Snarkpit Forum Index » General Banter » BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
« previous page 123
...
6
7
8 next page »
Post Reply
Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by OtZman on Thu Nov 4th at 4:53pm 2004

? quote: Orpheus

i still see abortion/pro-choice as pure evil..


Just out of curiosity, why are you against abortion?
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Yak_Fighter on Thu Nov 4th at 4:54pm 2004

Probably because it's basically the legal killing of thousands of babies? That's pretty much the beef opponents have with it.



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Wild Card on Thu Nov 4th at 4:59pm 2004

? quoting Yak_Fighter

EDIT: Maybe with the expiration of the ban on assault weapons I can finally legally buy myself a fiveseven... awesome.

lmao!

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by OtZman on Thu Nov 4th at 4:59pm 2004

? quoting Yak_Fighter
Probably because it's basically the legal killing of thousands of babies? That's pretty much the beef opponents have with it.

But, as far as I know, the baby isn't even conscious.
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Wild Card on Thu Nov 4th at 5:02pm 2004

Conscient or not, it is still considered a form of life. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Juim on Thu Nov 4th at 5:05pm 2004

The problem with outlawing abortion lies outside the moral issues. The simple fact remains that you cant stop it. Period. The act of outlawing it would simply drive the process underground, making people who control it criminals, not medically trained professionals,and endangering lives of people who would otherwise not be at risk.



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Pvt.Scythe on Thu Nov 4th at 5:10pm 2004

Agreed. I think women should be able to determine what they do on their bodies, in the end the baby is a part of their body until it is born... [addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Gwil on Thu Nov 4th at 5:12pm 2004

? quote:
That sounds like quite the utopia! Remind me again how that is seriously better than a US with guns aplenty?

EDIT: Maybe with the expiration of the ban on assault weapons I can finally legally buy myself a fiveseven... awesome.



Yeah, it's bloody awful - accelerated by King Tony and the governments mismanagement of just about everything.

Remind me again where I dipped my toe into the waters of the US gun debate?


[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Tracer Bullet on Thu Nov 4th at 7:57pm 2004

? quoting Leperous

lol Tracer, I love that graph and how it "squashes" the higher rape and murder rates... So, "400/100,000" assault in the UK compared to "310/100,000" in the US? So you're 1.3 times as likely to be assaulted. But note that rape rates are twice as higher than all the other countries on that graph, except the strange Canada figures, and it doesn't seem to list murder, for which I have heard statistics that you are up to 6 times as likely to be murdered in the USA. And again according to your graph, it doesn't seem like Israel has the lowest rape figures at all.

Perhaps most crucial of all, it says nothing about gun crime!

Anyway, you can always find all sorts of crime figures, and ones fudged to show what you want them to- and don't forget, these figures probably only show *reported* crimes, so of course there will be some extra bias there (I'm sure if you looked at Zimbabwe's crime levels right now there wouldn't be much being reported!). If you want to tell us your actual source Tracer it would be appreciated

Since we're talking about letting people own guns to defend themselves, I guess it's ok for countries to own nuclear weapons to defend themselves too?


Um... I guess you didn't bother to read any futher than the Graph.




? quoting Tracer Bullet

It came from a UN report. INTERPOL was only the first of several data sources and I didn't want to crowd the graph. If you want to see everything: Linky

Edit: If you want to see some equally impressive homicide data it's all here.


And regardless of the fact that rape and theft rates are low on the scale, it is still quite Representative of violent crime. I suppose I could have normalized the figures, but the people would have bitched about using arbitrary units. It is irrelavent whether the crime involves a gun or not. The pro-gun argument hinges on the idea that more gun possestion leads to lower TOTAL viloent crime. I'm not arguing that it leads to less GUN crime, just a lower total.
Edit: just to make things easier


Looks to me like homicide is less than twice as common in the United States vs. England/Wales, but then again, look at Scotalnd and Sweden.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by OtZman on Thu Nov 4th at 8:03pm 2004

? quote:
Agreed. I think women should be able to determine what they do on their bodies, in the end the baby is a part of their body until it is born...


I agree.
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Tracer Bullet on Thu Nov 4th at 8:10pm 2004

? quoting scary_jeff

? quote:
Oh... I'm sorry? Does that burst the bubble all of you non-Americans have been blowing about how violent we are? Certainly we are not the best in the world, but you cannot make the case that America is a more dangerous place then England because of gun laws. It isn't, for whatever reason, and that's a fact.


Nonsense. That chart is totally meaningless in this debate. It provides no information about gun crimes whatsoever.

Even if it did show gun crime information, it still wouldn't matter, because banning gnus would still reduce the number of gun deaths. I just don't understand why so many of you can't accept that.

Let's say america had the lowest gun death rate in the whole world. Why is it bad to reduce this further by taking guns away completely?

I do accept that. Obviously allowing guns raises the number of gun-related deaths. The arguments is that there is less total violent crime, as I stated above.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by mazemaster on Thu Nov 4th at 8:27pm 2004

? quoting Pvt.Scythe
Agreed. I think women should be able to determine what they do on their bodies, in the end the baby is a part of their body until it is born...


No. The baby is not a PART of her body, the baby and mother just SHARE the same body. There is a difference.

