Jump to content

Name a Right Wing Position


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

You know the answer to that even if if you do not believe it.  You do not have the liberty to kill a child. It is not just your body"

 

 


so you’re saying your idea of Republican policy has an underlying fallacy, that individual liberty is always stopped by the liberties of others.

 

Ill quote you since it’s so rare you give an actual opinion a quoting a random webpage “The God given,  say nature given if you would rather,  LIBERTY of the INDIVIDUAL.”

 

Here you just admit that the liberty of the individual will coincide with the

liberty of other individuals.

 

In a society, the liberty of the individual doesn’t exist. There’s always implications and limits on ones liberty as not to impact another’s liberty. 
 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, SCBills said:


“All time high of unaccompanied minors”

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/immigration-unaccompanied-children-border-custody-record-19k/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i&_amp=1*n4yn7w*s_vid*ZGhYYXJPajNkN1ZSbnZJdjdxOFBRRDFkUkdBd2VTNFd6OXZxbkpfd0xTNGxzR1ZiVXN1T1U5WU5zbHJObzdoTw..

 

Agree to disagree on the Maoist woke authoritarian influence of a growing element of the Democratic Party.   
 


As a pro- life person wouldn’t you agree it’s best to put a child’s position in the best circumstances to succeed? Or are you reverting to pro-birth let them be born and then let them pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

 

I don’t know if you’re a parent or not, but if you had a kid and had a chance to offer them a better life or maybe a life where they would live longer, wouldn’t you give do what you could to give it to them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


so you’re saying your idea of Republican policy has an underlying fallacy, that individual liberty is always stopped by the liberties of others.

 

Ill quote you since it’s so rare you give an actual opinion a quoting a random webpage “The God given,  say nature given if you would rather,  LIBERTY of the INDIVIDUAL.”

 

Here you just admit that the liberty of the individual will coincide with the

liberty of other individuals.

 

In a society, the liberty of the individual doesn’t exist. There’s always implications and limits on ones liberty as not to impact another’s liberty. 
 

 

 

 


As a pro- life person wouldn’t you agree it’s best to put a child’s position in the best circumstances to succeed? Or are you reverting to pro-birth let them be born and then let them pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

 

I don’t know if you’re a parent or not, but if you had a kid and had a chance to offer them a better life or maybe a life where they would live longer, wouldn’t you give do what you could to give it to them?


You seem to be arguing for straight up euthanasia.   At what point do we try to protect a defenseless life?  
 

If we only deem life born into certain circumstance as worth saving - And this is all determined by quality of life, with no moral equivocate given to the actual humanity of life - then why don’t we allow parents to kill a six month old if circumstance changes and that child is no longer in a situation one would deem ideal?  Or do you believe we should be able to kill that six month old?

 

Edited by SCBills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


so you’re saying  --  Whenever any Lib starts with this, they misinterpret what you have said

 

In a society, the liberty of the individual doesn’t exist. There’s always implications and limits on ones liberty as not to impact another’s liberty. 
 

 Amazingly poor reasoning

 

 

 


As a pro- life person wouldn’t you agree it’s best to put a child’s position in the best circumstances to succeed? Or are you reverting to pro-birth let them be born and then let them pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

The bootstraps remark proves that you are not serious,   anyway the child's best position is not in the wastebasket

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SCBills said:


You seem to be arguing for straight up euthanasia.   At what point do we try to protect a defenseless life?  
 

If we only deem life born into certain circumstance as worth saving - And this is all determined by quality of life, with no moral equivocate given to the actual humanity of life - then why don’t we allow parents to kill a six month old if circumstance changes and that child is no longer in a situation one was deem ideal?  Or do believe we should be able to kill that six month old?


No Im arguing let’s take care of the kids/people that actually are born over the unborn. If you can’t take care of those actually living then why care about if they’re born or not?

 

And really we can make this issue moot by teaching things and promoting things like birth control in schools which has statistically proven to lower the birth rate. Yet the Republican Party has been against that for

religious reasons.

 

If they were really pro- life, then it should start with sex Ed. 

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 


Name one situation in life where ones liberty doesn’t infringe on another’s 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


No Im arguing let’s take care of the kids/people that actually are born over the unborn. If you can’t take care of those actually living then why care about if they’re born or not?

 

And really we can make this issue moot by teaching things and promoting things like birth control in schools which has statistically proven to lower the birth rate. Yet the Republican Party has been against that for

religious reasons.

 

If they were really pro- life, then it should start with sex Ed. 


Again, we have a philosophical difference on life.  You believe there’s a difference between an unborn life vs a born life.  I don’t.  
 

Agreed.  I’m not against any of those preventative measures.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...control what we read and teach our children and deny our history.... censure debate..."

 

Meanwhile:

  • GQP wants to deny 1/6
  • GQP pass laws that control transgender children and restrict how we teach race in schools...
  • GQP = cult = facsists

The hypocrisy... lmao

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

A Conservative position is "Staying Informed.

 

VIEWERS OF CONSERVATIVE MEDIA MORE LIKELY TO GET THE FACTS RIGHT ON TOPICS IN THE NEWS

 

If you ever assumed that Americans who watch or listen to conservative news outlets are better informed on topics in the news, you would be correct.

That is not anecdotal.

 

According to a new poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports for The Heartland Institute, “There is a strong correlation between a likely voter’s favorite television news outlet and his or her understanding of basic facts about important topics in the news.”

 

The poll asked 1,000 likely voters a series of questions about a wide variety of news events and which news outlets they prefer.

 

Here are a few overall highlights from the poll.

 

“Generally speaking, respondents who identified CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, or NBC as their ‘favorite’ TV news outlet were more likely to incorrectly answer questions about the national debt, the income tax rate paid by the wealthy, and the percentage of the population that’s uninsured than the viewers of Fox News or ‘another’ cable or network news station (such as The Blaze TV or Newsmax).”

 

“Our survey also seems to indicate that those who do not watch cable news or network news are more likely to answer our questions about the news accurately than the viewers of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, or NBC.”

 

“Although viewers of Fox News and other cable networks were most likely to correctly select the percentage of the U.S. population without health care coverage, a sizeable percentage of these audiences also underestimated the size of the insured population (82%).”

 

By far, the biggest takeaway from the poll is that one’s knowledge about factual news events is directly correlated with their media preferences. And vice-versa.

 

For instance, when likely voters were asked what the national debt of the United States currently stands at (answer: $28 trillion), “69% of CBS viewers and 65% of NBC viewers underestimated the national debt, compared to 44% for those who said they don’t watch network news.”

 

More at the linK:

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/rasmussenheartland-poll-news

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

A Conservative position is "Staying Informed.

 

VIEWERS OF CONSERVATIVE MEDIA MORE LIKELY TO GET THE FACTS RIGHT ON TOPICS IN THE NEWS

 

If you ever assumed that Americans who watch or listen to conservative news outlets are better informed on topics in the news, you would be correct.

That is not anecdotal.

 

According to a new poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports for The Heartland Institute, “There is a strong correlation between a likely voter’s favorite television news outlet and his or her understanding of basic facts about important topics in the news.”

 

The poll asked 1,000 likely voters a series of questions about a wide variety of news events and which news outlets they prefer.

 

Here are a few overall highlights from the poll.

 

“Generally speaking, respondents who identified CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, or NBC as their ‘favorite’ TV news outlet were more likely to incorrectly answer questions about the national debt, the income tax rate paid by the wealthy, and the percentage of the population that’s uninsured than the viewers of Fox News or ‘another’ cable or network news station (such as The Blaze TV or Newsmax).”

 

“Our survey also seems to indicate that those who do not watch cable news or network news are more likely to answer our questions about the news accurately than the viewers of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, or NBC.”

 

“Although viewers of Fox News and other cable networks were most likely to correctly select the percentage of the U.S. population without health care coverage, a sizeable percentage of these audiences also underestimated the size of the insured population (82%).”

 

By far, the biggest takeaway from the poll is that one’s knowledge about factual news events is directly correlated with their media preferences. And vice-versa.

 

For instance, when likely voters were asked what the national debt of the United States currently stands at (answer: $28 trillion), “69% of CBS viewers and 65% of NBC viewers underestimated the national debt, compared to 44% for those who said they don’t watch network news.”

 

More at the linK:

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/rasmussenheartland-poll-news

 

 

 

 

Dude...what a joke...."right wing media say they are factual...because they say they are"

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TH3 said:

Dude...what a joke...."right wing media say they are factual...because they say they are"

 

 

Your comprehension is sh*t today.

 

They polled people on facts.  

 

The ones who got the most right were Conservatives.

 

FTA:

Quote


By far, the biggest takeaway from the poll is that one’s knowledge about factual news events is directly correlated with their media preferences. And vice-versa.

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/20/2021 at 3:06 PM, B-Man said:

 

 

Your comprehension is sh*t today.

 

They polled people on facts.  

 

The ones who got the most right were Conservatives.

 

FTA:

 

I guess TH3 just gave you yet another example, validating the poll...😉

Edited by JaCrispy
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2021 at 2:57 PM, TH3 said:

Dude...what a joke...."right wing media say they are factual...because they say they are"

Well, these are the same people that listen to Trump and believe him, so...

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2021 at 11:14 AM, BillStime said:

"...control what we read and teach our children and deny our history.... censure debate..."

 

Meanwhile:

  • GQP wants to deny 1/6
  • GQP pass laws that control transgender children and restrict how we teach race in schools...
  • GQP = cult = facsists

The hypocrisy... lmao

 

 

So by what you post above the video i would like to ask just exactly what are those people trying to deny as far as our history and please tell me to the transgender reply exactly what age of a child is old enough for them to make a life altering decision as far as their gender ?

 

Children are not allowed to drive until the age of 16, they are not allowed to drink until the age of 21, they are not allowed to buy tobacco until the age of 21, they are not allowed to vote until the age of 18, they are not allowed to join the military until the age of 18, they are not allowed to make a decision of consensual sex with a adult until the age of 18 i believe and all of these are for good reason !!

 

Yet by what you posted you apparently believe that they can make the decision of who or what gender they want to be by what age ?

 

And to add is their decision to based upon what they are being told or what is known to all of how we are created weather you believe in a god or not ? 

 

Just asking i would like a little clarification thank you so much for helping me understand your reply above ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/16/2021 at 10:32 PM, Backintheday544 said:


I framed the OP as they’re not hypocrites on for your points:

 

1. Pro-life - are they? They’re more pro being born. After that fend for yourself. Is that really pro-life? It boils down to whether or not you support the concept that abortion in some cases is equivalent to homicide. 
 

2. protecting gun rights - what are they protecting? Who had tried taking guns?  For one, through "red flag" gun laws which in a recent case the Supreme Court ruled as unconstitutional in a 9-0 vote.

 

3. Border security - Obama removed more unlawful immigrants than Bush and they said he was weak on border security. That’s more of a buzz word than a position I’d say  What relevance does Bush have now?  Biden completely dismantled all border security that was put in place under the Trump administration and replaced it with a system of chaos.  Total FUBAR.   If you can't "see" this then God help you.

 

4. Cultural anti-Wokism... can we even define that? Like imagine being a Lincoln standing up on a podium and saying I’m running on cultural anti-wokism 

Things like safe spaces, hate for our country, defund the police and embrace criminals as victims, but mainly encouraging a culture of emotionally and mentally weak pussies

 

From your next para It seems maybe you think wokeism is cancel cultural maybe? Republicans deal in cancel culture all the time. They wanted to cancel MLB for moving an all star game. They wasted millions on a political stunt to have Pence walk out on an NFL game. 

One other value I saw was a campaign slogan I saw "Make Crime Illegal Again".   I'd say that's a right wing value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, T master said:

 

So by what you post above the video i would like to ask just exactly what are those people trying to deny as far as our history and please tell me to the transgender reply exactly what age of a child is old enough for them to make a life altering decision as far as their gender ?

 

Children are not allowed to drive until the age of 16, they are not allowed to drink until the age of 21, they are not allowed to buy tobacco until the age of 21, they are not allowed to vote until the age of 18, they are not allowed to join the military until the age of 18, they are not allowed to make a decision of consensual sex with a adult until the age of 18 i believe and all of these are for good reason !!

 

Yet by what you posted you apparently believe that they can make the decision of who or what gender they want to be by what age ?

 

And to add is their decision to based upon what they are being told or what is known to all of how we are created weather you believe in a god or not ? 

 

Just asking i would like a little clarification thank you so much for helping me understand your reply above ...

 

Why don't you do some research and ask the parents that helped make this incredibly difficult decision in accordance to laws and medical professionals?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

Why don't you do some research and ask the parents that helped make this incredibly difficult decision in accordance to laws and medical professionals?

 

 

 

 

 

A child's mind and body are not developed enough for them to make this kind of life changing decision.  And parents that encourage or facilitate such transformations at a young age are negligent and absent in their responsibilities as parents.  For many reasons, including psychological. buyers remorse is extremely high in sex change surgeries.  That comes straight from the transgender community and from medical practitioners.  Look it up. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...