• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why Are The Progressives Pro Abortion If They Are Anti Death Penalty?

Patranus

Patranus

Diamond Member
Think about it.

In one instance you have an innocent life which only crime was being spawned inside of a woman who found that life to be an inconvenience for her life while in another instance you have a grown adult in full control of their actions who not only violated the social contract but violated the rights of others.

Sure the progressives argue that you may execute someone who there is an extreme outside chance they are innocent yet an abortion does just that, executes a life at its most innocent state.
 
Partisan trolling, by one who neglects thought upon his comparisons.

Easy answers:

  1. No child (person) nor a viable human life. A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
  2. An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life. An incarnated convict is under the responsible control and care of the state.
The two may not be confused, yet are so by irrational ideologues out to dishonestly fabricate with false equivalencies.

THREAD OVER
 
Excellent point. Also, why are progressives against torture if they subject themselves to these forums. Who knows why people do what they do.
 
Last edited:
ivwshane said:
I'm pro choice and pro death penalty.

However I think death sentences should only be given if the evidence is physical and cannot be interpreted in any other way.

I'm also not sure where you got your info from but it doesn't seem that the official democratic platform is anti death penalty:

http://www.ontheissues.org/democratic_party.htm
Click to expand...

To be fair, he is probably not sure where you got your info from that he was talking about the "official democratic platform" and not the explicitly stated general progressive position.
 
Whiskey16 said:
Partisan trolling, by one who neglects thought upon his comparisons.

Easy answers:

  1. No child (person) nor a viable human life. A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
  2. An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life. An incarnated convict is under the responsible control and care of the state.
The two may not be confused, yet are so by irrational ideologues out to dishonestly fabricate with false equivalencies.

THREAD OVER
Click to expand...

Another authoritarian progressive/communist says we're not allowed to discuss this anymore, sorry folks.
 
I don't think he said you couldn't discuss it. He implied that the question was stupid and the answer obvious. But the other thread also asks a stupid question with an obvious answer, so you guys can call it a draw.
 
Whiskey16 said:
Partisan trolling, by one who neglects thought upon his comparisons.

Easy answers:

  1. No child (person) nor a viable human life. A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
  2. An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life. An incarnated convict is under the responsible control and care of the state.
The two may not be confused, yet are so by irrational ideologues out to dishonestly fabricate with false equivalencies.

THREAD OVER
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could explain why execution is a violation of a person' rights, but locking them up in prison for 50 years is not?

It seems that both of them are. But through the due process you are allowed to remove those rights if they are guilty of a serious crime.
 
Last edited:
Whiskey16 said:
Partisan trolling, by one who neglects thought upon his comparisons.

Easy answers:

  1. No child (person) nor a viable human life. A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
  2. An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life. An incarnated convict is under the responsible control and care of the state.
The two may not be confused, yet are so by irrational ideologues out to dishonestly fabricate with false equivalencies.

THREAD OVER
Click to expand...

^^This right here..spot on
 
Both cases are Big Government trying to intrude on matters of life and death?

Big Government shouldn't be dictating what a woman does with her body.

Big Government can't be trusted with the power to execute its citizens. Real world data show its biased and flawed in the administration of the death sentence. It isn't even a effective use of tax dollars ...

Conservatives are always telling us BigGov is incompetent and corrupt and must be limited wherever possible. Why are they insisting BigGov be given such broad powers?
I can't think of any greater attack on someone's freedom than to kill them unjustly while wasting their tax dollars to do it.
 
Whiskey16 said:
No child (person) nor a viable human life.
Click to expand...

And when the child is viable outside the womb?

There have been children born at 5 months gestation, and lived.

Whiskey16 said:
An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life.
Click to expand...

Rights can be taken away through due process.


Whiskey16 said:
A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
Click to expand...

Having to pay child support interferes with my pursuit of happiness.
 
nehalem256 said:
The government mandating you perform labor for someone else would also seem to interfere with your civil rights with regard to not being a slave.
Click to expand...

Even though I broke no law I have become an indentured servant under the threat of imprisonment.

But somehow mothers can kill their unborn children?
 
Whiskey16 said:
Partisan trolling, by one who neglects thought upon his comparisons.

Easy answers:

  1. No child (person) nor a viable human life. A woman has the civil right to her body and being.
  2. An execution is the violation a person's fundamental civil right to retain their individual life. An incarnated convict is under the responsible control and care of the state.
The two may not be confused, yet are so by irrational ideologues out to dishonestly fabricate with false equivalencies.

THREAD OVER
Click to expand...

At what point do you consider a fetus viable?
 
Texashiker said:
Even though I broke no law I have become an indentured servant under the threat of imprisonment.

But somehow mothers can kill their unborn children?
Click to expand...

Or abandon them after they are born.

Or not tell the father and deny their child the child support the child is owed. Funny how women are allowed to deny their child the father's money, but the man isn't. What does that tell you? :hmm:
 
Texashiker said:
Having to pay child support interferes with my pursuit of happiness.
Click to expand...
Quite the quandrum!! A woman's right to decide medical care for her body, which the Supreme Court has said is constitutionally protected, vs. a phrase from a non-binding document written over 200 years ago! Poor baby!
 
berzerker60 said:
Quite the quandrum!! A woman's right to decide medical care for her body, which the Supreme Court has said is constitutionally protected, vs. a phrase from a non-binding document written over 200 years ago! Poor baby!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for you the 14th Amendment, prohibiting slavery, is binding. What do you call forced labor if not slavery?

And before you bring up, "its for the child", realize there is no law requiring the mother to go after child support. The mother can choose to deny the father's money to the child, but for some reason the father cannot. :hmm:
 
Patranus said:
Think about it.

In one instance you have an innocent life which only crime was being spawned inside of a woman who found that life to be an inconvenience for her life while in another instance you have a grown adult in full control of their actions who not only violated the social contract but violated the rights of others.

Sure the progressives argue that you may execute someone who there is an extreme outside chance they are innocent yet an abortion does just that, executes a life at its most innocent state.
Click to expand...

Because sexual liberation is one of their highest values. Abortion puts a sexually attractive woman back into circulation sooner, and execution removes alpha males (albeit violent and often misogynistic) from the sexual marketplace. Limiting the amount of pregnant women and dead felons expands the progressive dating pool of potential fuck partners.
 
berzerker60 said:
vs. a phrase from a non-binding document written over 200 years ago! Poor baby!
Click to expand...

And being an indentured servant under the threat of imprisonment?

A woman has the right to decide, but a man does not?

As per the opening post rights can be taken away under due process of law. Thus progressive liberals should uphold the death penalty.
 
Texashiker said:
Even though I broke no law I have become an indentured servant under the threat of imprisonment.

But somehow mothers can kill their unborn children?
Click to expand...

You can become financially liable to other people in one of millions of ways without breaking any law, becoming an indentured servant under the threat of imprisonment. I seriously don't get what is so hard to understand about this.

Mothers can terminate non-viable pregnancies. 22 weeks is the generally accepted time for that by medical experts. Just because there can be some outliers in extreme circumstances does not change this.
 
eskimospy said:
Mothers can terminate non-viable pregnancies. 22 weeks is the generally accepted time for that by medical experts. Just because there can be some outliers in extreme circumstances does not change this.
Click to expand...

And past the 22 weeks?

There are liberal progressives out there would would allow abortion up until the day the child is born. Back in the 1990s there was a crap storm about late term and partial birth abortions.

As long as the head does not come out its still a nonviable fetus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top