Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

[Darth_Shiveman]

Do tell. What does being fiscally conservative have to with abortion one way or the other?

LOL I was wondering the same thing.

Allowing easy access to abortion (especially for the poor) is cheaper for society ultimately for a number of reasons. When children are born into situations where families (or, more likely, single parents) aren't prepared to or fully capable of raising a child, then society often ends up footing the bill in one way or another.


Want to end entitlements? Give the poor easy methods to stop perpuating their plight.

Want to keep up the trend of dropping crime rates we've seen over the past 3-4 decades? Access to abortion has a strong correlation to decreasing crime rates.


There's nothing more hypocritial than the large numbers of people we see these days who call themselves fiscal conservatives while also being pro-life and in favor of the death penalty. It's cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

 

[BaldBiker]

Why does everyone hide behind the "Voting Against Hillary" line? I voted FOR Donald Trump.

<---- So did this guy.

We may not know what tomorrow brings with Trump as President, but I find that a whole lot more comforting than knowing exactly what tomorrow would bring with Clinton.

I didn't vote against Hilary, I voted for the man that was nothing like her.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Only thing I could come up with is society having to take care of a bunch of unwanted babies.

Babies as well as the families that can't afford them, the teenagers they become, and criminals we ultimately pay fiscal and societal costs for because they were born into a terrible situation because their mother had few other choices.

Why waste so much money to force people to have kids so likely to end up wasting away in a cell (costing me even more money)? Let em do what they want and have a better chance to become taxpayers than to doom them into perpetuating the viscious cycle of poverty.

 

[jave36]

Allowing easy access to abortion (especially for the poor) is cheaper for society ultimately for a number of reasons. When children are born into situations where families (or, more likely, single parents) aren't prepared to or fully capable of raising a child, then society often ends up footing the bill in one way or another.


Want to end entitlements? Give the poor easy methods to stop perpuating their plight.

Want to keep up the trend of dropping crime rates we've seen over the past 3-4 decades? Access to abortion has a strong correlation to decreasing crime rates.


There's nothing more hypocritial than the large numbers of people we see these days who call themselves fiscal conservatives while also being pro-life and in favor of the death penalty. It's cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

Not charging 30k for adoption would fix that problem overnight. The government withholds Medicaid for the mom and baby if the child is going to be adopted, so thousands of families who want to adopt can't. It's an easy problem to solve, and it's a fallacy anyway, because 99% of pro choice people don't even consider the financial argument you made as a reason for their being pro choice.

And on top of all that, with your logic, we should execute all humans who are a financial drain. Moms should be able to abort their 2 year olds. The whole pro life movement is based on the idea that an unborn baby deserves to be protected and not murdered. Money isn't any part of that, just like a mom killing her 2 year old can't say "I couldn't afford him and he'd have ended up in a cell anyway."

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Not charging 30k for adoption would fix that problem overnight. The government withholds Medicaid for the mom and baby if the child is going to be adopted, so thousands of families who want to adopt can't. It's an easy problem to solve, and it's a fallacy anyway, because 99% of pro choice people don't even consider the financial argument you made as a reason for their being pro choice.

That's assuming that there will always be people there to adopt the children, which isn't the case. Fact is, children coming from the lowest rungs of society aren't usually desireable for adoption anyway.


Also, what is your reasoning for that logic being a fallacy "because 99% of pro-choice people don't consider that argument?" What other pro choice people use as their reasoning to be pro choice has nothing to do with whether this reasoning holds weight. You're assertion and the reason you gave for it are completely unrelated.

And on top of all that, with your logic, we should execute all humans who are a financial drain. Moms should be able to abort their 2 year olds. The whole pro life movement is based on the idea that an unborn baby deserves to be protected and not murdered. Money isn't any part of that, just like a mom killing her 2 year old can't say "I couldn't afford him and he'd have ended up in a cell anyway."

That's a false equivalency though. A two year old and a fetus are different. One has a birth certificate and is a citizen of of the US (or some other country). The other has never drawn breath.

The line admittedly becomes less clear the closer you get to nine months, so there should definitely be some clear limit there (probably around the 20-24 week range which is generally accepted as the limit on when abortions should be allowed to be performed unless there is a high likelihood of some medical complications taking the mother's life).

 

[Glitch]

Allowing easy access to abortion (especially for the poor) is cheaper for society ultimately for a number of reasons. When children are born into situations where families (or, more likely, single parents) aren't prepared to or fully capable of raising a child, then society often ends up footing the bill in one way or another.


Want to end entitlements? Give the poor easy methods to stop perpuating their plight.

Want to keep up the trend of dropping crime rates we've seen over the past 3-4 decades? Access to abortion has a strong correlation to decreasing crime rates.


There's nothing more hypocritial than the large numbers of people we see these days who call themselves fiscal conservatives while also being pro-life and in favor of the death penalty. It's cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

Abortion has been legal since 1973. It hasn't fixed the problem. Making people accountable for their own actions is the only way to fix the problems of our society. Stop letting people skirt their responsibilities or push the consequences of their actions off on others. Cut off the free cheese for people who can physically earn their own cheese! I'm tired of buying their cheese!

 

[delfonic]

Criminals convicted of a heinous crime by a jury of their peers in what has been proven to be a flawed judicial system (though, admittedly it's the best one we've got) many times over? Kill them.

A person suffering from drug addiction? Let their addiction kill them.

A homeless person? Let them freeze on the street.

A person who can't afford healthcare? Let them die, if they want medical care they should get a job that allows them to access affordable health coverage.

A refugee from a foreign war? Let them die, they might be terrorists.

A black kid growing up on the south side of Chicago? Let them shoot each other.

A fetus? This is a human life and we need to do everything we can to protect it, I'm pro-life.

Life apparently is something that only happens between conception and the age at which people are capable of doing something disappointing.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Abortion has been legal since 1973. It hasn't fixed the problem. Making people accountable for their own actions is the only way to fix the problems of our society.

Who said abortion alone would fix the problems? Nobody. But it can be a factor that helps.

Crime rates have steadily decreased since Roe vs. Wade. That's undeniable. It would be ignorant to say abortion is the reason, but it is a factor that has contributed. Other countries have seen the same correlation happen.

Stop letting people skirt their responsibilities or push the consequences of their actions off on others.

I agree. Let them deal with the consequences personally. Give them the choice to avoid a bad situation so they can't push off the costs of that little runt on you and me!

Cut off the free cheese for people who can physically earn their own cheese! I'm tired of buying their cheese!

If you want to stop paying for other people's cheese, you should be in favor of giving them as many options as possible to ensure they need less cheese!

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Criminals convicted of a heinous crime by a jury of their peers in what has been proven to be a flawed judicial system (though, admittedly it's the best one we've got) many times over? Kill them.

A person suffering from drug addiction? Let their addiction kill them.

A homeless person? Let them freeze on the street.

A person who can't afford healthcare? Let them die, if they want medical care they should get a job that allows them to access affordable health coverage.

A refugee from a foreign war? Let them die, they might be terrorists.

A black kid growing up on the south side of Chicago? Let them shoot each other.

A fetus? This is a human life and we need to do everything we can to protect it, I'm pro-life.

Life apparently is something that only happens between conception and the age at which people are capable of doing something disappointing.

This is the hypocrisy that bothers me. At least be consistent. Either life is sacred or it's not.


But for some reason you don't see many people who are pro choice and in favor of the death penalty or pro life and against it.

 

[JacketVol]

Death penalty for a super horrible crime is something your own actions caused. The baby did nothing except be conceived when you were doing it. It is not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[jjay2518]

Criminals convicted of a heinous crime by a jury of their peers in what has been proven to be a flawed judicial system (though, admittedly it's the best one we've got) many times over? Kill them.

A person suffering from drug addiction? Let their addiction kill them.

A homeless person? Let them freeze on the street.

A person who can't afford healthcare? Let them die, if they want medical care they should get a job that allows them to access affordable health coverage.

A refugee from a foreign war? Let them die, they might be terrorists.

A black kid growing up on the south side of Chicago? Let them shoot each other.

A fetus? This is a human life and we need to do everything we can to protect it, I'm pro-life.

Life apparently is something that only happens between conception and the age at which people are capable of doing something disappointing.

Nailed it

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Death penalty for a super horrible crime is something your own actions caused. The baby did nothing except be conceived when you were doing it. It is not an apples to apples comoarison.

Also not apples to apples since one can't feel pain or fear.

 

[delfonic]

Death penalty for a super horrible crime is something your own actions caused. The baby did nothing except be conceived when you were doing it. It is not an apples to apples comoarison.

Maybe... if you're guilty. If you can prove to me that everyone sitting on death row is undoubtedly guilty then we can start the discussion. There are studies that have been performed that suggest that based on the rate of death penalty convictions that have been overturned that as many as 4% of the inmates that are sitting on death row are innocent.

People sitting on death row have a significantly higher cost of incarceration than most who are spending their lives in prison. Also, the cost of all the various appeals is significantly greater to the state than the cost of caring for a prisoner for the span of their natural life.

Finally, I've not seen any really reputable peer-reviewed study stating that the death penalty deters people from committing heinous acts. I've seen a bunch of empirical data that proves the opposite. I personally am from the school of thought that death penalty or the absolution of the death penalty has no effect on violent crime. The human mind doesn't have the ability to weigh the risk of being caught, charged, convicted, sentenced, facing multiple appeals, and then being put to death some decades later much the same way that my 3 year old daughter can't calculate risk and reward when I tell her that if she eats her vegetables I'll buy her a car when she turns 16.

The only reason to keep the death penalty around is vengeance. Admittedly, I'm not the Bible scholar that I should be. However, I think the quote below from the movie Kingpin works well in this context:

Roy Munson: Brother Thomas, you know what it says in the bible about not forgiving people, right?

Brother Thomas: Why don't you tell us all what it says Brother Hezekiah?

Roy Munson: It's against it.

 

[Catbone]

Let the states decide imo

 

[Glitch]

Who said abortion alone would fix the problems? Nobody. But it can be a factor that helps.

Crime rates have steadily decreased since Roe vs. Wade. (Please prove this. If you make statements like this you should at least provide legitimate documentation.) That's undeniable. It would be ignorant to say abortion is the reason, but it is a factor that has contributed. Other countries have seen the same correlation happen.


I agree. Let them deal with the consequences personally. Give them the choice to avoid a bad situation so they can't push off the costs of that little runt on you and me! I don't believe in killing children to avoid financial responsibilities. Make the parents deal with the financial responsibilities though. If my kids had zero consequences for their actions, they would do whatever they wanted. As it is, they do have consequences and are generally well behaved. Society has allowed this behavior by giving people a way to avoid the consequences by murdering an unborn child. Make people deal with the consequences of their actions.)




If you want to stop paying for other people's cheese, you should be in favor of giving them as many options as possible to ensure they need less cheese!

Also not apples to apples since one can't feel pain or fear.

How do you know an unborn child can't feel pain or fear? Your arguments are based on a lot of assumptions.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

How do you know an unborn child can't feel pain or fear? Your arguments are based on a lot of assumptions.

Crime rates:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

I was wrong about them declining since Roe vs Wade, but they have steadily declined since 1980 (within the time that people first legally aborted fetuses would have become adults).


Fetuses feeling pain:

There is a current scientific consensus that fetuses don't have nervous systems developed well enough to feel pin until the third trimester.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_perception


https://www.factcheck.org/2015/05/does-a-fetus-feel-pain-at-20-weeks/


Neither of those two arguments are based on assumptions. They're based on undeniable facts.



As for making parents who get an unwanted pregnancy deal with financial consequences, I agree. Make them pay for an abortion (before the 3rd trimester) and then don't force any costs on the rest of us.

Expecting poor people to have limited family planning options and leech less off of society isn't realistic. Expecting unwanted pregnancies not to happen and people to exercise self control isn't either. You're not going to change human nature. Creating a framework that expects people to act against their own nature is setting it up to fail.

 

[Glitch]

Crime rates:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

I was wrong about them declining since Roe vs Wade, but they have steadily declined since 1980 (within the time that people first legally aborted fetuses would have become adults).


Fetuses feeling pain:

There is a current scientific consensus that fetuses don't have nervous systems developed well enough to feel pin until the third trimester.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_perception


https://www.factcheck.org/2015/05/does-a-fetus-feel-pain-at-20-weeks/


Neither of those two arguments are based on assumptions. They're based on undeniable facts.



As for making parents who get an unwanted pregnancy deal with financial consequences, I agree. Make them pay for an abortion (before the 3rd trimester) and then don't force any costs on the rest of us.

Expecting poor people to have limited family planning options and leech less off of society isn't realistic. Expecting unwanted pregnancies not to happen and people to exercise self control isn't either. You're not going to change human nature. Creating a framework that expects people to act against their own nature is setting it up to fail.

Lol at using Wikipedia as a source. I will accept that a baby can't feel pain until after 20 weeks. That doesn't make them less alive.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Lol at using Wikipedia as a source. I will accept that a baby can't feel pain until after 20 weeks. That doesn't make them less alive.

Neither of those things are debatable assertions, dude. Just because Wikipedia says Nashville is the capital of Tennessee doesn't make it any less true.

Maybe try Freakonomics if you can't believe that crime rates have steadily declined since 1980. Or google it. There's not any contention about the fact that they've trended down.


And not feeling pain may not make them less alive, but it sure doesn't make them more alive either. Still not the same as an actual person.

 

[Glitch]

Neither of those things are debatable assertions, dude. Just because Wikipedia says Nashville is the capital of Tennessee doesn't make it any less true.

Maybe try Freakonomics if you can't believe that crime rates have steadily declined since 1980. Or google it. There's not any contention about the fact that they've trended down.


And not feeling pain may not make them less alive, but it sure doesn't make them more alive either. Still not the same as an actual person.

We are not gonna agree on anything except that we love the Vols. I think that is obvious at this point. We are coming at the issue from two very different points of view. My view point, which you completely dismiss, is one of faith. I read what was written in the bible and try to live my life by those teachings. I fail sometimes, as all humans will, but I believe that life begins at the moment of conception. It is because I believe this that I cannot condone or support abortion for any reason. You look at the world from a secular point of view and see additional mouths to feed and so abortion then becomes a cost benefit analysis situation for you. It makes good financial sense to reduce the number of children being born.

Liberals will argue tooth and nail for abortion. They will argue that an unborn baby isn't actually alive until it is born. (Even when they feel a baby kick in it's mother's womb). Then, liberals will turn around and fight tooth and nail to same some one-celled amoeba because we have to protect the environment. Their argument is flawed on every level.

Your argument makes sense from your secular point of view. I don't know if you have children, but if you do I don't know how you can ever be so crass about taking the lives of unborn children.

P.S. No courtroom or classroom in America would take Wikipedia as a source for an argument regardless of whether the information were correct or not. I could go on there right now and change those entries to fit any argument I like. "Your honor. This excerpt from Wikipedia clearly shows that my client was playing tag with the unicorns in fantasy land at the time of the murder. In light of this new evidence, I request that all charges against my client be dropped." lol:

 

[butchna]

Noted the "everyone hiding behind the 'I voted against Hillary not for Donald' well I voted for Trump". Good for you! Our votes went into the same pot, and most likely counted exactly the same! If the Democrats had trotted out almost anybody else, I prolly would have skipped this one altogether. As is, I was scared of what Hillary could do without someone higher up shooting it down. Didn't vote for her husband either, but in retrospect he did an overall good job. I smell her influence in the Somalia "Black Hawk Down" disaster, since the Benghazi disaster had the same markers...and that was on her! Of course I hope my vote went to someone who will represent as one of our great leaders...just didn't vote with that confidence in my back pocket.

 

[Glitch]

Noted the "everyone hiding behind the 'I voted against Hillary not for Donald' well I voted for Trump". Good for you! Our votes went into the same pot, and most likely counted exactly the same! If the Democrats had trotted out almost anybody else, I prolly would have skipped this one altogether. As is, I was scared of what Hillary could do without someone higher up shooting it down. Didn't vote for her husband either, but in retrospect he did an overall good job. I smell her influence in the Somalia "Black Hawk Down" disaster, since the Benghazi disaster had the same markers...and that was on her! Of course I hope my vote went to someone who will represent as one of our great leaders...just didn't vote with that confidence in my back pocket.

I also voted for Trump more in a protest vote against Hillary. It is funny, to me, to see the protests against Trump in the streets of major cities around the country. They are pitching little fits because they don't like the outcome. They say Trump scares them. Well Hillary as president scared me but if she had won I would go to work the next day and wait until the next opportunity to boot her out of office. Neither candidate excited me but I like Trumps economic plan and his plan to reduce the size and role of the federal government. Hillary would have expanded government and reached further and further into our pockets.

 

[bignewt]

I'm just glad the stock market didn't crash!

 

[butchna]

I'm just glad the stock market didn't crash!

So is my wife. She was very upset and predicted all kinds of apocalyptic doom.

 

[Kristy*]

That's a false equivalency though. A two year old and a fetus are different. One has a birth certificate and is a citizen of of the US (or some other country). The other has never drawn breath.

The line admittedly becomes less clear the closer you get to nine months, so there should definitely be some clear limit there (probably around the 20-24 week range which is generally accepted as the limit on when abortions should be allowed to be performed unless there is a high likelihood of some medical complications taking the mother's life).

The 20 to 24 week mark is generally accepted because that's when fetuses are viable. But the heart starts beating from nearly the beginning.

There is such thing as the Morning After Pill, which prevents a pregnancy from happening. Make those available to all people at an affordable cost. But people need to take more responsibility for their actions.

 

[butchna]

I also voted for Trump more in a protest vote against Hillary. It is funny, to me, to see the protests against Trump in the streets of major cities around the country. They are pitching little fits because they don't like the outcome. They say Trump scares them. Well Hillary as president scared me but if she had won I would go to work the next day and wait until the next opportunity to boot her out of office. Neither candidate excited me but I like Trumps economic plan and his plan to reduce the size and role of the federal government. Hillary would have expanded government and reached further and further into our pockets.

The smugness and expectation of some sort of coronation, being ripped away from the hordes and media talking heads was delicious! Worth the price of admission! Can only imagine what socialist utopian nightmare she had planned. Bad as Obama was, this was something she had claimed as her birthright LONG AGO! We avoided both barrels IMO. That being said, I would have approached it like her husband's and Obama's terms and hoped I was wrong. Definitely wouldn't have protested or copied/pasted stories of thugs wearing Hillary shirts robbing and assaulting citizens. :lol: