APP - Do Conservatives lack Freewill

[Lorca]

Seems like you are admitting that lefties legislate choices away from people. Who is always opposing school choice? That would be lefties. Who opposes privatizing social security to give people choices to fund their own retirement? Oh yeah, that would be democrats. You have to be forced into social security. You don't have a choice.

?

Nice try. We're discussing SOCIAL conservatism which concerns moral issues and personal choices (meaning things that affect people's personal lives. If you need to dissect that to distract from your argument, have at it. I wont play.)

And I certainly stated SOCIAL conservatism in my original post discussing free will and Islam. I also referred to it as fundamentalist-based conservatism. You understood it. Dont bob and weave now.

 

[Lorca]

I went back and re-read your post that I responded to and you didn't specify "social" conservatives. You were speaking broadly about free will. Now you may have thought that is what you meant in your head, but you didn't specify it in your post.

As for social conservatism being about legislating morals, doesn't everyone do that? I mean, when we were getting this healthcare abomination forced down our throats Obama made a "moral" argument that everyone should be covered. What is the difference?

Nice try. We're discussing SOCIAL conservatism which concerns moral issues and personal choices (meaning things that affect people's personal lives. If you need to dissect that to distract from your argument, have at it. I wont play.)

And I certainly stated SOCIAL conservatism in my original post discussing free will and Islam. I also referred to it as fundamentalist-based conservatism. You understood it. Dont bob and weave now.

Works here too.

 

[Lorca]

Now, since you make the claim that all of those things you legislate is to save lives, then I could make the argument that banning abortions is to save the life of an unborn baby that is being murdered. Additionally, I could argue that we need to outlaw homosexuality since that behavioral choice is a leading risk factor for contracting AIDS and dying. So if we can save the life of just ONE HOMOSEXUAL, we should outlaw homosexual behavior.

That is your argument right?

Nah, your arguments dont work. Any sexual behavior is a big risk factor for sexually transmitted diseases and those can be 100% prevented. Are you saying that the govt should MANDATE that everyone use condoms? And MANDATE that everyone wash their hands to prevent the flu? heh, No, that's not bigger govt and the govt intruding more into our lives, lol.

As for abortion, not gonna resolve that in a few sentences because you wont recognize that you cannot make decisions about a 'potential' life without infringing on the rights of the mother...her life, health, or privacy. (Can really just break those down into Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.)

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Nah, your arguments dont work. Any sexual behavior is a big risk factor for sexually transmitted diseases and those can be 100% prevented. Are you saying that the govt should MANDATE that everyone use condoms? And MANDATE that everyone wash their hands to prevent the flu? heh, No, that's not bigger govt and the govt intruding more into our lives, lol.

As for abortion, not gonna resolve that in a few sentences because you wont recognize that you cannot make decisions about a 'potential' life without infringing on the rights of the mother...her life, health, or privacy. (Can really just break those down into Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.)

Well, there is only one way to 100% prevent STDs and a condom ain't it. Here is a question for you. Would you have sex with a known AIDS positive individual if you wore a condom?

Additionally, there is only ONE STD that leads to DEATH. That would be the one that is mainly acquired through deviant homosexual activity

As for the murder of a baby, you are infringing on the rights of the baby. Its life, liberty and pursuit of happiness in order not to inconvenience the mother.

You will not win this argument. You will twist yourself in knots until you no longer recognize yourself.

 

[Lorca]

Well, there is only one way to 100% prevent STDs and a condom ain't it. Here is a question for you. Would you have sex with a known AIDS positive individual if you wore a condom?

Additionally, there is only ONE STD that leads to DEATH. That would be the one that is mainly acquired through deviant homosexual activity

As for the murder of a baby, you are infringing on the rights of the baby. Its life, liberty and pursuit of happiness in order not to inconvenience the mother.

You will not win this argument. You will twist yourself in knots until you no longer recognize yourself.

Yes I would have sex with someone I loved with a condom if they had AIDS. And that's my bar in general for sex...real emotional investment.

Gay sex referred to as 'deviant' behavior is a moral judgement. You are proving my point

And if life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are 'inconveniences' for the mother, why arent they 'inconveniences' for the fetus? SHe is entitled to the same rights. She could die in childbirth. The fetus could die before ever being born.

Please tell me how you can do anything with the fetus without infringing on the rights of the mother? Please tell me why the fetus' rights come above the mothers?

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Yes I would have sex with someone I loved with a condom if they had AIDS. And that's my bar in general for sex...real emotional investment.

Gay sex referred to as 'deviant' behavior is a moral judgement. You are proving my point

And if life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are 'inconveniences' for the mother, why arent they 'inconveniences' for the fetus? SHe is entitled to the same rights. She could die in childbirth. The fetus could die before ever being born.

Please tell me how you can do anything with the fetus without infringing on the rights of the mother? Please tell me why the fetus' rights come above the mothers?

The unborn baby is a living breathing human being. The mothers rights do not supersede the unborn childs. End of story. You lose. I win

 

[Lorca]

The unborn baby is a living breathing human being. The mothers rights do not supersede the unborn childs. End of story. You lose. I win

Ha, I love it...declaring yourself winner on the Internet. LMAO That's so cute.

And a fetus's do not supersede the mother's. Why is it accepted, including among the majority of pro-lifers, that abortion's ok *if the mother's life is in danger?*

Tell me again how you're right? lol

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Ha, I love it...declaring yourself winner on the Internet. LMAO That's so cute.

And a fetus's do not supersede the mother's. Why is it accepted, including among the majority of pro-lifers, that abortion's ok *if the mother's life is in danger?*

Tell me again how you're right? lol

i dont accept abortion under any circumstances.

But, I will tell you what. Let's make this compromise.

I oppose abortion under any circumstance. Your side wants to make it as simple as going to a RedBox. But, you also claim to want to make it "legal, safe and rare" (According to Billy Clinton)

So let's compromise. Abortion legal up to any point for cases of incest, rape and the health of the mother (meaning it would kill her to have the baby). Deal?

That way we could accomplish your goal of making it "legal, safe and rare" as you lefties claim. Because these instances are EXTREMELY rare. And it would accomplish my goal of not using abortion as a means of birth control after the fact.

I think that is a reasonable compromise which after all is what you lefties say you want. I am compromising on my principles, now you just need to compromise on yours.

Deal?

 

[Lorca]

i dont accept abortion under any circumstances.

But, I will tell you what. Let's make this compromise.

I oppose abortion under any circumstance. Your side wants to make it as simple as going to a RedBox. But, you also claim to want to make it "legal, safe and rare" (According to Billy Clinton)

So let's compromise. Abortion legal up to any point for cases of incest, rape and the health of the mother (meaning it would kill her to have the baby). Deal?

That way we could accomplish your goal of making it "legal, safe and rare" as you lefties claim. Because these instances are EXTREMELY rare. And it would accomplish my goal of not using abortion as a means of birth control after the fact.

I think that is a reasonable compromise which after all is what you lefties say you want. I am compromising on my principles, now you just need to compromise on yours.

Deal?

Doesnt remotely address the rights of the mother. You didnt tell me why the fetus's rights should supersede the mother's

It's not a reasonable compromise....here's just one example why: my friend's wife died in childbirth, after already having had a child, with no medical clues she would have problems giving birth. Baby died too, during the agonizing birth. (I got way more description than I wanted)

A woman has every right to choose whether or not she wants to risk her life, health, and future.

What IS reasonable is that EVERYONE has a choice. If you dont want to have an abortion, you dont have to have one.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Doesnt remotely address the rights of the mother. You didnt tell me why the fetus's rights should supersede the mother's

Nobody has the right to murder another human being out of convenience

It's not a reasonable compromise....here's just one example why: my friend's wife died in childbirth, after already having had a child, with no medical clues she would have problems giving birth. Baby died too, during the agonizing birth. (I got way more description than I wanted)

Of course it is a reasonable compromise. You are just unreasonable because you have a blood thirst for killing the unborn. As sad as your friends story is, how would abortion have helped? It wouldn't

A woman has every right to choose whether or not she wants to risk her life, health, and future.

She should think about that before she engages in the act that would risk her life, health and future yes? Sounds like you want her to be able to act irresponsibly and use murder as her get out of hail free card

What IS reasonable is that EVERYONE has a choice. If you dont want to have an abortion, you dont have to have one.

You say EVERYONE has a choice. What choice does the unborn child have? Why doesn't the baby have a choice whether or not to be murdered? Remember that choice you are making is taking another life. You are very cavalier about it

 

[Lorca]

You say EVERYONE has a choice. What choice does the unborn child have? Why doesn't the baby have a choice whether or not to be murdered? Remember that choice you are making is taking another life. You are very cavalier about it

Why should she concern herself over the health risks of pregnancy when she has legal options if her chosen birth control method fails? It's called free will, liberty. Both she and the man are FREE to choose to have sex and face any consequences. An abortion is certainly a consequence....it's not a day at the spa. (Do you also require a legal education? It is not murder.)

And exactly what other 'choices' does the fetus have? Did it really choose anything??? LOL What are you on?

Again, how does an unborn fetus's rights supersede the mother's? Why should she risk HER life?

And I am not treating this subject cavalierly. I just manage to keep my emotions out of it...unlike you and your accusatory drama. How many unwanted kids have you adopted? WHy dont you put your $$ where your emotions are and actually do some good? You have no idea how I feel about abortion 'personally.'

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Why should she concern herself over the health risks of pregnancy when she has legal options if her chosen birth control method fails? It's called free will, liberty. Both she and the man are FREE to choose to have sex and face any consequences. An abortion is certainly a consequence....it's not a day at the spa. (Do you also require a legal education? It is not murder.)

And exactly what other 'choices' does the fetus have? Did it really choose anything??? LOL What are you on?

Again, how does an unborn fetus's rights supersede the mother's? Why should she risk HER life?

And I am not treating this subject cavalierly. I just manage to keep my emotions out of it...unlike you and your accusatory drama. How many unwanted kids have you adopted? WHy dont you put your $$ where your emotions are and actually do some good? You have no idea how I feel about abortion 'personally.'

I don't even think you realize what you are saying. The unborn child deserves to be protected. Period. We will obviously never agree, but it is clear that you are in favor of murdering babies in an effort for women to "have fun". Pretty callous and uncaring if you ask me.

 

[Lorca]

I don't even think you realize what you are saying. The unborn child deserves to be protected. Period. We will obviously never agree, but it is clear that you are in favor of murdering babies in an effort for women to "have fun". Pretty callous and uncaring if you ask me.

I know what I am saying, you just dont like it. You cannot think about this rationally, only emotionally....you were the one asking about the choices a fetus has. Really? What exactly is an unborn fetus choosing?

Something that is not even viable doesnt 'deserve' anything because ONLY the person(s) involved should be attaching any emotional connections to it...or not. It's a matter of privacy, it's none of your business. Go save a child being abused or one that needs a home. Oh, why not? Because that actually involves something BESIDES moral outrage. Moral outrage is easy....putting your money and heart where they really matter? M'k, let's see it.

You also dont understand the legal definition of 'murder.'

You are right about one thing...I can see past the drama and we wont agree.

 

[Minister of Truth]

I lack free will. I'm sitting here watching football, drinking beer, and wishing my girlfriend was here with me instead of working still. Pretty typical for me...

 

[Dantès]

You know that is an interesting discussion. I guess when you speak of conservatives being opposed to change you are talking about their ideas to reform Social Security and the democrat party stubbornly not wanting to change it.

Or maybe you are referring to the conservatives desire to reform our failed union run public education system juxtaposed against the democrat party and their desire to maintain the status quo.

Sometimes before you go off on some half baked meme, it would be helpful to hold the mirror up to your own face to make sure it doesn't apply.

God bless

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as the "democrat party."

 

[Dantès]

Why doesn't the baby have a choice whether or not to be murdered?

Yes why can't the little unborn child say "murder me please."? In fact why can't unborn children just make the decision on abortion themselves and text us!

 

[Lorca]

Yes why can't the little unborn child say "murder me please."? In fact why can't unborn children just make the decision on abortion themselves and text us!

Statistically, many do. They're just not texting....yet.

 

[Lorca]

While I didnt intend for this thread to go off topic into abortion, it was a great subject for the topic, free will.

I dont know how ILA labels himself but I'm pretty sure it's conservative and from his posts, I see "social conservative."

And he illustrates my initial post in this thread beautifully. He wants society to decide FOR a woman what happens in her body. He wants to remove her free will and wishes to use the state to do so. He sees punitive action...."her consequences" as rightful and wants doctrine (limited doctrine, certainly not all agree with him) to FORCE a woman to do as THEY decide. He does not respect her free will and places the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of an unborn, non-sentient fetus above that of the fully functioning woman in society.

Good thread!

 

[midcan5]

Yep, conservatives hate government when it imposes laws on them, witness ACA, for others they are big fans of government. Never do they talk preventive education on the topic nor do they all have 15 to 20 children when married as cellular life is cellular life, for them it only counts when it is controlling another. All of a sudden the conservative is the moral arbiter who really does nothing but preach. It is the biggest moral crutch of the modern American conservative, usually republican, sometimes libertarian, hypocrite. Oh I have to be honest, some democrats too.

I've written about it elsewhere.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...ven-a-human-being-.....&p=1118744#post1118744
http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...ll-post-puberty-females&p=1215211#post1215211
http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?41846-America-s-Religious-Terrorists

I lack free will. I'm sitting here watching football, drinking beer, and wishing my girlfriend was here with me instead of working still. Pretty typical for me...

Threedee, you're catching on, great.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

While I didnt intend for this thread to go off topic into abortion, it was a great subject for the topic, free will.

I dont know how ILA labels himself but I'm pretty sure it's conservative and from his posts, I see "social conservative."

And he illustrates my initial post in this thread beautifully. He wants society to decide FOR a woman what happens in her body. He wants to remove her free will and wishes to use the state to do so. He sees punitive action...."her consequences" as rightful and wants doctrine (limited doctrine, certainly not all agree with him) to FORCE a woman to do as THEY decide. He does not respect her free will and places the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of an unborn, non-sentient fetus above that of the fully functioning woman in society.

Good thread!

I just want to be clear here. It is your contention that the government should not be able to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with or to her body?

Is that what you believe?