Republicans will stand up on guns but not abortion

[Liberty1911]

I'm not anti-religion. I think you can believe whatever it is you want to believe. Unlike the people of the "tolerant religion" I actually don't try and tell people that their beliefs are wrong. I dont find that to be a very Christian attitude.

Christ did. John 14:6

 

[thatguy]

Questions:
1) If a fetus is not a human being, then what is it?
2) How does it have a heartbeat, move around in the womb if not a human?
3) How can it have gender, early in his/her growth if it's not human?
4) How is somebody tried for murder, if they kill the unborn child, thru some violent act, other than abortion?

I've never understood the fetus isn't human argument, does this "other than human entity" when mixed with air outside the womb morph into a human?

As said above, states rights, not federal, so no, not looking for larger govt.

1) No one is denying that it's a human fetus as opposed to an animal fetus
2) My dog had a heartbeat and moved around in the womb... much to his mothers dismay at times
3) Again, many dogs and animals go thru the same stages of development in the womb.. poor argument.
4) Crappy laws, why is it the father of a child is automatically a deadbeat in the eyes of divorce court despite never doing anything wrong?

Just because you say something doesnt mean its valid. lets look at both science and religion, obviously religion says its wrong. Ok now science. According to scientists life has to meet certain criteria in order for it to be called LIFE. A fetus meets every single one of those criteria, examples being it eliminates waste, it responds to stimuli, etc. The fetus also has ITS OWN DNA. In regards to science and religion it is a human. in regards to the women who have gone through severe mental anguish for aborting their kid, if its not human and no more than a finger nail clipping, why do the majority of women regret that decision? What a ridiculous point, "its valid as anybody else's and i havent heard a good reason to think differently." Well here is one, YOU USED TO BE A FETUS YOU IDIOT. is that a good enough reason? Wow

You're using that word wrong. The scientific definition of life covers a whole spectrum of stuff. I don't see you crying when someone cuts down a tree because it's inconvenient. Or killing the weeds in your garden because you don't like them. Or sanitizing your hands, all those bacteria are life using the definition you just tried to use.

I'm not making a statement one way or another here, I know what I believe. If you're going to make arguments at least make good ones.

 

[bobzilla]

Christ did. John 14:6

I sure don't remember Christ slinging mud and calling them names though. I sure don't remember him yelling at the top of his lungs trying to shout you down. But it's been a while since I read that long book.

 

[bmbutch]

1) No one is denying that it's a human fetus as opposed to an animal fetus
2) My dog had a heartbeat and moved around in the womb... much to his mothers dismay at times
3) Again, many dogs and animals go thru the same stages of development in the womb.. poor argument.
4) Crappy laws, why is it the father of a child is automatically a deadbeat in the eyes of divorce court despite never doing anything wrong?

1) We agree a human fetus is human, not a blob of stuff.
2) The point was a blob of something not human, wouldn't do those things, if it's not alive. In a way, we agree, that baby dog is alive in it's mother's womb.
3) Kind of agree, you a living entity is developing, it's not a blob of stuff. Poor answer of poor argument.
4) Don't really see the analogy here, but do agree no fault divorce is a sham in numerous instances.

 

[thatguy]

1) We agree a human fetus is human, not a blob of stuff.
2) The point was a blob of something not human, wouldn't do those things, if it's not alive. In a way, we agree, that baby dog is alive in it's mother's womb.
3) Kind of agree, you a living entity is developing, it's not a blob of stuff. Poor answer of poor argument.
4) Don't really see the analogy here, but do agree no fault divorce is a sham in numerous instances.

A better point for number 4 would be that a person will only be charged with 2 counts if the fetus had been viable outside the womb...

What is Indiana's cutoff for abortions?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

A better point for number 4 would be that a person will only be charged with 2 counts if the fetus had been viable outside the womb...

Viable for what?

