So those on government assistance can be killed too? You are a monster.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
so say when a human gets in some sort of accident and requires assistance to live and breathe and therefore cannot live without help, you all for throwing them out as well?
Babies can survive outside the womb on their own with no assistance of any kind? You have seen a baby right?
Yeah, I'm not a conspiracy theorist so not going to entertain the idea of a fed reserve conspiracy.
So in one breath you scream and cry about how the big mean old government is out to get us, then in the next advocate for policy to allow you to commit violence against people you don’t like. Sure are consistent...
When a fetus is still part of a woman’s body it’s exactly that, part of her body. You aren’t on here bitching about someone amputating their toe. It’s just another reason for you to be a whiny bitch.
See my other post. A fetus is a part of a woman’s body, not a person.
"So it’s a good thing when the government murders people with due process, just not without. Can’t wait to make some new laws to make it legal to murder people in this thread."
123744 Dionysus444, 12 minutes ago"
Just making sure how your threat was received and how it would be dealt with. Perhaps you are too ignorant to understand your own postings. Warrior-cat 2 assorted assholes, nothing. This could get ugly quick. I will beat you here and in the street so, run away little boy.
In the case I mentioned, the killing of a 6 year old child by a grown man... I think there are exceptions. But if one thing constitutes the death penalty it’s murder. And not only does he avoid the death penalty, but a murder charge to boot.
Be careful, your post is dangerously close to coming off as defending a child murderer.
It is because I have a heart you moron and so does the fetus.
- At 18 days [when the mother is only four days late for her first menstrual period], and by 21 days it is pumping, through a closed circulatory system, blood whose type is different from that of the mother. J.M. Tanner, G. R. Taylor, and the Editors of Time-Life Books, Growth, New York: Life Science Library,
Now that doesn’t count. Only science that supports what he thinks counts. Don’t you know how this works?
Just because something has a heart doesn’t make it a person with legal rights. Cows and pigs have hearts and we eat them every day. Are you advocating for eating babies?
Lol what a weak attempt at a strawman. You are defeated. Go away. Or just change the subject altogether, because that debate is over
No he isnt advocating that and your analogy is as absurd as that ridiculous wrist comment...but speaking of advocacy, you are an advocate for society not killing the man who does eat babies.
What about those who are in minority groups that do really well for themselves? Are they just lucky? Does their hard work and dedication not mean anything? Plenty of minority people are able to succeed in spite of these so called societal and economic disadvantages. In fact, Asian people statistically do better than white people in this country. You know why that is? Because of their culture. Asian culture places very high value on education. If minorities want to succeed, it has to begin with a change in the culture of said minority group. They will never gain any type of long term success or independence if they depend on the government and are constantly lead to believe that they can't because of said disadvantages.
I’m advocating for the government to not have the power to kill any of its citizens. Baby eater included yes.
I don't know if it was murder or suicide but you're brain dead either way.
I do believe that’s the first time I’ve ever seen someone defend a child murderer like that. I thought there were some things everyone could agree on... like killing a child being a REALLY bad thing that deserves a REALLY harsh penalty.
You mean like the millions that are killed legally every year through abortion?
Those who transcend the circumstances of their birth are surely to be commended, but those who don’t shouldn’t be abandoned. Plenty of whites are born into difficult economic circumstances, should they be denied assistance and scholarships because they lack “hard work and determination”?
I don't have a problem with certain types of assistance. I'm all about helping people to get an education in some type of skill or trade that can help them make lots of money. That means an education or training for a well paying career that's in demand, not a 4 year degree in basket weaving from UNC. BUT. If we are going to give people financial assistance, we also need to be able to openly discuss changes that need to happen within cultures as well. And conservatives should be allowed to bring this up without being labeled racists or bigots.
So we can kill them up until they can live outside of the womb with no assistance of any kind? A 3 year old would starve to death without being fed by its parents. That's assistance. So by your logic, 3 years after the birth, a mother could decide she doesn't want to be a parent anymore and off her child.
I have a stepson. His father had a decent job but decided he wanted to be lazy and mooch. A few weeks after voluntarily quitting his job he got on food stamps and income based housing. He paid $1 a month to live in a one bed room. His GF moved in and helps with what little they actually had to pay for.
Now why should someone who quit a full time job just because they wanted to be lazy be eligible for such benefits? I’m with you. There are cases that I’m 100% okay with helping people and my tax dollars going towards that. But there are other cases, like the one above, that need to be changed.
That's a good point. We're not all a homogeneous bloc and we should definitely be allowed to discuss the differences and possible paths. Too many on both sides want to shut down conversation. This country needs more substantive conversation, not less.
I like the idea of helping those who want to help themselves. In fact, I think it's a good investment for the government to assist people in achieving a needed skill. When citizens make money, they pay more taxes. The problem is, the government sucks at everything. Government assistance is so abused and misused, that people who actually need help aren't getting it, and people who are lazy get free everything. If you even try to eliminate some of the waste, liberals freak the hell out.
I agree killing a child is a really bad thing and does deserve a really harsh penalty, life imprisonment. What we don't agree on is whether the fact that murderers exist should give a government the right to kill its citizens. These are the countries with the death penalty.
- Botswana
- Chad
- Comoros
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Egypt
- Equatorial Guinea
- Ethiopia
- Gambia
- Lesotho
- Libya
- Nigeria
- Somalia
- Somaliland
- South Sudan
- Sudan
- Uganda
- Zimbabwe
- Antigua and Barbuda
- Bahamas
- Barbados
- Belize
- Cuba
- Dominica
- Guatemala
- Guyana
- Jamaica
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
- Saint Lucia
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- Trinidad and Tobago
- United States
- Afghanistan
- Bahrain
- Bangladesh
- China
- India
- Indonesia
- Iran
- Iraq
- Japan
- Jordan
- North Korea
- Kuwait
- Lebanon
- Malaysia
- Oman
- Pakistan
- Palestinian Territories
- Qatar
- Saudi Arabia
- Singapore
- Syria
- Taiwan
- Thailand
- UAE
- Vietnam
- Yemen
- Belarus
- Australia
- Canada
- All of Europe
- The entire rest of the world. Look closely at those countries and tell me which list you would rather be on.
So lets say the FETUS (actually a baby since it is surviving outside the womb) is actually born and on day 1 of its life, I lay it down in my basement and go get on a 3 day bender. When they find that baby dead, do you think I will be charged with murder, manslaughter, or will I avoid jail time because the baby did not need assistance?
Cool. I want to see minorities do well in this country. I do not believe they are inferior in any way. It's frustrating though when my thoughts on how they can achieve success is shot down as being racists. Poor people have the same common denominator and it has nothing to do with race. It has to do with making good decisions and accepting personal responsibility. Some people are given better starts in life than others. Life isn't fair. But anyone can do pretty well for themselves if they graduate high school, get a job, and don't have kids outside of marriage.
Because liberals feel (except for babies) and don’t think...they never see the value in things or the unintended consequences of their emotional stances.
The threat of a death penalty is an incredibly valuable tool for law enforcement during an investigation. There are thousands upon thousands of the worst offenders who either confessed to their crimes or gave up accomplices if the authorities would wave the death penalty.
Now do the list of countries that allow abortions up to 28 weeks...
I could have phrased it as "when it biologically can survive as it's own separate entity without medical treatment". The point being viability after separation from the woman. If you hand that day 1 baby you mentioned to another person they can raise it. Up until that point of viable separation it's literally a part of the woman's body.
Fetal viability really starts at about 23 weeks and has an over 90% success rate at about 26 weeks. So personally yes we might be better served cranking it back a few weeks, but I somehow doubt that's what you're advocating for. Unless you are and then we agree.
Last edited:
I agree with most of what you said, but have issues with the last sentence. It's much harder to "do pretty well" with just a high school diploma than it used to be. Many jobs in America today require a college degree just to get in the door, and wages have been stagnant for decades across the board. Obama/Trump's booming wall street economy is doing much better for those who already had than those who are looking to get.
I don't know man. I only did those 3 things and I'm doing pretty well. And I was raised dirt poor by a single Mom. She wanted better for me though so she taught me to make good decisions. Im not rich by any means but any given weekend I could drive to Gatlinburg and have Papa John's pizza if I wanted. (Inside Paddock joke) So I'd say I'm living pretty good.
88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/files/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf
Over two-thirds of police chiefs do not believe that the death penalty is one of their most important tools.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/front-line-law-enforcement-views-death-penalty#sxn2
Do you also support torturing American citizens because of the invaluable information it provides?
I’m just glad to be living in number 31.
Part of the problem there is life imprisonment doesn’t always happen when murder is committed. In fact, drug abusers often serve more time than murderers which is absurd. Also with life imprisonment comes food to keep them alive. A lot of these prisoners get more nutritious meals than school children. And what about prisons being overpopulated?
As @WKBlu pointed out, the death penalty can be useful. And obviously it should be reserved for the worst of the worst to even have it on the table. That man got charged with assault. He killed a 6 year old. That is incredibly phucked up, death penalty or no.
Cruz sure wanted to avoid it after he took 17 lives. Said he’d plead guilty if he could avoid the death penalty. A guy that took 17 lives trying to avoid having his taken for a premeditated killing spree.
And to a person who commits a murder or murders, knowing they committed a felony that could be punishable by death... and does it anyway? I’m not sure I want to give that person a chance to escape prison. Speaking of murderers in prison, what if one just starts killing his cell mates? Solitary confinement? Or is that categorized as torture and unjust?
This illustrates my point. Of the countries listed very few of you would want to live in any of them but the USA.
Completely agree on that case, he needs to be locked up and the key thrown away. But this case again illustrates my point about the government killing people. The case was royally screwed up. Many of them are, our justice system sucks. This time it's going to let him off far too lightly, but the reverse is also true. There have been 15 executions since 1981 of people who have had compelling evidence that they were innocent surface due to new technology and investigations.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent
How many innocent deaths is an acceptable number to reap the disputable benefits mentioned by @WKBlu that every country on my previous list seems to do just fine without? I say zero.
