Messages

[What is your stance on legalization? If legalized, what do you believe the regulations behind it should be? If not, what punishments should be enacted?]

Funny passing here when I have no time,

but now I must say, I will have a opinion very close to Rolina's sorry for no having a more diverse opinion.

What is your stance on legalization? If legalized, what do you believe the regulations behind it should be? If not, what punishments should be enacted?
I do agree to legalize marijuana, simply because we cannot control the consumption, but if can control the product, then we have a good chance to control the damage it does to the users. Banning it will lead to people consumming more dangerous Marijuana just like alcohol.

If you believe in legalization of marijauna, how do you think that the growth of recreational cannabis should be regulated?
I have nothing new to say, here, I agree with the opinion expressed by Rolina, minimum age, you smoke mari- you don't drive, and etc.

What is your opinion on "stoner culture"? Do you think it positively or negatively impacts marijuana legalization? How large of a subset of marijuana users do you believe this subculture to be?

I don't know anything about that...

Do you have any interest in indulging in marijuana, be it through smoking, edibles or otherwise?
I don't smoke,
I don't take any drugs,
because they are a danger to my health, just as I avoid milk.

False dichotomies? = Two groups that are equally opposing, and you can't stay neutral?

On the contrary, I suppose I'd rather look at it as a priority thing, when you only have time for one, and have to get to the other later. (Or not at all.) ; That makes it realistic enough for me.

Meh, I never seem to get my posts right the first time I type them...


; No idea if I can use a version of this in a personality type of quiz...

False Ditchotomies===  You etheir with me, or against me. my way or the highway.

and please, rewarding bad actions ? you crazy ? I can't reward rapes and murders.
Punishing good actions, who, that is the same thing.
so you vent four thirthy cents or a dollar ?

Here is a debate... I'm sure this one is controversial.

Someone has said it was about death and spirits.

To me, these are things that are clearly about death:
Skeletons
Vampires (& bats, blood)
Zombies
Spiders (Like the black widow that is known for killing its mate.)
Spirits (Because it's like talking to the dead.)

--
I think that the right way to go for Halloween is giving out  healthy and tasty treats, and doing non-spooky costume parties. ; Just simply not doing anything is like having no Community, in fact, why not just have parties everyday? (Even though I'm not much of a party goer, unfortunately.)

most of it is just fiction, so come on.

You know, there's one thing that's good about being a silent protagonist! You just simply can't get in trouble! Well, maybe you can, but not because you said something wrong!

...

Looks like you're learning, Garet!

...a conversation/topic killer!

That is true.
How about all the monsters/animals that Isaac & Co. slaughter, presuming they kill them?
I guess one has to break the eggs to eat an omelet.

that is why we have games, not a single animal die in real life there, no problem.

Actually, once there's life, it is murder... The hard part is knowing when the unborn child has life... (Ex:  If you feel the baby kicking, you can be sure it's alive.)

[/topic]

Not an opinion collection?  Well!  By all means, move this topic somewhere where it can count as an "opinion collection"...!  I'm guessing it'll still have debates, though.

Heum, Fox, In Canada, there is no law regulating abortion, but such an abortion would be very dangerous for the woman. After 22 week, which is just before the end of the second semesters, very few doctor will give an abortion.

I believe we should let medics and doctors do their jobs, and beside, there is very few abortion in third semester

The hardest part is more knowing when the unborn develop a conscience...

All I can say, Darklylight, is that you should learn English better. Right now it is hard to understand what you mean, and it is apparent are misinterpreting some things that Rolina is saying. Until you can reply with coherent English don't think I will debate with you. Nothing against you, but at this point misunderstanding can very easily happen, which results in unnecessary red herrings, and the like.

I will however, say this: You do not understand Rolina's argument, and have misinterpreted what she has said. Also, I have no idea what you are saying either, so perhaps you do understand it and just cannot express your counterargument.

I didn't even realize this was gonna be a place for arguing.  I figured we'd come here, make our views, and acknowledge and accept the views of others without the need for trying to rip them apart.  The fact that it happened to me I find baffling, and just discourages me from bothering to do more threads like this.

Well, I'm sorry if I offended you. I suppose this post was asking for just opinions, and not really debate. I think that makes this topic less interesting. Things should be discussed to come to new interesting conclusions. But I suppose that these forums aren't mature enough for such a socratic debate.

In any case, I would ignore him. There isn't really any reason to discuss anything with him if he wont reasonably discuss it with you. Just makes people angry, and that makes me sad. :(

My was clear since the beginning, abortion is not murder and is not barbaric,

and this is the debate forum, not the opinion collection.

Eh, I'll be happy so long as they don't just copy paste the characters from past games again.  I'm sick of playing as Squires and Masters.  I want something new.

Amen to that,

Personnaly, I want a real challenge this time, not this joking freaking easy, game. Serious, even the last boss was barely a challenge with the broken Megido, I just did not had time to the post-story bosses

Maybe they could give dark Adept some actual psynergy this time, because now we have very little reason to even call them adepts.
yeah, and some light adept too, but I don't see how they can do this, without changeing the current system in place....

what the hell can I win in this ?
I give up, you will never understand, I tried my best, but it seem you are completly closed from any pro-choice logic

Pro-choice is simple, your body belong to you, do what you want.

I fail to see how abortion are barbaric... today these are a lot safer, and birth are safer too, but they are still painfull, while abortion can be done very soon, like 6 week after impregnation. with next to no damage.

Don't tell me you know right of woman more then me, I simply refer myself to the canadian constitution, which declare the rights of all man and woman valid in Canada, and I believe abortion is a right recognized in a lot of countries,, so ho please,

I think I should give up, I won't succeed in making you understand

You don't get it. Adoption is not an alternative to Abortion, because you force birth. you do not understand pro-choice.

Let's say I am woman, for the shake of this argumentation, I have a foetus in my womb, how can put it for abortion, without having me giving birth to the child, there is no way to do without forcing me to bear it, you say you oppose both pro-life and pro-choice, but your logic is just another pro-life.

Maybe if you have a way to save the live of an unborn child without forcing me to give it birth, that would perfect, but so far, these solution do not exist. except fecondation in vitro,

it is the life of the unborn child we oppose, we oppose the process of giving birth itself.

but let's admit many woman would love to put their child on adoption, since they would only abort if they lack money, how is a system going to be organised ?

Women have the right to make a choice, if they want to do an alternative to abortion they can, but if you really want to reduce the number of abortion, you should look for the cause and expend porverty fighting program

I don't know where you believe adoption is an alternative to abortion..
adoption is an emotionnal subject too, you endure 9 month of pregnancy, plus hours of pain to give your child away... this is a joke.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/10/20/adoption-universal-alternative-abortion-matter-anti-choicers-say/
http://www.exiledmothers.com/adoption_facts/adoption_vs_abortion.html

I would parental aid from the government a better solution then this.

Again, you refuse to acknowledge the fact that we have plenty of choices afterwards.  You continually insist that abortion is the only option after the fact, despite the fact that, like, three others minimum exist.  And you also refuse to acknowledge the fact I don't like the "Pro-life" argument either.  And you refuse to acknowledge that I dislike that men can just bail whenever the hell they want, and aren't being pressured like women are in this situation.

You have your own ideas, and anything that doesn't match your views exactly you dismiss and lecture people about their approach, cherrypicking phrases completely out of context to justify your bullshit.

I just lost my own message when writing this argument.
but now you are just putting word in my mouth, because you probably forgot some logic or somethings I have already wrote.

1 I never said Abortion is the only option. I said women have the right to choose to not give birth, meanwhile you think woman should give birth so they can choose adoption instead of abortion. because the only way to do an abortion, it force birth, adoption is not a solution to remplace abortion, yeah better birth control, but then again if abortion are bad, why is birth control good, they are doing the same thing, a woman use them to not give birth.
let me remind you that birth is a painfull process, study show that when simulated, men are unable to support the pain.
I can't accept an argument that would say women should endure pain, because they cause always give their child in adoption...
if that was not in your post, you can see why adoption cannot be a remplacement or a choice can make instead of abortion, because adoption include birth. but the choice of abortion is to not give birth.

2 I read it, but I always though that argument as nonsense because pro-life often support death penalty, it means their conclusion on abortion being murders is false... what kind of argument is that ?

3 I already answer your stance on men quitting their wife because they do not want to accept their responsibilities. Actions I believe are bad. that is why women have the right to go to a court and get a pension for their child, because a man must take their responsibilities of father, at least in Quebec.

let face it, being pro-choice is logic.
1 the birth is not absolute, just because you are pregnant, does not mean you will carry your child to term.
2 The foetus cannot survive alone, outside its mother womb.
3 the foetus is not a person, it is a person in formation, but it is not formed and not an human
4 women have the right to decide own they wish to live their lives.
5 women have the exclusive control of their body
6 women have the right to choose between all means of contraception, or not, they can also choose to go with no contraception, no protection and live with consequences of their action.
7 women have the right to choose abortion and live with the consequences of their actions

[BLATANTLY STATED THE OPPOSITE]

Not once did I say that recreational sex is no good.  Not once did I imply that the MAGICAL MIRACLE OF BIRTH CONTROL is not an option. [/spoiler]

In fact, I BLATANTLY STATED THE OPPOSITE - WE HAVE TONS OF MEANS OF BIRTH CONTROL AVAILABLE TO US, AND DAMMIT I'M SURE AS HELL GOING TO USE THEM!

How the hell is your reading comprehension so absolutely horrible that you don't get this?  Are you just not aware of what a birth control pill is?  A condom?  Diaphram?  Spermicide?  The MORNING FREAKING AFTER PILL (Scientifically proven to work ~5 days after sex!)?  And of course, Adoption?.

Yes, we have many way of controlling birth, but because we have multiple means of controlling, that does not abortion should be illegal, netheir that adoption is currently a good alternative. we are talking about the right of a woman to accept or deny the possibility of giving birth.

Yeah you have the right to use any contraception method you want, after all your body not mine.
but you have also the right to not use any contraception at all. And no matter if a woman use contraception or not, abortion is still a personnal choice, it has many consequence and it those consequence the woman will have to accept.

Pro-choice is very simple, my body, my right to choose and I am very sorry about the little thing in the womb not being born, but that said, his birth was just one possibility of the future, as I stated in previous post, the baby can die inside the mother womb, his birth is not forced.

If people want to use abortion as a mean of contraception, which is not good, well it is still their choice and their body to destroy, but keep in mind, it is not like someone on earth will wake up in the morning and came up with the goal of doing the most abortions.

Pro Choice is equally bullshit.  Why?  We have a choice.  We can choose whether or not to have sex, to have protection on the male, protection on us, the morning after pill, and even adoption.

I simply interpret this has,
1 we made a choice to have sex
2 we can make a choice to have birth control
3 woman saying they should have right to abort made bad choice, because they could have made another and better choice before,
conclusion: so pro-choice is bullshit.

If the 3rd line is not truth, then your premisses do not support your conclusion of pro-choice being bullshit.
pro-choice is
1 the feotus is not a person
2 I have the right to decide how I live my life
3 This happen in my body
conclusion, I have the right to have an abortion.

An sorry but remplacing abortion with adoption, this is a very bad idea and a very bad conclusion.

As long as it doesn't increase the chance of unwanting people getting STDs... then good...
I can almost see people wanting to hide the fact they have an STD in order to get better pay... meh.


@legalize: Seeing how I view my religion, though, it would probably be a no (at least for what I do with me for the time being), otherwise, I guess I won't say. (However, do note that this is not exactly a topic I'm interested in discussing.)

STDs, Legalisation in New Zealand put an obligation for all sex workers to use protection, aka Condom and force them to undergo test every week, if ever one is found to have a STDs, there are no longer allowed to work. if those are your objection, you can see there is nothing to worry about.

We are not buying the woman, woman still have the exclusive property of her body, but we are buying the voluntary service.

Rolina; I am a bit discouraged.  The first I read was pro-choice is bullshit, I am pro-choice, I am defending my position. PRO-CHOICE is not bullshit, it is simple logic.

While I understand your story on abortion, pro-choice is giving the right to a woman to deny what is happening in her body, give her the choice to not be a mother, you can't ask for them to not have sex, woman claim the right to have sex for pleasure only, they reclaim the right to have orgasm, not to only have sex for procreation.

This is what I wrote, this is far from lecturing you on the right of woman, but simply explaining the logic of pro-choice

and yet you are interpret mines as telling how you should think...
I know what are your argument and your logic and I rejected it, because I do not find it acceptable.
I don't know where you read that I am telling what you should think or what you do with your body.

Besides the right of a woman are no different then the right of a man, your body, your right to choose, if we male where the one having to bear children, you would know, abortion would legal since long time and there would be next to no debate.

ro Choice is equally bullshit.  Why?  We have a choice.  We can choose whether or not to have sex, to have protection on the male, protection on us, the morning after pill, and even adoption.

there is no reason we should not allowed to have sex for fun, it is our bodies.

Abortion is  personnal and pro-choice is the only logic, I am defending it.

Sure, people can use protection to not have sex, but how can anyone say that people who don't want babies have to use condom ? not your body, not your choice.
beside you know, protection can fail, it is not perfect, there is nothing perfect, you are imperfect, I am imperfect, the president of the united state is not perfect and the wealthiest man alive is imperfect...
I cannot accept that said logic, not your body, not your choice. All women have the right to abort.
it is not because the protection fails or they did not use it, that they should be forced to give birth. Their bodies, their right to choose.

Plus : banning abortion will not stop abortion, it will just stop safe abortions.

but I am certain you already read that somewhere, this is pro-choice logic.

Also, the whole "living in the past" thing is NOT the point of the death penalty.  The penalty is to actually PREVENT the crimes from occurring in the first place.  If you don't make do on threats, they have no power.  That's why the death penalty exists - killing another will result in society killing you back.  Betraying your people will result in your people offing your head. Wrong people, and expect to be wronged back.  These are powerful motivators to get people to follow the rule of law.  If the punishment for betraying my country was a few years in jail, I'd look for the highest bidder.  But it's death - meaning if I get caught, I'm screwed.  So I don't do it - it's not worth the risk.  Before you condemn stuff, stop and ask yourself why these things exist in the first place.

I view that as eye for eye, tooth for tooth, tell me, if I am convicted of murder and they kill me, will my victim ever return to live ? no, they will not. that is logic, once someone dies, there is no coming back to life.
death penalty play little role when discourageing a crime, if someone hate another so much or is extrem need of money, they will take the risk or will not even think about the consequence of law.
Death penalty is not the rule of law,
I have good reason to reject logic and the conclusion
Very few people are evil killing or stealing for fun, we need to act on the cause of crimes, If i have no reason to commit it, I won't do it.

Finally, there is historical proof about judicial mistake, innocent being killed for the crimes of another, I suppose that is a just some errors, some colateral damage...

Conclusion, Death penalty should be abolished. we have no need for it. Canada has done it and Canada does not have more crimes then US. Many state in the US did the same thing.

@Darkylighty: If you were held a prisoner in someone's home deep in some deserted place away from the public, and the person holding you hostage has already tortured you/doing rated XXX stuff, and proved that they were willing to kill you if you were to escape? What would you do? Let yourself die? And whoever else was held captive/may have escaped as well?  ; I dislike the idea of killing as well, but sometimes, there's just no obvious/easy other way, unfortunately...

This is like taking the better of two evils...

Everything else outside of self-defense can easily be controversial in my opinion. (Even if one wants to kill themselves, it could be that their just not in their right mind due to depression.)

- people have the right to do what they want with theirs sexual organ.

So do you think indecent exposure is okay?

that is a strong and emotionnal situation I have no choice to answer with logic.
of course if the person is behond saving, something we may have no choice to kill, but those situation do not always exist, now you give me a situation where the is only two person, me and him, but in real world there is the leviathan, the state who is there to enforce the law.

I always oppose suicide, we should not let people jump of road and we should give adaquate service so they come back in the society and accept life.

On your last question, yes, public nudity should be legal. it is a sexual organ, not a gun, it won't kill you. Come on, you have nothing to be scared.

Hey guys,

What should we do with prostitution

I say we legalise with and regulate it.
Because, prostitution is work, it is not dangerous by itself, but dangerous because of bad laws.

we should just legalize prostitution.

Luna_blade : well the government is not always evil, sure it can be evil, but that is what happen you don't place counter power or do not limit power.  sure we can't have governemental control of education, but in democratic society like ours, this will not happen, another reason why communist need democracy, but this is not on topics.

My argument is simple, abortion is not murder
- the birth is an absolute future, the baby can dies before the birth.
- Abortion is a personnal choice
- people have the right to do what they want with theirs sexual organ.

Sorry FOX: but I oppose strongly stand your grounds laws, just because someone stole from you, does not mean you have to administer your own justice, you should instead get help from the state and proceed to a trials.

What makes me in a bad position? I know English. It is my first language. You often make grammar mistakes in a way that makes what you are saying not completely comprehensible. What is wrong with this position?

we call it a natal language, but what ever

All I can say, Darklylight, is that you should learn English better. Right now it is hard to understand what you mean, and it is apparent are misinterpreting some things that Rolina is saying. Until you can reply with coherent English don't think I will debate with you. Nothing against you, but at this point misunderstanding can very easily happen, which results in unnecessary red herrings, and the like.

I will however, say this: You do not understand Rolina's argument, and have misinterpreted what she has said. Also, I have no idea what you are saying either, so perhaps you do understand it and just cannot express your counterargument.

EDIT : I don't think you are in a good position to say if I did not understand.
her points were easy to understand
1 Prochoice is bullshit since you had the choice to not have sex.
I reject this said logic, people have the right to have use without accepting everything that happen in their bodies.

2 Death Penalty Prevent crimes
I totally reject that affirmation, it is false.
And I say Death is final, when you die, that is it, your are gone. So any innocent judged by this method cannot get his life returned.

So Darkylighty, let me get this straight - because I'm a woman who uses this magical thing we call LOGIC to say "I have plenty of choices, and I FREAKING USE THEM", that means I don't have a right to talk?  Am I not female enough for you that you chose to exclude me from my own gender and talk down to me?  To try to explain I have rights that, well, I exorcize all the time, despite what your claims of my "beliefs" may be?

I never did judge your feminity, if you say you are female, you are female, only you is capable of deciding what is your gender and what are you belief. If you don't believe in Abortion, then do no abortion, but you have no right to decide for another what she can do with her body, not like abortion is without risk and it is not like someone is for abortions...

So, i am a male, would put me in jail I don't want to have children ? If us male had to bear children, we would have legalise abortion a long time ago.

All women have rights over their individual body, which belong only to themselves. they have the right to decide if they want to be a mother or not. it is that simple. ME, you, and even the president of the US have no say in the matter, we are not them, we should not decide what is better for someone else personnal life.

Who are you to decide that I should not have sex with my girlfriend if we are both willing but not ready for a child, this is our life, not your, you shall take this decision with your boyfriend for your shake. I am rejecting you logic about people should not sex...

Did I seriously hear you talk down to me about the rights of women?  Did I seriously see you point by point try to counter my views on this and all the rest of these things?

I am disagreeing hoverer your point of view, We can choose whether or not to have sex. that is not for you to decided, you have the right to decided what you do with your own vaginas, but what others girls do with their own vaginas and what I do with my penis is of not concern to you, you being a woman does not make you more legitimate to judge what people do with sexual organ then individual males.

RTFP, dood.  RTFP.  And next time, know who you're replying to.  At this rate, I'm going to have to explain to you how lesbians work after you accuse me of being a homophobe.  

You being a lesbian is barely a point, you have the right to love anyone body you want, if you want, you get into a polygamous homosexual incestuous mariage by marrying your two sisters and I have no problem with that, it is your life, you love the one you want, you choose who you marry, that is very simple. And I did not accuse of lbeing an homophobe.

I do not know you, but being lesbian, bieng heterosexual or bisexual is not a choice, but accepting it is.

Also, the whole "living in the past" thing is NOT the point of the death penalty.  The penalty is to actually PREVENT the crimes from occurring in the first place.  If you don't make do on threats, they have no power.  That's why the death penalty exists - killing another will result in society killing you back.  Betraying your people will result in your people offing your head. Wrong people, and expect to be wronged back.  These are powerful motivators to get people to follow the rule of law.  If the punishment for betraying my country was a few years in jail, I'd look for the highest bidder.  But it's death - meaning if I get caught, I'm screwed.  So I don't do it - it's not worth the risk.  Before you condemn stuff, stop and ask yourself why these things exist in the first place.

Also, you know those states where murder will cost you 30 years?  For some of the people I've dealt with, that'd be worth it.  The punishment must fit the crime, for two reasons - first to prevent cruelty, but also to encourage prevention.

You cannot repair a mistake with another mistake, death penalty is a mistake in itself, because when the guy is dead, he is gone, if ever we made a mistake and judge the wrong person, that innocent is dead, you cannot give him back his life.

laws by themselves have no effect on crime, and there is no such proof that death penalty is discourageing crime, while prison in life is not.

At some point, all of us made mistakes in our lifes, by giving death penalty, you deny the possibility that the criminal may change and you stick him an evil ticket, 25 years in prison, as in Norway is enough for a life time, and if ever the person is incapable to change, they just keep him in jail for 5 more years. while the goal of death penalty is to punish, we should go towards rehabilitation.

Dealt penalty does not prevent crime, the best way to prevent crime is to encourage education, I would free public education for all until university is a way better way to prevent crime then law and order. like I said, I prefer to see four criminals in liberty, then 1 innocent on the electric chair.

This mean the reason you kill an animal is for fun or for commercial purpose, but at the very least, it is not an usefull kill, you don't kill to eat, but for fun, because it would be your right to kill an animalk, I always oppose it.

What the hell are you trying to imply here?  If you're making a general statement, do not quote me as though it's a retort.  Nobody implied they had a right to kill anything.  I was merely pointing out the flaws in the question itself - there's no such thing as "random killing".  There is always a reason.

[/quote]
i was putting a definition of random killing, and not accusing you of anything.

there is no reason to kill, but abortions is not killing something
if ever the mother were to have an accident or her baby dies in her woob, should we accuse her of homicide ?
just because the woman is pregnant, it does not mean the baby will survive all 9 months in
Doctors in Canada always allow abortion as long it does not place the life of the woman in danger, I believe this is the code we should respect. we have no need for a law on abortions,

While I agree that Snowden is a hero, I disagree about killing traitors, you will never undo the wrong he has done, even if you kill him, you can't live in the past. 

The question is whether you'd undo any future-doing wrong that could happen with others... since if they knew that the consequences of their actions were taken seriously, then...
(And also to eliminate any thoughts from anyone planning a rescue operation if you jailed them or something? Although, I could probably leave this one out.)

And yeah, I look at the Ed as a hero as well... (I know that we all make mistakes, but the fact that he tried to make things fair tells everything, or something like that.) If I was implying otherwise, then I messed up my wording. Meh. Me and my wording...


@threat to mankind: Maybe "attempted murder" is what I meant?

there is little evidence that the death penalty is effective to prevent murder or crimes, at the very best, it has no effect, when people want to commit a crime, the death penalty will play no factor on the decision, if that the reason you use to justify it, you might as well give up, because it does not work. Not only the death penalty will not stop a crime, but it will prevent you from undoing a judicial mistake, in the case where you judge and killed the wrong person, you've kill a innocent person.

you should always to people a chance to defend themselves. I prefer to see 4 criminal in liberty then a single innocent on the death chair. personally.