This seems to be a convenient line in the sand for those that wish to rationalize acceptance of abortions. But how do you know when this is? This line is blurry as this computer screen is without my reading glasses. Even if you could pick a precise moment in time of development, when viability is achieved, what would be the real difference in that unborn child 1 minute previous to that precise moment in time?

 

[Liberty1911]

I sure don't remember Christ slinging mud and calling them names though. I sure don't remember him yelling at the top of his lungs trying to shout you down. But it's been a while since I read that long book.

Matt 23:33

 

[thatguy]

Viable for what?

This seems to be a convenient line in the sand for those that wish to rationalize acceptance of abortions. But how do you know when this is? This line is blurry as this computer screen is without my reading glasses. Even if you could pick a precise moment in time of development, when viability is achieved, what would be the real difference in that unborn child 1 minute previous to that precise moment in time?

Again, I'm not here to make that judgement call. I am not a doctor or medical scientist. I'm not defending or attacking any one view point. I'm giving a fact about the argument he used. But go ahead and put words in my mouth if that makes you feel better.

 

[Pinchaser]

The abortion issue, for now, has no place on our plate. We have other things that are SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to fight.

Forget about your abortion preferences. Let's try to save the country first. The house is on fire and you are worrying about the spilled milk on the rug. We have other, more pressing issues right now...... Frankly, that goes for 2A rights as well. Our entire way of life is ending. Prioritize......

 

[Liberty1911]

The abortion issue, for now, has no place on our plate. We have other things that are SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to fight.

Forget about your abortion preferences. Let's try to save the country first. The house is on fire and you are worrying about the spilled milk on the rug. We have other, more pressing issues right now...... Frankly, that goes for 2A rights as well. Our entire way of life is ending. Prioritize......

There's no more important right than the right to life. If you don't have that, you have nothing.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The abortion issue, for now, has no place on our plate. We have other things that are SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to fight.

Forget about your abortion preferences. Let's try to save the country first. The house is on fire and you are worrying about the spilled milk on the rug. We have other, more pressing issues right now...... Frankly, that goes for 2A rights as well. Our entire way of life is ending. Prioritize......

Are you telling us that the Second Amendment is not a priority in your reckoning? If so, you need to do hard time in remedial history.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Again, I'm not here to make that judgement call. I am not a doctor or medical scientist. I'm not defending or attacking any one view point. I'm giving a fact about the argument he used. But go ahead and put words in my mouth if that makes you feel better.

I'm hardly trying to put words in your mouth.

In post 145 you suggested: "A better point for number 4 would be that a person will only be charged with 2 counts if the fetus had been viable outside the womb... " I questioned your logic as its one of the same lame arguements abortion supporters and agnostics make all the time, because I thought you might want to consider a competing viewpoint...please disregard.

 

[DC47374]

I don't think the pro-choice movement is only about killing babies. It is also about women saying that gov't shouldn't be able to reach into a woman's body.

You know, sort of like gov't should never be able to reach into our homes and take away our guns.

If you are against gov't overreach; than the right to choose shouldn't be an alien concept to 2nd amendment supporters.

Sorry man...cold blooded murder is a foreign concept to me. I can rationalize defending myself with deadly force, but I can't rationalize women getting abortions because they want one. If you can't handle the responsibility that comes with sex.....just don't do it. Just like if you can't handle the responsibility that comes with carrying a firearm....just don't do it. Abortion is not a valid form of birth control.

 

[ar15]

This all comes down to religion... It's sad... Really sad that legal mutder of innocent babies is allowed... But that's where we are.... Look at our children's role models and Heroes... Times have changed

 

[DC47374]

1) No one is denying that it's a human fetus as opposed to an animal fetus
2) My dog had a heartbeat and moved around in the womb... much to his mothers dismay at times
3) Again, many dogs and animals go thru the same stages of development in the womb.. poor argument.
4) Crappy laws, why is it the father of a child is automatically a deadbeat in the eyes of divorce court despite never doing anything wrong?





