This forum is for non aviation related topics, political debate, random thoughts, and everything else that just doesn't seem to fit in the normal forums. ALL FORUM RULES STILL APPLY.
tiny wrote:In the years since WW2 the people of North America (and elswhere) have imbraced many of the "horrors" which the Nazis promoted. Abortion, euthanasia, and genetic engineering are some things which come to mind. Did the allied soldiers die in vain? Where the ideals they where fighting for not just? I would sugest that they where right in what they fought for in WW2. Let us remember them by honouring the strong stance they took for what is right.
My memory is a little fuzzy here but I swear that the reason our soldiers fought overseas is that some guy in Germany with a little moustache needed a little more "lebensraum" and that irked his neighbors a bit. Then to tide things over with the former tenants of his new "lebensraum", he gave them some "lebensraum" of their own at Auschwitz and Majdanek.
Personally, I'm not arguing that because Hitler was against it, it must be wrong. He helped Germany's economy, so is a good economy wrong? Well depends on how socialist you are hehe.
I'm arguing that abortion is a moral evil that can only be described as a genocide.
Hitler starting a genocide doesn't prove its immorality.
I want you guys to remember 1 thing. The ONLY thing that worries me is the people who have the power to take away our freedoms. Those people are Bush and Harper.
Only they can shut down our free media, prevent us from moving around, order us around at gunpoint. NO piss pot regime overseas could ever do that to us.
Once they have the north american union (which they never asked us about) it will be even easier to crack down.
PERIOD.
What freedoms have you seen taken away since 2000, or better yet September 11th 2001?
I have seen inconvience, however none of my freedom of movement has been taken away. I can still bare arms, I have freedom of speech, the right to due process, etc...
While my freedoms differ from yours in Canada, I don't believe any have been taken away on either side of the border.
Charley Reese is a retard who has probably never spent a day over here. I have shaken many Iraqi hands who thank me for being here.
I'm a Marine so I think I have an iota of credibility,
You support the troops by getting them out of harm's way, just as Ronald Reagan did after we lost the Marines in Lebanon.
I didn't join the Marine Corps to pass out flowers, what exactly do think the Marine Corps is?
---------- ADS -----------
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
I didn't join the Marine Corps to pass out flowers, what exactly do think the Marine Corps is?
I don't think anyone who has never been in the Corps understands exactly what it is, but even the dimmest politician understands that the job of the US Marines is to kill people.
This fact makes most Canadians uncomfortable, and drives the pacifist lefties wild.
For people who "just don't get" what the Marine Corp is ... being in the USN is like having a job in a corporation. You can leave it behind, walk away at any time, and that's it - it's all over. But being in the Marines is like being a member of a family. You might not like all of them - you will likely detest many of them - but nonetheless, they are your family - for life.
Nark, freedom of speech only truly exists in an environment where people can dessent without fear of retribution. That has not existed in the US since you megalomanic president declared "you are either with us, or your against us."
For example, look what happened to the Dixie Chicks after they publicly expressed an anti-war, anti-Bush, opinion. The pro-war, pro-Bush camp immediately responded with threats on their lives and boycotts of their music, concerts, and any radio station that played their music. Ever wonder how many others were silenced by that intimidation? That my friend is not free speech.
Supporting your troops is also not shown by sending them to their deaths on the basis of lies. In fact, I would suggest that Bush, at best, has absolutely NO RESPECT for the members of the US military. He is willing to piss your lives away in Iraq for NO KNOWN REASON. Don't forget that chickenhawk also used his old man's connections to keep his own ass off the battlefield when it was his turn to serve.
If it weren't for the Nazi's aggression and attempt at world domination, the world wouldn't have even gone to war over what Hitler was doing in his own country. Don't kid yourselves. How many genocides have occurred since WWII? And I don't want to hear about Bosnia. If the UN was concerned about genocide, the soldiers would have been allowed to defend them. How many genocides JUST in africa in the last couple decades?
grimey wrote:[So? The fact that some R&D was conducted by immoral men doesn't make that R&D immoral. The Nazis made the mistake of ignoring scientific research conducted by Jews. We'd be no better if we ignored the research conducted by Germans.
Not all of Mengele's experiments were of scientific value, including attempts to change eye colour by injecting chemicals into children's eyes, various amputations of limbs and other brutal surgeries. Rena Gelissen's account of her time in Auschwitz details certain experiments performed on female prisoners around October 1943. During roll calls Mengele would show up to perform a "special work detail" selection, which fooled some into thinking that this would be a relief from the otherwise hard labour they were performing. Mengele would experiment on the chosen girls, performing sterilization and shock treatments. Most of the victims died, either due to the experiments or later infections.
A Hungarian Jewish prisoner doctor, Miklos Nyiszli, who was an experienced pathologist and had studied in Germany, was chosen to work as Mengele's assistant, and wrote about his experiences. The subjects of Mengele's research were better fed and housed than ordinary prisoners and were, for the time being, safe from the gas chambers. To Mengele they were nevertheless not fellow human beings, but rather material on which to conduct his experiments. On several occasions he killed subjects simply to be able to dissect them afterwards.[1]
---------- ADS -----------
She’s built like a Steakhouse, but she handles like a Bistro.
Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
Nark wrote:What freedoms have you seen taken away since 2000, or better yet September 11th 2001?
I have seen inconvience, however none of my freedom of movement has been taken away. I can still bare arms, I have freedom of speech, the right to due process, etc...
While my freedoms differ from yours in Canada, I don't believe any have been taken away on either side of the border.
What about the "no fly" lists, doesn't being put on one of those violate freedom of movement? Before you say something silly like, "that doesn't affect me" keep in mind that lots of people have ended up on that list who aren't a danger to anybody. Including at least one congressman I seem to remember.
How about the internet and phone spying being done down there? Doesn't that violate your right to privacy?
grimey wrote:[So? The fact that some R&D was conducted by immoral men doesn't make that R&D immoral. The Nazis made the mistake of ignoring scientific research conducted by Jews. We'd be no better if we ignored the research conducted by Germans.
Operation Paperclip didn't go after Mengele, it went after military research. Many of the scientists involved may have been members of the Nazi party, but that doesn't mean that their experiments and research was any better or worse than stuff conducted by the allies. On the same note, it doesn't mean that all of their research had value or could be morally justified.
I'm syaing theres no aboriton law just as your link says, so a baby can be aborted at any time.
There's no unified NATIONAL abortion law. Each province develops it's own laws and guidelines in the matter and I don't know of any province that allows an abortion right up to full term. You're just plain wrong taxiway_matthew.
I'm arguing that abortion is a moral evil that can only be described as a genocide.
A "moral evil"? "Genocide"? Sorry dude, there's so much wrong with that sentence I don't know where to start.
What freedoms have you seen taken away since 2000, or better yet September 11th 2001?
Not such an issue on this side of the border yet but since the fallout of 911, the US has been active in secret arrests, wire-tapping (and other intelligence gathering), torture, and unlawful custody to name a few. And it's all enabled under the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Some time when Harper manages to pull his nose out of Bush's rear long enough I have no doubt he'll try to apply some of that W logic here. There are already indications that he likes Bush's initiatives.
There's no unified NATIONAL abortion law. Each province develops it's own laws and guidelines in the matter and I don't know of any province that allows an abortion right up to full term. You're just plain wrong taxiway_matthew.
There actually is a unified national law, but it was ruled to be not in effect by the Supreme Court of Canada. Now I'm not lawyer but if the Supreme Court says something, the provinces can't overrule, a sort of "the puck stops here" type of deal. The only thing that differs province by province is the amount of funding provided and where abortions are to be offered. That said, you receive a full term abortion anywhere in Canada.
Here's a fancy dancy law firm site to backup what I said. Be careful though, they might be imposters.
(Actually I setup the site myself to try and trick you)
A "moral evil"? "Genocide"? Sorry dude, there's so much wrong with that sentence I don't know where to start.
Well, I'm convinced! Thanks for proving me wrong, to think I've been wrong for all these years, sad really, so much time wasted on the wrong side of the tracks.
Not.
Take a gander, pick a random spot, and start from there. Please.
What would prevent me from proving you can receive a full term abortion in Canada? If theres no law restricting when during the pregnancy and abortion can occur, how then can you say someone can't get one full term?
And its not wrong to compare it to Hitler at all. Hitler killed off millions because he hated them. We're killing of millions because we don't want to accept responsibility. And because they're inside the womb rather than out, pretty shitty determing factor to whether or not you live, is it not?
Sometimes the most important lessons take the longest to learn
"In the eyes of the law...the slave is not a person" Virginia Supreme Court decision, 1858
"An Indian is not a person within the meaning of the Constitution." American Law Review, 1881
"The statutory word 'person' did not in these circumstances include women." British Voting Rights case, 1909
"The Reichsgericht itself refused to recognize Jews as persons in the legal sense" German Supreme Court, 1936
The law of Canada does not recognize the unborn child as a legal person possessing rights." Canada Supreme Court, 1991
PS. Before you go saying that those previous exs. weren't in Canada, they were.
taxiway_matthew wrote:What would prevent me from proving you can receive a full term abortion in Canada? If theres no law restricting when during the pregnancy and abortion can occur, how then can you say someone can't get one full term?
How about the fact that abortion is defined as "the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus."
You cannot have a "premature exit" at "full term".
Anything we do opposite to the nazi's couldnt be that bad of a thing.
If you side with them ,then you wouldnt be around today.
Sure we have all this liberal shit going on in society.But its still the lesser of 2 evils.They still wanted to kill hitler even though he had the same views as him on abortion etc.
What do you think hitler would do with kids that werent born blue and blonde??
Abortion is bad(because we might be killing a blonde hair blue eye person)
....thinks hitler
You must always try figure out EXACTLY why people say the stuff they do.
Are you by chance a full term abortion? I am. That's what those in the medical profession call a "birth". I hope all this medical jargon doesn't confuse you.
I don't think there's much sense debating this. Theres not much room for discussion when you're making such outlandish unsubstantiated claims.
Trancemania,
My guess is you and taxiway_matthew shared a dorm or something.
Anything we do opposite to the nazi's couldnt be that bad of a thing. If you side with them ,then you wouldnt be around today.
Its perfectly substantiated, it would be perfectly legal in Canada for a Doctor to perform an abortion at any time during the pregnancy. No laws prohibit it. Whether or not a doctor is willing to do it is beside the point, that fact of the matter is its legal, therefore your country is supporting murder. No one can claim that aborting a 42 week old fetus isn't murder, even Morgentaler says he won't do it.
Taxiway_matthew, you must be of middle eastern origin because you've expertly hijacked this thread. I think your "facts" are being clouded by your emotion. You are partially correct. An abortion can be performed in late stage pregnancy due to health risks to the mother and by that I mean high risk of death. An elective abortion I believe in most provinces is restricted to the 20th to the 22nd week.
Don't try and play on peoples heartstrings by comparing abortion to a genocide. It only makes you look foolish and shows you've led a fairly insulated life. Go to the Sudan, Rwanda or Cambodia and tell me what you think then.
taxiway_matthew wrote:Its perfectly substantiated, it would be perfectly legal in Canada for a Doctor to perform an abortion at any time during the pregnancy. No laws prohibit it. Whether or not a doctor is willing to do it is beside the point, that fact of the matter is its legal, therefore your country is supporting murder. No one can claim that aborting a 42 week old fetus isn't murder, even Morgentaler says he won't do it.
So by not having a law preventing doctors from doing something none of them would do, we're supporting murder?
Uh, no. It's the equivalent of saying we support alcoholism, because we don't have laws governing how much you're allowed to drink in your own home. There's no law governing late term abortions because doctors are regulating themselves, and therefore there's no need for a law.
