Talk with Liberal Daughter


Debray

New member
Subject: talk with daughter

This should be pretty clear to all of us. If not, go back and start over.

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs.
The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"
She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."
Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the conservative side of the fence."

If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and Jesus silenced.

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it because it is the Truth.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended."

Your Choice
 

also flows to other things...ie if you dont want gay marriage, dont get gay married...if you dont want an abortion, dont get one.
 
also flows to other things...ie if you dont want gay marriage, dont get gay married...if you dont want an abortion, dont get one.

I agree with you on gay marriage because it doesn't affect anyone besides those getting married, but the "dont want an abortion, dont get one" argument is like saying "don't like murder, don't kill people".
It is nothing less than cowardice to not defend those that are defenseless, and the "pro-choice" position can only gain authenticity by trying to remove the sense of humanity of unborn children.
 
meh...agree to disagree.

i support it to a point. if the child is able to survive outside of the womb, then no. whether that stipulation be 20 weeks, 24 weeks, whatever.
 
meh...agree to disagree.

i support it to a point. if the child is able to survive outside of the womb, then no. whether that stipulation be 20 weeks, 24 weeks, whatever.

What about babies born prematurely or even people that are in a non-vegetative state but living on life support? They are unable to maintain their own lives. Would you support terminating their lives if it was convenient?
 
What about babies born prematurely or even people that are in a non-vegetative state but living on life support? They are unable to maintain their own lives. Would you support terminating their lives if it was convenient?

If I could only live on life support, please turn it off!
 
What about babies born prematurely or even people that are in a non-vegetative state but living on life support? They are unable to maintain their own lives. Would you support terminating their lives if it was convenient?

you dont think 20-24 weeks would be premature? if they cannot survive outside of the womb, via NICU, etc, then yes.

If I could only live on life support, please turn it off!

^^ i second this guy. DNR me, then burn the leftovers.
 
If I could only live on life support, please turn it off!

Yes, but if your mom or significant other could only live on life support would you? What about a random stranger? To save resources, shouldn't we just go through the hospitals unplugging people? (hypothetical). You have the choice to sign a DNR, an unborn infant does not.
-
If someone is dying and their heart stops beating, we consider having saved them if we get their heartbeat back. An infant has a heartbeat 25 days after conception, and it gets stronger through the 2nd and 3rd month (8-12 weeks). Where did 20 weeks and 24 weeks come from? Pro-abortionists.
-
Regarding gay marriage, yeah, it doesn't effect anyone else, unless you are a baker or a photographer that chooses not to participate in the process - then your rights are taken away in favor of the gays.
Anti-Gay Christian Bakery Loses Appeal, Must Bake Cakes For Same-Sex Couples | The New Civil Rights Movement
Link Removed
And yes, I googled and found these from a progressive liberal site claiming "victory" in both cases.
 
Yes, but if your mom or significant other could only live on life support would you? What about a random stranger? To save resources, shouldn't we just go through the hospitals unplugging people? (hypothetical). You have the choice to sign a DNR, an unborn infant does not.
-
If someone is dying and their heart stops beating, we consider having saved them if we get their heartbeat back. An infant has a heartbeat 25 days after conception, and it gets stronger through the 2nd and 3rd month (8-12 weeks). Where did 20 weeks and 24 weeks come from? Pro-abortionists.
-
Regarding gay marriage, yeah, it doesn't effect anyone else, unless you are a baker or a photographer that chooses not to participate in the process - then your rights are taken away in favor of the gays.
Anti-Gay Christian Bakery Loses Appeal, Must Bake Cakes For Same-Sex Couples | The New Civil Rights Movement
Link Removed

if anyone had a DNR or will stating their intentions of having a plug pulled or not even being on it in the first place, then yes i would support it. i was in the room when my father died. he had a DNR on file.

even with a heartbeat and ALL of medical science, no way a child born at 25 days would survive. the current earliest born child to survive (with extensive medical care and lingering complications) is almost 22 weeks. so there ya go, stop em at 20 as they couldnt survive anyway.

i'm also for the death penalty (public ones would probably curb crime as well) and assisted suicides for the terminally ill.

after the cake blowup, i dont think you'd actually see any gay people going there to get a cake made except out of spite.
 
even with a heartbeat and ALL of medical science, no way a child born at 25 days would survive. the current earliest born child to survive (with extensive medical care and lingering complications) is almost 22 weeks. so there ya go, stop em at 20 as they couldnt survive anyway.
You're missing the point. Who cares whether or not it would survive outside the womb? He or she is NOT outside the womb. A person on life support would not survive without electricity, but they are still alive until someone intervenes.
-
If a baby is born prematurely, and that 22 week mark is used as justification for how much if any effort is expended to save it I can understand that. Here is my granddaughter (due in Sept) at 8wks and 16 wks. There was video as well (ain't technology great?) and at 16 weeks she was sucking her thumb.

Link RemovedLink Removed
 
You're missing the point. Who cares whether or not it would survive outside the womb? He or she is NOT outside the womb. A person on life support would not survive without electricity, but they are still alive until someone intervenes.
-
If a baby is born prematurely, and that 22 week mark is used as justification for how much if any effort is expended to save it I can understand that. Here is my granddaughter (due in Sept) at 8wks and 16 wks. There was video as well (ain't technology great?) and at 16 weeks she was sucking her thumb.

dont know that i would necessarily call someone in a vegetative state on life support "alive".

anyways, the point is that the person having it does not want it in their body. prior to 22 weeks (on record), the fetus would not survive. with that being the case, taking the fetus outside of the womb, it would not survive. i didnt ask my wife to have any with our 2 children, but we're not in the same situation as many that want this done.

as like anything, outlaw something and someone will still do it (prohibition, gun free zones, etc). now you may end up with the death of the fetus and the female or you may end up with a child getting paid for by the gvmt until 18 y/o that no one will take. many being addicted to drugs due to shitty parents (less likely to be adopted and more costly). on the other hand they keep them and continue to suck the gvmt tit on social programs. we already have a growing problem with lack of adoptions. seems everyone wants designer children from other countries.

weird string of sentences, but none the less.
 
nyways, the point is that the person having it does not want it in their body. prior to 22 weeks (on record), the fetus would not survive. with that being the case, taking the fetus outside of the womb, it would not survive. i didnt ask my wife to have any with our 2 children, but we're not in the same situation as many that want this done.

Take a look at you children then answer this question. If someone purposely hit your wife in the stomach while pregnant with one of them, and they died in the womb... would you want that person convicted of murder, or only misdemeanor assault?
 
Take a look at you children then answer this question. If someone purposely hit your wife in the stomach while pregnant with one of them, and they died in the womb... would you want that person convicted of murder, or only misdemeanor assault?

Yahtzee!
 
wouldn't that fall under aggravated battery since contact was actually made, as well as possible permanent disfigurement? the difference being the intentions of the female. trying to actually carry the child to full term vs actually planning an abortion.

i guess we need to charge every female that has had a miscarriage after 25 days of gestation with murder or involuntary manslaughter?
 
Eeesh, hate this topic. But... some girl ought to chime in, I suppose. I'll butt out again after this... It's a very emotional topic; feel free to disagree. This is only my thoughts.

As a mother, as soon as I found out I was pregnant, that was my baby. If someone had tried to hurt him as early as two weeks along, there would have been hell to pay. On the other hand, as a woman, I'd never vote to make abortion illegal. There is such a thing as medical necessity, and asking a very ill woman who faces the choice of either the baby dies or they both do to jump through red tape is a bit much. Also, congenital defects that won't allow a baby to live (having no brain, for instance) should have the option of aborting without legal hoops to deal with. And I'm not going to tell a rape victim not to abort. If she sees it as something good coming from something horrible, that's great. If instead it causes her to relive her torture every day for nine months, I won't try to change her mind. I didn't experience it, not my place to decide. Then, of course, imagine your teenage daughter too ashamed to admit she got pregnant... would you rather her go to a clinic or resort to a back alley doctor or a coat hanger? If not your daughter, it'll be someone's. Finally... a story my mom told me when she worked in a NICU... a ten year old girl who came a hair's breadth away from death due to complications during labor because her daddy raped her before her body was ready to deal with pregnancy and childbirth. Pick which kid you would save in that scenario. I don't even know what I would say.

So basically... abortion is terrible. But it should stay legal, because sometimes it's the less terrible option.

There, that's my take. I don't really have the stomach for this type of debate, though... both sides suck. I'll leave you guys to it.
 
Eeesh, hate this topic. But... some girl ought to chime in, I suppose. I'll butt out again after this... It's a very emotional topic; feel free to disagree. This is only my thoughts.

As a mother, as soon as I found out I was pregnant, that was my baby. If someone had tried to hurt him as early as two weeks along, there would have been hell to pay. On the other hand, as a woman, I'd never vote to make abortion illegal. There is such a thing as medical necessity, and asking a very ill woman who faces the choice of either the baby dies or they both do to jump through red tape is a bit much. Also, congenital defects that won't allow a baby to live (having no brain, for instance) should have the option of aborting without legal hoops to deal with. And I'm not going to tell a rape victim not to abort. If she sees it as something good coming from something horrible, that's great. If instead it causes her to relive her torture every day for nine months, I won't try to change her mind. I didn't experience it, not my place to decide. Then, of course, imagine your teenage daughter too ashamed to admit she got pregnant... would you rather her go to a clinic or resort to a back alley doctor or a coat hanger? If not your daughter, it'll be someone's. Finally... a story my mom told me when she worked in a NICU... a ten year old girl who came a hair's breadth away from death due to complications during labor because her daddy raped her before her body was ready to deal with pregnancy and childbirth. Pick which kid you would save in that scenario. I don't even know what I would say.

So basically... abortion is terrible. But it should stay legal, because sometimes it's the less terrible option.

There, that's my take. I don't really have the stomach for this type of debate, though... both sides suck. I'll leave you guys to it.
I completely understand your view. Here's a link (article with references) so you know I'm not just blowing smoke.
-

Fact #8: Less than 1% of all abortions are performed to save the life of the mother.
-
Just so the Planned Genocide people don't completely brainwash you, 2 supported points from this article that are telling:
1. A VERY small percentage of abortions are done to save the mothers life. (this says 1%, I've seen 2.8% elsewhere)
2. This type of abortion, a life saving medical decision between a woman and her doctor, was legal before the abortion of convenience came about.
It is a straw man argument brought by the left to vilify the right, but has no basis in fact.
 
wouldn't that fall under aggravated battery since contact was actually made, as well as possible permanent disfigurement?

There has been no aggravated assault committed against your wife; only assault.
Link Removed

And since by your definition, the baby is not out of the womb therefore does not count as a human life, no one else has been assaulted.
As for permanent disfigurement, not sure where you came up with that. Pregnancy is not a permanent condition.

the difference being the intentions of the female. trying to actually carry the child to full term vs actually planning an abortion.

So it's a life if she intends to have it, but it's not a life if she doesn't? Interesting.

i guess we need to charge every female that has had a miscarriage after 25 days of gestation with murder or involuntary manslaughter?

No, that would be "death by natural causes." Failure to survive it's environment during incubation, is a natural cause. Being sucked out or pulled out of the womb; or being poisoned is not a natural cause.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,262
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1
Back
Top