Create account

1353d · pol/ - Politically Incorrect
Pretending that we would somehow accept Muslim law is foolish. The funny thing is the same people who fear that are often the ones pushing for horrible Christian laws.
replied 1353d
Go to one of the no go zones in Sweden, let us know how it works out for you.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1353d
Silentsam don't know about the no go zones in Sweden. CNN don't talk about them for bear with him.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1353d
*so
replied 1352d
I think you do not understand what no go zones really are, and have been misinformed.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
I know exactly what they are.
replied 1352d
Okay, so then explain what you think the issue is so I am not assuming what you know.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
Google is your friend mate. Quite watching CNN for a change.
replied 1352d
I have Googled them, and I am right about them. They are just ghettos where people do not report crime or cooperate with police. They existed before some Muslim immigrants moved in.
replied 1352d
Show what you mean by "no go zone."
replied 1352d
If some Muslims suddenly moved into Compton would you say they turned it into a no go zone?
replied 1352d
Honestly the best I can tell is that people have made it look as if a group of Muslim immigrants suddenly sprung up a no go zone in an area that was already bad before all this.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1353d
Spineless keyboard warriors like yourself are easily spotted 😂
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1353d
You are too much of a beta to defend freedom a majority of Muslims. You're fooling ones. I dare you to go in Saudi Arabia and defend gay rights. That's right beta male.
replied 1352d
Just because Saudi Arabia is a backward country doesn't mean we will suddenly become Muslim. I bet you support the politicians most in need with Saudi Arabia though.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
Oh you won't become a Muslim, they'll stone you way before that.
replied 1352d
If you want to fight radical Islam then go to Syria. Otherwise your just a bitch whining about immigrants. Immigrants are not a threat. The economy needs them.
replied 1352d
The laws we have can not magically change because of some Muslim immigrants. You really are acting like a bitch about them. As if there isn't terrorists for other religions and reasons
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
Right, they just need Muslims majority to vote them away. Ding ding ding!
replied 1352d
I think you are talking to a AI CNN bot.
replied 1351d
We will never see a Muslim majority with how few there are, so again you are being a big pushy over nothing.
replied 1352d
Look up Iran.
replied 1351d
I have, and that really hurts your argument. They were a Muslim nation before the events that made them what they are. It shows that it wasn't simply being Muslim that was the problem.
replied 1351d
Watch the video I put up. So they look the same to you now? How many head scarfs do you see?
replied 1351d
Refugees being put in a ghetto doesn't mean hey made it a ghetto. It is easy to be misleading in such videos.
replied 1352d
Is it this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Iran
"After the 1979 overthrow [...], the system was greatly altered. The legal code is now based on Islamic law or sharia"
replied 1351d


Looked like any country in Europe.
Barricade
replied 1351d
Yes, Iran was wonderful before all that Islamic shit. Nowadays many Iranian women are still fighting for her rights, actually many Persians are not religious people.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1353d
There is no such thing as Christian laws. How clueless can you be?
replied 1352d
Are you joking? Do you not understand christianity? The reason the right has taught abortion rights. It is why they originally taught gay rights. Its why they push the bible is school.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
One must not be a Christian to know that killing babies is outright immoral. As usual you are completely clueless.
replied 1352d
A fetus is not a baby, and the only thig immoral is telling a woman she has no right to one. The only other immoral thing is men do not also have an after conception choice.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1352d
A featus is absolutely a baby you immoral abject human being.
replied 1351d
Why is there two different words then? Do you think it is a baby when it is just a large clump of cells?
replied 1352d
How do you define a human beeing?
replied 1352d
Pretty sure it's technically a parasite until it can support itself
replied 1352d
Do you mean until it gets a job?
replied 1352d
That is every liberal.
replied 1351d
Wanting to help the poor does not mean one is poor. It is fiscally responsible to prevent a mess rather than clean it up afterward. Welfare is cheaper than militarized police.
replied 1351d
Fine to help people with your own money. Criminal to extort it from your neighbor and then give it to someone else. Easy to give away someone else's earnings.
replied 1351d
Meh, that is a separate issue. Some claim taxation is immoral, but I have yet to see a sound argument on the matter.
replied 1351d
I just made one. You choose not to see it.
replied 1351d
No, you made a statement on the subject.
replied 1352d
I'm a diehard Republican, didn't you know that John? I'm all for small govt, they shouldn't have any control over how many Muslims we have here. Let 'em all in.
replied 1352d
Actually it's very much in line with GOP views if you consider their rhetoric on welfare
replied 1352d
;has_verified=1
replied 1351d
Ha, propaganda videos. Lol

It does not matter if you agree about abortions. Making a law about it is bad. If you don't like abortions then don't have one.
replied 1351d
So it is always an arbitrary line drawn from an unknown exact instant of conception. Even the first trimester boundary can not be completely accurately determined. It's always a guess.
replied 1351d
Oh true, it is a vague line. It has nothing to do with personhood though. My only issue is the man involved has no say on the issue. Je should also have a choice about parenthood.
replied 1351d
If they allow it to ever be considered human, then the problem is that there's no single clearly defined event where it changes from non-human to human because it is a gradual process.
replied 1351d
Birth is when it is a person.
replied 1351d
That's why pro-abortion groups can't admit that an unborn child is ever a human, not even up to the day before birth, sometimes not even right after birth.
replied 1351d
Actually birth is the point when a the fetus becomes a baby. It's not that pro-abortion groups can not define it, it is that it is irrelevant.
replied 1351d
Location dictates personhood? Does a woman own you penis, once you put it inside of her? Can she destroy it while it is there?
replied 1351d
It is not simply a location. It's not as if a full baby magically appear inside a woman the day after conception. The actual person is growing a fetus. The woman is the person.
replied 1351d
Why are premature babies people? Can you kill someone's premature baby and it is only a property crime?
replied 1351d
Assaulting a pregnant woman would be the crime, not a property crime. The discussion centers on the woman who has the baby inside her more than the baby itself.
replied 1351d
A premature baby is one that is born preterm. They are no longer attached to the mother.
replied 1351d
Yes... so?
replied 1351d
The job of a pro-abortionist is to convince the anti-abortionist that the fetus is not a human. Any other argument will never succeed in convincing anyone to allow abortion.
replied 1351d
To the pro-abortionist that is irrelevant. All that matters is why the woman should have the right over her body denied to her. You must show why a womans body does not belong to her.
replied 1351d
That's a bad argument. If you believe an unborn infant is a person, then you can't ignore someone else killing it. That's akin to "If you don't like child abuse, don't abuse children."
replied 1351d
Personhood of the fetus seems irrelevant. Even if it is a person a woman should still have the right to an abortion. That is the point behind the classic pianist argument.
replied 1351d
What is my argument?
replied 1351d
You have yet to give one.
replied 1351d
We got a miscommunication there 😂
replied 1351d
Hajjaajjaaja
replied 1351d
Maybe I never noticed it. Seems to me you declared it wrong, and called that an argument.
replied 1351d
I replied to SILENTSAM, not you. He's arguing it is a victimless crime because he does not believe in the personhood of an unborn child.
replied 1351d
Not a crime, and victimless is not brought up as it is irrelevant.

If a person would die unless connected to your circulatory system you should not be forced to have them connected.
replied 1351d
Your concept of not being a person till you pass a magic line doesn't make much sense. Which conjoined twin is a human, & which isn't. Simply declaring irrelevance isn't sufficient.
replied 1351d
Birth is a very objective line. The issue of personhood is irrelevant because it changes nothing. Sure, call a fetus a person, but abortion is still fine.
replied 1351d
You are arguing circles. A baby would not die if it was removed from the circulatory system the day before it would be born. Therefore, you just declared it a human.
replied 1351d
The day before it is to be born is irrelevant as abortions happen during the first trimester.
replied 1351d
In a late term abortion, it is required to kill the baby before it is removed, otherwise it magically becomes a baby if it was removed alive.
replied 1351d
Late term abortions are rare, and usually only happen due to medical complications. They are irrelevant as they would happen even if regular abortions were illegal.
replied 1351d
You contradict yourself a lot.
replied 1351d
Can you point out one time I have done so?
replied 1350d
"...abortions happen during the first trimester."

"Late term abortions are rare..."

That's just the one I was talking about here.
replied 1349d
That is not a contradiction at all. Abortions happen during the first trimester, except in extreme situations. Late term abortions are irrelevant to the issue of abortion rights.
replied 1351d
My bad. 😂 Got carried away there.
replied 1351d
I just had the same confusion. Memo now gives you notifications of replies to replies of yours, which makes it seem sometimes that someone is talking to you. Not sure I like it.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1351d
Says the guy who watch CNN all day. Oh man that's rich 😂
replied 1351d
I actually do not waste money on cable, so not sure why you enjoy this assumption so much. Do you think FOX is a viable news source?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 1351d
Nope.
replied 1351d
No.
replied 1351d
At what stage should abortion be illegal?
replied 1351d
Seems the answer is after the first trimester. Sounds like a good point. Later abortions are only allowed for medical reasons, despite what Alex Jones claims.
replied 1351d
Why are they fighting about saving babies that survived abortion? Anyway, what about gender based abortion? Is that ok?
replied 1351d
Show me where they are actually doing that. Of course gender based abortions are wrong.
replied 1351d
Why is gender based abortion wrong?
replied 1351d
😂😂😂 don't have the guts to watch it ha? Stay ignorant.
replied 1351d
Watching the video didn't help your position.
replied 1352d
I would love it if you posted a condensed response. If everyone responded to challenges with 28-minute videos, debates would take ages.
replied 1351d
Learning takes time. You need to read books and watch documentaries etc. Socialism is easy to sell with catch phrases. Liberty takes more thought.
replied 1351d
Learning my ass. In addition to wasting my time, this video makes an argument from shock factor.
replied 1351d
Socialism is a completely different issue, and yes socialism is horrible. The thing is it is because of being educated we know you are incorrect.
replied 1351d
Arrogance and ignorance go hand in hand.
replied 1351d
So does arrogance and education sometimes. I often like to point it out to other university educated people that their education is a bigger privilege than any racial privilege.