LordReed:


UNLAWFUL. Which of the Nazi laws stopped them from killing the Jews?

You argument is not making sense.

If the Nazis can see the below as murder, it means there is objective truth. Like Xavier5 tells you, subjective truth also exist.

You can say doing one thing is right when one person do it but wrong when another person do that same thing.

Xavier5:


Bro nobody is insulting you, I'm just surprised at your dehumanizing and ridiculous reasons to kill a human life. That's it. Anybody with a conscience will squeeze his or her face at what you just said. That's just it.

Imagine blaming a fetus for something that isn't his or her fault and using it to justify their killing. Imagine calling for the killing of a fetus when it stands as no threat to the woman's life. Is that not something to squeeze one's face at?

#Xavier

It’s interesting to read all your concern about the fetus without considering how a woman will treat an unwanted fetus inside her body. You surely know that her lifestyle, mental health, eating habits and possible substance abuse all have an impact on the fetus and with the development of the nervous system the pain that she can inflict on the fetus and then embryo will be felt more intensely. Will anyone be there to protect this fetus from what a woman can do or not do to ensure that it is provided with everything a fetus/embryo needs and save it from any harm?

And how has the ban on abortion stopped women from having abortions?

LordReed:


Like I already said the fetus has no right to use the woman's body without consent. It's her life the fetus has to depend on, it literally has to live off of her blood. Do you think somebody should have the right to just come take your blood without your consent?

If you can find a way to preserve a fetus that is between 0-5 months old outside of the woman's body that would be great. Till then the owner of the body should have the right to agree or disagree with growing something inside her.

In order to sneak this reductive argument as something viable or even sensible, you first have to define a fetus as an unwanted parasite that appeared out of nowhere without the consent of the woman. FYI, there are a gazillion parasites that don't need to live inside the body of the host. Cuckoo Bird is one good example. Besides, a 1-year-old baby cannot survive on its own, too. Why not extend the limit of the abortion to 1 year? The parasite argument can work perfectly in that case.

The woman has every right to her body, but society has the right to autonomy and can rightfully deny her their labor in helping her get abortion. I made the same argument to Ijeb back with my buying a prescription drug from a pharmacy.

If the woman could chuk her hand inside her womb to remove the baby, there wouldn't be this back-and-forth debate about pro-life or pro-choice. But, society is involved in making this decision because the woman needs the skills of society to make that procedure possible. So, who's autonomy is greater, the autonomy of society, or the autonomy of a single individual?

The Trolley dilemma argument, perhaps?

So, what's the better argument? It's the burning house analogy!

Ask Xavier5 to choose between a 1-year-old baby and an embryo in a petri dish or even a dog from a burning building. He'll pick the 1-year-old baby if he's human and believes any of the "intrinsic human value" he claims all humans have.

Oh....@budaatum, I see what you mean! I guess, Xavier hasn't done his homework. How can all humans value other humans in the same manner we have a history of slavery, tribalism, racism, and war. hahaha. You know what, instead of banning the bible and the Quran why not rewrite it ? I mean, we could literally just slowly phase out the old stuff and input new ideas into it. "thou shalt love thy neighbor from other tribes and countries as well"
"Thou shalt not bother about your neighbors sexual orientation or lifestyle"

Xavier5:


Bro nobody is insulting you, I'm just surprised at your dehumanizing and ridiculous reasons to kill a human life. That's it. Anybody with a conscience will squeeze his or her face at what you just said. That's just it.

Imagine blaming a fetus for something that isn't his or her fault and using it to justify their killing. Imagine calling for the killing of a fetus when it stands as no threat to the woman's life. Is that not something to squeeze one's face at?



#Xavier

Imaging saying there is nothing wrong with the genocide done to the Jews because he thinks it is lawful. How? How do you go about killing a particular race and another person says, well, there is no law stopping that and the Nazis don't see it as bad or murder so it is fine.

Anything you think in life is the right thing because it is your belief.

Xavier5:


Bro nobody is insulting you, I'm just surprised at your dehumanizing and ridiculous reasons to kill a human life. That's it. Anybody with a conscience will squeeze his or her face at what you just said. That's just it.

Imagine blaming a fetus for something that isn't his or her fault and using it to justify their killing. Imagine calling for the killing of a fetus when it stands as no threat to the woman's life. Is that not something to squeeze one's face at?



#Xavier

I thought you are someone I can have a good conversation with but I see you are just too emotional to get your points across without insults. Check it have I used any words like ridiculous to address any of your posts? No but you feel you should use such insults to respond to me. Not going to bother responding to you any further.

Maeve7:


It’s interesting to read all your concern about the fetus without considering how a woman will treat an unwanted fetus inside her body. You surely know that her lifestyle, mental health, eating habits and possible substance abuse all have an impact on the fetus and with the development of the nervous system the pain that she can inflict on the fetus and then embryo will be felt more intensely. Will anyone be there to protect this fetus from what a woman can do or not do to ensure that it is provided with everything a fetus/embryo needs and save it from any harm?

And how has the ban on abortion stopped women from having abortions?

I think, women who are that careless usually end up in jail and charged with murder if the baby is born with developmental problems.

In November, a California woman who gave birth to a stillborn baby and admitted to using methamphetamine while she was pregnant was charged with murder. The case touched a nerve, igniting a debate over whether mothers should be held accountable for their drug use or treated with compassion for their addictions.

Maeve7:


It’s interesting to read all your concern about the fetus without considering how a woman will treat an unwanted fetus inside her body. You surely know that her lifestyle, mental health, eating habits and possible substance abuse all have an impact on the fetus and with the development of the nervous system the pain that she can inflict on the fetus and then embryo will be felt more intensely. Will anyone be there to protect this fetus from what a woman can do or not do to ensure that it is provided with everything a fetus/embryo needs and save it from any harm?

And how has the ban on abortion stopped women from having abortions?

I addressed this genuine concern of yours in one of my write-ups. Here it is below;

Talking about my pro-life. I'm against extreme pro-life, but rather I stand for common sense or rational pro-life. That's why I advocate for;

* The respect, care and protection of all human life... fetus inclusive.
* The creation of systems (which I personally refer to as Abortion Mitigating System aka AMS) that ensure the woman isn't forced to be mother against her will while simultaneously ensuring the protection of the life of the unborn babies, the care or welfare of children, the protection of the life of women, and the tackling of the menance of unwanted pregnancies.
* The allowance of temporal pro-choice until the above system is effectively established.

Yes, establishing the mentioned system is going to be physically, mentally, emotionally and financially straining, but hey, a human life is worth those strains. And as a person, I've decided that I'm not just going to be a sit and watch pro-life but an action one. I have plans to establish an organization that would be heavily committed to establishing the above systems via;

* Funding child support and orphanages
* Ensuring good and accessible healthcare for women and children
* Subsidizing birth controls to make them affordable, available and accessible.
* Spreading the message of celibacy and protected sex with the aim of establishing such culture.
* Allowing Abortion in the CRITICAL CASES which are pre-adolescent pregnancies, severe deformity of the fetus, and medically or surgically unremedied life threatening pregnancies. Critical cases majorly deal with the woman's life.

If the above is effectively done;

1.) Women won't be forced to be mothers against their will thanks to well funded orphanages.
2.) The life of the unborn babies will be protected thanks to well funded child support and orphanages.
3.) Children will be taken care of thanks to well funded child support and orphanage, likewise good and accessible healthcare
4.) The life of women will be protected thanks to good and accessible healthcare, and the allowance of abortion in the critical cases (which majorly deals with the woman's life)
5.) Unwanted pregnancies will be tackled (higher chance) thanks to subsidized, accessible, affordable and available birth controls, likewise a pro celibacy and protected sex culture.

It's going to take lots of time and a whole lot of work and resources, but I believe it can and will be possible, and I also believe that with such efforts, governments, individuals, and organizations will jump on board with time. If things are effectively done, I see abortion not being an issue in the future.

That's Xavier's pro-life view, and I'm proud to hold such view. I don't see a reason why anyone with a conscience will have issues with that. So rather than push for abortion, why don't we create such systems... while allowing temporal pro-choice until the systems are effectively in place?

#Xavier

bemeruca:


Imaging saying there is nothing wrong with the genocide done to the Jews because he thinks it is lawful. How? How do you go about killing a particular race and another person says, well, there is no law stopping that and the Nazis don't see it as bad or murder so it is fine.

Anything you think in life is the right thing because it is your belief.

Do you understand English? Where did I say there is nothing wrong with the genocide done to the Jews because I think it is lawful?

LordReed:


Wait you think LGBTQ people are having sex in public?

No. They are displaying their sexuality in public. You don't see heterosexuals displaying their sexuality in public.

LordReed:


I thought you are someone I can have a good conversation with but I see you are just too emotional to get your points across without insults. Check it have I used any words like ridiculous to address any of your posts? No but you feel you should use such insults to respond to me. Not going to bother responding to you any further.

It is okay to say someone is ridiculous or a post is ridiculous. That's not an insult. You are being petty. And if you think the Nazis subjective truth in killing the Jews is okay as objective truth does not exist. Why do you care someone calls your post ridiculous?

Xavier5:


I addressed this genuine concern of yours in one of my write-ups. Here it is below;

#Xavier

I guess your "I'm a liberal" stance was a pretext to have a full throated discussion about the pro Life position in this thread afterall .
Who would have thought? (sarcasm)

LordReed:


I thought you are someone I can have a good conversation with but I see you are just too emotional to get your points across without insults. Check it have I used any words like ridiculous to address any of your posts? No but you feel you should use such insults to respond to me. Not going to bother responding to you any further.

So if an idea is ridiculous, I shouldn't call it so? So you are trying to tell me that blaming an innocent fetus for something that isn't its fault and using it as a justifiable reason to kill it is not ridiculous? Or you're trying to tell me that killing a fetus when it doesn't threaten the life of the woman isn't ridiculous? Even wirinet did not go this far for Christ sake.


#Xavier

LordReed:


Do you understand English? Where did I say there is nothing wrong with the genocide done to the Jews because I think it is lawful?

Here and I can go deeper and quote more. You seem to not understand subjective and objective morality

LordReed:


UNLAWFUL. Which of the Nazi laws stopped them from killing the Jews?

If a government make a law to kill people does not mean killing people is okay. You are conflating things when you asked what law stopped the Nazis from killing Jews.

Xavier5:


I addressed this genuine concern of yours in one of my write-ups. Here it is below;


#Xavier

Are you suggesting that adoption/orphanages will make a woman provide the necessary care for the unwanted fetus/embryo inside her body and stop her from harming it with e.g. substance abuse?

kkins25:


I think, women who are that careless usually end up in jail and charged with murder if the baby is born with developmental problems.

In which country?

kkins25:


In order to sneak this reductive argument as something viable or even sensible, you first have to define a fetus as an unwanted parasite that appeared out of nowhere without the consent of the woman. FYI, there are a gazillion parasites that don't need to live inside the body of the host. Cuckoo Bird is one good example. Besides, a 1-year-old baby cannot survive on its own, too. Why not extend the limit of the abortion to 1 year? The parasite argument can work perfectly in that case.

Not necessary to. You can invite a guest to your house today and kick them out tomorrow. Does it make you an arsehole, absolutely but it remains your prerogative.

The woman has every right to her body, but society has the right to autonomy and can rightfully deny her their labor in helping her get abortion. I made the same argument to Ijeb back with my buying a prescription drug from a pharmacy.

Sure but I don't want a society that forces women to have babies against their will.

If the woman could chuk her hand inside her womb to remove the baby, there wouldn't be this back-and-forth debate about pro-life or pro-choice. But, society is involved in making this decision because the woman needs the skills of society to make that procedure possible. So, who's autonomy is greater, the autonomy of society, or the autonomy of a single individual?

Over the body of the individual? The individual should have autonomy.

wirinet:

No. They are displaying their sexuality in public. You don't see heterosexuals displaying their sexuality in public.

I live in a place where homosexuality is accepted and don’t see any homosexuals display their sexuality in public more than heterosexual couples do. In fact, I see it much less with homosexuals.

bemeruca:


Imaging saying there is nothing wrong with the genocide done to the Jews because he thinks it is lawful. How? How do you go about killing a particular race and another person says, well, there is no law stopping that and the Nazis don't see it as bad or murder so it is fine.

Anything you think in life is the right thing because it is your belief.

That's always the problem with this absolute relativist. They refuse to acknowledge that some things are actually or inherently true or right irrespective of personal opinions. But these are the same people that will be screaming rape is evil even though the rapist doesn't see it as so. These same people will be screaming election deniers are wrong even though the election deniers think they're saying the truth.

Why will they do the above if they think nothing is actually or inherently true, except they believe somethings are actually or inherently true irrespective of personal opinions. They never fail to contradict themselves and shoot themselves on the foot.

You say you don't believe in intrinsic human value, but you scream human rights and equality. How please? Why not also extend that to plants and animals, since intrinsically there's no difference in our and their value... thanks to all being intrinsically valueless.

Truth is, there are philosophies, and there is truth. There are philosophies, and there is reality. Reality always has a way of bringing us back to the truth irrespective of philosophies.

Objectivity and subjectivity exist.


#Xavier

bemeruca:

Here and I can go deeper and quote more. You seem to not understand subjective and objective morality


If a government make a law to kill people does not mean killing people is okay. You are conflating things when you asked what law stopped the Nazis from killing Jews.

Where do I say it is right? I simply pointed out that legally the Nazi laws did not prevent them from killing the Jews rather they made laws that allowed them to do it. Did you not see where I said the Allies saw it as murder? You guys aren't ready for this debate.

Obrigardo:
With so many things working against the rapist felon trump who will lose to Harris, this one seems to put the nail in the coffin.

No matter the political party, this is going to hit women to the core. Only Democrats with a full chamber can reverse this wickedness - and Voters know.

Add Georgia as well. The Supreme Court reinstated the 6 Week Abortion Ban. What a decision in this moment. This makes it more likely she'll win the state.

Georgia Supreme Court Restores State’s 6-Week Abortion Ban
The ban will resume while the court considers an appeal to a decision that had briefly allowed greater access to abortions in the state.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/07/us/georgia-supreme-court-abortion-ban.html

wirinet:

No. They are displaying their sexuality in public. You don't see heterosexuals displaying their sexuality in public.

Yep I do. Mardi Gras, the Brazilian Parades, any Red Light District and many more displays of heterosexual sexuality.

bemeruca:


It is okay to say someone is ridiculous or a post is ridiculous. That's not an insult. You are being petty. And if you think the Nazis subjective truth in killing the Jews is okay as objective truth does not exist. Why do you care someone calls your post ridiculous?

The issue here is that he might be dealing with a pricked conscience after realizing he just misfired with that statement, hence the complains that I called his statement ridiculous. Anything to distract oneself from that reality is welcome.


#Xavier

bemeruca:


It is okay to say someone is ridiculous or a post is ridiculous. That's not an insult. You are being petty. And if you think the Nazis subjective truth in killing the Jews is okay as objective truth does not exist. Why do you care someone calls your post ridiculous?

Again where did I say the Nazi killing the Jews was ok?

LordReed:


Not necessary to. You can invite a guest to your house today and kick them out tomorrow. Does it make you an arsehole, absolutely but it remains your prerogative.

Not if the supposed guests are my own children, which I had to engage i coitus to create out of my will.

Sure but I don't want a society that forces women to have babies against their will.

Sure. But even if society turns a blind eye, nature will carry out its course. It's not society forcing her to, It's good-old mother nature.

Over the body of the individual? The individual should have autonomy.

Of course. However, the autonomy of the individual cannot supersede that of society. After all, as much of an introvert as I am, when I left Christianity, it was hell. And I'm able to survive because I found society in my nairalander folks and those online. Without society, the individual becomes insane.

Maeve7:


Are you suggesting that adoption/orphanages will make a woman provide the necessary care for the unwanted fetus/embryo inside her body and stop her from harming it with e.g. substance abuse?

-https://www.routefifty.com/health-human-services/2019/12/pregnant-women-drug-use/161701/

wirinet:

As a liberal, I don't believe in and certainly won't advocate for LGBTQ. Having said that, I believe sex is a private affair and what two consenting adults do in the privacy of the bedroom is non of my business. My problem is when they do it in public.

So why should you call yourself a liberal if you dont believe in or advocate for LGBTQ rights

The same thing you want to hang Xavier5 for is what you are guilty of.

budaatum:


I doubt you understand how this works. Do you know that a person can be against aborting for themselves but support the fact that others may want the choice?

Biden, being a Catholic, is not likely to want to abort, but he understands that others may want to, so chooses pro-choice Kamala as his VP.

Being able to allow others to chose for themselves to abort or not just as you have chosen not to, is liberal.

How is this different from what Xavier5 believes? Does this stop the person from being liberal?

IjeBos:


My mind can't even comprehend the rubbish you are asking.

Kaine considers himself a left leaning centrist or a moderate. Hence his positions.
Murkowski considers herself a Conservative leaning centrist or a moderate. Hence her positions.
Xavier claims to be a liberal. His positions are contrary to that. He may be a Nigerian liberal or like Murkowski a conservative leaning Moderate.

You somehow think that people must be either Conservative or Liberal.

You should really read a book. You don't understand how much you don't know because you don't read.
I'm not joking. Read some books or editorials in the Newspaper. May make you smarter. But you have such a deficit who knows.

Your feeble mind cannot comprehend anything more complicated than A for Apple, B for Ball. You know I told you that you are at 2nd grade reasoning, So its not your fault. Its your brain that wasnt properly formed

Maeve7:


Are you suggesting that adoption/orphanages will make a woman provide the necessary care for the unwanted fetus/embryo inside her body and stop her from harming it with e.g. substance abuse?

I mentioned child healthcare and welfare systems. With such, if a woman is known to be a drug addict, the government steps in to prevent her from doing that with the needed policies and healthcare.

And when she gives birth and it is determined that she can't cater for that child, then the well funded orphanage system comes in to cater for the child. If there's a relative that's willing to shoulder that responsibility, then the child can be handed over to them. If money is the issue for the relatives, then the well funded child support system comes in.

But I also emphasized the allowance of temporal pro-choice until the mentioned system, which I personally call the Abortion Mitigating System aka AMS, is effectively established.


#Xavier

cococandy:
Backing out of an interview because you’ll be fact checked is wild.

So we’re just okay accepting the right as the party of lies? Okay.

The media seems to be.
The lies an obfuscation 60 minutes called out here is wild.
The media has a double standard when it comes to Trump compared to Harris.
They have normalized his behavior.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDIq-0u8wwQ

Xavier5:


The issue here is that he might be dealing with a pricked conscience after realizing he just misfired with that statement, hence the complains that I called his statement ridiculous. Anything to distract oneself from that reality is welcome.


#Xavier

He all makes mistakes, and we can be contradictory, given we post a lot here. I don't see why simple things like acknowledgment or ignoring are a problem instead of saying someone is insulting him.

basilico:
Kamala goes on 60 minutes


HARRIS: My plan is about saying that when you invest in small business, you invest in the middle class, and you strengthen America’s economy. Small businesses are the backbone of America’s economy.

WHITAKER: Pardon me, Madam Vice President. The question was, how are you going to pay for it?

HARRIS: Well, one of the things, I’m gonna make sure that the richest among us, who can afford it, pay their fair share of taxes. It is not right that teachers and nurses and firefighters are paying a higher tax rate than billionaires and the biggest corporations, and I plan on making that fair.

ADVERTISEMENT
WHITAKER: But we are dealing with the real world here.

HARRIS: But the real world includes…

WHITAKER: How are you going to get this through Congress?

HARRIS: You know, when you talk quietly with a lot of folks in Congress, they know exactly what I’m talking about because their constituents know exactly what I’m talking about. Their constituents are those firefighters and teachers and nurses

More here
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2024/10/08/new-more-kamala-60-minutes-n2180271

check every forum that interview clip was posted on youtube, IG, Facebook, twitter and read the comments

wirinet:

As a liberal, I don't believe in and certainly won't advocate for LGBTQ. Having said that, I believe sex is a private affair and what two consenting adults do in the privacy of the bedroom is none of my business. My problem is when they do it in public.

Strange, why not? I'm curious.