[QUOTE="mindstorm"]As long as I am alive you can be certain that there is at least one person who is pro-life.kingkong0124
Anti-choice*
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="mindstorm"]As long as I am alive you can be certain that there is at least one person who is pro-life.kingkong0124
Anti-choice*
Obviously it's going to die. Gay marriage is going to be legal soonish (already is in some countries and 2015 in the UK)
The NHS already cover abortions, so pro-lifer's lost a long time ago on that one.
I don't know when drugs would become legal, but with all the debates about it, it's most likely going to happen.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"]It's troubling that words such as "liberal" and "conservative" have had their meanings grossly distorted by politickers. It makes it difficult to have any kind of coherent and meaningful discussion about politics.Sajo7Well yes and no. Liberal and conservative have always meant wildly different things for different states and different situations. But the American definitions are getting pretty strange, what example were you thinking of in particular? Well lately in the US, the "conservative" agenda seems to involve starting wars around the world, overthrowing old governments, and making new ones. The "liberal" agenda seems to be the promotion of government-enforced collectivism.
I don't think it really matters because social issues aren't what Americans care about right now. It's really the terrible economy that's not getting better.cslayer211
The discussion of social conservative issues by the leading GOP candidates says otherwise. The same goes for PResident Obama giving his support to gay marriage.
Current Social Conservatism has already died in a place were the future is now... Northern and Western Europe.
Isn't it hilarious how the majority of the "pro life" people support the death penalty? Or, to quote Bill Hicks, kill abortion doctors.MrPraline
Or to quote George Carlin "Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers"
[QUOTE="hoola"]
Yeah it probably will. Most people aren't capable of self control which is what conservatism is all about. It is kind of sad. I really think humanity is on the verge of being something greater than the animals that most people are. Unfortunately, people keep proving me wrong by killing off their children, taking mind altering substances for fun, and having uncontrolled sex.
Bane_09
So people are animals that need to be controlled according to you? you sick f*ck
No, just the opposite. Let people do what they want. It isn't your problem and it isn't mine. I'm saying we behave more like animals when we rely on our feelings rather than on reason.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"]Isn't it hilarious how the majority of the "pro life" people support the death penalty? Or, to quote Bill Hicks, kill abortion doctors.toast_burner
Or to quote George Carlin "Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers"
ROFL Carlin is a legend tooI am a Libertarian Conservative. I don't do drugs (anymore): Ok, with Legalization. I strongly oppose abortion, and try to persuade people to give life to unborn: I support Pro-Choice I am for keeping Marriage between 1 Man and 1 Woman: I support equal benefits to gay couples, and Civil Unions. But I live my life as a Conservative and hope more people do the same because I think it's a better way of societal structure.DevilMightCry
Yes, this is what I am as well. I agree with all of those except the equal benefits, not because I am opposed to gay marriage, but because I am opposed to government granting benefits in general. People should be taxed as individuals, not as families or unions.
Do you think acting on conservative principles is going to become a thing of the past?
[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]It's troubling that words such as "liberal" and "conservative" have had their meanings grossly distorted by politickers. It makes it difficult to have any kind of coherent and meaningful discussion about politics.LaihendiWell yes and no. Liberal and conservative have always meant wildly different things for different states and different situations. But the American definitions are getting pretty strange, what example were you thinking of in particular? Well lately in the US, the "conservative" agenda seems to involve starting wars around the world, overthrowing old governments, and making new ones. The "liberal" agenda seems to be the promotion of government-enforced collectivism. Yeah it is pretty bizarre how the "conservative" party promotes a foreign policy based on liberalism. The democrats sort of lacks an identity, it is basically a bunch of liberal-sque people that argue with each other
[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"] I don't do drugs (anymore): Ok, with Legalization. I strongly oppose abortion, and try to persuade people to give life to unborn: I support Pro-Choice I am for keeping Marriage between 1 Man and 1 Woman: I support equal benefits to gay couples, and Civil Unions.Jebus213The last two are a lost cause and you know that... Gay marriage will be legal and abortion will be legalized in some way.Abortion is already a constitutional right as set by RvR. The debate however won't be going away and the ideology will undoubtedly never die.
Isn't it hilarious how the majority of the "pro life" people support the death penalty? Or, to quote Bill Hicks, kill abortion doctors.MrPralineYes
[QUOTE="mingmao3046"][QUOTE="MrPraline"]Isn't it hilarious how the majority of the "pro life" people support the death penalty? Or, to quote Bill Hicks, kill abortion doctors.MrPralineMaybe because they want everyone to have a chance at life, but once you do something like rape, or murder, you should be put down? (im not pro life btw) Sure but life = life. "pro life' does not sound very nuanced.Please, that argument goes both ways. The staunchest liberals will pervade the notion of "woman choice" then come down and argue against Capital Punishment. On one hand, destruction of a child is alright, but destruction of a serial murderer is *not* okay; hell, they only deserve a menial sentence anyways, right Norway?
Don't like abortion or the death penalty.
Come at me bro.
Gay marriage is cool tho.
coolbeans90
So you think murderers should get out of jail free so that they can go provide dangerous backalleyway abortions with coathangers?
Did I also mention they're gay murderers?
