DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
The Forum
HTML https://thewiforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: State and local topics
*****************************************************
#Post#: 12046--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: ecsmith2
Date: February 27, 2014, 4:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
> Liberals are generous with other people's assets! :)
> Conservatives like to do things way they always did things
BECAUSE THOSE WAYS WORK! :o
>
>
> As for pro life shooting a burglar, if you don't shoot him he
just might kill you! :o
>
--- End Quote ---
I am just trying to understand you now. Your feeling is that
pro-life people can be involved with the death of another human
being, as long as it fits the standards that they approve of
having, correct?
#Post#: 12053--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: wmd102
Date: February 27, 2014, 6:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ecsmith2 link ---
>
>
> I am just trying to understand you now. Your feeling is that
pro-life people can be involved with the death of another human
being, as long as it fits the standards that they approve of
having, correct?
>
--- End Quote ---
First of all, I don't recommend basing any decision on feelings
as long as there are facts to be discovered. You might want to
try it sometime!
Any right can be forfeit if you are willing to deprive others in
no uncertain terms!
#Post#: 12056--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: ecsmith2
Date: February 27, 2014, 6:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
> First of all, I don't recommend basing any decision on
feelings as long as there are facts to be discovered. You might
want to try it sometime!
> Any right can be for it if you are willing to deprive others
in no uncertain terms!
>
--- End Quote ---
I agree. I was doing this right now. That is why I asked you
the question, to determine the fact of what your belief is about
what I asked. I figured you would be the source of that
information, instead of making up what I wanted to believe about
your belief.
If you could just answer the question, we could proceed with the
discussion.
I am not trying to trick you at all, I just am trying to make
sure I get my understanding of what you believe right.
#Post#: 12061--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: wmd102
Date: February 27, 2014, 7:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ecsmith2 link ---
>
>
> I agree. I was doing this right now. That is why I asked you
the question, to determine the fact of what your belief is about
what I asked. I figured you would be the source of that
information, instead of making up what I wanted to believe about
your belief.
>
> If you could just answer the question, we could proceed with
the discussion.
>
> I am not trying to trick you at all, I just am trying to make
sure I get my understanding of what you believe right.
>
>
>
--- End Quote ---
First, please re-read my previous and updated post. Spell check
malfunction!
Back to your question, I do not care what a person believes or
feels or feels as long as it does not manifest itself in the
form of harming me, my family or my property! To make a long
story short DARWIN AWARD APPLICATION TIME! >:( :( :
I hope this answers your question!
#Post#: 12064--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: ecsmith2
Date: February 27, 2014, 8:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
> First, please re-read my previous and updated post. Spell
check malfunction!
> Back to your question, I do not care what a person believes or
feels or feels as long as it does not manifest itself in the
form of harming me, my family or my property! To make a long
story short DARWIN AWARD APPLICATION TIME! >:( :( :
> I hope this answers your question!
>
>
--- End Quote ---
You just seem to be avoiding answering the question with a
direct simple answer. And I don't really know why.
Your hope is misplaced.
The question was do you believe a pro-life person can have that
moral stance and still kill an intruder in his home in self
defense?
A simple yes or no would suffice. If you want to add any other
details, that would be fine also.
I have no problem with an individual killing in self defense.
#Post#: 12076--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: wmd102
Date: February 28, 2014, 6:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ecsmith2 link ---
>
>
> You just seem to be avoiding answering the question with a
direct simple answer. And I don't really know why.
>
> Your hope is misplaced.
>
> The question was do you believe a pro-life person can have
that moral stance and still kill an intruder in his home in self
defense?
>
> A simple yes or no would suffice. If you want to add any
other details, that would be fine also.o
>
> I have no problem with an individual killing in self defense.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Well why didn't you ask it way in the first place?
The answer is YES! NEXT QUESTION!
#Post#: 12083--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: Sheila
Date: February 28, 2014, 8:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
> Well why didn't you ask it way in the first place?
> The answer is YES! NEXT QUESTION!
>
--- End Quote ---
The term, "Pro-Life" as it has been marketed by the
anti-abortion groups is loaded with two tons of guilt. I do not
advocate for abortions. Yet, I do not consider myself
"pro-life". I will support my life, and others around me to the
best of my abilities. Yet, I will also hunt small game, and take
only that which I can eat. Self defense, which may result in an
aggressor's death is a natural instinct. There is nothing
"pro-life" about it.
