Immigration and our Borders

[Guest]

@pumpf said:

@SFVikeFan said:

@pumpf said:
I'm not really going to be lectured (falsely, in this case, not that that has ever mattered to you) by someone who supports the murder of children- both born and preborn.  Nor, am I going to listen to someone spouting off about compassion when he is incapable of defending his belief that parents should have the right to kill their child if it has Down Syndrome.  Maybe when purposefully killing human beings in the name of convenience... is a greater moral problem for him than stopping people from crossing the border illegally... I'll listen to something he has to say.  It'll be a nonsensical copy-and-paste job from some biased "fact check" website... but I'll at least respect his effort.  But not while he's supporting a the modern-day equivalent of slavery and the holocaust. 

This is why it's pointless to have any discussion with you.

You're not trying to have a discussion with me.  If you were, you'd answer the one question that I've been asking you all along.  Until you do that- no: we're not having a discussion.  It's just you preaching your own perverted "gospel".

Oh the irony... preaching from your moral high ground that treating children like animals is okay, because you consider a 48 hr old clump of cells as a person. 

I've answered your question.  I defend a woman's right to choose.   You think it's okay a 12 yr old should have her father's incest baby, that a woman should be forced to bear the child of her rapist.  There's nothing to discuss on the issue as you only can acceot one outcome regardless of the circumstances.  Basically you want everyone to accept your version of Christian Sharia law and force your religious beliefs on women.

And just like Hillary's emails with conservatives, you can't seem to get over it and move on to discuss anything else.

Funny if you were Muslim and trying to force your religious views on all Americans conservatives would lose their minds ... but nobody does irony in America better than the religious right. 

[Guest]

@SFVikeFan said:

@pumpf said:

You're not trying to have a discussion with me.  If you were, you'd answer the one question that I've been asking you all along.  Until you do that- no: we're not having a discussion.  It's just you preaching your own perverted "gospel".

Oh the irony... preaching from your moral high ground that treating children like animals is okay, because you consider a 48 hr old clump of cells as a person. 

I've answered your question.  I defend a woman's right to choose.   You think it's okay a 12 yr old should have her father's incest baby, that a woman should be forced to bear the child of her rapist.  There's nothing to discuss on the issue as you only can acceot one outcome regardless of the circumstances.  Basically you want everyone to accept your version of Christian Sharia law and force your religious beliefs on women.

And just like Hillary's emails with conservatives, you can't seem to get over it and move on to discuss anything else.

Funny if you were Muslim and trying to force your religious views on all Americans conservatives would lose their minds ... but nobody does irony in America better than the religious right. 

Just so we're clear (since you said you answered my question): you are OK with people with Down Syndrome being aborted- simply because they have Down Syndrome?  If that's your position, then we're going to have to go back to the beginning and ask the original question: How, then, can you say you support the Special Olympics?

As for the rest of your "discussion":  There's a difference between being OK with rape and incest... and being OK with allowing a pregnancy to go to full term.  If you knew anything about working with rape victims, you'd know why your position on this issue is actually anti-woman.  But you're as closed- minded as they come, so I'm not going to bother trying to pry it open with facts.

As for "my version of Sharia law", you do know that there are many atheists who are pro-life.  And do you know why?  It's obviously not because some god told them what to believe.  It's because even a 5-year old can recognize human life.  You talk about a 48 hour old lump of cells.  Fine... but it doesn't take long beyond that for the baby to have a heart beat, brain waves and be able to sense pain.  Since you seem fixated on the "clump of cells" (which is a logical fallacy for another day), it would SEEM that you'd support putting some kind of restrictions on abortion when it moves beyond the "lump of cells" stage (which- in reality- none of us do; that's all we are now: a lump of cells).  But you don't, do you?  So, why not just be honest and say that it's not about the child in the womb; it's about the woman who doesn't want a baby?

And, by the way, I don't think I've mentioned my "beliefs" once in any of these threads.  A child in the womb is as alive and is an individual human life, just like  you or me.  That's not (just) God talking; that's science.  But liberals aren't really into "science"; they are the new and improved Inquisition.

[Guest]

I'm open to a post term 75th Trimester abortion.  If we're going to talk about this seriously we need to consider a parents rights. 

[Guest]

Why are you guys talking about abortion in a thread about immigration?


We get it.  It’s a
hard subject.  You’ve got two competing
people’s rights:  the mom and the
babies.  3 if you include the dad.  Furthermore you don’t know when the baby
switches from a bunch of cells to a conscious being.  We’ll probably never come to agreement on it.


But if you’re going to use abortion as the reason not to have
rational discussions on other issues, you’re just being argumentative.