N
nicholasG
Guest
On your opinion, not mine. You see, I do have freedom after all.
- Status
P
phil19034
Guest
It’s not an opinion. It’s a theological fact.phil19034:
On your opinion, not mine. You see, I do have freedom after all.
N
nicholasG
Guest
Who is forcing people to have abortions?
A
Anesti33
Guest
First of all, we’re talking about unborn babies who have no choice but to be murdered. That’s where the force comes in.Cimachol:
Who is forcing people to have abortions?
Second of all, do you really believe that a mother wakes up one morning with a positive pregnancy test and gleefully says “out of all the wonderful choices I have before me, I freely and willingly choose to abort my unborn child!” No, it is much more tragic than this. Women are forced into abortions by angry boyfriends who threaten to leave, or abuse them. Women are forced into abortions by parents who will throw them out of the house and/or disown them if they are found to be pregnant. Women are forced into abortions by careers and workplaces that are unforgiving to mothers. Woman are forced into abortions because they truly believe they have nowhere else to turn.
N
nicholasG
Guest
Theology is a belief not a fact.
We keep hearing this false dichotomy, republic vs. democracy. That is not the right comparison.
The United States is Republic, not a Monarchy (e.g. Canada, but Canada is also a democracy, while not a Republic).
The United States is a Democracy, not an Autocracy (e.g. North Korea, Baath’ist Iraq, which are also Republics, but not democracies).
Further, the United States (a Republic) is a representative democracy as is Canada (a Monarchy), not an absolute democracy.
Last edited:
N
nicholasG
Guest
And there forced into abortions because of:
RAPE
INCEST
WORK
MISTAKES (we are all human)
Affordability
Etc…
RAPE
INCEST
WORK
MISTAKES (we are all human)
Affordability
Etc…
P
phil19034
Guest
The United States is technically NOT a “representative democracy.”
The United States a “democratic Republic.” In other words, a republic with democratic characteristics, but we are NOT a “representative democracy.”
There is a nuanced, but very important difference between a “representative democracy” vs a “democratic Republic”
In a “representative democracy” the representative is REQUIRED to vote the will of the people on every issue. They take polls constantly, etc. Honestly, some politicians act like they are serving a “representative democracy” even though they are not.
However, in a “democratic Republic” the public elects their representative to study the issues and make the best decision on every vote, with the information the representative has at hand. Then, come election time, if the people think the rep did a good job, they are re-elected.
The ONLY part of the American system that operates like a representative democracy is the Electoral College - where in some states it is illegal for the representative to vote against the will of the people he/she is representing.
As a political scientist, this nuanced difference bugs me when people call the US a representative democracy, because we technically are not (even though some congressmen act as if we are)
Last edited:
A
Anesti33
Guest
Right, and I hope that you realize that none of those are valid reasons to murder an innocent child?
N
nicholasG
Guest
Because as a result, many babies wind up poor and starving. You think that’s better?
P
phil19034
Guest
Yes.phil19034:
Because as a result, many babies wind up poor and starving. You think that’s better?
Poor and starving > murdered
N
nicholasG
Guest
So if the country allows abortion it’s murder and if it doesn’t, the child starves to death.
So you’re ok with the latter as long it’s not abortion?
Yeah that makes a lot of sense!
N
nicholasG
Guest
Murder is your definition not mine.
P
phil19034
Guest
Strawman. I NEVER said I’m “ok” with a child starving to death. But the solution is not to give up and murder the child.phil19034:
So if the country allows abortion it’s murder and if it doesn’t, the child starves to death.
So you’re ok with the latter as long it’s not abortion?
Yeah that makes a lot of sense!
The answer is to end starvation by removing the corrupt leaders that are causing the starvation and helping the poor.
P
phil19034
Guest
So you must be ok with euthanasia too, right?Anesti33:
Murder is your definition not mine.
N
nicholasG
Guest
Maybe if the anti abortion groups put as much effort in helping the millions of poor and starving born children then the unborn, we would have a better world.
N
nicholasG
Guest
Changing the subject. Typical.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Maybe if the BLM protesters put as much effort into helping the many victims of intra-racial murder, we’d have less of a problem.
See? I can stand on a soapbox and tell people what rights they’re allowed to be upset about violations of too!
See? I can stand on a soapbox and tell people what rights they’re allowed to be upset about violations of too!
N
nicholasG
Guest
You’re soapbox would have more credibility if you understood what BLM mean. I see you don’t.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
No, I’m prefectly aware. BLM exists to fight disproportionate law enforcement against minorities. It’s a legitimate cause. The pro-life movement exists to fight the slaughter of innocent children. You can’t tell members of a movement what to protest.
- Status