Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-8-2016 Trump wins Presidency
#41
(08-12-2015, 12:59 AM)BoFox Wrote:
(08-12-2015, 12:52 AM)SickBeast Wrote: BoFox marrying your brother or sister is a choice.  Being gay is not.  You should not be comparing the two at all.

Marriage is a choice.

I don't understand your point.
Reply
#42
This is what I was discussing - the right to marry for any consenting adults.
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#43
I just don't know why you're bringing it up. I have never heard of someone wanting to do this. Is this common in the US? It seems really stupid to me.
Reply
#44
From wiki:
Quote:However, laws prohibiting incest between siblings have come under attack in recent years as defining a victimless crime, and violating the human rights of siblings who wish to have sexual relations as consenting adults.

In 2008, a 31-year old man of Saxony, Germany, who had been imprisoned for three years for fathering four children with his sister appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. In a number of European countries such as France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Spain, marriage between siblings remains prohibited, but incest between siblings is no longer prosecuted.

Point is, why outlaw marriages for these people as well?  There might be many more of them coming out of the closet (hence you having never heard of incestuous relationships, given such ultra-taboo status in the society today)?  Sure, marriage might be a choice, but is love really a choice?
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#45
Siblings marrying each other creates children with birth defects and all sorts of problems which then creates a burden for society. Homosexuals on the other hand adopt children who are otherwise abandoned by their parents, which actually helps society. I really don't see your point. I don't know how you could advocate for something so twisted and I don't think it's fair that you're bringing it up in the discussion about gay marriage. It almost feels like you are implying that being gay is a choice.
Reply
#46
So, you're saying that because they're able to have their own children (if the female is younger than 40-50 years old, and chooses to not use birth control or condoms), marriage should be outlawed for siblings who are in love with each other. I know some middle-aged siblings who live with each other, just to keep each other company - they eat out together at restaurants all the time, go to movies together, and are some of the best buddies on the planet. Their sexual relations are none of your business. Why does it matter if it's a choice or not, like as if you're the judge of their adult rights? Choice or not, it's the heart of the matter that remains (freedom of marriage among consenting adults).

There are some adults with diseases like AIDS or whatever, that can be inherited to their children. Like the exceptionally severe NF2 disease, which has a 50% chance of being passed on. Are you saying that these people shouldn't be allowed to marry the opposite sex?

What about siblings wanting to adopt children (especially if they're infertile themselves)? No? Tongue
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#47
And then there's this link BoFox posted a while ago: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/y...er_it.html
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#48
(08-12-2015, 01:59 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote: And then there's this link BoFox posted a while ago: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/y...er_it.html

Thanks.  Yes, it was a while ago.  Wink  Shall I put this in my sig?  Tongue

Nah, I don't take it as seriously as I used to in the past - I realized it's not for me to judge.  Let the one who has not sinned be the first to cast a stone..   The freedom is a divine right among mankind - the basis upon which America was built (and yet abused over and over against despite the Amendments).
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#49
And is it a choice for a 40-year old male to fall in love with a 15-year old female, like traditionally done in the old days?  It was this way for thousands of years, and now we're saying that underage minors aren't allowed (at least without parental consent in some places) to marry or even have sex?  

By the time they are able to reproduce, they're physically "adults" in the scientific sense.  All of the animal species have been reproducing as shortly as they were capable of it, and the same applied for overall human civilization for thousands of years until now when, despite the scientific progress, the government declares that 18 is the required age for sex or marriage - even if it's NOT a "choice" for them and their sexual attraction and deep love.  

Ahh, the twisted irony of it all.  Gotta untwist it and get the logic and science straightened out someday..  Tongue

(08-10-2015, 05:31 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: I think my son said it best, "I'm a spiritual person that believes in God and the Bible, but here on Earth logic and science have to be considered."

[Image: funny-videos.jpg]
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#50
They are considered minors for a good reason. They are allowed to have sex with people their own age. 40 year old men having sex with teenagers are disgusting. Give your head a shake. Please.
Reply
#51
Disgusting and therefore illegal?  Hmmm...  It's been happening for thousands of years, including in America when experienced male farmers were finally able to afford running their own farm and build their own house, and they usually preferred young virgins who were happy to have many kids with them.  Nowadays, some teenage girls have a crush going on for older males, especially high school teachers.  My Grandma from Alabama got married when she was 13, to a WW2 soldier returning to America that she fell in love with - he was about 20 years old, and they ran a farm together for decades, built their own house, raised 3 kids on their own.  

