Join the Anti-Party Movement! End the Bias!

[AntiParty]

AGAIN, I can't read past your very first sentence.

I'm not here to help you with your literacy issues, Comrade, only your reasoning skills.

What do you know about the Left Wing parties? I'll bet the only thing you know about them is what was taught to you by Fox News or another bias source.

You are very young, aren't you? Living in moms basement and outraged that the world doesn't cater to you the way mom does.



Son, I'm a Libertarian. The views I promote are those of Republican ideals (Jefferson, not the GOP, since you clearly lack the education to grasp what Republican means.)

I've read Marx, Krugman, Chomsky, Zinn, AND all of you KOS Kiddies here. I reject your ideas as infantile and moronic.

The reason I reject them is your ideas are infantile and moronic.




You're quite stupid - no doubt much of the reason you failed to finish high school.

I said that the shutdown was a farce perpetrated by the media. The only real effect was your little tin god attacking vets at a war memorial.



Really?

Explain in what way the government seeks a thinking populace, sploogy?

Government isn't the people you see them as. GOVERNMENT are the people hired to do what THE PEOPLE want them to do. History has showed us what has what has corrupted the Government and it's always $.

So, you think government is infallible, and only corrupted if capitalists are allowed the freedom to trade?

You seem to embrace the corruption but hate the Government....

THE PEOPLE aren't bad. PROFIT isn't bad. But profit driven corruption of the people is bad.

Welcome to politics.

You are a shallow little child, lacking wits and education.

You are a perfect leftist.

No, you made it quite clear you were Libertarian when you resorted to "MOM" style insults.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is where you are VERY WRONG.

First off you quote someone I proved wrong immediately. I openly stated every Right Wing topic I'm in line with, why the blind eye?

The poster did not say that you don't lie about being right wing, he said you never attack the Democrats. As of yet, you have provided no proof that he is wrong about that, which is rather surprising considering that I can point to Democrats charged with gun running that you haven't said a fucking thing about if you were actually anti party.



You must point me to all the people, other than you, who say that everyone who isn't on the right is a "Liberal." So far you are the only person I have seen that says that, and you always accuse other people of labeling you a liberal even when they don't mention the word.



Funny, I never saw anyone characterize them that way. I guess that is because intelligent people talk about independents, not "Indipependents."

Never confuse Anti-Party Platforms with Uneducated voters.

I never confuse people who cannot spell with educated anything, which is why I never confuse you with Jethro Bodine.

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

 

[BobPlumb]

The poster did not say that you don't lie about being right wing, he said you never attack the Democrats. As of yet, you have provided no proof that he is wrong about that, which is rather surprising considering that I can point to Democrats charged with gun running that you haven't said a fucking thing about if you were actually anti party.



You must point me to all the people, other than you, who say that everyone who isn't on the right is a "Liberal." So far you are the only person I have seen that says that, and you always accuse other people of labeling you a liberal even when they don't mention the word.



Funny, I never saw anyone characterize them that way. I guess that is because intelligent people talk about independents, not "Indipependents."



I never confuse people who cannot spell with educated anything, which is why I never confuse you with Jethro Bodine.

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

Many people, democrats especially like to claim to personally be against abortion, but then say that they are for individuals right to choose to have an abortion. Well, I'm personally against serial killing, but I am for the right of individuals to choose to be serial killers. Give me a break!

 

[BobPlumb]

The poster did not say that you don't lie about being right wing, he said you never attack the Democrats. As of yet, you have provided no proof that he is wrong about that, which is rather surprising considering that I can point to Democrats charged with gun running that you haven't said a fucking thing about if you were actually anti party.



You must point me to all the people, other than you, who say that everyone who isn't on the right is a "Liberal." So far you are the only person I have seen that says that, and you always accuse other people of labeling you a liberal even when they don't mention the word.



Funny, I never saw anyone characterize them that way. I guess that is because intelligent people talk about independents, not "Indipependents."



I never confuse people who cannot spell with educated anything, which is why I never confuse you with Jethro Bodine.

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

I find the Democrats for Life organization to be quite illogical. They are anti-abortion, yet when the rubber meets the road they support the pro-abortion party.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Then talk to a Libertarian leader about that topic and tell me what they tell you

Again, Libertarians are Liberty no matter what. No thinking involved.

Child, I am a Libertarian. I've dined socially with Harry Browne (dearly missed.) I know full well what I believe. You won't find rational Libertarians suggesting that children have the rights of adults., Not Rothbard, not Rockwell, oh Chomsky might have said it, but the old Marxist fuck was never a Libertarian.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, you made it quite clear you were Libertarian when you resorted to "MOM" style insults.

That's not an insult, just an observation: You are no doubt 30 going on 13.

 

[HackinJack]

right

 

[AntiParty]

The poster did not say that you don't lie about being right wing, he said you never attack the Democrats. As of yet, you have provided no proof that he is wrong about that, which is rather surprising considering that I can point to Democrats charged with gun running that you haven't said a fucking thing about if you were actually anti party.



You must point me to all the people, other than you, who say that everyone who isn't on the right is a "Liberal." So far you are the only person I have seen that says that, and you always accuse other people of labeling you a liberal even when they don't mention the word.



Funny, I never saw anyone characterize them that way. I guess that is because intelligent people talk about independents, not "Indipependents."



I never confuse people who cannot spell with educated anything, which is why I never confuse you with Jethro Bodine.

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

So you attack my anti-party platform stance by stating that "some Democrats don't agree with Abortion"............................................................................................

You clearly don't get the point at all.

I'm embarrassed for you at this point.

 

[AntiParty]

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

Many people, democrats especially like to claim to personally be against abortion, but then say that they are for individuals right to choose to have an abortion. Well, I'm personally against serial killing, but I am for the right of individuals to choose to be serial killers. Give me a break!

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

 

[AntiParty]

Then talk to a Libertarian leader about that topic and tell me what they tell you

Again, Libertarians are Liberty no matter what. No thinking involved.

Child, I am a Libertarian. I've dined socially with Harry Browne (dearly missed.) I know full well what I believe. You won't find rational Libertarians suggesting that children have the rights of adults., Not Rothbard, not Rockwell, oh Chomsky might have said it, but the old Marxist fuck was never a Libertarian.

You believe in Rational Libertarians..........are you underground in a bunker LOL.

Liberty is important for all parties. The need for a Libertarian party SHOULD be obsolete.

Liberty is a cornerstone. When politicians started focusing on $$$ and not people the small minded felt comfort in the Libertarian paradise that praised it does not work for Corporations.

Sadly, all those Libertarians still work for corporations and the money trail is easy to see.

At this point I'm planning to vote for Rand Paul in hopes that he is working for the people.


Libertarians believe we should own all the same weapons our Military does. That has been the basic concept for years now. (Because Fox News has them scared to death)

BTW; You never dined with anyone. If you did, it was the most uneducated night of your life. I went through a phase where I tried to dine with my local Libertarian ring leader. Turns out he had TONS of money and just hated taxation.

 

[westwall]

Another one sentence in stop reading. I'm openly against abortion. I've stated this before...

But are you trying to make me attack democrats? I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

I attack substance. Not parties. You simply think that I'm attacking your party if you are on the wrong end of substance by large.

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

So you attack my anti-party platform stance by stating that "some Democrats don't agree with Abortion"............................................................................................

You clearly don't get the point at all.

I'm embarrassed for you at this point.

No we attack your claim to be "anti-party". You are a progressive of the first order, that makes you a member of the most destructive, murderous, group (PARTY) the world has ever seen.

 

[BobPlumb]

I am pro-party. Cake, ice cream, funny hats, noise makers, what is there not to like? Let's party!

 

[BobPlumb]

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

Many people, democrats especially like to claim to personally be against abortion, but then say that they are for individuals right to choose to have an abortion. Well, I'm personally against serial killing, but I am for the right of individuals to choose to be serial killers. Give me a break!

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

A (human) embryo does not have human qualities....... Thanks for breaking that down for me.

 

[AntiParty]

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

So you attack my anti-party platform stance by stating that "some Democrats don't agree with Abortion"............................................................................................

You clearly don't get the point at all.

I'm embarrassed for you at this point.

No we attack your claim to be "anti-party". You are a progressive of the first order, that makes you a member of the most destructive, murderous, group (PARTY) the world has ever seen.

I'm certainly not against SMART progress. If you have people teaching you that progress is everything bad in America then you need to re-think your political skills. Even the Constitution was written to be progressive.....

To stop time and the ability to change would mean you have no ability to learn....... Because when you learn things, you change...

Progress/change isn't a bad word because a politician used it as a slogan...

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

If you were half as good at research as you think you are this wouldn't be so much fun. There are actually a lot of Democrats that oppose abortion, they even organize themselves .

Democrats For Life of America

If you attacked substance you would attack Democrats when they were wrong. What you actually attack is the Tea Party because you have convinced yourself that you are smarter than they are. The funny thing is that all the political analysts say that the Tea Party tend to be better educated, and have a better grasp of politics, than the typical voter. In other words, they are exactly what you claim you are, yet you attack them because they watch Fox News, even though there is no evidence tat they do.

You wouldn't know what to do with substantial post if someone handed it to you on a silver platter, you aren't fooling anyone.

Many people, democrats especially like to claim to personally be against abortion, but then say that they are for individuals right to choose to have an abortion. Well, I'm personally against serial killing, but I am for the right of individuals to choose to be serial killers. Give me a break!

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

 

[AntiParty]

Many people, democrats especially like to claim to personally be against abortion, but then say that they are for individuals right to choose to have an abortion. Well, I'm personally against serial killing, but I am for the right of individuals to choose to be serial killers. Give me a break!

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

^The bias are still attacking... "You have to be a Leftist! YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

My perspective on abortion is this.....;

If everyone had access to birth control, why would abortion be a necessary for anyone? Abortion would be obsolete... (and one topic voters would stop voting for turds ready to sell out America based on ONE TOPIC)

But I'm sure you think women should just keep their legs shut if they don't want to get pregnant and meanwhile, you have no responsibility in the matter.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

^The bias are still attacking... "You have to be a Leftist! YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

My perspective on abortion is this.....;

If everyone had access to birth control, why would abortion be a necessary for anyone? Abortion would be obsolete... (and one topic voters would stop voting for turds ready to sell out America based on ONE TOPIC)

But I'm sure you think women should just keep their legs shut if they don't want to get pregnant and meanwhile, you have no responsibility in the matter.

Everyone does have access to birth control./contraceptives, yet abortion still exists. Maybe if your brain could think beyond one topic you would realize how stupid it sounds to claim that one topic is all that matters.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Let me break down your perspective on the matter...........

Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

Rightists believe that once the act has happened, (sex), God has the plan for that baby.

The overall question has ALWAYS been, "Is it a child"

Science has it's beliefs, Christians have their beliefs and then some. But neither side wants to understand the other even though the Constitution says, "Freedom of Religion" which means no forced Christian scenarios or other religion scenarios BY LAW.

At what point it's determined a human is the actual debate.

Do we have the Liberty to take a human life, most say no, but it depends on the circumstances <--100% Right Wing logic even when they are the "I shall not kill party" by majority.

Do we have the ability to flush out an embryo that shows no signs of being a human, <---100% science logic. Science lines up with the Left.

Yet the Right has overstepped it's boundaries and tries to control items that can prevent pregnancy to begin with saying that, "God will decide". These people have never heard of Satin...................................

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

^The bias are still attacking... "You have to be a Leftist! YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

My perspective on abortion is this.....;

If everyone had access to birth control, why would abortion be a necessary for anyone? Abortion would be obsolete... (and one topic voters would stop voting for turds ready to sell out America based on ONE TOPIC)

But I'm sure you think women should just keep their legs shut if they don't want to get pregnant and meanwhile, you have no responsibility in the matter.

I like that you assume I'm biased in the opposite direction of my actual bias.

I am absolutely against the Federal government weighing in on abortion at all.

Personally, I believe the fetus is a human, if you made one and you have to kill, you fucked up. I believe it to be morally wrong.

I know, however, that I can't prove it's humanity on a philosophical level, and I accept that the argument could be made, though it doesn't suit my beliefs, that the fetus is a parasite until some point in its development.

As a libertarian, I'm opposed to the government imposing virtually any sort of moral standards, regardless of whether or not I happen to agree with the particular moral in question.

So, actually, your stated conclusion is perfectly in line with my own on this issue. The fact that you've stated that -science- states that a fetus has no human characteristics baffles me, though, and implies that you, who have stated many times that you side with science, believe that a fetus has no human characteristics. If that's your belief, why are you opposed to killing one? I honestly don't get it.

Are you opposed to killing tape worms? If the fetus isn't human, its practically the same as a tape worm. Where do you drawn the line? Which parasites are to be protected?

No, it's not that you don't agree with me that makes you a leftist. It's the fact that you're a leftist that makes you a leftist. The fact that the only thing that you disagree with the Dems on is abortion, but that your conclusion on abortion flies in the face of your reasoning, makes me think your'e less anti-party than you claim to be. You don't like the idea of being a sheep-like partisan follower, but unfortunately you are one. It's my suspicion that if this abortion thing isn't outright bullshit so you can separate yourself from a purely partisan Democrat, then you're clinging to it as a psychological defense against having to admit that you are what you rail against.

 

[AntiParty]

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

^The bias are still attacking... "You have to be a Leftist! YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

My perspective on abortion is this.....;

If everyone had access to birth control, why would abortion be a necessary for anyone? Abortion would be obsolete... (and one topic voters would stop voting for turds ready to sell out America based on ONE TOPIC)

But I'm sure you think women should just keep their legs shut if they don't want to get pregnant and meanwhile, you have no responsibility in the matter.

