Pro Choice?

Grind said:
the trick is not to have someone pay you via a lawsuit but rather pay into your own separate retard insurance fund, so if a member of your family becomes retarded, you'll be ok.
Click to expand...

Of course. If someone damages you, you just should've had the forsight to pay your own damages. That sounds completely fair.
 
Grind said:
Ok Seriously. Example time.

Characters:

1) Beefy
2) Mr. Joe.

Beefy smashes into mr. joes car. Beefy does not have insurance.
Mr. Joe does have insurance, and as such his insurance company covers his own ass.

As a result, Mr. Joe gets paid by his own insurance company to help with his expenses.
If Mr. Joe wants more money, he sues Mr. Beefy.

Stupid Scenario: Mr. Joe goes to Beefy's insurance agent and collects money. He gets paid, but at the cost of less freedom for everyone because we are made to pay for shit we don't want.

Smart Scenario. Instead of going over to Beefy's side, Mr. Joe is protected by his very own insurance company. Mr. Beefy is shit out of luck because he doesn't have insurance for HIS car... but Mr. Beefy is still happy because he was able to make a free choice.
Click to expand...

You're an idiot.

Stupid scenario: forcing people to pay for others faults.



If insurance weren't mandatory, people without much assets would have no reason to buy it, and people who had assets would be forced to pay for them. Let's use some common fucking sense here.
 
Last edited:
theMAJORITY said:
Live and let live beefy--remember? Some may say pro life is right side------but it is really liberial----liberials tell people what to do and how to live. A real libertarian would let the woman have the choice.

you sir--are not a real libertarian IMO.
Click to expand...

I am pro choice you idiot.

But I actually walk the walk. That was the point of the thread.
 
Watermark said:
Of course. If someone damages you, you just should've had the forsight to pay your own damages. That sounds completely fair.
Click to expand...

what do you think flood insurance, earthquake insurance, fire insurance is, you retard? You have the forsight for these things so in the event something bad happens, you are covered, or you are screwed. It's how it works for any other protection basically.
 
Watermark said:
You're an idiot.

Stupid scenario: forcing people to pay for others faults.
Click to expand...

You could still bring legal action dipshit. You do realize forcing me to buy insurance because we have already had so many car crashes in society is the same thing as "forcing me to pay for other people's faults" don't you?
 
Grind said:
You could still bring legal action dipshit. You do realize forcing me to buy insurance because we have already had so many car crashes in society is the same thing as "forcing me to pay for other people's faults" don't you?
Click to expand...

You have a simplistic, idiotic view of life.
 
Grind said:
what do you think flood insurance, earthquake insurance, fire insurance is, you retard? You have the forsight for these things so in the event something bad happens, you are covered, or you are screwed. It's how it works for any other protection basically.
Click to expand...

Except that they aren't only being irresponsible to themselves.
 
Watermark said:
Seriously Beefy,

Have you ever heard of "political framing"? The terms "pro-choice" and "Pro-life" are the textbook examples of that. It implies that their opposition is anti-choice, or anti-life, which is ridiculous. Try not to think to hard about it.
Click to expand...

Some pro-choicers are actually pro abortion because they've been conditioned to hate humanity by the nihilists in charge of our education system. They love trees instead. How noble.
 
Watermark said:
I'm pro-choice I'm just agianst abortion.
Click to expand...

But, can you be against abortion and still see that it is not your decision to make for another individual?

As with anything else. I am pro-choice. That does not mean that I condone certain actions. I just realize that I do not have infinite wisdom to presume to make other peoples' choices for them.
 
Why must we subvert our natural rights (principles America was founded on) to something as obviously out of line with them as abortion? You don't get to choose when natural rights are at stake. Otherwise, what the hell are we doing outside of the Commonwealth?
 
I'm Pro-life. It isn't a serious choice to me when you have a beating heart and a living human being inside you, to decide to kill it so you aren't burdened with him/her.
 
Beefy said:
Pro Choice has become a term that pro abortionists use to espouse that their opinion on the issue is about choice, freedom, personal decisions.

But as usual, they're flat full of shit. They're not pro choice, because if they were, they would really care about choices.

If they were pro choice, and honest about it, how would they fell about the following?


School Vouchers
Social Security and Retirement
The 2nd Amendment
The ability to write a memo on a check (1st amendment)

For schools, they're anti choice. People should not have the ability to choose where their kids go to school unless they can afford private schools. Eat the rich right liberals? LOL. Give the more affluent a choice in schooling, but take it away from the poor. Yet you're still "pro choice".

Social Security. Should people be incharge of their own retirement and be able to CHOOSE whether or not they participate in a government run retirement scam? Of course not. But they're still "pro choice".

Should people be allowed to excercise their freedom to choose gun ownership? Well, maybe, but only under the guidelines the left enacts. Yet, they're "pro choice".

Should people be able to choose to say whatever they want so long as it is not harming anyone else? No, Cypress and BAC think people should be jailed nd fined for writing a memo on a check that the recipient finds offensive. But they're "pro choice".

There's plenty more examples.

Call it what it is. Pro abortion, not pro choice. You leftists have all but forgotten that choices are what make us free, so when you claim to be "pro choice", mean it, or die.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but I think the point is better made by pointing out where they are not pro choice on medical/health decisions. Illicit drugs, medical procedures they don't believe are safe/effective, outlawing stuff in foods (e.g., trans fat), trying to tax people out of smoking, helmet/seat belt laws, etc.

As far as auto insurance, this is relevant only because the government owns the roads and forcing people to have old age or medical insurance is not nearly the same.

If you want to drive your car around a big field that you own, that's your right and you are not required to have auto insurance, a license or registration, nor must you obey any traffic laws. But if you plan on going on government roads you have to have insurance and all the rest. If the roads were private it is probable private owners would require such things or they would charge you a service fee that included such costs.
 
CensoredRed said:
But, can you be against abortion and still see that it is not your decision to make for another individual?

As with anything else. I am pro-choice. That does not mean that I condone certain actions. I just realize that I do not have infinite wisdom to presume to make other peoples' choices for them.
Click to expand...

I'm not against abortion. Anyone who knew me would've realized that I was just being fascetious. Sorry for the confusion.
 
Threedee said:
Why must we subvert our natural rights (principles America was founded on) to something as obviously out of line with them as abortion? You don't get to choose when natural rights are at stake. Otherwise, what the hell are we doing outside of the Commonwealth?
Click to expand...

Why must we subvert our natural rights and restrict abortion and force women to carry to term against their own personal will at the point of a gun? Because you, in your infinite wisdom, believe in a ridiculously restricted definition of human life?
 
Watermark said:
Why must we subvert our natural rights and restrict abortion and force women to carry to term against their own personal will at the point of a gun? Because you, in your infinite wisdom, believe in a ridiculously restricted definition of human life?
Click to expand...

Well, life does come first in the list... But fuck life. You know, I could easily sit back and say nothing (as it is, I am no activist) for these reasons:

-it doesn't directly affect ME
-I cannot be aborted
-I wasn't aborted, and therefore I no longer have a vested interest
-MY personal comfort level is very important to ME
-As long as I make a claim to supporting life, it should look good on MY spiritual resume

I just find myself very era-centric. Its 2008. WTH?
 
CensoredRed said:
But, can you be against abortion and still see that it is not your decision to make for another individual?

As with anything else. I am pro-choice. That does not mean that I condone certain actions. I just realize that I do not have infinite wisdom to presume to make other peoples' choices for them.
Click to expand...

Not really, I don't think being able to say, "okay, I'm not a bad person, can we go now?" is very honorable. As a member of this society, I am just as guilty as you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top