Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
#5,726
#5,726
glichtenwalter said:
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." :eek:lol:
Click to expand...

On Wikipedia: of course you can't use it as a citation for academic paper or anything like that. But that also doesn't mean that nothing on it can be accepted as a fact. Most teachers and professors will tell students that there's nothing wrong with using the citations from Wikipedia as a starting point for research (though citing a wiki article on a paper is a no no of course).

If a wiki article about crime rates has a large number of citations of statistics from the FBI, that article can be a good jumping off point in collecting the information necessary to form an opinion backed facts. If it's citing the huffington post, then not so much. How about reading it, checking its citations (or lack thereof) and actually making an argument about the validity that way instead of completely disregarding all information on an article because it's on Wikipedia?




As for the rest of what you said, I think it's probably true that our values are too different to agree.

But I also think (for those who don't believe in original sin, at least) there is a strong argument to be made that abortion just ensures a soul's chances of making it to heaven. I mean, if what you believe is true, then basically anybody born into a situation that would make it highly unlikely for them to become a Christian would be better off being aborted because it sends them straight up to heaven. Completely removes the chance of a mortal sin or nonbelief dooming them to an eternity of suffering. AND it happens before they can feel pain or know fear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,727
#5,727
Kristy* said:
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.
Click to expand...
It's accepted because that's when the nervous system has developed enough for the brain to process pain.


The problem with the morning after pill is that you've only got a 48 hour window and many don't realize they're pregnant for weeks. Sometimes birth control pills, condoms, diaphragms, etc can fail without users knowing until it's too late.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,728
#5,728
butchna said:
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:
Click to expand...
It was definitely a juicy meltdown. Great night of entertainment.

I wish I hadn't been on business and could have kicked back with a beer and watched it unfold.
 
#5,729
#5,729
Darth_Shiveman said:
On Wikipedia: of course you can't use it as a citation for academic paper or anything like that. But that also doesn't mean that nothing on it can be accepted as a fact. Most teachers and professors will tell students that there's nothing wrong with using the citations from Wikipedia as a starting point for research (though citing a wiki article on a paper is a no no of course).

If a wiki article about crime rates has a large number of citations of statistics from the FBI, that article can be a good jumping off point in collecting the information necessary to form an opinion backed facts. If it's citing the huffington post, then not so much. How about reading it, checking its citations (or lack thereof) and actually making an argument about the validity that way instead of completely disregarding all information on an article because it's on Wikipedia?




As for the rest of what you said, I think it's probably true that our values are too different to agree.

But I also think (for those who don't believe in original sin, at least) there is a strong argument to be made that abortion just ensures a soul's chances of making it to heaven. I mean, if what you believe is true, then basically anybody born into a situation that would make it highly unlikely for them to become a Christian would be better off being aborted because it sends them straight up to heaven. Completely removes the chance of a mortal sin or nonbelief dooming them to an eternity of suffering. AND it happens before they can feel pain or know fear.
Click to expand...

From my perspective, there are over 1 million additional murders that take place every year that aren't counted in the criminal statistics quoted from the FBI on Wikipedia. From my perspective, we accept the murder of over 1 million innocent children every year to avoid the possibility that they may grow up to be criminals and leeches on society. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a scientist that could have found the cure for cancer, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, or any number of diseases. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been an inventor that might have developed a new type of motor that runs more efficiently on cleaner fuel and creates less harmful exhausts. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a civil rights leader that spoke with such grace and eloquence that people could not help but unite together and move out of their distrust and racism. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a mom or a dad, a brother or a sister, a friend or a neighbor that lives on a normal street and lives a normal life. Did they deserve to die without ever having the opportunity to become what they could've become. Are we allowed to sentence them to death in order to reduce our crime statistics and save a few dollars on healthcare costs. If the argument is made that some of those aborted babies would have grown up to be criminals then the argument that some of them would have grown up to be wonderful productive people must be taken into account as well. You are willing to allow babies to be killed on the off chance that they might grow up to be a criminal. I just can't follow that argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#5,730
#5,730
glichtenwalter said:
From my perspective, there are over 1 million additional murders that take place every year that aren't counted in the criminal statistics quoted from the FBI on Wikipedia. From my perspective, we accept the murder of over 1 million innocent children every year to avoid the possibility that they may grow up to be criminals and leeches on society. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a scientist that could have found the cure for cancer, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, or any number of diseases. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been an inventor that might have developed a new type of motor that runs more efficiently on cleaner fuel and creates less harmful exhausts. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a civil rights leader that spoke with such grace and eloquence that people could not help but unite together and move out of their distrust and racism. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a mom or a dad, a brother or a sister, a friend or a neighbor that lives on a normal street and lives a normal life. Did they deserve to die without ever having the opportunity to become what they could've become. Are we allowed to sentence them to death in order to reduce our crime statistics and save a few dollars on healthcare costs. If the argument is made that some of those aborted babies would have grown up to be criminals then the argument that some of them would have grown up to be wonderful productive people must be taken into account as well. You are willing to allow babies to be killed on the off chance that they might grow up to be a criminal. I just can't follow that argument.
Click to expand...

:clap:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,731
#5,731
glichtenwalter said:
From my perspective, there are over 1 million additional murders that take place every year that aren't counted in the criminal statistics quoted from the FBI on Wikipedia. From my perspective, we accept the murder of over 1 million innocent children every year to avoid the possibility that they may grow up to be criminals and leeches on society. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a scientist that could have found the cure for cancer, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, or any number of diseases. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been an inventor that might have developed a new type of motor that runs more efficiently on cleaner fuel and creates less harmful exhausts. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a civil rights leader that spoke with such grace and eloquence that people could not help but unite together and move out of their distrust and racism. What about the possibility that somewhere in those millions of babies that have been aborted might have been a mom or a dad, a brother or a sister, a friend or a neighbor that lives on a normal street and lives a normal life. Did they deserve to die without ever having the opportunity to become what they could've become. Are we allowed to sentence them to death in order to reduce our crime statistics and save a few dollars on healthcare costs. If the argument is made that some of those aborted babies would have grown up to be criminals then the argument that some of them would have grown up to be wonderful productive people must be taken into account as well. You are willing to allow babies to be killed on the off chance that they might grow up to be a criminal. I just can't follow that argument.
Click to expand...

:huggy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,732
#5,732
Kristy* said:
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.
Click to expand...

Boom!..Also lol at idiots calling us hypocrites having cognitive dissonance. It is the ultimate hypocrisy to be the ones that supposedly care so much for the guilty, and unfortunate whose choices have led to their doom, and turn around and sentence millions of innocents to death because they ultimately are just..inconvenient. And God forbid anybody actually try to teach anyone that you can overcome your baser nature. There is almost no reason that anyone ever has an unwanted pregnancy if the don't do something stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,733
#5,733
I'm not going to get into an argument with someone that believes it is ok to kill an unborn child, so I am just going to throw this out there.

If you don't want a child, use some form of birth control before the conception, not after. Make your choice before, not after conception.

Make adoption more affordable, and give parents that are not able to conceive a chance to have a baby. This hits really close to my heart on this, because after 2 miscarriages, me and the wife were considering adoption, but the cost was crazy. However, luckily GOD made it clear to us to try 1 more time, and he has blessed us with a healthy baby 2 years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#5,735
#5,735
Darth_Shiveman said:
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.




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).
Click to expand...

The waiting list for adoption is massive, even with the 30k or so price tag. My sister had to wait 2 years and she had the cash in hand. Make it affordable to every family who can't have children naturally and a huge percentage of aborted babies would get adopted. Maybe not all, but a lot. Amd your statement about children from poverty being undesirable is flat out wrong. Where do you think almost every adopted baby comes from, rich families at the top of society?


The only reasoning I ever hear for pro choice is that it's a woman's property and she can destroy it if it's an inconvenience to her. Until you made it, I've never heard the financial drain in society argument.

Since when are drawing a breath and having a birth certificate and being a citizen the prerequisites for not being murdered? Bald eagle fetuses are protected, so there's precedent for valuing a life before it's 100% developed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,736
#5,736
jave36 said:
Bald eagle fetuses are protected, so there's precedent for valuing a life before it's 100% developed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, buts it's not very practical to value those lives up to 26 or 27 years of age when people are fully developed...

Also, no one light a match in here or you'll kill all the straw men.
 
#5,739
#5,739
delfonic said:
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.
Click to expand...

A fetus made no choices. Everyone above made their own choices. When are they held responsible? So I will pick and choose from that list: a foreign refugee and people who can't afford health care deserve help. The others deserve help but only if they're willing to help themselves. Every sentence above is a topic in itself and is much broader.
 
#5,741
#5,741
Question:

Someone posted this on Facebook and said it was racist and said something like at least now the sheets have come off 😳

I am legitimately confused at how this is racist. Can someone please help me? I know there are some African American posters on here. So maybe y'all can shed some light or perspective here? And I know In general many in that demographic are upset that Trump won (and if you know my history of posts on here I was not a Trump fan. I was both #neverTrump and #neverHillary. I wrote in my vote ) but I am failing to see the racism in this painting on The Rock at UT....


.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2812.jpg
    IMG_2812.jpg
    44.9 KB · Views: 4
Last edited:
#5,743
#5,743
volssam said:
Question:

Someone posted this on Facebook and said it was racist and said something like at least now the sheets have come off 😳

I am legitimately confused at how this is racist. Can someone please help me? I know there are some African American posters on here. And I know In general many in that demographic are upset that Trump won (and if you know my history of posts on here I was not a Trump fan. I was both #neverTrump and #neverHillary. I wrote in my vote ) but I am failing to see the racism in this painting on The Rock at UT....


.
Click to expand...

Prolly the #Nosafespace
 
#5,744
#5,744
bignewt said:
maybe its the hashtag?
Click to expand...

butchna said:
Prolly the #Nosafespace
Click to expand...


Isnt that just a push back against political correctness and censorship ?

I mean isn't the whole safe space concept just in general people about getting offended when people disagree with them. Not racism.

Unless I am not understanding. Which is possible I guess. I will be 33 in less than two weeks. Maybe I'm out of touch
 
Last edited:
#5,745
#5,745
Oh and someone posted in the comment section this "peaceful update" as they called it. What makes it peaceful? Because he agrees with it?


.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2813.jpg
    IMG_2813.jpg
    90.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,747
#5,747
Again I'm not dispelling the fact that many African Americans are upset and even maybe fearful due to the results. But the rock painting to me looked like Trump supporters celebrating his victory.

If it's racist I apologize for bringing it up. Racism is anti-Christian. But I was legitimately confused.
 
#5,748
#5,748
volssam said:
Isnt that just a push back against political correctness and censorship ?

I mean isn't the whole safe space concept just in general people about getting offended when people disagree with them. Not racism.

Unless I am not understanding. Which is possible I guess. I will be 33 in less than two weeks. Maybe I'm out of touch
Click to expand...

You can always go to the Urban Dictionary:

Urban Dictionary: safe space
 
#5,749
#5,749
I hope Trump is a great president and proves me wrong. If so I hope I can vote for him in 2020.

If his list of what he plans for his first 100 days is legit and comes to fruition, I will probably be sold and very impressed.

I am skeptically optimistic.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top