I'm just giving you guys a hard time - but now you get the idea.  
a) Rollo said that he won't be voting Republican just because of them not actively supporting homosexuals as much as Democratic candidates would.  
b) I pointed out that it's now a resolved issue at large, legalized in the remaining 40 states since last year, by the Constitution.
c)  SB brings up the issue that homosexuality is not a choice  -  I don't know where that came from????
d)  I counter with the issue about sibling love for each other (along with physically mature teenagers who only like older adults), as a potentially natural thing as well.  
e)  These points are treated by Rollo and SB towards siblings and teenagers with the exact same approach as conservative homophobics would treat the issue of homo marriages.  

[Image: BINGO.gif]
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#52
BoFox it really feels like you are trying to deflect attention from your own bigoted view of homosexuals with all this nonsense. You're actually weirding me out with your comments. You have really twisted views on sexuality.
Reply
#53
(08-12-2015, 03:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: BoFox it really feels like you are trying to deflect attention from your own bigoted view of homosexuals with all this nonsense.  You're actually weirding me out with your comments.  You have really twisted views on sexuality.

I don't think he's trying to support incest, or old man/minor sex.

I think he's trying lump in gay marriage with those pretty much universally reviled aspects of sexuality because he doesn't approve of gay marriage and to indirectly say the Bible is right on the topic.
Reply
#54
(08-12-2015, 03:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: BoFox it really feels like you are trying to deflect attention from your own bigoted view of homosexuals with all this nonsense.  You're actually weirding me out with your comments.  You have really twisted views on sexuality.

*sighs*..  these are just counter-points that I do not necessarily believe in myself.  These are just debate points concerning your contention that I was saying that homosexuality was not a choice (which you kept on bringing up in this thread) - when I never said anything about homosexuality not being a choice.  It was about siblings right to marriage, not about it being a choice or not, which was irrelevant anyway.

5,000 years of human civilization of natural attraction between older males and younger females twisted??  Your say, your highness, Sick-o-Beast.  Maybe the older women were unavailable, or at least the available ones were not attractive like the younger ones, in some parts of the country?  Let's say that a female student has a crush on you, and you just got divorced.  You fell deeply in love with her, but a love letter fell out of your pocket and you have to face 10 years of jail time just because of this "natural attraction/love"?  

Sickbeast, it really feels like you're only trying to turn everything towards my own view of homosexuality, in order to win.  Geez, thanks.  


[Image: funny-pictures-auto-demotivation-who-wan...65112.jpeg]

Just like Donald Trump, who would be the best President ever, losing all because of everything boiling down to his own views on homo marriages (which should be left alone anyway, according to the 1st Amendment, and which he would not abuse anyway, after it being legalized nationwide and protected by the Constitution).  

Ahhhhh....  got any real cold beer in your fridge?
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#55
(08-12-2015, 04:29 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:
(08-12-2015, 03:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: BoFox it really feels like you are trying to deflect attention from your own bigoted view of homosexuals with all this nonsense.  You're actually weirding me out with your comments.  You have really twisted views on sexuality.

I don't think he's trying to support incest, or old man/minor sex.

I think he's trying lump in gay marriage with those pretty much universally reviled aspects of sexuality because he doesn't approve of gay marriage and to indirectly say the Bible is right on the topic.

Thank you, dude - and more importantly, quit whining about homosexuality!  You just wanted me to be faced with something controversial to argue about in this thread, at your sadistic pleasures!  Tongue

Show me your smiling selfie, in 2015 the year of nationwide legalization of homo marriages!  Big Grin  Now, that it's all lawful, I'm actually respecting the freedom that America is enforcing with the 1st Amendment rights.  We're all supposed to have the freedom as to our own inner personal convictions, no matter what any single person preaches to us - whether a homosexual, a sibling living together, or in a relationship of 30-40 year age difference.  SB just wants to burn me on a stake now, though, I get it..   Angel

Edit - An act of tolerance is always honorable and humbling. Hats off to this.
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#56
BoFox these discussions with you regarding homosexuality really go nowhere fast and they constantly cause a huge disruption on the forum. I have decided to no longer discuss this topic with you. We both have different views on this. I think we should leave it at that.
Reply
#57
(08-12-2015, 05:33 AM)SickBeast Wrote: BoFox these discussions with you regarding homosexuality really go nowhere fast and they constantly cause a huge disruption on the forum.  I have decided to no longer discuss this topic with you.  We both have different views on this.  I think we should leave it at that.

On the old man/young girl thing:





When you were 18, no matter how poor you were, and how rich Estelle Getty was, could you have landed your meat missile in her ground zero grotto? Could you even have got it up?

We're somehow expected to believe the young girls who service the rich old fossils aren't throwing up in their mouths?

The older I get, the more I think growing old is about dignity. No dignity in raping someone for cash. :unwell:
Reply
#58
I agree Rollo it's disgusting.
Reply
#59
I think bofox just blowed your minds!!!!!!

He does have some major points. I don't understand how you can say that a brother and sister in love and having sex is a choice but at the same time claim gays don't have a choice.

The huge risk a brother and sister takes, having to hide away their relationship because of the extreme things that would happen to them if the world found out. Is that a choice? Is love a choice for those who incest but not for gays? How does that work.

I am actually on the other side and never shared bofox's distaste for gay marriage. I have always believed gays should have the right to live as they choose, I believed 100%. I have had many gay friends, even had a gay person get the wrong ideas about me and make a physical pass. Some of my best friends in my life were gay.

I can see bofox'a point. As much as it disgust you, I see his point as valid.

As for the marriage at a young age, that is an area I also see his point in. But at the same time, our modern world requires children to be programmed and conditioned throughout their life until they become legally an adult. In this, the good outweighs the bad. Our modern society needs school even if it infringes on individual freedoms and liberty. That's the point though. All these things are true to an extent and we fake and pretend throughout the rest.

I personally believe school is a great thing but to enforce this, we condemn children in their rights. Even their parents are forced when it comes to children. The Government not only has the say, they will take your kids if you don't do it their way. But I am sure that people who argue for limited government, they don't really want that. That just want whatever might benefit them when it comes to limited government.

They don't care about all people having rights to live how they want, they won't stand for incestual love. Many people who argue limited government can't stand the idea of gay marriage. What a surprise!
That's not what they want.

Ultimately, how many people out there are really fooled? At the end of the day, very few things add up. We just pretend.

I believe that school is great for our society. That the government should have say in how we raise our children. But if I say those things, I can't say that I believe in limited government. Dictating how we raise our children, that is anything but limited. About as invasive as you can get. The next thing they will tell us is how to spend our money......which they do. Already.... Try raising children in a home with no electricity. Would you argue this is right?
The government has the final say when it comes to our children. They can't do whatever they want and we can't raise them any way we want. Liberty? That's not what we really believe in, not for all. I am cool with that but I find myself laughing at the people who preach just about anything. Cause it's almost always self serving when you boil it all down.
The government decided you are not an adult until 18, I can stand by that. But how many kids hate this, they don't have the rights of a man or woman. But I see the common good and support this no matter how unfair some teenagers think it is. Because I support this, they can't just marry much older people. We have to train them, they are our future. They need to go to school, not marry and make babies!!!!


Anyway, most of these ideas are just people pushing personal agendas. No one wants limited government, as popular as this cry has become. That isn't what they really want.
Reply
#60
(08-12-2015, 01:40 AM)SickBeast Wrote: Siblings marrying each other creates children with birth defects and all sorts of problems which then creates a burden for society.  Homosexuals on the other hand adopt children who are otherwise abandoned by their parents, which actually helps society.  I really don't see your point.  I don't know how you could advocate for something so twisted and I don't think it's fair that you're bringing it up in the discussion about gay marriage.  It almost feels like you are implying that being gay is a choice.

That is what he is doing. It's how the religious have a sly dig at homosexuals nowadays -- lump them in with pedophiles and incestious people etc then suggest that if it is right for homosexuals why shouldn't it be right for these others?
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#61
(08-12-2015, 09:18 AM)ocre Wrote: I think bofox just blowed your minds!!!!!!

