Time magazine's cover of NJ governor raises outcry?!!

[christiefan915]

Who has ever stated that innocent lives are not lost in war? Or put to death by the state? Oh yeah, no one.

Are you suggesting that no one should ever warrant a death penalty because of this? That no war is justified?

Was WWII justifiable? Did innocent people lose their lives in that war?

I'm 100% against the death penalty so in answer to your question, no, no one should ever get it.

I'm also mostly against war, probably shouldn't say 100%, because WWII is the exception. I believe Hitler needed to be stopped. I don't agree with actions like firebombing Dresden, or dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

So if this makes me a hypocrite, I'll go with it.

 

[christiefan915]

"Innocent" life is a religious designation from anything I've ever read.

And, at least according to the Catholics, you are no longer innocent the second that you enter the world...and must spend the rest of your life getting back into Grace.

So there's really no 'innocent' life unless you want all fetuses to remain in the womb and continue to worship them there.

<Just a sidebar here: for Catholics baptism restores the infant to sinlessness and grace so it's more about spending the rest of your life staying in grace.
I know, it doesn't seem to make sense.>

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

that magic thing is called a womb.

its part of a humans body and they own it and not you.

they own all the flesh inside their body YOU don't own their flesh

Thanks for proving you are a sociopath.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think your opinion in 3 is fine. That's all yours, and is your right. Of course I hold no animosity towards babies but also do not care about stranger's fetuses (which is quite unnatural, btw).

Regarding 2, applying your definition, they are innocent because they have no free will to act, period. So that's kind of 'silly,' isnt it? So you are judging them in the womb?

Yes, you do hold an animosity towards them. Which is why you call the unborn child a 'fetus' which is simply a stage of its development. You again try to dehumanize it. Which by itself shows animosity towards the unborn child.

By your standard of caring, you should also not care if a person chooses to shoot other people. I mean, why should you care if they do or not so long as it doesn't affect you?

Does a two month old have 'free will to act'??? No, they are completely dependent upon the care of others. So that eliminates that line of stupidity from you. I am not 'judging' them. I am stating the obvious. Clearly they cannot have broken any laws, thus they cannot be guilty of any crime. The absurdity of the opposite shouldn't have to be explained to anyone.

 

[evince]

you pretend women make these decisions lightly and ONLY you can make the decision for other people.


Yet once a kid is born you don't give a fuck what happens to them.

then you lie right into the face of facts when your proven wrong.


You fight to see people go hungry.

your a sociopath


Im the bleeding heart liberal remember?

 

[evince]

Yes, you do hold an animosity towards them. Which is why you call the unborn child a 'fetus' which is simply a stage of its development. You again try to dehumanize it. Which by itself shows animosity towards the unborn child.

By your standard of caring, you should also not care if a person chooses to shoot other people. I mean, why should you care if they do or not so long as it doesn't affect you?

Does a two month old have 'free will to act'??? No, they are completely dependent upon the care of others. So that eliminates that line of stupidity from you. I am not 'judging' them. I am stating the obvious. Clearly they cannot have broken any laws, thus they cannot be guilty of any crime. The absurdity of the opposite shouldn't have to be explained to anyone.

if you care then go build an artificial womb so you can adopt them all

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'm 100% against the death penalty so in answer to your question, no, no one should ever get it.

I'm also mostly against war, probably shouldn't say 100%, because WWII is the exception. I believe Hitler needed to be stopped. I don't agree with actions like firebombing Dresden, or dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

So if this makes me a hypocrite, I'll go with it.

No, I don't think you are a hypocrite. Your position is that it should be avoided as much as humanly possible, but there will be extreme cases where it is warranted. At the same time you think some methods of war (or ending them) should never be used.

On the death penalty we disagree, but more likely it is a matter of our opinions on which is more humane. I believe putting down a rabid dog is the humane thing to do vs. locking it in a cage until it dies. There is no coming back from being a Dahmer, Bundy, etc...

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

if you care then go build an artificial womb so you can adopt them all

Or else you will jab a metal spike in their head and relish in the deaths of the children? Thanks for once again proving you are a sociopath.

 

[evince]

If they were children they could breath on their own.

until they can they are tissue inside a womans body making them her tissue

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

The social thing is my main issue with republicans. I don't know that much about Christie either but he has managed to annoy his own party so that's probably a plus.

for a second i thought you were talking in the 3rd person

 

[evince]

You just want a way to own women and tell them how to live.


How about you just concern yourself with your own sperm and leave us chicks the fuck alone

 

[Big Money]

If they were children they could breath on their own.

So people on life support aren't human?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

you pretend women make these decisions lightly and ONLY you can make the decision for other people.

No, I do not pretend any such thing.

Yet once a kid is born you don't give a fuck what happens to them.

Again a complete lie on your part.

then you lie right into the face of facts when your proven wrong.

No desh, that would be you... you just did it right above.

You fight to see people go hungry.

Another blatant LIE from Desh.

your a sociopath

I am not the one advocating jabbing a metal spike into a childs head desh... that would be YOU.

Im the bleeding heart liberal remember?

Who loves to jab spikes in babies heads. I am sure they all appreciate how liberal you are.

 

[Big Money]

You just want a way to own women and tell them how to live. How about you just concern yourself with your own sperm and leave us chicks the fuck alone

I'm pretty sure you're being left the fuck alone by anyone with sperm, grandma.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

If they were children they could breath on their own.

until they can they are tissue inside a womans body making them her tissue

ROFLMAO... thanks for once again proving not only what a sociopath you are, but also the FACT that you are an idiot that will LIE when proven wrong.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You just want a way to own women and tell them how to live.


How about you just concern yourself with your own sperm and leave us chicks the fuck alone

More LIES from Desh the sociopath.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

If they were children they could breath on their own.

until they can they are tissue inside a womans body making them her tissue

So people who can't breathe on their own, ie: ventilators, aren't human; according to you.

 

[Lorca]

If those people would not put their life on the line to protect those around them that they love... then yes... they are indeed silly.

Ahh... see, you again feebly try to dehumanize the unborn child. Genetics dictates that the unborn child is a unique human life. You may think there is a magic 'baby fairy' that comes along and birth and turns them into humans, but here in the real world, we know the truth of the matter. You wish to dehumanize them so that you may justify killing them. Hitler did something similar with the Jews.

They're human. But they're not yet 'persons' or 'people' with rights. They might not even reach full term and be born....nature handles that Herself quite a bit.

Otherwise, you could not 'kill' them in order to save the woman from extreme mental anguish in the cases or rape or incest, or in order to save her life. Do we do that with any 'already born' humans? If so, please give examples.

 

[Big Money]

They're human. But they're not yet 'persons' or 'people' with rights. They might not even reach full term and be born....nature handles that Herself quite a bit.

And you think Nature needs a hand whenever the hostess organism feels like it...

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

They're human. But they're not yet 'persons' or 'people' with rights. They might not even reach full term and be born....nature handles that Herself quite a bit.

Again, you are attempting to dehumanize them. If they die of natural causes, then it is a natural death. If you jab a metal spike in their head and kill them, then it is unnatural.

I understand that under the current legal system they are not entitled to basic human rights protections. THAT is the what the debate is actually about. Whether they should have basic human rights protections or not.

Otherwise, you could not 'kill' them in order to save the woman from extreme mental anguish in the cases or rape or incest, or in order to save her life. Do we do that with any 'already born' humans? If so, please give examples.

1) Incest is either consensual or it is rape.

2) Yes, if it is a life vs. a life, the woman should choose who she wishes to save.

3) Yes, in major catastrophes, medics may be forced to choose who to save... usually done on the basis of probability of survival and severity of injury.

4) Whether we do the same with born individuals is irrelevant.