I think we're actually covering that already, before I had a chance to respond to this. (That you feel that it's a weak argument for abortion.)

So, you're OK with prostitution?

What pro-choicers usually fail to acknowledge is that fight against abortion is, in the minds of those opposing abortion, a fight for the rights of unborn human beings. Obviously, denying a person's right to exist is about as fundamental infringement on personal liberty as there is - so I do not buy the argument that abortionists are in the business of protecting human rights. I acknowledge that pro-choicers see this issue differently, but this issue is every bit as debatable as property rights.

 

I understand the pro-choicer's arguments completely. I am "almost" prochoice myself, in that abortion would NEVER be a choice that I would make and that I think it is used to often as a form of birth control. My biggest gripe with the actual pro-choice community is the "exceptions." Why the child of rape or incest doesn't have a right to life...or when the mother's life is in danger...why does that child not have a right at a chance to life? To me, I can't full support something that to me ends up hypocritical.

So, you're OK with prostitution?

 

I have only religious opinions on that, not political ones.

I understand the pro-choicer's arguments completely. I am "almost" prochoice myself, in that abortion would NEVER be a choice that I would make and that I think it is used to often as a form of birth control. My biggest gripe with the actual pro-choice community is the "exceptions." Why the child of rape or incest doesn't have a right to life...or when the mother's life is in danger...why does that child not have a right at a chance to life? To me, I can't full support something that to me ends up hypocritical.

While I'm in agreement with you here, some view it as something that is forced on someone vs not taking precautions.

I have only religious opinions on that, not political ones.

:thumb: But you see the point I'm making, right?

Really? I know many that think the way I do, perhaps it's conservatives around here veiw it differently than in your area.

 

Really. Most of those that I discuss politics that are conservative (which is about everyone I personally know) feel as adamantly again civil unions as they do abortion. To them, saying yes to civil unions means saying that homosexuality is acceptable.

While I'm in agreement with you here, some view it as something that is forced on someone vs not taking precautions.

 

Right! You make my point exactly! If the reason to be against abortion is that you are taking a life, then you are still taking a life if it's the case of rape, incest, or harmful to the mother. Let's say the woman chooses to have the baby...and then decides it is too painful to raise. Would we then let her kill the child? Of course not!!!!!!!! But if you are against abortion because it is killing babies, then how can those exceptions not be murder, too?

 

What I find is that some true pro-choicers (and not saying you and definitely not LBBC) hold a vast majority of this opinion because they simply don't want it used as a form of birth control.

Really. Most of those that I discuss politics that are conservative (which is about everyone I personally know) feel as adamantly again civil unions as they do abortion. To them, saying yes to civil unions means saying that homosexuality is acceptable.

I guess I view it differently, if they want civil unions I see no reason to keep them from doing so. Must be the liberal side of me. :lol:

I guess I view it differently, if they want civil unions I see no reason to keep them from doing so. Must be the liberal side of me. :lol:

 

:laugh: I think we may have found the 0.00001% liberal part of you, yes.

Attacking liberal ideas and positions is not the same as attacking the posters who hold those opinions. I get frustrated when some posters cannot distinguish between the two. There is nothing wrong with attacking ideas - that is the foundation of a good debate.

Agreed. But I'm sure you can also agree that there are posters on both sides of the fence that cannot distinguish.

 

I cannot comment without violating one of the BGP rules. So I won't.

Fair enough, and I'm sorry I put you in that position.

 

I do. I have a great deal of respect for many of those who I disagree with most often. I have no respect for the poster who simply appears from time to time to take a cheap shot and then returns to the sports forums until their next drive-by appearance here. I also have no patience for those who interpret criticism of their opinions as personal attacks. If people are not confident enough in their own opinions to support them without getting their feelings hurt, then they should keep their opinions to themselves, IMO. This is not show and tell where people just post information - it is intended to be a free exchange of ideas within the rules.

 

I enjoy debate and as much as I enjoy exchanging information with those with whom I generally agree, most of my posting pleasure comes from debating ideas with those with whom I often disagree. I believe that Habib, H, HB20, and Hatz, for example understand that I hold no personal animosity toward them and that I appreciate their willingness to support their positions with the facts as they see them. I do not interpret attacks on conservatism as an attack on me personally and I wish that everybody here would adopt that same approach.

 

As for posters who might believe that I don't like them personally (even though we have not met) or that I am just here to make them miserable or to discourage them from posting - that is their problem, not mine.

 

I admit that although we rarely agree, I do respect the breadth of your knowledge. I've learned a lot from what you post. Sometimes, though, I do have to wait a while and go back to read it, because the tone gets my blood boiling. But, you do challenge me, for one. I like that.

 

There are several others that I respect greatly, including those you mentioned and others such as HHSDad, RTS (as long as we're not talking gun control...because he hasn't figured out yet I'm not against guns), and Pepper. I like the civility in which HHSDad, in particular, is able to convey his dissent.

 

I, though, get upset when someone thinks I don't like them because of my posts. I rarely have a dislike for someone. However, when I do, I have good reason, and I'm pretty set in that. Oh...and if I were ever trying to win popularity votes, do you think I'd voice my opinion in here? :lol:

Attacking liberal ideas and positions is not the same as attacking the posters who hold those opinions. I get frustrated when some posters cannot distinguish between the two. There is nothing wrong with attacking ideas - that is the foundation of a good debate.

 

I cannot comment without violating one of the BGP rules. So I won't.

 

I do. I have a great deal of respect for many of those who I disagree with most often. I have no respect for the poster who simply appears from time to time to take a cheap shot and then returns to the sports forums until their next drive-by appearance here. I also have no patience for those who interpret criticism of their opinions as personal attacks. If people are not confident enough in their own opinions to support them without getting their feelings hurt, then they should keep their opinions to themselves, IMO. This is not show and tell where people just post information - it is intended to be a free exchange of ideas within the rules.

 

I enjoy debate and as much as I enjoy exchanging information with those with whom I generally agree, most of my posting pleasure comes from debating ideas with those with whom I often disagree. I believe that Habib, H, HB20, and Hatz, for example understand that I hold no personal animosity toward them and that I appreciate their willingness to support their positions with the facts as they see them. I do not interpret attacks on conservatism as an attack on me personally and I wish that everybody here would adopt that same approach.

 

As for posters who might believe that I don't like them personally (even though we have not met) or that I am just here to make them miserable or to discourage them from posting - that is their problem, not mine.

 

I do understand that. I do not hold any personal animosity towards anyone on this website either. However I do have a feeling there are some people, specifically that post in this forum often, that have personal animosity towards me. Not going to name anyone though...

I do understand that. I do not hold any personal animosity towards anyone on this website either. However I do have a feeling there are some people, specifically that post in this forum often, that have personal animosity towards me. Not going to name anyone though...

I doubt anyone does, HB.

Could be that some like to jerk your chain as much as you like to jerk theirs. :walk:

I doubt anyone does, HB.

Could be that some like to jerk your chain as much as you like to jerk theirs. :walk:

 

With your two's little sparring matches, if you two don't hate each other, then I doubt anyone on this board hates each other.

With your two's little sparring matches, if you two don't hate each other, then I doubt anyone on this board hates each other.

:lol: I don't hate anyone on this board, in fact I respect everyone on here regardless of much we disagree.

 

Let's all sing "Kumbaya."

:lol: I don't hate anyone on this board, in fact I respect everyone on here regardless of much we disagree.

 

Let's all sing "Kumbaya."

 

Or "I'd like to teach the world to sing" :lol: