 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Victimless Crimes |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
Should Crimes That Hurt Only The People Doing Them Be Illegal| Yes |
42.9%, 6 votes | No |
57.1%, 8 votes | Multi-voting is disabled. 14 users have voted.
| |
| User | Post | ||
emcee Red Super Koopa                  Since: 11-20-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| Although those against abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage are probably more likely to be Christian, that doesn't mean these are really "Christian views". A lot of people promote them as that, because is helps their cause, but it's not really the case.
Take the issue of abortion, for instance. 33% of Americans want a ban on abortions not involving rape or health risks to the mother. So even if every last one of those people were Christians, the majority of the 80% of American Christians are clearly not against abortion. |
|||
SamuraiX Broom Hatter   Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
Originally posted by emcee On the contrary, I'm pretty sure Pope John Paul II was strongly against abortion, if that's any indicator. Even so, how can one say American Christians represent all Christians, and thus theorise what a Christian would do under given circumstances? Does saying one is a Christian make them a Christian? If there was a value clash between net neutrality and the immorality of abortion, most Christians on this board might just care more about net neutrality. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4288103.stm |
|||
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6282 days Last view: 6282 days |
| ||
| I've been away a few days, so some of this reply is a little late.
Abortion has been debated already. I'm bored with the topic right now. But i will say that I've never met anyone who had an abortion as a form of birth control or who took the decision to abort frivolously. I'm thoroughly unconvinced that most people who have abortions do it for kicks. As for teenagers and sex.. Its like this; people are growing up much faster today than ever before, yet laws are forcing them to be treated as if small children for longer than ever before. Basically for as long as mankind has existed up to just relatively recently, there has been a big distinction between a woman who can bear children and a small child who cannot. Traditionally (even in the great christian society you have been touting as the be all end all), a female is no longer a girl after her first period. It's sketchier with a boy, but generally it was around 13-14 when he became a man, and usually after a right of passage. We dont do it like that anymore. I'm not saying we should continue to do it like that, but we need to take into account that there were also biological reasons why it was done that way. After a person becomes sexually mature they will develop sexual needs, and its perfectly normal and natural to find yourself sexually attracted to a person who is capable of having children, it is the primary purpose of sex in the 1st place. Making someone legally into a deviant sexual rapist who will more or less lose their life over something which is perfectly natural is the not only absurd, but just fucking tragic. Now, if violence or threat of violence is involved, there is incest, or one partner is pre-pubescent, then we have a sexual deviant who needs to dealt with in some manner, but preferably humanely because I really believe those people are mentally ill and did'nt necessary choose to be that way. But, if none of those conditions are met then all we have is someone who violated a social more. If the parents did a good job raising their kids, they will make responsible decisions about deciding to have sex or not and to use birth control. But whether or not you taught them well and whether or not you make it illegal, teenagers will be having sex. And thats perfectly normal and natural. "Lets say a 14 year old has sex with a 21 year old man. She gets pregnant, and immediately has an abortion." Why would she immediately get pregnant and instantly have an abortion? Thats the worst case scenario, and actually kinda rare. Plus, its happening anyway, only right now she may feel like she has to have an abortion because the father cannot claim his child without being labeled a sex offender and doing a decade or so behind bars. Right now if she admits who the father is then the father is gone and does'nt even have the option of raising his child. If this was treated as a family issue rather than an issue of criminality, then the 21 YO in your example could be made responsible for caring for his child, and that child might get a father rather than being forced apart from him. I've actually worked around these sorts of situations before, and often times what you'll find actually happens, is the couple develop feelings for each other, the law insists the girl is a victim, and she becomes severely depressed when she finds out the guy she loves has had his life throughly destroyed over her. She'll never be the same, and it has more to do with someone she cares about being hauled off to prison, most likely raped in there with the sex offender label, and forever branded. She will see it as her fault because she was an even partner in the relationship and will be carrying around a great deal of guilt. Oftentimes she will be driven to drug use. "Most 15 year olds are far less mature than 19 year olds. So much so that there is very little chance for a relationship based on anything but sex." Your quite wrong here, a 4 year age