-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
That liberty and freedom belongs to the unborn as well.
I wouldn't change a thing.
I'm not a fan of abortion either (is anybody?), but you bring up a good point. My wife likes to compare it to the gun debate in this way:
"If it were illegal, would that make it disappear?"
I think if a person thinks honestly about both situations (guns and abortion), you'd have to admit that it's going to exist even if the government decides to make it illegal. When has a prohibition against something man wanted to do ever served to eliminate it? Drugs? Alcohol? Abortion (before it was legalized?).
But YOU DO have that right, so if your neighbor pulls out a gun and says he is going to shoot the person right next to you, you dont think you have the right to choose what is right for others? Then why have ANY laws at all? All a law is, is something that denies someone from doing something because its wrong. Thats the whole point of laws, its choosing what is right for others. As far as a gay marriage, its not marriage, marriage is defined as a union between and man and a woman before God. Thats the traditional meaning. If gays wanna be together, no one is stopping it, but it is NOT marriage, it is a civil union, it is a man and a man, which is not the same thing as man and a woman. no one is banning a man and a man being together, this is where the argument for liberals falls apart. They make you think we are against gays being together, sure i dont agree with it, but no one is stopping it, we are just not going to call an orange an apple, and we arent going to give them the same benefits because we are the majority. If enough gays voted enough people in to give them the same benefits, then that would happen. The whole argument is a sham. A man and a man is not the same as a man and a woman. Simple as that. I believe YOU have the right to tell someone else that they cannot KILL YOU. No one should deny you the right to life as a baby. Now when it comes to someone who murders another, well that is a whole nuther' can o worms. I mean even obama, who says he is for gay marriage, has done NOTHING to advance that, and never will, even they dont think its right.
Then why have any laws?
of course, there will always be "illegal" things that are always around. I think the point is that as a society we should stand against things we believe are wrong, just cuz something is happening doesnt mean she would just make it legal. It may never serve to eliminate something to prohibit it, but it will deter that act from happening and substance from being abused.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Probably not, but you fail to consider two issues.
First, if the murder of the innocent for simply being inconvenient is going to be tolerated, I demand that all murder be legal so we can at least take out people who have done something to do it.
Second, if abortion were illegal, my tax dollar wouldn't be paying for it. Before anyone jumps in with the standard boilerplate, I know that the federal money isn't supposed to be used for performing abortions, and TECHNICALLY it isn't. It is used to pay for things that otherwise would be paid out of other revenue streams, allowing that money to be redirected to paying for abortions, hence in reality it is paying for abortions even thought the accounting says otherwise. For those who give donations for a designated purpose, like, for example, a favorite program at church, pay close attention to this. Accepting designated gifts and applying them to that purpose while cutting that much money that would otherwise be used for your pet project is a favorite way of being honestly dishonest, accepting your money for the program while in actuality your gift does nothing to improve funding for it. At least at church, you don't have to worry about the money financing murder!
IncendiaryGunner
Master
I think while we have been discussing the abortion issue itself, we have overlooked the elephant in the room - why elected officials avoid taking a hard stance on abortion while in office....
As far as politics goes, the abortion issue is about playing to the base of both major parties - and not about legislative change. It is one of the polarizing issues that is invoked during campaigns when political points are thought to be the outcome - and is then quickly forgotten once votes have been cast.
Unfortunately for Republicans that oppose legalized abortion, in modern times it does not seem to garner as much political favor, and in many instances harms their campaign - which is likely why we have heard less about abortion recently.
As far as politics goes, the abortion issue is about playing to the base of both major parties - and not about legislative change. It is one of the polarizing issues that is invoked during campaigns when political points are thought to be the outcome - and is then quickly forgotten once votes have been cast.
Unfortunately for Republicans that oppose legalized abortion, in modern times it does not seem to garner as much political favor, and in many instances harms their campaign - which is likely why we have heard less about abortion recently.
I think that is perfect the way it is
Thanks
Thanks
Would you feel morally justified if your tax dollars went to paying for Emergency Room care for women who received an abortion with a coat hanger? Your argument about the fungibility of currency cuts both ways.
I don't like abortion, and I respect those that fight against the demand for abortion by promoting abstinence, birth control, etc. Where our paths diverge is when folks feel the need to take what I consider a religious conviction, and try to codify it into law that others may not agree with.
While it may be possible (see Theocracies in the Middle East), I don't think it is right, or is in line with what the founders of our country had in mind.
Maybe let the prison system take care of the bill...they pay for murderers medical expenses.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Better than willfully being party to murder.
Aren't the two issues a dichotomy of human free will?
On one hand you're saying people have the right to protect themselves and carry weapons but someone cant choose to have an abortion because you know whats best.
I may not agree that everyone should own a gun but I will protect their right, and on the same side of the freedom coin I may not agree with abortion as an option to 99.9999% of early pregnancy but I do not agree with taking away that free will to choose. It's not my choice, it's not the governments choice, it's not my neighbors choice. Its the choice of the woman whose body it affects.
On one hand you're saying people have the right to protect themselves and carry weapons but someone cant choose to have an abortion because you know whats best.
I may not agree that everyone should own a gun but I will protect their right, and on the same side of the freedom coin I may not agree with abortion as an option to 99.9999% of early pregnancy but I do not agree with taking away that free will to choose. It's not my choice, it's not the governments choice, it's not my neighbors choice. Its the choice of the woman whose body it affects.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Should it be legal for me to kill you?
It already is under some circumstances.
That is half of the equation. Too bad the other half doesn't get a vote.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
I meant arbitrarily.
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
That is what happens to the defenseless unfortunately.
