"A well timed highly charged issue in and around the time some of your assets are being flogged off."
Thank you, vt.
13 comments:
Animal
said...
Bout time though ah.......
You have to wonder why teenage mums and other bums on the dole get the benefit for free when those teenagers who are trying to get ahead in life have to burrow to study and survive.... One of life quirks
It is disturbing, watching those 'get ahead' teenagers, burrowing like rabbits, rather than breeding like them. 'Teenage mums and other bums' - someone's going to have your guts for garters, animal. It interests me that the argument of the 'Left', as espoused by Metiria on CampbellLive tonight, seem impossible to grasp by Rightwing commentors. I've heard Rightwingers support Bennett's claims and point of view, but not one has addressed any detail of what lefties are saying. As per usual, I'd have to say.
(From NoRightTurn) So, the government is pushing ahead with the Welfare Working Group's recommendation for creepy eugenics, in the form of providing free contaception to women on benefits. Contraception is a great thing - it lets people control their own fertility, and enables them to make choices about their own lives, rather than being slaves to biology. Making it freely available to all, in whatever form works best for them, would be a significant advance for human freedom. But that's not what the government is planning. Instead, they're making it freely available to some, in a form which will limit their fertility for prolonged periods, in the very specific hope that they will use it. This isn't about enabling choice - its about constraining it.
Are you a supporter of contraception for women, Shunda? Not concerned that the natural process, God's prescription for creating his sons and daughters, is being artificially interrupted and the potential child lost to God? Not saying that I do, just asking if you've thought it through to the nth degree.
I'm not against contraception and I'm for God, he created rubber didnt he? In fact I'm quite happy to say I've had a vesectomy, far better to head things off at the past than have to murder them later I think. I always find it interesting that the argument is 'pro choice' vs 'pro life'. Why can't it be more honest and say 'pro life' vs 'pro death'
By the way RG, I now have a real identity, Towack is the name as you have seen, gone is the 'animal' RIP (not aborted, just deceased)
Hey, Towack. Pleased you've joined us humans and shed your beastly mantel. There's a question mark hanging over all us Rivertonians now - who knows what it means, where it might lead and why, why, why it's there (you can see its effect on me already - questioning, questioning...)
Why can't it be more honest and say 'pro life' vs 'pro death' We don't really get much of a say about death. Once we are conceived, death is inevitable. The aspect we may have some influence over is when death occurs. In short, we're all gonna die. So being pro-death or anti-death is a bit of a sideshow. In terms of pregnancy, there's a spectrum. At each end of the spectrum is some form of compulsion. One end compels women to end their pregnancy. It's not discussed too often because if every pregnancy was compulsorily terminated, we would die out as a species. And while that's absurd, some societies have gone some of the way. The example that comes to mind is China's one child policy. At the other end is compelling every woman to bear (and raise) every child. Once we stray into the grey area of "it is OK to terminate some pregnancies" we introduce the idea of choice, and the questions become: a) who makes the choice, and b) how are the choices constrained?
I think that rather than a pro-life /pro-death dichotomy, we should frame it as pro-choice/pro-compulsion.
13 comments:
Bout time though ah.......
You have to wonder why teenage mums and other bums on the dole get the benefit for free when those teenagers who are trying to get ahead in life have to burrow to study and survive....
One of life quirks
It is disturbing, watching those 'get ahead' teenagers, burrowing like rabbits, rather than breeding like them.
'Teenage mums and other bums' - someone's going to have your guts for garters, animal. It interests me that the argument of the 'Left', as espoused by Metiria on CampbellLive tonight, seem impossible to grasp by Rightwing commentors. I've heard Rightwingers support Bennett's claims and point of view, but not one has addressed any detail of what lefties are saying. As per usual, I'd have to say.
(From NoRightTurn)
So, the government is pushing ahead with the Welfare Working Group's recommendation for creepy eugenics, in the form of providing free contaception to women on benefits. Contraception is a great thing - it lets people control their own fertility, and enables them to make choices about their own lives, rather than being slaves to biology. Making it freely available to all, in whatever form works best for them, would be a significant advance for human freedom. But that's not what the government is planning. Instead, they're making it freely available to some, in a form which will limit their fertility for prolonged periods, in the very specific hope that they will use it. This isn't about enabling choice - its about constraining it.
Robert is right!! if they get free contraception the left will have no more babies to abort!!
People don't "grasp it" Robert, because there is nothing to grasp.
Just "lefties" doing what they do best, being hypocrites and being contrarian.
Are you a supporter of contraception for women, Shunda? Not concerned that the natural process, God's prescription for creating his sons and daughters, is being artificially interrupted and the potential child lost to God?
Not saying that I do, just asking if you've thought it through to the nth degree.
I'm not against contraception and I'm for God, he created rubber didnt he? In fact I'm quite happy to say I've had a vesectomy, far better to head things off at the past than have to murder them later I think.
I always find it interesting that the argument is 'pro choice' vs 'pro life'. Why can't it be more honest and say 'pro life' vs 'pro death'
By the way RG, I now have a real identity, Towack is the name as you have seen, gone is the 'animal' RIP (not aborted, just deceased)
Ha ha! not so fast Robert, it turns out it is the Greens that share the common ground with extreme right wing fundamentalist Christians on this one.
You can't blame me for pointing this out Robert, to me it reeks of hypocrisy.
Fancy that, the left arguing against free contraception!!
They are not, Shunda. metiria is arguing against targeted longterm contraception that comes with strings attached.
Hey, Towack. Pleased you've joined us humans and shed your beastly mantel.
There's a question mark hanging over all us Rivertonians now - who knows what it means, where it might lead and why, why, why it's there (you can see its effect on me already - questioning, questioning...)
The imaginary boat people didn’t work last week, the welfare whores have this week.
You’d think political journalists might have read “Distractions for Dummies”, but apparently not.
Why can't it be more honest and say 'pro life' vs 'pro death'
We don't really get much of a say about death. Once we are conceived, death is inevitable. The aspect we may have some influence over is when death occurs. In short, we're all gonna die. So being pro-death or anti-death is a bit of a sideshow.
In terms of pregnancy, there's a spectrum. At each end of the spectrum is some form of compulsion.
One end compels women to end their pregnancy. It's not discussed too often because if every pregnancy was compulsorily terminated, we would die out as a species. And while that's absurd, some societies have gone some of the way. The example that comes to mind is China's one child policy.
At the other end is compelling every woman to bear (and raise) every child.
Once we stray into the grey area of "it is OK to terminate some pregnancies" we introduce the idea of choice, and the questions become:
a) who makes the choice, and
b) how are the choices constrained?
I think that rather than a pro-life /pro-death dichotomy, we should frame it as pro-choice/pro-compulsion.
I think that rather than a pro-life /pro-death dichotomy, we should frame it as pro-choice/pro-compulsion.
I think we should stop over complicating the simple reality that ripping a forming human from the womb is a deeply uncivilised and repugnant practice.
When something is so ugly and destructive, we should all be committed to reducing it's incidence.
Perhaps free contraception will do such a thing.
Perhaps education will help too.
we should all be committed to reducing it's incidence.
Perhaps free contraception will do such a thing.
Perhaps education will help too.
Precisely.
Post a Comment