He does have some major points.  I don't understand how you can say that a brother and sister in love and having sex is a choice but at the same time claim gays don't have a choice.

It's actually pretty easy to say that.





Could any of you choose to have sex with any of those guys? Marry one of those guys and have sex with them every week?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKg8G9sMWUY

How about these girls? Pretty much every one of them, right?

That's because you're sexually attracted to women, not men. You couldn't "choose" to be attracted to Bachman Turner Overdrive if you wanted to.

Your mom or your sister are just two of the millions of women you could choose to have sex with, and yes, if you didn't know who they were (adopted at birth) you might. Genetic dangers and the oldest social customs are why people don't make that choice.
Reply
#62
P.S.

Nobody blows the wise old Rollo's mind- nobody!

Cool
Reply
#63
(08-12-2015, 11:08 AM)gstanford Wrote: That is what he is doing.  It's how the religious have a sly dig at homosexuals nowadays -- lump them in with pedophiles and incestious people etc then suggest that if it is right for homosexuals why shouldn't it be right for these others?

So the civilization was mainly based off of pedophiles for thousands of years?  Remember when I just said that my Grandma in Alabama got married when she was 13?  Well, my OTHER Grandma actually got married when she was....   12!!  Yes, 12 years old! 

Back then, when it was ok for teenage girls to get married, divorce rates were way lower than after the legal age of 18 was imposed.  Now, divorce rate has been hovering around 50% ever since 1981 when the rate was at its peak.

Both of my grandmas got married in the 40's.
1940 - marriages: 1,595,879 (12.1% rate), divorces: 264,000 (2.0% rate)
1950 - marriages: 1,667,231 (11.1% rate), divorces: 385,144 (2.6% rate)
1960 - marriages: 1,523,000, divorces: 393,000

Then fast-forward to today:
2012 - marriages: 2,131,000, divorces: 851,000

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005044.html
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#64
And what precisely have those marriage rate anecdotes and tales about your grandmothers got to do with your claims about incest and marriage?!
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#65
Back then,
1) Divorce rates were way lower
2) Men over 18 didn't get thrown in prisons for falling in love with a 15-year old girl
3) The civilization was actually in accord with the physical SCIENCE (that we all love so much today), where each and every single animal species usually reproduced the earliest chance they got. It goes in line with the natural sexual attraction/love that apparently isn't a "choice", yet these men are continuing to be thrown in prisons and given one of the worst criminal labels of being a pedophile.

1600's: Blasphemous women burnt on the stake as witches
2000's: Woody Allen burnt on the stake for marrying his young adopted daughter (yes, I know that was CRAZY)!!!
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#66
(08-12-2015, 11:33 PM)BoFox Wrote: Back then,
1) Divorce rates were way lower
2) Men over 18 didn't get thrown in prisons for falling in love with a 15-year old girl
3) The civilization was actually in accord with the physical SCIENCE (that we all love so much today), where each and every single animal species usually reproduced the earliest chance they got.  It goes in line with the natural sexual attraction/love that apparently isn't a "choice", yet these men are continuing to be thrown in prisons and given one of the worst criminal labels of being a pedophile.  

1600's:  Blasphemous women burnt on the stake as witches
2000's:  Woody Allen burnt on the stake for marrying his young adopted daughter (yes, I know that was CRAZY)!!!

Back then arranged marriages were far more common (because religion had a stronger hold over people, and forced/arranged marriage and religion go hand in hand together). As for pedophiles nowadays, most of them are in the Catholic Church serving as priests............

Still doesn't address anything you said about incest and marriage.

You might want to bring up the price of tea in china in your next post also. It's about as related as anything else you've spouted......
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
Reply
#67
(08-12-2015, 11:24 PM)gstanford Wrote: And what precisely have those marriage rate anecdotes and tales about your grandmothers got to do with your claims about incest and marriage?!

More importantly:





Bofox could you "choose" to have sex with these sexy rock stars? What about the groupies?

Starting to see the nature of choice vs the way you're wired?
Reply
#68
Haha, I give up.

Let's get back to the topic... TRUMP!!! THE LONG-OVERDUE AMERICAN TRUMP over the national debt, etc.!!
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#69
(08-13-2015, 01:07 AM)BoFox Wrote: Haha, I give up.

Let's get back to the topic...  TRUMP!!!  THE LONG-OVERDUE AMERICAN TRUMP over the national debt, etc.!!

I pretty much knew you would not be replying, "Hell yes I could do Randy Bachman! He is a powerful handsome man!".

(or at least that I had a 90% chance you would not say it)

I've got to think it's the same for those people with the opposite sex.

Trump just seems misguided to me.
Reply
#70
So what are the big issues in this election?
Reply
#71
(08-13-2015, 05:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: So what are the big issues in this election?


1. Repeal Obamacare
2. Bring back American manufacturing
3. National defense
Reply
#72
(08-13-2015, 05:45 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:
(08-13-2015, 05:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: So what are the big issues in this election?


1. Repeal Obamacare
2. Bring back American manufacturing
3. National defense

Sounds like a pretty lame election then. I don't see how the Republicans could repeal Obamacare at this point. As for the manufacturing, there isn't a lot that the government can do about this. We just can't compete with the much lower cost of labor in other parts of the world. As for national defense, you guys spend plenty of money on that even after Obama's minor cuts.

There have got to be bigger issues. This election is going to be a sleeper if that's all it's about.
Reply
#73
(08-13-2015, 07:22 PM)SickBeast Wrote: As for the manufacturing, there isn't a lot that the government can do about this.  We just can't compete with the much lower cost of labor in other parts of the world.
Sure we can. Make offshoring illegal, make it illegal to take any business outside the US, enforce these laws at gunpoint, institute a total trade embargo with China which will ban anything that has even 1 screw made in China, and institute massive protective tariffs.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#74
(08-13-2015, 07:22 PM)SickBeast Wrote:
(08-13-2015, 05:45 PM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:
(08-13-2015, 05:36 AM)SickBeast Wrote: So what are the big issues in this election?


1. Repeal Obamacare
2. Bring back American manufacturing
3. National defense

Sounds like a pretty lame election then.  I don't see how the Republicans could repeal Obamacare at this point.  As for the manufacturing, there isn't a lot that the government can do about this.  We just can't compete with the much lower cost of labor in other parts of the world.  As for national defense, you guys spend plenty of money on that even after Obama's minor cuts.

There have got to be bigger issues.  This election is going to be a sleeper if that's all it's about.

Obamacare can be repealed the same way it was put in place- by the Republicans controlling the House, Senate, and Executive branch of government. They now control the House and Senate, if win the Executive branch it would be easy to end Obamacare.

As SC notes, we used to control the trade deficit with tariffs/lack of trade agreements. It's not as straight forward in these times of stagnant wages and underemployment though. Removing cheap import goods raises prices as domestic wages are much higher. That's why I think we need to route benefits through manufacturers and us the assistance community as dirt cheap labor. The companies pay some small wage on top of the benefits they dispense, the ex-welfare people become low end workers better off than they were financially, but out 40 hours/week of their time.

You don't get terrorism in Canada, you're not enough of a player in global politics to have other countries targeting you for attack. You can trust me when I say defense is a bill we cannot fully pay. Isis just released a 1400 name US citizen "hit list" and basically anyone here is apparently fair game.
Reply
#75
I will say that Obamacare is really half-assed. They should have made it completely universal so that it benefits everyone, similar to what we have in Canada. I could see a lot of Americans feeling like Obamacare is really unfair. Only some people get to benefit from it. If it were made universal then it would have freed up all that money for the employers to either pay their employees higher salaries or pump that money into the economy in other ways. The way Obama did it is stupid. He cheaped out. You guys need to either do the UHC thing properly or don't do it at all. If it takes more time to implement, then fine. Here in Canada we pay half as much as you guys in the US per capita for health care and we are all covered. Our system is both cheaper and better. Yes, there are some issues up here but the US system has its own problems as well.
Reply
#76
(08-13-2015, 05:03 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:
(08-13-2015, 01:07 AM)BoFox Wrote: Haha, I give up.

Let's get back to the topic...  TRUMP!!!  THE LONG-OVERDUE AMERICAN TRUMP over the national debt, etc.!!

I pretty much knew you would not be replying, "Hell yes I could do Randy Bachman! He is a powerful handsome man!".

(or at least that I had a 90% chance you would not say it)

I've got to think it's the same for those people with the opposite sex.

Trump just seems misguided to me.

[Image: portrait-of-marchesa-brigida-spinola-doria.jpg]

Don't you dare ruff my feathers or blow air up my dress! 


FACT:  Trump wants to repeal Obamacare.  He was actually for a better universal healthcare plan, but I need more details on what exactly what he has in mind. 

Trump is now #1 among the Republican candidates, beating Ben Carson and the long list of others, including the dishonorable Jeb Bush who pretty much caused a huge amount of American women to no longer vote Republican altogether. 

Jeb Bush's mother told him, no more Bushes as Presidents, please.  But Jeb is going for it anyway - now his mother is upset about this, lol.

The Clintons are calling Trump's campaign "Entertainment". 

Is it just me, or are all of these politicans sounding so childish nowadays - even worse than McCain and Romney turds?!
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#77
I like a lot of what Ben Carson says, but he's another one that seems to think that abortion is now a crisis even though it's been going on since time began and always will.

The only difference is now our daughters and sisters aren't dying or being crippled by it. It's as simple as that. We can have it part of the our health care or we can bury women for wanting to have reproductive freedom.
Reply
#78
Are you serious??? It's like killing babies because mothers decided they couldn't afford feeding them, or no longer wanted them... and that we should give them the money to buy guns to kill their babies with?

While women still get to enjoy reproductive freedom, there are all kinds of birth control methods out there that are provided for free by healthcare clinics. If women decide to change their minds later on, it should be their responsibility, not that of health care's. If we shift the responsibilities, then we're only encouraging women to be more careless with becoming pregnant and then changing their minds later on. I wouldn't want to be paying my own tax dollars for the deaths of these fetuses in the wombs of irresponsible women.
Ok with science that the big bang theory requires that fundamental scientific laws do not exist for the first few minutes, but not ok for the creator to defy these laws...  Rolleyes
Reply
#79
But you are all for killing a bunch of semens?

That is what brings the life to the egg. Otherwise it is just an egg.......an empty egg that does nothing. A semen is the life. It struggles and fights a million times harder than you can ever imagine, carrying life to that egg which it enters and a human is formed. The journey that seamen make is an endurance testament far beyond the struggles humans have living in our modern civilizations.

So, Bofox!!!!!
You are all for killing semens, the actual living and moving life that is the spark for human life!!!!

Thats awful
Reply
#80
(08-15-2015, 06:56 AM)BoFox Wrote: Are you serious???  It's like killing babies because mothers decided they couldn't afford feeding them, or no longer wanted them...  and that we should give them the money to buy guns to kill their babies with?

While women still get to enjoy reproductive freedom, there are all kinds of birth control methods out there that are provided for free by healthcare clinics.  If women decide to change their minds later on, it should be their responsibility, not that of health care's.  If we shift the responsibilities, then we're only encouraging women to be more careless with becoming pregnant and then changing their minds later on.  I wouldn't want to be paying my own tax dollars for the deaths of these fetuses in the wombs of irresponsible women.

I think we can safely assume the women having abortions didn't want to get pregnant, and the guy who didn't wear a condom has half the responsibility.

If you don't want to pay a few hundred for the unwanted kid's abortions, how do you feel about a hundred thousand for their AFDC with mom or in orphanage?

Or a few hundred thousand for their more likely future incarceration?

That's what we're talking about here.

Not "Mrs. Rollo doesn't want to have another baby because then we'd have to come up with $200K for college instead of $100K.".

https://www.guttmacher.org/media/infogra...poor2.html

We're talking about 3/4m - 1m abortions a year, with 42% of them below the federal poverty line.

I don't think abortion is a "good" thing, or "pleasant".

I think it's the lesser of two evils and that if outlawed we would have:

300-400K more unwanted kids in poverty.

A spike in women dying from illegal abortions.

And a corresponding spike in the crime rate, because again, it isn't kids like Rollo Jr sitting in our prisons for the most part. It's unwanted kids of fuck up parents.

You can't have it with both ways.

It's my opinion EVERY kid should be wanted and provided for by the parents.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)