matthew wrote:Ok. Peace. I honestly do not care what you personally think of what I write on this forum, but if you make communication difficult, then I'm sorry I can't reciprocate.

It's encouraging that you realize that I'm not some toolshed playing games like whoever is posing as Humphrey Bear or Waltermalling.

I'll accept your explanation for your "salut". I do not however think I did anything to provoke such an outburst from her. If I were in a pub and some man or woman said something like that, I would be taken aback.

I can appreciate the less immediate circumstances that a webforum elicits, but nevertheless a little decorum is in order. I don't really mind being called "full of shit" or "" or "irrational"

(though I personally try not to resort to such words unless it seems nothing else will work) or anything else along those lines within a discussion as long as there is some sort of reason why I am. What I do resent is being dehumanized as this person did without provocation. She was off the wall here, regardless of anything she might have said elsewhere.

...
I will also say that I cannot and will not answer every question posed to me- because I simply do not have the time to and because not every question has equal value or significance to me; furthermore many "questions" that I've encountered so far here are bullshit and are an attempt to attack me personally.

matthew wrote:The rest of your post is bullshit.

... some people, unlike yourself, don't hide behind online handles...

Don't try to change the subject, by the way, Kiwi.

I'm sorry but you are so full of shit here that're you're crapping your pants against your will.

prattle

Asinine.

YOU are the creep and I threw it right back atchya. You're probably a guy anyway....

Once again you're a hell of a guy when it comes to recording music, really. But....stick to that please.

More bourgeoise bullshit....

Prattle!

you pompous doodle-brain...............spoiled my ass. Who the hell are you?? This is such typical elitist, liberal horse manure.

You seriously need a life.......over forty six hundred posts here in like two years? That's not much of a life.

you work, including commute time MAYBE 40 hours a week, sometimes more and once in awhile ALOT more. I routinely work 50+ a week sans commuting, plus I go to school.

matthew wrote:I don't ignore people just to be a jerk. I ignore people who don't want to talk and rather want to simply personally badmouth or worse. If you post in a reasonable way even though it is blunt and even a little sarcastic and harsh, fine.....even if I've told you "ignored" previously. I don't hold grudges unless you do. But I will not deal with people who gang up and personally attack me with coarse langauge. I think in this respect I've been more than fair.

Peanuts' capture of some things matthew wrote:The rest of your post is bullshit.

... some people, unlike yourself, don't hide behind online handles...

Don't try to change the subject, by the way, Kiwi.

I'm sorry but you are so full of shit here that're you're crapping your pants against your will.

prattle

Asinine.

YOU are the creep and I threw it right back atchya. You're probably a guy anyway....

Once again you're a hell of a guy when it comes to recording music, really. But....stick to that please.

More bourgeoise bullshit....

Prattle!

you pompous doodle-brain...............spoiled my ass. Who the hell are you?? This is such typical elitist, liberal horse manure.

You seriously need a life.......over forty six hundred posts here in like two years? That's not much of a life.

you work, including commute time MAYBE 40 hours a week, sometimes more and once in awhile ALOT more. I routinely work 50+ a week sans commuting, plus I go to school.

kerble wrote:

kerble wrote:liar.



you said you were done.

DrAwkward wrote:

kerble wrote:

kerble wrote:liar.



you said you were done.

Linus Van Pelt wrote:What do you think the punishment should be for a doctor who performs an abortion? What do you think the punishment should be for a woman who has an abortion?

matthew wrote:

Linus Van Pelt wrote:What do you think the punishment should be for a doctor who performs an abortion? What do you think the punishment should be for a woman who has an abortion?

First of all, I'll call you LVP from now on. Just don't p me off and I'll return the favor. I think Peanuts is pretty benign anyway.


These are jurisprudential questions that I cannot give a "they always should use this sentence and that". Surely you can appreciate this since I recall somewhere you mention you are going to law school.

I will however say that the doctor who performs the abortion should receive the harsher penalty, and I would not rule out the sentence of death. It would send a clear message that society will not tolerate the deliberate taking of the most innocent, helpless human life. As for the mother, there ought to be a criminal penalty, because regardless of any migitating circumstances because she is to an extent an accomplice in murder by allowing said doctor to abort her child. The penalty ought to fit the amount of complicity. It's a delicate question of jurisprudence and I admit that I cannot give a very good answer to the question of the mother. I'll have to read and think about it, but by no means is the mother innocent if she is not forced or coerced into the procedure. But again the provider of the abortion is always highly culpable and the sentence of death or life in the stockade definitely are just penalties in my mind. As I said there are no black and white "always this sentence" answers.

Linus Van Pelt wrote:

matthew wrote:

Linus Van Pelt wrote:What do you think the punishment should be for a doctor who performs an abortion? What do you think the punishment should be for a woman who has an abortion?

First of all, I'll call you LVP from now on. Just don't p me off and I'll return the favor. I think Peanuts is pretty benign anyway.


These are jurisprudential questions that I cannot give a "they always should use this sentence and that". Surely you can appreciate this since I recall somewhere you mention you are going to law school.

I haven't started yet, but yes, that's the plan. Of course, I wasn't looking for an exact answer like "10 years with the possibility of parole," but rather a sort of "sentencing guideline."

I will however say that the doctor who performs the abortion should receive the harsher penalty, and I would not rule out the sentence of death. It would send a clear message that society will not tolerate the deliberate taking of the most innocent, helpless human life. As for the mother, there ought to be a criminal penalty, because regardless of any migitating circumstances because she is to an extent an accomplice in murder by allowing said doctor to abort her child. The penalty ought to fit the amount of complicity. It's a delicate question of jurisprudence and I admit that I cannot give a very good answer to the question of the mother. I'll have to read and think about it, but by no means is the mother innocent if she is not forced or coerced into the procedure. But again the provider of the abortion is always highly culpable and the sentence of death or life in the stockade definitely are just penalties in my mind. As I said there are no black and white "always this sentence" answers.

See, and this, I think, is where the pro-life position starts to fall apart. Among most pro-lifers, it falls apart a lot more quickly. Most don't feel comfortable punishing a woman for having an abortion. The South Dakota legislature certainly didn't; they put language in the law specifically ruling out punishing the woman. (And the doctor would be punished less harshly than a real murderer-for-hire would be.) But even though you're a lot more consistent than the average pro-lifer, you're still hedging. The mother is "to an extent an accomplice"? "To an extent," really? If I hire someone to kill someone, my culpability is clear, and my punishment will be severe. If you believe life begins at conception, and nothing significant happens at the moment of viability, or the moment of birth, then why have a lighter penalty for a woman who has an abortion than for a woman who takes out a contract on a 2-year-old? You believe in the death penalty; why not execute such women? Hey - why have abortion laws at all? Why not simply declare that life begins at conception, and allow the homicide laws we already have in place to take care of the rest?

Here's the thing: Some extreme pro-lifers might be able to make themselves comfortable with that. You might be able to make yourself comfortable with that. But the vast majority of this country is not comfortable with it. The hypocritical laws of South Dakota show that they do not consider life to begin at conception. The killer gets a lighter punishment than an actual murderer, and the person who plans, arranges, and finances the hit gets no punishment at all? That's not how you protect life. That's not how you respect life. That's how you pander to the majority of South Dakotans who are not, when it comes right down to it, morally opposed to abortion, but rather, just really grossed out by it.

So that's why this question is a trap for the pro-lifer (and a totally fair one): if you say that the punishment should be the same as for any other murder, then you're morally consistent, but completely out of touch with most of America, including many of your fellow pro-lifers - the position is sound, but politically untenable. If you say (as you pretty much do, without committing to it) that the punishment should be different from the murder of a born person, then you show your belief that life does not begin at conception - the position is popular, but hypocritical, and morally untenable.

matthew wrote:It would send a clear message that society will not tolerate the deliberate taking of the most innocent, helpless human life.