If You are Pro-Choice, can You be a Conservative?

[Agnapostate]

Oh, as it were...

Actually, you're simply not smart enough to see it

Not hard to see how such a simpleton could think that there's not, given your inability to understand anything but the most most basic of characterizations of ideologies

Simply more of your ignorance of empirical research exposed. Perhaps you should consider consultation of Ananat et al.'s Abortion and Selection.

Abortion legalization in the early 1970s led to dramatic changes in fertility. Some research has suggested that it altered cohort outcomes, but this literature has been limited and controversial. In this paper, we provide a framework for understanding selection mechanisms and use that framework to both address inconsistent past methodological approaches and provide evidence on the long-run impact on cohort characteristics. Our results indicate that lower-cost abortion brought about by legalization altered young adult outcomes through selection. In particular, it increased likelihood of college graduation, lower rates of welfare use, and lower odds of being a single parent.

So are you not of the opinion that increased likelihood of college graduation, lower rates of welfare use, and lower odds of becoming a single parent are among the agendas of fiscal conservatives? this is the bait...

 

[code1211]

The irony of this question is three quarters of the conservatives I know are pro choice. But so often we assume republicans are conservatives, so maybe that number would be reduced if we categorized people on a greed scale.

Many republicans are republicans because of taxes and the myth republicans are good for businesses and monied people. Republicans are good for the wealthy and the corporations all the others can go to Hades. People with money sure as heck don't want to support the hordes born if everyone allowed life to form each month or year.

That is the great paradox of republicans today, since they are a party of extremists, on one hand the religious moralists and on the other the greedy manipulators. They'll never solve that one.

I am a Conservative and therefore have no representation in our government.

I don't understand the rational supports for taking the incentives away from developing wealth thereby providing private sources of capital for economic expansion and community improvement.

I recently saw a book which I think was a biography of Harvey Firestone, but the cover showed a picture of Firestone, Ford and Edison sitting on a door stoop together. The image these three sitting on a low concrete stoop togetrher was impressive. All of them were quite venerable at the time. All of them filthy, stinking rich. All of them, along with Morgan, Carnegie and Rockerfeller were the fathers of American economic prosperity.

It could be argued that men like these would seek the power resulting from their ambition with or without the financial reward. The opposite could also be argued. What would our country be like today if these six men had lived during a time when the government put a cap on their earning potential? Eliminated their ability to make dramtic, gambling decisions with their capital?

Would our economy have grown? Would our middle class have come into being?

When did the act of keeping wealth that is earned become classified as an act of Greed?

When did stealing the wealth of others become an act of compassion?

If pulling the wagon and riding the wagon yeild the same reward, who will pull the wagon?

 

[JBeukema]

f it's YOUR womb, sport, it's YOUR body.

The child isn't not a part of your body; it is a distinct human life.

That you must lie and avoid these facts reveals that in your heart, you know you cannot defend what you call for

And you think you're a conservative, too, don't you?

You're not. Not remotely.

you know nothing of me and you're merely showing your own ignorance

You are a perfect example of the authoritarian control freaking self-proclaiming conservative hypocrite I'm talking about.

Wait, so first I'm not conservative.. yet I'm a conservative- and a prime example of one?

You are a perfect example of the dishonest, uneducated libertine that poisons the Left and makes liberals book bad by association

You want to give the government the right to tell women what to do with their own bodies?!

You want to give women the right to kill their children for their own convenience, deny scientific facts, and argue for a position you refuse to even defend

Do you hate women or is the fact that they had sex what really gets your panties in a bunch?

A pathetic ad hom- and you've still yet to defend you position or admit what it is that you want

Their bodies, their decision.

Not their bodies- science > libertine lies and propaganda

[quote[Doesn't get anymore idologically conservative than that, sport.[/quote]

When I want to hear fallacious libertine talking points and denial of basic scientific facts, I'll tell you to speak

 

[JBeukema]

Agna, a hard line fiscal conservative with no other ideological, personal, or moral concerns would not support 'choice'

they would demand abortion

 

[Agnapostate]

When did stealing the wealth of others become an act of compassion?

Probably around the same time it became depicted as innovative entrepreneurship.

 

[JBeukema]

Hi, you have received -197 reputation points from jillian.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
you aren\'t bright enough to have a convo on this issue

Regards,
jillian

Note: This is an automated message.

Seeing as I cite scientific FACT (even AGNA acknowledges that) and all you do is repeat uneducated libertine bullshit, you have no room to speak.

 

[JBeukema]

When did stealing the wealth of others become an act of compassion?

Probably around the same time it became depicted as innovative entrepreneurship.

Or part of an 'ideal commune' ?

 

[Agnapostate]

Agna, a hard line fiscal conservative with no other ideological, personal, or moral concerns would not support 'choice'

they would demand abortion

Nope. There was no analysis of abortion itself, merely its legalization. Speaking of forced abortion in the manner that you have therefore does not analyze the additional costs incurred through enforcement of such a policy.

 

[Agnapostate]

Or part of an 'ideal commune' ?

If you're going to repeat lies even after they're identified as such, there's really nothing I can do to help you...

 

[JBeukema]

Agna, a hard line fiscal conservative with no other ideological, personal, or moral concerns would not support 'choice'

they would demand abortion

Nope. There was no analysis of abortion itself, merely its legalization. Speaking of forced abortion in the manner that you have therefore does not analyze the additional costs incurred through enforcement of such a policy.

What cost? Simply require all medical professionals to induce an abortion through any means they choose upon discovering a pregnancy

contrasted with costs associated with child services, preschool, public education....

if the only goal is to reduce the final cost, killing all children (and the elderly and sick) would be the 'logical' choice

Or part of an 'ideal commune' ?

If you're going to repeat lies even after they're identified as such, there's really nothing I can do to help you...

your words...

 

[jillian]

Did you feel it necessary to include your battle with Jillian in your response to me? If so, why? If you can answer that, I might entertain the idea of responding from my point of view.

just to make it clear, there was no battle with me. That would require I responded in kind. There was, however, a pointless and baseless and precipitous attack on me.

I just chose not to play with his ignorant self.

 

[JBeukema]

Actually, jill, there has only been an attempt to educate you, the uneducated,lying libertine

 

[jillian]

Honestly, while his demeanor certainly leaves a lot to be desired, he's right. A fetus is a form of "human life," in that it's simply a member of the species homo sapiens. It's not a dog life or a pig life; it's a human life. The real point of contention should be centered around whether the fetus is a person, which you perhaps considered "human life" synonymous with anyway...

i distinguish between protectable life and non-protectable life. We make decisions about what life to terminate and what life to protect all of the time. But that is separate and apart from the issue of when it is appropriate for government to intervene and act to prohibit someone's dominion over their own body.

The rabid religious right likes deflecting and making this a debate about when life begins. That is a false issue and one specifically intended to create an emotional and visceral response. The actual question was the one asked in Roe v Wade (the one they like to ignore) whcih was when does the governmental interest in protecting the unborn life outweigh the individual's right to make her own bodily decisions.

 

[Agnapostate]

What cost?

The additional costs incurred through creation of a black economy and attempts to enforce its closure.

your words...

Nope. Your mendaciousness.

 

[jillian]

Actually, jill, there has only been an attempt to educate you, the uneducated,lying libertine

you're insane, aren't you?

 

[JBeukema]

i distinguish between protectable life and non-protectable life.

I wonder wh. But that is separate and apart from the issue of when it is appropriate for government to intervene

What was the first right the founding fathers thought to mention needs protecting, again?

The rabid religious right likes deflecting and making this a debate about when life begins

You said it's not a human life

you were shown to be wrong

are you recanting?

and when did the religious right ever enter this thread?

.

That is a false issue and one specifically intended to create an emotional and visceral response.

No, it's not. You denied that we're dealing with human life because you can't personally face what you're calling for in your heart of hearts

The actual question was the one asked in Roe v Wade

Where your side showed that lies are all you have

 

[Toro]

Her intro got me wondering. She claims to be a conservative and and is pro-choice. In most western nations, you can be a conservative and be pro-choice. But what about America?

Can you be pro-choice and be a conservative?

How are we defining 'conservative' for the purposes of this discussion/question?

As conservatives in America define themselves.

So far, the overwhelming response is "Yes." That's a good thing, not because I am pro-choice (I am not as I have no opinion and generally abhor abortion) but because of what it says about the political pulse of the nation.

I am curious to know if a pro-choice Republican can win the Presidential nomination. The conventional wisdom is "no," but if conservatives think you can be pro-choice and be a conservative, that would suggest the conventional wisdom is wrong.

 

[JBeukema]

As conservatives in America define themselves.

I'm not sure that works, as 'conservative' has been adopted by multiple mutually-exclusive ideologies

 

[editec]

f it's YOUR womb, sport, it's YOUR body.

The child isn't not a part of your body; it is a distinct human life.

That you must lie and avoid these facts reveals that in your heart, you know you cannot defend what you call for

And you think you're a conservative, too, don't you?

You're not. Not remotely.

you know nothing of me and you're merely showing your own ignorance


Wait, so first I'm not conservative.. yet I'm a conservative- and a prime example of one?

You are a perfect example of the dishonest, uneducated libertine that poisons the Left and makes liberals book bad by association


You want to give women the right to kill their children for their own convenience, deny scientific facts, and argue for a position you refuse to even defend

Do you hate women or is the fact that they had sex what really gets your panties in a bunch?

A pathetic ad hom- and you've still yet to defend you position or admit what it is that you want

Their bodies, their decision.

Not their bodies- science > libertine lies and propaganda

[quote[Doesn't get anymore idologically conservative than that, sport.

When I want to hear fallacious libertine talking points and denial of basic scientific facts, I'll tell you to speak[/quote]

Bla bla bla.

Their body, their decision. End of discussion.

If you don't like abortion then you are free not to HAVE one.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Who the fuck to you think you are to tell some woman that what SHE will do with HER body?

The difference between you fundamentalist American pseudo-Christian freaks and the TALIBAN is essantially zero as far as I'm concerned.

Meddlesome religous fucking freaks like you have been fucking up people lives in the name of YOUR take on god since civilization began.

Fucking Idiots.

 

[JBeukema]

Bla bla bla.

Now that's an intelligent response

Their body, their decision. End of discussion.

not their body. Another human life.

Do try to keep up, as your talking pints have been refuted and shown to be utter bullshit

If you don't like abortion then you are free not to HAVE one

.

hmm.. Let's see how that reasoning flies

If you don't like rape then you are free not to COMMIT it

If you don't like rape then you are free not to COMMIT it

If you don't like theft then you are free not to steal

If you don't like murder then you are free not to murder

If you don't like driving drunk then you are free not to DO so



'Otherwise, shut the fuck up. '

and don't stop anyone else...

You do realize that's you're arguing for the abolition of all law and anarchy, right?

Who the fuck to you think you are to tell some woman that what SHE will do with HER body?

Not her body. Do try to keep up with the smart people- or excuse yourself from the discussion

The difference between you fundamentalist American pseudo-Christian freaks and the TALIBAN is essantially zero as far as I'm concerned.

Hmm. Godwin takes a new spin

not to mention the fact that I'm not a 'fundamentalist American pseudo-Christian freak' and anyone on this board can confirm that.
So instead of actually addressing anything I've said, you're firing blanks at an imaginary target

-and you expect to be taken seriously?

Meddlesome religous fucking freaks like you have been fucking up people lives in the name of YOUR take on god since civilization began.

Fucking Idiots.

Just what I was thinking when reading your moronic post

Ask everyone on this board what religion JB is... go on, ask them how stupid you are...


Anyone? Does anyone remember JB's take on religion? Can anyone tell this fool whether JB is a Christian?