THEOCRACY WATCH!!! Texas Gov signs anti-gay, anti-choice legislation in church

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
OneBadStay said:
Not the first time I've silenced someone from the pro-baby killing crowd.

See, the problem with this kind of stuff is, you just damage your own cause and make it more difficult for people like 80sU2isbest and others, including myself, to argue the case against abortion.

In other words, you make the pro-life people look bad.
 
Irvine511 said:




i have to admit, i respect an ego.

you've silence no one, dear.

we've moved on.

Moved on? Uhhh...no.

More like avoided the conversation when points came up that you could neither acknowledge nor refute and then came back well later in the discussion to declare it "over."

It's happened before. I'm used to it.

I certainly don't expect martha back to refute my scientifically-backed claim that the DNA mismatch between the mother and the preborn baby renders her whole (outdated) "it's my body" argument invalid. She'll claim that she's "moved on" as well. (The best concession I can ever usually expect.)
 
OneBadStay said:


Moved on? Uhhh...no.

More like avoided the conversation when points came up that you could neither acknowledge nor refute and then came back well later in the discussion to declare it "over."

It's happened before. I'm used to it.

I certainly don't expect martha back to refute my scientifically-backed claim that the DNA mismatch between the mother and the preborn baby renders her whole (outdated) "it's my body" argument invalid. She'll claim that she's "moved on" as well. (The best concession I can ever usually expect.)



just how is the view from up there?
 
financeguy said:


See, the problem with this kind of stuff is, you just damage your own cause and make it more difficult for people like 80sU2isbest and others, including myself, to argue the case against abortion.

In other words, you make the pro-life people look bad.

financeguy -

Go back and re-read the parenthetical that you, for some reason, omitted when you quoted me. You clearly missed the irony of my post that you quoted above.
 
OneBadStay said:


financeguy -

Go back and re-read the parenthetical that you, for some reason, omitted when you quoted me. You clearly missed the irony of my post that you quoted above.

I didn't see any parentheses. Where are they? I must be blind.
 
OneBadStay said:


Same old lines?

Seems like you can't counter what I've said. Not the first time I've silenced someone from the pro-baby killing crowd. (Keep using the intolerant, offensive, and incorrect "anti-choice" label, and maybe I'll just make up my own ridiculous labels for you, also. OK?)

Or maybe you probably haven't even read my posts and are confusing me with someone else.

financeguy -

See above. I tried more than once earlier in this thread to point out the fact that "anti-choice" is an inappropriate label for those of us who oppose abortion on moral grounds. It seems that some still weren't getting the memo, so I used the equally inappropriate term "pro-baby killer" to make the same point in a new way.
 
OneBadStay said:


Wow. This is some of the piss-poorest debating I've ever seen...

What a letdown this board is...



it sounds like you're upset that the whole thread isn't revolving around your specific posts. that's understandable.

since you've only posted 30ish times, i assume you haven't yet come around to the fact that most of these discussions are dynamic and they shift, and often very relevant, intelligent posts go unresponded to simply because the conversation itself has moved on to other topics. these are rich areas for discussion, and abortion is no different, so for you to continually harp on the "baby killer!" argument isn't a way to keep people engaged for very long.

as i said, most of us have heard it -- that goes for pro- and anti-choice people alike -- and you're not telling us anything new, despite your "scientifically backed" (!!!) evidence. so, instead of complaining that the conversation hasn't suited your needs, why don't you try to adapt to how the conversation is evolving?

it's obvious you feel very strongly, and i'm always happy to hear a strong view, because i admire passion (just take a look at any gay-related posts and you'll see where i get passionate).

however, the working assumption that, because no one has responded to you, specifically, means that no one *can* respond to you is hugely false, and hugely arrogant.
 
pax said:
Yes, well, we have a door and you're welcome to use it.

Sorry, but I have a background in philosophy, and we were always mixing it up with each other on all kinds of issues. And you had to stay on point instead of disappearing for a while and then coming back with some lame personal attacks like "how's the view from up there?". That's just what I'm used to.

I guess that just makes people uncomfortable around here...
 
OneBadStay said:
financeguy -

See above. I tried more than once earlier in this thread to point out the fact that "anti-choice" is an inappropriate label for those of us who oppose abortion on moral grounds. It seems that some still weren't getting the memo, so I used the equally inappropriate term "pro-baby killer" to make the same point in a new way.

I am anti-abortion in the majority of cases, I also don't think "pro-baby killer" is an appropriate label even if used in an "ironic" sense.
 
Irvine511 said:

however, the working assumption...is hugely false, and hugely arrogant.

OK, I'll stick with arrogance, and you stick with intolerance.

I guess that's how we'll proceed here...
 
OneBadStay said:


Sorry, but I have a background in philosophy

I hate to break it to you, but that doesn't make you exactly special here. Many have backgrounds in philosophy and we discuss damn near anything. But people who come in and pitch hissy fits don't get listened to very often. Might be worth remembering if you choose to stay.
 
I sometimes wonder if people cruise the Internet looking for random debates on abortion to get involved in.
 
financeguy said:

I also don't think "pro-baby killer" is an appropriate label even if used in an "ironic" sense.

Then you just don't get what I'm saying. And to respect the ever-in-flux nature of this dynamic conversation, I will spend no more time on it.
 
OneBadStay said:


OK, I'll stick with arrogance, and you stick with intolerance.

I guess that's how we'll proceed here...


are you still under the impression that you've made some kind of impressive argument?

where's the intolerance of the anti-choice label? as i view the issue, it centers around whether or not abortion should be a legal procedure. i support the right of a woman to be able to choose whether or not she wants to have an abortion. i also know many people who would never have an abortion themselves, who would try to talk someone out of having an abortion, but still believe it should remain legal and that women should retain their right to choose. hence, once is pro- or anti- the right to choose the procedure. it's an accurate response to one who claims to be "pro-life" but, really, they're simply pro-birth, unless you're going to start arguing for universal health care, universal pre-natal care, comprehensive sex education, free birth control, guaranteed housing as well as access to quality counseling, day care, and even parenting classes.
 
Irvine511 said:

are you still under the impression that you've made some kind of impressive argument?

No, when did I say that?

I told you earlier that we don't prefer to be called "anti-choice." You essentially said, "Screw you, I'll call you what I want."

Sorry for calling that intolerance.
 
indra said:


I hate to break it to you, but that doesn't make you exactly special here. Many have backgrounds in philosophy and we discuss damn near anything. But people who come in and pitch hissy fits don't get listened to very often. Might be worth remembering if you choose to stay.

Does "you are the type of Christian who makes me want to vomit" qualify as a hissy fit, or is that just plain meanness?
 
Oh, duh, here I am having a chat about philosophy and not noticing that this thread has totally derailed into name-calling and bringing stuff up that happened a million years ago.

Sorry about that. :|

OneBadStay, if you want to reminisce about philosophy, my e-mail address is in my sig.
 
OneBadStay said:


No, when did I say that?

I told you earlier that we don't prefer to be called "anti-choice." You essentially said, "Screw you, I'll call you what I want."

Sorry for calling that intolerance.


wow. aren't you unpleasant?

firstly, you complained that you had shot down pro-choice people all the time, and that you were used to them not being able to respond to your deft arguments.

clearly, that's not the case.

as for anti-choice, what i did was offer you an explanation as to why i prefer to outline the issue as one centered around the idea of choice. i don't care if you object, you're free to do so, but don't tell me that all i offered you was a "shut up" argument when i just spent a paragraph detailing my position (as you seem to want). that's not at all intolerance -- in fact, i did exactly what you wanted: i engaged you in a debate, and you turn around and whine about people being intolerant.

where i went to college, we were evaluated on the quality of our arguments and our ability to respond to questions and critiques.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom