Assumptions without any facts? Again, I can see why you are so left wing, Pee.

Again, without my answer, all meaningless assumptions on your part. Though I have to commend you once again for spinning the issue - and trying to paint me in a hypocrtical light. You sure you aren't a politician?

I wouldn't do that because, after all, I'm not like you, Pee.

Oh, right, you mean, like supporting the murder of babies and the ACLU's defense of terrorists?

That's some "reality" you've got there.

I think I'd need some of Patrick's drugs to get me there, though.

And you enjoy your senility and pathetic pathos for the liberal ideals that bear no functional solutions. Without Vietnam, you and those like you will still continue to be would-be intellectuals on a soapbox, instilling the same values in your children.

Regards,
Double-J

---

I am against stem cell research when it comes to growing and harvesting them from fertilized eggs and such ("embryonic"), including the destruction of those unused cells.

However, if they came from a source (such as those found in the spinal cord) of the person being treated or a donor, that would be acceptable, and, according to research, are just as effective as "embryonic" stem cells.

A more simple solution would be adoption. No need for any such technology. I mean, the idea is commendable, and would be far better than abortion. But until is feasible, adoption is the best option.

Best,
Double-J

Get bent you piece of shit. You don't know anything about me or my life. Don't bring me or my life into a topic when I didn't even participate in the thread.

You did say that you smoked marijuana? Is that untrue?

I don't have to use a very broad brush to paint you in a hypocritical light, JJ.

As far as assumptions go, yeah, I'd prefer not to make them, but since you're so willing to share your beliefs ideas and opinions when it suits you, and not do so when it doesn't, you leave me no choice.

Your words (or lack of them) speak for themselves.

You always manage to avoid the tough questions with your defense-mechanism-like little quips that add nothing to the discussion, so it's really a waste of time to bother even asking them.

Like "How come a guy that believes what you believe doesn't drop out of school (where you're nice and safe) and join the armed forces?"

Never mind. The question doesn't require an answer. Your actions speak for themselves.

First off, it has nothing to do with this. Second off, I have tried marijuana, yes, but don't consider myself a smoker.

Double-J, this was a peaceful, professional well thought out debate, why do you have to go and bring Pat into it when HE never even posted in this thread or brought his personal life into it. It's personal attacks and flame bait like that that bring these debates down.

DMC, this was a peaceful, professional, well thought out debate. Why do you have to go and criticize JJ in it?

It's personal attacks and flame bait like this that bring these debates down.

:p

Hey, here’s a reality check for all you hypocrites out there. When a child is conceived through rape ITS STILL A FREAKIN CHILD. How is that child different from any other child? Its conceived the same way as any other child. Rape is a terrible thing, but why kill someone over it? That’s life inside the womb.

I’m merely pointing out the actual facts here. Life is life, rape or not. Sure, its just a womb booger to some, but to others it is life. (And maybe I’ve never made myself clear on this because I kid around a lot on the boards)

Let me make myself clear on this- If you’re pro death penalty and anti abortion, you’re a hypocrite and have a flawed argument. At least remain consistent. Stick with either pro life or anti life.

And here’s my little God take on this. Sure, go ahead, have an abortion, you have free will. Its not my place to judge or anyone else’s for that matter. But rest assured God will judge you.

And this is the way it is. These are the facts. Stop messing around and having unwanted children! Want to have an abortion? Them punch yourself in the stomach or roll down a rocky hill side and save the money. Its still a sin either way, so why commit a sin and lose money?

Oh, get out of your little hissy fit, Plaw. When haven't I expressed my true opinions? When haven't I divulged to the fullest, except in this thread? I chose to not answer your question for the very reasons that it wasn't relevant to the discussion at hand, which was when a baby becomes human (which you said yourself, as I pointed out).

Personally, no, I would never condone abortion, even in that case. However, I certainly would have no qualms about physical retribution towards those who committed the act.

Other than the aforementioned question, I've been completely forthcoming with all of my opinions. Feel free to cite those which you feel I've not done so.

Pfft. And you always manage to spin the issue, but that doesn't fool anyone, not Apple or Fathersson, especially.

However, in all of my debates (including this one, until you decided to label me), I've faithfully backed them up, which is more than I can say for the vast majority of those expressed by others.

Actually, someone did ask that of myself (as well as other BB'ers) in a thread quite some time ago (feel free to dig it up).

And the answer - while it is none of your business - is quite simple. I have scholarship at University, and will be in a doctoral program with a stipend and research grants. Should I give that up to join the Army? Had my nation called upon me, I would faithfully do my duty, no questions asked. However, as you well know, our army is one compiled of volunteers.

Speaking of which, Plaw, what are you doing to help the war effort? Heck, why didn't you go to Vietnam?

Oh, such a noble road you've taken! My compliments. I didn't realize that debate based on facts and opinion was so scary for you, Pee.

I could just have easily said Partagas' cigars, or TIS' girle blue drinks. However, since I was talking with Plaw, I felt your name was appropriate.

Actually, I find that it is unsubstantiated comments, spin, and diversions that do that just as well. Look, Plaw. We're not even discussing the issue at hand now. Kudos.

Sincerely,
Double-J

Truly, I have to agree with JJ that he does back up his stuff. Instead of creating tripe that would choke a buzzard, he at least takes things seriously enough to enter a thoughtful debate.

I'm not saying that I 100% agree all the time, but at least the man backs his shit up unlike other people. I think debates on the boards would be a lot more civil if people stuck to facts and read entire posts. Oh yeah, and people need to remain consistent.

There ya go. That wasn't so tough, was it?

See, the thing about abortion, like most issues, is that I don't see it as all black or white, but rather with many shades of grey.

Knowing someone's opinion with respect various hypothetical situations sometimes help clarify things for people who don't tend to view everything as an absolute.

I think that one will go done as a classic. Really, I do.

We all tend to generally use that "lol" smiliey far too indiscriminately, I think, but this was one time that I actually did.

Translation: "I'm nice and safe in school, why risk my life fighting 'The War on Terror'?"

"It'a a volunteer army, which is great. That way, I can do a lot of talking, and leave the volunteering to others, many of whom dropped out of college to join the war because they bellieved in it."

If you believe in the war, yes you should. I think this country has enough history teachers.

And does that mean if you weren't in school with your grants and stipends, you would enlist?

Now don't get me wrong: In your position, given this particular war, I might very well do the same.

But as someone once said, "Let's call a spade a spade"


I'm doing nothing to help the "war effort", and I'm proud of that fact.

I support the troops , however (a distinction that some fail to see), by wanting to bring them home. I've contributed some money to a couple of organizations which provide little amenities for our troops (one of which was suggested a few months back by Don Cardi), and written to a few of my elected officials to voice my protest of the war and express my desire to see our brave men and women get home safely and alive.

And no, I didn't go to Viet Nam.

You have it backwards, though BTW, when you imply a negativity to that by saying "Heck, why didn't you go to Vietnam?"

Why? Because obviously, I didn't support that war. Had I supported it, I might very well have joined the military to fight for what I thought was right.

Hard to say for sure, though, 40 years later.

But since I wasn't afraid to demonstrate against it, even in the face of being part of a peaceful demonstration and attacked on a picket line by bunch of hard-hatted construction worker-thugs swinging iron pipes and having only my bare hands to fight back with (and getting a good ass-kicking in the process), and another time being waded into by billy-club wielding police and winding up with a broken arm for my efforts, I don't think I would have been afraid of fighting in a war if it was a fight for something I felt was right.

I was one of the lucky ones, though.

I managed by hook and by crook to stay one step ahead of my draft board, and so was never afforded the opportunity of going more than 5000 miles away to fight an "enemy" that I or other Americans had no quarrel with, and having the chance to come home in a box.

And, for your information, from 1969-1975 I was a memeber of the United States Army Reserve.

At that time, the reserves was considered a "safe haven" from service in Viet Nam, since reserve units were never called to active duty, but I figured that by joining, in addition to self-preservation, I'd be ready to fight for my country in case we ever were attacked or really at war with someone.

As you must remember, the "cold war" was still on, and we weren't that far removed from confrontations such as that over the Berlin wall or the Cuban Missle crisis.

So if we ever were in a "real war", one in which our country was actually threatened, I was ready to go.

All in all, though, if there's one thing that I'm ashamed of during the Viet Nam era, it's not my failure to serve in Viet Nam, but my failure to do more to end the war there.


Give your kudos to DMC, not me.

Well Johnny boy, so now we are the only ones who are hypocrites. Let's see, you don't have a uterus but if you had one you might had a better understanding of how it is to be affected with such a pain and agony to bring a child to this world that you'll always be struggling between hating and loving him/her. I believe that is more wrong than letting a piece of blood go. Believe it or not, it is nothing more than that to me, unless I was willing to be a mother, something I never want in case of a rape.

So a child is a child right? How about those children in the villages where terrorists are hiding? Why bomb those areas? Does it matter who their fathers or mothers are? Aren't they perfectly innocent? Why should you kill them because of fault of their parents? So why no protest about killing them, when actually someone else is killing their babies, rather than themselves, which in my opinion in far worse?

Why right-wingers who don't like to pay their share to the Social Security, want to add more mouths to be fed by that so called unnecessary organization? Why don't you ask your parents to adopt a child like that and you share your room, DVDs, computer, college funds and play station with him? Why on Earth are you so selfish? Why can't these kids have what you are having?

Whether my brother, my father, my husband or whoever else such as you for that matter wants to keep the product of rape or not, it is going to be my decision and that's the only opinion that matters and counts. If I'm not ready and willing to love such a child that reminds me of that nightmarish accident and I couldn't take responsibility, it is going to end, one way or another because just like you I'm a selfish hypocrite.

Your example proves one of my points:

That it's not always all black and white.

May I assume that if you think that those who are anti-abortion and pro-death penalty are hypocrites that you think that those who are pro-abortion and anti-death penalty are also hypocrites?

Because if you allow that assumption, here's the flaw in your argument:

I favor abortion, but I am against the death penalty, and here's why:

I favor the death penalty in principle.

But I am against it in practice for the following reasons:

1- It is not applied equally across the board to all murderers in the same set of circumstances, and
2- They make too damn mnay mistakes in executing, or nearly executing, innocent people.

In a perfect world, I'd favor the death penalty 100%, but this isn't a perfect world.

Does that make me a hypocrite?

I guess for some, who view things only in absolute black or white terms, it does.

Anyway, same argument with abortion.

I'm against it, in principle. Against it in a perfect world with no unwanted pregnancies or pregnancies which endanger the physical or mental health of the mother.

But in practice, in an imperfect world where we have

1- Rape,
2- Incest,
3- Mothers who can die during childbirth,
4- A lack of sex education in our schools,
5- A welfare system that forces me to pay for unwanted babies with my tax dollars, and
6- Pregnancies which are unwanted for other health or social reasons.

Then I'm for it.

When the world is perfect, like I'll need it to be before I favor the death penalty in practice, I'll be against abortion, too.

But in a perfect world it will be a moot point because there won't be any unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

I appreciate the fact that you're at least non-judgemental, though, since those who do not believe in God now don't have to worry about being judged by anyone.

Ok, then stay a hypocrite. That's fine by me. Sperm + Egg = child, rape or not. Its the same. There are no such grey areas, everything can be defined in black and white. Thank You Hegel.

Don't want the child? Tough, it wants to live just like you do.

So I take it since you are not a hypocrite you are going to get your placard and perform anti-war demonstrations because of innocent life being destroyed by wars as well.

Also, since being alive is not enough and a child has many other needs you might want to accept letting a little brother or sister in your house while his/her actual mother comes and stalk your family every other week to make a scene and then dump the kid back the next day, because she is not quite sure if she loves or hates her kid and you know biological irresponsible moms come first most of the time. At least I give them the right being the emotional mess that they are.

"Many of whom dropped out of college to join the war..."

Where is this magic phenomenon occurring, Plaw? Hasn't the standard Charlie Rangel-leftist argument that the army is made up of uneducated, poor minorities?

If that is true, then where are all of these college students dropping out and joining the service? :rolleyes:

Who said I believe in the war? You can quote me in multiple threads expressing my desire to leave Iraq immediately.

And the world has enough wankers, but...

It is a distinct possibility, considering my family has a history of serving, and that the Armed Forces offer phenomenal packages for schooling and such.

Clearly not enough of that beating sunk in.

Because, quite frankly, we all know what your generation did to "support the troops" in Vietnam - they would return home, and be spat upon and ostracized for doing their duty.

So much for "supporting the troops."

No, they were intentionally directed at you - after all, we're no longer on-topic.

---

That "piece of blood" is your own flesh and blood. But hey, I suppose, in the name of...umm..."pain and agony," you'd rather kill out of convenience.

Please. Collateral damage is in no way comparable with abortion, because children are not intentionally targeted. Both are tragedies, of course.

Oh, that is a good one. That ranks right up there with Howard Dean's comments from a few months ago.

Where are these mythical right-wingers who aren't paying their share to Social Security?

If anything, the vast majority of Americans are paying more than their fair share.

But, to take a more liberal view - why shouldn't we be disagreeing with a system that doesn't work, in the same way they protest a war they don't agree with?

Furthermore, your statement, in essence, is implying that death is ultimately better than the vast and unlimited opportunities that are brought by life, and, specifically, adoption.

Clearly, based upon your opinions of murdering your own children, we could ask you the same thing.

So do selfish, uncaring abortionists.


Faithfully,
Double-J

So killing children in war is not comparable to abortion? Last I checked, everyone wanted to have a shot at life. Why is that okay, is it because their DNA is different being from another country?

Collateral damage? Let's see, I just took the fetus out of the womb. Its dying is a collateral damage. That's a good one, thanks for making a way for the bad girl. :p

And for the record, I didn't say the right-wingers don't pay to the SSO. I said they don't like to pay, and try to eliminate the SSO altogether. How can I trust future of a baby on an organization that is going to be non-existent a few years from now?

Yes, a woman can have babies every year, but I don't think I like to give this opportunity to forty or so babies in my lifetime.

Not in the way you are stating. You are implying that children die in war purposefully, which, outside of terrorism, is generally not the case.

Abortion, however, is the deliberate murder of a child.

Oh, yes, pull the race card. Because, after all, I have been advocating abortion across the globe, as long as it isn't in America. :rolleyes:

[/sarcasm]

That is NOT collateral damage. By definition:

Noun Collateral Damage - (euphemism) inadvertent casualties and destruction inflicted on civilians in the course of military operations.

Abortion is by no means inadvertant.

So bad girl, go back to the drawing board.

How do you know?

Again, this is speculation. Certainly there are some who want to do away with it, but the vast majority of conservatives want reform.

By that same token - there sure are alot of anarchists, radical Muslims, and Philippinos that want to get rid of America... :rolleyes:

I didn't know American tax-dollars supported women in Iran?

Regards,
Double-J

When you bomb a village children die. So I don't need to imply anything, it happens and you put it conveniently as collateral damage.


Oh, yes, that is. Collateral means parallel simply put. Fetus can live, but it better does not count on me on aforementioned case. Its dying because it is outside the womb goes parallel to my decision. Tough, but collateral damage baby!

We've discussed this many times. Under which rock were you at the time? Do a search on the topic on these boards. (I like it when I use your own language, "under the rock!" Also I begin to like the way you spin everything by breaking a message apart. It sure feels good. )

Relevance?.

It sure doesn't. This happened in America. Since America is beacon of hope and freedom for everyone around world and plans to make the world a free place, she'd better start with herself. We don't want a country that doesn't grant the freedom of the choice to the women to lead us to freedom. We are already struggling for such rights. So you start with your own country. There was a time I wished to become an American. That time is long gone, just getting to know Americans such as you and to see them actually begin to rise and slid down the slippery slope. Sorry to say this, but that's how I feel.

Afs, you are so wasting your breath. There are men like Mad Johnny and Double J who obviously feel that the sanctity of the unborn is vastly more important than the mother. It wouldn't matter how you got pregnant, or by whom, it doesn't matter if you were gang-raped, tortured and beaten, if the rapist then killed the rest of your family in front of your eyes - you are the mother and you must carry that child. It doesn't matter what trauma you have experienced, or what trauma you might experience to bring that child into the world, you either give birth to that child or hop the next express train to Hell. You are to have no rights and certainly no choices. And if you ever even think of advocating for a woman who MIGHT choose to terminate a pregnancy, then you're a murderer, too.

Now, Afs you silly little girl, do you FINALLY understand??

Why would I judge a war? It is not my place to judge. I will not stand in front of an abortion clinic or go to an anti war rally. Why? That does not accomplish anything.

Why not get back on topic?

Although, I will say a rapist should get his stuff cut off. I think that's fair.

If a fetus in a womb was able to make that conscious decision about "wanting to live" then I'd agree with you and be 100% anti-abortion.

Looking at everything in black or white terms only makes no sense to me, Hegel notwithstanding (after all, he is not the final authority on anything, altho you certainly may subscribe to to his philosophical theorizing - which is all that philosophy is, anyway - if you wish).

Should every rapist have his "stuff" cut off?

How about those guilty of statuatory rape? A 17 year-old boy who "rapes" his 15 year old-girlfriend, say?

A female who rapes a male? Not unheard of. What do we do with her "stuff"?

And I'm no hypocrite - at least when it comes to the abortion-death penalty analogy.

As I said, I favor both in principle but not in practice.

If that makes someone a hypcrite in your eyes, I could probably give you loads of examples that make almost everyone a hypocrite to some degree or another.

First of all, don't ascribe what you call the "standard leftist arguments" to me.

If I've said that, fine. If I haven't, it carries no weight with me AFAIC.

Now, where is this "magic phenomenon occuring?

Well, all over, i'd say. I've read and heard any number of stories about college kids from all over the country who have done just that.

Perhaps they were made-up stories stories designed to disprove the notion that some people have that the armed forces are "made up of uneducated, poor minorities"?

(BTW, do the out-of-town kids attending UB still call the natives of Buffalo "Buffaloons"? Perhaps these stories haven't reached up there yet)

I think that everyone wants us out of Iraq ASAP. That certain;y doesn't distinguish you from anyone else.

Do you want us out before "we finish the job", or should be just leave?

And haven't you expressed the view that you favored our invasion of Iraq in the first place?

You could have enlisted then.


Well, I guess if you say so..... Who am I to doubt your word?

Yeah, that's the way to do it. Have a bunch of lawless thugs beat up those who they don't agree with, hoping that their message "sinks in".

Am I giving you too much credit in thinking that you don't really believe that, or am I misunderstanding your comment, which was perhaps meant only as another clever quip?

Please elaborate.

And once again, do not assume that my personal views are the same as those of "my generation"

I didn't spit on or ostracize any returning soldiers, and I don't know anyone who did, and I think that the few who did engage in that type of behavior were 100% wrong and hardly representative of a generation.

You weren't around then, so I should explain that the news accounts you've read about incidents like that were reported only because they were rare cases and, because they were so despicable, newsworthy.

Kinda like "man bites dog."

The vast majority of Americans - and I mean the vast majority - welcomed the troops home and were thankful that they reurned alive.

Those who returned from Viet Nam were victims of the war, the same as its other victims, and most people treated them as such.

[sarcasm]Damn, I keep forgetting that you're the self-appointed internet police around here, deciding what is on topic and what isn't and when it is appropriate to cite posts from other threads and when it's not.[/sarcasm]

I'll be gladly hop on that train if it takes me as far away as possible from such mindsets, who see no wrong in killing the children of other countries, yet don't grant a women the freedom to make a choice for what would affect her life. Spending the eternity with them would be the true Hell for me.

I don't care if JJ calls me a murderer for standing up for women's right, because he advocates a far greater murder and sees no wrong in that calling it simply collateral damage.

I'll just go back to my original argument, ladies:

IMO, it's all about the power that men wield (or would like to) over women, and their views being self-serving.

It's real easy for men to be pro-Iraqi War when they don't have to worry about being drafted into the army and sent to Iraq to fight.

Just as it is for men to be anti-abortion when they know that they will never be faced with the personal decision of whether or not to have one.

Yeah, because all men who are anti-abortion are close-minded misogynistic cavemen.

No, I wouldn't go that far, by any means.

But let's face reality here.

Don't people tend to make decisions and form their views based on their own self interest - at least to some extent?

Is it hard to grasp the idea that many men might feel differently about their anti-abortion stance if the decision was one that affected them more personally?

I think that would apply more to abortion then to me. I don't think caring about an unborn baby would classify as "self-interest."

No, it wouldn't, possibly, though, because you have no personal self interest in the issue as of yet.

But can you be certain that you would feel the same way if you were the person who was pregnant, or had the chance to become pregnant?

Can you be sure how you'd feel if you were the father and your 17 year-old girlfriend was the pregnant one?

I'd think not.

I don't see how anyone can ever be certain about how they'd feel about any situation that they've never been in or have no chance of being in.

I'm against the death penalty, but I might feel differently if one of my loved ones was the murder victim.

And I'm pro-choice, but I might have felt differently if 10 years ago (I'm waaaaay too old now to be having any new babies) it was my girlfriend who was pregnant with my child (although while I might argue, and prefer that she not get an abortion, i would still relinquish the decision to her without too much argument, but quite possibly not without anger or resentment).

Never having been in those situations, I just don't know for sure how I'd feel.