Abortion

---

However, the German ideology was Nazi. Surely you've heard of Nazi Germany in your little HS history class.

Thats right, I said tings.

I didnt learn it from history, buddy. all from books, which are better than any history lesson.

No, my argument is very plausible and would work well. The government would not allow abortions, which would show other young people the concequences of that type of sex. The drug analogy is also correct because the government could also NOT punish people who use drubs, and let all of the population see what horrible things they can do with you.

buddy???? hmmmm....interesting, sounds like your being a little condescending, oh well.I will concede one thing...Pre-WW1 Germany was socialisticHowever...http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=3415667Read the first sentance of the section titled Germany and the Leadership Principle

I agree with abortion 100%. My sister got screwed and didn'thave the money for a kid so she got an abortion. Babies aren't humans until they are born so I say it's better to kill them than make them live a shitty life and over populate the world with people that live on the streets.

Remember, in general drug laws have failed.

In reply to:of course I am pro-war. Yt I am very right wing. Odd, I know. How is that odd? In reply to:The last war to be declared was WW2 That’s correct, but you needn’t “declare” a war to fight one. Wars are no longer declared in modern warfare, but that doesn’t mean they’re not “wars.” Any argument to the contrary is pure semantics. First of all, the notion of “declaring war” was purely the product 16th to early 20th century Europe (and adopted by Americans in the later half of that period). If you’re arguing that you need to declare war to be “at war,” then you’re essentially arguing that Asian and African countries have never been at war (except when fighting 16th to early 20th century Europeans), and that Europe was incapable of war until the 16th century. And by the way, the power to declare war is legislative, not executive…In reply to: Maybe if we thought about others for a chance we'd realize that stupid teenager that have babies are far less important than people dying of starvation in far greater magnitudes than the babies being born. Is this an argument for limiting abortion? There’s no causal relationship between abortions and starvation (except maybe an inverse relationship- but that would only be a bizarre argument FOR abortions, lol).In reply to: The government would not allow abortions, which would show other young people the concequences of that type of sex Again, deterring the consequences of consentual acts WITH the consequences is not a regulatory strategy that has EVER been used to justify positive law, because it promotes the exact ends that we're trying to prevent!!!Let me be clear that I'm not Zach bashing with these last couple of posts. I'm just trying to get you to think about these things. I honestly think that there’s a lot of good knowledge in that head, but I think that you’re trying too hard to show that knowledge, and therefore not thinking enough before arguing. Everyone needs to step back and think about things every once in a while.

You say you are right wing, then you say you're socialist. How??? Two completely different ideological foundations.Republicanism is a "right-wing" ideology. That being said how is pro-war odd.Ever heard of the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Modern warfare, as Steppen said, is very different than WW2 and before. It relies on surprise. So, how is surprise achieved by saying, "We're at war."?

In reply to: I agree with abortion 100%. My sister got screwed and didn'thave the money for a kid so she got an abortion. Same thing happened to my sister, but I don't think she should have aborted. In reply to: Babies aren't humans until they are born This is where we differ, I believe life begins at conception. So aborting, IMO, is like committing murder. In reply to: so I say it's better to kill them than make them live a shitty life Why would being adopted be so shitty? In reply to: and over populate the world with people that live on the streets. I do believe that overpopulation is a problem, but that is why I'm pro capital punishment and pro war.There are 3 natural controllers of overpopulation. Famine, disease or sickness, and war. With the elimination of famine and a lot of diseases and sicknesses, the last natural controller left is war. But recent times have given birth to a new controller; Contraceptives!

In reply to: There are 3 natural controllers of overpopulation. Famine, disease or sickness, and war. With the elimination of famine and a lot of diseases and sicknesses, the last natural controller left is war. But recent times have given birth to a new controller; Contraceptives! This is not so much anymore...ooops...maybe I should read closer next time. Never mind.I was gonna say famine and disease are pretty much gone. Oops.

lol. so hasty to debate I see.

I'm in a debatable mood!!!

Contraceptives sound better than war to me. Make condoms, not bombs!!!

Or we could make BOMBDOMS!!!Keep kids from having sex now!!!.........and forever!!!

LMAO!!!

i am pro-choice. for people like me, (17 and never want to have children), am i to never have sex? i plan on it someday, and if i am pregnant and do not want the child, i wont have it. i would never have sex without speaking to my partner about what we would do if i were to be pregnant. i have spoken to my current partner, although we are not having sex at this time, and we have both decided beforehand that it would not be wise for me to have a child at my age, or current state. if he had said he would want me to have the baby, i wouldnt ever sleep with him, because he has a say and i would want full support behind what i was doing. also, IF we were to sleep with each other i would be on birth control, and he would use a condom. the proper precautions, of course, but again, if i got pregnant i wouldnt have the baby. i wouldnt go through pregnancy, i wouldnt give it up for adoption. because it is my body, and my choice.-BBGF

In reply to: for people like me, (17 and never want to have children), am i to never have sex? With today's contraceptives, you can have sex and have very little worry about getting pregnant.I think everyone would agree that something needs to be done about getting people to use what's available more than what it is now. But what needs to be done? A change in educational curriculum would help.

from your responses before though websex, you were saying that abortion should be made illegal and that people should just stop having sex if they didnt want babies. or taht is how it read to me. cant be arsed to go backa nd quote so ill just use my dodgy memory instead *grins* im so lazy

I agree with confused1... If a female does not want a kid, keep your legs closed! That or get on the pill AND... yes and... use protection! Get your tubes tied... abstenacy is the number one way to stay away from getting pregnant... and if you do get prego and not want the kid, find sumone who does, who will adopt ur baby when its born... or give it for adoption... Abortion is like murder, you should get prosecuted for that too!