Arbitrary and capricious

[wmw999 2,146]

1 hour ago, markharju said:

 I have always found it peculiar that there are those (not alluding to  anyone here) who argue against the death penalty but support post-partum abortion. Never understood that.

What exactly do you mean by post-partum abortion? post-partum means after birth, and usually refers to a baby that's born due to some normal or medical method. An abortion is a pregnancy termination, generally carried out well before viability of the fetus or embryo (at which time its personhood is very debatable -- look at the treatment of miscarriage).

If it's post-viability, the overwhelming majority of the cases are due to birth defects that are incompatible with life. The family and doctor choose whether it's more humane to have a quicker death, or to let the pregnancy continue, with the effect on the mother that she knows she's carrying, at risk, a very short or very labored life (e.g. trisomy 13 babies can live quite awhile, but there's zero quality of life).

Yes, there are people who elect abortion for bullshit reasons. There are also people who leave their dogs behind when they move, who neglect or give away their children, and who keep their parents alive when they've expressed a desire to be let go. There are even people who use guns for bad purposes.

Wendy P.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

What exactly do you mean by post-partum abortion? post-partum means after birth, and usually refers to a baby that's born due to some normal or medical method. An abortion is a pregnancy termination, generally carried out well before viability of the fetus or embryo (at which time its personhood is very debatable -- look at the treatment of miscarriage).

If it's post-viability, the overwhelming majority of the cases are due to birth defects that are incompatible with life. The family and doctor choose whether it's more humane to have a quicker death, or to let the pregnancy continue, with the effect on the mother that she knows she's carrying, at risk, a very short or very labored life (e.g. trisomy 13 babies can live quite awhile, but there's zero quality of life).

Yes, there are people who elect abortion for bullshit reasons. There are also people who leave their dogs behind when they move, who neglect or give away their children, and who keep their parents alive when they've expressed a desire to be let go. There are even people who use guns for bad purposes.

Wendy P.

Wendy: I know what post-partum means. I won't comment, except to say that there are some people who should be shot like dogs. How can anyone not have compassion for a mother who is forced through medical reasons to decide which of her unborn will live, and which will die? I can't even imagine the emotional anguish - in fact it breaks my heart to even think of it. However, my friend was cruelly murdered in cold blood and there was absolutely no question of her killer's guilt. Therefore, I stand behind my remarks. If I were to ever kill someone, G*d forbid, whether through action or inaction, I hope that I would have the courage to take responsibility for my actions as Andrew Chabrol did when he killed my friend. For that I actually respect him. He still needed killin' but I respect him. As a personal aside: btw - you were right about the mercenary business.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Guest

[Guest]

 

Quote

 

 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Guest

[jakee 1,257]

11 minutes ago, markharju said:

Wendy: I know what post-partum means. I won't comment,

Because you're making shit up again?

Quote

there are some people who should be shot like dogs.

Just because you're having a hard time adjusting to life after Trump please don't start copying the way he speaks as well as the way he thinks. There are far better role models out there for both, even on the far right side of the spectrum you inhabit.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, jakee said:

Because you're making shit up again?

Just because you're having a hard time adjusting to life after Trump please don't start copying the way he speaks as well as the way he thinks. There are far better role models out there for both, even on the far right side of the spectrum you inhabit.

I mean no offense, but kindly consider that your remarks allude to short-term, shallow, narrow-minded and incomplete thinking. "Life after Trump" - piffle. There's a much larger picture that you appear to be completely overlooking. If you saw life through a more severe lens, you might appreciate my view. Just sayin'.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Guest

[lippy 775]

12 minutes ago, markharju said:

kindly consider that your remarks allude to short-term, shallow, narrow-minded and incomplete thinking.

As opposed to celebrating the murder/attempted murder of Iranian scientists and attempted murder of their spouses.  Your comments in that thread illustrate the depth, breadth and completeness of your thinking on such topics.

 

[jakee 1,257]

13 minutes ago, markharju said:

I mean no offense, but kindly consider that your remarks allude to short-term, shallow, narrow-minded and incomplete thinking. 

No, your propensity for making shit up is a long term thing, though it absolutely is shallow, narrow minded and incomplete.

Quote

"Life after Trump" - piffle.

Just because you can't comprehend it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Sooner or later you'll come to terms with that and you'll stop this acting out. Just try making it sooner, yeah?

[JoeWeber 2,324]

1 hour ago, markharju said:

except to say that there are some people who should be shot like dogs.

You can certainly turn a phrase. Have you ever shot a dog? Not a coyote but an actual pet type dog. I did once around 40 years ago. It was a chicken killer. We knew because it was my room mates dog and he found it in our coop with a mouth full of feathers and surrounded by dead chickens. There was no place and no one to give it to so he asked me to do the deed. I gave it a raw egg in a bowl to lap up and used a .22. Is that what you have in mind? Give the bastard a raw egg and then one through the head? Maybe you're thinking of dogs running across your yard and making a great shot, possibly a double. Maybe it just has a nice mouth feel when you say it. More likely it's something you've heard and read before and subconsciously you recognize it's a semi acceptable thing to say these days. So, please clarify what it means to you. After a trial? Before the trial because he's getting it anyway? Dragged out of a PTA meeting and forced to kneel? How do you shoot dogs?

