Get Global Supremacy Now!

Are we a country who likes to glorify murder?

• Merrÿpranxter Sep 9, 2013

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  Doesn't really matter what you think. Our history and our leaders have already experienced both ends of the stick. It's more humane to make it legal for many many reasons that you can read about yourself. Less lives are lost overall. Real lives, the kinds that have hearts, lungs and kidneys. Not only that but women's rights have also already been established so unless you are a female then again your opinion holds no significance. Here's a tip on how you can prevent a women from having an abortion that you stuck your stick into. Go get a vasectomy. Problem solved for your personal experiences. 👍
• ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ Sep 9, 2013

  Do Americans glorify murder? Thank you for generalizing an entire population. And in general, we do not.

  Now, are there specific aspects of our vast culture (and every culture) that glorify murder? Yes, such as movies, and video games--which are not limited to the USA alone. And this is not some new concept plaguing modern humanity. If you look back at the history of civilizations across the globe you can find that "murder" is a subject matter prevalent in theater performances, folk tales, music, and other mediums alike.

  Sadly, murder has existed since humans have walked the earth, and it is a part of a life. Whether you want to argue that an idea being presented in itself is a form of glorification, that is up to you. But murder has occurred in art-forms and writings throughout time.

  That is the answer to your question, regardless of how ridiculous of a thread this is.

  P.S - Most of you are idiots.
• ★punchy★ Sep 9, 2013

  "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament."

  -Florynce Kennedy
• ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ Sep 9, 2013

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  So you're arguing that the future state of technology can determine whether something is considered murder or not? What if that family cannot afford that medical technology and treatment?..Are they now murderers?

  And to the dude posting Foxnews links, you're officially a douche.
• Sentinel Sep 9, 2013

  ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ wrote:

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  So you're arguing that the future state of technology can determine whether something is considered murder or not? What if that family cannot afford that medical technology and treatment?..Are they now murderers?

  And to the dude posting Foxnews links, you're officially a douche.

  Geez. You don't have to come on so strong like that.
• c. Sep 9, 2013

  ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ wrote:

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  So you're arguing that the future state of technology can determine whether something is considered murder or not? What if that family cannot afford that medical technology and treatment?..Are they now murderers?

  no. he suggested it was not murder due to not being able to survive. i asked if that would in his view change things. my opinion is that it is killing a baby and wrong. doesnt matter though since addi has informed me that my genes keep me from having an opinion.
• Sentinel Sep 9, 2013

  "MOM, GET THE POPCORN!"
• ★punchy★ Sep 9, 2013

  ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ wrote:

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  So you're arguing that the future state of technology can determine whether something is considered murder or not? What if that family cannot afford that medical technology and treatment?..Are they now murderers?

  And to the dude posting Foxnews links, you're officially a douche.

  Sometimes you use the source that is best suited to those you're arguing with. It could have just as easily been Ammesty International or the ACLU if I was talking to people not wearing blinders. Also, lighten the fuck up.
• HIPPIE🍁MAFIA Sep 9, 2013

  c. wrote:

  if medical advanced could keep a fetus alive after say 2 months, should abortion then be illegal after 2 months in your view hippie? after all premature babies require medical care to survive "eviction".

  Well IF science ever advanced that far, to not only keep it alive, but to allow it to properly develop, I would still believe the women would have the choice to remove it from her body, but I wouldn't have an issue with the fetus being kept alive. There is of course the question of who pays for it. Keeping a premature baby alive costs thousands a day, and that's usually for a period of a month or two tops. You take that to 6-7 months, multiplied by the millions of fetuses, and that's one hell of a tax increase coming your way. Then of course you have the costs after to raise the child...

  Point is though we are no where near that technology, so it's a mite point till that day.
• ⅉⅇⅆⅈ ཫཬསབϯའཪངƙऽ Sep 9, 2013

  ★punchy★ wrote:

  Sometimes you use the source that is best suited to those you're arguing with. It could have just as easily been Ammesty International or the ACLU if I was talking to people not wearing blinders. Also, lighten the fuck up.

