The End of the Christian Right

[Newby]

Why is it only morality originating from religion that is vilified?

This is a false allegation. I hate Nazis of all kinds, whether they are energy nazis, food nazis, or religious fascists who think women shouldn't be elected to the presidency.

Sorry, I've only seen you speak out against one of those, and you celebrate the downfall of christianity, so give me a break.

 

[Nosmo King]

Uncensored,
Do you believe in smaller less intrusive government? In a government that should not control your personal life?

Are you asking if I would support the repeal of laws against rape, because it is a personal choice on the part of the rapist if he wants to rape or not? No. that's neither the question nor a salient point of this conversation. It is, in fact, a rather clumsy straw man argument unworthy of you.

Do you believe that every individual has a right to his or her own reproductive circumstance?

Shouldn't the intended victim get some say in the reproductive question? Besides, how can you be sure the rapist intends to reproduce? What rapist? Is this going to be a repeated theme of your argument against reproductive freedom? And the 'intended victim' is an embryo, not a full fledged human being. Should frozen embryos stored in in vitro clinics have legal standing as humans? Does their presence in a Congressional district effect census data? If they are transported to another facility, can the truck driver use the HOV lanes? Of course not!

Do you believe that no government should have the power to tell you when to have children, how many children to have and how best to raise the children you have?

I think laws that protect women from sexual assault don't infringe the rights of the rapist.

Your right to pull arms and legs off end at your own appendages. A civil society constrains you from pulling the arms and legs off of others, even though you find them inconvenient.Again, what rapist? I posed simple questions to you and expected a cogent response, not some primrose path of Rape and person-hood for embryos.

Please re read my post an provide answers to the questions. Stop moving the goalposts.

 

[Katzndogz]

The law doesn't force women to have an abortion. The law forces doctors to perform abortions. It forces hospitals to allow abortions to be performed on their premises.

The law doesn't force men to marry men or women to marry women. The law forces innkeepers to allow same sex couples on their premises. The law punishes counselors who admit that same sex relationships are not their area of expertise to provide counseling services anyway. The law prohibits photographers from refusing to perform photography services for same sex weddings.

So this isn't NEARLY a matter of the privacy of the couple. Abortion isn't CLOSE to a private decision between a willing woman and a willing doctor.

 

[Dr.Drock]

When did i say killing is freedom?

Abortion is the killing of a human.

That is biological fact, irrefutable. You view abortion as the greatest expression of freedom known to mankind. Ergo, you see killing as freedom.

Or is this another instance of you being pro-choice, and agreeing with me, but pretending that isn't your stance so that the religious fundamentalists (who view you as a hell-bound heathen) will side with you?

I am pro-choice. I support choice between cable and dish. I support school choice (do you? most pro-aborts don't!) I support a choice between Coke and Pepsi, between Nvidia and AMD, I'm pro-choice.

I'm also anti-abortion.

I believe in liberty. I believe that a civil society enacts laws to protect the least of us. I believe that we cannot take life without due process. We don't put convicted, mass murderers to death without judicial review. I must condemn putting our children to death without at least the same protections afforded mass murderers.

You really sound like a bleeding heart lib when you make this posts purely based on emotion.

Just the other week you said you thought abortions should be legal up to a certain point in the pregnancy which is exactly what every pro-choice person says, now you're anti-abortion, I'll leave that for you to figure out as it's not important to me.

 

[Nosmo King]

The law doesn't force women to have an abortion. The law forces doctors to perform abortions. It forces hospitals to allow abortions to be performed on their premises.

The law doesn't force men to marry men or women to marry women. The law forces innkeepers to allow same sex couples on their premises. The law punishes counselors who admit that same sex relationships are not their area of expertise to provide counseling services anyway. The law prohibits photographers from refusing to perform photography services for same sex weddings.

So this isn't NEARLY a matter of the privacy of the couple. Abortion isn't CLOSE to a private decision between a willing woman and a willing doctor.

Do you think that laws telling lunch counter owners that they cannot refuse service to Black customers is wrong too?

Freedom and equality require constant vigilance against those willing to forget that freedom and equality must extend to each and every American citizen.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Uncensored, your comments are worthless because they are not grounded in reality.

So you support rape, since the rapist makes a choice, and you're "pro-choice," right?

Unless what you really mean is that you're pro-abortion.

You are making uninformed assumptions as you go along, like most extreme progressive right wing pro-lifers.

The fact is this. Every abortion is a tragedy. Matters such as rape, incest, and a threatened life of a woman are tragedieis. To not have an abortion in these situations will be a greater tragedy.

