Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I figured it was a good time to make this topic considering the narrowness of the Abortion thread. Do you agree that these two issues are important? Is one more important than the other? Are they equally important?

As a socially responsible societydo we place top much emphasis on certain topics while altogether ignoring others? Discuss.

I'm against both of them... Stopping poverty is a nice idea but will in fact ruin human society as we know it... Making the world more prosperous in all places is a nice idea though, and probably an okay thing to do. But we must always have poor people simple as that.

I'm also pro-choice, so I don'tthink stopping abortian is a good thing either. So making poor communities a bit richer, or at least giving them schools water food healthcare and a possible future ranks way higher in my lists.

I vote for Stopping spin-off threads!

What an utterly ridiculous thread!

Originally posted by Fishy
I'm against both of them... Stopping poverty is a nice idea but will in fact ruin human society as we know it... Making the world more prosperous in all places is a nice idea though, and probably an okay thing to do. But we must always have poor people simple as that.


that comment is frightening

Originally posted by Deano
that comment is frightening

Well sorry but human society requires that some people suffer for others to prosper, without evil there can be no good. Without poor people there can be no rich people. Without rich people our social structure collapses. Get the point? Sure we can try to make there lives better, but to trully stop people from being poor is an illogical thing to do.

Giving everybody the minimal things required for a good live is a good idea, but I don't really consider that stopping poverty as it will still be there. Just heavily limiting it.

Originally posted by Fishy
Well sorry but human society requires that some people suffer for others to prosper, without evil there can be no good. Without poor people there can be no rich people. Without rich people our social structure collapses. Get the point? Sure we can try to make there lives better, but to trully stop people from being poor is an illogical thing to do.

Giving everybody the minimal things required for a good live is a good idea, but I don't really consider that stopping poverty as it will still be there. Just heavily limiting it.

ever thought that human society is the whole problem? because it suits those in power?



SEE THE PROBLEM?

The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the Agenda. and if people keep telling me otherwise, the more i will lose faith in ''humanity''

You wouldn't be complaining if you had some power Go get a job, damn hippie

Originally posted by Deano
ever thought that human society is the whole problem? because it suits those in power?


I think that human nature is the problem, and we certainly can't reform that

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
What an utterly ridiculous thread!
I second that.
Even christian conservatives would say so.

I say we eliminate abortion AND poverty by turning poor people into breeders and eating the babies!

good one, Swift! Too bad nobody listens...

Originally posted by Deano
ever thought that human society is the whole problem? because it suits those in power?



SEE THE PROBLEM?

The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the Agenda. and if people keep telling me otherwise, the more i will lose faith in ''humanity''

No, because its just human nature.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
What an utterly ridiculous thread!

He speaks the truth.

finish poverty n the need for abortion will go down tenfold with it!

Originally posted by BackFire
He speaks the truth.

It would help if you elaborated. Why is it SSOOO ridiculous?

because its a spinoff thread. you cant compare the two equally, and inevitably the thread becomes another abortion for or against thread, since nobody is 'for' poverty. i mean, anyone can say "i think poverty is more important" but after that point it will certainly shift toward why they feel for/against a womans reproductive rights, since everyone can agree that poverty sucks to a point where there is no yard stick to measure the suck.

...although i think they were pretty harsh in their criticism of the thread.

Originally posted by meep-meep
It would help if you elaborated. Why is it SSOOO ridiculous?

BF surely meant YOU speak the truth.

It's ridiculous because what the **** does Abortion and poverty have to do with eachother? They're not related, they're not comparable.

Next thread - What's worse? Intergalactic Warfare or Bestiality? Coming this fall.

Too bad all those poor people hadn't been aborted in the first place......

new thread-

which is funnier: late term abortion or tim allen movies.

Originally posted by meep-meep
I figured it was a good time to make this topic considering the narrowness of the Abortion thread. Do you agree that these two issues are important? Is one more important than the other? Are they equally important?

As a socially responsible societydo we place top much emphasis on certain topics while altogether ignoring others? Discuss.

I think it's better to deal with the unfortunate children already living here than worry about forcing mothers into bringing in more unfortunate children.

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
I think it's better to deal with the unfortunate children already living here than worry about forcing mothers into bringing in more unfortunate children.

is it?

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
I think it's better to deal with the unfortunate children already living here than worry about forcing mothers into bringing in more unfortunate children.

Wouldn't necessarily say unfortunate children?

Fine, if you want to be technical about it "potentially" unfortunate.

Most of the women who truly need abortions dont come from wealthy families or can aquire a job that pays well enough to support herself and the child comfortably.

Ergo, making a poor mother give birth to a child makes two poor people, instead of just one.

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Fine, if you want to be technical about it "potentially" unfortunate.

Better

I love it when a conversation ends well.

^co-sign

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
I say we eliminate abortion AND poverty by turning poor people into breeders and eating the babies!



SOLUTION!

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
SOLUTION!

I know that one. A Modest Proposal. Good read.

Originally posted by meep-meep
I figured it was a good time to make this topic considering the narrowness of the Abortion thread. Do you agree that these two issues are important? Is one more important than the other? Are they equally important?

As a socially responsible societydo we place top much emphasis on certain topics while altogether ignoring others? Discuss.


poverty

Both are important. Poverty more so, because no one deserves to live like that.

Originally posted by PVS
because its a spinoff thread. you cant compare the two equally, and inevitably the thread becomes another abortion for or against thread, since nobody is 'for' poverty. i mean, anyone can say "i think poverty is more important" but after that point it will certainly shift toward why they feel for/against a womans reproductive rights, since everyone can agree that poverty sucks to a point where there is no yard stick to measure the suck.

...although i think they were pretty harsh in their criticism of the thread.

Touche! You definitely have a good point. Myabe it would help to post a topic strictly on topics of poverty rather than trying to integrate 2 in depth topics. Thanks for the clarification.

We should deal with poverty first, no one should have to starve like those poor people do, we should do everything we can to help them.

Womens rights can come later, helping people is far more important than a womans right to abortion. IMO, of course.

Originally posted by Makedde
Womens rights can come later, helping people is far more important than a womans right to abortion. IMO, of course.

Because fighting for women's rights in a world where selfish people are fighting to take them away, is not helping people...

-AC

Well I do think one way as a possible solution for a partial fix for poverty is to take everyone in the world who wants to get rid of it and pool all their money then throw in all the poor people and their money now divide it all Man there we go

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because fighting for women's rights in a world where selfish people are fighting to take them away, is not helping people...

-AC

No, but at least they are not starving to death, dying of diseases that can easily be cured. Poverty stricken people don't have access to contraception-most women do. So womens rights should come second, because saving lives is more important than ending them.

Originally posted by Makedde
No, but at least they are not starving to death, dying of diseases that can easily be cured. Poverty stricken people don't have access to contraception-most women do. So womens rights should come second, because saving lives is more important than ending them.

Who's ending lives? Oh, blinkered view of abortion. I see.

In the real world, where we know abortion isn't ending "lives", why is helping the women in your OWN country coming secondary to helping people in another country?

That's the thing with pro-lifers. They're not really pro-life, they're pro-ego. "Saving women's rights to have abortions won't make me look selfless and humanitarian, doing poverty work will." *Pats self on back*

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
In the real world, where we know abortion isn't ending "lives", why is helping the women in your OWN country coming secondary to helping people in another country?

Would it be better if I said 'potential lives' just to please you?

It'd be better if you answered my question.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Who's ending lives? Oh, blinkered view of abortion. I see.

In the real world, where we know abortion isn't ending "lives", why is helping the women in your OWN country coming secondary to helping people in another country?

That's the thing with pro-lifers. They're not really pro-life, they're pro-ego. "Saving women's rights to have abortions won't make me look selfless and humanitarian, doing poverty work will." *Pats self on back*

-AC

God you are infantile!!!

I thought it was only in the other thread.

So in your "real world" abortion is only ending tissues and blood?

(that can move, breathe, cry, etc.. but isn't a life)

Piss on you.



You're the only one who is pro-ego on this topic.

To make a generalization like, "all pro-lifers want to look selfless and humanatarian" is complete horseshit.

I do it because I CARE (oh!) about lives being ended against their wills.

I know people who have had abortions and had destructive consequences, and people who didn't (through adoption and abstinence) whose lives are better for it.

I give my opinions because I see them in action in the "real world".

So don't lump me in any group that you made up in your head.



You're in some fake world where you spout off opininos about things that you don't have any personal stake in,... just to make yourself feel big.



And leave Mak alone.

Perahps she thinks that helping people in poverty takes priority over helping women who should have used protection or not had sex at all.


Her opinon is her business.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
God you are infantile!!!

I thought it was only in the other thread.

So in your "real world" abortion is only ending tissues and blood?

(that can move, breathe, cry, etc.. but isn't a life)

Piss on you.

I'm infantile? Ending with "Piss on you" isn't the best way to end a passage after making that claim. Continue throwing around these posts full of insults and I'll report you, I know for a fact I'm not the first you've done so to.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
You're the only one who is pro-ego on this topic.

To make a generalization like, "all pro-lifers want to look selfless and humanatarian" is complete horseshit.

I do it because I CARE (oh!) about lives being ended against their wills.

As I said, selfish. If you genuinely cared, why all the noise about "OH I CARE! I CARE ABOUT THESE LIVES! Look at me caring! No look!" Yes, we get it. We can see you, how amazing you are, you...oh, yeah. See, I just proved my own point.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I know people who have had abortions and had destructive consequences, and people who didn't (through adoption and abstinence) whose lives are better for it.

Yes? So? What exactly would be your point there? You believe this is the only outcome?

I would say I don't believe you're THAT stupid, but I can't be sure.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I give my opinions because I see them in action in the "real world".

You live in the real world, naturally. Whether you are mentally in acceptance of how things work in it, I'm not sure.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
So don't lump me in any group that you made up in your head.

The "Obnoxious Self-Righteous, Selfish Christians" isn't a made up group, it's a very special group of which you are the leader.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
You're in some fake world where you spout off opininos about things that you don't have any personal stake in,... just to make yourself feel big.

Oh, so you constantly aim diss filled posts at me and others on this board for what reason, Mr. I have a great life?

Mak? She's a big girl, she makes her own choices. Discussion board, check your inability to accept being challenged at the door. It'll save me the bother of throwing you back out of it later.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Perahps she thinks that helping people in poverty takes priority over helping women who should have used protection or not had sex at all.

That'll be the selfishness kicking in over sensible decisions then.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Her opinon is her business.

Welcome to KMC discussion board.

-AC

You can't stop poverty. Despite how rich we all get there will always be a "poverty" level in the world. Unless we have unlimited resources and everything is free....

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Who's ending lives? Oh, blinkered view of abortion. I see.

In the real world, where we know abortion isn't ending "lives", why is helping the women in your OWN country coming secondary to helping people in another country?

That's the thing with pro-lifers. They're not really pro-life, they're pro-ego. "Saving women's rights to have abortions won't make me look selfless and humanitarian, doing poverty work will." *Pats self on back*

-AC

Look, if your ever going to meet at any half way point with "pro-lifers" wouldn't it help to not bash them every chance you get?

Originally posted by Draco69
You can't stop poverty. Despite how rich we all get there will always be a "poverty" level in the world. Unless we have unlimited resources and everything is free....

True. There may always be poverty to some extent but does it have to be so extreme? Bill Gates has hundreds of billions of dollars. Kids in the Sudan eat crackers for dinner, when their lucky.

Originally posted by meep-meep
Look, if your ever going to meet at any half way point with "pro-lifers" wouldn't it help to not bash them every chance you get?

I'm not bashing them, I'm bashing people who think they are pro-lifers and bash me for not agreeing with their dangerous p.o.v.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not bashing them, I'm bashing people who think they are pro-lifers and bash me for not agreeing with their dangerous p.o.v.

-AC

And we may think your point of view is also dangerous.

Originally posted by Fishy
I'm against both of them... Stopping poverty is a nice idea but will in fact ruin human society as we know it... Making the world more prosperous in all places is a nice idea though, and probably an okay thing to do. But we must always have poor people simple as that.

I'm also pro-choice, so I don'tthink stopping abortian is a good thing either. So making poor communities a bit richer, or at least giving them schools water food healthcare and a possible future ranks way higher in my lists.

Thank God!!!!!!! We have finally found someone on these boards who lives in the real world!

Poverty of course - the question is a bit ridiculous - why would you even compare the two in any shape or form?

I guess my reason for starting this thread had to do with the idea that I've noticec some people who are against abortion say they are against it to protect life. I guess my question is why not protect the life that is already here? There are tons people working for less than a living wage, people sold for sex, etc. Why can't we put the attention that abortion gets in to something so much more important? Why not create some sort of national program to get the homeless jobs, or put them through rehab?

I don't suggest we cater to the poor whether they work or not, but shouldn't everyone at least by given a chance?

^I must say that I agree.

Originally posted by meep-meep
I guess my reason for starting this thread had to do with the idea that I've noticec some people who are against abortion say they are against it to protect life. I guess my question is why not protect the life that is already here? There are tons people working for less than a living wage, people sold for sex, etc. Why can't we put the attention that abortion gets in to something so much more important? Why not create some sort of national program to get the homeless jobs, or put them through rehab?

I don't suggest we cater to the poor whether they work or not, but shouldn't everyone at least by given a chance?


There are several flaws though

A living wage in one country is not the same as a living wage in another

Protecting life on one hand, while calling for the death of a criminal on the other, is useless

People who are sold for sex are often times provided with back alley abortions that don't even figure into the statistics that are studied

Only abortion matters to those who disagree with it (most of the time) (OH, and gay marriage) at the exprense of more important things going on around them in this fu*ked up world.

Poverty is where people chose to live, because they don't get off their asses and do something about it. (In a limited world view)

If you give everyone a chance, then that means that everyone has an equal chance, which means that only the "gifted" would prevail....and Darwin can't be right...at all costs.

My personal opinion:

When humans stop popping out babies at the current rate, poverty will be addressed at the same time.

Living wages are different in other countries. The comparison between the poor here compared to the poor in, let's say, Ghana is pretty drastic. But, before our government starts worrying about other countries problems we should worry about our own first. I think if we are going to go preach to other nations about their policies pertaining to their people we at least better give them an example. A good example.

Oh and I don't think abortion as an issue should be ignored. I just think much of our attention should be placed elsewhere. Women should have the right to choose what they choose. I doubt they want to end human life as we know it. Unless, women have it out for us men..uh oh. Run for the hills! Burn them at the stake! Well, that's how I think some people perceive women...anyway.

Even if the "gifted" prevail so long that everyone has an equal chance then I guess that is the way it is, but if everyone is given an equal and fair chance then that should minimize the amount of people left behind.

I think along with people stopping reproducing so quickly, education also needs to get better so that pverty can be minimized.

sorry it was a double post...

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
When humans stop popping out babies at the current rate, poverty will be addressed at the same time.

That's actually pretty funny.....the one is the solution of the others.

Aid the Poor; have an abortion - I'm sure the 'Restricted Choicers' will love that!

All this goes back to distribution of wealth and let me tell ya that it will never be different. Go ask Donald Trump and co. to give up his wealth and share with the rest of the folks, he will either kick you in the groin and have you kicked out or just spit out you and have you kicked out.
Take the Bible, there was somewhere in it when one day Jesus and his disciples were walking down a dirt road and a wealthy young men approached him and ask " I believe that you are our savior and I worship you. What can I do to be among you disciples and be saved?"
Jesuse said" Go home and give away all your riches and comeback to me as you are with nothing but the shirt and pants on you back."
The young man thought for a moment and turned away sadly. One of the disciples asked Jesus what happened and he replied" I say this unto you, it will be easier for an elephant to go through an eye of a needle than the rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven"
The point was the boy was so rich and the prospect of giving it all away to the poor was too much so he preferred keeping his riches and be barred from Heaven. That's pretty powerful as a message

The wealthy young man should have laundered the money and had it written off on his taxes.

Originally posted by botankus
The wealthy young man should have laundered the money and had it written off on his taxes.



LOL. He might get audited a few years from now.
Imagine. Jesus has died, Christians being persecuted and I am being audited. Damn it it's just too much trouble!!!!

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
My personal opinion:

When humans stop popping out babies at the current rate, poverty will be addressed at the same time.

What about in those countires where contraception is not readily available?

Both abortion and poverty are interrelated.

Many woman in the ghetto abort babies because they wouldnt be able to support it.

Originally posted by Makedde
What about in those countires where contraception is not readily available?

Abortion. Or they can stop having sex. But, since that is an unrealistic expectation, abortion will work just fine.

Insisting that poverty is a requirement for richness is just plain idiocy.
Someone please present some arguments in favour of that, please?
There is plenty of wealth in the world, we just need to distribute it fairer. But hey, as long as the rich get richer and greedier, they won't do it willingly.
Saying that "this will never change" because right now, this day, we can't see how it should be done, is not an argument. 300 years ago the aristocracy squirmed at the thought of every man voting - WHAT, a common peasant? Voting?? A 100 years ago it was, what, women, voting? Nah, ridicilous...

A woman's right to choose what happens to her body, is FUNDAMENTAL for freedom and democracy. Without that right, you, YES you, the self-proclaimed holier-than-thou anti-abortionist, is trying to take away a basic democratic freedom! Shame on you!
If you want to live in a feudal state, where the STATE decides over the womans body, go move to some backwards feudal state, and take your medival opinions with you. If you want to stay, then by all means live by your own word, and stop forcing your world-views on others! THAT's facism! Both Hitler and Mao told people in their countries to spawn as many kids as thet could!! (With the result in China being, that they had to enforce a one-child policy so there would be food enough and resources enough for everyone).

Me? I'm for freedom and democracy!!! And I don't even think having kids should be a right!! Not every person who has a child SHOULD!
Me? I care for the people who have been BORN! Who're wanted by their parents, who are someones friend, mother, father, brother, sister...
Care, for crying out loud, for those who live.
A fetus never ASKED you to speak on its behalf! You're forcing your ideas on someone who can't even tell you, to shut up.

If poverty were to be eliminated using th earths current resources 80% of the rest of the world woula suffer because they would have to adapt to the minimal resources.

I'd have to go with poverty, common sense dictates my belief.

However, neither will seise, the goverment bennefits from both far too much..

How does a government benefit from abortions?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
How does a government benefit from abortions?
Do you EVER read my posts?

Abortions promote the capitalist agenda, women pay money to have abortions, that's puts money in doctor and the state's pockets. Perhaps more to the former, but that's irrelevant, the goverment wants there to be doctors and crap for just this reason, so we all work for them, do thier dirty work for them, and run around in circles with the illussion that is a free market..

This is what your post stated:

Originally posted by Hack Benjamin
However, neither will seise, the goverment bennefits from both far too much..

So, my question was obviously pertinent. Then there's this:



How can you even begin to be taken seriously when you state something like this? 'Abortions promote the capitalist agenda' is one of the most laughable things I've ever read on this web-site. The Bush administration is trying to restrict the availability of abortions, so how on Earth did you come to your preposterous conclusion?

Stop poverty. What's the point of keeping kids if there's a whole lot of money going into a small portion of the population's pockets? Why should we force women to keep babies when we already have starving youths elsewhere?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
This is what your post stated:



So, my question was obviously pertinent. Then there's this:



How can you even begin to be taken seriously when you state something like this? 'Abortions promote the capitalist agenda' is one of the most laughable things I've ever read on this web-site. The Bush administration is trying to restrict the availability of abortions, so how on Earth did you come to your preposterous conclusion?

No, wait, he's a hypocrite. Let's give gim a chance to go back on what he said.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
How can you even begin to be taken seriously when you state something like this? 'Abortions promote the capitalist agenda' is one of the most laughable things I've ever read on this web-site. The Bush administration is trying to restrict the availability of abortions, so how on Earth did you come to your preposterous conclusion?
Why do you think everyone hates Bush so much? He's a rebel, a reckless, air-head, rebel, he's a true American..

And the liberal capitalist goverment doesn't like that one bit, he's the Morpheous to thier matrix.. you can (once again) start your petty flames all you want, but what idiot WOULDN'T asscosiate abortions with capitalism?

Immagine, if everyone was smart enough and had enough self-control to wait untill marriage before having sex.

Where would the condom industry go?
Birth control pills?
The morning after pill?

Our economy relies on people being immoral, the goverment isn't stupid, they'll find ways to get the most bennefit out of total lack of regard for anybody else, they're ingenious enough to use society's selfishness to thier advantage, and you're so busy caring about your pitiful illussions of "freedom" that you don't notice how much the goverment has control over you. Freedom isn't about having the choice to kill a fetus..

Bush sees that, and Bush is trying to change that, check your history books sometime, it's always been the "conservatives" who have fought for freedom and democracy. Religous whackos? Maybe, but I'd feel safter at night with some God obsessed redneck protecting me with his boomstick, then some ego-maniac liberal who'd molest me with a chainsaw for a buck..

Originally posted by Hack Benjamin
Why do you think everyone hates Bush so much? He's a rebel...

Admittedly I did stop reading after that.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Admittedly I did stop reading after that.

-AC

I stopped after seeing rebel in the same sentence twice.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Admittedly I did stop reading after that.

-AC

I should have, didn't, and feel less intelligent for it.

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
I should have, didn't, and feel less intelligent for it.

I feel the exact same way... What a waste of another 30 seconds of my life.

Oh please, you were probably going to waste them blaming Christians and president Bush for your problems anyway..

Originally posted by Hack Benjamin
Oh please, you were probably going to waste them blaming Christians and president Bush for your problems anyway..

Give credit where credit is due.

Originally posted by PVS
new thread-

which is funnier: late term abortion or tim allen movies.

Tim Allen movies

Originally posted by Hack Benjamin
Why do you think everyone hates Bush so much? He's a rebel, a reckless, air-head, rebel, he's a true American..