Sure but life = life. "pro life' does not sound very nuanced.Please, that argument goes both ways. The staunchest liberals will pervade the notion of "woman choice" then come down and argue against Capital Punishment. On one hand, destruction of a child is alright, but destruction of a serial murderer is *not* okay; hell, they only deserve a menial sentence anyways, right Norway?Please Stevo, you know I have a soft spot for you but don't say silly things. Breivik in Norway didn't get a "menial sentence", dude effectively got a life sentence. Best the current laws could do. The -on paper- maximum sentence can be extended with 5 years forever if they deem him not fit to re-enter society, and no politician with an eye on a future career will do that, so he's royally f*cked for life. No death, but never getting out.[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="mingmao3046"] Maybe because they want everyone to have a chance at life, but once you do something like rape, or murder, you should be put down? (im not pro life btw)Stevo_the_gamer
Sure but life = life. "pro life' does not sound very nuanced.Please, that argument goes both ways. The staunchest liberals will pervade the notion of "woman choice" then come down and argue against Capital Punishment. On one hand, destruction of a child is alright, but destruction of a serial murderer is *not* okay; hell, they only deserve a menial sentence anyways, right Norway?The majority of pro choicers don't see a fetus as a human.[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="mingmao3046"] Maybe because they want everyone to have a chance at life, but once you do something like rape, or murder, you should be put down? (im not pro life btw)Stevo_the_gamer
[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]I am a Libertarian Conservative. I don't do drugs (anymore): Ok, with Legalization. I strongly oppose abortion, and try to persuade people to give life to unborn: I support Pro-Choice I am for keeping Marriage between 1 Man and 1 Woman: I support equal benefits to gay couples, and Civil Unions. But I live my life as a Conservative and hope more people do the same because I think it's a better way of societal structure.hoola
Yes, this is what I am as well. I agree with all of those except the equal benefits, not because I am opposed to gay marriage, but because I am opposed to government granting benefits in general. People should be taxed as individuals, not as families or unions.
Do you think acting on conservative principles is going to become a thing of the past?
I think you need to have more forsight on this issue, a declining birth rate in Europe is forcing governments to hand out large insentives to have children, and we're headed for a similar "lack of children" problem here in the future. Incentives are going to be coming, and without them, the economy will suffer as the population ages.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]I agree with 2/3 of this post, means we can still have sex right?Don't like abortion or the death penalty.
Come at me bro.
Gay marriage is cool tho.
MrPraline
Yes.
[QUOTE="JoGoSo"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]How does that make you feel?Jebus213Late? America hasn't lived by a social conservative code of conduct for decades. Keyword is "current"The "current" social conservatism will be the future one- alive and kicking where it matters and irrelevant in all matters of a secular nature. The last battle is gay marriage and that one would have won already if not by the way its proponents were battling it- with the stupid notion that social conservatives should simply change their mind about it.
Sure but life = life. "pro life' does not sound very nuanced.Please, that argument goes both ways. The staunchest liberals will pervade the notion of "woman choice" then come down and argue against Capital Punishment. On one hand, destruction of a child is alright, but destruction of a serial murderer is *not* okay; hell, they only deserve a menial sentence anyways, right Norway?How da fvck is there a connection with women's right to control their body and capital punishment? If you put a murderer on death row and kill him, that won't magically ressurect everyone he's killed.[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="mingmao3046"] Maybe because they want everyone to have a chance at life, but once you do something like rape, or murder, you should be put down? (im not pro life btw)Stevo_the_gamer
I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_Witness
As long as there are babies that are put up for adoption, and sperm donors, there can be married gay couples that can raise children.
I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_WitnessThey can adopt. And even if not, are you aware of current divorce statistics? And you call that "robust"? Don't make me cry.
I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_WitnessI wasn't aware gay marriaged would prevent straight people from getting married. You should report this to FOX News.
[QUOTE="The_Witness"]I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.jimkabrhel
As long as there are babies that are put up for adoption, and sperm donors, there can be married gay couples that can raise children.
The government shouldn't subsidize it. A child needs a father and mother figure. If a boy grows up with two moms, they will become too feminine.[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="The_Witness"]I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_Witness
As long as there are babies that are put up for adoption, and sperm donors, there can be married gay couples that can raise children.
The government shouldn't subsidize it. A child needs a father and mother figure. If a boy grows up with two moms, they will become too feminine. Rofl. Whose alt are you?[QUOTE="The_Witness"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]The government shouldn't subsidize it. A child needs a father and mother figure. If a boy grows up with two moms, they will become too feminine. Rofl. Whose alt are you? Just because I seem to have an unpopular opinion doesn't mean I'm an alt. Irrelevant post is irrelevant.As long as there are babies that are put up for adoption, and sperm donors, there can be married gay couples that can raise children.
l4dak47
I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_WitnessPeople will be gay regardless of whether they can marry or not. So your point about procreation is completely moot.
What harm is there in letting two people who love each other get married? Why do you feel the need to trample on other peoples happiness?
I believe that the foundation of a society is a marriage comprised of one man and one woman. You cannot have a fully robust civilization with government subsidizing gay marriage. Mostly because they cannot procreate without the help of outside sources and our society is dependent on humans.The_WitnessHowever homosexual people are in the minority so there is no risk for the population of the earth.
Unless you want to make some prediction that condoning homosexuality will lead to it taking over the entire population like a virus.
Which, you know, will justifiably make you look like an idiot.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment