Can you be Anti Authoritarian on the right?

[Asclepias]

Keeping it short since that seems to get more of a response.

Mostly a question to those who self identify as being more right wing.
And hopefully is treated with honest responses and not just emotional venting.

That's THE definition of the right -- just short of anarchy. Authoritarianism grows as you move left

So why do rightys want the authority to force a woman to carry a child in her uterus that she doesnt want?

Why is it that those on the left never understand being responsible for your actions?

Why is it that those on the right never understand they arent responsible for anyone elses actions but their own? If you dont want an abortion dont get one. If someone else does its none of your business right?

It seems the left want to be like a bunch of undisciplined children. Do whatever you want don't worry about the consequences. Why should I have to pay for your inability to understand that all actions have consequences. If you don't want those on the right to take an intrest in what you on the left do then stop making us pay for your crazy actions. Do not make us use government or state money to pay for abortions, health care and everything else

If you want me to pay for crazy shit like walls and statues to traitors/losers then you have to pay for things we want. If you dont like it make it illegal. If you cant shut up and stop whining about it.

 

[Markle]

So you believe you have the authority to stop someone else from having an abortion even though it only says "thou shall not...". I dont see anywhere in that where you have permission to regulate someone else. Do you?

Who speaks for the unborn child?

The mother.

She also breathes and eats for the unborn child which is precisely why its her decision despite you wanting to control her and her body.

I don't want to control her body, she made the decision to get pregnant. The infant has the right to have someone represent their desire.

 

[Markle]

But they did say those on the right want small government. $30B aint exactly small. Why dont they let the states decide like they always cry about?

As you know, and must agree, $30 billion today is chump change.

In 2006, Democrats were saying ‘build that fence!’
By Annie Linskey GLOBE STAFF JANUARY 27, 2017

What has changed? Why have Democrats reversed their vote and now want to punish American citizens?

WASHINGTON — As a senator, Barack Obama once offered measured praise for the border control legislation that would become the basis for one of Donald Trump’s first acts as president.

“The bill before us will certainly do some good,” Obama said on the Senate floor in October 2006. He praised the legislation, saying it would provide “better fences and better security along our borders” and would “help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.”

Obama was talking about the Secure Fence Act of 2006, legislation authorizing a barrier along the southern border passed into law with the support of 26 Democratic senators including party leaders like Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer.

In 2006, Democrats supported legislation to build border fence - The Boston Globe

 

[Markle]

Who told you I was for open borders?

You said so. You want illegal aliens so you get cheaper fruits and vegetables.

Of course I am, I have been in jail before, a life sentence is way more cruel then a death sentance .

Nope, execution is far more of a deterrent and no chance of a change in law turning the murderer loose after 30 years or whatever.

I would revise the death penalty to allow two years from the time the death sentence is handed down for all appeals to be completed. Condemned gets their choice of execution, hanging, firing squad, guillotine, or electric chair. No easing into it with sodium pentothal.

 

[Markle]

I think youre too dumb to realize I am talking about a least 1 other reason humans kill. Not to mention there are several more.

Only three or four reasons we kill.

 

[Asclepias]

So you believe you have the authority to stop someone else from having an abortion even though it only says "thou shall not...". I dont see anywhere in that where you have permission to regulate someone else. Do you?

Who speaks for the unborn child?

The mother.

She also breathes and eats for the unborn child which is precisely why its her decision despite you wanting to control her and her body.

I don't want to control her body, she made the decision to get pregnant. The infant has the right to have someone represent their desire.

You arent an attorney and even if you were.... the mother is the one that would decide if you were to be hired.

 

[Markle]

So you believe you have the authority to stop someone else from having an abortion even though it only says "thou shall not...". I dont see anywhere in that where you have permission to regulate someone else. Do you?

Who speaks for the unborn child?

The mother.

She also breathes and eats for the unborn child which is precisely why its her decision despite you wanting to control her and her body.

I don't want to control her body, she made the decision to get pregnant. The infant has the right to have someone represent their desire.

You arent an attorney and even if you were.... the mother is the one that would decide if you were to be hired.

That's not the case with children. The court appoints someone to represent the child in legal matter.

If what you say is true, that the infant has no rights, how then can someone kill the pregnant mother and the fetus, charged with a double murder?

Springfield man accused of shooting pregnant woman now charged with double murder
Giacomo Bologna, [email protected] 5:47 p.m. CT Aug. 4, 2017 | Updated 5:58 p.m. CT Aug. 4, 2017

Prosecutors have upgraded charges against a 21-year-old man who is accused of shooting and killing a woman and her unborn child.

Springfield man accused of shooting pregnant woman now charged with double murder

 

[Asclepias]

So you believe you have the authority to stop someone else from having an abortion even though it only says "thou shall not...". I dont see anywhere in that where you have permission to regulate someone else. Do you?

Who speaks for the unborn child?

The mother.

She also breathes and eats for the unborn child which is precisely why its her decision despite you wanting to control her and her body.

I don't want to control her body, she made the decision to get pregnant. The infant has the right to have someone represent their desire.

You arent an attorney and even if you were.... the mother is the one that would decide if you were to be hired.

That's not the case with children. The court appoints someone to represent the child in legal matter.