difference does'nt always equate to a huge gap in maturity level. I grew up knowing many people with that very age difference (or greater in a couple cases), who got along well as couples. It has more to do with the individuals. Some people are shallow and only want sex out of a relationship, but they will be that way at any age. Those are the types of people you sometimes have to learn about the hard way. "The simple truth is that 14 year olds are not mentally mature enough to make life changing decisions. We shouldn't allow them to, and we shouldn't force them to. " In my home state, a 14 year old can legally go hunting with a rifle, and a 15 YO can drive an automobile. So they are responsible enough to be trusted not to blow my head off or kill me in a car crash, but not responsible enough to use birth control? force? why are you even using that term? I specifically said that cases of force should be handled in the court system, its cases of consentual sex involving teenagers that i feel should be a family issue rather than a state issue. |
|||
|
emcee Red Super Koopa Since: 11-20-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SamuraiX I'm not talking about the former Pope, or non-Americans. I'm specifically referring to the 80% of Americans that Koryo mentioned. And the 80% number only means 80% of Americans filled in a circle or checked a box next to the word "Christian". It doesn't says what denomination, how religious they actually are, if they are fundamentalist "bible belt" Christians, or whether they even attend a church. It really gives no insight at all in to their political views, which is the point I was trying to make in that last post. |
|||
|
SamuraiX Broom Hatter Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
Originally posted by emceeOriginally posted by SamuraiX Ah, but you see, I'm agreeing with you. |
|||
Alkis Since: 12-28-06 From: Arletpolis < FA < Arletland Last post: 6304 days Last view: 6302 days |
| ||
| Another victimless crime to be noted is illegal immigration. It really affects no one negatively yet provides a better life for the immigrant and the country they are entering. | |||
Silvershield   580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by AlkisIn short, no. The old "immigrants take all our jobs" deal is probably exaggerated and blamed too often for other problems, but it has even the smallest seed of truth. Not to mention, immigrants screw with the wages an employer offers to legal workers, because an illegal immigrant will accept a lower salary almost invariably. I don't know enough about the debate to offer a really strong treatment of either side - nor do I really stand on either side of it, in honesty - but it is an utter falsehood to say that illegal immigration has no ill effects whatsoever. |
|||
yoshi's friend Red Paragoomba no  Since: 01-27-07 From: California USA Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| i would just like to say if you agree or not a crime is crime but that doesn't mean realgious things and stuff like that arn't or are crimes just saying | |||
MathOnNapkins 1100  In SPC700 HELL Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| *blink blink*
In English please? |
|||
|
yoshi's friend Red Paragoomba no Since: 01-27-07 From: California USA Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| well simply put we one day with us(usa) making newer weapons to top the ones of the people that we are at war some day we will destroy ourself with the weapons
we created. |
|||
BMF54123 Since: 11-18-05 From: MOOGLES Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Pardon my bluntness, but are you just smacking your face on the keyboard?  |
|||
|
SamuraiX Broom Hatter Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
Originally posted by yoshi's friend Your "post" is a crime against the English language, and it's also sacrilege. Please improve your coherence by a good deal, if you would be so kind. People will tend to listen more if you do so. |
|||
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| So, so, so high. | |||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Arwon You are? Or am I? |
|||
Koryo Keese Since: 10-17-06 From: Michigan, USA Last post: 6289 days Last view: 6289 days |
| ||
Originally posted by emcee By "Christian views" one only means that they are views supported largely by Christians, and largely for religious reasons. A majority of Christians do oppose abortion, and a majority of people opposing abortion are Christians. The same is true with gay marriage and stem cell research. That doesn't mean that all Christians oppose them, or that all people who oppose them are Christians. There seems to be some confusion as to the definition of majority. Originally posted by SamuraiX I didn't say that American Christians represent all Christians, but non American Christians cannot vote for American politicians in American elections, and therefore, they are immaterial to a discussion about how the presence or absence of a Christian majority affects American elected politics. 
Also, I'm sure most people on this board would find net neutrality more pressing than abortion but: 1: most people on this board are young men. Older people view abortion differently than young people, and women view it differently than men. 2: this board is an international board with a surprising lack of Americans (and a disproportionate lack of Christians), and therefore is not an accurate random sampling of the American electorate. 3: Doesn't it say something about a person if he feels more strongly about the internet than about a life and death issue?