And the liberal capitalist goverment doesn't like that one bit, he's the Morpheous to thier matrix.. you can (once again) start your petty flames all you want, but what idiot WOULDN'T asscosiate abortions with capitalism?

I read up to here, but then I couldn't go on for tears in my eyes. No, Hick, they weren't tears of sadness, although I do pity you.

Hick? You know, unless I'm mistaken, education is proven in a person by the manner of respect and ability to eliquintly speak to other's, not just in how much they know, we all know something.

And for someone that is so educated, you act like a barbarian.. Now, I know you're not use to treating people with respect, because you're a bully, and it's obviously been working for you here so far, but not with me, so please, stop..

I must apologise, it was merely a typo. You really shouldn't think that a such term could apply to you.

As for treating people with respect, it helps if you are deserving of respect. You are not, so I don't.

Hack Benjamin> Sorry, people don't pay for abortions in DK.
And wouldn't a capitalist state BENEFIt more from too many poor workers to keep wages down through high unemployment?

Bush?? A true American??? ... ? BAHAHHhahahahahhahHAHAHHAHAH Michael Moore is a true American. Bush pffffrhhhahhahhahaha.....

Originally posted by The Omega
Hack Benjamin> Sorry, people don't pay for abortions in DK.
And wouldn't a capitalist state BENEFIt more from too many poor workers to keep wages down through high unemployment?

Bush?? A true American??? ... ? BAHAHHhahahahahhahHAHAHHAHAH Michael Moore is a true American. Bush pffffrhhhahhahhahaha.....

For the Capitalist thing: Not necessarily...

And how is Michael Moore more of an American than Bush?

Stopping poverty is obviously the crucial matter. It is the issue that gives rise to all subsidiary issues.

Originally posted by Bardock42


And how is Michael Moore more of an American than Bush?

More American? I don't know about that.....he's a lot more FATTER and UGLIER than Bush....yeah, I would agree with that.

There's more of him.

Poverty. But it is crucial that both matters be dealt with regardless of which is more imoprtant.

Originally posted by Wesker
There's more of him.

Good point.

Neither is going away anytime soon. Abortion can be made illegal but that won't stop it, it will only make it more dangerous for women seeking it. As for poverty, capitalism by nature creats as much poverty as it does wealth. Besides, some people choose to be poor, most homeless people, in the US anyway, are that way because they choose to be.

Bardock42>"And how is Michael Moore more of an American than Bush?"

It's just me... To me a true patriot is someone who loves his contry and is NOT afraid to point out things that needs to change. i have a hard time seeing how attractiveness and size matters there, but if you find Bush attractive... ???
I'm just European

Originally posted by The Omega
Bardock42>"And how is Michael Moore more of an American than Bush?"

It's just me... To me a true patriot is someone who loves his contry and is NOT afraid to point out things that needs to change. i have a hard time seeing how attractiveness and size matters there, but if you find Bush attractive... ???
I'm just European

So am I, if I remember correctly.

Still, how can someone be a "truer" American than another? Now if Bush was Italian, I suppose that would have some sort of meaning to it, but since they are both citizens of teh United States it seems rather pointless.

Also, for your Arguement I wouldn't say that Michawel Moore loves his country much more, I think they both use their patriotism for their own goals, and just because I might agree more with Moores views doesn't make him a better American.

Originally posted by Fishy
I'm against both of them... Stopping poverty is a nice idea but will in fact ruin human society as we know it... Making the world more prosperous in all places is a nice idea though, and probably an okay thing to do. But we must always have poor people simple as that.

I'm also pro-choice, so I don'tthink stopping abortian is a good thing either. So making poor communities a bit richer, or at least giving them schools water food healthcare and a possible future ranks way higher in my lists. so u want people to stay in poverty, so ur life wont change. well ur a jolly nice person

no he didn't say that, he said society, as we know it, will always have and might very well need, poor people.

It's Bullshit to say that Micahel Moore, OR Bush is more OR less American. Just because one was elected president doen't imply more loyalty. Both are just as American as the other. I suppose it should be considered that "American" implies loyalty. Nothing could be further from the truth, in either case.

Originally posted by meep-meep
I figured it was a good time to make this topic considering the narrowness of the Abortion thread. Do you agree that these two issues are important? Is one more important than the other? Are they equally important?

As a socially responsible societydo we place top much emphasis on certain topics while altogether ignoring others? Discuss. Poverty is inherent to capitalistic governments,so you can't "stop" poverty. And everyone should have the right to abortions.