Last edited by Vyxn; 2013-02-25 at 09:24 PM.
This has been refuted many, many times. Children are not the only purpose of having sex. Beyond the instant gratification of it, sex has been shown to be important in forming close and personal bonds between individuals. It's also why there are several industries behind prevention of pregnancy and birth; abortion is one of these establishments.
The entire argument that you "accept the risk of getting (her) pregnant if you have sex" is absolute, unadulterated '50s-era bullshit.
It used to be a risk. It isn't, any more. Because if you DO get pregnant, and don't want to have a child, you can get an abortion.
It's as much of a "risk" as dying from an infected toe is, today, because you have a religious opposition to antibacterials. You're describing artificial restrictions you're putting on your choices for reasons that are not by any means universal, and trying to claim that everyone must abide by those imagined restrictions.
The facts are, abortion is a legal and relatively safe alternative. That removes the "risk" of having a child as a result of having sex, in the off chance that birth control fails.
cutterx, when you feel that blatant insults are the only way to bring your point across, then you have no point to make, you're just being inflammatory and you lose all credibility, and those giving you some consideration stop doing so. It's also against the forum rules, there is no bias in an infraction. Being frustrated is no excuse to resort to insults. Feel free to rejoin the conversation when you can do so without insulting others.
That's just it though, they are quickly becoming irrelevant because a lot of people aren't ok with their outrageous and outdated social policies, and their economic policies afford little social spending. The only popular part about their economic policy is lower taxes, but that doesn't really help them when they want to put the lion's share of spending into military. They have this notion that anyone on government assistance is a leech on society, and the reality of it is these people work 40-60 hour weeks and still don't make up to the standard of living because of wage laws. So who are you gonna vote for, the guy telling you that he's going to make you wonder when you're going to eat your next meal while calling you a leech on society... after you've worked a 10 hour day, or the one who tells you that you don't have to worry about going hungry and they're going to find other ways to balance the budget?imo too many in this thread are reading it as "how does the republican party get fixed to where im ok with it" instead of "what will make them relevant again". just ditching the social agenda makes them relevant again imo. i disagree with their economics - quite strongly actually - but enough people buy into what they are selling that they would in fact be very relevant without the social agenda anchor. imo their recent failures (at the polls) have much more to do with society not being interested in the bullshit fundamentalism, and little to nothing to do with economic ideology
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
While true certain forms of abortion are currently legal, the situation is more like:
Taking a vial of bacteria, cutting yourself, then pouring it in the wound and then cutting off the limb to save your life. It's a completely self-induced situation. A result of sexual intercourse is a baby. Everyone full-well knows this whenever they participate. The baby becomes the couple's responsibility because they already accepted it can/will/did happen as part of the deed. Sure, they can kill it if they're fast enough before it becomes outlawed.
...I lost where I was going with this. I don't think I even read the original point one of you was trying to make. I just had to point out the correct analogy is self-induced.
Given that a a vast difference in relative power between two peoples (student/teacher, Boss/employee, etc) can be grounds to term sexual conduct as rape, then wouldn't the power relationship between G-d and Man also be enough of a power differential for that too to be rape?
Bob Marley had so much ahead of him...
The risk of having an abortion outside of a clinic, such as when the procedure is illegal, is a much higher risk as well.
You know how with gun rights, if they are illegal, only criminals will have them. If abortions are illegal, they will become a black market commodity. Where instead of a doctor, a criminal will perform it.
---------- Post added 2013-02-25 at 09:56 PM ----------
No, they can still 'kill' it, but by now illegal means. Resulting not only in one 'killing' but tremendously increasing the odds of two 'killings'. The real world does not abide by the principle of 'if it's illegal, it won't happen'.
The argument of babies and where life begins, assumes that an alternative is no abortions. It's emotional, not logical. It should have no place in this debate and serves only the purpose of muddying the waters by trying to define the beginning of life.
Last edited by Felya; 2013-02-25 at 10:00 PM.
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
Eh, I'll chime in:
The Republican "brand" is in trouble. Thinking now, what does the label "Republican" mean to you? To a lot of independents and Democrats, words like "nutjob" or "extremely religious" or "Sarah Palin" or "Rush Limbaugh" or "Todd Akins" or "anti women." Meanwhile, to the core group of Republicans, you'll see words like "family values" or "good will" or "intelligent."
Republicans must get as far away from the social lunatics as they can. They need to publicly declare that Rush Limbaugh is not part of the party, and refuse any donations he tries to give. They need to come out and say "that is not who we are."
Republicans should be the party of "freedom" - and instead, they've become the party of anti-freedom. Almost every stance they take is against something, which severely diminishes their brand.
They shouldn't ever mention, discuss, or engage on any of these issues:
- Rape. Never mention it, period. If you're about to say the word "rape," you probably should shut the fuck up. No possible good can come of it.
- Abortion. It's been fucking FIFTY YEARS - the debate is over. Don't talk about abortion. This issue is decided, and you will not change it even if elected, so don't talk about it. If someone asks "what's your stance," don't take one. Just say "I'm not going to advocate for or against any abortion related policy."
- Homosexuality / Gay Marriage. Just don't talk about it. If someone asks "what is your stance on gay marriage?," just say "it's not part of our platform in either direction." If you don't make progress towards gay marriage, fine (Democrats haven't either), but when you come out and actively oppose it, you become the party of "anti-progress."
- Welfare. No ideas that you have are going to solve welfare in a way that makes people satisfied. Take this on in a final term if you really want, but don't talk about it.
- The Bible. You can talk about your religion, but when you start going into "The Bible," you're losing the argument.
- Guns. Don't take a stance. Gun control is a polarizing issue that is unlikely to be effective either way. Redirect any gun-related questions to general violence in the United States. Talk about gangs and education. Don't talk about guns.
Secondly, Republicans need to fucking catch up to modern marketing and technology. Obama's marketing team was pretty fucking sick. In 2008, it was estimated that every dollar Obama spent had over 10x the impact as Hillary Clinton and John McCain combined. Obama arms his team with obscene amounts of data, and uses that data to be effective in swing states. Republicans, on the other hand, are relying on "traditional" campaign techniques that are just losing.
Last edited by Blacksen; 2013-02-25 at 10:00 PM.
You're making this wild assumption that everyone who gets an abortion is a couple that willfully does not use contraception and goes "oops lol" and rushes off to the abortion clinic.
Contraception fails, rape happens, people make mistakes and regret them later. You're also implying that sex is only for baby making... in which case I'll point you to contraception can fail.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
1. Drop their opposition to social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc).
2. Court the growing minority community by explaining how their policies will improve their lives (other than the Democrat platform of "we'll give you free stuff!")
3. Run a minority candidate (Rubio, Jindal, et al) that the Democrats can't attack as another out-of-touch old white man.
I might be able to take this analogy seriously if your arm grew back after cutting it off. It doesn't though. On the other hand if you have an abortion in a clinic the chances that you'll be able to have a child in the future are very high, so you can't really compare the two.