Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

biccat wrote:Well, no one except unwanted kids should receive the death penalty, apparently.

Which is a perfectly sensible argument, provided everyone believes that a collection of cells that will develop over nine months to become a baby.

Now, it's perfectly reasonable to believe that, in fact I'd say it's about as reasonable a point as any other. But the insistance that we must all accept that point is basically the exact opposite of reasonable.

sebster wrote:

biccat wrote:Well, no one except unwanted kids should receive the death penalty, apparently.

Which is a perfectly sensible argument, provided everyone believes that a collection of cells that will develop over nine months to become a baby.

Now, it's perfectly reasonable to believe that, in fact I'd say it's about as reasonable a point as any other. But the insistance that we must all accept that point is basically the exact opposite of reasonable.

Reading comprehension is your friend, sebster:

its their kid their decision

The poster admits what you refer to as "a collection of cells" is a kid, and actually makes no distinction between kids and "a collection of cells." It's unclear whether the poster in question 'merely' supports abortion or has adopted Peter Singer's infanticide argument.

In the future before you respond, please take some time to read the post you're responding to, especially when you decide to respond in such an aggressive manner. I'd sure appreciate it.

How do you generally vote? : Democrat

What sources do you get your political news from? : NBC, Daily SHow, Colbert Report, random other sources

... and how often do you do so? : Every day or so.

How do you feel about...

Abortion: Zygotes are not people, therefore I am indifferent.Late term abortions I still think are o.k, just I don't personally like the idea.

Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality: Rights for everyone!

Religion: Non religious. Science FTW

Global Warning\Climate Change: We need to do something quickly.

Gun Control: I am a liberal. WITH GUNS. I friggin LOVE guns.

Healthcare: I probably haven't researched enough on this to form an intelligent response.

Capital Punishment\Death Penalty : Sometimes I think it is alright, but not the way Texas does it. That's just too much.

What do you think about the 2012 US Presidential election?

Meh. Hope Obama gets it, though I don't think he's a great president. Decent enough though.

What do you do for a living? : Work my @ss of in school in hopes of becoming an astronaut.


Another thing: I am EXTREMELY pro space exploration. I think it is in the long run the most important thing we can do for humanity, and I may actually go to college with being an Astronaut in mind. I think we should spend a LOT more on our space program. Though the space shuttle cancellation was a good thing because NASA is ow developing the SLS (Space Launch System) with the goal of human exploration in mind, to Near Earth Asteroids, instead of just earth orbit like the space shuttles. When it comes to space, I'm not left or right, I'm UP lol.

Anyway, that's my hastily typed 2 cents.

biccat wrote:Reading comprehension is your friend, sebster:

its their kid their decision

The poster admits what you refer to as "a collection of cells" is a kid, and actually makes no distinction between kids and "a collection of cells." It's unclear whether the poster in question 'merely' supports abortion or has adopted Peter Singer's infanticide argument.

I think you're reading a hell of a lot into his use of the word 'kid', almost as if you're assuming your mindset applies to other people.

I'm happy to wait to see his response, if he says it is a person but he's okay with the mother deciding to kill it, then I'll concede the point.

In the future before you respond, please take some time to read the post you're responding to, especially when you decide to respond in such an aggressive manner. I'd sure appreciate it.

At this point in our posting history, I really, sincerely doubt it.

biccat wrote:
Such an impression is, of course, mistaken.

Not so much. There is no part of either the definition of terrorism, or the definition of religious expression which renders them mutually exclusive categories.

Terrorism may not be a protected form of religious expression (the state has a compelling interest to restrict it), but that doesn't suddenly prevent it from being religious expression; just as "fighting words" don't cease to be speech even if that speech is not protected.

biccat wrote:
You do know that there's a difference between free speech and religious freedom, right? They're completely different.

I was speaking to the general principal of freedom of belief, but you're correct the example was poorly conceived.