Who's Setting The Agenda For The Democratic Party?

You are confused. For some reason, you think that when I said “More government means less freedom. Always” that I am against all laws and regulations. I’m not. But one freedom no law or regulation can take away from anyone is choosing which ones you like or don’t like. We all do that. So knock it off with your sanctimonious all or nothing routine. Furthermore, regulations and laws don’t stop any sort of behavior, all they do is criminalize that behavior and establish penalties for engaging in that behavior. The behavior that the laws and regulations are aimed at continues because people continue to choose to ignore the ones they want to ignore while running the risk that their freedom will be lost if caught. There is no question, more government always means less freedom.

But clarify for me if you would … keeping in line with your “both ways” argument … do you want the freedom to kill anyone you want to, or just babies?

2 Likes

not killing babies, aborting fetuses pre viability.

dont misrepresent my position.

and yes people should have the freedom to do that without the govt nosing around in their private medical decisions .

that the point that we disagree on.

Allan

Viability … Is that what makes them human in your eyes? :roll_eyes:

I have no problem with a woman and her doctor making medical decisions for her without government interference. What abortion choice is though, is a life and death decision for someone other than the woman. This takes us back to your argument about being free to kill anyone you want without government interference. Human life is human life from beginning to end according to science. It’s not just human life when government says it is. You can’t have it both ways …

2 Likes

This aged very well.

1 Like

exactly survival outside the womb. seems like a fair compromise between the human life begins at conception v abortion on demand argument.

compromise like the debt ceiling bill.

silly me for even thinking about a compromise.

we can plainly see that you are not willing to compromise.

tis a pity……

just like the gallant 117.

ideals over reality.

Allan

What does survival outside the womb have to do with it? In fact, that is counter logic. You say that it’s okay to kill it if it cannot survive outside the womb yet say that it can survive that it should not be removed from the womb. But on the larger scale, regardless whether you demarcate between viable and non-viable, no fetus can survive on its own outside the womb, nor can it survive on its own probably through age four or five or more. Regardless of what stage of development the child is, it requires the nurture and care of the mother before it is born, and after birth, from the mother and/or other adults. In short, your viability argument is pure crap.

3 Likes

What does it even mean. Even after birth at full term it won’t survive without help

2 Likes

Which is exactly what I said.

1 Like

No is just what you lying to yourself to make yourself feel better. I personally have a different view on time lines then most conservatives on here. But I don’t tell myself it isn’t a baby being killed.

2 Likes

Lol didn’t even read the second sentence.

everything. first trimester. its basically just a clump of cells.

i was. you were. everyone was.

Allan

nope, just dealing with reality.

fertilized eggs >>> embroyos >>>>> fetuses >>>>> babies

see how that works.

Allan

Yep I see. You have to lie to yourself to make yourself feel better. Sad.

2 Likes

human biology aint your thing.

we all get that.

Allan

cat fight

Big Pharma is setting the agenda. And the MIC…

Medical Mandates and endless wars…

Reality isn’t yours. Do you call your arm an upper extremity or an arm? When you refere to every single part of your anatomy by the latin medical name I will believe you. Otherwise you are just trying to make yourself feel better.

A clump of organized, genetically programmed, developing human cells.

Yep, and fully human at every stage.

I love irony. :smirk: