Let me as you this. Do you think abortion is a violent act against another human being?
Where do YOU split with the good doctor?
- Thread starter erect
- Start date
Let me as you this. Do you think abortion is a violent act against another human being?
ok whatever but that's not an argument it's a sweeping declaration. and I agree that the current state of affairs can be called slavery but slavery is extraordinarily adaptable. and not at all exclusive to governments or economies of any kind.
according to what schedule? pegged against what other currencies or commodities? what will former dollar holders do while this balance magically manifests? what market players even have the wherewithal to make this a reality, and more importantly a reality that improves the overall living standard more efficiently than the system it replaces? can systems that these players introduce even handle the volume of turnover that the world demands? what of the consequences if market forces cannot fill the void and world trade slows to megadeath proportions? how would issuers be stopped from forming a cartel or monopoly and pricing society into a megatyranny?
the questions aren't for you, i'm just putting theme out there. but they are anything but rhetorical for someone like ron paul and i would expect him to be able to answer them confidently without a second's hesitation and back them up with numbers and history.
program and strategy are the coin of the realm for great politicians and i don't look too hard but i don't see much out there to that end from his neck of the woods.
no offense buzzy but that's a destructive way of organizing your reality and it does nothing for the momentum of human progress. and it also reeks of the worn out rhetoric of demagogues holding sway over their flocks for centuries.
This is a 6 week old embryo.
Is this a human being?
I don't think so.
I don't think abortions are violent acts against human beings, because I don't think that embryos are human beings.
I think abortions are morally reprehensible, but I can't support any attempt to legislate them.
This is a 6 week old embryo.
Is this a person?
I don't think so.
Does the baby above have unique Human DNA?
Is it different than the mothers'?
This is a 6 week old embryo.
Is this a person?
I don't think so.
Yes it is. It's just a very young person.
Don't allow yourself to be constrained by the idea that age begins once you emerge from your mother's vagina.
That's like saying you never existed before the second in which you were free from your mother. Logically that's not correct, because you were alive the second prior, and all the previous months.
Honestly my biggest gripe is what in the fuck is the issue with birthing the child and giving it up for adoption or entering it into the system?
You don't want it, that's fucking fine. But you fucked, accept the natural potential consequence of pregnancy, give it up for adoption and let the child have a chance in his or her life.
Yeah, he/she might end up with foster parents who abuse him/her, but is it for *YOU* the person who engaged in sexual intercourse to decide whether or not that chance should be taken for another life? FUCK YOU.
Let the child decide. If they don't like their life, fine, they'll off themselves on their on will.
You don't want it, that's fucking fine. But you fucked, accept the natural potential consequence of pregnancy, give it up for adoption and let the child have a chance in his or her life.
Yeah, he/she might end up with foster parents who abuse him/her, but is it for *YOU* the person who engaged in sexual intercourse to decide whether or not that chance should be taken for another life? FUCK YOU.
Let the child decide. If they don't like their life, fine, they'll off themselves on their on will.
I think once you start legislating abortion, you are a stones throw away from legislating other lifestyle choices on behalf of the unborn. Why not mandate prenatal yoga, or natural childbirth? Perhaps the state should require all pregnant women to be drug tested in the interests of protecting the unborn children inside of them.
Children and the unborn are the favorite tools of those who would happily allow government to pry into the private lives of it's citizens to whatever degree it deems necessary.
Children and the unborn are the favorite tools of those who would happily allow government to pry into the private lives of it's citizens to whatever degree it deems necessary.
Just a few of probably hundreds of reasons
ECB report
source
Less spending = less debt = less burden to the tax payer = jobs
Market confidence will be an immediate shot of adrenalin. Our current economy is powered by nothing but hopes and dreams. Saying "our house is back in order" is a great way to exude confidence to consumers and investors the world over. Back to business as usual.
To me, if there's significant science that protects the well-being of a child from conception to delivery, I'm all for those government mandates. We're talking about human life here.
Natural childbirth for instance. The US has a terrible mother/infant death rate % compared to the rest of the world.
Why? Because of over-medicine. The average c-section rate in the US is 34%. LOL!!!!! 34 FUCKING PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO ENTER A HOSPITAL WILL DELIVER THEIR BABY VIA "getting their stomach's cut in half" (many times cutting the baby in the process), and always making it difficult for the baby to breathe, since the natural process of squeezing their lungs from the pressure of vaginal birth is negated. My wife as an RN saw this many times, these ridiculous scheduled c-sections.
My wife is pregnant now with our 2nd child, and the new midwife we've hired who'll do our homebirth has birth'd over 1,000 babies with only 6 c-sections, and not 1 mother or infant has died.
Do I feel safe birthing our child at home and not in a hospital? Fuck yes.
Here is the root of our disagreement.
You are a socialist, at heart anyway.
What do you think about Darwin's theory of evolution?
Should the government mandate vaccination? There's "significant science" which indicates that vaccines do save human lives.
Premature Births Fuel Infant Death Rates in U.S., Report Says - NYTimes.com
I had a feeling you might, I do as well. I have to admit though, I find it curious that many people who have no issue with the concept of natural selection in nature have such a difficult time when the same principles are applied to governments, economies, and human beings. Isn't abortion a form of natural selection?
No, there's not significant science that indicates vaccines save human lives. There's a lot that point to the opposite at this stage.
What I was referring to when I said that was the evidence that clearly indicates that pain medications, pitocin etc.. have absolutely no positive benefits (and usually likely negative outcomes) to babies during deliveries.
I'll have my wife refer to this tmw as she's more the expert and i'm tired as fuck
Maybe anyone who cant cut his legislation cravings get the fuck out of this thread?
RP is about de-regulation, not re-regulation. Thats a conceptual difference. If you want some douche to realign laws slightly differently so that they fit your personal needs better, there are abut a dozen different candidates to choose from. Pick yours.
So vaccines dont save human life. Ever heard of smallpox, diphtheria, half a dozen childrens diseases, tetanus? Maybe the imaginary swine flu wasnt necessary to get vaccinated. A couple dozen deadly diseases are. Most of those dont really exist anymore because widespread vaccination got rid of them. There is no reasonable science that could ever claim that vaccinations reduce ones expected lifespan and im not brainwashed by some government for believing that. If you want to give it a try, perform some real hardcore oldschool science, wait for your tetanus injection to wear off (10 years) and then try to infect yourself with it. Is a long and painful death. Enjoy.
RP is about de-regulation, not re-regulation. Thats a conceptual difference. If you want some douche to realign laws slightly differently so that they fit your personal needs better, there are abut a dozen different candidates to choose from. Pick yours.
So vaccines dont save human life. Ever heard of smallpox, diphtheria, half a dozen childrens diseases, tetanus? Maybe the imaginary swine flu wasnt necessary to get vaccinated. A couple dozen deadly diseases are. Most of those dont really exist anymore because widespread vaccination got rid of them. There is no reasonable science that could ever claim that vaccinations reduce ones expected lifespan and im not brainwashed by some government for believing that. If you want to give it a try, perform some real hardcore oldschool science, wait for your tetanus injection to wear off (10 years) and then try to infect yourself with it. Is a long and painful death. Enjoy.
couldn't help myself but to check this thread one last time via phone before I went to sleep..
Ill just say this, keep injecting all those metals/chemicals into your body. Ill practice good hygiene and continue my 4+ yr streak of only getting sick once.
oh noes, I might get the flu! or my child might get chicken pox lols. its a moneygrab bra.
lolwat? Are you fucking kidding me? Poliomyelitis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please show me some peer reviewed scientific evidence that vaccines don't save human lives.