You're using that word wrong. The scientific definition of life covers a whole spectrum of stuff. I don't see you crying when someone cuts down a tree because it's inconvenient. Or killing the weeds in your garden because you don't like them. Or sanitizing your hands, all those bacteria are life using the definition you just tried to use.

I'm not making a statement one way or another here, I know what I believe. If you're going to make arguments at least make good ones.

Did you really just compare a fetus to a dog, a tree, weeds, and bacteria all in one post? Come on man.... These are children that will never have the opportunity to experience a life outside of the womb. Use some tact.

 

[thatguy]

Did you really just compare a fetus to a dog, a tree, weeds, and bacteria all in one post? Come on man.... These are children that will never have the opportunity to experience a life outside of the womb. Use some tact.

I'll spell this out for you because reading and comprehension apparently aren't your strong suit. No, I did not compare a human fetus to a dog, tree, weeds, or bacteria. I was attempting to make the point that if you are going to make an argument, make a good argument. The first part the guy asked general questions that could be easily applied to many, many things. I used one example that pointed out the flaw in his logic. The second guy was using the scientific definition of life incorrectly. I used several examples to explain why his usage was wrong.

My point here isn't arguing for one side or another. If you believe it to be murder, fine stand on that and shout it from the rooftop. Just don't make horrible arguments that don't help your cause. Also, I believe just as firmly in the First Amendment as I do the Second. I'll quote it for you:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I emphasized the first part of that for you because it establishes freedom of religion, which inherently implies freedom from religion. Applying that to my point, you don't get to legislate your particular brand of beliefs. That is something the Republican party desperately needs to learn if they want to keep up with the times. This doesn't need to be a religious debate. Moral, definitely, but religion doesn't need to be a part of it. Using religion as a basis for political views turns off many people that would otherwise agree with your stance.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I emphasized the first part of that for you because it establishes freedom of religion, which inherently implies freedom from religion.

And you would be incorrect.

It says, as far as congress is concerned, you may practice any religion, including no religion, you choose. Not that you are to be free from religion.

 

[thatguy]

And you would be incorrect.

It says, as far as congress is concerned, you may practice any religion, including no religion, you choose. Not that you are to be free from religion.

No I am not. You are correct in that, a person can practice any religion including no religion. Personally, I go to a catholic church. However, you are not free to legislate your religion, thus my comment about freedom from religion. It has nothing to do with saying a person can't talk about their beliefs, build buildings associated with there beliefs, even protest based on their beliefs. It has everything to do with a person legislating their beliefs.

 

[mbills2223]

The abortion issue, for now, has no place on our plate. We have other things that are SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to fight.

Forget about your abortion preferences. Let's try to save the country first. The house is on fire and you are worrying about the spilled milk on the rug. We have other, more pressing issues right now...... Frankly, that goes for 2A rights as well. Our entire way of life is ending. Prioritize......

You're comparing the right to life to spilled milk?!?!

Our way of life is ending precisely because we are letting all this "spilled milk" add up. If you don't show up to any of the battles, you are doomed to lose the war. If basic rights aren't important, please enlighten me to what IS important. The American people are capable of fighting for more than one thing at a time...

 

[zippy23]

Good grief, that's your argument? By that "logic", banning guns would result in less government because it would eliminate the need for all those expensive ATF agents. If you oppose abortion, that's all fine and well, but at least be honest enough to admit that what you're after in an increase of governmental power so as to intervene in people's lives.

Lets see guns and abortion. Having the right to own a gun and being against abortion are not the same thing, correct? Correct. Banning abortion is about saving LIVES, banning guns is about gov't taking away our rights thereby increasing their power. So intervening in someone's life to save a child or take away your guns are the same type of governmental power? Is that so? Gov't does have power, they need to have power to make laws, but banning abortion is not increasing gov'ts power, while banning guns is increasing gov'ts power by taking away our right to protect ourselves, giving US less power and THEM more power. Banning abortion has nothing to do with gov't increasing its power, its not allowing the gov't to have the power to allow you to KILL A CHILD, which would be less gov't power. And there is your honesty.