xj0hnx
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2007
- 9,262
- 3
- 76
Yeah I guess it makes sense tards are this easily entertained.
Don't get too down on yourself little guy, you couldn't be that easily entertained.
Yeah I guess it makes sense tards are this easily entertained.
Strange how pro-life people are also pro-death penalty. And how after the child is born want to penalize the parents for improper care but give no support for proper care. But then you're nuts too.
This is brought up over and over again by lefties..."XXX is for small government but he wants abortion to be illegal !"
See if you can follow this logic...
Some people believe in small government in our lives but they still want murder to be illegal.
Some of those same people consider abortion to be an act of murder, because it is depriving the fetus of life. The same way you can get charged for 2 murders when you kill a pregnant woman.
You may not agree with this but can the resident lefties at least follow this logic? Its not at all hypocritical to want limited government but still want abortion to be illegal.
This is what gets me about pro-lifers. They usually bitch about the cost of welfare, yet they want more mouths to feed on welfare by denying abortions. Once the child is born, they want to forget it exists and not support it. But some will literally kill to see that they're born.
His foreign policy views are, in my view, pretty nutty, but in other respects I think he talks sense. Foreign policy is, however, a big deal, since national defense is arguably the President's most important role, and I wouldn't vote for someone with such a detached view of the projection of American military power.
We don't need a foreign-minded president right now. We've had that for the last 12 years and it hasn't done us any damn good.
We need a president that focuses on fixing our own shit and lets the rest of the world fix their own shit. We can't fix our shit while at the same time fix everyone else's shit. We don't have the resources.
We need a foreign policy of non-interventionism for a few years while we right our ship. If, after that time, we decide that some foreign country needs our aid, then we can decide whether or not it benefits us to give it. Pouring billions of dollars per year in "foreign aid" to Israel and other countries doesn't seem like a particularly brilliant idea when we are running a massive, massive deficite and most of our domestic programs are severely underfunded.
This is what gets me about pro-lifers. They usually bitch about the cost of welfare, yet they want more mouths to feed on welfare by denying abortions. Once the child is born, they want to forget it exists and not support it. But some will literally kill to see that they're born.
exactly. We don't even properly extort the countries we are helping. We should be getting oil rights up the wazzooo for the work we have done liberating the middle east. If we wanna play global police we need to start getting paid, then they(whomever we are helping) can decide if they really want our help.
stability in the middle east is directly benefiting OPEC countries who are bending us the fuck over. Gass should be 99 cents a gallon for all the shit we have done.
Why do I get told I'm an arrogant American bigot when I say basically this very same thing?
That's easily fixable...
You want government aid (EBT, food stamps, welfare, etc)? You get forced contraception, in the form of an IUD.
Right now, we REWARD poor people for getting pregnant by giving them more fucking money. It's a circle that will never end and abortion will not solve it.
While I detest abortion, I'm of the opinion that what private people do with their own money in the privacy of their own doctor's office is their own business. I will not ever, EVER condone the government providing free abortion services for girls/women that are too stupid to not have sex.
I mean, hell, you can get free birth control in any city with almost no questions asked. If they're too stupid to do that, or too stupid to remember to take it, then we shouldn't be rewarding them by fixing their mistakes for them.
This is what gets me about pro-lifers. They usually bitch about the cost of welfare, yet they want more mouths to feed on welfare by denying abortions. Once the child is born, they want to forget it exists and not support it. But some will literally kill to see that they're born.
Don't get too down on yourself little guy, you couldn't be that easily entertained.
Then what do you propose happens to the children born to those "too stupid" people? Take them away from their birth-mothers? Put them in an orphanage? It costs money no matter what. The taxpayers are still "on the hook".
So you're saying you'd prefer for someone to be ok with something they feel is morally incorrect just to solve another issue? So are you saying you don't understand how someone can stand by their morals/principles even if straying from those morals might solve some other problem?
This is brought up over and over again by lefties..."XXX is for small government but he wants abortion to be illegal !"
See if you can follow this logic...
Some people believe in small government in our lives but they still want murder to be illegal.
Some of those same people consider abortion to be an act of murder, because it is depriving the fetus of life. The same way you can get charged for 2 murders when you kill a pregnant woman.
You may not agree with this but can the resident lefties at least follow this logic? Its not at all hypocritical to want limited government but still want abortion to be illegal.
Single-issue voters are a problem.
A president by himself CANNOT pass a law legalizing or banning abortion. So refusing to vote for the best candidate for the job just because of his different views on abortion is silly. Even if he's elected, he's not going to be able to change anything by himself.
then those people should also be against the murder of all animals and plants, seeing as that fetus is as selfaware as a ficus...
then those people should also be against the murder of all animals and plants, seeing as that fetus is as selfaware as a ficus...
Comeback posts aren't your strong suit, stick to hula hooping.
We really need spending cuts as well as tax increases to get out of the hole we're in. Which candidate is advocating that? We have the lowest tax rates in recent history and we're in the worse shape since the Great Depression.
Spending cuts alone won't do it, and lowering taxes further for the rich won't fix it either.
Ron Paul is widely considered a joke, in both parties, and no one takes him particularly seriously because he's consistently wrong and not particularly bright to boot.