In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

dtaylor944 Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 10:53 AM
I am worried about my soul. I believe that if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. I believe that by being against the voluntary abortion of fetus who are going to be born with addictions and afflictions to people who cannot take care of themselves much less a child you only increase a burden that should have been avoides.I suppose those ae the ones that are also against tying the tubes of those who have abused society in the past and produced burdens for other people only to do it repeadedly. Yes the absolute birth control. If the could have been trusted they would not be in this situation.
AZYaateeh Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 4:47 PM
So, eugenics.

Have fun with that.
Anominus Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 11:24 AM
"I suppose those ae the ones that are also against tying the tubes of those who have abused society in the past and produced burdens for other people only to do it repeadedly."

Your supposition is baseless - I would favor mandatory sterilization for those who are convicted of felonies and at least temporary sterilization for those applying for welfare. The problem is that I don't trust the government to hold such a power. That still doesn't mean I must abide abortion.

"Yes the absolute birth control."

Abstinance is the absolute birth control: it costs nothing, requires no surgery or medication, and bears no risk of pregnancy or STD.
Anominus Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 11:18 AM
"I am worried about my soul."

As you should be, given your apparently vacuous nature.

"I believe that if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one."

I believe that if you don't believe in murder, you shouldn't murder anyone.

"I believe that by being against the voluntary abortion of fetus..."

Voluntary for whom? Certainly not for the person being aborted - or maybe you are another twit like John Edwards who can talk to ghosts in the courtroom?

"...who are going to be born with addictions and afflictions to people who cannot take care of themselves much less a child you only increase a burden that should have been avoides."

That describes most liberals - should we "mercy kill" them as well?
Raven7 Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 11:07 AM
1. Do you have any data to back up your assertions?
2. Why do people claim to know the eventual outcome of the life of the "fetus" based solely on the present condition of the pregnant woman?
3. Why do people claim that it is better for the "fetus" to be killed than to have the same opportunity for life as the people who want to kill it?
4. Why do so many people claim to know what's "best" for someone else?
arpiem Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 11:01 AM
So you want to be God. Have fun!

Liberal academics have been using speech codes for years. They hear an idea they don't like and it makes them angry. But they don't quite know how to defeat the idea on its own merits. So instead of either a) taking the time to cool down and offer a rational response, or b) actually changing their view, they simply give in to the impulse to censor. That is why our campus speech codes really don't reduce so-called hate speech. They simply embolden those who hate speech.

I wish I could say that this childish inclination toward censorship is unique to liberal...