#Post#: 12097--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: ecsmith2
Date: February 28, 2014, 12:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
> Well why didn't you ask it way in the first place?
> The answer is YES! NEXT QUESTION!
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, that is what I asked in the first place, just with fewer
words so it wasn't convoluted.
So "pro-life", for anyone that believes that way, is not the
elimination of killing humans by other humans, it would actually
be the "pro-choice" position just with a different set of
standards over when a human life can be taken.
Could you agree with that?
Again, not trying to trick anyone into saying anything they
don't want to say. I would like to get rid of the labeling that
gets in the way of discussing the real issue, what reasoning do
we have for when it is ethical to end a human life prematurely.
#Post#: 12102--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: wmd102
Date: February 28, 2014, 3:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ecsmith2 link ---
>
>
> Well, that is what I asked in the first place, just with fewer
words so it wasn't convoluted.
>
> So "pro-life", for anyone that believes that way, is not the
elimination of killing humans by other humans, it would actually
be the "pro-choice" position just with a different set of
standards over when a human life can be taken.
>
> Could you agree with that?
>
> Again, not trying to trick anyone into saying anything they
don't want to say. I would like to get rid of the labeling that
gets in the way of discussing the real issue, what reasoning do
we have for when it is ethical to end a human life prematurely.
>
--- End Quote ---
"Kill or be killed" does not seem like much of a choice to me!
>:(
As for self defense killing, could you explain what an unborn
child could have ever done to be threat to merit the ultimate
price?
Agreement at this point seems unlikely.
--- Quote from: Sheila link ---
>
> The term, "Pro-Life" as it has been marketed by the
anti-abortion groups is loaded with two tons of guilt. I do not
advocate for abortions. Yet, I do not consider myself
"pro-life". I will support my life, and others around me to the
best of my abilities. Yet, I will also hunt small game, and take
only that which I can eat. Self defense, which may result in an
aggressor's death is a natural instinct. There is nothing
"pro-life" about it.
>
>
>
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Sheila, every deer that a hunter shoots is one that a car won't
hit! :P
#Post#: 12107--------------------------------------------------
Re: Is an Individual Capable of Running a State if he Doesn't
Know the Obvious?
DIR By: ecsmith2
Date: February 28, 2014, 5:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wmd102 link ---
>
>
> "Kill or be killed" does not seem like much of a choice to me!
>:(
> As for self defense killing, could you explain what an unborn
child could have ever done to be threat to merit the ultimate
price?
>
> .....snip.....
>
--- End Quote ---
Every conscious action a human being takes is a choice. Some
one that believes they have the morals to never kill another
human belief would be violating their own moral belief by
killing in self defense. I don't see how that is hard to see.
As I have posted previously, the even the Catholic Church can
find the circumstances to be moral in the ending of the life of
a fetus. All the Catholic Church needs is to ignore the fetus
completely, and only focus on the medical treatment of the
mother. If the treatment of the mother ends the life of the
fetus, as long as there was no intention to kill the fetus, it
is perfectly moral.
Who is talking about what a fetus has done to "pay the ultimate
price"? Not me. Don't try to pull that in this thread, I have
had enough of that from trollslayer.
I was in now way comparing a fetus to an armed attacker in
someone's home. I was comparing a "pro-life" person with a
"pro-choice" person and trying to say they really are both
prochoice, they just have different standards when it comes to
ending the life of another human being.
I regard to the innocent fetus situation, the pro-life person
has moral reasoning to make the decision for other people to not
end the life of other peoples' fetuses, not just their own. The
pro-choice people want to allow an individual make an ethical
medical decision with a physician about their health care. The
only way to make that decision for other people is through laws,
and using their morals is usually their religious belief, and in
the Constitution, the founders didn't want religious beliefs to
be used to make laws. The ethical medical decision making
process does not use religion, but the individual can easily use
their own religious beliefs as part of the processes. and since
the individual is only making the choice about their own health,
it would not be affecting anyone else's religious beliefs.
Many at this point would being up that there are two individuals
at conception, and technically that is true. But it is also
technically true that they are just one individual until the
fetus is viable. The Supreme Court has reached the conclusion
that they are just one, with the mother able to make the medical
decisions for the complete organism without interference by
others, until the fetus is viable, and then they see two
different organisms.
Someone one deciding to have an abortion does nothing to violate
anyone else's religious beliefs against having abortions. Have
your religious beliefs in this country does not extend to having
the belief that individuals cannot be allowed to commit actions
what some other person finds immoral.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page