die but crime labs are much better now and fewer and fewer innocents are getting convicted. The argument about what if it was me or my family member isn't up to par. It would be awful but I still believe that it is better to do what is good for the many than good for the one.

As to the money. Once the prisons are cut down to a lower population you would have your income for the new born's.


My opnion on abortion has change with having kids of my own. Third and most of second trimester it's plain murder.



And Mike I now see where that comment in the Marrying thread came from. While I am anti-abortion to a point Amanda did a better job debating then you.

---

Even at that, think about it.......once the children grow and begin to work, don't they begin giving to the tax system? Which would actually CREATE more tax revenue. Seems to me that if you had more people being taxed, which you would if abortion were illegal, then you would in turn create more tax revenue. It's a no brainer that if you have 500 people being taxed instead of 100 that you are going to create more tax revenue.

I also posted earlier about the ties to abortion and the social security crisis, but no one seemed to want a piece of that. All they wanted to do was bash me for my joke in that same post, so whatever.
-Mike

It certainly is possible that the rising birth rate that would come if abortion was criminalized would end paying for the costs that would come from an abortion prohibition....eventually. Keep in mind that it would be a minimum of 16 years until the additional children born would be taxpayers. Until that day came, the prohibition would present nothing but expenses....and tremendous expenses at that.

Honestly I have my doubts as to whether the additional taxpayers born in the face of an abortion ban would be able to counter the costs of prohibition. Every time a prohibition is enacted, its supporters project the net cost savings society will eventually enjoy. Certainly that has not been the case with the War on Drugs. It swallows up a higher share of taxpayer dollars each additional year, with zero results. Trying to legislate the laws of supply and demand out of existence will always be an exercise in futility.

Protecting a culture of life by thrusting government death squads on lawbreakers, as Diesel Grinch suggested, is a betrayal of both limited government power and valuing human life, both of which the political right claims to hold at the top of their political agenda. If basic components of a civilized society are upheld, as opposed to the police state tyranny of China, prohibitions will always fail. The poor choices of the masses are a cost of personal freedom, and I'm generally willing to accept that cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amanda

It certainly is possible that the rising birth rate that would come if abortion was criminalized would end paying for the costs that would come from an abortion prohibition....eventually. Keep in mind that it would be a minimum of 16 years until the additional children born would be taxpayers. Until that day came, the prohibition would present nothing but expenses....and tremendous expenses at that.

Honestly I have my doubts as to whether the additional taxpayers born in the face of an abortion ban would be able to counter the costs of prohibition. Every time a prohibition is enacted, its supporters project the net cost savings society will eventually enjoy. Certainly that has not been the case with the War on Drugs. It swallows up a higher share of taxpayer dollars each additional year, with zero results. Trying to legislate the laws of supply and demand out of existence will always be an exercise in futility.

Protecting a culture of life by thrusting government death squads on lawbreakers, as Diesel Grinch suggested, is a betrayal of both limited government power and valuing human life, both of which the political right claims to hold at the top of their political agenda. If basic components of a civilized society are upheld, as opposed to the police state tyranny of China, prohibitions will always fail. The poor choices of the masses are a cost of personal freedom, and I'm generally willing to accept that cost.

---

The bottom line is that abortion is wrong, I've always thought it funny that left wingers are all about the choice and abortion and what not. They don't mind kicking off a few human fetuses. Let's say though that the bengal tiger for example, lets say its fetus became some sort of rare exotic food, and people started killing the tiger fetus to eat it.....left wingers would go NUTS. You'd have every yahoo and wacko coming out of the woods, saying "oh the tiger's fetus has the right to life blah blah blah." I've actually heard that argued before, I couldnt believe it, lol.
-Mike