Advertisement

by Opaloka » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:35 am

by Nua Corda » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:36 am

by Cosara » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:36 am
Osterreichischen wrote:And because I am a real man, of which there is an obvious shortage of in this world.


by Dilange » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:36 am
Osterreichischen wrote:Tsuntion wrote:
Abortion is one way to assume responsibility (rather than just ignoring the situation).
The woman doesn't have to deal with a baby yet, just the pregnancy. She can take responsibility for it by terminating it if she doesn't want to have the baby, or by letting it continue if she does want the baby. Letting it continue when she doesn't want the baby and not making plans for the baby, ignoring the pregnancy and hoping stuff works out, etc. are ways of not taking responsibility.
If she doesn't want the baby, then she should completely avoid the risk altogether, act more responsible and wait for sex until she is in a position to maintain and take care of a small child.
How hard is that?
Is the desire to have sex more important than ending up having to kill a baby?

by His Noodliness the FSM » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:36 am
Spiritwolf wrote:The Realm of God wrote:
Your opinions sicken me. You deprive women of their right to liberty and right of free choice in direct violation of this nations constitution.
The Constitution of the United States of America protects ALL Americans rights to include those that have just been concieved. Women have been literally getting away with murder for far too long now. And yes, I fully intend to curtail this particular problem before more innocent children die. It's called a "VOTE". It is the ultimate use of force. And I am going to use it on you with extreme prejudice.

by Desperate Measures » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:37 am
Ifreann wrote:Osterreichischen wrote:
If she doesn't want the baby, then she should completely avoid the risk altogether, act more responsible and wait for sex until she is in a position to maintain and take care of a small child.
How hard is that?
Is the desire to have sex more important than ending up having to kill a baby?
If you don't want to die in a car accident, never get into a car. How hard is that? Is the desire to drive more important than a fiery death?

by Starkindler » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:37 am
Sophian wrote:Common NS Patron on abortion thread: "WHAT? YOU HAVE CRITICISM OF ABORTION? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR SYMPATHY FOR FETUSES! YOU ARE A MORON! FETUSES ARE THE PARASITIC SCUM OF THE EARTH NEXT TO REPUBLICANS! YOU HATE WOMEN! YOU THINK WOMEN SHOULD BE SLAVES! YOU PROBABLY HATE OBAMA BECAUSE HE'S BLACK! OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN EXTREMIST IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME AT ALL ON THIS ONE ISSUE! ANY RESTRICTION ON ABORTION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!"
Common NS Patron on gun thread: "CONSTITUTION? THAT WAS WRITTEN OVER A HUNDRED YEARS AGO! ITS OUTDATED! YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OWN A GUN JUST BECAUSE IT WAS MADE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT SO THAT IT WOULD BE PROTECTED FROM DEMOCRACY!"

by Osterreichischen » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:37 am

by Spiritwolf » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:37 am
Ifreann wrote:Spiritwolf wrote:The Constitution of the United States of America protects ALL Americans rights to include those that have just been concieved...
The decision in Roe v. Wade explains that the Constitution's various uses of the term "person" could not reasonably be understood as including the unborn. The Constitution of the United States protects the rights of all people in its jurisdictions, and the unborn aren't people.


by The Realm of God » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:37 am

by Sophian » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:38 am
Starkindler wrote:Sophian wrote:Common NS Patron on abortion thread: "WHAT? YOU HAVE CRITICISM OF ABORTION? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR SYMPATHY FOR FETUSES! YOU ARE A MORON! FETUSES ARE THE PARASITIC SCUM OF THE EARTH NEXT TO REPUBLICANS! YOU HATE WOMEN! YOU THINK WOMEN SHOULD BE SLAVES! YOU PROBABLY HATE OBAMA BECAUSE HE'S BLACK! OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN EXTREMIST IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME AT ALL ON THIS ONE ISSUE! ANY RESTRICTION ON ABORTION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!"
Common NS Patron on gun thread: "CONSTITUTION? THAT WAS WRITTEN OVER A HUNDRED YEARS AGO! ITS OUTDATED! YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OWN A GUN JUST BECAUSE IT WAS MADE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT SO THAT IT WOULD BE PROTECTED FROM DEMOCRACY!"
You should think of the fetuses in a way that they'll be born someday. And children deserve to be raised in a nurturing, peaceful environment. With access to such luxuries as loving parent/s (it's a different discussion), or edible food, clean water, maybe education and a home to return to?
As money's evil, God can't provide these things to people, as by providing money, God would corrupt people. Praying won't feed anyone. Working parent/s will.

by Lunalia » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:38 am
Dilange wrote:Osterreichischen wrote:
If she doesn't want the baby, then she should completely avoid the risk altogether, act more responsible and wait for sex until she is in a position to maintain and take care of a small child.
How hard is that?
Is the desire to have sex more important than ending up having to kill a baby?
Sex =/= the consent for impregnation.

by Nua Corda » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:38 am

by The Huskar Social Union » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:38 am
Samuraikoku wrote:Too bad the UDHR does not define what "person" is, eh?
Samuraikoku wrote:Also, it's not legally binding. Your argument is invalid.

by Dilange » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:39 am
Spiritwolf wrote:Ifreann wrote:The decision in Roe v. Wade explains that the Constitution's various uses of the term "person" could not reasonably be understood as including the unborn. The Constitution of the United States protects the rights of all people in its jurisdictions, and the unborn aren't people.
In North Dakota they are. And they will soon be nationwide.

by Ashmoria » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:39 am
Osterreichischen wrote:Desperate Measures wrote:If a woman would rather give birth to a child rather than have an abortion when she wasn't ready or fully able to care for it, that is a bigger problem with worse consequences.
The problem is engaging in sexual behavior when you're not in a position to maintain a family in general. If you're not in a situation to take care of yourself and a small child, you're certainly not in a position to make the decision of having sex.
Why?
Because sex has obvious risks. Becoming Pregnant is one of them, and the biggest risk one must be aware of and prepared for.
If a woman would rather kill a baby than wait for marriage to have sex, I'd suggest taking a look at her priorities in life.

by The Rich Port » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:39 am

by Condunum » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:39 am
Osterreichischen wrote:The Huskar Social Union wrote:Yet you dont know the name of the German Army (its Heer, by the way) which you have supposedly applied for.
edit: Seems Realm said this already.
I didn't apply. I wanted to all my life but I met the woman who is my wife right now and had to choose between staying here with her and raising a family or joining the WEHRMACHT which I will call it that because It contains the Heer. Wehrmacht is like saying "Armed Forces"
It is not branch specific, but if you need me to then ARMY or HEER is what I wanted to do.
"Armed Forces" "Wehrmacht" Is more appropriate because I wanted to join the "Army" "Heer" OR the "Navy" "Deutsche Marine" because my grandfather was in the Kriegsmarine during the second world war.
And because my grandparents were, it does not make me a nazi.

by Cosara » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:40 am
Samuraikoku wrote:Cosara wrote:If you're a living member of the human race (which fetuses are) I consider you a person.
Too bad the UDHR does not define what "person" is, eh?

by Lunalia » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:40 am

by Cosara » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:41 am
Condunum wrote:Osterreichischen wrote:
I didn't apply. I wanted to all my life but I met the woman who is my wife right now and had to choose between staying here with her and raising a family or joining the WEHRMACHT which I will call it that because It contains the Heer. Wehrmacht is like saying "Armed Forces"
It is not branch specific, but if you need me to then ARMY or HEER is what I wanted to do.
"Armed Forces" "Wehrmacht" Is more appropriate because I wanted to join the "Army" "Heer" OR the "Navy" "Deutsche Marine" because my grandfather was in the Kriegsmarine during the second world war.
And because my grandparents were, it does not make me a nazi.
The Wehrmacht was the unified armed forces of Germany from 1935 to 1945. It literally does not apply anywhere else, and the fact that you insist it does proves you aren't a German.

by Celritannia » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:41 am
My DeviantArt Obey When you annoy a Celritannian U W0T M8?
| Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman. Atheist, Environmentalist, Pansexual, Left-Libertarian. |

by Cosara » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:41 am
Lunalia wrote:A thought just occurred to me. People say that "babies are a punishment for having sex".
Sex isn't a crime. A punishment for something that isn't wrong is... assault.
So a woman is free to kill the "person" that is assaulting her.

by Dilange » Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:41 am
Lunalia wrote:A thought just occurred to me. People say that "babies are a punishment for having sex".
Sex isn't a crime. A punishment for something that isn't wrong is... assault.
So a woman is free to kill the "person" that is assaulting her.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Eurocom, EuroStralia, In-dia, Likhinia, Majestic-12 [Bot], Necroghastia, Pizza Friday Forever91, Senscaria, Western Theram
Advertisement