Conservatives/liberals

[aps45819 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

What rights of homosexuals are conservatives proposing removing? Which of the Bill of Rights?

The right to wear a dress in combat and screw in the barracks shower

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

What would you call those little masses of human flesh inside the womb?

You say it's a baby; I say it's a potential future felon.

If Mama and Daddy want the PFF and are interested in raising it, it loses its felon status (most of the time). But if Mama and Daddy DON'T want it and have no interest in raising it, its future felon likelihood goes up dramatically.

Abortion is a matter of pure practicality.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

You say it's a baby; I say it's a potential future felon.

If Mama and Daddy want the PFF and are interested in raising it, it loses its felon status (most of the time). But if Mama and Daddy DON'T want it and have no interest in raising it, its future felon likelihood goes up dramatically.

Abortion is a matter of pure practicality.

So, are you admitting that this lump of human flesh in the womb (PFF or not) is, indeed a human being? I mean if that’s the case, aren’t you still murdering a PFF, before that PFF becomes a PFF. So, who is really the felon here? Or are all “unwanted” pregnancies PFFs and deemed guilty in womb, thus deserving of extermination?

Do we want to discuss this from a practical standpoint or discuss it from a “is this a living human in the womb” standpoint? If, from a practical standpoint, then assuming this was a PFF, it deserves constitutional rights; and those rights demand a fair trial of its peers.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Well, wait a minute:

If a liberal doesn't approve of gays, he doesn't become one.
If a conservative doesn't approve of gays, he wants their rights taken away.

If a liberal doesn't approve of abortion, she doesn't get one.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortion, she wants it outlawed.

So it works both ways.

That's why I'm moving away from calling myself a conservative, because I'm not one. I'm a "depends on the issue" person.

I'll give you the abortion..

The gay, not so much..

NOBODY is talking about taking any RIGHTS away from the homsexuals.. The liberals want them to have SPECIAL rights, making them a protected class..

The conservatives don't think they meet the litmus test to be a protected class or to have special rights.

I haven't seen a single convservative talk about taking a SINGLE right that they now have away. If you have proof to the contrary please provide.

[itsbob (Premo)]

If a liberal doesn't want to be gay, he'll find a conservative that is, and destroy his life..

[Animal]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Do we want to discuss this from a practical standpoint or discuss it from a “is this a living human in the womb” standpoint? If, from a practical standpoint, then assuming this was a PFF, it deserves constitutional rights; and those rights demand a fair trial of its peers.

It seems the Constitution already covers this by stating that one must be born or naturalized to be a citizen and thus protected.

But I'll play your what if game. Let's say that they are deserving of constitutional protection, how will you guarantee those rights that you seek to confer to the unborn? If you are serious wouldn't you have to require any female that gets pregnant to register so that the progress of the development up until birth can be followed to assure that the unborn are being protected? Wouldn't you then have to require that any/all miscarriages and still-borns be investigated for potential wrongdoing? Who is going to handle the registration and investigation process, for without it the rights you seek to give them are meaningless? Do you plan to dump that back on the states or will you seek another government managed program?

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Animal

It seems the Constitution already covers this by stating that one must be born or naturalized to be a citizen and thus protected.

Where does the Constitution say you must be a citizen to be protected by it?

But I'll play your what if game. Let's say that they are deserving of constitutional protection, how will you guarantee those rights that you seek to confer to the unborn? If you are serious wouldn't you have to require any female that gets pregnant to register so that the progress of the development up until birth can be followed to assure that the unborn are being protected? Wouldn't you then have to require that any/all miscarriages and still-borns be investigated for potential wrongdoing? Who is going to handle the registration and investigation process, for without it the rights you seek to give them are meaningless? Do you plan to dump that back on the states or will you seek another government managed program?

I'd say that, for now, just not killing them intentionally would be sufficient, personally.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Abortion is a matter of pure practicality.

So, it should be mandated? Some form of statistical test to determine the likelihood of PFF, and kill the kids who are likely to become the felon?

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

the legally permissible medical procedure that kills babies without a jury of their peers convicting them of any crime.

You don't want an abortion, don't have one..

Simple solution..

[Animal]

Originally Posted by This_person

Where does the Constitution say you must be a citizen to be protected by it?I'd say that, for now, just not killing them intentionally would be sufficient, personally.

If you don't know why should I bother showing you? And what does a court decision concerning Gitmo detainees have to do with citizenship?

Killing what, don't you have to be born and thus alive before you can be killed?