  It was intended to be a humorous statement, not a personal attack.
• HIPPIE🍁MAFIA Sep 9, 2013

  c. wrote:

  So you're arguing that the future state of technology can determine whether something is considered murder or not? What if that family cannot afford that medical technology and treatment?..Are they now murderers?

  no. he suggested it was not murder due to not being able to survive. i asked if that would in his view change things. my opinion is that it is killing a baby and wrong. doesnt matter though since addi has informed me that my genes keep me from having an opinion.

  Killing a baby is wrong... But removing a fetus is not. And I don't think Addi said you can't have an opinion, i think she just said your opinion doesn't matter. Every guy should know their opinions don't matter when it comes to a women's body (or anything else really when dealing with women 😜)
• Sentinel Sep 9, 2013

  By the way, I think this is supposed to be a discussion, not an argument. So stop bickering and give an educated opinion and be able to back it up with facts.👍
• Sentinel Sep 10, 2013

  This makes me want to join my school's debate team.
• Merrÿpranxter Sep 10, 2013

  @c.

  Opinions lead to autrocities in this case. We've been through this already in our country as I said. But hey maybe you support your daughter's boyfriend sticking a coat hanger up her hooha to take care of it. Maybe she'll live? *shrugs* Bottom line is you can't legislate morality. You make your personal choices and teach your kids how best to make it in the world. That is it. The consequences of legislating this sort of thing is in plain view for the world to see if you dare empathize with our countries past and use your critical thinking skills.

  Fundy pro-lifers don't see what's right in front of them. Real sex Ed and preventative health/sex measures drastically reduces abortions. But they like to defund all that and keep pushing abstinence. If it wasn't so sad it would be hilarious. Cutting off ther nose to spite their face.
• ★punchy★ Sep 10, 2013

  Here is an event that informed one of the 7 Supreme Court justices that ruled in favor of legalized abortion in 1973, Roe v. Wade. just to give some perspective on the issue:
  In his book, "Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.," published in 1993, (former clerk) Professor John C. Jeffries recounted a dramatic incident from Powell's years as a senior partner at a Richmond law firm. A distraught 19-year-old office helper called him at home in the middle of the night and asked to meet him at the office. The young man's girlfriend had become pregnant. He had tried to help her abort herself, but the procedure went terribly wrong and she had bled to death.

  Powell went to see the local prosecutor, with the result that no charges were ever filed. "This incident convinced Powell that women would seek abortions whether they were legal or not and that driving the practice underground led to danger and death," Professor Jeffries wrote.
• ▪False▪ Sep 10, 2013

  I'm Pro-Choice.
  But I want to take away the choice and abort immediately if the child's quality of life will be low. Regardless.

  And some animals have to be born to be slaughtered. It's the way it works. Deal with it.

  And I have no problem with capital punishment. It should be more prominent. And more painful.

  --False
• c. Sep 10, 2013

  addi i highly doubt the number if coat hanger abortions would equal the 50million abortions in the past 40 years if abortion was still illegal. thats about the same number of dead in world war 2 and more than 8 times as many dead as jews at the hands of the nazis. you are right about prevention abd it is hypocritical of many prolifers to resist birth control methods like condoms and pills. but if we are going to spend money on abortion as a country id much rather see it spent on getting women thru pregnancy and the kids adopted than on eliminating them.
• PRIDE Sep 10, 2013

  ▪False▪ wrote:

  I'm Pro-Choice.But I want to take away the choice and abort immediately if the child's quality of life will be low. Regardless.

  And some animals have to be born to be slaughtered. It's the way it works. Deal with it.

  And I have no problem with capital punishment. It should be more prominent. And more painful.

  --False

  I think this guy is mentally unstable.
• PRIDE Sep 10, 2013

  Yeah bro, why would you raise my taxes just to keep others alive, it's hardly worth it.
  C. I don't see why you keep arguing with them. I have a general rule when it comes to debating a topic, if they can't make logical statements then I won't reply. Simple as that.
• ▪False▪ Sep 10, 2013

  I'm perfectly stable.
  I don't think you have the right mindset. There are people that murder entire families and only get life in prison. I don't want to waste my taxes in keeping their useless selves alive. They deserve whatever capital punishment they get. Whether it is hanging or a leth injection. I don't care. But humane? Really? We are talking about ethics when people abruptly end others lives to benefit themselves somehow? Okay. Completely fair.
  What an idiotic thread of clusterfuck.

  --False
• c. Sep 10, 2013

  PRIDE wrote:

  Yeah bro, why would you raise my taxes just to keep others alive, it's hardly worth it.C. I don't see why you keep arguing with them. I have a general rule when it comes to debating a topic, if they can't make logical statements then I won't reply. Simple as that.

  im just bored and too much time on my hands tonight. anyway im done it's not like addi or i will change each others mind.
• noahdaninja Sep 10, 2013

  HIPPIE🍁MAFIA wrote:

  c. wrote:

  PRIDE wrote:

  Yes we do, it's called "pro-choice". It's sad really.

  sad but true

  Oh how I love you people. Technically abortion is just an eviction... If the fetus could live on it's own then it would be murder... And illegal. But it can't, therefore it is a women making a choice regarding her body, and what lives in it.

  Your argument made no sense... Even a five year old cant really live on its own
• noahdaninja Sep 10, 2013

  ▪False▪ wrote:

  I'm Pro-Choice.But I want to take away the choice and abort immediately if the child's quality of life will be low. Regardless.

  And some animals have to be born to be slaughtered. It's the way it works. Deal with it.

  And I have no problem with capital punishment. It should be more prominent. And more painful.

  --False

  Hmm low quality of life... Worse than death... Hmmm
• ▪False▪ Sep 10, 2013

  Low quality of life is worse than death. Especially if the death is before life is even known.

  --False
• The Saw Sep 10, 2013

  I'm happy we don't let just any yahoo make these decisions for us. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Fortunately it's those with experience/wisdom, education, are informed, and have a balanced perspective of our common society that get to make these decisions for our collective well-being. I can only imagine the country we would live in if some of you fanaticals above were in charge. Open your minds people and consider how your views effect others. You can't use one fact to form an opinion.
• Merrÿpranxter Sep 10, 2013

  C. You do understand wether abortion is legal or not its very wide spread either way? The cost$ to society is high. Tax payers are then dishing out even more money for non preventative health. Which, is the biggest drain on our health system btw. The reason we pay out so much more in health costs than other 1st world countries even with legal abortions. In our history we have proven that making it illegal in no way prevents it from happening. You understand this right or do you really believe legislating morality is a real preventative measure? If so, I'd love to see some facts backing up that idealistic thought process. Also, how do you suppose those extra 50 million children dropped in the system would end up with forever homes? We already have 30,000 children aging out of foster care every year, never acquiring a family. It's a very very strained system as is...
• Merrÿpranxter Sep 10, 2013

  What would happen if we stressed the system more with your "oh just put them up for adoption" attitude? Also, are you going to start helping these generally poor women in their birthing costs -before and and after birth care? You know the main reason people have abortions due to not having the money to have children?
• c. Sep 10, 2013

  ★Λddi★ wrote:

  What would happen if we stressed the system more with your "oh just put them up for adoption" attitude? Also, are you going to start helping these generally poor women in their birthing costs -before and and after birth care? You know the main reason people have abortions due to not having the money to have children?

  id happily pay higher taxes for those children to be given a chance at life. we would love to adopt a couple kids. it would probably be the one worth while thing our f'ed up gov would spend money on.
• KOZY Sep 10, 2013

  The Saw wrote:

  I'm happy we don't let just any yahoo make these decisions for us. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Fortunately it's those with experience/wisdom, education, are informed, and have a balanced perspective of our common society that get to make these decisions for our collective well-being. I can only imagine the country we would live in if some of you fanaticals above were in charge. Open your minds people and consider how your views effect others. You can't use one fact to form an opinion.

  You do let yahoos make decisions. Bush. Nuff said
• PRIDE Sep 10, 2013

  This is what I'm getting out of the pro-choice people.

  -too much money to keep the unborn alive, it will raise my taxes.
  -they're not considered "human beings" until they come out of the womb.