New escalation to stupidity. The question is when is he going to stop?

I don't get why this is a controversial statement.

IIRC Trump was talking about illegal abortions. Typically there's a punishment when someone breaks the law, otherwise it's not a law and more like a suggestion.

^Just because something is a law does not make it right. See slavery.

I won't argue whether abortion should or should not be legal (that is another debate I am not interested in). But, certainly we should not just say all laws are just as a blanket statement, and punish accordingly. Each one must be evaluated on merit, and each abortion case is unique.

Trump called to punishing women who get an abortion if the act of doing so is illegal. A few hours later, he said that only the doctors should be punished. This backtrack is likely because he did not know that the abortion question was coming.

Research a little before you rant, please.

Trump existing is punishment enough

^^Who was ranting?

Edited 3/31/2016 18:30:06

Trump called to punishing women who get an abortion if the act of doing so is illegal. A few hours later, he said that only the doctors should be punished. This backtrack is likely because he did not know that the abortion question was coming.

Research a little before you rant, please.

Of course the act of doing so would be illegal, since he is planning to make abortion illegal, if you do not see the plain hypocrisy here, then you are more brainwashed than I thought.
And God, "he did not know that the obortion question was coming" and the fact that he tried to improve his former statement, is just showing how amateurish he is, Trump is a pure joke, and people like you defending him do not see anything coming.


Now, what about his statement about using nuclear weapons in Europe and Middle East if needed? "Not taking cards off the table" when it comes to using nuclear weapons in any situation?

if you do not see the plain hypocrisy here, then you are more brainwashed than I thought.

There is no hypocrisy. He made a statement, your media took it out of proportion and context.

And God, "he did not know that the obortion question was coming" and the fact that he tried to improve his former statement, is just showing how amateurish he is, Trump is a pure joke, and people like you defending him do not see anything coming.

*abortion

Trump is a shit speaker. Always has been, always will be. That doesn't change the fact that a) your media took his initial statement out of proportion and context, as if it wasn't controversial enough as it is, and b) he came out and made clear what he meant.

I am not defending anyone. But I still see nothing coming, because that's what will happen if Trump gets elected: Nothing. Take off your tinfoil hat, man.

Now, what about his statement about using nuclear weapons in Europe and Middle East if needed? "Not taking cards off the table" when it comes to using nuclear weapons in any situation?

Yeah, that has nothing to do with this thread. Good try.

Edited 3/31/2016 19:08:24

There is no hypocrisy. He made a statement, your media took it out of proportion and context.

A statement does not come from nowhere.

Trump is a shit speaker. Always has been, always will be. That doesn't change the fact that a) your media took his initial statement out of proportion and context, as if it wasn't controversial enough as it is, and b) he came out and made clear what he meant.

Shit speaker? Yes sure. This guy is simply saying bullshit but sure it is not important and we should not pay attention on it.

Yeah, that has nothing to do with this thread. Good try.

Well you know what? I made this thread. And these statements were made in the same interview, but if you want to censor it and keep not discussing about such stupid comments with Trump talking rubbish, keep on this way Darth.

Trump call to punish women aborting...

^That is your thread's name.

Thanks to remind me that, it's not like I'm not able to read what I wrote earlier.

To be frank, against abortion except in cases of mother's death (but some are even more extreme - against abortion in all cases. I think Cruz is for banning abortions totally, while Trump is for them only in mother's life and rape) is probably one of the most shieldable points conserves have.

The thing is you should not forbid people wanting abortion to not abort, some people are against abortion mostly for, lets be honest, religious reasons. And these religious people are anyway free to not abort, but for people in favor of abortion they should also have the possibility to abort or this would be rather dictatorial and backward.
If abortion was finally tolerated in most of our modern societies it is for good reasons.

Everyday this is looking more and more accurate: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35066940 (Is Donald Trump a Democratic secret agent?)

Given Killary Klinton's dishonesty and professional history of lying and deceit, I wouldn't be surprised.

Edited 3/31/2016 22:52:35

The thing is you should not forbid people wanting abortion to not abort, some people are against abortion mostly for, lets be honest, religious reasons. And these religious people are anyway free to not abort, but for people in favor of abortion they should also have the possibility to abort or this would be rather dictatorial and backward.

I mostly agree, but the grounds the for-abortion argument is strong in particular is that they are killing human life, which should never be killed (but you'll see the same folk wanting more military spending and misdeeds...), and the human life that is killed doesn't get to choose at all (and even if it could choose, should it be able to choose? Should doing such an awful choice like suicide be legal?).

but for people in favor of abortion they should also have the possibility to abort or this would be rather dictatorial and backward.

Some would describe the slaughtering of our own young to be backward.

Free does not always mean good. There are certain things people should not be free to do.

the for-abortion argument is strong in particular is that they are killing human life, which should never be killed (but you'll see the same folk wanting more military spending and misdeeds...),

This is actually so true Juq, these people are most of the time those pro-life people who are generally the ones with a total absurdity in favor of military spending, I guess after all it could be explained for some of them according to their religious ideals:
Making babies is sacred ("As for you, be fruitful and multiply; Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it.", Genesis 9:7), but killing infidels and heretics is also sacred! ("Don't imagine that I came to bring peace to the earth! I came not to bring peace, but a sword.", Matthew 10:34)

Edited 3/31/2016 23:51:09

Even the Book tells how to do abortions if "the wife is unfaithful". Numbers 5:

"Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Speak to the Israelites and say to them: “If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure – or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure – then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.

‘“The priest shall bring her and make her stand before the Lord. Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. After the priest has made the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, ‘If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband’– here the priest is to put the woman under this curse – ‘may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.’

‘“Then the woman is to say, ‘Amen. So be it.’

‘“The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to make the woman drink the water. If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: when she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.

‘“This, then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and makes herself impure while married to her husband, or when feelings of jealousy come over a man because he suspects his wife. The priest is to make her stand before the Lord and is to apply this entire law to her. The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.”’

Edited 4/1/2016 00:04:41

This is actually so true Juq, these people are most of the time those pro-life people who are generally the ones with a total absurdity in favor of military spending, I guess after all it could be explained for some of them according to their religious ideals:

Or not. Unborn children are the most innocent human beings, and in a pro-life eye, the least worthy of death. You don't need religion to have that viewpoint.

And many who are in favor of not lowering or raising the military budget are worried about protection, not killing people.

This is actually so true Juq, these people are most of the time those pro-life people who are generally the ones with a total absurdity in favor of military spending,

Got some evidence to back that generalization? I'm Pro-Life and I think the U.S needs to scale back on military, or at the very least, focus that money on homeland defenses instead of maintaining a hundred off-shore bases in countries we have no need patrolling.

I guess after all it could be explained for some of them according to their religious ideals:

Always gotta bring religion into it.