4 ms·

> For anyone who honestly feels this way, it would seem that the most obvious next step is to enact very strong laws that prevent that now-born perfectly viable

> For anyone who honestly feels this way, it would seem that the most obvious next step is to enact very strong laws that prevent that now-born perfectly viable human child from being murdered at school. I can respect such a consistent position. I'm pretty sure there are already pretty strong laws against violence in schools, let alone murder. I think what you're insinuating on are gun laws? Well, sure. I think that every teacher should be armed and trained in the event of a school shooter because they have the responsibility to protect those children. >"No, not like that!" Haha. We tried it your way. Turns out criminals don't respect laws. Most gun deaths occur in gun-free zones. But those cities that are most armed also tend to be most polite and least violent. Think carefully about why that is. > I've yet to meet anyone who takes this "pro-life" position a single moment beyond birth though. Why is that? Again, pretty strong laws on the books against murder. I think what you're insinuating here is why aren't there government programs to raise children? Well, it's quite simple. The murdering of children is a completely separate issue. One dwells on preventing murder, and the other hinges on who's responsibility it is to raise it. I think it should be illegal to kill the homeless. To have you then turn around on me and tell me I'm obligated to take care of that homeless man is disingenuous. These are two, completely separate issues. I think that in general children are obligated to be taken care of by their parents, and I'm pretty sure we have laws on the books for that too. So, what's your issue with conservatives, really?

jjav 4y ago
> I'm pretty sure there are already pretty strong laws against violence in schools, let alone murder. That's why I said laws that prevent, not just words on a book. > they have the responsibility to protect those children They most certainly don't. Teachers have responsibility to teach and mentor children and they're fairly overworked on those roles already. Pretending they'll moonlight in SWAT school is hardly realistic on any level. The question was how come nobody who believes in the sanctity of a child's life before birth actually believes in any protection to that child's life post-birth?

jjav 4y ago

> I'm pretty sure there are already pretty strong laws against violence in schools, let alone murder. That's why I said laws that prevent, not just words on a book. > they have the responsibility to protect those children They most certainly don't. Teachers have responsibility to teach and mentor children and they're fairly overworked on those roles already. Pretending they'll moonlight in SWAT school is hardly realistic on any level. The question was how come nobody who believes in the sanctity of a child's life before birth actually believes in any protection to that child's life post-birth?