I.V.F. and the Liar-in-Chief

[Aristides]

27 minutes ago, User said:

Feel free to actually argue how. Looks like you are running away again. 

My moral code is quite simple here and I live by it too:

It is wrong and should be unlawful to kill humans, including unborn children, for the mere convenience of it. 

Yes, I rightly complain about the federal government violating the law and Constitution to compel people to get vaccinated through their employers and other such mandates. 

Yes, you jumped into this discussion, and now I am responding to the crap you are saying. If you didn't want to talk about abortion, you could have moved right along. 

So live by your moral code and give the same consideration to others.
 

I responded to your and Ironstones posts that linked IVF to abortion.

The only reason you are upset about vaccinations is because it affects you. 

Edited October 18, 2024 by Aristides

[Hodad]

17 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Pro-choice is pro-abortion. I think you're the only one saying otherwise. 

It's not like people are disputing a woman's right to carry a baby to term and then give birth, but I wouldn't put it past the demonrats. 

It's not and he's not.🙄

[User]

9 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So live by your moral code and give the same consideration to others.

Oh I see... so you are an anarchist now? It should be lawful for someone to stab you while you are walking down the street?

10 minutes ago, Aristides said:

I responded to your and Ironstones posts that linked IVF to abortion.

The only reason you are upset about vaccinations is because it affects you. 

I fought and argued against the mandates when they didn't impact me too. 

You are the one crying about a discussion on abortion that you jumped into. 

[Aristides]

16 minutes ago, User said:

Oh I see... so you are an anarchist now? It should be lawful for someone to stab you while you are walking down the street?

I fought and argued against the mandates when they didn't impact me too. 

You are the one crying about a discussion on abortion that you jumped into. 

That’s the problem with you zealots you can’t help dealing in extremes.

So you think you should be able to post anything you want without it being disputed?

[User]

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

That’s the problem with you zealots you can’t help dealing in extremes.

You are the one saying it is just my moral code I should follow in regards to thinking it is wrong to kill people. 

I am putting your absurd comments to the test. Apparently you want more people to follow just my moral code after all. 

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So you think you should be able to post anything you want without it being disputed?

I am not the one complaining about this being a discussion on abortion. 

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

You mean couples...don't you?

No. 

 

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Stop pretending that anyone thinks women who get raped have to have babies, or that no conservatives want women to ever have access to abortion.

Almost everyone on both sides is somewhere in the middle ground. 

The problem in the US is that Roe v Wade was 100% unconstitutional, and even RBG said so. It was a classic case of judges ruling from the bench. If you don't know what 'ruling from the bench' means, just google it. 

A court or a supreme court ruling is only supposed to be a stop-gap solution, not forever legislation. FYI legislation comes from a group of elected officials, like congress or a provincial legislature, not from judges. That's a foundational aspect of democracy, not an either/or thing.

It will take a while for each state to get it right, but it's still much easier to get all the necessary compromises made at regional levels, where people are more similar. Urban and rural areas just have different moral expectations.  

Except that it was constitutional for 50 years, until a perversely conservative court who had all agreed it was the law of the land decided it shouldn't be. And all judges "rule" from the bench. Literally. That's the whole job. I'll assume you're trying to parrot some other piece of language from the echo chamber. 

And yes, there are state laws already on the books that do not provide exceptions for rape and incest. So yes, very much, conservatives DO want women who get raped to have babies. 

 

[robosmith]

21 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Pro-choice is pro-abortion. I think you're the only one saying otherwise. 

It's not like people are disputing a woman's right to carry a baby to term and then give birth, but I wouldn't put it past the demonrats. 

You're an lDIOT. You can CERTAINLY be personally anti-abortion while ALSO being pro OTHER'S right to CHOOSE.

[Aristides]

3 hours ago, User said:

Oh I see... so you are an anarchist now? It should be lawful for someone to stab you while you are walking down the street?

Like I said, you always deal in extremes.

Quote

I fought and argued against the mandates when they didn't impact me too. 

That's fine, you had every right to do so but no one is mandating abortions. So you should be able to understand why people don't want you imposing your mandates on them. Getting a vaccination to protect you from something that could kill you or pass on to others is not the same as being forced to bring up a child by yourself.

Quote

You are the one crying about a discussion on abortion that you jumped into. 

Who's crying?

Edited October 18, 2024 by Aristides

[User]

13 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Like I said, you always deal in extremes.

Only in response to the absurd positions you make to make that point. 

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

That's fine, you had every right to do so but no one is mandating abortions. So you should be able to understand why people don't want you imposing your mandates on them.

It is not a mandate on someone anymore than it is to say it is wrong to stab you when you are walking down the sidewalk. 

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Getting a vaccination to protect you from something that could kill you or pass on to others is not the same as being forced to bring up a child by yourself.

So, you think a mother should be allowed to kill her 5-year-old if she is a single mother now?

15 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Who's crying?

You were:

"BTW. This thread is about IVF and Trump's absurd claim."

[Aristides]

18 minutes ago, User said:

Only in response to the absurd positions you make to make that point. 

It is not a mandate on someone anymore than it is to say it is wrong to stab you when you are walking down the sidewalk. 

So, you think a mother should be allowed to kill her 5-year-old if she is a single mother now?

My absurd positions! Too funny, listen to yourself.

 

Quote

 

You were:

"BTW. This thread is about IVF and Trump's absurd claim."

 

You and Ironstone dragged abortion into the discussion, I just responded. 

[User]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

My absurd positions! Too funny, listen to yourself.

Yes, your absurd positions. That is why you are running from them right now. 

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

You and Ironstone dragged abortion into the discussion, I just responded. 

So... still crying. 

 

[Aristides]

Comparing a 10 week old fetus to a 5 year old.

Allowing someone dominion of their own body is the same as stabbing someone in the street.

Right.

Have a nice day.

[User]

Just now, Aristides said:

Comparing a 10 week old fetus to a 5 year old.

I am comparing your dumb arguments to a 5-year-old. Yes. 

You keep making these bad arguments trying to justify abortion because it would be forcing a single mother to be a single mother or a mother and her child to live in poverty. 

So... you are OK with forcing a single mother to be a single mother and live in poverty with her 5 year old?

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Allowing someone dominion of their own body is the same as stabbing someone in the street.

No, you keep trying to say I should not impose my moral code on others. My moral code is that it is wrong to kill people for the mere convenience of it.. so, apparently you are just fine with someone stabbing you on the street. 

I wouldn't want to impose my moral code on them to stop them. 

 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

No. 

Well that's rather narrow minded.

[User]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

So yes, very much, conservatives DO want women who get raped to have babies. 

So, a woman decides that her 5 year old child, a child born of rape, is too much for her... she gets to take the kid out back and kill it?

 

[Aristides]

7 minutes ago, User said:

I am comparing your dumb arguments to a 5-year-old. Yes. 

 

 

Bullshit

Quote

Living in poverty is a non-sequitur. Unless you are so evil and depraved, you support killing 5-year-olds too, so that women can get out of poverty. 

Quote

 

You keep making these bad arguments trying to justify abortion because it would be forcing a single mother to be a single mother or a mother and her child to live in poverty. 

So... you are OK with forcing a single mother to be a single mother and live in poverty with her 5 year old?

 

You are the one who wants to sentence her to living in poverty with a 5 year old. You have no compassion, just an ideology.

[Nationalist]

How did this become an abortion issue?

IVF- Creation of life.

Abortion-Destruction of life.

[User]

11 minutes ago, Aristides said:

You are the one who wants to sentence her to living in poverty with a 5 year old. You have no compassion, just an ideology.

So... you are cool with her killing her 5 year old if she is in poverty or doesn't want to be a single mother?

[Hodad]

43 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well that's rather narrow minded.

It's not restricted to couples. Singles may avail themselves of the same medical process.

 

[Nationalist]

Just now, Hodad said:

It's not restricted to couples. Singles may avail themselves of the same medical process.

 

Indeed they are. But a male is necessary for the process and I'd have to say that a mommy and a daddy should be preferable to a single of either gender.

[Hodad]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Indeed they are. But a male is necessary for the process and I'd have to say that a mommy and a daddy should be preferable to a single of either gender.

That's what a sperm bank is for, yo. Cut out the diddle man.

 

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

That's what a sperm bank is for, yo. Cut out the diddle man.

 

How...uncaring of you. The best environment to raise a child in, is a mother and father. After that, 2 parents. Single moms and dad's should be on the bottom of the selection list.

[Fluffypants]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

That's what a sperm bank is for, yo. Cut out the diddle man.

 

You still need men to make the deposits.

 

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

How...uncaring of you. The best environment to raise a child in, is a mother and father. After that, 2 parents. Single moms and dad's should be on the bottom of the selection list.

Selection list? Not like we have a sperm shortage. People are blasting that shit all over.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Selection list? Not like we have a sperm shortage. People are blasting that shit all over.

Lol...that's funny.

But it doesn't address my point.