Butters
-
Content
4,759 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by Butters
-
Next time you see an anti-life person, ask them if they support the legalization of drugs, same sex marriages, the blank panthers, the ku klux klan, etc... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
So why are comatose people on life support considered legal people but viable fetuses aren't? PS: Who (exactly) gets to decide to terminate life support? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
The fact you can't explain it implies that the "issue surrounding abortion" might not necessary be there, or even be anything but your own creation. Are you laughing because I want to know if I'm laughing at you or with you ... The issue surrounding abortion is based on the definition of a legal person because legal people are entitled to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
The fact that you don't get it implies that you don't get the issue surrounding abortion ... what is a legal person. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Of course! 'Pro-choice' is explicitly referred to abortion only. But if you call yourself 'pro-life' under the "protect the sacred human life" slogan, you're already getting out of scope of just abortion, and must address other issues which affect the "sacred human life", such as death penalty. And if your 'pro-life' position only addresses abortion, this means you're really just anti-choice, and only call yourself 'pro-life' for marketing purposes. I'm pro-choice. People have the choice to have sex. People have the choice to commit crimes. Both choices have consequences ... (if you read my previous posts in other threads you'll realize I don't support abortion but I do tolerate it before the fetus becomes viable). What exactly has a comatose person on life support with pro-choice, anti-choice or pro-life, assuming you're not talking about euthanasia? It has to do with the definition of a legal person. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Yes, regarding the subject. I do not expect every "pro-life" person to be vegetarian either, but having someone claiming to be "pro-life" but supporting death penalty sounds pretty hypocritical to me. So pro-choice is only in regards to the subject (abortion) but pro-life isn't? PS: You still haven't answered my question, what is the difference between a viable fetus and a comatose person on life support? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
That's just it, why not charge $500 (or $1000) instead of $5 (or less)? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
White House to sell homes to hurricane-displaced families for as little as $1 "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
What evil women? All I stated was that pro-life doesn't mean pro-life in all circumstances just like pro-choice doesn't mean pro-choice in all circumstances ... silly labels. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
So pro-choice people are always pro-choice? What choices does the man have? None in regards to abortion. None in regards to child support. What choices does the viable fetus have, or the tax payers, or ... you're argument is falling apart. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Correct, because the Supreme Court decided they are not yet legal people just like blacks and women weren't legal people at one point in time. PS: Why is a viable fetus not a legal person but a comatose person on life support is? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Why shouldn't someone have the right to say who can and who can not have kids if that someone has to support the kids? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
He took over his father's practice after his father died, so what you are insinuating is a little silly. I think it's a little silly that two men follow in their father's footsteps and you declare one is doing it because of what he believes and the other is doing it because of what he's told to believe ... when you don't know either of the men. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Are you sure? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
It wasn't based on the Fourteenth Amendment. It was based on the Supreme Court's decision that the fetus should not be defined as a legal person and thus was not entitled to the rights given to a legal person by the Fourteenth Amendment. Much in the same way that blacks and women weren't considered legal people at one point in time ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
... same as the old boss. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
"Warrantless Wire Taping. Ah, Didnt the Left Condem Bush For Doing This?
Butters replied to rushmc's topic in Speakers Corner
But he does because his political party is all about victimhood. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch -
The definition of art has degraded to the point that I could take a crap and call it art ... so it's both art and crap. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
Irish probe: Abuse ‘endemic’ in Catholic schools
Butters replied to Butters's topic in Speakers Corner
I question this statement given the findings in the report (for Ireland alone) ... also, I don't believe other institutions act as accomplices in the same way the Catholic Church did. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch -
Irish probe: Abuse ‘endemic’ in Catholic schools
Butters replied to Butters's topic in Speakers Corner
Catholic orders plead poverty in Irish abuse "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch -
Wing suits let humans fly free "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
The problem is that their rhetoric suggests they aren't developing nukes to defend themselves but to attack others. Yes, I understand we are attacking others. Yes, I understand we attacked others with nukes. However, the reasons we do and did it are different than the reasons they would do it ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
I know (and I'm not complaining because it's fun, makes good video, and teaches me to fly through burbles) but I still think it would (or will) be fun to just collapse my wings and take you for a ride ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch
-
The human side of NAZI concentration camp guards
Butters replied to Skyrad's topic in Speakers Corner
I view them as accomplices. No. They were humans. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch -
I like it .. this is what I said I would do to a certain someone if they burbled me one more time.