Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pan6467
I am always perplexed about the hypocrasy of the whole pro-life/pro capital punishment and the pro-choice/anti death penalty.
Isn't life, life? If you claim it is wrong to have an abortion because it is murder is not capital punishment murder and since most people who are in this class are religious, does not the Bible say Jesus says "Vengeance is mine"?
But the case for the other side makes no sense either. Isn't death death? Aren't both in essence murder?
I don't know just an observation.
Me? I'm pro-choice, pro-capital punishment. I believe that if we allow one we must allow the other. Or if we ban one we must ban the other.
|
Well, no, life is not life, because then you have to include all the other non-human life forms, which is practically taboo. The fact of the matter is life is a huge gray area and staking out definitive positions is bound to run into exceptions, objections, and endless argument. But wait. I like this one even better. If abortion is murder then women who have abortions have either commissioned a murder for hire or are murderers themselves. Now find me a pro-lifer who would support convicting and punishing those women appropriately. (How about the death penalty?) *crickets* Nobody does hypocrisy better than moral conservatives.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
I never said it was the reason, I said it was A reason. Look at the numbers, do the math, add-subtract, people that were paying in, people that would be paying in, people that are taking out, factor in 40 million less (actually it'd be lower then that, so lets go with 25-30 million) potential people not paying into SS since Roe. v. Wade.
|
The fault of your argument is that you take Social Security to be a big pyramid scheme wherein the earlier entrants (retirees) are supported by the later entrants (young workers). But Social Security is not a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes can work for a while but are bound to failure when you run out of people to join them (regardless how many of them you're aborting
you can never have enough to support the whole pyramid). The point of Social Security is for workers to support THEMSELVES in retirement by paying into the system while they work and getting that money BACK later. The current problems with Social Security are basically due to projections that underestimated the amount of money the system would need to pay benefits. It was never intended for the workers to support the retirees, thus it's irrelevant how many workers there are since they're only paying themselves.