Originally posted by emcee Obviously, 80% is a figure with a large margin for error. But 80% is a statistically staggering figure. We elect presidents on a 51% or less majority. If 80% of people checked the little circle calling themselves Christians, then its fair to say that at least 51% of people are slightly more devout than average. Just look at the evidence. Have we ever had an outspoken atheist president? Have we ever had a president who refused to say "god bless America"? FDR, beloved by most Americans on both sides of the aisle, gave 10 minute long prayers over the radio during WW2. The first ever Muslim has entered congress and people are concerned that he would use a Koran rather than a Bible. Regardless of whether that concern is justified or not, what does it tell you? US abortion laws were never voted in, but were forced on the people by supreme court judges. All the evidence points to an overwhelming Christian majority. Now, a Christian majority doesn't mean that we should elect the Pope as the fourth branch of government, or that we will make Christianity the official state religion. It only means that most people in the US believe certain things. Such as there is more to life than the 80 or so years you spend on Earth, so you should plan for the long term. Just because no one is around to whiteness a crime doesn't mean you will get away unpunished. Just because a baby isn't capable of saying "please don't kill me" doesn't mean we should kill her. Life didn't spring into existence by pure chance. Just because someone doesn't regularly attend church, just because they don't belong to some imaginary Bible belt, just because they don't go door to door distributing literature doesn't mean they don't have a predictable and measurable voting record. Originally posted by SamuraiX If you say Ceteris Paribus 5 more times, you will appear more intelligent. Keep saying it. Ceteris Paribus is a common and useful tool of social scientists. Don't knock it. |
|||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite.  Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by KoryoOriginally posted by emcee Sure there is an overwhelming majority, 73% last time I heard, but that doesn't mean that they get to decide everything. The supreme court is here to stop a tyranny by majority. They should be more active when it comes to human rights, since you know, that's their job. |
|||
|
Koryo Keese Since: 10-17-06 From: Michigan, USA Last post: 6289 days Last view: 6289 days |
| ||
| Will everyone stop with the tyranny of the majority nonsense? It's not as if this is the Aryan race making laws that bar the Jews from owning property. Passing laws that ban abortion saves lives. It has nothing to do with tyranny. The Supreme Court should be more active? They are the least democratic branch of government we have. They are appointed by elected individuals (making them two full steps removed from the people), they are given office until the day they die or retire. Their power to oversight ratio is incredibly out of proportion. A US president has incredible power, but also incredible oversight, as the public, the media, and his opponents pick at every aspect of his life trying to harm or disgrace him for a year or more prior to his election, and then the entire body of the American people have the final say on whether he takes office or not. A US congressman has very limited power, being one out of hundreds in the legislative branch of the government. But they also have less oversight, as only a few hundred thousand people vote for them, and their election process is not as grueling as a president's. So a president has a high level of power, and a high level of oversight. A congressman has a low level of power and a low level of oversight. A supreme court justice has a high degree of power and very little oversight at all. The Senate confirmation process lasts a relatively short time and is far less invasive than a Presidential race. Of the three branches of government, the supreme court is the least democratic. If we had 9 Catholics on the supreme court who ruled in favor of Christians every time, you'd be calling the US an oligarchy. But, since the supreme court agreed with you about abortion, you side with the least democratic branch of our government. The Christian majority is not tyrannizing anyone.
How about this? Let's kill everyone with AIDS by lethal injection. Their lives are effectively over anyway, as there is no cure for aids, and there is the chance that they could spread it to other innocent people. Why take that risk? Those aids patients obviously aren't contributing to society anymore, and they're a burden on their families and anyone else who has to pay their abnormally high medical bills. Are you spitting at your monitor yet? OK, you're right. Killing aids patients is wrong. It's not their fault. Instead, let's kill unborn babies. They are a burden on society, and you are effectively ruining a young woman's life if you force her to carry a baby she doesn't love. How can you be so elitist and unfeeling as to tell a woman that she can't put a fork in her baby's head and tear out his brain, or inject salt into her womb to effectively pickle him. It's her body, after all. |
|||
|
SamuraiX Broom Hatter Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Koryo By making "life" all important, anything is justified in the name of protecting life. Liberty, justice, and whatsnot. But of course, biopower is completely okay with you, isn't it? |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
Blah blah blah, pre-birth potentiality of life != life. Blah blah blah, if abortion equates to murder then that justifies killing pro-abortion supreme court justices and blowing up abortion clinics as acts of heroic resistance aimed at stopping a holocaust. Blah blah blah cheap attempts at emotional blackmail don't constitute an argument and neither do strawmen. I think that about covers it. (edited by Arwon on 02-06-07 12:21 AM) |
|||
|
SamuraiX Broom Hatter Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Arwon More or less. I thought this thread was dead anyways. And it should die before its body is desecrated. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Victimless Crimes |
| |