Consider siamese twins. They are another example of two people sharing the same body, but that doesn't give them the right to kill each other.

Hell, by your logic the baby should have the right to kill the mother: after all the mother is part of the baby's body...

The only decent argument for abortion is the one Juim brings up about practicality. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Cash Car Star on Fri Nov 5th at 9:53am 2004

Why do you people think you'll solve the baby-mother thing? I don't think there's an issue with less common ground. I don't like it, but I consider myself a practical person and so politically believe in the mantra safe, legal and rare. Situations where a woman needs it can and will occur, and this is not something you can wait around on bureaocracy for.

Crono, thanks for the info on Oregon. I guess I incorrectly assumed with it being right between Washington and California that it would be quite similar in political composition.

Spartan, neither Cassius nor myself are Canadian.

Tracer, that latest graph interests me not so much due to the country to country comparison, but rather the 1990 to 2000 comparison. Our homicide rate seems to have dropped off by a third. Compared to 1990, the Danes and Swedes seem to be out on a warpath right now. Was their any explanatory text to accompany the graph where you found it?





Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Tracer Bullet on Fri Nov 5th at 5:38pm 2004

Unfortunately there is very little text on the whole page. it is basically just a massive compilation of socioeconomic statistics. If you want a full description, Try this: http://www.unece.org/stats/trend/introduction.htm [addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Ferret on Sat Nov 6th at 5:43am 2004

I'm happy with the election results go bush
obviously MOST people aren't unhappy with the electino if bush won the popular vote.




Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Orpheus on Sat Nov 6th at 10:52am 2004

? quoting Ferret
I'm happy with the election results go bush
obviously MOST people aren't unhappy with the electino if bush won the popular vote.

LOL, as absurd as it is, this idea doesn't come into play this time.. the candidates were so bad, that it all boiled down to picking the person who could screw you the least overall..

whatever you may think of that, i have yet to meet someone not online... who voted for our president because they felt they were the best candidate.. i'm sorry but thats the basic truth of the matter..

someone keeps asking "what about the others?" seriously??? i haven't heard them mentioned, not one single time, excepting in here.. not once... they must have been even bigger losers..

as for the abortion legal or underground idea posed by juim..

practically speaking i agree and disagree.. there will be a certain portion of the world that would continue to get abortions underground.. these people, don't deserve to live IMO so its no great loss if they die.. and before you say it, that idea is NO MORE immoral than the act of abortion so stop judging me, unless you are going to judge them as well..

it is my opinion that the abortion totals have not risen because its legal or illegal, it has risen because it has become acceptable.. accepted practices always cause a rampant rise in actions..

we may never be able to stop abortions now, it has become to big an issue.. but i will always consider it the most selfish act any woman can think of.. even when it saves her own life to do it..

i would like to say this one last thing, its not ageism either... at least wait to form an opinion about abortion until you have children, or have one taken from you without your consent by a female.. then by all means.. tell us again how it feels..

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Cash Car Star on Sun Nov 7th at 10:34am 2004

? quoting Orpheus

these people, don't deserve to live IMO so its no great loss if they die.. and before you say it, that idea is NO MORE immoral than the act of abortion so stop judging me, unless you are going to judge them as well..

Technically, that destroys your credibility as a Pro-Lifer; you're now simply an anti-abortionist. Course, all it is is a silly little label.





Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by scary_jeff on Sun Nov 7th at 10:56am 2004

? quote:
I do accept that. Obviously allowing guns raises the number of gun-related deaths. The arguments is that there is less total violent crime, as I stated above.


That's not my argument.



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by Orpheus on Sun Nov 7th at 12:51pm 2004

? quoting Cash Car Star
? quoting Orpheus

these people, don't deserve to live IMO so its no great loss if they die.. and before you say it, that idea is NO MORE immoral than the act of abortion so stop judging me, unless you are going to judge them as well..

Technically, that destroys your credibility as a Pro-Lifer; you're now simply an anti-abortionist. Course, all it is is a silly little label.

i know, and i am not proud of it either.. but given a choice between a heartless mom, and a baby.. *shrugs*

i am not stupid though, there are certain occasions, as in a mom having cancer and needing treatment ASAP or die.. i would of course chose the mom.. thats not a contradiction in my policy really, because the mom is just as innocent, and not every cell cluster is guaranteed to become a viable baby, but the mom is already here, she doesn't need to baste for months, quite the contrary, basting may only spread the cancer more. same holds true for many other life threatening diseases, but i only express cancer cause many can grasp the need for urgency of treatment.

my thinking on abortion basically circles the women whom abuse the system with it truly.. i have always believed that if you play, you must pay.. anyways, i just wanted to clear things up, i am not completely heartless to the women..

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: BUSH WINS NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Posted by scary_jeff on Sun Nov 7th at 1:35pm 2004

Interesting.

So you would not sacrifice the mother for an unborn baby. I don't have a problem with that at all. What if there was an unborn baby that was definately going to have a hihgly dibilitating desease and not live past say the age of 8? Allowing the baby to be born does in effect destroy the lives of both parents involved. Would you support an abortion in such a situation? If not, what if the age that the baby would live to were only 4 years, or just 1?

I'm not saying you should or shouldnt support abortion in this case, I'm just interested as to what your view is.




« previous page 123
...
6
7
8 next page »
Post Reply