LogFAQs > #887426597

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Confirm or Deny, most pro life people are hypocrites
Zeus 09/28/17 12:40:50 AM #79:	adjl posted... Zeus posted... adjl posted... Zeus posted... And it's not the child's fault, so why is the child the victim in that scenario? That's not an answer to the question I asked at all. Please answer the question I asked before presenting a new topic of discussion. It's only polite. Because your "argument" is based on any number of faulty premises. First, you're assuming that everybody who has an abortion can't afford the baby, which is demonstrably false. Second, you're assuming that everybody who can't afford children have abortions, which is also demonstrably false. All that leaves is reckless behavior -- which you admit by noting that it involves unprotected sex -- which brings me back to my point: The ONLY person not at fault in that arrangement is the child, so why make him (or her, because it's usually a girl being aborted) the victim? Only a sith deals in absolutes. wah_wah_wah posted... If you think unprotected sex is risky and reckless, why are you so adament that these risky and reckless people have children, especially when they additionally have expressed they don't want to have children? Seems pretty fucking stupid to me. Then feel free to take the kid away afterward if they're truly awful people. However, it doesn't make much sense to kill the kid for the stupidity of her parents. More importantly, if you keep giving outs like that, it's only a matter of time before they catch a STD and the state winds up paying for the parent's care anyway. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash <cite>Zeus posted [p:887426597] in Confirm or... [t:75806455]...</cite> <quote><cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>And it's not the child's fault, so why is the child the victim in that scenario? </quote> That's not an answer to the question I asked at all. Please answer the question I asked before presenting a new topic of discussion. It's only polite.</quote> Because your "argument" is based on any number of faulty premises. First, you're assuming that everybody who has an abortion can't afford the baby, which is demonstrably false. Second, you're assuming that everybody who can't afford children have abortions, which is also demonstrably false. All that leaves is reckless behavior -- which you admit by noting that it involves unprotected sex -- which brings me back to my point: The ONLY person not at fault in that arrangement is the child, so why make him (or her, because it's usually a girl being aborted) the victim?</quote> Only a sith deals in absolutes.</quote> <cite>wah_wah_wah posted...</cite> <quote>If you think unprotected sex is risky and reckless, why are you so adament that these risky and reckless people have children, especially when they additionally have expressed they don't want to have children? Seems pretty fucking stupid to me.</quote> Then feel free to take the kid away afterward if they're truly awful people. However, it doesn't make much sense to kill the kid for the stupidity of her parents. More importantly, if you keep giving outs like that, it's only a matter of time before they catch a STD and the state winds up paying for the parent's care anyway. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1