Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 31 Jul '15 04:17
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/jeb-bush-was-director-of-philanthropy-that-funded-planned-parenthoods-globa

    This should end his bid to become the GOP front runner, but we all know it won't.
  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    31 Jul '15 20:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/jeb-bush-was-director-of-philanthropy-that-funded-planned-parenthoods-globa

    This should end his bid to become the GOP front runner, but we all know it won't.
    It is not easy to defeat the government and science establishment with a viewpoint that they consider only religious.
  3. 01 Aug '15 15:46
    Those who are willing to vote for Jeb know and don't care that he is part of the establishment. This news won't change the mind of many who would vote for him, but it might bring people out to vote against him who would normally not vote.
  4. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    01 Aug '15 18:12 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/jeb-bush-was-director-of-philanthropy-that-funded-planned-parenthoods-globa

    This should end his bid to become the GOP front runner, but we all know it won't.
    "This is a fight to [help] women control their own destinies," Bloomberg said. "And let me tell you: We are in it to help them win it, and we're gonna stay in it until they do."


    Presumably the GOP advocates that women be treated as battery hens and their bodies placed at the disposal of right wing "Pro-Lifers" for ritual abuse.
  5. 01 Aug '15 20:11
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Enough Margaret Sanger!
  6. 01 Aug '15 20:12
    Originally posted by finnegan
    "This is a fight to [help] women control their own destinies," Bloomberg said. "And let me tell you: We are in it to help them win it, and we're gonna stay in it until they do."


    Presumably the GOP advocates that women be treated as battery hens and their bodies placed at the disposal of right wing "Pro-Lifers" for ritual abuse.
    That's right, ritual abuse by making them not kill their offspring.

    Mwhahahaha!!
  7. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    02 Aug '15 11:32
    Originally posted by whodey
    That's right, ritual abuse by making them not kill their offspring.

    Mwhahahaha!!
    Yep you really have your teeth into the idea that you can control women's bodies and deprive them of autonomy, while you run miles from advocating any positive policies to benefit women, or to promote sexual health policies that might, in fact, produce lower abortion rates than your oppressive campaigns have achieved. Because of your attitudes generally to such policies, it is evident that you are not looking to reduce abortions (Holland's policies would be your model in that case) but rather looking to control women. You belong with the American Taliban. (I wonder are mobile phones a risk to the unborn Republican?)
  8. 02 Aug '15 18:40
    Originally posted by finnegan
    Yep you really have your teeth into the idea that you can control women's bodies and deprive them of autonomy, while you run miles from advocating any positive policies to benefit women, or to promote sexual health policies that might, in fact, produce lower abortion rates than your oppressive campaigns have achieved. Because of your attitudes generally to ...[text shortened]... belong with the American Taliban. (I wonder are mobile phones a risk to the unborn Republican?)
    Is the unborn baby always'the mother's body' as long as the baby is inside the mother?
  9. 02 Aug '15 20:06
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Is the unborn baby always'the mother's body' as long as the baby is inside the mother?
    Yes. It is always the mother's body.
  10. 02 Aug '15 20:08
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Yes. It is always the mother's body.
    So you believe that if a baby can be removed by C section and survive just fine on its own that the mother should be able to kill it?
  11. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    02 Aug '15 20:11
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Is the unborn baby always'the mother's body' as long as the baby is inside the mother?
    Clearly a fetus is not the mother's body. Indeed, a finger is not the mother's body and neither is a knee.

    "The unborn baby" is not an accurate way to describe the embryo or the fetus throughout pregnancy. It is emotive. The not-yet-even-an-unborn-baby-more-a-bunch-of-cells is more accurate for nearly all abortions, 95% of which are undertaken in the first trimester. For example at four weeks we can read: " The ball of cells – now called an embryo – growing inside your uterus (womb) is the size of a poppy seed. It's dividing into three layers that will later form organs and tissues." Obviously an interesting little thing in its way but hardly the basis for a busy trade in human organs for example and not much in the way of fuel for the heating system either. Ho hum. Four weeks. Nail clipping can remove more cells than most abortions do.

    Every society on earth in which abortion is legally allowed sets a time limit and late abortion is a topic with entirely separate issues, usually concerning life or death decisions for the mother. You may take it that all societies have a rational discussion about the nature of the fetus at each stage of development and makes distinctions between earlier and later stages. The concept of an unborn child is empty.
  12. 02 Aug '15 20:12
    Originally posted by Eladar
    So you believe that if a baby can be removed by C section and survive just fine on its own that the mother should be able to kill it?
    I certainly didn't say anything remotely like your incoherent interpretation. If the baby has been removed and is surviving just fine, then its a baby. Obviously. What's less obvious is the ground upon which you want to tell women what to do reproductively.
    What makes it any of your business?
  13. 02 Aug '15 20:20
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    I certainly didn't say anything remotely like your incoherent interpretation. If the baby has been removed and is surviving just fine, then its a baby. Obviously. What's less obvious is the ground upon which you want to tell women what to do reproductively.
    What makes it any of your business?
    You said as long as the baby is in the mother she can kill it.
  14. 02 Aug '15 20:37
    Originally posted by Eladar
    You said as long as the baby is in the mother she can kill it.
    If you are going to quote me, have the decency and intellectual honesty to do it accurately.
  15. 02 Aug '15 20:39
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    If you are going to quote me, have the decency and intellectual honesty to do it accurately.
    You answered my question with a yes. You might want to read the quote more carefully next time.