Originally Posted by rp2pilot

If it's the woman's decision to kill her child, why draw the line at birth. Using that logic, she should have the right to kill her children till they reach 18. I have no opinion on abortion, but I find the reasoning you use as severely flawed.

Originally Posted by regularguy

ok one post wrote “common sense” as the idea of how to approach this issue. The problem is how people define “common sense.”

i for one understand the abortion issue is out of the box and can’t be stuffed back in. Where i highly disagree is the whole “woman’s body” argument. Why? Because anyone with “common sense” would see it took two to tango and there is the potential third party involved. But others “common sense” see it another way. And “common sense” might ask the question, in these days of proper birth control, “why is abortion a viable option for birth control?”

i don’t think anyone believes it’s a viable option for birth control. Yes, it does take two to tango but when the tango is over there is normally just one to answer for a mistake - that’s the female. Her chose and option. As my wife would say screw the chalky old man - he’s not the father and he doesn’t have any skin in this.

ok to me “common sense” tells me we need to protect our children as long as they are in our care. Additionally we need to protect the crowd in common areas (think concert), but “common sense” tells me banning all guns isn’t the fix for the issue and yet that is what the “common sense” of others is telling them.

nobody is saying ban all guns - most are saying m16/ak47 assault type weapons on the street - killing in mass.

so why isn’t there a real “conversation” over this?

You got it, “common sense.”

btw i agree that while this is being argued we are ignoring the safety of the innocent.

What am i for? The proper instruction and certification of those who want to enjoy the recreation of shooting in these united states. I also believe that includes the ownership of “assault weapons” (again what a definition and painting of a picture) and other dangerous things.

But the “common sense” of others want to deny such things, even when they include proper training and certification. Basically i believe it eventually becomes a control issue and has little to do with protecting the innocent.

the reason swat teams and some local police carry the m16 is because they are going up against ‘bad guys’ with assault type weapons. Same thing happened back in the 30’s with the tommy-gun. It was outlawed to solve the problem. It worked!

had enough of this thread. “common sense” tells me to walk away.

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

The reasoning is that you are,trying to take a biological thing and turn it into a religious thing. When does life begin? There are laws that regulate abortion and murder. While you may see them as the same - they are not.

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

The reasoning is that you are,trying to take a biological thing and turn it into a religious thing. When does life begin? There are laws that regulate abortion and murder. While you may see them as the same - they are not.

Originally Posted by Regularguy

Ok I guess I missed, where’s the “religious” thing?

Another ad hominem attack, I guess your unable to have a “conversation.”
In the context of abortion rights it’s the religious right attacking it.

If you will check your facts “Tommy Guns” are fully automatic while the exact same model is sold today in the semi version and are fully legal, but would be called “assault weapons” under the complete ban proposal currently in the House.

So you’re saying that I should say “AK47/M16/automatic Tommy-Gun” type weapons - BS

Dude you really need to check things out before you attack.

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

Your the one trying to attack but blab away.

Originally Posted by rp2pilot

You still can't see the flaw in your rationalization, but that's okay. The fact that you see it as a religious argument belies your liberal paradigm. I don't think we should outlaw abortion but, be honest with yourself for once .. admit that it is killing. If you really maintain that the unborn are not alive, then follow that posit to it's logical conclusion and see the absurdity of it. For once, just think.

Originally Posted by Regularguy

Is this really your only response?

Originally Posted by AllenAllert

By itself - no - you purposely left out the remainder of the original post. This is why conversation are hard to come to a conclusion - some think it important to do anything just to declare them self a winner.

Here you go - You’re a winner.........

Originally Posted by Regularguy

Really?

I left nothing out, just pushed quote button and that’s all you posted.

Nothing won here and that’s how the National debate will also go.

Originally Posted by Regularguy

Ok I guess I missed, where’s the “religious” thing?

Another ad hominem attack, I guess your unable to have a “conversation.”
In the context of abortion rights it’s the religious right attacking it.

If you will check your facts “Tommy Guns” are fully automatic while the exact same model is sold today in the semi version and are fully legal, but would be called “assault weapons” under the complete ban proposal currently in the House.

So you’re saying that I should say “AK47/M16/automatic Tommy-Gun” type weapons - BS

Dude you really need to check things out before you attack.