Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
The death penalty is an archaic punishment that has outlived its use.
While moral arguments can be made for the death penalty for certain crimes, the practically of implementing such a punishment and having it be fair just is too difficult.
life without parole serves the exact same function as the death penalty and I would even advocate for a sort of voluntary death penalty where people who have life sentences can choose to be euthanized than to suffer many cruel years in prison.
[automerge]1703528092[/automerge]
As for abortion. Abortion is fine because fetuses objectively are not people.
They are alive but they do not have any of the mental characteristics that one would associate with personhood.
I would argue a dog is more sentient than a fetus.
While moral arguments can be made for the death penalty for certain crimes, the practically of implementing such a punishment and having it be fair just is too difficult.
life without parole serves the exact same function as the death penalty and I would even advocate for a sort of voluntary death penalty where people who have life sentences can choose to be euthanized than to suffer many cruel years in prison.
[automerge]1703528092[/automerge]
As for abortion. Abortion is fine because fetuses objectively are not people.
They are alive but they do not have any of the mental characteristics that one would associate with personhood.
I would argue a dog is more sentient than a fetus.
There is no such thing as "murdering kids" when you take away what is inthe womb until 13 to 15 weeks.
Unless you consider that plants needs to be all saved, there is no reason to be prolife up to a certain and large number of week. (consciousness only appear around the 20th week)
In fact, you are not prolife. If it was the case, you would be like me, a militant of people's identity, anticapitalist (as it creates homelessness and death), antiracist and feminist.
Yes, the reality is that you are not prolife, you don't really care about the life of a baby just as much as you don't care about the lifes of millions of people dead because of our society.
What you are is antifeminist. What you want is having a say about women's bodies.
And if that didn't convinced you, let's assume that a non existent consciousness has the right to life : Do you know the story about the violonist ?
Let me take you there by quoting Wiki:
""
In "A Defense of Abortion", Judith Jarvis Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appealing to a thought experiment:
For the same reason, Thomson says, abortion does not violate the fetus's legitimate right to life, but merely deprives the fetus of something – the non-consensual use of the pregnant woman's body and life-supporting functions – to which it has no right. Thus, by choosing to terminate her pregnancy, Thomson concludes that a pregnant woman does not normally violate the fetus's right to life, but merely withdraws its use of her own body, which usually causes the fetus to die.
""
And about the death penalty:
It has no effect, its archaic and its, this time, a real murder.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/act500062008en.pdf
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/s...e-the-death-penalty-is-an-effective-deterrent
https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf
Unless you consider that plants needs to be all saved, there is no reason to be prolife up to a certain and large number of week. (consciousness only appear around the 20th week)
In fact, you are not prolife. If it was the case, you would be like me, a militant of people's identity, anticapitalist (as it creates homelessness and death), antiracist and feminist.
Yes, the reality is that you are not prolife, you don't really care about the life of a baby just as much as you don't care about the lifes of millions of people dead because of our society.
What you are is antifeminist. What you want is having a say about women's bodies.
And if that didn't convinced you, let's assume that a non existent consciousness has the right to life : Do you know the story about the violonist ?
Let me take you there by quoting Wiki:
""
In "A Defense of Abortion", Judith Jarvis Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appealing to a thought experiment:
You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.
Thomson argues that one can now permissibly unplug oneself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: this is due to limits on the right to life, which does not include the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist, one does not violate his right to life but merely deprives him of something – the use of someone else's body – to which he has no right. "f you do allow him to go on using your kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due."For the same reason, Thomson says, abortion does not violate the fetus's legitimate right to life, but merely deprives the fetus of something – the non-consensual use of the pregnant woman's body and life-supporting functions – to which it has no right. Thus, by choosing to terminate her pregnancy, Thomson concludes that a pregnant woman does not normally violate the fetus's right to life, but merely withdraws its use of her own body, which usually causes the fetus to die.
""
And about the death penalty:
It has no effect, its archaic and its, this time, a real murder.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/act500062008en.pdf
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/s...e-the-death-penalty-is-an-effective-deterrent
https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf
Wrong. Prison exist ONLY to isolate dangerous people from society.
Prison nowadays are foundamentaly non efficient because people like you think that we should just punish when the answer is not punishment its rehabilitation. (And isolation for lost cases).
This leads to people just being there for minor crimes being sometimes radicalized to do something much worse, because there are no efforts given of rehabilitation in most cases.
The same way, the ISOLATION of a person for years IS the sentence. Prison is ONLY the localization of the sentence. Which brings us to question like : "what about human rights ?" Its not because someone commited a crime that their rights are forfeit, so they must STILL be treated well.
So, again, you are showing your far right side. You still thinks in an archaeic way, like middle age people were people were not only put in prison, but also tortured.
Being isolated for year and sometimes decade is already a torture (trust me on that), but living that in small unsanitized overpopulated cells, with people who sometimes did something far worse than you, with labor and human condition close to 0 and a disdain from the public.. is ALSO a torture.
So be honest, what you want is not longer sentence, its torture.
Prison nowadays are foundamentaly non efficient because people like you think that we should just punish when the answer is not punishment its rehabilitation. (And isolation for lost cases).
This leads to people just being there for minor crimes being sometimes radicalized to do something much worse, because there are no efforts given of rehabilitation in most cases.
The same way, the ISOLATION of a person for years IS the sentence. Prison is ONLY the localization of the sentence. Which brings us to question like : "what about human rights ?" Its not because someone commited a crime that their rights are forfeit, so they must STILL be treated well.
So, again, you are showing your far right side. You still thinks in an archaeic way, like middle age people were people were not only put in prison, but also tortured.
Being isolated for year and sometimes decade is already a torture (trust me on that), but living that in small unsanitized overpopulated cells, with people who sometimes did something far worse than you, with labor and human condition close to 0 and a disdain from the public.. is ALSO a torture.
So be honest, what you want is not longer sentence, its torture.
So because you don't like them and they did something horrible, they should get two sentences instead of one thus completely negating basic human rights AND on top of that work free for the states and being slaved ?
You have a conception of human life that is quite peculiar (/horrible) but its cool you want non conscious blobs of skins to have the right to live and you are ready to take away women's right of consent and body for that, so I guess its okay.. (I'm gonna vomit, I'll be right back)
Merry christmas everybody, but not the naughty ones
You have a conception of human life that is quite peculiar (/horrible) but its cool you want non conscious blobs of skins to have the right to live and you are ready to take away women's right of consent and body for that, so I guess its okay.. (I'm gonna vomit, I'll be right back)
Merry christmas everybody, but not the naughty ones
was talking the sources you used
they are long winded rants that pretty much have no objective information displayed
at least going by the one, I read
name 1 mainstream source that supports my vision???
last im to check all of them are literal leftist propaganda mills
look up the Duluth model
it's a practice favoring women's testimony in domestic violence cases
you are quite literally not going based on facts but rather ideological basis so like always
this but unironically
there is zero laws that are made to negatively affect solely black people or women
there are laws made specifically to help these groups such as affrimtive action and other such things
such would not be the case carrot if the current status quo seeks to opress women
almost like carrot, biden is a liberal leftist just like you
almost as if the status quo is leftist
and right wing is the counter culture
carrot, you arent against the status quo\
you are the status quo, just a liberal kid preaching liberal bs hoping some cnnn anchor hires him to preach about leftist values on leftist tv run by the leftist quo that you carrot are apart of
cool
the average joe has no power
their view is not in line with the larger liberal leftist
the systematic powers arent really representative of the average joe
but rather more representative of liberals like you
your demonstrations
mean jack shit
again because it's not in line with reality
nobody believed johnny dept against amber heard
at least with regards to mainstream media and leftists like you
so literally wtf you talking about beyond just making stuff up to support your deluional beliefs
and your different how??
you base your im right on far left propaganda and your own feelings
so because some random forum with random people makes fun of you and disagrees with you
that therefore equates to your view not being suppported
i was talking about mainstream media and world governments not a unknown forum
random people gonna reject leftist more then the cnn of the world cause one is a leftsit source that agrees with your pol,tics and the other is a forum where anybody and anyone can post
if you wanna make a change here maybe invent some of your fellow liberals from twitter
[automerge]1703532316[/automerge]
so by your logic
people in a coma are not alive
Last edited:
I’m against abortion and the death penalty.
I’m against abortion because I think it’s anti women. Western society wants women to think that an abortion is easier than pregnancy and raising a child. I know rape and incest need to be taken into account, but an abortion won’t heal a woman from such trauma. In fact it only adds to it. I think if a woman has an abortion, she should have counseling to help her emotionally. We need a society where women know that there are better options than abortion. Seriously babies are precious and we are biologically programmed to protect our most vulnerable, so how can we kill them?
I’m against the death penalty because there’s been instances where a person was exonerated after they were killed. In the US we need to fix our Justice system because it’s blatantly racist.
I’m against abortion because I think it’s anti women. Western society wants women to think that an abortion is easier than pregnancy and raising a child. I know rape and incest need to be taken into account, but an abortion won’t heal a woman from such trauma. In fact it only adds to it. I think if a woman has an abortion, she should have counseling to help her emotionally. We need a society where women know that there are better options than abortion. Seriously babies are precious and we are biologically programmed to protect our most vulnerable, so how can we kill them?
I’m against the death penalty because there’s been instances where a person was exonerated after they were killed. In the US we need to fix our Justice system because it’s blatantly racist.
Last edited: