Why can't a Democrat be pro life?

27,996 Views | 287 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by Florda_mike
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Waco1947 said:

I am sorry for the women who have to live with vile hatred because they are pregnant. I'll stand with them.
.
Can't see your hate, can you? That's sad for women. I know you don't 'hate pregnant women" but you have such of silly opinion of why they got pregnant.
You are oblivious to their plight.
Waco 1947 i s Caiaphas 2018, ladies and gentlemen

Expediency over Truth, no matter who gets killed to accomplish it.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Waco1947 said:

I am sorry for the women who have to live with vile hatred because they are pregnant. I'll stand with them.
.
Can't see your hate, can you? That's sad for women. I know you don't 'hate pregnant women" but you have such of silly opinion of why they got pregnant.
You are oblivious to their plight.
The cause of pregnancy is not in dispute in most circles. The idea that women who become pregnant became pregnant through sexual intercourse with a man is not a "silly opinion," it is not even an opinion. In the overwhelming number of cases it is simply a fact.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

So you still got nothing to say but reverso world. Is it any of your business as a citizen of the United States who rights are protected by the Constitution to make a woman have an abortion who also lives with those same right?
As a Christian you certainly have a right to voice your opinion but not foist it on another human being in the USA.
And yes I am Pro Life because I believe that after a child leaves the womb we should as citizens should help these women with healthcare, food, child care and education. That's a pro life position not simply a anti abortion position.
I will say that pregnant women should have free prenatal care - that pro life.
You are an unhinged looney grasping at straws.

Are you senile? Serious question.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

I am sorry for the women who have to live with vile hatred because they are pregnant. I'll stand with them.


You are merely babbling foolishness still again. No one remotely said any thing about hating pregnant women.

My goodness you are a complete nut case .
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I love it when you guys circle up and call me names. It means you love me and I am hitting too close to home. You apparently cannot trust women to make their decisions. Government has to do it for them. Neither can you tell how you were going to provide health care, child care and education for 110,000,000 mothers and children. You dance around that one every time and are reduced to ridicule and name calling and slander. As quash says there can be a middle ground. All I hope is to keep raising justice and hope for these women to make their own choices.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

I love it when you guys circle up and call me names. It means you love me and I am hitting too close to home. You apparently cannot trust women to make their decisions. Government has to do it for them. Neither can you tell how you were going to provide health care, child care and education for 110,000,000 mothers and children. You dance around that one every time and are reduced to ridicule and name calling and slander. As quash says there can be a middle ground. All I hope is to keep raising justice and hope for these women to make their own choices.
You expect us to agree with you and if we don't then you claim we are against women's rights which is wholly untrue.

I've already laid out my arguments against abortion to you several times and your responses are elementary and emotional at best.

Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

Waco1947 said:

I love it when you guys circle up and call me names. It means you love me and I am hitting too close to home. You apparently cannot trust women to make their decisions. Government has to do it for them. Neither can you tell how you were going to provide health care, child care and education for 110,000,000 mothers and children. You dance around that one every time and are reduced to ridicule and name calling and slander. As quash says there can be a middle ground. All I hope is to keep raising justice and hope for these women to make their own choices.
You expect us to agree with you and if we don't then you claim we are against women's rights which is wholly untrue.

I've already laid out my arguments against abortion to you several times and your responses are elementary and emotional at best.


. My response (which you took no time to refute) are solid. If you think that are emotional or elementary then show me. Constitutional Rights are rconatitutional rights and yes that's elementary
but true.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
contrario
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
Slave owners had different names for black people too. That doesn't mean people of the time didn't recognize the disgusting practice and didn't debate the issues. The only ones that grasped on to the antiquated definitions were the slave owners. 100 years from now, people that differentiated between abortion and infanticide will be held in the same light as those that defended slavery. You are on the wrong side of history.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
contrario said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
Slave owners had different names for black people too. That doesn't mean people of the time didn't recognize the disgusting practice and didn't debate the issues. The only ones that grasped on to the antiquated definitions were the slave owners. 100 years from now, people that differentiated between abortion and infanticide will be held in the same light as those that defended slavery. You are on the wrong side of history.

Or not. You don't get to decide.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

I love it when you guys circle up and call me names. It means you love me and I am hitting too close to home. You apparently cannot trust women to make their decisions. Government has to do it for them. Neither can you tell how you were going to provide health care, child care and education for 110,000,000 mothers and children. You dance around that one every time and are reduced to ridicule and name calling and slander. As quash says there can be a middle ground. All I hope is to keep raising justice and hope for these women to make their own choices.
I don't trust anyone to make the decision to kill another in cold blood for no reason. That isn't a "choice" that anyone has a right to make. Doesn't matter if it is a man or woman. What you are doing is making excuses for the wholesale killing of unborn human offspring as though they were nothing but warts or skin tags or tonsils to be removed as "health decisions."
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.