Everyone does have access to birth control./contraceptives, yet abortion still exists. Maybe if your brain could think beyond one topic you would realize how stupid it sounds to claim that one topic is all that matters.

Everyone with money...

But the inability to think beyond ones self is a hard obstacle for some. WELCOME TO POLITICS

 

[AntiParty]

Your language in this post makes it difficult to believe that you're actually anti-abortion.

"Leftists believe in Science and they believe that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities."

The implication here, based on the fact that you included that leftists believe in science, is that science believes that at certain stages the embryo has no signs of human qualities.

If you imply that science believes this, you imply that it is reality.

If your belief is that physical reality tells us that the embryo isn't human until a certain point, and you are not a religious man, then you believe that the embryo isn't a human until a certain point.

You either see nothing wrong with abortion up to this certain point, or you have a soft spot for parasites, which is how you would define a non human organism feeding off of its host's life functions.

What makes it really funny is that your initial claim is silly as shit. What "science" is it that you speak of that ignores that the embryo, from conception, has distinctly human genes? Or that it's the product of human sperm and egg cells, and attaches itself to the uterus just like every other human embryo did at one time or another?

The distinction in human qualities and whether that embryo is human or a parasite is a purely philosophical debate, it isn't the science vs religion question you make it out to be, and the fact that you've drawn the line there, coupled with the fact that you, yourself, aren't religious, really makes your singular claim to a non-democrat ideal pretty f'in fishy.

When all your own reasoning would inevitably point someone of your mindset in the direction that abortion simply favors the rights of a human over a non-human, but you claim that your conclusion is the opposite, I can't help but smell bullshit.

Or, if the science and leftists statement really is something that you think, -and- you truly believe that abortion is inherently wrong, maybe your logic is just completely piss-poor, in which case you're a funny guy for thinking that you've got anything substantive to say about anything substantive

^The bias are still attacking... "You have to be a Leftist! YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

My perspective on abortion is this.....;

If everyone had access to birth control, why would abortion be a necessary for anyone? Abortion would be obsolete... (and one topic voters would stop voting for turds ready to sell out America based on ONE TOPIC)

But I'm sure you think women should just keep their legs shut if they don't want to get pregnant and meanwhile, you have no responsibility in the matter.

I like that you assume I'm biased in the opposite direction of my actual bias.

I am absolutely against the Federal government weighing in on abortion at all.

Personally, I believe the fetus is a human, if you made one and you have to kill, you fucked up. I believe it to be morally wrong.

I know, however, that I can't prove it's humanity on a philosophical level, and I accept that the argument could be made, though it doesn't suit my beliefs, that the fetus is a parasite until some point in its development.

As a libertarian, I'm opposed to the government imposing virtually any sort of moral standards, regardless of whether or not I happen to agree with the particular moral in question.

So, actually, your stated conclusion is perfectly in line with my own on this issue. The fact that you've stated that -science- states that a fetus has no human characteristics baffles me, though, and implies that you, who have stated many times that you side with science, believe that a fetus has no human characteristics. If that's your belief, why are you opposed to killing one? I honestly don't get it.

Are you opposed to killing tape worms? If the fetus isn't human, its practically the same as a tape worm. Where do you drawn the line? Which parasites are to be protected?

No, it's not that you don't agree with me that makes you a leftist. It's the fact that you're a leftist that makes you a leftist. The fact that the only thing that you disagree with the Dems on is abortion, but that your conclusion on abortion flies in the face of your reasoning, makes me think your'e less anti-party than you claim to be. You don't like the idea of being a sheep-like partisan follower, but unfortunately you are one. It's my suspicion that if this abortion thing isn't outright bullshit so you can separate yourself from a purely partisan Democrat, then you're clinging to it as a psychological defense against having to admit that you are what you rail against.

I REALLY didn't have to read beyond this because it's true in so many stories, "As a libertarian, I'm opposed to the government imposing virtually any sort of moral standards, regardless of whether or not I happen to agree with the particular moral in question.
"
Don't you understand that everything Government made was based on MORALS. Libertarian party paints "Governemnt is always bad" but what about the 2A, wasn't that based on MORALS. Isn't LIBERTY in general based on morals?!

What Libertarians lack is the fact that THE PEOPLE run the Government, not the other way around. THE PEOPLE can change the government at any time through the correct process. They can even change the Constitution.

What I've heard lately from MANY Libertarians is that "the people don't know what is best for them anymore" because that is what Fox News paints for them.

UNITED WE STAND.........Put your trust in the people and the people will be the best America always. Put your trust in government or corporations (the same), we will never be successful.