Yzermandius19

when either the pro-abortion side prioritizes the mother's life above the unborn child or the fake pro-life side prioritizes the unborn child's life above the mother I criticize them for valuing one life over the other to the point of justifying the death of them for bad reasons

1) it's not her body it's the unborn child's body it is not my view that there should be no welfare you pretending my views are hypocritical is not accurate nor is your assumption that I am feigning compassion 2) human life had no intrinsic value is insane but following that idiotic line of thinking why should one care about poverty or the environment if humans have no value to the point that you condone murdering them?

indeed he allowed hatred of the gun grabbers exploiting the situation to cloud his logic to such a degree that he jumped to some ridiculous conclusions this was obvious at the time but that doesn't mean I'm going to write him off entirely to appease his haters

most of the pro-abortion crowd can't argue their position without 1) valuing one human life above another and/or 2) valuing the choice to murder above the right to life and/or 3) not valuing human life at all all of which are terrible arguments

life is a right cows, pigs and other animals don't have the same rights as humans dehumanizing unborn children is a key tactic of the pro-abortion advocates to justify abortion first you call into question the value of human life to justify abortion then you call into question the value of the unborn child relative to other humans to justify abortion it seems most who support abortion cannot justify it to themselves without first devaluing human life to do so and you are clearly one of them

murder is not a right free choice doesn't mean any choice you make should be a right that governments protect this includes abortion if you are arguing that murder cannot be judged as good or evil simply because religions have a stance on subject that is totally irrational arguing that people having differing moral views on a subject means that no view is more rational or moral than another is stupid and using that as justification for the view that government should not restrict murder is also stupid first you agree that abortion shouldn't be justified by freedom of choice argument then after your anti-life eugenics argument gets shot down your cognitive dissonance kicks in you immediately retreat to the freedom of choice argument to justify both abortion and your anti-life eugenics argument clearly indicating you have no good argument in favor of abortion whatsoever and you built your justification on a house of cards

America is quite violent when they don't direct that energy at themselves they direct it at others it is hardly without war it is constantly at war yet it's the greatest civilization in the history of mankind

you sure use a whole lot of words to say nothing of relevance do you have a point somewhere in all that gobbledygook?

false dichotomy violence and civilization are not mutually exclusive terms civilization is not the absence of war one can be both violent and civilized the most civilized nations on the planet are often quite violent and good at violence

bullshit when Russia and Ukraine were the same country Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians being one country doesn't cause Ukraine and Russia to get along history shows the exact opposite occurs Ukrainians are even more poorly treated by Russians than they are now

ideas being religious doesn't make them wrong you don't just get to label an idea as religious to dismiss it again you are creating dichotomy between rationality and religion and creating a moral relativism where human life is no more valuable than any other form of life is asinine you speak of rationality, yet present none if you really value rationality as much as you claim, then you would value human life above other life on this planet because humans are the most rational life forms on the planet you strawman ideas of those you disagree with to justify your idiotic positions as being the only alternative to the strawman because your ideas don't stand on their own merit and only look good when compared to deliberate misrepresentation of the actual alternatives

if he planned to take classified documents with him, why would you assume he didn't declassify them before doing so, when he easily could have? the whole theory makes no sense, the FBI is full of shit, obvious witch hunt is obvious

you create a false dichotomy there is an authentic pro-life position that opposes abortion supporting abortion from a eugenics position, a humans are a virus anti-life position, is even dumber than supporting it from a freedom of choice position that's going backwards to Margaret Sanger and Thomas Malthus it was an evil argument then, it is an evil argument now

my point is that there are three lives involved in a pregnancy the mother, the father and the unborn child many pro-abortion activists on this board want to pretend like the only life that matters in the decision is the mother to justify killing the child and pretend like that is the equal rights position instead of extra rights for the mother and no rights for the child if one is going to support abortion at least be honest and admit it's murder unless the life or health of the mother is at stake dehumanizing the unborn doesn't make abortion ethical

obviously not pregnancy is not rape equivocating the two is not only stupid but reprehensible

nope some needing to use your body temporarily to survive is not grounds to kill them especially when your actions are directly responsible for them needing your body to survive

that's not defending yourself that's just murder

lies, communism, propaganda

that is not what is being discussed what is being discussed is the lack of evidence that AJ knew he was lying

equal rights would mean you can't murder someone for being dependent on another killing in self defense is fine murder because of needing another body to survive is not

the fetus has less rights in some states because it's legal to murder them and not legal to murder the child I am arguing for equal rights for both

the OJ Simpson jury also did that does that mean they must have made the right decision?

you have no evidence they made the right call it's all speculation which is why "the jury said so" argument is stupid what the jury said isn't relevant as to whether there is evidence that Alex Jones knew he was lying

no it's not a fact a jury is capable of making a wrong decision that isn't based on evidence

they have medical autonomy over their own bodies they don't have the right to murder though