Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Trump On Abortion- Favors Punishing Women

zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 8:07:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
This is the same as saying that abortion should be outlawed, unless someone thinks that people should be allowed to break the allow without any punishment, or unless someones interprets Trump's words as a call to retroactively punish women for doing something that was legal at the time they did it, which is of course not what he's doing (I think?)
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:41:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

What I have read is that he says IF abortions are illegal, AND a woman seeks an abortion, THEN there needs to be a punishment for her.

You seem to be suggesting that IF abortions are illegal, there should be no punishment for women who have an abortion.
Is that your position?
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:37:48 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
If abortion BECOMES illegal he thinks there should be some sort of punishment for a woman who breaks this law and pays someone to murder her baby (baby is unborn).
This is sarcasm. Over the years since the supreme court made abortion legal. ProLifers have said that since abortion is murder, someone who performs abortions should be punished really bad.
When they were asked about what should be done to the pregnant girl who decided to have her baby murdered, the ProLifers suddenly became all forgiving, and would not say she should be prosecuted for anything.
As a republican Trump is opposed to abortion because this is part of the republican party platform.
It seems like a mute point, because all of the last 5 republican presidents in office have not re-criminalized abortion. I guarantee the next one won't either.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:42:06 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
He's already reversed it. Somehow he managed to find the one stance that both pro-life and pro-choice people reject.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:43:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
If Ted Cruz becomes president we can expect a return to many of the policies of both George Bushes.
If Donald Trump becomes president, this is a maybe, -maybe not.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:43:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
It won't do simply to punish abortion doctors; what if women perform abortions on themselves? If you don't punish them, then how could a law banning abortion be enforced?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 3:37:59 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 1:42:06 AM, TN05 wrote:
He's already reversed it. Somehow he managed to find the one stance that both pro-life and pro-choice people reject.

Yes, and what's amazing is that there is ANYONE who will vote for him - before this and especially now.
bulpoof
Posts: 143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?
vortex86
Posts: 568
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case). The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans. That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.
bulpoof
Posts: 143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:30:28 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case). The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans. That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant. : :

Donald Trump is learning the hard lessons of being a lying politician. One day, he will be just as good a liar as all the rest of those lying thugs who selfishly live off the hard labor of the working class they rule over.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:44:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
If a woman has unprotected sex and the morning after takes 10 birth control pills at the same time , a fertilized egg inside her will get aborted. If you believe that life begins at conception, then what happened here is a life that began last night ended the morning after.
My guess is Mr. Trump believes the case for making abortion illegal is a crock of ****. However the republican party requires him to agree with the far-right on this issue whether he wants to or not.
This might matter if you expect that abortion would become illegal in the future.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:47:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
If your goal is to stop abortion, making it illegal is not gonna work.
We must sterilize people so that they will not become pregnant.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:48:55 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?

I'm all for speaking your mind.

In Trump's case, many of his positions are downright ridiculous for someone wanting to be the leader of a country, to Hitler-like levels. Yet his supporters just don't care.

Trump is like an arrogant shepherd. He's great at bringing the sheep together because sheep can't think for themselves so he knows they'll follow the call of his voice, but all he does is lead them off a cliff because he's so full of himself he thinks he can just fly them all to safety like he's Superman. The really sad part is most of them hear him claiming to be Superman and actually believe him.
bulpoof
Posts: 143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:51:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 6:48:55 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?

I'm all for speaking your mind.

In Trump's case, many of his positions are downright ridiculous for someone wanting to be the leader of a country, to Hitler-like levels. Yet his supporters just don't care.

Trump is like an arrogant shepherd. He's great at bringing the sheep together because sheep can't think for themselves so he knows they'll follow the call of his voice, but all he does is lead them off a cliff because he's so full of himself he thinks he can just fly them all to safety like he's Superman. The really sad part is most of them hear him claiming to be Superman and actually believe him. : :

You're correct about Donald Trump and everyone else that inhabits the earth. When God finally kills all the inhabitants of the earth, we will never have to listen to another man's lies again.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case).

It's not Trump's position here which is necessarily at fault (never mind that no one is actually sure what his position truly is now, not even Trump himself).

It's the fact that he speaks without thinking and it's caught up to him again. His credo of speak what's on your mind first and then think about it should have already made him the laughingstock of this election, but foolish people have ignored these huge gaffes on his part and voted for him anyway.

The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans.

First, yes, it certainly could happen. It's a delicate issue and SCOTUS is split on many issues right now. Depending upon who ultimately fills the final seat, a lot could change.

Second, logically there's no reason to think an embryo isn't a developing human - but that's another discussion.

That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

This is all true so I won't argue it.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Yes he backtracked because he's a fool who speaks first and thinks later. Anyone that foolish should NEVER lead a country.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.

