Pro-life and Democrat

[Ktoyou]

At least the Democratic party wants to do everything it can to PREVENT as many abortions as possible by providing poor women with the medical care they need as well as contraceptives - the things which enable poor own to avoid unwanted pregnancies and to be able to provide for children if they are pregnant .
Trump and the Republicans want to abolish Obamacare , but they don't have anything better to perplexed it .The Trump administration is trying to abolish essential government programs to help the poor - especially poor pregnant women . This will e guaranteed to INCREASE the abortion rate in America .
Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats genuinely care about children born to poor women . They do not want these children to grow up hungry, malnourished , living in poor, unsanitary , cold housing and without medical care .
The Republican party's concern for the unborn invariably ends at birth . Then, it';s "You're on your own, kid . We just wanted tomato sure your mother didn't have an abortion ".

It is just as simple as wealthy persons paying almost all the taxes in this country being sick of doing so. That is the main issue I see, too much offered to the poor destroys their incentive to work when they can receive almost the same standard of living on the dole.

Just sick and tired of being one adult who has to take care of other adults because they never grew up!

 

[Town Heretic]

It is just as simple as wealthy persons paying almost all the taxes in this country being sick of doing so. That is the main issue I see, too much offered to the poor destroys their incentive to work when they can receive almost the same standard of living on the dole.

I was with you until the end of that, because we both know the standard of living the poor would receive if we dedicated ourselves to a living wage floor would be far below what those of us who have or have experienced the life provided by having substantial means experience(d).

Travel, both abroad and at home, cultural exposure, quality of everything from the sheets on your bed to the food in your pantry is simply on a different level. And it would be if we did a better job for the poor, though I'd agree that job should be tied into production of some sort where possible. Let's have another TVA or the like. Our infrastructure is a mess and there's plenty of work to be done.

Just sick and tired of being one adult who has to take care of other adults because they never grew up!

I wonder if Jesus ever gets tired of forgiving us on that same principle.

It's worth considering at any rate.

 

[Stripe]

I wonder if Jesus ever gets tired of forgiving us on that same principle.

Your emotionalism destroys the gospel. Forgiveness comes through Jesus' work on the cross and His resurrection. That only happened once and "it is finished."

He didn't "get tired of it"; it killed Him.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[ok doser]

... too much offered to the poor destroys their incentive to work when they can receive almost the same standard of living on the dole.

similarly, prison is viewed by many of the desperately poor in the inner city as a rite of passage, as an improvement in their circumstances in many ways

in both cases, the primary goal is not addressed, to get the individual back on track to being a productive member of society

Just sick and tired of being one adult who has to take care of other adults because they never grew up!

the siren song of faux concern is appealing to the likes of Horn - he can posture as "caring" while achieving his primary goal - that of bashing the right

unfortunately, his level of caring is flawed as it is based not on logic and reasoning, but emotion

and as long as it avoids any mention of taking responsibility for oneself - the true hallmark of adulthood

 

[Town Heretic]

Your emotionalism destroys the gospel.

You just say emotionalism because I'm a rationalist and you think that's the best way to do what you really want to do while you pretend to do the noble defense thingamabob. Silly business. You need to let go of that bruise. It's not doing you any favors.

Forgiveness comes through Jesus' work on the cross and His resurrection.

And water is wet.

That only happened once and "it is finished."

Right.

He didn't "get tired of it"; it killed Him.

So you didn't understand what I was saying to her...why didn't you just say that?

Ah, I forgot. You sort of just did.

 

[Stripe]

You just say emotionalism because I'm a rationalist.

No, it's because you responded to an idea you don't like with an appeal to emotion.

You know, the opposite of a rational argument.

You think that's the best way to do what you really want to do.

You didn't understand what I was saying to her.

How nice for you.

Meanwhile, God forgave once and for all.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[ok doser]

Your emotionalism destroys the gospel. Forgiveness comes through Jesus' work on the cross and His resurrection. That only happened once and "it is finished."

He didn't "get tired of it"; it killed Him.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

the parable of the good samaritan:

Luke 10:30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. 33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, 34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.

the "certain man" who was left stripped, wounded and half dead bore no resemblance to these children who don't want to take on adult responsibility:

 

[Town Heretic]

No, it's because you responded to an idea you don't like with an appeal to emotion.

No, that's just how you chose to read it and for the reason noted prior, which is why you first tried the :rotfl: bit before finding an "in"...which is really kind of sad and pointless. You need to move on and give that up.

Kat was saying that she gets tired of helping those who won't help themselves, in essence. The point of my answer was to remind her that Christ sacrificed for all of us and we could be aptly described as being, spiritually, exactly as she sees those who won't do for themselves materially.

Meanwhile, God forgave once and for all.

I'll give this to you though, when it comes to arguing points no one is arguing you're aces. :thumb:

 

[ok doser]

Just sick and tired of being one adult who has to take care of other adults because they never grew up!

liberals reject 2 Thessalonians 3:10

 

[ok doser]

At least the Democratic party wants to do everything it can to PREVENT as many abortions as possible ...

why?

the democratic party does not believe that an unborn child has an inherent right to life, correct?

why then would they not view abortion at any stage a viable form of birth control?

 

[Stripe]

The point of my answer was to remind her that Christ sacrificed for all of us and we could be aptly described as being, spiritually, exactly as she sees those who won't do for themselves materially.

It was an appeal to emotion.

Try to make rational points. That's what one would expect from a rationalist.

I'll give this to you though, when it comes to arguing points no one is arguing you're aces. :thumb:

:AMR:

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Town Heretic]

It was an appeal to emotion.

That's an appeal to repetition.

Still wrong though.

 

[Stripe]

That's an appeal to repetition.

Still wrong though.

Nope. Your words.

You think something is wrong with wanting people to grow up and you used an appeal to emotion to try to convince her of it.

Shouldn't a "rationalist" stick to rational responses.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope. Your words.

I did use words, but not to appeal to emotion.

I wonder what the over/under is for you repeating that in new and entertaining ways until you hit your go-to emoji.

 

[Stripe]

Not to appeal to emotion.

Sure, you did. You think your idea of Jesus' forgiveness is a model for dealing with obstinate or childish people. You didn't explain anything, you just left it to the imagination if there was any rationality behind your admonition.

Shouldn't a "rationalist" stick to rational arguments?

I wonder what the over/under is for you repeating that in new and entertaining ways until you hit your go-to emoji.

:rotfl:

:mock: Town.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Town Heretic]

Sure, you did.

No. You just didn't get it. Now you just don't want to.

:rotfl:

:mock: Town.

Not much of an over, but one heck of an under.

 

[Stripe]

You need to move on and give that up and stop being redundant by saying the same thing twice.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Stripe]

You just didn't get it.

Nobody knows what you're talking about. :idunno:

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Town Heretic]

Nobody knows what you're talking about.

Well, not if they're getting their understanding from you.

 

[Stripe]

Well, not if they're getting their understanding from you.

You're the one declaring that I do not get "it."

Nobody knows what "it" is.

You made an appeal to emotion and got called on it*. Now you're dissembling. :idunno:

* Note how when I say "it," what I'm referring to is obvious.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk