Guns, homicides, and Sarah Palin -- Discuss (FSZ)
Quote: DeMangoIn our society it is legal to murder those unborn. Something about privacy. We are such a superior society!
Actually, it's not legally POSSIBLE to "murder" the unborn.
Quote: mkl654321Actually:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Still a radical concept, that some human rights transcend the permissions or prohibitions of governments, but a valid idea nonetheless. I do see it disappearing under the smothering weight of an increasingly intrusive government that "knows what is best for us", and I foresee in the not too distant future, persons being carted off to reeducation camps and mind-wiped for quoting the above passage. Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.
Just because a few fellows in powdered wigs wrote that doesn't make it fact. Their king would probably argued with them on it as a matter of fact.
These are men, law givers, giving us these rights.
Quote: mkl654321Actually, it's not legally POSSIBLE to "murder" the unborn.
I don't believe fetal homicide laws are all that uncommon in the U.S.
From Wisconsin Statutes, 940.04:
(1) Any person, other than the mother,
who intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child is guilty of
a Class H felony.
(2) Any person, other than the mother, who does either of the
following is guilty of a Class E felony:
(a) Intentionally destroys the life of an unborn quick child; or
(b) Causes the death of the mother by an act done with intent
to destroy the life of an unborn child. It is unnecessary to prove
that the fetus was alive when the act so causing the mother’s death
was committed.
(3) Any pregnant woman who intentionally destroys the life
of her unborn child or who consents to such destruction by another
may be fined not more than $200 or imprisoned not more than 6
months or both.
(4) Any pregnant woman who intentionally destroys the life
of her unborn quick child or who consents to such destruction by
another is guilty of a Class I felony.
(5) This section does not apply to a therapeutic abortion
which...
Quote: BigTipJust because a few fellows in powdered wigs wrote that doesn't make it fact. Their king would probably argued with them on it as a matter of fact.
These are men, law givers, giving us these rights.
That's the whole point! Human rights exist whether or not anyone says that they do. Those who wrote that passage understood that "self-evident" truth.
Quote: CalderI don't believe fetal homicide laws are all that uncommon in the U.S.
From Wisconsin Statutes, 940.04:
Of course. But note that a new crime, "fetal homicide", had to be created out of thin air. They don't call it "murder", or plain old "homicide", because those terms refer to killing a human being, something that a fetus is NOT. It's more than just a semantic distinction, though. The MOTHER has every right to kill her fetus if she wishes; any other person doing so without the mother's consent violates the MOTHER's rights.
Quote: mkl654321The MOTHER has every right to kill her fetus if she wishes
Then she has the right to kill any of her children, right? What should be the cutoff age, 18?
edit: After thinking about it more, the thing that really gets me is obnoxious smokers in the casino. That one I can't stand. The rest I can live with, although I'd much rather live without it.
Quote: EvenBobThen she has the right to kill any of her children, right? What should be the cutoff age, 18?
A fetus is neither a child nor a human being.
In any case, as I'm sure you're aware, abortion is legal but infanticide is not, so the law recognizes the same distinction as I made, above.
Quote: mkl654321A fetus is neither a child nor a human being.
What is it then, nothing? Its a human being. You think something magical happens at birth that POOF, its now human and before that it was nonexistant? Its a human from the time of conception, people who think otherwise are kidding themselves because they have an agenda. Its alive in the womb, it doesn't come alive at birth. Get real..
Quote: EvenBobWhat is it then, nothing? Its a human being. You think something magical happens at birth that POOF, its now human and before that it was nonexistant? Its a human from the time of conception, people who think otherwise are kidding themselves because they have an agenda. Its alive in the womb, it doesn't come alive at birth. Get real..
It's a stupid debate, because one of the sides (guess which) is based on religion, which means that rationality goes out the window.
Even someone blinded by religion can figure out that there are not only two states of existence, i.e., "nothing" and "human"--as you so ridiculously state. Nothing "magical" happens at birth--magic is for religious people. What happens at birth is that a fetus becomes a child.
What you are failing to realize, in your ideological, magical, religious haze is that there is a distinction between a human being and a POTENTIAL human being. POTENTIAL does NOT equal ACTUAL. 3000 years ago, there were social taboos against masturbating because primitive religious cultures thought that sperm were human beings. Many persons' thinking hasn't evolved beyond that primitive time.
I doubt that I've even managed to give your brain the tiniest jolt, however, so I'll stop right here.
We know from science that when sperm and egg mate (zygote) and attach to the wall of the uterus (embryo), we have a the formation of human life. At about eight weeks we have a fetus. There is no magic here.
Thanks to the laws of this land, the supreme court has made it legal to have abortions and has maintained the right for a woman to choose the outcome of their embryo or fetus up to a certain point in its development, at which time, a magical decision says "it's too late" and then it becomes infanticide. Really, abortions were happening long before they became legal and certainly, the passage of this law has saved the lives of many "non-parents".
I'm not going to get into my personal beliefs about religion and abortion here. Ok, maybe I will. Why draw the line at three months or six months or whatever it is? Why is it too late at eight months?
Absolutely, the life of the mother and father (if he is around) will change when the child is born. But you should think about that before you get in the sack. Abortion for the sake of convenience for me seems to be just wrong.
Quote: mkl654321there is a distinction between a human being and a POTENTIAL human being. POTENTIAL does NOT equal ACTUAL.
Who says? Its an OPINION, not a fact. And I'm not at all religious, I have no religion. Its just common sense, something thats always lacking in the argument. Just because the baby is hidden from view, lets all pretend its not real. How silly. And dangerous. If you want to kill your baby, kill it. But don't play a word game and pretend you're killing a worthless bunch of cells. At one time, that worthless bunch of cells was YOU. And you're the one with magical thinking, believing its not a baby till you can see it breathe on its own.
Quote: boymimboWhy draw the line at three months or six months or whatever it is? Why is it too late at eight months?
Exactly. I think we should be allowed to kill our children up till the age of 5, whats the difference. That makes just as much sense as killing them at 3 months. Wait till they're 5 and have a chance of finding your gun and fighting back.
>> There is no magic here. >>
Theres no magic in any of it, just facts. Its the abortionists that push the magic BS, telling people you can't see it, you can't talk to it, why, its not really there. Just pretend it was indigestion..
Quote: boymimboI'm not going to get into my personal beliefs about religion and abortion here. Ok, maybe I will. Why draw the line at three months or six months or whatever it is? Why is it too late at eight months?
Well, you could, Gawd forbid, bring science into the debate, when you would note that the fetus exhibits brain activity at 25 weeks. There could be a strong argument for allowing abortions only up to that point. The fetus is not independently viable until birth, though, so you could also make a strong argument for allowing abortions at any time. Monty Python sang "Every Sperm is Sacred", so you could also make an argument for forbidding abortions altogether.
Whatever benchmark you use, what gets aborted (or not) is a FETUS. Not a "child", a "baby", a "human being", or anything else. A FETUS. When the misogynistic "pro-lifers" (Gawd, how I love that term) start bleating on the issue, it's always a BAYBEE that is being aborted.
You can't abort a baby. If it's still in the womb, it's a FETUS. Any debate that fails to acknowledge that simple and obvious fact is doomed from the start.
I'd like to give the right-wingers something to chew on, though: you all favor limited government (except, of course, on religious issues). If you were to make abortion illegal, wouldn't the enforcement arm of that prohibition be the most powerful and intrusive in the history of the nation? Wouldn't you need to register every pregnancy, and monitor the behavior of EVERY expectant mother? Would you fill the prisons with those women who had illegal abortions?
The question really is, is a fetus life? Of course it is. There is a heartbeat long before 25 weeks. Just because it's not thinking yet doesn't make it any less valuable as a baby.
As far as I am concerned, "abortion" is just a loophole for a mother to get herself out of a mistake. The mother is responsible for the life and the pregnancy of the unborn so she gets to make a choice. My own opinion doesn't matter and I'm not going impose my beliefs on others. Your higher being of choice (or lack thereof) will judge your actions.
There was a Catholic, a Protestant, and a Jew having this very debate.
The Catholic said,"Life begins at conception!"
The Protestant said, "Life begins at birth!"
The Jew said, "Oy, life begins when they finally graduate from college and move out!"
Quote: KeyserHave you ever noticed that the biggest abortion supporters are also the biggest PETA supporters?
Yup, and the biggest abortion ban supporters are also the biggest death penalty supporters. There's lots of hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle.
Where do I fit?
Quote: NareedWhere do I fit?
An Independent?
I wasn't meaning to bash either side, I just find it humorous that few have consistent viewpoint with regards to abortion and death penalty.
Quote: progrockerAn Independent?
I wasn't meaning to bash either side, I just find it humorous that few have consistent viewpoint with regards to abortion and death penalty.
When you consider the premises various sides operate on, they usually are consistent.
Quote: NareedWhen you consider the premises various sides operate on, they usually are consistent.
Yeah. TOO consistent. The trouble is, the right-wingers argue from emotion and/or religious ideology, neither of which are exactly stances conducive to cogent debate. I still have never received a satisfactory answer from any right-wingnut to my question about the government apparatus that would be necessary to enforce a ban on abortion. But then, they are also perfectly OK with a coercive theocracy roughly equivalent to that which exists in Iran or Saudi Arabia, so I guess a 100,000-strong Abortion Police and reeducation camps for young women fits right in for them.
I don't see how anyone's stances on abortion and on the death penalty have anything to do with each other. Any equating of the two would come from some specious argument such as "state-sponsored murder" or some similar tommyrot.
Quote: NareedFor the record I favor abortion on demand only in the first trimester. I wish PETA would curl up and die. And I support the death penalty for murder.
Where do I fit?
Somewhere in the right of centre in the overall scheme of the cultural index.
I don't care about PETA as they are idealogical flawed, I don't support the death penalty in any instance and I agree with the 1st trimester (12 week) rule, but have no real feeling on it in any case. I certainly don't subscribe to the argument of convenience of abortion, or that a woman has in all cases total control over her ability to become pregnant or otherwise.
Potential for life starts at conception, but actual, independent life is somewhere between that point and the point of birth (by natural or unnatural means). That point is different for each pregnancy, and my own view would be to err heavily on the side of caution, but not so far as to impose a stupidly strenuous rule that can punish parents and children for life.
Quote: mkl654321Monty Python sang "Every Sperm is Sacred", so you could also make an argument for forbidding abortions altogether.
Even the lyrics indicate that the opus may refer more to masturbation than abortion:
Let the heathens spill theirs
on the dusty plains
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.
If a conservative doesn’t like guns,
he doesn`t buy one.
If a liberal doesn’t like guns,
he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian,
he doesn`t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian,
he wants all meat products banned
for everyone.
If a conservative is homosexual,
he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual,
he demands legislated respect.
If a conservative is down-and-out,
he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going
to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like
be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer,
he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention
of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course !)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it,
or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands
that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this,
he’ll forward it
so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it
because he’s “offended”.
Quote: SanchoPanzaEven the lyrics indicate that the opus may refer more to masturbation than abortion:
Let the heathens spill theirs
on the dusty plains
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.
Haploids are terribly discriminated against.
Quote: SanchoPanzaEven the lyrics indicate that the opus may refer more to masturbation than abortion:
Let the heathens spill theirs
on the dusty plains
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.
Contraception is addressed as well, as is emphasized by the Protestant couple's discussion after witnessing the Catholic song and dance number. I need to give that film another viewing.
Quote: thecesspitPotential for life starts at conception, but actual, independent life is somewhere between that point and the point of birth (by natural or unnatural means). That point is different for each pregnancy, and my own view would be to err heavily on the side of caution, but not so far as to impose a stupidly strenuous rule that can punish parents and children for life.
The key word is "potential."
To say the fetus is alive is an equivocation. All cells in your body are alive, including your sperm or ova as the case may be. But as cells in your body are dependent of the rest of the body, so is the fetus in relation to the mother's body.
I agree that the point when the fetus can survive independently of the mother varies by individual situation, but the point is around six to seven months, if you have a state of the art neonatal ICU and neonatologists to match. Otherwise it's closer to 7 1/2 months.
There is no question, however, that a 120 day old fetus can't survive by any means outside the mother's body.
BTW I consider abortion a last resort, not a substitute for contraception. It's true that contraceptives can fail. If/when they do and the woman decides she'd be better off aborting, then that's her decision.
I also don't mind if left-over embryos from fertility treatments are discarded, donated, or used in research.
Quote: KeyserIf a conservative is a non-believer,
he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention
of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course !)
Not quite:
If a conservative is a non-believer,
other conservatives will call him a RINO.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention
of God and religion silenced
(Unless it's Islam, of course!)
There. Fixed it for you.
But we can also add:
If a liberal belives abortion is immoral,
other liberals will call him a racist and mysoginist.
If a conservative believes abortion is immoral,
he will want to ban abortion and impose death penalties on doctors who perform them.
I get by with develop and decay rationale. Most complex things are not a new thing immediately (one or more chemical and or physical process have to occur), but there is a stew (a middle point of development) where it is neither the thing that it was or the thing that it is becoming.
If abortion is occuring as early as possible, I have the least problem with it.
Quote: NareedThe key word is "potential."
I also don't mind if left-over embryos from fertility treatments are discarded, donated, or used in research.
Reminds me of a question posed to pro-lifers. If you were in a burning fertility clinic (the fire may or may not have been started by you) and as you were making you way out of the clinic you find a 40 lb toddler and a 40 lb container of viable embryos. You can only save one before everything is burned up, which one to you take out out of the clinic? I guess you can do the George Castanza and knock the kid and container over as you plow through the fire exit.
Wow, this thread devolved from smoking in casinos to smoking fertility clinics.
Quote: SanchoPanzaEven the lyrics indicate that the opus may refer more to masturbation than abortion:
Let the heathens spill theirs
on the dusty plains
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.
Right. But the original reason for banning "onanism" was that sperm that could be used for reproduction was being wasted. Therefore, sperm were being regarded as potential human beings. Not that the scientific knowledge of a small band of ancient desert nomads was very sophisticated in such matters.
What I find ludicrous is that abortion opponents still think the same way as those ancient desert nomads!
Quote: KeyserThe difference between liberals and conservatives.
If a liberal doesn't approve of abortions, he will say so over lattes at Starbuck's.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal disagrees with someone's religious views, he will shrug and talk to someone else.
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he will live in an urban area, and never visit a National Park.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importuned by a beggar, he will give that person a dollar.
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will call 911, and then attempt to help.
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
Quote: boymimboEvenBob... I agree with you, it is murder. From the way I view it, it's a loophole that gives mothers-to-be a choice to not take responsibility for the life that they've created. After all, really, having a child is a life-long commitment and is completely life-altering. Whether it's right or wrong is a debate for the ages.
Wow. Medieval, misogynist, and lunatic at the same time! What about the FATHERS' responsibilities?
Of course, you uncover the REAL reason why right-wingnuts hate the idea of abortions. They hate women, and compelling women to complete their pregnancies against their will would solidify men's control over them, and help set right that silly feminism and women's suffrage nonsense.
You SERIOUSLY believe that it is a superior outcome for society for an unwanted baby to be born? And a question I've asked before--how would your utopian conservative government prevent abortions? Mandatory registration and monitoring of pregnancies? Federal Abortion Police? The death penalty for mothers who don't carry their babies to term? (Perhaps there would be enough dedicated volunteers available to simply murder those women in the street, in the name of Godliness.)
Quote: mkl654321Wow. Medieval, misogynist, and lunatic at the same time! What about the FATHERS' responsibilities?
Of course, you uncover the REAL reason why right-wingnuts hate the idea of abortions. They hate women, and compelling women to complete their pregnancies against their will would solidify men's control over them, and help set right that silly feminism and women's suffrage nonsense.
You SERIOUSLY believe that it is a superior outcome for society for an unwanted baby to be born? And a question I've asked before--how would your utopian conservative government prevent abortions? Mandatory registration and monitoring of pregnancies? Federal Abortion Police? The death penalty for mothers who don't carry their babies to term? (Perhaps there would be enough dedicated volunteers available to simply murder those women in the street, in the name of Godliness.)
I do agree with with this. It will become an old testament draconian style society that would make far-out rights happy. Would need a license to have unprotected sex -- maybe a learner's permit first?
Quote: mkl654321You SERIOUSLY believe that it is a superior outcome for society for an unwanted baby to be born?
Hard to say.
But it's probably a better outcome for the baby.
Quote: I808I do agree with with this. It will become an old testament draconian style society that would make far-out rights happy. Would need a license to have unprotected sex -- maybe a learner's permit first?
Yet another possible way for the government to collect revenue and pay down the national debt! How about sex licenses? You can either buy a one-month license, or get the coupon book. You will simply report every time you have sex, using the audio feed in your implanted microchip. (You would have to be careful, though: If your mate was in the habit of crying, "More! More! More!", you might use up your entire coupon book in one night.)
Quote: mkl654321
You SERIOUSLY believe that it is a superior outcome for society for an unwanted baby to be born? And a question I've asked before--how would your utopian conservative government prevent abortions? Mandatory registration and monitoring of pregnancies? Federal Abortion Police? The death penalty for mothers who don't carry their babies to term? (Perhaps there would be enough dedicated volunteers available to simply murder those women in the street, in the name of Godliness.)
I'm not exactly sure how they do it, but there are plenty of countries that make abortion illegal after a period of time for the pregnancy(between 12-24 weeks, usually). I don't know their methods, but I doubt they have a federal abortion police to enforce the law, nor the death penalty for the mothers.
Quote: mkl654321You SERIOUSLY believe that it is a superior outcome for society for an unwanted baby to be born?
Lots of unwanted babies grow up to be happy and productive people. What crystal ball do you use to pick out the ones that won't? And why is it any of your goddam business?
Quote: EnvyBonusI'm not exactly sure how they do it, but there are plenty of countries that make abortion illegal after a period of time for the pregnancy(between 12-24 weeks, usually). I don't know their methods, but I doubt they have a federal abortion police to enforce the law, nor the death penalty for the mothers.
Then how would, or do, they enforce it? The same objections apply: if they diligently enforced that law, it would be a 1984esque nightmare; if they didn't enforce it, then it wouldn't really be a law at all.
Quote: mkl654321If a liberal doesn't approve of abortions, he will say so over lattes at Starbuck's.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal disagrees with someone's religious views, he will shrug and talk to someone else.
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he will live in an urban area, and never visit a National Park.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importuned by a beggar, he will give that person a dollar.
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will call 911, and then attempt to help.
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
Guess it's not difficult to determine how you vote...
Quote: mkl654321If a liberal doesn't approve of abortions, he will say so over lattes at Starbuck's.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal disagrees with someone's religious views, he will shrug and talk to someone else.
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he will live in an urban area, and never visit a National Park.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importuned by a beggar, he will give that person a dollar.
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will call 911, and then attempt to help.
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
I think you got it wrong on many counts:
If a liberal does not approve of abortions he will be refused permission to talk at the Democrat National Convention or banned from the democrat party.
If a conservative does not approve of abortion he or she will pray for the souls of the unborn.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman he will call her "trailer park trash" and hit on the nearest intern
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, hey, what is your problem with June Celaver? Ward stayed home most nights!
If a liberal is importruned by a beggar he will demand a social program to help him funded by "taxes on the rich."
If a conservative is importuned by a beggar he will rightly tell the person he is not giving them money to buy drugs or booze then put the $1 or more in a Salvation Army Kettle.
If a liberal sees someone injured and in need of help he will find a lawyer to help them sue anyone who even said "hello" to them
If a conservative sees someone injured and in need of help, he will help or get help. The volunteer fireman or EMT is probably also a coneservative.
If a liberal does not approve of abortions he will be refused permission to talk at the Democrat National Convention or banned from the democrat party.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman he will call her "trailer park trash" and hit on the nearest intern
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he's a liberal, and will flatten the tires of every SUV within a 10 mile radius.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importruned by a beggar he will demand a social program to help him funded by "taxes on the rich."
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone injured and in need of help he will find a lawyer to help them sue anyone who even said "hello" to them
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
I like this guy!Quote: boymimboHere in our house it goes like this:
If a liberal does not approve of abortions he will be refused permission to talk at the Democrat National Convention or banned from the democrat party.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman he will call her "trailer park trash" and hit on the nearest intern
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he's a liberal, and will flatten the tires of every SUV within a 10 mile radius.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importruned by a beggar he will demand a social program to help him funded by "taxes on the rich."
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone injured and in need of help he will find a lawyer to help them sue anyone who even said "hello" to them
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
Quote: PeteMI like this guy!
I'm liberal... my wife is conservative... it makes for an interesting marriage!
Quote: mkl654321If a liberal doesn't approve of abortions, he will say so over lattes at Starbuck's.
If a conservative doesn't approve of abortions, he will blow up a Planned Parenthood clinic.
If a liberal disagrees with someone's religious views, he will shrug and talk to someone else.
If a conservative disagrees with someone's religious views, he will try to have that person executed for heresy.
If a liberal doesn't care about the environment, he will live in an urban area, and never visit a National Park.
If a conservative doesn't care about the environment...he's a conservative. And he will vote to strip-mine Yosemite.
If a liberal is rejected by a woman, he will try to find someone else to talk to.
If a conservative is rejected by a woman, he will call her a "femi-Nazi" and resume his search for June Cleaver.
If a liberal is importuned by a beggar, he will give that person a dollar.
If a conservative is importuned by a begger, he will call the police.
If a liberal sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will call 911, and then attempt to help.
If a conservative sees someone who is injured and in need of assistance, he will walk on by, because if that person has insurance, he'll be taken care of, and if he doesn't, he deserves to bleed to death anyway.
What a pantload of stereotypical nonsense. Of course MKL said it, who else..
