Instant Access Registration Takes Less Than 15 Seconds! You May Not Post Until Registered.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having trouble staying logged in when navigating between forums/topics/etc., you need to reset your session cookie. Go into your browser and delete any cookie for the site them log back in. This should fix the login issue.
i can say it aint any of your fukin biz what a women decides to do, unless ofcourse your the dad or your wanting to support the kid. no offence bro, but i believe in choice. and, i'm not a "lib". it's just one of the things i agree with them about. i never heard that they detect a heart beat 3 days after, but i dont care...i could careless if they get a heartbeat from an unfertalized egg!!!
where's klash on this one?, lol. he's pretty far from liberal, but i gotta assume he supports the right to choose.
D. Your a solid guy. I don't even want to get into the pro life/choice argument. There's no sense in that. But there's not a heart beat from an unfertilized egg. Conception is...
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have. -Thomas Jefferson
D. Your a solid guy. I don't even want to get into the pro life/choice argument. There's no sense in that. But there's not a heart beat from an unfertilized egg. Conception is...
i understand that bro, but my point is still....i dont care IF there was!! your right...i dont want to debate this with you...we got plenty of other shyt to argue about, lol
HE WHO MAKES A BEAST OF HIMSELF, GET'S RID OF THE PAIN OF BEING A MAN!!
I think the problem this country is facing, is it has gotten away from the fact that the only standard any issue should be applied to is individual rights. In our current era, we have conservatives applying social issues to the standards created by a book written 2000 years ago. We have liberals applying issues to the standards of some undefined "common good".
When you apply the issue of abortion to the standard of individual rights - the answer is easy. The rights of a woman can never be superseded by the rights of an unborn baby, without undermining the entire concept of rights. If you disagree, just follow the consequences of giving an unborn baby rights that supersede the woman's rights. 1.) Any "would be rapist" would have more rights to a woman's reproductive system than the woman herself. 2.) If babies really have rights how do we know those rights weren't infringed upon when a woman states she had a "miscarriage" without an official investigation? 3.) If babies have rights at the moment of conception, then just about all forms of birth control would have to be made illegal, even the birth control pill - it can cause a hostile womb and thus prevent a fertilized egg from surviving. 4.) In-vitro fertilization would have to be banned because it would essentially be infringing "rights" of several fertilized eggs in the hopes that at least one thing that is already considered "alive" could live.
This is the world "pro-life" people advocate, even though they never want to take their ideas to there logical conclusion - it helps point out how preposterous this position is.
I think the problem this country is facing, is it has gotten away from the fact that the only standard any issue should be applied to is individual rights. In our current era, we have conservatives applying social issues to the standards created by a book written 2000 years ago. We have liberals applying issues to the standards of some undefined "common good".
When you apply the issue of abortion to the standard of individual rights - the answer is easy. The rights of a woman can never be superseded by the rights of an unborn baby, without undermining the entire concept of rights. If you disagree, just follow the consequences of giving an unborn baby rights that supersede the woman's rights. 1.) Any "would be rapist" would have more rights to a woman's reproductive system than the woman herself. 2.) If babies really have rights how do we know those rights weren't infringed upon when a woman states she had a "miscarriage" without an official investigation? 3.) If babies have rights at the moment of conception, then just about all forms of birth control would have to be made illegal, even the birth control pill - it can cause a hostile womb and thus prevent a fertilized egg from surviving. 4.) In-vitro fertilization would have to be banned because it would essentially be infringing "rights" of several fertilized eggs in the hopes that at least one thing that is already considered "alive" could live.
This is the world "pro-life" people advocate, even though they never want to take their ideas to there logical conclusion - it helps point out how preposterous this position is.
lmao!!! i LOVE this guy!!!! my man can take a fart and argue it's right to be!!!
HE WHO MAKES A BEAST OF HIMSELF, GET'S RID OF THE PAIN OF BEING A MAN!!
and klash is right. Every individual should have rights. Every living human being should have the right. The woman's rights shouldn't supercede the baby's, and vice-versa. It goes no further because then it's flat out unreasonable as klash gave example. You could scream "murder" once a month. The right to live should begin where life begins. conception. The woman has just as many rights pre-conception as she does after. How about she exercise some pro choices before she makes the wrong one. Which now that we've created such a dependant, non-thinking, hand-holding, no rights wanting America, I say we appoint a committee to decide who has the right to breed. uh ohhh.
and klash is right. Every individual should have rights. Every living human being should have the right. The woman's rights shouldn't supercede the baby's, and vice-versa. It goes no further because then it's flat out unreasonable as klash gave example. You could scream "murder" once a month. The right to live should begin where life begins. conception. The woman has just as many rights pre-conception as she does after. How about she exercise some pro choices before she makes the wrong one. Which now that we've created such a dependant, non-thinking, hand-holding, no rights wanting America, I say we appoint a committee to decide who has the right to breed. uh ohhh.
as i've said many times...you need a drivers licence to drive a car, but any idiot can breed!!!
HE WHO MAKES A BEAST OF HIMSELF, GET'S RID OF THE PAIN OF BEING A MAN!!
as i've said many times...you need a drivers licence to drive a car, but any idiot can breed!!!
oh yeah, I'm right with ya. The steady removal of human rights have fuked people up. While it's no longer a country of freedom, why not go ahead and take care of that little problem. Then grant a better country our freedoms. Better yet, Let'em keep on keepin on, but chop the government hand off that has the handouts.
Free to do what you want. yeah. Free to make the choice. yep.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment