What party am I?

[Jon Miller]

uh, ok

why not outlawing abortions in the 2nd and 3rd semesters then?

this is my problem with prochoicers... they want no laws constraining abortions.. but their arguments are all based upon really early abortions..

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

you and Che (other person who thinks similiarly) are ghoulish

Are you anti-war in every way? Anti-death penalty?

you are ****in dense..

it is very different to say that the issue is pragmatic, then to say that someone who has killed many and would kill more should be put to death, or that that a war should not be fought to save innocents

now the only recent war I have been deffinitely for was WW2 (and there are still many problems with it)

and I would limit the death penalty more then say Texas, and would be fine if it was removed as the law (although I am also fine with it existing for some cases)

but if you can't see the difference between the positions

then you are stupid

JM

[Mr. Harley]

Uh John - third trimester abortions are illegal in most states, with the exception of the health of the mother. In fact almost every anti-abortion law that was overturned in the last decade by SCOTUS did not contain that provison. Which leads one to believe that all Republican legislators pushing those laws are morons (which I do not believe) or that instead it was more important to keep their base galvanized. Think about it. Rather than protect unborn children - their terminology - by passing those laws further restricting third and some late second trimester abortions, they passed laws knowing they would fail.

Now that is truly abhorrent. If they believe their positon, then they are monsters, condemning children to death so they can galvanize their base. Making an example of those children. Or, if they are cynical and don't believe that abortion is murder, and are just using the Christian right as political tools - enough said. And our right wing posters (which I do not include you in, I think you are a well meaning person with deep convictions who I disagree with at times) constantly point to the moral corrupton of the Democrats. :vomit:

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
you are ****in dense..

it is very different to say that the issue is pragmatic, then to say that someone who has killed many and would kill more should be put to death, or that that a war should not be fought to save innocents

now the only recent war I have been deffinitely for was WW2 (and there are still many problems with it)

and I would limit the death penalty more then say Texas, and would be fine if it was removed as the law (although I am also fine with it existing for some cases)

but if you can't see the difference between the positions

then you are stupid

JM

AH, look at the reaction. It appears I've hit a nerve. You can try to make all the distinctions you want, but even being for WW2, you've come up with a utilitarian outlook on death. Some should die (soldiers) so more can live (or live well, depending). So if you are utilitarian on death, can you really criticize others for also being utilitarian on death? I mean you may say that they are wrong on what the costs/benefits are, but since you are a utilitarian on death calling someone the same thing derisively is highly hypocritical on your part.

In other words, PWNED!

[Jon Miller]

no idiot

I am not utilitarian on death

war to save the lives of innocents by volunteers is something different... (Wasn't WW2 in the US, but was for some perhaps..?)

war for defense by members of the state in question is something different (Perhaps was not WW2)

I am not going on a utilitarian outlook on death

there is nothing in my statement where I said that material benefits outweighed the forced expediture of lives of people

so learn to read, or quit discussing things on apolyton

I use to have a more utilitarian view, I have changed my mind (at least for right now)

and of course you hit a nerve, you are willing to kill people (innocent people) to assist the well beings of others

might as well start the organ factories now...

****ing ghoul

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Mr. Harley
Uh John - third trimester abortions are illegal in most states, with the exception of the health of the mother. In fact almost every anti-abortion law that was overturned in the last decade by SCOTUS did not contain that provison. Which leads one to believe that all Republican legislators pushing those laws are morons (which I do not believe) or that instead it was more important to keep their base galvanized. Think about it. Rather than protect unborn children - their terminology - by passing those laws further restricting third and some late second trimester abortions, they passed laws knowing they would fail.

Now that is truly abhorrent. If they believe their positon, then they are monsters, condemning children to death so they can galvanize their base. Making an example of those children. Or, if they are cynical and don't believe that abortion is murder, and are just using the Christian right as political tools - enough said. And our right wing posters (which I do not include you in, I think you are a well meaning person with deep convictions who I disagree with at times) constantly point to the moral corrupton of the Democrats. :vomit:

oh, I agree that the Republicans are idiots

note that I no longer support them in the slightess (while I use to back when I thought they might do something good on this front)

and I made statements to that affect earlier in the thread (in fact said that the republicans were just using abortion to get votes from the right..)

I am for the most part one of the more left wing posters on this site, except for my positions on abortion...

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


AH, look at the reaction. It appears I've hit a nerve. You can try to make all the distinctions you want, but even being for WW2, you've come up with a utilitarian outlook on death. Some should die (soldiers) so more can live (or live well, depending). So if you are utilitarian on death, can you really criticize others for also being utilitarian on death? I mean you may say that they are wrong on what the costs/benefits are, but since you are a utilitarian on death calling someone the same thing derisively is highly hypocritical on your part.

