Roe VS Wade officially goes back before the Supreme Court - Page 19 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15202069
BlutoSays wrote:
Does that mean you'll make vaccines mandatory for illegal aliens coming through the southern border?

Or the United Auto Workers who just told Biden they won't comply?

Or does that mean that you'll keep doing what democrats do - play favorites,

play lawfare

and remain the most hypocritical bunch of donkeys (asses) on the planet depending on what outcome you want?



Dumb.

Mandates work, the change in the vaccination rate among federal works has been remarkable. So I really don't much care what they say, as long as we can get a mandate that applies to them.

That makes no sense.

Also makes no sense, what the hell is lawfare supposed to mean in your twisted brain? Btw, there is a good website with that name.

Again, that makes no sense, George Washington mandated a vaccine, it's what sane people do.
#15202075
Unthinking Majority wrote:What does that have to do with anything I said?
I am saying exactly the same thing, as you try to use your fucked up twisted logic to compare vaccines to abortions. :knife:

Are you going to try to compare car accidents and homosexual marriages to it next?

You are trying to compare having to take a needle for 5 seconds(against your will) with an insignificant health risk, vs. a woman having to carry a fetus against her will for 9 months with a significantly higher health risk. :knife:
#15202095
Godstud wrote:I am saying exactly the same thing, as you try to use your fucked up twisted logic to compare vaccines to abortions. :knife:
...
You are trying to compare having to take a needle for 5 seconds(against your will) with an insignificant health risk, vs. a woman having to carry a fetus against her will for 9 months with a significantly higher health risk. :knife:

Yes because they both involve consent over one's own body. ("my body, my choice").

Apparently you and many others only care about consent when it it's in your own self-interests, and you're perfectly willing to force others to relinquish their right to consent over their own bodies when it's in your own self-interest. So please don't pretend this has anything to do with people's rights, it's about self-interest.
#15202114
Unthinking Majority wrote:Yes because they both involve consent over one's own body. ("my body, my choice").

Apparently you and many others only care about consent when it it's in your own self-interests, and you're perfectly willing to force others to relinquish their right to consent over their own bodies when it's in your own self-interest. So please don't pretend this has anything to do with people's rights, it's about self-interest.


How is this about self interest? And even if it is, so what? Would a cure for cancer be any less effective if the people who invented it did it out of self-interest?

Rather than focus on imagined vices in your ideological opponents, try to focus on the flaws in the arguments.
#15202116
Godstud wrote:
I am saying exactly the same thing, as you try to use your fucked up twisted logic to compare vaccines to abortions. :knife:

Are you going to try to compare car accidents and homosexual marriages to it next?

You are trying to compare having to take a needle for 5 seconds(against your will) with an insignificant health risk, vs. a woman having to carry a fetus against her will for 9 months with a significantly higher health risk. :knife:



Unthinking Majority wrote:
Yes because they both involve consent over one's own body. ("my body, my choice").



Sheeeeeeeoooorrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnnnn, I'm gonna be siding with GS on this one. It's apples-and-oranges, vaccines to abortions. (Uh, yeah, vaccines are the 'apples'.)

Vaccinations / coronavirus / pandemic should *not* be politicized.

Bad "issue" to select, like abortion or Hong Kong, since it's / they're purely *contrived* -- 'political hay' -- in an attempt to have a social / political presence, but for *what* at the end of the day -- (!)
#15202118
Pants-of-dog wrote:How is this about self interest? And even if it is, so what? Would a cure for cancer be any less effective if the people who invented it did it out of self-interest?

Rather than focus on imagined vices in your ideological opponents, try to focus on the flaws in the arguments.

Because it's not about "rights". Nobody cares about rights they care about what's in it for them. That is a flaw in the argument because the arguments are full of hypocrisy. If it were about "my body, my choice" then wtf is with these same people wanting to coerce people to take vaccines they don't want to?

So body autonomy rights are not the issue at all, it's about people wanting to do whatever they feel like doing while also forcing others to do whatever they want them to do because it benefits them. There is no ethical consistency, it's just about being selfish. Their goal isn't human rights, their goal is to further their own interests no matter what.

If body autonomy rights are so important that we can kill the unborn for them, then they should be important enough where you can't require someone to have an vaccine injected into their bloodstream because the lives of others may be at risk.

The message from most progressives is: we demand our body autonomy rights, but you can't have yours because it risks our health. Meanwhile they don't give 2 shits about the health of the unborn. They're hypocrites and full of shit.
#15202127
@Unthinking Majority

The veracity of an argument is independent from the hypocrisy or morality of the person making it. Biden, for example, often talks about how people should not sexually assault other people.

And it is true that we should not sexually assault others.

This is true even if the accusations against Biden (i.e. that he sexually assaulted Ms. Tara Reade) are true. Biden is correct even he is a hypocrite and people have a right to not be sexually assaulted even if the people who talk about it are all hypocrites.

And furthermore, you cannot show that every person who supports freedom of choice also supports forcing people to be vaccinated or hating babies or whatever.
#15203185
It's really funny to me that right wingers only started giving a shit about having to get vaccinated when Corona came around, because vaccines have been mandatory for every level of education for decades. And not just for children, but for educators too. But because there exist no thought leaders on the right who deal in anything besides fear and paranoia we have to pretend this is an actual, honest conversation with absolute dumbshits who only picked up these arguments yesterday because an angry man on the television told them about it between breathless screechings about white replacement theory.

Like I don't believe for a second anyone crying about having to get vaccinated to have access to public education is so ideologically consistent that they now consider the polio vaccine a grave injustice perpetrated against the American people. And if they do they're an even bigger moron than I thought they were.

The polio vaccine is one of several required in all 50 states but yeah let's just toss aside a century's worth of medical advancement to placate society's loudest morons. Bill Gates put micromachines in the vaccine to control you and replace your DNA with jellyfish DNA and if you don't respect this deeply held belief then you are literally Hitler.
  • 1
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Yale course on Ukrainian history: https://www.you[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

You cannot simultaneously claim that the IDF is lo[…]

You mean that hospital that was in fact hit by a r[…]

Hmmm, it the Ukraine aid package is all over mains[…]