If abortion isn't murder then there is no problem, you expose your ass yet again.

You know it's wrong and you're backpedaling.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.



If it makes you feel better you can believe that. Won't make it true.

But seriously, why so averse to engaging in dialogue that seeks a solution?
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You republican right wing loonies are not pro-life; you are pro-birth. After the baby is born you Repubs and your party support cutting every program which assists the development of the child, physically & emotionally. If you want to see what evil really looks like, go stand in front of a mirror and get a good look at yourselves. I believe Jesus said something to the effect of Let the little children come to me, not kids you are on your own-get out of here and don't bother me. And drop the socialist garbage; you're sounding like totalitarians and neo-nazis.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.



If it makes you feel better you can believe that. Won't make it true.

But seriously, why so averse to engaging in dialogue that seeks a solution?
You're the hack that came on a thread civilly discussing the tradition you willfully ignore and betray with partisan stupidity and now want to play a victim for being exposed as intellectually dishonest.

If there is nothing ethically wrong with abortion then there's no need to compromise, period.

You didn't come here to be a solution seeker, that's a pivot from showing your ass, and you're too clueless to realize your indefensible position exposes itself by asking for a solution, because if your position were true then there would be nothing to talk about, but you know better despite your posturing.

You're comfortable with an immoral position, it just irks you that reality has to be bent to keep you insulated with that choice.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry said:

You republican right wing loonies are not pro-life; you are pro-birth. After the baby is born you Repubs and your party support cutting every program which assists the development of the child, physically & emotionally. If you want to see what evil really looks like, go stand in front of a mirror and get a good look at yourselves. I believe Jesus said something to the effect of Let the little children come to me, not kids you are on your own-get out of here and don't bother me. And drop the socialist garbage; you're sounding like totalitarians and neo-nazis.
That's the hackneyed eugenicist rants of the leftist thugs that parrot this personal gospel to feel smugly self-satisfied with trying to pretend their eugenicist history and infanticide supporting is some sort of mercy killing.

You guys keep showing your ass coming on a thread about how liberalism historically was pro-life, and how historical liberalism was informed by honoring the sanctity of life.

You must be a reverend in the church of satan to worship death with such passion.

quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.



If it makes you feel better you can believe that. Won't make it true.

But seriously, why so averse to engaging in dialogue that seeks a solution?
You're the hack that came on a thread civilly discussing the tradition you willfully ignore and betray with partisan stupidity and now want to play a victim for being exposed as intellectually dishonest.

If there is nothing ethically wrong with abortion then there's no need to compromise, period.

You didn't come here to be a solution seeker, that's a pivot from showing your ass, and you're too clueless to realize your indefensible position exposes itself by asking for a solution, because if your position were true then there would be nothing to talk about, but you know better despite your posturing.

You're comfortable with an immoral position, it just irks you that reality has to be bent to keep you insulated with that choice.

I tried several times to move the discussion forward. You can't see anything but your side, and that is why many Americans oppose your position. Try common ground instead of hate for the post-born.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry said:

You republican right wing loonies are not pro-life; you are pro-birth. After the baby is born you Repubs and your party support cutting every program which assists the development of the child, physically & emotionally. If you want to see what evil really looks like, go stand in front of a mirror and get a good look at yourselves. I believe Jesus said something to the effect of Let the little children come to me, not kids you are on your own-get out of here and don't bother me. And drop the socialist garbage; you're sounding like totalitarians and neo-nazis.


Let us assume that you are correct and those Republicans are totally evil. Let us assume that they don't care about children, hate Jesus and are little more than Nazis. Since I am not a Republican, those charges would not apply to me anyway, but none of those charges can change the fact that you support the wholesale slaughter of unborn human offspring.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.



If it makes you feel better you can believe that. Won't make it true.

But seriously, why so averse to engaging in dialogue that seeks a solution?
You're the hack that came on a thread civilly discussing the tradition you willfully ignore and betray with partisan stupidity and now want to play a victim for being exposed as intellectually dishonest.

If there is nothing ethically wrong with abortion then there's no need to compromise, period.

You didn't come here to be a solution seeker, that's a pivot from showing your ass, and you're too clueless to realize your indefensible position exposes itself by asking for a solution, because if your position were true then there would be nothing to talk about, but you know better despite your posturing.

You're comfortable with an immoral position, it just irks you that reality has to be bent to keep you insulated with that choice.

I tried several times to move the discussion forward. You can't see anything but your side, and that is why many Americans oppose your position. Try common ground instead of hate for the post-born.
No, out the gate you behaved like an unprovoked jackass and destroyed credibility for trying to dialogue, you made it quite clear you weren't here for that.

Then you thought we were all dumb enough to fall for semantic dumbassery, and then you backpedaled to the point of revealing you KNOW abortion is immoral or else you wouldn't suddenly shrink from bravado, to semantics, to pretending you're some peacemaker looking for compromise.

Americans don't oppose my position, most are appalled at abortion being used as birth control. Wendy Davis was rejected in the worst landslide since 1998 accordingly for trying to filibuster a bill that 66 percent of the public backed, and that still made Texas abortion laws more liberal than every nation on Earth outside of Canada and the UK.

When you lot are so frothing at the mouth that you won't even agree not to kill children after they are scientifically proven to feel pain in the womb, you show how barbaric and threatened you feel by having to consider the ramifications of abortion at all.

In France you can't get an abortion past 10 weeks, in Spain and Germany 12, much of Western Europe follows suit with that, none permitting more than 20 weeks because of the fact the child can without a shadow of a doubt feel pain as it's being burned to death or suctioned apart.

But you bloodthirsty libertines on this side of the Atlantic think semantics can disqualify scientific reality, one our much more secular members of Western civilization acknowledge and abide by, but for some reason modern "liberalism" can't even coincide with supposedly more "liberal" societies than our own on the issue, much less the tenants of liberalism's own historical pro-life position.


Florda_mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
contrario said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
Slave owners had different names for black people too. That doesn't mean people of the time didn't recognize the disgusting practice and didn't debate the issues. The only ones that grasped on to the antiquated definitions were the slave owners. 100 years from now, people that differentiated between abortion and infanticide will be held in the same light as those that defended slavery. You are on the wrong side of history.


Is it a coincidence those on wrong side of slavery and abortion, BOTH, were democrats then and democrats now???
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You might read a little history. For you answer
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Florda_mike said:

contrario said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
Slave owners had different names for black people too. That doesn't mean people of the time didn't recognize the disgusting practice and didn't debate the issues. The only ones that grasped on to the antiquated definitions were the slave owners. 100 years from now, people that differentiated between abortion and infanticide will be held in the same light as those that defended slavery. You are on the wrong side of history.


Is it a coincidence those on wrong side of slavery and abortion, BOTH, were democrats then and democrats now???
Yes, actually.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Blood thirsty? You just make up lies. Grasshopper DT has taught you well
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Blood thirsty? You just make up lies. Grasshopper DT has taught you well
Says the goat that claims to be a sheep.

Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Blood thirsty? You just make up lies. Grasshopper DT has taught you well
You support death on demand. That's blood thirsty by any reasonable definition.

Stop lying to yourself.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SilliMilli mite learn something if that person would study teachings of Jesus, but I can tell from the name calling we have another worshiper at the throne of our degenerate president. You can't be pro-life and then post birth wash your hands of children, especially those unwanted children abandoned by their parents. I am very pro life but those children can not be abandoned by our society. So try to get a life milli & get some education so you will know what you are talking about.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

MilliVanilli said:

quash said:

Again, words have meaning and we have separate words for abortion and infanticide. But you're more interested in ideological posturing than in helping solve the problem.
You use semantic to feel good about infanticide, we get it, you're a hack that tries to silence whatever conscience you have left by asininely parsing words in hopes that will deflect from reality.



If it makes you feel better you can believe that. Won't make it true.

But seriously, why so averse to engaging in dialogue that seeks a solution?
You're the hack that came on a thread civilly discussing the tradition you willfully ignore and betray with partisan stupidity and now want to play a victim for being exposed as intellectually dishonest.

If there is nothing ethically wrong with abortion then there's no need to compromise, period.

You didn't come here to be a solution seeker, that's a pivot from showing your ass, and you're too clueless to realize your indefensible position exposes itself by asking for a solution, because if your position were true then there would be nothing to talk about, but you know better despite your posturing.

You're comfortable with an immoral position, it just irks you that reality has to be bent to keep you insulated with that choice.

I tried several times to move the discussion forward. You can't see anything but your side, and that is why many Americans oppose your position. Try common ground instead of hate for the post-born.
No, out the gate you behaved like an unprovoked jackass and destroyed credibility for trying to dialogue, you made it quite clear you weren't here for that.

Then you thought we were all dumb enough to fall for semantic dumbassery, and then you backpedaled to the point of revealing you KNOW abortion is immoral or else you wouldn't suddenly shrink from bravado, to semantics, to pretending you're some peacemaker looking for compromise.

Americans don't oppose my position, most are appalled at abortion being used as birth control. Wendy Davis was rejected in the worst landslide since 1998 accordingly for trying to filibuster a bill that 66 percent of the public backed, and that still made Texas abortion laws more liberal than every nation on Earth outside of Canada and the UK.

When you lot are so frothing at the mouth that you won't even agree not to kill children after they are scientifically proven to feel pain in the womb, you show how barbaric and threatened you feel by having to consider the ramifications of abortion at all.

In France you can't get an abortion past 10 weeks, in Spain and Germany 12, much of Western Europe follows suit with that, none permitting more than 20 weeks because of the fact the child can without a shadow of a doubt feel pain as it's being burned to death or suctioned apart.

But you bloodthirsty libertines on this side of the Atlantic think semantics can disqualify scientific reality, one our much more secular members of Western civilization acknowledge and abide by, but for some reason modern "liberalism" can't even coincide with supposedly more "liberal" societies than our own on the issue, much less the tenants of liberalism's own historical pro-life position.





Powerful post Milli...well done
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry said:

You republican right wing loonies are not pro-life; you are pro-birth. After the baby is born you Repubs and your party support cutting every program which assists the development of the child, physically & emotionally. If you want to see what evil really looks like, go stand in front of a mirror and get a good look at yourselves. I believe Jesus said something to the effect of Let the little children come to me, not kids you are on your own-get out of here and don't bother me. And drop the socialist garbage; you're sounding like totalitarians and neo-nazis.
You are a moron, whoever's sock you are. These conservative people you hate so much adopt problem babies more than anybody on the planet. A good friend just adopted another child, this one with fetal alcohol syndrome.

Clueless clown award for you. The bald face lie you chose to contort your seared mind with is just that, a lie.

Nobody and I mean nobody tries to save unwanted children from their plight more than evangelical conservatives.

You used to be good for chuckles, now that your primary account was likely banned, your sock is now coming on strong with the hate.

Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Does this moral position of pro life serve to benefit a person or does it hurt them?
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Does this moral position of pro life serve to benefit a person or does it hurt them?
What moron debates whether or not executing an innocent child and protecting a woman from regret, quack butchery, possible death from said butcher, post partem guilt, statistical heightened suicidal thoughts, future miscarriages, and heighten cervical cancer risk is out to hurt them?

You're the one advocating risking all of the above to satisfy politicizing ignorant fear in a desperate woman or expedience from the responsibility of one's own actions.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Some of y'all are almost making 47 look rational.
MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rev. Dr. Elmer Gantry said:

SilliMilli mite learn something if that person would study teachings of Jesus, but I can tell from the name calling we have another worshiper at the throne of our degenerate president. You can't be pro-life and then post birth wash your hands of children, especially those unwanted children abandoned by their parents. I am very pro life but those children can not be abandoned by our society. So try to get a life milli & get some education so you will know what you are talking about.
Nah, you're just getting called out the same way Christ told Peter to get behind Him, Satan.

And overturned and whipped the moneychangers from the Temple, the fact you think righteous anger is not the character of God shows that you don't actually worship Him at all.

You cast your god in man's image and decree creation under man's judgment.

You're just a goat hiding among the sheep at best, truthfully a wolf if any poor wretch actually listens to you.

Someone who is "very pro life" doesn't come spouting caustic ignorance so readily as you do.

Nor make excuses for backing politicians who support infanticide as a party platform.



MilliVanilli
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So not a single liberal is going to come forth and own up to liberalism's betrayal of its historical pro-life ethic?

To date, all it's been is deflecting to attack conservatives and partisan Republicans instead of asking why this isn't a bi-partisan issue.


Florda_mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Democrats = the party of killers
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MilliVanilli said:

So not a single liberal is going to come forth and own up to liberalism's betrayal of its historical pro-life ethic?

To date, all it's been is deflecting to attack conservatives and partisan Republicans instead of asking why this isn't a bi-partisan issue.





I tried the common ground route. You stood on your side and hurled insults and lies.

Still here if anybody wants to discuss the issue rationally.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.