In other words, PWNED!

no

in other words, you are a jackass

JM

[Jon Miller]

note

I consider those that don't think the baby is a human to be misinformed

it is only those who are in favor of killing people to make the lives more confortable for others that I have been attacking...

Jon Miller

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
no idiot

I am not utilitarian on death

war to save the lives of innocents by volunteers is something different... (Wasn't WW2 in the US, but was for some perhaps..?)

war for defense by members of the state in question is something different (Perhaps was not WW2)

I am not going on a utilitarian outlook on death

there is nothing in my statement where I said that material benefits outweighed the forced expediture of lives of people

so learn to read, or quit discussing things on apolyton

I use to have a more utilitarian view, I have changed my mind (at least for right now)

and of course you hit a nerve, you are willing to kill people (innocent people) to assist the well beings of others

might as well start the organ factories now...

****ing ghoul

Jon Miller

This is like shooting fish in a barrel. You SAID WW2 was a justified war. It was to save the lives of innocents. Aren't people going to die in that war? Even if they are a part of a volunteer army? Aren't you sacrificing some (even if you don't know who they are) so that the innocents won't be slaughtered anymore (even if the innocents are less than the men you may lose)?

And of course I am willing to see people die to assist the well being of others... I supported NATO's war in Kosovo.

The anger is amusing though. It seems I've brought up something you don't want to admit. You are as utilitarian about human life as the rest of us, you just try to rationalize it away (unsuccessfully).

[Jon Miller]

ok

where did I ever say anything about people volunteerly laying down their lives.. for anything?

as I said, learn to read

you jackass

and yes, I am angry, I am not a hypocrite and I hate to be called one

JM
(the right to lay down your life, for what you beleive in, is as important as most any other right)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
ok

where did I ever say anything about people volunteerly laying down their lives.. for anything?

as I said, learn to read

you jackass

and yes, I am angry, I am not a hypocrite and I hate to be called one

JM
(the right to lay down your life, for what you beleive in, is as important as most any other right)

You justified WW2. Maybe you should learn to read. And you most definitely are a hypocrite and, may I add, I love to see you squirm like this.

When Ben is challenged, he keeps his cool, because he knows his beliefs. You are all agitated, I believe because I've shown you things about yourself that you don't want to see. It's ok, you can admit it .

[Jon Miller]

I get all agitated because you call me a hypocrite, which I am not

WW2 was claimed to be a better war (and note, I said I had some problems with it..)

because
it was to save the lives of innocents
it was for defense (some disbute this)

it is part of the contract, between government and citizens, that the government can request the citizens to die for the country in the countries defense...

so while yes, I am not a bid fan of draft, it is ok in some circumstances (immigrate to a different country, or change the law in the one you are in, if you don't agree to that contract)

also, americans volunteered for ~2 years of the war...

so yes, learn to read

and you are not only a ghoul, you personally, are in *******

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


You justified WW2. Maybe you should learn to read. And you most definitely are a hypocrite and, may I add, I love to see you squirm like this.

When Ben is challenged, he keeps his cool, because he knows his beliefs. You are all agitated, I believe because I've shown you things about yourself that you don't want to see. It's ok, you can admit it .

and your post doesn't even make sense after mine..

I said that I was in favor of allowing people the choice of laying down their lives in favor of something...

and you write this bunch of crap

why dont' use post a response to the posts I write, instead of attacking me from left field?

Jon Miller

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I get all agitated because you call me a hypocrite, which I am not

WW2 was claimed to be a better war (and note, I said I had some problems with it..)

because
it was to save the lives of innocents
it was for defense (some disbute this)

it is part of the contract, between government and citizens, that the government can request the citizens to die for the country in the countries defense...

so while yes, I am not a bid fan of draft, it is ok in some circumstances (immigrate to a different country, or change the law in the one you are in, if you don't agree to that contract)

also, americans volunteered for ~2 years of the war...

so yes, learn to read

and you are not only a ghoul, you personally, are in *******

Jon Miller

Guess what, Jon, YOU ARE A UTILITARIAN WITH HUMAN LIFE! You are "ok in some circumstances" with the draft! You said WW2 was ok because it was to save the lives of innocents.

I don't know how you can't see it. Oh, I know, you've blinded yourself. I mean you say it is ok (even if you have problems, yadda, yadda, whatever) because it was to save the lives of innocents, but you are sacrificing soliders on the alter of saving innocents. And while some Americans volunteered, most came because of the draft, which you said was ok because it is part of the social contract.

Even with defense, you said it was in the social contract, and thus when threatened, the country should be allowed to draft individuals, even though who may believe the country wouldn't be worse off with the other guys in charge. Sacrifcing them on the alter of governmental soveriegnty.

You've made a cost/benefit decision. X deaths are ok because of Y. Y being saving innocents from dying or defending the homeland.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[Imran Siddiqui]

I said that I was in favor of allowing people the choice of laying down their lives in favor of something...

WW2 had the draft as well for every in country involved.