If what you say is true, that the infant has no rights, how then can someone kill the pregnant mother and the fetus, charged with a double murder?

Springfield man accused of shooting pregnant woman now charged with double murder
Giacomo Bologna, [email protected] 5:47 p.m. CT Aug. 4, 2017 | Updated 5:58 p.m. CT Aug. 4, 2017

Prosecutors have upgraded charges against a 21-year-old man who is accused of shooting and killing a woman and her unborn child.

Springfield man accused of shooting pregnant woman now charged with double murder

You arent the court either.

True. A fetus has zero rights. It exists solely at the discretion of the mother. It cant eat or even breath without her doing it for the fetus.

Easy. You take two lives without permission and you get charged with double murder. Muder doesnt mean you took someones rights. The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a life. This isnt really all that hard to figure out is it?

 

[Maxdeath]

That's THE definition of the right -- just short of anarchy. Authoritarianism grows as you move left

So why do rightys want the authority to force a woman to carry a child in her uterus that she doesnt want?

Why is it that those on the left never understand being responsible for your actions?

Why is it that those on the right never understand they arent responsible for anyone elses actions but their own? If you dont want an abortion dont get one. If someone else does its none of your business right?

It seems the left want to be like a bunch of undisciplined children. Do whatever you want don't worry about the consequences. Why should I have to pay for your inability to understand that all actions have consequences. If you don't want those on the right to take an intrest in what you on the left do then stop making us pay for your crazy actions. Do not make us use government or state money to pay for abortions, health care and everything else

If you want me to pay for crazy shit like walls and statues to traitors/losers then you have to pay for things we want. If you dont like it make it illegal. If you cant shut up and stop whining about it.

And yet you are against paying for the wall and you have not paid one single cent for any statue except to have it removed. While my taxes have paid for ACA and abortions, phones and other freebies. So tell me exactly how is that fair? I have no problem if you want to make the mother pay for an abortion, I don't want to have to pay for it.
As for your other make it illegal crazy comment. Again I have no problem if she pays for it.
You just can not get past having the government, and by extension me, pay to right your screw ups.

 

[Markle]

You arent the court either.

True. A fetus has zero rights. It exists solely at the discretion of the mother. It cant eat or even breath without her doing it for the fetus.

Easy. You take two lives without permission and you get charged with double murder. Muder doesnt mean you took someones rights. The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a life. This isnt really all that hard to figure out is it?

Murdering someone doesn't mean you took someone's rights? WHAT?

 

[Asclepias]

You arent the court either.

True. A fetus has zero rights. It exists solely at the discretion of the mother. It cant eat or even breath without her doing it for the fetus.

Easy. You take two lives without permission and you get charged with double murder. Muder doesnt mean you took someones rights. The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a life. This isnt really all that hard to figure out is it?

Murdering someone doesn't mean you took someone's rights? WHAT?

You could have looked it up in a dictionary so you wouldnt appear to be as ignorant as you are.

mur·der
/ˈmərdər/
noun

1. 1.
   the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

 

[Markle]

You arent the court either.

True. A fetus has zero rights. It exists solely at the discretion of the mother. It cant eat or even breath without her doing it for the fetus.

Easy. You take two lives without permission and you get charged with double murder. Muder doesnt mean you took someones rights. The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a life. This isnt really all that hard to figure out is it?

Murdering someone doesn't mean you took someone's rights? WHAT?

You could have looked it up in a dictionary so you wouldnt appear to be as ignorant as you are.

mur·der
/ˈmərdər/
noun

1. 1.
   the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

 

[westwall]

Keeping it short since that seems to get more of a response.

Mostly a question to those who self identify as being more right wing.
And hopefully is treated with honest responses and not just emotional venting.

Of course....far left equals collective government and in the worst case totalitarian government. The opposite of that is ultra right wing which is NO GOVERNMENT, or anarchy. It's hard to be authoritarian when there is no government.

HA! I can finally put you on ignore!

Yeah, idiots who can't come up with a reasoned argument ignore those who can....because we make you like like ignorant twats.

 

[Asclepias]

You arent the court either.

True. A fetus has zero rights. It exists solely at the discretion of the mother. It cant eat or even breath without her doing it for the fetus.

Easy. You take two lives without permission and you get charged with double murder. Muder doesnt mean you took someones rights. The definition of murder is the unlawful taking of a life. This isnt really all that hard to figure out is it?

Murdering someone doesn't mean you took someone's rights? WHAT?

You could have looked it up in a dictionary so you wouldnt appear to be as ignorant as you are.

mur·der
/ˈmərdər/
noun

1. 1.
   the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

The point is that youre an idiot that didnt know the meaning of murder until I educated you.

 

[DandyDonovan]

Keeping it short since that seems to get more of a response.

Mostly a question to those who self identify as being more right wing.
And hopefully is treated with honest responses and not just emotional venting.

Of course

I'm a conservative leaning person who wants the government to butt out of the private contract of marriage, I want to legalize drugs and just let people kill themselves with narcotics if they choose to, I encourage more liberals to abort their stupid babies. I believe black men should have the right to refuse to serve whites. and so on and so forth

What about authoritarians on the left, you aren't concerned about them i see.