[Guest]

I'm saying that had the law allowed it, I would have gladly shot the man who tortured, raped and murdered my friend. She wasn't a chicken.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Guest

[JoeWeber 2,324]

3 hours ago, markharju said:

I'm saying that had the law allowed it, I would have gladly shot the man who tortured, raped and murdered my friend. She wasn't a chicken.

Of course you believe you would. But your entire decision tree yet lays ahead. Everyone will say if they entered a room, gun in hand, and saw an evil doer raping a friend they'd shoot. Of course, even they still have a fair bit of work ahead. For example, if the perpetrator was in the act would they shoot and just hope their friend was missed? Would they try for a better angle? Would they insist the fellow got off and then shoot? You take it further. You say you'd be happy to shoot them "like a dog" but offer no clarifying explanation. For example, do you have limits? If not, then when or how? Would you try for a merciful coup de' gras after receiving government permission and giving the condemned a cigarette or moment of prayer or would you drive by the motherfuckers house and let loose with your MP9? That's the problem with just saying what comes to mind without thinking it through first. Nothing is as straight line as you think. There are always other considerations.

Edited November 29, 2020 by JoeWeber

[SkyDekker 1,141]

On 11/29/2020 at 9:23 AM, markharju said:

I hope that I would have the courage to take responsibility for my actions as Andrew Chabrol did when he killed my friend. For that I actually respect him. He still needed killin' but I respect him.

Considering you stated you would get pleasure out of killing somebody, you really appear to be no different than people like Andrew Chabrol. Maybe the respect had more to do with a feeling of kinship than anything else.

Edited November 30, 2020 by SkyDekker

[Guest]

Only if it's lawful. I didn't respect Chabrol as a person, but I did respect him taking responsibility for his actions. He pleaded guilty and did not appeal (note: in Virginia at the time, appeal of a death sentence was automatic. I don't know about now). Anyway, the court of appeals upheld the decision, and Chabrol went to the Chair only  two years after the crime.

I think child molesters should be fed feet-first into a wood chipper.

[Phil1111 913]

Just now, markharju said:

Only if it's lawful....

So your  morals and conduct is based upon laws and not internalized standards of behavior?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

So your  morals and conduct is based upon laws and not internalized standards of behavior?

The rule of law is there for a reason - it's what separates the civilized from the savage. However, given sufficient provocation, I'd be glad to mete out some frontier justice, and the consequences be damned.

[SkyDekker 1,141]

10 minutes ago, markharju said:

Only if it's lawful.

Unsurprisingly, within one post you indicate yourself that this is a lie. Rest of the post is probably a lie too.

Edited November 30, 2020 by SkyDekker

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Unsurprisingly, within one post you indicate yourself that this is a lie. rets of the post is probably a lie too.

You're right to point that out. That's why I said "given sufficient provocation", in my next response. For me to violate the law myself, well, it would have to be for a very good reason. Consider that if  some thug raped and murdered  your spouse / partner / whatever, and then walked free on a technicality. There's always The Brass Verdict.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Guest

[wmw999 2,146]

2 minutes ago, markharju said:

The rule of law is there for a reason - it's what separates the civilized from the savage. However, given sufficient provocation, I'd be glad to mete out some frontier justice, and the consequences be damned.

So it's OK for you to say something like that, but not OK for a Muslim to say something that is associated with the PLO. Mark, that's pretty arbitrary and capricious.

Wendy P.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

So it's OK for you to say something like that, but not OK for a Muslim to say something that is associated with the PLO. Mark, that's pretty arbitrary and capricious.

Wendy P.

Because the Jihad Squad are antisemites, and they're public about it. It's one thing to call for BDS (especially for goods and services coming from the occupied territories), but in my opinion it's quite another to call for genocide. Edit to add: the occupation of Palestine is both illegal and immoral, but it won't be improved when one side advocates genocide.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Guest

[billvon 2,426]

7 minutes ago, markharju said:

Because the Jihad Squad are antisemites, and they're public about it. It's one thing to call for BDS (especially for goods and services coming from the occupied territories), but in my opinion it's quite another to call for genocide. Edit to add: the occupation of Palestine is both illegal and immoral, but it won't be improved when one side advocates genocide.

?? But you are advocating for genocide too.  You regularly rail against "islamofascists" and how the world would be better off if they were dead.   Why is it OK for you but not for them?

[jakee 1,257]

26 minutes ago, markharju said:

Because the Jihad Squad are antisemites, and they're public about it. It's one thing to call for BDS (especially for goods and services coming from the occupied territories), but in my opinion it's quite another to call for genocide. Edit to add: the occupation of Palestine is both illegal and immoral, but it won't be improved when one side advocates genocide.

That's what you do. All. The. Time.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, jakee said:

That's what you do. All. The. Time.

I'm just a loudmouth on a political forum, not a member of the US House of Representatives.

[wmw999 2,146]

True dat. Wish our soon-to-be former president would take that point

Wendy P.

[jakee 1,257]

3 hours ago, markharju said:

I'm just a loudmouth on a political forum, not a member of the US House of Representatives.

So if I'm to understand this correctly, you're saying you have absolutely no ethical or moral problem with what Tlaib said? The only thing you think is wrong with it is that she's a public figure and so it might be counterproductive to the Palestinian peace process?