Page 146 of 500

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:27 am
by Hardholm
1. Just setting the parameters for discussion.

2. Different definitions of words exist. As I've provided a legitimate dictionary definition, an unborn child is a child, but by your definition it is not. That's okay, we can disagree.

3. I don't think this was stated in good faith, so... No response?

I don't see why things can't be discussed in good faith. I'm not here to score points, just chat. I understand its a hot-button issue and it's nice to pepper your political enemies :p But I'm just not into that haha.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:32 am
by The New California Republic
Hardholm wrote:Just setting the parameters for discussion.

You can't waltz into the thread on page 146 and see fit to dictate the discussion.

Hardholm wrote:I don't think this was stated in good faith, so... No response?

I don't see why things can't be discussed in good faith. I'm not here to score points, just chat. I understand its a hot-button issue and it's nice to pepper your political enemies :p But I'm just not into that haha.

Wh...what is this? Who are you talking to? :eyebrow:

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:33 am
by Hardholm
The New California Republic wrote:
Hardholm wrote:Just setting the parameters for discussion.

You can't waltz into the thread on page 146 and see fit to dictate the discussion.

Hardholm wrote:I don't think this was stated in good faith, so... No response?

I don't see why things can't be discussed in good faith. I'm not here to score points, just chat. I understand its a hot-button issue and it's nice to pepper your political enemies :p But I'm just not into that haha.

Wh...what is this? Who are you talking to? :eyebrow:


But, I am introducing myself to the discussion and have to set the parameters of how I intend to interact with you all. It's only good form.

Your third point seemed written in bad faith. So you I guess.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:37 am
by Neanderthaland
Hardholm wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:
You can't waltz into the thread on page 146 and see fit to dictate the discussion.


Wh...what is this? Who are you talking to? :eyebrow:


But, I am introducing myself to the discussion and have to set the parameters of how I intend to interact with you all. It's only good form.

Your third point seemed written in bad faith. So you I guess.

It struck me more as incredulity at your condescension.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:38 am
by Hardholm
Neanderthaland wrote:
Hardholm wrote:
But, I am introducing myself to the discussion and have to set the parameters of how I intend to interact with you all. It's only good form.

Your third point seemed written in bad faith. So you I guess.

It struck me more as incredulity at your condensation.


Well, I certainly don't mean to come off that way. I'll make an effort to come off as less so in the future. Thank you for clarifying. It can be hard to come across as sincere given the topic and medium by which we have to communicate.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:38 am
by The New California Republic
Hardholm wrote:Your third point seemed written in bad faith. So you I guess.

It wasn't. Now are you going to answer it?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:40 am
by Hardholm
The New California Republic wrote:
Hardholm wrote:[
Your third point seemed written in bad faith. So you I guess.

It wasn't. Now are you going to answer it?


Sure, I'll stick to what I said, typically abortions are had by women under great social and personal duress, and I think they're a victim of emotional manipulation and propaganda. Typically, they are indeed victims of society, even if a lot of people like to think of them as just evil. We've not done enough to help them see the alternatives and to provide them with resources to carry to term and beyond, which might otherwise appear to them as too difficult a task.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:41 am
by Christian Confederation
The New California Republic wrote:
Christian Confederation wrote:If they don't want a kid don't do the act

Again contraception can fail. You still haven't addressed that, as you seem to prefer the constant smokescreening by mentioning something else when your argument starts to collapse.

Look abortion is wrong the ga law agnolages it as a necessary evil, if they don't want a kid don't have sex. Than there's 0% chance of an unwanted child.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:42 am
by Jebslund
The New California Republic wrote:
Hardholm wrote:mother is likely a victim of pressures, emotional manipulation, and so forth and so is likely under duress of some sort or at the very least brainwashed.

The actual fuck is this? So in your view the woman isn't really choosing to have an abortion, but is just a victim? What a crock of condescending shit. :roll:

It's a symptom of the "My way is the only legitimate way anyone would ever willingly choose" mentality. People making the same choices are doing so of their own free will, but people making different choices are *obviously* brainwashed or crazy or being forced to do so and, free of those pressures, they would *obviously* choose the same thing.

It's a mindset that often crops up in discussions regarding people under 18 identifying as gay/trans. If they identify as straight/cis, it's because they are and they're not going to let anyone tell them otherwise, but if they identify as gay/bi/poly/ace/trans/genderless, well, that must be their parents forcing them to do that or liberals brainwashing them!

It's also extremely disingenuous and irritating.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:44 am
by The New California Republic
Hardholm wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:It wasn't. Now are you going to answer it?


Sure, I'll stick to what I said, typically abortions are had by women under great social and personal duress, and I think they're a victim of emotional manipulation and propaganda. Typically, they are indeed victims of society, even if a lot of people like to think of them as just evil. We've not done enough to help them see the alternatives and to provide them with resources to carry to term and beyond, which might otherwise appear to them as too difficult a task.

The tone of this is so fucking condescending, I hope you know that.

That said, do you have any evidence of any of this, or is it just opinion with no evidence?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:45 am
by Nanocyberia
Hardholm wrote:I'm sure, sooner or later, MW will "catch up" to everyone else and eliminate their recognition of unborn children as children, but that is of little matter to me either way. It is nice to point to, but I do realize that words have different meanings for people.

It's an additional definition they include: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

Oxford seems weirdly encompassing: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/child (But it turns out it's implicit, in that 'child' != 'baby' or 'fetus'.)
See https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/baby and https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fetus

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:46 am
by Vassenor
Christian Confederation wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Again contraception can fail. You still haven't addressed that, as you seem to prefer the constant smokescreening by mentioning something else when your argument starts to collapse.

Look abortion is wrong the ga law agnolages it as a necessary evil, if they don't want a kid don't have sex. Than there's 0% chance of an unwanted child.


So you're still ignoring that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy, and the ability of contraception to fail.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:47 am
by Hardholm
Jebslund wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:
The actual fuck is this? So in your view the woman isn't really choosing to have an abortion, but is just a victim? What a crock of condescending shit. :roll:

It's a symptom of the "My way is the only legitimate way anyone would ever willingly choose" mentality. People making the same choices are doing so of their own free will, but people making different choices are *obviously* brainwashed or crazy or being forced to do so and, free of those pressures, they would *obviously* choose the same thing.

It's a mindset that often crops up in discussions regarding people under 18 identifying as gay/trans. If they identify as straight/cis, it's because they are and they're not going to let anyone tell them otherwise, but if they identify as gay/bi/poly/ace/trans/genderless, well, that must be their parents forcing them to do that or liberals brainwashing them!

It's also extremely disingenuous and irritating.


Maybe it is naive, but I do feel like a mother's natural instincts and good will towards her offspring would usually not otherwise be overcome to violence against it?

I think there is also a decades long pro-abortion propaganda blitz from those circles which is undeniable.

Definitely not disingenuous in my thoughts. I know this is hot button so irritation is to be expected.

The New California Republic wrote:
Hardholm wrote:
Sure, I'll stick to what I said, typically abortions are had by women under great social and personal duress, and I think they're a victim of emotional manipulation and propaganda. Typically, they are indeed victims of society, even if a lot of people like to think of them as just evil. We've not done enough to help them see the alternatives and to provide them with resources to carry to term and beyond, which might otherwise appear to them as too difficult a task.

The tone of this is so fucking condescending, I hope you know that.

That said, do you have any evidence of any of this, or is it just opinion with no evidence?


I'm sorry you feel that way, and can only ask you to take me at face value. If not then I am not socially capable enough to speak in a way that doesn't come off in whatever way. I'm being genuine though.

I'm more interested in coming to understanding that compromise or "winning", but I can give my thoughts on any given topic? I have spent quite a few years trying to amass and share evidence and such and found it confounding a fruitless. Instead, I feel like discussion and clarity of opinions and thoughts leaves involved parties more satisfied.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:47 am
by The New California Republic
Christian Confederation wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Again contraception can fail. You still haven't addressed that, as you seem to prefer the constant smokescreening by mentioning something else when your argument starts to collapse.

Look abortion is wrong the ga law agnolages it as a necessary evil, if they don't want a kid don't have sex. Than there's 0% chance of an unwanted child.

I am absolutely amazed that you are still doubling down with the same smokescreening shit to avoid the question of failed contraception.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:57 am
by Genivaria
Hardholm wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:It wasn't. Now are you going to answer it?


Sure, I'll stick to what I said, typically abortions are had by women under great social and personal duress, and I think they're a victim of emotional manipulation and propaganda. Typically, they are indeed victims of society, even if a lot of people like to think of them as just evil. We've not done enough to help them see the alternatives and to provide them with resources to carry to term and beyond, which might otherwise appear to them as too difficult a task.

Please source any of this condescending garbage.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:59 am
by Hardholm
Genivaria wrote:
Hardholm wrote:
Sure, I'll stick to what I said, typically abortions are had by women under great social and personal duress, and I think they're a victim of emotional manipulation and propaganda. Typically, they are indeed victims of society, even if a lot of people like to think of them as just evil. We've not done enough to help them see the alternatives and to provide them with resources to carry to term and beyond, which might otherwise appear to them as too difficult a task.

Please source any of this condescending garbage.


Source the Sexual Revolution and Liberalism? Or source that the American system does not provide adequate support for new mothers? I think asking for "sources" on common knowledge is a fallacy, but I'll have to double-check.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:00 pm
by Genivaria
Christian Confederation wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Again contraception can fail. You still haven't addressed that, as you seem to prefer the constant smokescreening by mentioning something else when your argument starts to collapse.

Look abortion is wrong the ga law agnolages it as a necessary evil, if they don't want a kid don't have sex. Than there's 0% chance of an unwanted child.

Again if you don't drive there's 0% change of having an accident, so there's no reason to have auto insurance by your logic.
So are you of the view that people should just be victims of chance and fuck em?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:01 pm
by Genivaria
Hardholm wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Please source any of this condescending garbage.


Source the Sexual Revolution and Liberalism? Or source that the American system does not provide adequate support for new mothers? I think asking for "sources" on common knowledge is a fallacy, but I'll have to double-check.

It's not a fallacy of any kind, asking for evidence of a claim is pretty normal on this forum.
You claimed it now prove it.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:03 pm
by Inkopolitia
Only make it allowed in cases where the woman's life is in danger or if it's rape. Simple as that, the already high taxes shouldn't be spiked up even more.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:04 pm
by Hardholm
Genivaria wrote:
Hardholm wrote:
Source the Sexual Revolution and Liberalism? Or source that the American system does not provide adequate support for new mothers? I think asking for "sources" on common knowledge is a fallacy, but I'll have to double-check.

It's not a fallacy of any kind, asking for evidence of a claim is pretty normal on this forum.
You claimed it now prove it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left

?

Look. I don't really feel like you genuinely care one way or the other about... Well... Anything other than scoring points so... If you want a conversation, inquire, otherwise I hope you have a genuinely pleasant day. You can disagree with others without being rude.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:05 pm
by The New California Republic
Hardholm wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:The tone of this is so fucking condescending, I hope you know that.

That said, do you have any evidence of any of this, or is it just opinion with no evidence?


I'm sorry you feel that way, and can only ask you to take me at face value. If not then I am not socially capable enough to speak in a way that doesn't come off in whatever way. I'm being genuine though.

I'm more interested in coming to understanding that compromise or "winning", but I can give my thoughts on any given topic? I have spent quite a few years trying to amass and share evidence and such and found it confounding a fruitless. Instead, I feel like discussion and clarity of opinions and thoughts leaves involved parties more satisfied.

I don't see any evidence for your claims...

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:05 pm
by Jebslund
Hardholm wrote:
Jebslund wrote:It's a symptom of the "My way is the only legitimate way anyone would ever willingly choose" mentality. People making the same choices are doing so of their own free will, but people making different choices are *obviously* brainwashed or crazy or being forced to do so and, free of those pressures, they would *obviously* choose the same thing.

It's a mindset that often crops up in discussions regarding people under 18 identifying as gay/trans. If they identify as straight/cis, it's because they are and they're not going to let anyone tell them otherwise, but if they identify as gay/bi/poly/ace/trans/genderless, well, that must be their parents forcing them to do that or liberals brainwashing them!

It's also extremely disingenuous and irritating.


Maybe it is naive, but I do feel like a mother's natural instincts and good will towards her offspring would usually not otherwise be overcome to violence against it?

I think there is also a decades long pro-abortion propaganda blitz from those circles which is undeniable.

Definitely not disingenuous in my thoughts. I know this is hot button so irritation is to be expected.

There is no "overcoming". At the point at which the vast majority of abortions are performed, the fetus isn't sapient. It is still an it. The mother to be doesn't even have any way of knowing its sex yet. Late-term abortions are typically only done in cases of medical need (One or both will die if it isn't done. Before you say anything, carrying a dead body isn't healthy for the woman, and can cause complications.). You are conflating abortion with infanticide. You hear "abortion" and imagine a mother smashing a born infant to death.

My irritation is at the disingenuity of your mindset, not at the issue. The idea that only being the victim of some plot against women could a woman ever see the issue differently.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:05 pm
by Neanderthaland
Hardholm wrote:
Genivaria wrote:It's not a fallacy of any kind, asking for evidence of a claim is pretty normal on this forum.
You claimed it now prove it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left

?

Look. I don't really feel like you genuinely care one way or the other about... Well... Anything other than scoring points so... If you want a conversation, inquire, otherwise I hope you have a genuinely pleasant day. You can disagree with others without being rude.

Neither of those prove the claim he is asking you to prove. Are you being intentionally dense?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:06 pm
by The New California Republic
Hardholm wrote:
Genivaria wrote:It's not a fallacy of any kind, asking for evidence of a claim is pretty normal on this forum.
You claimed it now prove it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left

?

Look. I don't really feel like you genuinely care one way or the other about... Well... Anything other than scoring points so... If you want a conversation, inquire, otherwise I hope you have a genuinely pleasant day. You can disagree with others without being rude.

Show us the parts that back up your claims, instead of just throwing in some wiki links and hoping that something sticks.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:07 pm
by Genivaria
Hardholm wrote:
Genivaria wrote:It's not a fallacy of any kind, asking for evidence of a claim is pretty normal on this forum.
You claimed it now prove it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left

?

Look. I don't really feel like you genuinely care one way or the other about... Well... Anything other than scoring points so... If you want a conversation, inquire, otherwise I hope you have a genuinely pleasant day. You can disagree with others without being rude.

I'm not being rude in the slightest, if you don't want to actually substantiate what you say then this isn't a good forum for you.
When you make a claim or take a stance you will be challenged on it, that is entirely normal here.
Look. I don't really feel like you genuinely care one way or the other about

Then you're wrong, I care very much about an argument being made to deprive women control of their bodies, so if there is a reason it better be a good one that you can back up.