MovieChat Forums > Lake of Fire (2007) Discussion > anti abortion and pro gun?

anti abortion and pro gun?


How many people out there are anti abortion and pro gun?

It is an interesting hypocritical aspect of America that I don't see mentioned that often and worth further discussion.

reply

[deleted]

Obviously, nothing.

reply

I'd say you are significantly misrepresenting yourself....

reply

Being pro gun and anti-abortion isn't hypocrispy if you give the fetus a gun!

reply

sounds like you have a massive chip on your shoulder about not being educated to be honest.

reply

This.


I still believe that peace and plenty and happiness can be worked out some way. I am a fool.

reply

Exactly what is an "educated liberal elite"? Obviously Tuba Charlie is intimidated by the educated. Our local newspaper carries a daily column by Billy Graham and a frequent theme is Billy's fear that any young person attending college is likely to have their mind polluted by exposure to this liberal educational environment that frightens Tuba.

reply

I can understand the debacke against being pro-life and for capital punishment.

The gun argument I don't understand.

Most people that own a gun do so to defend themselves with no intention to kill someone else. 100% of those that have an abortion take a life.

reply

'Most' people intent on defending themselves wouldn't need a gun if they were prepared to defend themselves within the law.

People that perform an abortion take away a potential life, not an actual one. Marked difference.

reply


It's not hypocritical. Why not try thinking about it before making yourself look dumb?


The Doctor is out. Far out.

reply

How is this hypocritical? Are you assuming that everyone who is anti-gun control wants to kill people? If so you're a foolish child.

reply

First of all, the "right to bear arms" has been completely misinterpreted from it's original meaning. This right does not mean that every American citizen can own a gun. Rather, it means that the government has a right to form a militia and protect itself from danger (usually during times of war) with deadly weapons. Secondly, not every American does have the right to own a gun. Do you know the legal process of acquiring a gun? The consequences of transporting a gun across state lines? How to obtain a concealed-weapons permit? These processes are government-regulated for a reason. Guns are dangerous and too many people are injured every day by lethal weapons. However, if someone wants a gun, he/she will acquire it in whatever capacity he/she can. Thousands of guns are scattered around every city illegally. So are drugs, prostitutes, gangs, arsonists......

Fortunately those of us who are "educated liberal elites" know how to practically reason with difficult subjects. We know how to interpret historical documents and draw logical conclusions based on evidence. (Remember the scientific method?) I have personally chosen to be an "educated liberal elite," just as I have chosen not to make decisions for other women's bodies. You shouldn't mock the well-educated because you made the choice to not take that route. Or perhaps someone else made that decision for you....which is probably why you feel the need to make other's decisions for them now.

It would behoove all of the ignorant people, both liberal and conservative, to actively reflect on their own lives, and to understand the Bill of Rights before trying to create an argument for either side of the gun-control, abortion, and/or health care debates.

reply

I shall now quote the Second Amendment.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The first part means that we, the people, have the right to organize militias, under the control of the local governments, so as to keep security for the local jurisdiction. This part was intended to protect the people from the government (OUR government) in case it became tyrannical to a similar point that the British government did to the colonies at that time period. (The British tyranny as interpreted by the colonies at the time, not as interpreted by history.) The people who authored the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were so skeptical and paranoid of government power after the Revolutionary War that they purposely set up laws that allowed the people to have some form of martial protection. That was one of their reasons for writing the Bill of Rights in the first place.

The Second part, "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," means that the population is allowed to have personal weapons. They are using "the people" to refer to the population. Such as in the first paragraph of the Constitution, "We, the People" is in reference to the population of the United States were appointing the document as the foundation of the Government, instead of the Government appointing the laws over the people. Kind of as a way to romanticize the situation, but I digress, this second part of the amendment is clearly in reference to the population owning personal weapons, since the founding fathers were again so paranoid of an oppressive government that they wanted to ensure the population had a means of fighting back if they needed to. Their philosophy was that if the government has all the weapons, they then have all the power.

To say that the Second Amendment only enforces the first part about the well regulated militias and not the second part about the peoples right to bear arms is to truly misrepresent the Amendment.

reply

I'm staunchly pro-choice and basically pro-gun (I think there should be limits, but I do believe in a basic right to bear arms), and I really disagree with the original post: saying that being both pro-life and pro-gun is hypocritical is sort of akin to saying that people who are pro-gun are pro-murder, or are into celebrating instruments of violence and death - the truth is a lot more complex, I think. There are all sorts of practical reasons to support people's right to own guns. Also, I guess I just generally take issue with certain analogies and extrapolations regarding people's stance on abortion - like, the idea that if you believe X about abortion, you must believe Y about some more-or-less unrelated issue; I've heard similar logic used to make the ridiculous argument that pro-choice people shouldn't be vegetarians.

That said, I do think there is a lot of hypocrisy (or at least contradiction) with certain pro-lifers; for example, people who say that they want the government to be as small as possible turning around and advocating for a federal ban on abortions (if you believe in small government, then shouldn't it be determined on more of a community level?). Or, the big one for me: people who say that they believe in the value of every individual human life and then support foreign policy - the invasion of a foreign country based on vague half-truths, let's say - that directly leads to hundreds of thousands of deaths...

reply

My biggest problem with the pro-gun lobby is their reliance on the constitution. Who gives a *beep* what the constitution says? Times change, it's outdated, get over it. Today we need to adapt, and the faster we strip the public of arms, the better we'll behave and survive in a well functioning society. In this day and age, there is no justification for being pro-guns.


"oh mummy, oh daddy - lets all play Kabadi!"

reply

Ironic that to implement your proposal--namely the abolition of law and stripping of rights--would require massive and persistent use of firearms.

reply

That's not true at all. You just make them illegal, as is the case throughout Europe. If you prevent access to arms, then you're well on your way to problem solved. The issue is that the pro-gun lobby in America is so massive no President wants to brave it. Not to mention that it seems a huge proportion of the US still cling to their 'right to bear arms' as if life won't function without it. These people need to think more and trust antiquated words on a page less. Logically, the right to bear arms makes absolutely no sense in this day and age.

"oh mummy, oh daddy - lets all play Kabadi!"

reply