That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.
vortex86
Posts: 568
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 7:13:38 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case).

It's not Trump's position here which is necessarily at fault (never mind that no one is actually sure what his position truly is now, not even Trump himself).

It's the fact that he speaks without thinking and it's caught up to him again. His credo of speak what's on your mind first and then think about it should have already made him the laughingstock of this election, but foolish people have ignored these huge gaffes on his part and voted for him anyway.

The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans.

First, yes, it certainly could happen. It's a delicate issue and SCOTUS is split on many issues right now. Depending upon who ultimately fills the final seat, a lot could change.

Second, logically there's no reason to think an embryo isn't a developing human - but that's another discussion.

That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

This is all true so I won't argue it.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Yes he backtracked because he's a fool who speaks first and thinks later. Anyone that foolish should NEVER lead a country.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.

That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.

He was asked if it was overturned. I gave you the only circumstance that it would ever be overturned. That I gave clarification why his answer is the only logical one. Now does this mean he doesn't support women's choice? The question bears no indication of this one way or the other.

What big gaffe/ faux pas did he make "with his big mouth"? If anything the only criticism I see of this act was his retraction and backing down from his original position. Perhaps after reflection he found a more suitable answer in his opinion. He said it was a complex issue and was not certain with his answer to begin with. Listen to all "controversial" interviews in their entirety before jumping on the media buzz of the day.

The people once again that focus and continue to over embellish these non stories are people that would never have voted for him to begin with.

Explain to me how this affects me.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 7:56:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?

Or be a coward and pretend to be someone you are not.
bulpoof
Posts: 143
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 8:00:58 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 7:56:10 PM, desmac wrote:
At 3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?

Or be a coward and pretend to be someone you are not. : :

it's amazing how you haven't been banned from DDO yet.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 8:02:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 8:00:58 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/31/2016 7:56:10 PM, desmac wrote:
At 3/31/2016 4:39:24 PM, bulpoof wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now. : :

Why is it foolish to admit your thoughts? Isn't it more foolish to be a coward and not let anyone know what you think?

Or be a coward and pretend to be someone you are not. : :

it's amazing how you haven't been banned from DDO yet.

Truly astonishing, phoney.
vortex86
Posts: 568
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 8:15:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM, zoinks wrote:
That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.

John Roberts (conservative) - He stated: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land"

Anthony Kennedy (Republican moderate) - reaffirmed in principle (though without many details) the Roe v. Wade decision

Clarence Thomas - (conservative) - Believes it was rules inccorectly would overturn

Ruth Ginsburg - (liberal) - supports abortion rights

Stephen Breyer (liberal) - supports abortion rights

Samuel Alito (conservative) - May/may not vote to overturn

Sonia Sotomayor (former demorat turned independent) - agreed to anti-abortion legislation

Elena Kagan (liberal) - voted in favor of banning late term abortions.

explain to me how that equates to 5+ votes in favor of overturning roe vs wade even if a Republican were to appoint a pro-life justice. As I stated, this is a non-issue.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2016 12:21:51 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Say that in a theoretical future abortion becomes illegal. Do you people think that a doctor who does an abortion should go to jail, but a pregnant girl who went to a clinic and had an abortion done has done nothing wrong, it's the doctors fault? like he had his nurses grab the pregnant girl on the street and dragged her into the clinic?
How about the guy who got the girl pregnant?
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2016 4:06:08 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 7:13:38 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case).

It's not Trump's position here which is necessarily at fault (never mind that no one is actually sure what his position truly is now, not even Trump himself).

It's the fact that he speaks without thinking and it's caught up to him again. His credo of speak what's on your mind first and then think about it should have already made him the laughingstock of this election, but foolish people have ignored these huge gaffes on his part and voted for him anyway.

The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans.

First, yes, it certainly could happen. It's a delicate issue and SCOTUS is split on many issues right now. Depending upon who ultimately fills the final seat, a lot could change.

Second, logically there's no reason to think an embryo isn't a developing human - but that's another discussion.

That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

This is all true so I won't argue it.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Yes he backtracked because he's a fool who speaks first and thinks later. Anyone that foolish should NEVER lead a country.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.

That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.

He was asked if it was overturned. I gave you the only circumstance that it would ever be overturned. That I gave clarification why his answer is the only logical one. Now does this mean he doesn't support women's choice? The question bears no indication of this one way or the other.

He's made his views very clear - after he stuck his foot in his mouth, AGAIN.

What big gaffe/ faux pas did he make "with his big mouth"?

Oh, I don't know, saying what seems to be the one thing that can equally anger both the pro life and pro choice crowd might be a big gaffe - but only if he wants to WIN the nomination/election. If his goal is to lose then it's just fine.

