Gun ownership poll

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So Bob, is a pro-life individual being a hypocrite if he or she signs up for military or police service knowing that could involve the taking of a human life?

Personally I see no inconsistency between being pro-life and supporting the appropriate (and hopefully very limited) use of the death penalty.

You see no inconsistency? I'm pro-life except when I'm not? No inconsistency? I happen to consider myself pro-life. Like you, I support the use of the death penalty when appropriate and when there is 100% absolute proof of guilt (after all, once they're dead, there's no taking it back). I find being pro-life and supporting the death penalty as contradictory. I could be called a hypocrite for espousing both views and I would agree. To me, it's better to acknowledge the hypocrisy than to try to perform some mental gymnastics and twist my brain into a pretzel to convince myself otherwise. But, to each their own.

Originally Posted by G1911

Nobody thinks in such absolutes without any regard for context whatsoever.

A person who is pro-life does not believe that there is no such thing as justifiable self-defense and that they are obligated to let their family be killed instead, or that the innocent and the guilty are the exact same thing.

A person who is pro-choice does not believe anyone can make any choice at any time.

This should not need to be said. I’m sure the two sides could debate on reasonable grounds.

Wow, talk about thinking in absolutes. Do you automatically assume that self-defense has to include killing the perpetrator? This should not need to be said, but a pro-lifer can defend him(her)self and his(her) family without resorting to killing. To think otherwise is unreasonable.

Originally Posted by G1911

You know exactly what pro-life vs. pro-choice is about. Stop pretending you don't. I did not define these terms in context. Nor did Peter. Decades of American culture and common language have.

Again, you know damn well what the phrase means and its context here in this thread. You know what pro-choice vs. pro-life is.

I know what the terms mean to me. Pro-life is a term people who are opposed to abortion like to call themselves in an attempt to take the high moral ground in the abortion debate. They want to claim abortion is murder and therefore they are "pro-life" in opposing abortion. They also, like Peter has done repeatedly, call people who are pro-choice, "pro-abortion." That's a pejorative term they like to label the opposition, again in an attempt to frame their argument in a more favorable light. But, just because a person likes to use "pro-life" to describe himself in regards to abortion, it doesn't mean they are truly pro-life. A more accurate term for them is anti-abortion or even anti-choice.

The pro-choice vs. pro-life dichotomy doesn't exist. It's a made-up artifice perpetrated by people who are against abortion to persuade others that they are morally superior to people who don't have the same belief about abortion that they have. That is the plain, simple truth about pro-choice vs. pro-life.

I happen to be pro-life and pro-choice. Even though being pro-life and not opposed to the death penalty makes me a hypocrite, being pro-life and pro-choice does not.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

Wow, talk about thinking in absolutes. Do you automatically assume that self-defense has to include killing the perpetrator? This should not need to be said, but a pro-lifer can defend him(her)self and his(her) family without resorting to killing. To think otherwise is unreasonable.

Re-read. I never said EVERY self-defense case requires lethal force. I have even said very much the opposite in this thread. Some cases do. I said that in such an eventuality, a pro-life person is not hypocritical.

Originally Posted by AustinMike

I know what the terms mean to me. Pro-life is a term people who are opposed to abortion like to call themselves in an attempt to take the high moral ground in the abortion debate. They want to claim abortion is murder and therefore they are "pro-life" in opposing abortion. They also, like Peter has done repeatedly, call people who are pro-choice, "pro-abortion." That's a pejorative term they like to label the opposition, again in an attempt to frame their argument in a more favorable light. But, just because a person likes to use "pro-life" to describe himself in regards to abortion, it doesn't mean they are truly pro-life. A more accurate term for them is anti-abortion or even anti-choice.

The pro-choice vs. pro-life dichotomy doesn't exist. It's a made-up artifice perpetrated by people who are against abortion to persuade others that they are morally superior to people who don't have the same belief about abortion that they have. That is the plain, simple truth about pro-choice vs. pro-life.

I happen to be pro-life and pro-choice. Even though being pro-life and not opposed to the death penalty makes me a hypocrite, being pro-life and pro-choice does not.

What it means to you is utterly irrelevant. If we all just decided what phrases meant for ourselves, human communication would be impossible. I am well aware all of you know the purpose of language. I am well aware that all of you understand exactly what pro-life and pro-choice means in the context of an abortion debate. How I feel about these phrases is entirely irrelevant (personally, I'm not a fan of them either). We all know what is being talked about no matter how much some of you want to pretend that you do not. Pro-life and pro-choice are opposing platforms on abortion. Stop pretending otherwise.

It's wild that we (others really, I gave no opinion on abortion itself) were having a very polite and civil discussion on abortion, and it's now starting to derail over people pretending not to know what the terms even mean. Usually it's the opinion on abortion that causes the fire, not the dictionary.


For those who claim not to know:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pro-life
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pro-choice

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by G1911

What it means to you is utterly irrelevant. If we all just decided what phrases meant for ourselves, human communication would be impossible. I am well aware all of you know the purpose of language. I am well aware that all of you understand exactly what pro-life and pro-choice means in the context of an abortion debate. How I feel about these phrases is entirely irrelevant (personally, I'm not a fan of them either). We all know what is being talked about no matter how much some of you want to pretend that you do not. Pro-life and pro-choice are opposing platforms on abortion. Stop pretending otherwise.


For those who claim not to know:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pro-life
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pro-choice

It's very relevant, and not just to me. One of the comments on the pro-life definition in response to a comment to an earlier comment: "I've been working in the pro-life cause for decades and in every definition we have ever given it has included all life from conception to natural death, but Webster's dictionary can redefine what actual pro-life people mean by the word. I am pro-life, this includes being against euthanasia, child abuse, elderly abuse, or anything else that attacks the dignity of the human life! No your the the one rewriting in order to fit a liberal agenda."

So what do you call the person who wrote the quote above? She's against euthanasia because she believes in the sanctity of life, but according to you, she can't call herself pro-life unless she is talking strictly about her stance against abortion.

I also find it very odd that a person could be "pro-life" because they're against abortion and then not give a damn about that life after it's born.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

It's very relevant, and not just to me. One of the comments on the pro-life definition in response to a comment to an earlier comment: "I've been working in the pro-life cause for decades and in every definition we have ever given it has included all life from conception to natural death, but Webster's dictionary can redefine what actual pro-life people mean by the word. I am pro-life, this includes being against euthanasia, child abuse, elderly abuse, or anything else that attacks the dignity of the human life! No your the the one rewriting in order to fit a liberal agenda."

So what do you call the person who wrote the quote above? She's against euthanasia because she believes in the sanctity of life, but according to you, she can't call herself pro-life unless she is talking strictly about her stance against abortion.

I also find it very odd that a person could be "pro-life" because they're against abortion and then not give a damn about that life after it's born.

Okay. Webster's is part of a vast right-wing conspiracy to brand pro-life as an abortion term.


You know what it means, especially in the context of an abortion discussion. Stop pretending to be stupid. There are many words I don't like and wouldn't use to label things, but such is the world. Pro-life and pro-choice are both positive sounding brandings. In my little niche of the world, 'gun control' is a phrase to describe A) the use of a holster or sling with passive retention to ensure retention of my weapon or B) proper handling of my weapon and a muzzle brake to keep follow up rounds in the hitbox of my target. Does that mean I'm going to come here and pretend gun-control means lots of things and it isn't just legislation aimed at restricting firearms? I would score some virtue signaling and martyr points with some extremists on my side, but no. That would be ridiculous. Words have actual meanings, regardless of my feelings. That meaning is not whatever the hell I want it to be.


This is a very bad argument. I am greatly amused that we had an intelligent discussion in this thread about both guns and abortion that was polite and earnest while people debated the actual issue. It is only now when 2 people are pretending they don't know what common-use terms mean that its derailing.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by G1911

Okay. Webster's is part of a vast right-wing conspiracy to brand pro-life as an abortion term.

Okay. And you say this, why?

Originally Posted by G1911

You know what it means, especially in the context of an abortion discussion. Stop pretending to be stupid. There are many words I don't like and wouldn't use to label things, but such is the world. Pro-life and pro-choice are both positive sounding brandings. In my little niche of the world, 'gun control' is a phrase to describe A) the use of a holster or sling with passive retention to ensure retention of my weapon or B) proper handling of my weapon and a muzzle brake to keep follow up rounds in the hitbox of my target. Does that mean I'm going to come here and pretend gun-control means lots of things and it isn't just legislation aimed at restricting firearms? I would score some virtue signaling and martyr points with some extremists on my side, but no. That would be ridiculous. Words have actual meanings, regardless of my feelings. That meaning is not whatever the hell I want it to be.

Yes, I know what it is co-opted to mean by those who are against abortion. But seriously, how can a person claim to be pro-life if he/she wants to execute people? Seriously. That's all I want to know.

Originally Posted by G1911

This is a very bad argument. I am greatly amused that we had an intelligent discussion in this thread about both guns and abortion that was polite and earnest while people debated the actual issue. It is only now when 2 people are pretending they don't know what common-use terms mean that its derailing.

This thread got derailed when abortion was thrown in the mix. Don't pretend otherwise.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

But seriously, how can a person claim to be pro-life if he/she wants to execute people? Seriously. That's all I want to know.

If you think imposing the death penalty on a convicted murderer is the same as the picture below, your a sick and disgusting person.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If you think imposing the death penalty on a convicted murderer is the same as the picture below, your a sick and disgusting person.

Is this the scientific evidence that life begins at conception that you claimed existed and that I asked for back in post 134 or should I keep waiting?

And as to your comment, you are definitely free to conjure up a false impression of me that is not based on anything I've written. But in doing so, I think "your (sic) a sick and disgusting person."

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If you think imposing the death penalty on a convicted murderer is the same as the picture below, your a sick and disgusting person.

Topps has a new chase card?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by AustinMike

Okay. And you say this, why? .

See your next point where you say pro-life has been co-opted by people who do not support abortion (generally, this is the right). Get the little joke now?

Originally Posted by AustinMike

Yes, I know what it is co-opted to mean by those who are against abortion. But seriously, how can a person claim to be pro-life if he/she wants to execute people? Seriously. That's all I want to know.

Because most people are on the whole reasonable are not absolutist hardliners in every facet. A majority of people were fine with killing Osama Bin Laden. Very few people are fine with killing a new, innocent life (abortion is a disagreement primarily on when life begins) that has done no wrong. A person who supports the death penalty does not believe EVERYONE should be executed.

This illogical and absurd argument can be made for pro-choice too. A pro-choice person supports some right to get an aboriton. They do not believe literally everyone for any reason in all issues can make any choice. They still believe in some rule of law. A pro-choice person does not support a right for me to do anything at any time for any reason.

Most people are not cartoonish hardline absolutist caricatures of a human being.

Originally Posted by AustinMike

This thread got derailed when abortion was thrown in the mix. Don't pretend otherwise.

Perhaps in the sense that it got off-topic, but it was a quite reasonable debate until BobC and you pretended not to be able to understand common words and phrases.

[AustinMike]

Originally Posted by G1911

See your next point where you say pro-life has been co-opted by people who do not support abortion (generally, this is the right). Get the little joke now?

Hmm, I guess some people shouldn't tell "jokes."

Originally Posted by G1911

abortion is a disagreement primarily on when life begins

That's what I said in Post 130. Aren't you following along? But anyway, if abortion is a disagreement on when life begins, why do they claim they are "pro-life" when they actually aren't?

Originally Posted by G1911

A person who supports the death penalty does not believe EVERYONE should be executed.

Who said they did? But tell you what, when a group gets together that wants to

1) redefine death so that a person incapable of breathing and eating on their own is declared legally dead;

2) make it illegal to use life support systems despite a loved one's objection;

3) is against the death penalty; and

4) call their group Pro-Death to gain support

get back to me.

Originally Posted by G1911

This illogical and absurd argument can be made for pro-choice too. A pro-choice person supports some right to get an aboriton. They do not believe literally everyone for any reason in all issues can make any choice. They still believe in some rule of law. A pro-choice person does not support a right for me to do anything at any time for any reason.

Fair point.

Originally Posted by G1911

Most people are not cartoonish hardline absolutist caricatures of a human being.

I'm not sure whether I agree with "most." The jury is still out on that one.

Originally Posted by G1911

Perhaps in the sense that it got off-topic, but it was a quite reasonable debate until BobC and you pretended not to be able to understand common words and phrases.

It's not that I "pretended not to be able to understand common words and phrases," it's more that I don't agree with using the term pro-life in that manner. So far, nobody has even attempted to answer the question, how can they be "pro-life" when they're not? Just like I don't agree with Russia using the term "special military operation" for their invasion of Ukraine. Should we all just acquiesce and call it a "special military operation" because it's their invasion and that's what they want to call it?