Election Day at K-GOV

[Stripe]

Murder has not ended anywhere, despite it being illegal virtually everywhere.

You're a complete head-in-the-sand moron! MURDER IS LEGAL virtually the world over. That's what is going to be ended.

There is no guarantee, save the end of the world itself. Do things that save lives. Don't try to rely on the government as your remedy.

What is the government doing?

Um, no it wasn't, lunkhead. Last time it ran was in a huge democratic wave. This time, democrats didn't vote. The electorate was mostly older and conservative. I'd forgive you for this error since you don't actually live in the US but you decided to wax stupid instead of recognizing your own ignorance.

Colorado and Colorado. You cannot hide an increased vote for personhood behind an increase in conservative voters.

It is an accurate statement that has been widely reported. Turnout in midterm elections is almost always biased this way, this year more than others. Point being this was probably the best imaginable shot for the measure and it Epic failed.

I guess a lesser man would be tempted to give up then. :idunno:

No, I said there was almost no chance of a measure PASSING if 70% oppose it.

And I showed you a measure that was INTRODUCED in spite of more than 70% opposition when you said there is no chance of a measure being enacted with less than 30% of the popular vote.

Learn to debate honestly. The democratic process has no moral nor practical implication for future efforts to stop the murder of children.

 

[Alate_One]

You're a complete head-in-the-sand moron! MURDER IS LEGAL virtually the world over. That's what is going to be ended.

Murder of people that are born is illegal, moron. You knew what I was talking about and ignored the point. When has something being illegal stopped it cold?

What is the government doing?

If abortion were illegal, government would be enforcing this law. Of course it is very hard to enforce, much harder than enforcing other crimes. You'd have to monitor pregnancies and make sure they resulted in a live birth. Or would you put hidden cameras in women's clinics?

Did you know abortion was illegal in the US during the 1930s? Did you know one abortion doctor during that time estimated that the ratio of abortions to live births was almost 5 to 1?

Because of the terrible shame involved with having a child out of wedlock, women would kill themselves if they could not get an abortion. But I'm sure you and others think those were the "good old days".

Colorado and Colorado. You cannot hide an increased vote for personhood behind an increase in conservative voters.

Stripe, you're being purposefully stupid. Not everyone votes in every election, different subsets do depending on who and what is on the ballot, how they feel etc. Even different subsets are registered year to year.

And I showed you a measure that was INTRODUCED in spite of more than 70% opposition when you said there is no chance of a measure being enacted with less than 30% of the popular vote.

I didn't see any measure you linked having 70% opposition to start with.

Learn to debate honestly. The democratic process has no moral nor practical implication for future efforts to stop the murder of children.

It doesn't? Then why on earth are you using the democratic process to try and stop it? :kookoo: Are you actually thinking about what you say before you say it?

 

[Stripe]

Murder of people that are born is illegal, moron. You knew what I was talking about and ignored the point. When has something being illegal stopped it cold?

And when has the possibility of something not stopping cold been justification for ignoring it?

Murder is legal the world over. That is what is being resisted. Your equivocation is irrelevant.

If abortion were illegal, government would be enforcing this law. Of course it is very hard to enforce, much harder than enforcing other crimes. You'd have to monitor pregnancies and make sure they resulted in a live birth. Or would you put hidden cameras in women's clinics?

When you learn how to respond honestly to the argument at hand we might be able to discuss how stupid this analysis is.

Not everyone votes in every election, different subsets do depending on who and what is on the ballot, how they feel etc. Even different subsets are registered year to year.

At yet here you are comparing results from different years...

I didn't see any measure you linked having 70% opposition to start with.

That's because you're not willing to think. I linked to a measure that was enacted despite overwhelming opposition. Your argument that public action is a waste of time for a minority idea is completely bankrupt.

It doesn't? Then why on earth are you using the democratic process to try and stop it?

Because it might be of some benefit, used correctly.

Try to read what I say before saying dumb things. :up: