CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should most abortions be considered self defense?
Rather than defending abortion on the grounds of privacy/liberty, etc., I think people should discuss it in terms of self-defense.
Notes:
I said "most" rather than "all" because there are cases of severe abnormality the might better be considered mercy killing and cases like selective reductions, etc.
I've discussed this in a couple different debates, but wanted to give it a debate of its own - to make it easier for people to find and for me to link people to.
Imagine if we used your same inhuman excuses for killing innocent life after they travel down the birth canal.
Children can cause women many mental/emotional/social/financial harm no matter the age of the child. SO LETS KILL THEM!!!!!! That's your answer! LOL, what a selfish inhuman amoral fool!
You are laughable, your pathetic excuses to kill even innocent viable babies for any reason up to birth when you vote for this extremist Democrat party.
We already have life of mother exceptions for abortions! The GOP want a simple compromise of 20 weeks (with extreme case exceptions) but this extremist pro aborton Democrat party refuse to compromise even though over 80% of Americans do want restrictions on abortions. The Democrat party is tied to pro abortion lobby groups. IT'S ALL ABOUT MONEY AND VOTES FOR THESE INHUMAN POLITICIANS.
If you vote for these extremists (and hllary is one who supports no restriction abortions for any reason), you might as well use the forcepts yourself because you will be culpable for the inhumanity.
Self-defense rules consider alternatives - if the child is already born, there is a better alternative - give the baby to someone else. An alternative not available in the womb.
I have a friend, he is about 55 years old. He is a twin.
Raised in Philly by his mom and grandmom.
Great guy, super nice. He is half black and half Italian. He never knew his dad, because his dad was a rapist, who was never caught. His mom recently died at age of late 90s.
His grandmother was killed sometime in his 20s. Again another tragedy for his mom and his family. Both were black on white crimes. Which are neither here nor there regarding race, other than facts. And that my friend is mixed from a rape, and the inconvenience of this woman's decision to raise them herself despite the thug that raped her.
So this little Italian lady, who I had the pleasure of knowing, had her two black babies, not one but twins from a violent rape.
She never married after that. She also never had men to the house, She wasnt of that influence or generayion.
Raising twin mixed black children 55 years ago probably wasn't easy for her and her little old mother from Italy, especially for this woman who lived with her Italian mother in a liw class Italian and mixed area of Philly, who like many Italians of that time, grandmom's was from off the boat.
My friend adored his mom and grandmom. Very strong family ties. He is 5' 6" his twin is 6' 3. My friend looks like a black Italian guy. And funny as can be. Pleasant well adjusted. He and his wife just adopted three children over the last 5 years, from an Asian country. Lots of goodness and love in this man, who was birthed out of a tragedy.
So, I don't think he or his mom, or his grandmom's would have changed anything. Because out of tragedy God gave something greater than the that which was meant for evil.
How does this apply to whether abortion is self-defense?
Let's try to make an applicable analogy - if you leave the door to your house unlocked and an intruder enters, do you still have the right to self-defense?
There are, in my opinion a number of acceptable reasons why a pregnancy should/could be terminated but self defence isn't one of them.
Such an argument in support of an abortion is self defeating as, in almost all cases the termination procedure presents at least as big a danger as having the baby.
In the event of a ''back street'' abortion, the risk is significantly greater than giving birth.
As a consequence of your juvenile like ignorance your bullshit is almost forgivable.
For instance, do you have any idea what is involved in a ''back street'' abortion?
That was a rhetorical question as you clearly don't and made your embarrassingly uninformed response in a glaringly obvious and desperate attempt to eliminate any reply which exposes your bullshit for what it is.
Let me enlighten you my little man.
A backstreet abortion usually involves the use of a rubber bulbous instrument with a delivery tube, similar to a battery acid filler.
This is filled with a witch's brew of water, antiseptic solution, carbolic soap, an effervescent laxative and god knows what else.
This highly toxic liquid is then injected into the female's womb.
Upon completion of the process she is given a towel or a rug and told to walk around, usually through deserted alleyways, or fields, until the foetus comes away.
Of course it's seldom, if ever as simple as this and many deaths have occurred as well as destroying the possibility of the victim being able to conceive again.
The psychological damage is incalculable.
Only a shithead like you could possibly try to argue that this filthy process is safer than giving birth.
In numerous studies including one by Doctor Priscilla Coleman and Doctor David Reardon whose study included a large number of women, almost half a million, experiencing first time pregnancies. The data is wholly reliable as it was compiled from Danish Government sources including the fertility records of births and stillbirths, the national abortion registry and cause of death registry.
This extensive study revealed that during the first six months after an early abortion ( 12 weeks or less) a woman has double the risk of death compared to giving birth.
During the first year following a late abortion ( after 12 weeks ) a woman has three times the the risk of death compared to giving birth.
Not only is your post a complete ''abortion'' but you're imbecilic assertions are downright dangerous.
You are a fool trying to present yourself as someone with knowledge in a medial subject when it is clear you are only a dirty little phony.
If you has any integrity you would bow your head in shame and retract your utter nonsense and move on to yodelling up the canyon or some other pursuit more commensurate with your arrested intellect.
Ha, the racist has to resort to citing a procedure that makes up such an overwhelming minority of all abortions done in order to argue against a legal argument.
In case you haven't noticed, I've debated the issue for several years - do you think pro-lifers have missed the chance to try and avoid the argument through pictures, videos, or graphic details related to abortions?
Only a shithead like you could possibly try to argue that this filthy process is safer than giving birth.
Well, me and everyone who looks at the actual information related to causes of death.
numerous studies including one by Doctor Priscilla Coleman and Doctor David Reardon
You mean two outspoken anti-abortion advocates who have had their research repeatedly debunked? refrefref
Do you generally ascribe high weight to the opinion of a "doctor" who got his degree from "an unaccredited correspondence school offering no classroom instruction"? ref
The reason the study is a farce is the same reason their other studies are laughable - they don't actually care about finding the truth. Might you expect such a study of mortality to look into the actual cause of death? If you do, then you would be disappointed, because they specifically tell you that they don't: "all causes of death were analyzed together" So, you have no idea whether the death is related to abortion or not. They also don't control for physical, mental, financial conditions, etc. going in - wouldn't people in poor mental, physical, or financial conditions be more likely to be the ones seeking abortions? Do those groups also have a higher mortality rate with or without an abortion?
If you has any integrity you would bow your head in shame and retract your utter nonsense
The smokescreen you're trying to throw up by attempting to degrade the results of a massive survey by two eminent doctors and the indisputable records from the Danish government is fooling no one.
You tried to skim over my accurate account of the horrific details of a ''back street'' abortion, but in doing so you only made a bigger fool of yourself than you really are, and clearly, that's really saying something.
You're trying to sell your ridiculous assertion that a sobbing woman hemorrhaging from the womb whilst aborting the foetus as she makes her way through the dog's shit of a dark alleyway without professional medical attendance and only a dirty towel to absorb the abortion discharge is less dangerous than giving birth in a hospital under the care of qualified medical staff.
You are fucking stark raving mad.
Whose word do you think any intelligent person would accept? The results of a survey by two top surgeons supported by the Danish government, versus the amateur ramblings of an unqualified self appointed cyber 'knowitall'.
You, my dear boy are nothing more than a 2 cent phony who has achieved nothing in life and uses forums such as this in a futile attempt to boost your deflated ego.
Wise up, grow up and shut up, you're an embarrassment to everyone reading your drivel and a disgrace to yourself.
skim over my accurate account of the horrific details of a ''back street'' abortion
Is it relevant to whether abortion is self-defense?
Whose word do you think any intelligent person would accept?
Mine. Since I've shown how their study is flawed and that they have other studies that are similarly flawed and I can produce far better evidence that hemorrhage, sepsis, hypertensive disorders, etc. are responsible for more maternal death than abortion complications.
Moreover, the best way to reduce maternal mortality due to unsafe abortions is just to have abortion be legal so that safer methods are used.
by two top surgeons
Wow, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about - neither of them are surgeons, they are PhD doctors not MD doctors.
And, as I already pointed out, Reardon got his degree from Pacific Western University, an unaccredited correspondence school. The school was later fined $500,000 and shut down ref
FYI These are murders, blood spilt calls from the ground just like Abel's, and the babies murdered in Egypt and Bethlehem, and just like the Saints martyred. Revelations takes note of them all. This is blood crying to God for vengeance. All who do not wash their garments in the Savior, will be judged from the murderer to those who give approval to them! Murder in your heart is the same as the one who murders.
Luke 1:15
For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.
Luke 1:41
When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.Luke 1:44
For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy.
Luke 2:21
[ Jesus Presented at the Temple ] And when eight days had passed, before His circumcision, His name was then called Jesus, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb.
Hosea 12:3
In the womb he took his brother by the heel, And in his maturity he contended with God.
Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
Isaiah 49:5
And now says the Lord, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the Lord, And My God is My strength),
Job 31:15
“Did not He who made me in the womb make him, And the same one fashion us in the womb?
Judges 16:17
So he told her all that was in his heart and said to her, “A razor has never come on my head, for I have been a Nazirite to God from my mother’s womb. If I am shaved, then my strength will leave me and I will become weak and be like any other man.”
Genesis 25:23
The Lord said to her, “Two nations are in your womb; And two peoples will be separated from your body; And one people shall be stronger than the other; And the older shall serve the younger.”
Self defense is toward an act of violence of a perpetrator.
Accidental death would possibly be an unintentional accident occuring during self preservation but, I think the host maternal body should bear responsibility, and be the bigger person, not the innocent helpless baby in the womb of depravity who seeks to murder her own child. And what are we teaching people anyway?
I only know of psychos that use self defense against the weak and defenseless.
To this generation of academia and intellect as your god and your strength, God will scoff and mock at you!
Let me fill you all in on the end of God's final work in this generation.
Who ever still can reason in their mind, should consider this and study it for yourself, test it, see if it is true.
Deceptions will be revealed soon and are right now. God is explaining and revealing like in no other time period!
He will pull off the snake scales that have covered your eyes, which you all allowed because you are an enemy of the True God. They are your own snake scales because you hardened your hearts again your Creator, and you mocked like foolish people who have no understanding at all!
He is going to make you see how absolutely stupid and foolish you all truely are, that a brain of a mouse will prove to be smarter than the smartest among you!
God is going to mock and scoff at you!
NOT because you couldn't find that which is hidden.
But because He will reveal all things to this generation, as it actually is! With no excuse for any, and no ability to deny that the TRUTH was as plain as day, and as visible ad the nose on your face!
And it will be undeniable like it's written on the back of your hand clever hand, and condemn you on your clever forhead! So clearly, that you will mock yourself and smack yourself with that hand for ALL ETERNITY!
GOD will scoff and mock at you, why?
Because you were so intelligent, so smart, so dumb!
You missed Him in the most easy and basic knowledge, elementary kindergarten intellect of a child. Even children will laugh at your calamity.
He will mock at you! The children will mock at you!
You will all be blithering stammering stupid stumbling tripping over each other idiots! Like the three stooges, no not even that smart!
As you slap yourselves silly, and smack each other with your same dumb hand!
As the simple truth condemns you all, as you look through Eternity reading your folly, your forever name on the back of your hand. Which is attached to your broken arm. An arm that has no strength at all!
That weak arm couldn't have saved you from a flea, let alone the damnation that God will deliver mockingly hurled with His arrows of mockery, reminding you every moment of your foolishness!
Your name engraved on you for head and your hand "a fool" the common name of the grave of Sheol. As Sheol mocks at you as well!
Deceptions will be revealed soon and are right now.
I know, right:
> According to POLITICO’s five-day analysis, Trump averaged about one falsehood every three minutes and 15 seconds over nearly five hours of remarks. ref
> Donald Trump Made Up Stuff 71 Times In An Hour (And that’s counting the commercial breaks.) ref
> Trumps First Ad Averages 1 Lie Every 4 seconds ref
Here is a week’s worth of Trump’s factual transgressions.
ECONOMY:
1. “The reason I do manufacture things overseas — I have to do this, there is no choice, because [other countries] have devalued their currency so much that our companies are out of business for the most part.” (Sept. 20, Fox 8 interview)
Manufacturing is diminishing as a share of the economy, but it’s hardly vanishing. The sector constituted 11.8 percent of GDP in the first quarter of 2016. In the first quarter of 2006, it made up 13.1 percent, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.
2. “Excessive regulation costs our economy $2 trillion a year. Can you believe that? Two trillion dollars a year.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
One week of Donald Trump fact-checks
The $2 trillion estimate comes from a report from the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute. It’s widely quoted, but independent fact-checkers have questioned its methodology. Additionally, the figure excludes any benefits derived from the effect of regulations. The Cleveland Plain Dealer notes that car seat belts, for example, are included as a cost. But the lives/money saved as a result is not used as an offset, even though the federal government has estimated the benefits of regulations outstripped the costs.
3. “The World Trade Organization — disaster for us.” (Sept. 20, Kenansville, North Carolina, rally)
This is an oversimplification. The organization adjudicates countries economic claims against each other, and the U.S. has both won and lost cases in front of the body — including in February, when the U.S. won a big decision against rules in India that discriminated against foreign solar power technology.
4. “This NAFTA is a one-way street right out of our country. Our jobs go right out of our country, our companies. It’s a one-way street for our companies and our jobs to get out of here. Nobody comes in. Did you ever hear of NAFTA coming in and bringing jobs? Did you ever hear of a new company opening in upstate New York because of NAFTA?” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends)
According to the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, “U.S. exports to Canada and Mexico support more than three million American jobs.” NAFTA made it easier to sell U.S. goods in those countries, meaning that some — and certainly not zero — of those 3 million jobs are a result of the trade agreement.
5-6. “Hillary Clinton is raising your taxes, it’s a very substantial tax increase." (Sept. 20 High Point, North Carolina, rally, and a similar statement at least one other time)
Clinton has not released the full details of her tax plan, but she has sworn off tax hikes for households earning less than $250,000 a year. The vast majority of tax increases she proposes levying affect the highest earners.
7. “Hillary Clinton wants to approve the Trans-Pacific Partnership; that deal will be a disaster for North Carolina, for every state. Your state.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally)
CNN tracked 45 instances in which Clinton supported the TPP, including in 2012 when she called it the “gold standard” of trade deals. But facing a challenge to her left from Bernie Sanders, Clinton this year said she opposed it and would continue to as president. The trade pact’s economic impacts are hotly debated, with some arguing it will hurt domestic workers while others arguing it will spur further exports and economic growth.
8. “Michigan is getting killed. Ohio is getting killed. A lot of states are getting killed, including by the way, North Carolina.” (Sept. 20, Kenansville, North Carolina, rally)
From January 2009 (when President Obama took office) to last month, Michigan’s unemployment rate fell from 11.6 percent to 4.5 percent, Ohio’s rate went from 8.8 percent to 4.7 percent and North Carolina’s rate declined from 9.7 percent to 4.6 percent.
9. “We have a trade deficit with China of $500 billion a year. ... We have a $500 billion trade deficit with China.” (Sept. 20, Kenansville, North Carolina, rally)
The U.S. trade deficit with China peaked at $366 billion in 2015, $134 billion less than Trump claims.
Trump's campaign responded by saying that a roughly $400 billion trade deficit would reach $500 billion if combined with Chinese theft of U.S. intellectual property.
10. “We’re keeping jobs, they’re bad jobs. We’re losing our good jobs.” (Sept. 20, Kenansville, North Carolina, rally)
The average hourly wage for American workers was $23.06 five years ago in August 2011; last month it was $25.73. The relatively slow pace of wage increases is a frequent criticism of the economy under Obama — and it’s spread unevenly across the workforce — but it’s not the broad collapse of good jobs that Trump is portraying.
11. “They’re negotiating to move out of different states. And our politicians do nothing about it.” (Sept. 20, Kenansville, North Carolina, rally)
Politicians, including Obama, have pushed for tax breaks for companies to give them incentives to build new manufacturing facilities in the U.S.
12. “My entire economic plan — tax relief, regulatory relief, energy reform and trade reform — will create at least 25 million new jobs over the next 10 years, assuming an average growth rate of 3.5 percent.” (Sept. 22, Pittsburgh speech)
An analysis by The New York Times concluded Trump’s numbers rely on a set of tremendously optimistic scenarios: There aren’t projected to be enough people in the labor force to fill as many new jobs as Trump is promising to create, and achieving that growth rate would also require a major increase in labor productivity.
13. “China’s treating us like we’re a child the way they do. They charge tax but we don’t charge tax.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
Chinese agricultural products face a 2.5 percent tariff in the United States while non-agricultural goods get taxed at 2.9 percent, according to World Trade Organization statistics.
Trump's campaign responded that he was referring to China's Value Added Tax.
14. “According to the Institute for Energy Research, lifting the restrictions on American energy, including shale production, will accomplish the following: increase GDP by more than $100 billion each year [and] add over 500,000 new jobs annually.” (Sept. 23, Pittsburgh speech)
This is likely the most rosy estimate of the economic benefits of new coal, oil and gas development, as it’s done by a group funded by the American Petroleum Institute and the Charles Koch Institute. The study itself also provides no accounting of the environmental costs of such development, including no mention of climate change.
15. “These unilateral [Obama administration climate change] plans will increase monthly electric bills by double digits without any measurable improvement in climate whatsoever.” (Sept. 23, Pittsburgh speech)
The nonpartisan Energy Information Administration estimated the administration’s “Clean Power Plan” would result in a 3 percent increase in electricity costs and an additional 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, relative to the rule not being implemented.
16. Clinton “plans a $1.3 trillion tax hike.” (Sept. 22, Pittsburgh speech)
Trump is quoting an analysis of Clinton’s tax plan by the conservative American Action Forum. The nonpartisan Tax Foundation estimated her plan would increase revenue by $498 billion over 10 years.
17. “Every energy dollar that isn’t harvested here in America is harvested instead in a foreign country.” (Sept. 22, Pittsburgh speech)
Decreased domestic energy supplies could raise global prices and spur foreign production, it’s not a 1-to-1 relationship. And indeed, many foreign oil producers are already capped out on production or, in the case of Saudi Arabia, intentionally producing below capacity to influence world energy prices.
Miller responded: "If a dollar is being invested in a country, but isn’t being invested in the United States, then logically it is being invested into another country."
18. “Hillary Clinton’s war on energy will cost our economy $5 trillion at least,” while Trump would “scrap the $5 trillion Obama-Clinton Climate Action Plan.” (Sept. 22, Pittsburgh speech)
Even the conservative Heritage Foundation pegs the cost of the Climate Action Plan at $1.47 trillion of lost national income by 2030, not $5 trillion.
The Trump campaign responded: "Mr. Trump is fully committed to ending the Obama – Clinton administration’s addiction to frivolous spending and making our economy great again."
HEALTH CARE
19. “Premiums in Ohio have increased more than 80 percent since Obamacare was passed. 80 percent.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
Trump’s claim is likely based on a state insurance department report on an 80 percent premium rise for individual plans, but that’s misleading because it ignores the vast majority of people who are employed through their employer or through the government. It also ignores that Obamacare provides subsidies for low- and middle-income insurance buyers.
20. “Premiums have gone up almost $5,000 nationwide since 2009.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
Trump’s claim on national premiums is also misleading. Premiums — across all plans, not just individual ones most affected by Obamacare — have climbed since 2009, but at slower rates than they have under Obama’s predecessors. There are many reasons for this — it’s not all because of (or in spite of) Obamacare — but the claim ignores the fact that premiums have been rising relatively quickly for far longer than Obama’s presidency, as well as that their rise has slowed in recent years.
21. “More than two-thirds of our nation’s counties, think of this, have lost insurers. Every day I’m reading, another one left. All the big ones, they’re all leaving.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
Trump appears to be mischaracterizing recent reports projecting a decline in coverage options on Obamacare health insurance exchanges — and the likelihood that a third of all counties could function under single-insurer exchanges. But the report doesn’t address what percent of counties are seeing insurers depart. There have, however, been high profile exits from the Obamacare exchanges, including UnitedHealthcare, Humana and Aetna, which validate Trump’s claim about big insurers leaving.
22. “We’re going to replace government-run Obamacare with reforms that put patients first. These reforms include expanding access to popular savings accounts, empowering Americans to shop for their insurance so that they can really have great choice right across state lines and to block granting and, really important, Medicaid to the states so they can design innovative solutions.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
Trump’s call for Medicaid block grants to states seems to contradict his earlier statements on how he would provide insurance to people who couldn’t afford it. In his appearance on Dr. Oz, he said Medicaid would cover people who couldn’t afford health insurance, but that would be near impossible under block grants, as they cap the cost of Medicaid spending within a state.
23. “Ohio has lost one-third of its manufacturing jobs since the Bill Clinton-signed NAFTA disaster, which Hillary supported totally.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
The numbers are correct, but the cause is in dispute. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has found that Ohio manufacturing jobs declined from just under 1 million to fewer than 700,000 between 1990 and 2015. Economists are divided over NAFTA’s role in the decline of manufacturing, as well as its potential economic benefits. In December of 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law, unemployment in Ohio was at 6.4 percent. Today, the state’s rate is 4.7 percent.
SECURITY
24-29. “[ISIL is] very strong. ... These were started by Hillary Clinton and her policies and Obama when they got out of Iraq this is what happened. This is the remnant of that.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview, and five other times.)
First, the obvious: Clinton did not start ISIS. The group’s founders include Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who founded predecessor group Al Qaeda in Iraq and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ISIL’s current leader.
Nor did all of it happen “on Hillary Clinton’s watch.” The group’s roots trace back to 2004, years before she became secretary of state. And while Clinton left the administration in early 2013, many of ISIL’s highest-profile attacks, atrocities and military victories happened after.
Clinton’s role in the rise of ISIS is more complicated. As secretary of state, she was a prominent foreign policy voice in the Obama administration. By the manner in which the administration withdrew U.S. forces from Iraq, it contributed to a power vacuum that allowed ISIL to accumulate territory in Iraq and Syria. The withdrawal, however, was also dictated in a Status of Forces Agreement negotiated by the George W. Bush administration. The instability that allowed terrorist groups, including ISIS, to quickly amass power and territory may also be linked to the Bush administration’s original decision to invade Iraq in 2003 and topple Saddam Hussein; that decision was supported with a vote of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.
30. “President Obama did a terrible thing the way he got us out of the war. … He got us out the wrong way and ISIS formed. Great job, President Obama.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
ISIS’s roots can be traced back to 2004, when Barack Obama was an Illinois state Senator.
31. “We’re not knocking them. We’re hitting them every once in awhile. We’re hitting em in certain places. We’re being very gentle about it.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
As of Sept. 20, the Defense Department has disclosed 11,697 strikes in Iraq and Syria against ISIL — 6,704 in Iraq and 4,983 in Syria.
32-36. “My opponent won’t even say the words radical Islamic terror.” (Sept. 20 rally, High Point, North Carolina, and similar claims at least four other times.)
In June, Clinton broke from President Obama and used the term “radical Islamism” to describe an attack on an Orlando night club. “Whether you call it radical jihadism or radical Islamism, I'm happy to say either. I think they mean the same thing," she said on CNN in June.
37. “You buy magazines and they tell you how to make the same bombs that you saw. … But how do you allow magazines to be sold — these are magazines that tell you, from step one, go to the store and buy such-and-such, right?” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
Trump appears to be referencing the Islamic State’s main propaganda magazine, Dabiq, which can be viewed online. That magazine does not appear to be available for purchase in the U.S., however.
38-39. “This is something [Clinton] said today, that it’s my strong opposition to these people that’s a recruiting tool.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally, and at least one other time)
Clinton has said that Trump’s rhetoric and policy proposals, including his proposed ban on Muslim immigration, are helping ISIL recruit members by portraying the United States as anti-Muslim. Both ISIL and Al Shabaab, an al Qaeda affiliate in Somalia, have featured Trump in propaganda videos. Clinton has not criticized Trump’s opposition to ISIL, and she too has condemned the group.
40. “Obama and Clinton have toppled regimes, displaced millions of people, then opened door to ISIS to enter our country.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
About 434,000 people have been displaced in Libya, according to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center. Muammar Gaddafi is the only leader who was deposed after direct U.S. military intervention under Obama.
41. “Right now the world has no respect for our country. The world has no respect for our president whatsoever.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
A 2015 Pew survey of 39 countries found a median of 69 percent of people in those countries had a favorable opinion of the United States.
Trump's Miller responded that the Republican's statement was true. "Yes, fact," he wrote.
42. “I was against going into the war in Iraq. … I opposed going into Iraq, unlike Hillary Clinton.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
Trump told Howard Stern he supported the invasion in 2002. Asked by the radio host if he was for the invasion, Trump responded: “Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly.” Clinton, in her role as a U.S. senator, voted for the Iraq invasion in 2002.
Trump's Miller responded that the Republican had been opposed to the invasion "from the very beginning" and cited news reports dated after the start of the war, and after the interview with Stern.
43. “Our local police, they know who a lot of these people are. They’re afraid to do anything about it because they don’t want to be accused of profiling and they don’t want to be accused of all sorts of things.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
There are no publicly known instances of local police knowing where Jihadi terrorists are but opting not to act on that information. Trump did not cite any specific examples.
The Trump campaign responded by citing a Washington Times report that the Homeland Security Advisory Council advised law enforcement to avoid using words that might offend Muslim communities and a CBS report that the Fort Hood shooter was not investigated before than incident because of concerns about political correctness.
44-47. “All together, Hillary Clinton’s plan would bring in 650,000 refugees in her first term alone with no effective way to screen or vet them. Her plan would cost $400 billion in terms of lifetime welfare and entitlement costs.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally, and similar statements at least three other times)
Clinton has proposed resettling up to a total of 65,000 refugees, one-tenth of the 650,000 Trump says she’s proposing. The $400 billion figure likely comes from a statement by Trump ally and Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, who assumed Clinton’s goal was 155,000 refugees annually. Sessions used statistics from the Heritage Foundation that argued 10,000 refugees would cost $130 million per year to calculate a total cost of more than $400 billion.
48-49. “We’ve been letting in people by the thousands, the tens of thousands. ... Just last week, Obama said more than 100,000 people were going to come in from Syria. … They can’t be properly vetted. There’s no way. ... Thousands of people are pouring into our country and we have no idea what we’re doing.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview, and a similar statement at least one other time)
The Obama administration in September said it intends to bring in 110,000 refugees over the next year. That number applies to all refugees, however, rather than just those from Syria. Last month, the administration let in the 10,000th Syrian refugee of the current fiscal year. Refugees are also rigorously screened for security, including checks from international organizations, the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department.
50. “Israel does it [racial profiling], and Israel does it very successfully.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
Politifact rated this half-true, concluding that Israel does use racial profiling but it isn’t the reason the country has strong counterterrorism.
51. “As secretary of state, she allowed thousands of criminal aliens to be released into our communities because their home countries wouldn’t take them back.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
Detentions and deportations are the responsibility of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, not the State Department. There is a federal law that allows the secretary of state to withhold visas for citizens from countries that refuse to accept deportees, but it’s unclear whether ICE ever asked the State Department to intervene during Clinton’s tenure.
52. “We’re presiding over something that the world has not seen. The level of evil is unbelievable.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
Judging one “level of evil” against another is subjective, but other groups in recent history have without any question engaged in as widespread killing of civilians as ISIS.
53. “I never said the term ‘Muslim,’ you did. I’m saying you’re going to profile people who maybe look suspicious. I didn’t say they were Muslim or not.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
Just moments earlier, Trump had told O’Reilly that the country had “no choice” but to profile Arab and Muslim men. Politifact noted that Trump has repeatedly broached the subject and characterized profiling of Muslims as “common sense.” And he also has routinely discussed surveilling mosques. Trump’s call for a shutdown of Muslim immigration to the United States isn’t specifically about profiling by police, but it’s a policy that similarly targets people of a specific religion for extra scrutiny and restriction.
54. “The detainees being released from Gitmo are returning to the battlefield. Many of those detainees are returning to the battlefield and some immediately.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
The truth of this claim depends on your definition of “many.” Since Obama took office, seven of the 144 released detainees were confirmed as engaging in terrorist activities, and another 12 were suspected of the same, according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
55. “The guy over the chicken stand brought a lot of litigation against different people.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
Trump was referring to Ahmad Khan Rahami, who was arrested on suspicion of placing bombs in New York and New Jersey. News reports have identified only one lawsuit by the Rahami family, not by Ahmad Rahami himself, alleging discrimination by local police.
56. “We’re going to build the wall. Mexico’s going to pay for the wall, 100 percent.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally
The U.S. has no legal recourse to force Mexico to pay for a border wall. Multiple Mexican officials have said the country wouldn’t pay for any of it, and current President Enrique Peña Nieto, who met with Trump this year, said there’s “no way” Mexico will pay for it.
57-58. “My opponent has the most open-doors policy of anyone ever to seek the office of presidency. It’s not even close.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally and at least one other similar claim)
Clinton's policies are actually squarely in the mainstream of Democratic politics. She's called specifically for securing the border but emphasizes deportations of criminal undocumented immigrants rather than mass deportation as Trump has advocated. Per Politifact, Clinton has consistently made a case for secure borders.
59. “It’s just a plain fact that our current immigration system makes no real attempt to determine the views of the people entering our country.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally)
Various fact checks note that immigration processes are lengthy and include detailed interviews. Some forms include questions about membership in terrorist organizations. But critics of Trump's "extreme vetting" proposal note that it's fraught with subjectivity and vulnerable to people who misrepresent their beliefs — in other words, unlikely to be enforceable.
HILLARY CLINTON
60-62. “I don’t know if you saw. Her campaign, 50 to 1 in advertising, 50 to 1, and I think we’re actually winning. I actually think we’re winning.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally, and similar claims at least two other times)
Trump is referring to an ABC News report that Clinton is slated to outspend him by a 53-to-1 margin on television ads in Florida between now and Election Day. At the current levels of all national advertising, Trump’s right that Clinton has the lion’s share, but he’s overstating it. POLITICO’s Steve Shepard broke it down Thursday, finding a seven-to-one ad spending edge for the Democrat. Also, polls still show a close contest with Trump gaining ground but Clinton holding an edge in swing states.
63. “Ever notice — all she does is attack me, constantly attack, attack?” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally)
Clinton does relentlessly attack Trump, but she also often gives policy addresses on what she wants to do as president, as well as — as she did this week — give her thoughts on current events and how the country should handle them.
64. “Do people notice Hillary is copying my airplane rallies — she puts the plane behind her like I have been doing from the beginning.” (Sept. 20, Twitter)
The imagery of presidential candidates using planes as backdrops for campaign events is voluminous.
Trump's campaign responded: "Mr. Trump never claimed that he invented the tactic of using airplanes/airports as backdrops for events. He's merely pointing out that her press availability on Monday was the first time that we've been able to identify her using an airplane as a backdrop for an event this presidential cycle. This comes after a string of events where Mr. Trump used his plane as a backdrop.
65. “Hillary Clinton is taking the day off again, she needs the rest. Sleep well Hillary — see you at the debate!” (Sept. 20, Twitter)
Hillary Clinton did, in fact, take Tuesday off the campaign trail, but she didn’t take a “day off.” She was holed up with advisers to prepare for the first debate, and in the afternoon she convened a conference call with counterterrorism experts to discuss the recent attacks in New York, New Jersey and Minnesota.
66. "Crooked Hillary's bad judgement forced her to announce that she would go to Charlotte on Saturday to grandstand. Dem pols said no way, dumb!" (Sept. 23, Twitter)
Clinton was invited by local faith leaders to come to Charlotte, but she later cancelled the visit after local officials said it would be detrimental to the situation. Trump’s claim is also somewhat undermined by his own decision to go to flood-ravaged Louisiana as a sign of hands-on leadership — even though Democratic officials there also warned against the distraction of a political visit. On the other hand, Clinton’s initial plans to visit Charlotte seem to contradict her reasons for not going to Louisiana, showing a lack of consistency by both candidates.
67. “It helped when Hillary made the statement, ‘I’m gonna put all those mines and miners out of business.’” (Sept. 23, Pittsburgh speech)
Trump is referring to a remark Clinton did make at a March town hall on CNN, but it came in context of a longer statement about helping coal miners adjust to a changing energy economy. “I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right?”
68. “The platform produced by Hillary Clinton’s party this year also calls for a price on carbon. That’s just political speak for a massive new tax on coal and shale production.” (Sept. 23, Pittsburgh speech)
Trump is correct that the Democratic Party Platform calls for a tax on carbon emissions, but Clinton has kept her distance from it, instead proposing other methods to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It’s unclear whether that tax would be “massive,” as Trump claims.
69. “Those peddling the narrative of cops as a racist force in our society and this is a narrative that is supported with a nod by my opponent — you see what she’s saying and it’s not good — share directly in the responsibility for the unrest that is afflicting our country and hurting those who have really the very least.” (Sept. 22, Chester Township, Pennsylvania, rally)
“Supported with a nod” is a difficult insinuation to prove or disprove, but here’s what Clinton said about police violence on Thursday. "Too many Black Americans have lost their lives and too many feel that their lives are disposable," she said, according to a readout of a call with Charlotte officials. “There are good, honorable police officers serving their communities across our country, and we must all work together to mend the wounds that exist.”
TRUMP ON TRUMP
70. “Not only did I win, I got 14 million votes.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
Trump received 13.3 million votes during the Republican primary.
71. “I won 42 states and [Ohio Gov. John Kasich] won one state and by the way didn’t win it by much. That was Ohio. I am right now leading in Ohio by a lot.” (Sept. 19, Fox & Friends interview)
Trump won 36 states during the primary. Kasich won Ohio by 11 points. Trump leads Clinton in Ohio by 2.2 percent in the polls, according to POLITICO’s Battleground States polling average.
72. “Even in sports, I win.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
Trump has repeatedly been accused of cheating at golf, a charge he vehemently denies. He was also considered a good college athlete. In this clip, however, he does appear to win a point in beach volleyball.
THE POLLS
73. “I think some of the states we're leading, like I see we're doing great in Maine, we're doing great in Connecticut, we're doing great in places that normally a Republican wouldn't do as well … Colorado has been amazing.” (Sept. 21, Sean Hannity/Fox News Town Hall)
Donald Trump is not leading in Maine, Connecticut or Colorado. In Connecticut, a solid blue state, the latest poll gave Clinton a 15-point lead and in Colorado, Clinton has led handily in most polls, despite a narrowing of late. Maine, typically a safe blue state, is also leaning toward Clinton, though polls have shown a narrower-than-expected race there.
74. “We’re doing very well in the polls, and we’re leading in many states, including the great state of Florida.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
A New York Times Upshot/Siena College Florida poll released that day found Clinton and Trump within the poll’s margin of error in Florida, 41 percent to 40 percent.
75. “Our people, the highest levels of enthusiasm that they’ve seen.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally)
A recent CNN/ORC poll found 33 percent of Trump’s voters identified themselves “extremely enthusiastic” about their candidate. Four years ago, 36 percent of Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s supporters told the same pollster they were extremely enthusiastic.
76-78. “I’m going to get tremendous votes from the African American community. And we’re going to get tremendous votes from the Hispanic community.” (Sept. 19, Fort Myers, Florida, rally, and similar statements at least two other times)
Clinton leads with black voters by 81.6 percentage points and with Hispanics by 33.3 percentage points, according to an average of nine recent polls compiled by Bloomberg.
79. “We're five points up and we have great support [in Ohio].” (Sept. 21, ABC6 Interview)
Trump is referring to a pair of recent polls that show him up five points — but that only refers to his two best polls: a Fox News survey out this week and a Bloomberg poll out last week. The RealClearPolitics polling average gives Trump a narrower 2.5 percentage point edge in a four-way race, a lead he has built in recent weeks.
80. “We’re doing really great in the polls. The Bloomberg poll, we’re up 5 in Ohio. In CNN, CNN we’re up 3 in Florida. We now lead in Nevada, Iowa. We lead in North Carolina. The LA Times has us four or five points up.” (Sept. 21, Toledo, Ohio, rally)
Again, Trump is cherry-picking his best polls. The RealClearPolitics average shows the race essentially tied in Florida, though Clinton has seen more encouraging results in the past few days than Trump, including a Monmouth poll that showed her leading by five points. Trump does appear to hold leads in Nevada, Iowa and North Carolina, though his lead in North Carolina is far slimmer than in the other two states. The latest LA Times tracking poll at the time Trump made his remarks showed Trump up just 2 points on Clinton nationally.
81. “We’re up to 90 percent now, 95 percent, 92 percent with the Republicans. We’re doing very well. They’ve come back in.” (Sept. 20, Fox 8 interview)
Republicans are increasingly lining up behind Trump, but it has been uneven across swing states. In no polls does he register support from 95% of Republicans, and even 90 percent appears to be a best case scenario. Conversely, he's polling just above 70% support from Republicans in Pennsylvania and around 80% in Wisconsin and Virginia.
82. "The foundation is really rare. It gives money to vets. It's really been doing a good job.” (Sept. 21, ABC 6 interview)
Trump’s foundation has been the source of a series of negative revelations, largely at the hands of Washington Post reporter David Fahrenthold. He reports Trump used $258,000 in foundation money to settle a legal dispute. Trump also reportedly used charity money to buy a 6-foot-tall self-portrait. And in a long-running investigation, Fahrenthold has found no evidence to support Trump’s claim of having given tens of millions to charity.
THE MEDIA
83. “‘Irredeemable,’ that’s a terrible word that hasn't been reported but that was a word that she used.” (Sept. 20, High Point, North Carolina, rally)
Multiple news organizations, including POLITICO, have reported that Clinton used the word “irredeemable” to describe half of Trump’s supporters.
84. “Well look, everybody understands what's going on [at the Clinton Foundation], and it's a whole pay for play deal ... Nobody is picking it up. They're just not picking it up.” (Sept. 21, Hannity/Fox News Town Hall)
Many, many outlets have written repeatedly about potential conflicts of interest among the Clinton Foundation, Clinton’s State Department and the Clintons’ personal wealth.
85. “The NYT wrote a story about me and women and it turned out it was a false story. We’re going to take that up with them at a later date. … The women called the office, they said, ‘We never said that about Donald Trump, we really like him.’ They quoted women and they never even said it, and it was on the front page, center fold, massive big color picture. It was disgraceful. They are so dishonest.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
One of the many women the Times interviewed later did television interviews saying the reporters put a “negative connotation” on the comments, but she never denied making them.
86. “Lester’s a Democrat. They’re all Democrats.” (Sept. 19, The O’Reilly Factor interview)
Lester Holt, who’s moderating the first presidential debate, is a registered Republican, according to New York State records.
87. “I certainly don't think you want Candy Crowley again. ... She turned out to be wrong.” (Sept. 22, Fox & Friends interview)
Trump was referring to a dramatic moment in Candy Crowley’s moderating of the second presidential debate in 2012. President Obama said he called the Benghazi attack an act of terror the day afterward in the Rose Garden, and Mitt Romney claimed he hadn’t used the word for 14 days. “Get the transcript,” Obama said, and Crowley interjected that he was correct and Romney was mistaken. Conservatives criticized Crowley for interfering, but her live fact-check was accurate. “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation,” Obama said on Sept. 12 in the Rose Garden.
They did a spin article on Dickinson Chaney about a statement he said in an interview, paraphrasing to the point. that he said terrorist don't fall under Geneva convention. And said he was false and quoted a piece of the added clause that is outside of war, but failed to address article 3, that states of the act of war by participant doesn't also follow Geneva rules they are disqualified. So they ONLY quoted the part that supports their spin!
Yes go to article 3! They only referred to half of it!
The other half disqualifies them because they are required to also act according to Geneva convention rules!
And flying planes into buildings and suicide bombing is AGAINST THE GENEVA RULES.. So they disqualify themselves for the guideline of Geneva rules of engagememt!
they are required to also act according to Geneva convention rules
"each Party" is bound - one side breaking the rule doesn't give the other side permission to also break it.
read the clauses
read the Supreme Court decision...
Artclie 3 "affords some minimal protection, falling short of full protection under the Conventions, to individuals associated with neither a signatory nor even a nonsignatory who are involved in a conflict “in the territory of” a signatory."
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
BEGINNING AND END OF APPLICATION
ARTICLE 5 [ Link ]
The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 [ Link ] from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.
Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4 [ Link ] , such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
BEGINNING AND END OF APPLICATION
ARTICLE 5 [ Link ]
The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 [ Link ] from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.
Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4 [ Link ] , such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.
Self defense is offensive to you Democrats. Man or woman who defends themselves against criminals with a weapon just puts you Democrats into tailspin !
When it comes to physical threats, I can say that abortion is self defense. For cases where pregnancy is a non-physical threat (financial, mental, mother's life plans), I don't believe the self defense laws protect abortion.
On the other hand, all pregnancies extremely affect a woman's body and lead to discomfort and pain. So, on those bases, all pregnancies is a to some degree a physical threat.
Imagine if we used your same inhuman excuses for killing innocent life after they travel down the birth canal.
Children can cause women many mental/emotional/social/financial harm no matter the age of the child. SO LETS KILL THEM!!!!!! That's your answer! LOL, what a selfish inhuman amoral fool!
You are laughable, your pathetic excuses to kill even innocent viable babies for any reason up to birth when you vote for this extremist Democrat party.
We already have life of mother exceptions for abortions! The GOP want a simple compromise of 20 weeks (with extreme case exceptions) but this extremist pro aborton Democrat party refuse to compromise even though over 80% of Americans do want restrictions on abortions. The Democrat party is tied to pro abortion lobby groups. IT'S ALL ABOUT MONEY AND VOTES FOR THESE INHUMAN POLITICIANS.
If you vote for these extremists (and hllary is one who supports no restriction abortions for any reason), you might as well use the forcepts yourself because you will be culpable for the inhumanity.
If a child reached into my body and grabbed an artery.. attaching it to its belly button and put me at risk of a number of life threatening conditions... I think self defense would be the appropriate defense to a murder charge if I killed it.
guah!!! guah!! guah!!!! Are you some sort of animal? Try and control yourself deary.
The risk of being killed by the feotus sometime in your pregnancy is 14 times higher than the risk of dying as a complication of abortion. This isn't taking into account the risk of disability from a complication of pregnancy.
Fool! Do you know that in my entire life, I have never known anyone or heard of anyone that knows someone who DIED FROM BEING PREGNANT! I know it happens but very very seldom. This is why we support life of mother abortions you deceptive liar!
But these are the deceptions, the lies, the rhetoric from people who must make some kind of ludicrous excuse to hide their inhumanity to our most innocent life.
Now do what all you pro abortion fanatics always do, and talk about zygotes, or 1st trimester abortions, even though you and the Democrat party support NO RESTRICTION ABORTIONS FOR ANY REASON AT ANY STAGE!
Right, the chance of dying is 0.1%. Half of all pregnant woman have some complications during their pregnancy. 3% of woman suffer serious illness and debilitating injury. If a child, of any age, latched on to your body, demanded you care for it forever and causes you these risks, would you kill it or would you let it cling on to you? There is strong justification for killing it.
And I have to say.. you have no idea what I support you strange little man.
There is one thing I know about you. It is a waste of time bantering words with you as with most arrogant extremist Democrats.
When a person lacks the simple humanity to understand the depravity of even no restriction abortions, when supporting the politicians who keep it legal, there can be no debate. These extremists are truly lost in their self love.
Well, then I suggest you stay away of debates about abortion. All you ever say is abortion is wrong because abortion is wrong BECAUSE ABORTION IS WRONG BECAUSE ABORTION IS WRONG. If you want to debate.. debate. If not, fuck off this debate site.
There is no debating someone who lacks the discernment to know that name-calling and denial are fallacies and not a form of debate.
It's impossible to debate you because you don't debate. The one time I found you using something close to an argument when arguing with you was when you said gay marriage was wrong because you thought it was "weird".
You say it's a waste of time to talk to anyone that disagrees with you, then you call anyone that disagrees with you an extremist, completely missing the irony of it.
You're thinking outside of the box, but frankly that's an ugly argument which isn't going to persuade anyone.
I believe abortion is killing, and I believe our society (and most societies) consider it among the list of justifiable killings - comparable to self defense - but that doesn't make it the same thing as that.
Didn't really expect someone like you to accept the truth and face up to the harshness of the indisputable facts.
Does the image of a female walking through the dog's shit of an alleyway in Belfast, or any other city for that matter, whilst discharging blood and the foetus is abortioning make you feel squeamish?
Oh you poor sensitive little boy, go to the bathroom and have a quick vomit and then pop off to bed and read Alice and wonderland.
That's a nice safe world up in cloud cuckoo land, right up your street.
I doubt very much that you read my post in it's entirety and know that you haven't researched the issue properly.
The facts of the ''backstreet abortions'' may be ugly but my post is nevertheless a true and accurate account of the procedure.
Are you such a mammy's boy wimp that you cannot face up to, or accept reality?
Your anti abortion argument is nothing more than naive, sanctimonious gobbledygook which is totally meaningless and has no place in the real world.
Actually, I think both sides just sticking to their talking points is less likely to be convincing to others.
Not only do most conservatives have a strong belief in self-defense, this also avoids some of the unwinnable arguments currently made - e.g. when does life begin, etc.
comparable to self defense - but that doesn't make it the same thing as that.
In what ways do you think there are important differences?
Self defense depends in part on the killer not really having an option other than succumbing and possibly dieing themselves. That's usually not true in pregnancy.
It already is illegal to shoot a thief. I've gone over this in other gun debates. When I got my license to carry a judge spoke to our class and made this a very clear warning. If there is any way to avoid shooting, even if it involves leaving out your back door, you have to, because if you use deadly force and it wasn't really necessary you'll be the one going to jail.
For example - see the current version of the castle doctrine in Florida - an intruder is presumed to be a threat of great bodily harm or death, no duty to retreat, etc.
I can believe that for Florida. But I'd also believe that 3 out of 4 people regardless of what state they are in believe they have the same rights as Florida but most of them would be shocked in the aftermath to find out they don't.
I agree that many people would be wrong about the rules of self-defense in their state.
Do you think they should change the law in Florida - or change other states to be more like it?
Where there is a duty to retreat, it only applies when you actually can retreat - so it would still not seem to apply in the case of abortion, correct?
No, I actually agree the people of each state should get to decide this at the state level. I wouldn't try to tell Florida what to do.
And I'm sorry, I'm sorry but I still think you're stretching too far to try to use this in abortion. I doubt any court, or any voting public, would agree the the self defense analogy in abortion.
Chris Christie at the GOP primary debate in New Hampshire Feb 6, 2016:
"And the fact is that we have always has believed, as has Ronald Reagan, that we have self-defense for women who have been raped and impregnated because of it, or the subject of incest and been impregnated for it.
That woman should not have to deliver that child if they believe that violation is now an act of self-defense by terminating that pregnancy."
I know people don't think of it in these terms, but when advocates say - my body, my rights, etc. - I think they are really using this same idea - just not explicitly so.
Glad you are taking the time to flush it out (no pun intended) - every time I have this discussion, something new seems to come up - but, so far the argument holds really well - except for mental resistance to the paradigm shift.
Absolutely not, even the title of the thread is out of context as the accepted meaning of the term, self defense is normally associated with retaliatory physical force in protecting one's self or property.
Self preservation would have been a better choice of terminology.
However, abortion cannot be rationalized just by using either of these terms.
Absolutely not, even the title of the thread is out of context as the accepted meaning of the term, self defense is normally associated with retaliatory physical force in protecting one's self or property.
Yes, the "Self" would be the woman's body, and the outside force would be the fetus.
Self preservation would have been a better choice of terminology.
Self preservation is the motivation behind self defense.
However, abortion cannot be rationalized just by using either of these terms.
It already has been within this debate many times.
No it hasn't, you're one of the site's bully boys I see. As far as I'm concerned abortion hasn't been justified even once, and certainly not by you. You are hallucinating, too much wanking in the toilets. Judging by your stance and your feeble attempt to defend the indefensible nonsense of a title you and your alter ego goat who created this argument are one of the same. Were you always a thick bastard?
No it hasn't, you're one of the site's bully boys I see
Only to FromWithin, and there's backstory there. Oh and Winkle, but he's an admitted white supremacist.
As far as I'm concerned abortion hasn't been justified even once, and certainly not by you.
It actually has, you just disagree with the justifications. There's a difference.
You are hallucinating, too much wanking in the toilets.
And you are trying to accuse others of being a "bully"?
Judging by your stance and your feeble attempt to defend the indefensible nonsense of a title you and your alter ego goat who created this argument are one of the same.
Not only do you not actually know my position on abortion (I am personally against it), but saying JustIgnoreMe is an alt account of mine shows a degree of ignorance regarding this website that's just plain baffling.
Because I say so, and that's all that is required. You and your schizophrenic friend should go and screw each other. Send this to IamSpartacus on St, Valentine's day, Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic, and so am I. Your multi-personality disorder is really very obvious.
Because I say so, and that's all that is required. You and your schizophrenic friend should go and screw each other. Send this to IamSpartacus on St, Valentine's day, Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic, and so am I. Your multi-personality disorder is really very obvious.