 

[Katzndogz]

The law doesn't force women to have an abortion. The law forces doctors to perform abortions. It forces hospitals to allow abortions to be performed on their premises.

The law doesn't force men to marry men or women to marry women. The law forces innkeepers to allow same sex couples on their premises. The law punishes counselors who admit that same sex relationships are not their area of expertise to provide counseling services anyway. The law prohibits photographers from refusing to perform photography services for same sex weddings.

So this isn't NEARLY a matter of the privacy of the couple. Abortion isn't CLOSE to a private decision between a willing woman and a willing doctor.

Do you think that laws telling lunch counter owners that they cannot refuse service to Black customers is wrong too?

Freedom and equality require constant vigilance against those willing to forget that freedom and equality must extend to each and every American citizen.

Are you equating behavior with color? Liberals often do. Actually they always do.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No. that's neither the question nor a salient point of this conversation. It is, in fact, a rather clumsy straw man argument unworthy of you.

It most certainly IS the question. You demand that since one person makes a choice, that the other person is irrelevant.

Your argument is no different than claiming that the rights of rapists are infringed by blocking him from raping those he chooses. Why should the state decide how he applies his sexual urges?

What rapist? Is this going to be a repeated theme of your argument against reproductive freedom? And the 'intended victim' is an embryo, not a full fledged human being. Should frozen embryos stored in in vitro clinics have legal standing as humans? Does their presence in a Congressional district effect census data? If they are transported to another facility, can the truck driver use the HOV lanes? Of course not!

Rape isn't freedom, nor is abortion. Rape is violence, abortion is the deliberate killing of another human.

You don't have the "freedom" to kill others.

Again, what rapist? I posed simple questions to you and expected a cogent response, not some primrose path of Rape and person-hood for embryos.

Your straw man is of no use. Dehumanizing the victim may be the technique you are taught, but it's useless.

No, abortions do not involve an embryo. Few women even realize they are pregnant prior to 6 weeks gestation. Long past the embryo phase. Most abortions occur on a fetus who has a beating heart and measurable brain waves. We are talking about a human with unique DNA, completely separate nervous and circulatory systems. A separate and distinct human life.

What you seek to do is kill humans - that is an irrefutable fact. Dehumanizing the victim and outright lying about what you seek does not alter the fact.

Now in all fairness, Dr. Drock likes to say that I support abortion - I don't. He says this because I approach the subject from a purely scientific standpoint. Life in a human is defined by the presence of brain and heart activity. This is the defining line - life. Prior to life, I don't have an issue, once there is life, I do. Virtually all abortions performed by abortionists are against a living human. However, RU486 and Plan B are prior life beginning, so I do not oppose them.

As a libertarian, I support the the right of every human not to be killed with the blessing of the state without judicial protection and review.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You really sound like a bleeding heart lib when you make this posts purely based on emotion.

I am a liberal.

But I make my argument based on scientific fact. You seek to kill, with the blessing of the state, other humans. You demand that you have a "right" to kill with no judicial oversight nor process of appeal for the victim.

As a libertarian, I support the right of people NOT to be summarily killed.

Just the other week you said you thought abortions should be legal up to a certain point in the pregnancy which is exactly what every pro-choice person says, now you're anti-abortion, I'll leave that for you to figure out as it's not important to me.

I've always been anti-abortion.

I said that prior to life, you are not killing. Life is medically defined as heart and brain activity. This occurs about 6 weeks gestation.

For this reason, I support RU486 and Plan B.

My position has not, and does not change.

 

[Nosmo King]

The law doesn't force women to have an abortion. The law forces doctors to perform abortions. It forces hospitals to allow abortions to be performed on their premises.

The law doesn't force men to marry men or women to marry women. The law forces innkeepers to allow same sex couples on their premises. The law punishes counselors who admit that same sex relationships are not their area of expertise to provide counseling services anyway. The law prohibits photographers from refusing to perform photography services for same sex weddings.

So this isn't NEARLY a matter of the privacy of the couple. Abortion isn't CLOSE to a private decision between a willing woman and a willing doctor.

Do you think that laws telling lunch counter owners that they cannot refuse service to Black customers is wrong too?

Freedom and equality require constant vigilance against those willing to forget that freedom and equality must extend to each and every American citizen.

Are you equating behavior with color? Liberals often do. Actually they always do.

No. I'm equating freedom with citizenship. Is it illegal to be homosexual? Do homosexual relationships violate any standing laws? If being homosexual is legal, why should discriminating against homosexuals be legal?

 

[Katzndogz]

Uncensored, your comments are worthless because they are not grounded in reality.

So you support rape, since the rapist makes a choice, and you're "pro-choice," right?

Unless what you really mean is that you're pro-abortion.

You are making uninformed assumptions as you go along, like most extreme progressive right wing pro-lifers.

The fact is this. Every abortion is a tragedy. Matters such as rape, incest, and a threatened life of a woman are tragedieis. To not have an abortion in these situations will be a greater tragedy.

I take it then that you are opposed to abortions for convenience or for sex selection.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are making uninformed assumptions as you go along, like most extreme progressive right wing pro-lifers.

You're the one who demands the you are "pro-choice," fakey jake.

Now look, we both know you're lying. You're anything but an advocate of choice. Let the choice be of what school to send your children to, and you'll be dead set against it.

What you are is pro-abortion.

The fact is this. Every abortion is a tragedy. Matters such as rape, incest, and a threatened life of a woman are tragedieis. To not have an abortion in these situations will be a greater tragedy.

Why?

You find failure to kill to be a tragedy?

 

[Dr.Drock]

You really sound like a bleeding heart lib when you make this posts purely based on emotion.

I am a liberal.

But I make my argument based on scientific fact. You seek to kill, with the blessing of the state, other humans. You demand that you have a "right" to kill with no judicial oversight nor process of appeal for the victim.

As a libertarian, I support the right of people NOT to be summarily killed.

Just the other week you said you thought abortions should be legal up to a certain point in the pregnancy which is exactly what every pro-choice person says, now you're anti-abortion, I'll leave that for you to figure out as it's not important to me.

I've always been anti-abortion.

I said that prior to life, you are not killing. Life is medically defined as heart and brain activity. This occurs about 6 weeks gestation.

For this reason, I support RU486 and Plan B.

My position has not, and does not change.

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

So you would support law that requires judicial review to protect the rights of the victim prior to abortion?

 

[Nosmo King]

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

So you would support law that requires judicial review to protect the rights of the victim prior to abortion?

Did you support the 'personhood' amendment movement in Mississippi?

 

[Katzndogz]

You are making uninformed assumptions as you go along, like most extreme progressive right wing pro-lifers.

You're the one who demands the you are "pro-choice," fakey jake.

Now look, we both know you're lying. You're anything but an advocate of choice. Let the choice be of what school to send your children to, and you'll be dead set against it.

What you are is pro-abortion.

The fact is this. Every abortion is a tragedy. Matters such as rape, incest, and a threatened life of a woman are tragedieis. To not have an abortion in these situations will be a greater tragedy.

Why?

You find failure to kill to be a tragedy?

It could be! Some women can become so desperate that the alternative isn't a live baby, but a dead mother and dead baby.

I have come across pro lifers (I use the term with some respect, descriptive only) who find that keeping women who want an abortion confined, in shackles and handcuffs to be force fed as appropriate treatment if necessary to prevent an abortion, self induced miscarriage or suicide.

There is no easy answer. The tragedy is in imposing a one size fits all solution that is as bad, if not worse than refusing abortions completely. Obviously abortion has become the monster that ate Kansas. How did we get from a society sympathetic to desperate women in life threatening situations to the concept of post birth abortion where babies born healthy and alive are killed? We have a health care czar who believes that post birth abortion is appropriate up to the age of two.

How did this kind of insanity happen? Is it better or worse than disallowing abortion under any circumstances?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Did you support the 'personhood' amendment movement in Mississippi?

I live in California. I have no say over what is done in Mississippi.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are making uninformed assumptions as you go along, like most extreme progressive right wing pro-lifers.

You're the one who demands the you are "pro-choice," fakey jake. Now look, we both know you're lying. You're anything but an advocate of choice. Let the choice be of what school to send your children to, and you'll be dead set against it. What you are is pro-abortion.

The fact is this. Every abortion is a tragedy. Matters such as rape, incest, and a threatened life of a woman are tragedieis. To not have an abortion in these situations will be a greater tragedy.

Why? You find failure to kill to be a tragedy?

Now you sound, Uncensored Fascist, as if you were an extreme progrssive right wing pro-life from Nazi Germany.

Abortion is a choice, and most Americans believe that situations such as incest, rape, and the endangerment of the mother's health are appropriate reasons for abortion.

 

[Nosmo King]

Did you support the 'personhood' amendment movement in Mississippi?

I live in California. I have no say over what is done in Mississippi.

Okay. I'll pare it down to its core. Would you support a 'personhood' amendment?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Did you support the 'personhood' amendment movement in Mississippi?

I live in California. I have no say over what is done in Mississippi.

Okay. I'll pare it down to its core. Would you support a 'personhood' amendment?

Yes, uncensored does support such an amendment.