Political Self-Identification Pole

I'm probably more of a left libertarian than right libertarian but whatever. I do think the country is going to grow more libertarian over time. Its moving liberal on social issues (marriage, abortion, drugs). Once the economy gets out of this mess the population will be more in favor of libertarian economic policy. Ron Paul & Gary Johnson will end up being way ahead of their time.

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

I almost went field, as I have traces of right-republican and right-evangelical in there too. Mostly I'm a libertarian who is against abortion (except in cases where the mother's life is in danger) and dgaf about weed either way.

Also, FMFYFGOPFDFE

Yeah I can't wrap my head around abortion positions like that. You think abortion is murdering a child, correct? How is that okay because the mothers life is in danger? Shouldn't that be left to gods will or something?

Honestly, it seems more like you're making a concession rather than standing by your principles. I respect that you think rape babies shouldn't be aborted. You're a monster for that. But I can respect the principle. I just don't get the mother in danger part.

Actually I think it's the most consistent position. I support other situations where you take life to protect life: self defense, war (occasionally), death penalty, etc. I'm for life but not so idealistic as to think there's not situations where you have to pick one life over another. If it's baby or mom I can understand picking mom.

I think this is extremely massively rare, though.

Why is the mom's life more valuable than the baby's?

Blackie said:

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

I almost went field, as I have traces of right-republican and right-evangelical in there too. Mostly I'm a libertarian who is against abortion (except in cases where the mother's life is in danger) and dgaf about weed either way.

Also, FMFYFGOPFDFE

Yeah I can't wrap my head around abortion positions like that. You think abortion is murdering a child, correct? How is that okay because the mothers life is in danger? Shouldn't that be left to gods will or something?

Honestly, it seems more like you're making a concession rather than standing by your principles. I respect that you think rape babies shouldn't be aborted. You're a monster for that. But I can respect the principle. I just don't get the mother in danger part.

Actually I think it's the most consistent position. I support other situations where you take life to protect life: self defense, war (occasionally), death penalty, etc. I'm for life but not so idealistic as to think there's not situations where you have to pick one life over another. If it's baby or mom I can understand picking mom.

I think this is extremely massively rare, though.

Why is the mom's life more valuable than the baby's?

I didn't say it is, I just said if somebody has to make this choice I'm fine with someone choosing that way. I honestly can't say what I'd choose in that situation.

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

I almost went field, as I have traces of right-republican and right-evangelical in there too. Mostly I'm a libertarian who is against abortion (except in cases where the mother's life is in danger) and dgaf about weed either way.

Also, FMFYFGOPFDFE

Yeah I can't wrap my head around abortion positions like that. You think abortion is murdering a child, correct? How is that okay because the mothers life is in danger? Shouldn't that be left to gods will or something?

Honestly, it seems more like you're making a concession rather than standing by your principles. I respect that you think rape babies shouldn't be aborted. You're a monster for that. But I can respect the principle. I just don't get the mother in danger part.

Actually I think it's the most consistent position. I support other situations where you take life to protect life: self defense, war (occasionally), death penalty, etc. I'm for life but not so idealistic as to think there's not situations where you have to pick one life over another. If it's baby or mom I can understand picking mom.

I think this is extremely massively rare, though.

To be clear, you just compared unborn babies to criminals, murderers and war. And you're calling that your most consistent position.

I didn't say it's *my* most consistent position, I said it's *the* most important position (against abortion). Sounds like GoldShower needs to learn the difference.

And I didn't compare unborn babies to any of those, I just said I'm willing to acknowledge that sometimes we have to choose one life over the other. It's messy, but that's life.

You did specifically say "it's the most consistent position". So, if it's the most consistent position , and it's your position, it would be fair to posit that it's your most consistent position. I also think you meant consistent position in regards to all abortion positions which just wasn't how I read it. I don't see how it's more consistent than "unborn babies aren't people, therefore, kill them all you like" though.

Right. Sometimes we have to choose one over the other. Like when someone is going to kill someone or already has killed someone. Also, when an innocent unborn baby has done nothing at all. Sometimes it's ok to kill them.

Do you not see how insane that is? How do you justify giving citizens the right to murder an innocent human being in this circumstance?

You are comparing them. I don't want to be a dictionary asshole, to you at least, but you brought them up to note the similarity (they're all situations that you have to choose one life over another). That's a comparison. If it wasn't a comparison then what the fuck did you bring those situations up for?

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

allpurpleallgold said:

dnc said:

I almost went field, as I have traces of right-republican and right-evangelical in there too. Mostly I'm a libertarian who is against abortion (except in cases where the mother's life is in danger) and dgaf about weed either way.

Also, FMFYFGOPFDFE

Yeah I can't wrap my head around abortion positions like that. You think abortion is murdering a child, correct? How is that okay because the mothers life is in danger? Shouldn't that be left to gods will or something?

Honestly, it seems more like you're making a concession rather than standing by your principles. I respect that you think rape babies shouldn't be aborted. You're a monster for that. But I can respect the principle. I just don't get the mother in danger part.

Actually I think it's the most consistent position. I support other situations where you take life to protect life: self defense, war (occasionally), death penalty, etc. I'm for life but not so idealistic as to think there's not situations where you have to pick one life over another. If it's baby or mom I can understand picking mom.

I think this is extremely massively rare, though.

To be clear, you just compared unborn babies to criminals, murderers and war. And you're calling that your most consistent position.

I didn't say it's *my* most consistent position, I said it's *the* most important position (against abortion). Sounds like GoldShower needs to learn the difference.

And I didn't compare unborn babies to any of those, I just said I'm willing to acknowledge that sometimes we have to choose one life over the other. It's messy, but that's life.

You did specifically say "it's the most consistent position". So, if it's the most consistent position , and it's your position, it would be fair to posit that it's your most consistent position. I also think you meant consistent position in regards to all abortion positions which just wasn't how I read it. I don't see how it's more consistent than "unborn babies aren't people, therefore, kill them all you like" though.

Right. Sometimes we have to choose one over the other. Like when someone is going to kill someone or already has killed someone. Also, when an innocent unborn baby has done nothing at all. Sometimes it's ok to kill them.

Do you not see how insane that is? How do you justify giving citizens the right to murder an innocent human being in this circumstance?

You are comparing them. I don't want to be a dictionary asshole, to you at least, but you brought them up to note the similarity (they're all situations that you have to choose one life over another). That's a comparison. If it wasn't a comparison then what the fuck did you bring those situations up for?

disagree