The people once again that focus and continue to over embellish these non stories are people that would never have voted for him to begin with.

So the sane, rational people then.

No one else would want that psycho as the leader of a country.

Explain to me how this affects me.

If he becomes the leader of the country and does something crazy (and he will, it's only a matter of time) you'll be as ****ed as everyone else on planet Earth.
vortex86
Posts: 568
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2016 4:15:39 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/1/2016 4:06:08 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 7:13:38 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case).

It's not Trump's position here which is necessarily at fault (never mind that no one is actually sure what his position truly is now, not even Trump himself).

It's the fact that he speaks without thinking and it's caught up to him again. His credo of speak what's on your mind first and then think about it should have already made him the laughingstock of this election, but foolish people have ignored these huge gaffes on his part and voted for him anyway.

The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans.

First, yes, it certainly could happen. It's a delicate issue and SCOTUS is split on many issues right now. Depending upon who ultimately fills the final seat, a lot could change.

Second, logically there's no reason to think an embryo isn't a developing human - but that's another discussion.

That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

This is all true so I won't argue it.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Yes he backtracked because he's a fool who speaks first and thinks later. Anyone that foolish should NEVER lead a country.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.

That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.

He was asked if it was overturned. I gave you the only circumstance that it would ever be overturned. That I gave clarification why his answer is the only logical one. Now does this mean he doesn't support women's choice? The question bears no indication of this one way or the other.

He's made his views very clear - after he stuck his foot in his mouth, AGAIN.

What big gaffe/ faux pas did he make "with his big mouth"?

Oh, I don't know, saying what seems to be the one thing that can equally anger both the pro life and pro choice crowd might be a big gaffe - but only if he wants to WIN the nomination/election. If his goal is to lose then it's just fine.

Wow, a direct quote from a news article care to use an original thought? I'm sorry but him answering a hypothetical question reasonably is not a story. Once again I ask you to look at the context of the answer/question.


The people once again that focus and continue to over embellish these non stories are people that would never have voted for him to begin with.

So the sane, rational people then.

Yes, the sane rational people fixate on enquirer stories.. laugh.

No one else would want that psycho as the leader of a country.

Explain to me how this affects me.

If he becomes the leader of the country and does something crazy (and he will, it's only a matter of time) you'll be as ****ed as everyone else on planet Earth.

His answer on a hypothetical that by any reasonable person is a legitimate answer. If someone breaks the law some consequence should ensue. If you disagree with that sentiment then you are the one lacking rational thought not those that chose to ignore media buzz topics and pushed narratives.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2016 6:51:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/1/2016 4:15:39 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 4/1/2016 4:06:08 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 7:13:38 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:55:18 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 3/31/2016 6:06:17 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 7:50:37 PM, zoinks wrote:
Trump said in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews "There needs to be some sort of punishment" for women who get abortions.

Of course this will probably do nothing to affect the incredibly loyal base of his supporters, who don't actually care what foolish remarks he makes about virtually anything because if they did he'd have no support by now.

Heaven forbid you punish someone for breaking the law (which in the hypothetical posed would be the case).

It's not Trump's position here which is necessarily at fault (never mind that no one is actually sure what his position truly is now, not even Trump himself).

It's the fact that he speaks without thinking and it's caught up to him again. His credo of speak what's on your mind first and then think about it should have already made him the laughingstock of this election, but foolish people have ignored these huge gaffes on his part and voted for him anyway.

The only way Roe vs Wade would be reversed (not going to happen) is if the Supreme Court determined that embryos are considered humans.

First, yes, it certainly could happen. It's a delicate issue and SCOTUS is split on many issues right now. Depending upon who ultimately fills the final seat, a lot could change.

Second, logically there's no reason to think an embryo isn't a developing human - but that's another discussion.

That would mean to get an abortion would be murder. The doctor performing it would be committing the murder, and the one giving consent or knowingly assisting (the mother) would be an accomplice. You would think some sort of punishment should ensue, yes.

This is all true so I won't argue it.

Him backtracking is pandering to the masses that are suddenly outraged by his response to a hypothetical, and his analysts must have determined that it was going to negatively affect his campaign so he back tracked.

Yes he backtracked because he's a fool who speaks first and thinks later. Anyone that foolish should NEVER lead a country.

Either way Abortion is a non issue as the other thread said this doesn't belong in politics as it's irrelevant.

That's just absurd.

Abortion is a huge issue and this is obviously a discussion of a political candidates statement on the matter, so it quite logically belongs in politics.

He was asked if it was overturned. I gave you the only circumstance that it would ever be overturned. That I gave clarification why his answer is the only logical one. Now does this mean he doesn't support women's choice? The question bears no indication of this one way or the other.

He's made his views very clear - after he stuck his foot in his mouth, AGAIN.

What big gaffe/ faux pas did he make "with his big mouth"?

Oh, I don't know, saying what seems to be the one thing that can equally anger both the pro life and pro choice crowd might be a big gaffe - but only if he wants to WIN the nomination/election. If his goal is to lose then it's just fine.

Wow, a direct quote from a news article care to use an original thought?

That IS an original thought. I said it immediately following news of Trump's statement. If someone else said it too then that's just corroboration. I'm not aware of any news article which says it.

Also, do you always assume everyone else has read the same news articles you have?

I'm sorry but him answering a hypothetical question reasonably is not a story. Once again I ask you to look at the context of the answer/question.

Except it wasn't reasonable. It was a ridiculous gaffe on his part and if he had been prepared he'd have known it.

THat's the Trump style, though. He stammers and has no idea what to say and then just spits things out that he thinks will make people support him because it's worked on sheep and idiots thus far and this time it got him nowhere but trouble.

The people once again that focus and continue to over embellish these non stories are people that would never have voted for him to begin with.

So the sane, rational people then.

Yes, the sane rational people fixate on enquirer stories.. laugh.

You really think a severe misstep by a candidate for the highest office in America which is on video and verified is in any way related to enquirer stories? If so, you've shown YOU can't be taken seriously on this issue.

No one else would want that psycho as the leader of a country.

Explain to me how this affects me.

If he becomes the leader of the country and does something crazy (and he will, it's only a matter of time) you'll be as ****ed as everyone else on planet Earth.

His answer on a hypothetical that by any reasonable person is a legitimate answer.

Clearly you have no idea what a reasonable person would do.

No reasonable person running for POTUS would EVER give that answer to that question. EVER.

If you don't know that, then you don't even know enough about the situation to be in this discussion.
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2016 12:28:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
He never should have even answered the question, since it is such a hypothetical. It's like asking if gay marriage becomes illegal again should gays be punished for getting married.

Then he made himself look worse for backtracking, at least imo. He's been proud so far to say what's on his mind, it's part of his supposed appeal, and now he's doing the opposite.

He was clearly unprepared for the interview. And as much as I'll still vote for him if he's the republican nominee, he's clearly unprepared for the Presidency.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2016 12:40:04 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/2/2016 12:28:35 AM, RookieApologist wrote:
He never should have even answered the question, since it is such a hypothetical. It's like asking if gay marriage becomes illegal again should gays be punished for getting married.

Then he made himself look worse for backtracking, at least imo. He's been proud so far to say what's on his mind, it's part of his supposed appeal, and now he's doing the opposite.

He was clearly unprepared for the interview. And as much as I'll still vote for him if he's the republican nominee, he's clearly unprepared for the Presidency.

I'm glad he is unprepared. Crony hacks are how we got to this point.
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2016 1:12:37 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/2/2016 12:40:04 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 4/2/2016 12:28:35 AM, RookieApologist wrote:
He never should have even answered the question, since it is such a hypothetical. It's like asking if gay marriage becomes illegal again should gays be punished for getting married.

Then he made himself look worse for backtracking, at least imo. He's been proud so far to say what's on his mind, it's part of his supposed appeal, and now he's doing the opposite.

He was clearly unprepared for the interview. And as much as I'll still vote for him if he's the republican nominee, he's clearly unprepared for the Presidency.

I'm glad he is unprepared. Crony hacks are how we got to this point.

Being prepared for an interview doesn't mean one is a "crony hack". I think most would agree he hasn't had the best of weeks. His abortion, NATO, and nuclear proliferation stances, plus his backtracking of previously made statements of late, have all at least raised an eyebrow or two.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2016 1:21:15 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/2/2016 1:12:37 AM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 4/2/2016 12:40:04 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 4/2/2016 12:28:35 AM, RookieApologist wrote:
He never should have even answered the question, since it is such a hypothetical. It's like asking if gay marriage becomes illegal again should gays be punished for getting married.

Then he made himself look worse for backtracking, at least imo. He's been proud so far to say what's on his mind, it's part of his supposed appeal, and now he's doing the opposite.

He was clearly unprepared for the interview. And as much as I'll still vote for him if he's the republican nominee, he's clearly unprepared for the Presidency.

I'm glad he is unprepared. Crony hacks are how we got to this point.

Being prepared for an interview doesn't mean one is a "crony hack". I think most would agree he hasn't had the best of weeks. His abortion, NATO, and nuclear proliferation stances, plus his backtracking of previously made statements of late, have all at least raised an eyebrow or two.

The country is so messed up a babbling idiot can do better than a paid crony genius.