• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

I keep saying that it's the ultra conservatives (I won't even class them as republicans), you know the ones who keep calling us Nazis, that are creating a Nazi style regime. The things they are saying and doing go against the basic tenants of our constitution and what we as a people hold as our greatest value, our freedom:

1. Ted Cruz wants to patrol neighborhoods and people based on religion - I think we've seen that in a dictatorship before and I believe I still have my right to religious freedom. Besides, how do you tell if someone is Muslim?
2. The Kansas governor/legislature is working to dismantle the judicial branch by making it so they can impeach any judge who "attempts to usurp the power of the legislative or executive branch." Translated, the last several rulings didn't go in our favor s we want you out. Sounds like the start of a dictatorship to me. First consolidate power - the legislature pushed out even moderate republicans that don't side with the governor's plan. Next eliminate the competition - we're working on it.
3. We're also working on diminishing the value of others opinions. If they don't agree with you, they are the enemy. That's why we have labels like "liberal" and make it an evil word. One of my commissioners came out yesterday to bash the League of Women voters because he doesn't like "those" people. By those he meant liberal minded. I believe the Nazi party did similar things.

All these things are being done by so called republicans. Again, I can't even call them republicans because I still hope that there are people out there that hold the old values of reduced government influence, efficient government, and good old fashioned hard work to get ahead. None of which has anything to do with religion, race, sexuality, and dismissing people who don't think like you.

I hope this whole fiasco of a political race wakes up the party after the democrats win in a landslide and they start working to make some changes.

Sorry for ranting. I'm just in a bad mood this morning.
These
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article67444902.html#storylink=cpy
 
dvdneal said:
I keep saying that it's the ultra conservatives (I won't even class them as republicans), you know the ones who keep calling us Nazis, that are creating a Nazi style regime. The things they are saying and doing go against the basic tenants of our constitution and what we as a people hold as our greatest value, our freedom:

1. Ted Cruz wants to patrol neighborhoods and people based on religion - I think we've seen that in a dictatorship before and I believe I still have my right to religious freedom. Besides, how do you tell if someone is Muslim?
2. The Kansas governor/legislature is working to dismantle the judicial branch by making it so they can impeach any judge who "attempts to usurp the power of the legislative or executive branch." Translated, the last several rulings didn't go in our favor s we want you out. Sounds like the start of a dictatorship to me. First consolidate power - the legislature pushed out even moderate republicans that don't side with the governor's plan. Next eliminate the competition - we're working on it.
3. We're also working on diminishing the value of others opinions. If they don't agree with you, they are the enemy. That's why we have labels like "liberal" and make it an evil word. One of my commissioners came out yesterday to bash the League of Women voters because he doesn't like "those" people. By those he meant liberal minded. I believe the Nazi party did similar things.

All these things are being done by so called republicans. Again, I can't even call them republicans because I still hope that there are people out there that hold the old values of reduced government influence, efficient government, and good old fashioned hard work to get ahead. None of which has anything to do with religion, race, sexuality, and dismissing people who don't think like you.

I hope this whole fiasco of a political race wakes up the party after the democrats win in a landslide and they start working to make some changes.

Sorry for ranting. I'm just in a bad mood this morning.
These
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article67444902.html#storylink=cpy
Click to expand...

Sounds like your a Moderate Republican who wants his party back. If everyone who thought like this united and brought the GOP back down to earth, America would be a much greater place.
 
The Terminator said:
Sounds like your a Moderate Republican who wants his party back. If everyone who thought like this united and brought the GOP back down to earth, America would be a much greater place.
Click to expand...

I tend to think of myself that way, but in this state I'm a flaming liberal. People like you we just shoot or lock up in an insane asylum. No sorry, we just shoot them. An asylum would be a form of welfare.
 
dvdneal said:
I tend to think of myself that way, but in this state I'm a flaming liberal. People like you we just shoot or lock up in an insane asylum. No sorry, we just shoot them. An asylum would be a form of welfare.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I'm never setting foot in Kansas (outside of KC) ever.
 
The Terminator said:
Sounds like your a Moderate Republican who wants his party back. If everyone who thought like this united and brought the GOP back down to earth, America would be a much greater place.
Click to expand...

I like to think of myself as a conservative liberal. Or a liberal conservative. I can't decide which is more accurate.
 
RandomPlanner said:
I like to think of myself as a conservative liberal. Or a liberal conservative. I can't decide which is more accurate.
Click to expand...

In an ideal world Id like to think of myself as an Anarcho-Syndicalist. But we dont live in a perfect world now do we, so pro-2nd amendment democratic eco-socialist will do.

Leaving work today I saw some mamaluke holding trump signs on a main road, harrassing passing cars with racial epitets. God save us.
 
Thinking about this earlier in the day:

What if the Repubs split after a Trump nomination and put up another candidate for an "independent" nomination?
What if the Liberal Dems split after a Hillary nomination and put up another candidate (presumably Bernie) for an "independent" nomination?

Could we have a 4-way race that might actually mean something and skew the body politic away from two traditional parties?
 
zman said:
Thinking about this earlier in the day:

What if the Repubs split after a Trump nomination and put up another candidate for an "independent" nomination?
What if the Liberal Dems split after a Hillary nomination and put up another candidate (presumably Bernie) for an "independent" nomination?

Could we have a 4-way race that might actually mean something and skew the body politic away from two traditional parties?
Click to expand...


That is what happened with the election of 1912, but the dems were not quite this split.
 
Valuable Lessons Learned From Rob Ford's "Legacy"?

While the world was focused on Brussels, Toronto's Ex-Mayor Rob Ford quietly died.
(Suprisingly, it really was pretty quiet!)

The New Yorker periodical has come up with one "lesson" (my bolding):
. . . Running for election in 2010, [Rob Ford} had emerged as an improbable but genuine political phenomenon—one that in many ways anticipated a certain Republican politician with whom Americans have become intimately acquainted. Large, brash, and uncouth, Ford engaged in behavior and made utterances that would have sunk a traditional politician, but that appeared to enhance his standing with his core supporters, who called themselves Ford Nation.

<:scissors:details of his "calculated populist" campaign:scissors:>

Emerging from rehab, in 2014, he again framed his battle as an everyman’s struggle, and announced that still intended to run for reëlection. But six weeks before election day he dropped out of the race, diagnosed with the cancer that later killed him. His brother Doug ran in his stead, finishing second to John Tory, a lawyer and businessman who has some of Toronto’s bluest blood. The lesson, for observers of popular movements, might have been that the establishment has a way of winning in the end.
Click to expand...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-calculated-populism-of-rob-ford

To quote the late Peggy Lee's most famous song:
Is That All There Is?
 
Last edited:
Saw a great facebook thing:

Stay home November 8th. That's when Obama is coming to get your guns.
 
It took me a while but I realized the brilliance of one of Trump's proposals: Building a wall along the Mexico-US border and getting Mexico to pay for it.

Obviously Mexico will pay for it. Gladly.

To keep out the flood of illegal American immigrants fleeing the dire economic conditions and social unrest in the United States!
 
otterpop said:
It took me a while but I realized the brilliance of one of Trump's proposals: Building a wall along the Mexico-US border and getting Mexico to pay for it.

Obviously Mexico will pay for it. Gladly.

To keep out the flood of illegal American immigrants fleeing the dire economic conditions and social unrest in the United States!
Click to expand...

The South Park episode where Canada accidentally elects a Trump like Prime Minister is pure gold at this point. Similarly, the Canadians build a wall to keep Americans out. The Prime Minister is almost a perfect caricature of Trump. "We thought he was funny at first. By the time we started to think about who we should seriously elect, it was too late!"
 
In my fair city's newspaper today - 8-! :-o

Satire, Sarcasm, Humor or something else ?

Ted Cruz, the love child of a demonic iguana and that flying dog from "The Neverending Story...
Donald Trump, a sentient piece of bologna lifted from a shower drain, ....

Hillary Clinton, a shell of a human who skips from persona to persona like an old iPod on shuffle,...
Bernie Sanders, the human equivalent of a Birkenstock's Facebook feed,...
Click to expand...
 
Id really love to see Open Carry at the RNC. It would be grotesquely hilarious and prove a point about our crazy gun culture in the US. And Im generally a gun control opponent because (A), but we take it too far. Too bad the Secret Service wont let the crazy R's pack on the convention floor.
 
The Terminator said:
Id really love to see Open Carry at the RNC. It would be grotesquely hilarious and prove a point about our crazy gun culture in the US. And Im generally a gun control opponent because (A), but we take it too far. Too bad the Secret Service wont let the crazy R's pack on the convention floor.
Click to expand...

seriously, just put the candidates behind some bulletproof glass and let the rest thin the herd a bit.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rs-interviews-with-donald-trump-and-ted-cruz/

I never commented on Tuesday about this, but I like this take. I think Trump is so vapid that he doesn't even know when he is beaten. Cooper took control and made him show how uninformed he is on topics. Trump is a sound bite machine, but has no understanding of any policy. That was made abundantly clear by Cooper.

Cruz, who has tremendous knowledge of policy and the system, was made to look stupid because he talks a big game, that he knows he can't back up. He knows his far right policies aren't good for the country and most could never even be implemented, but he pushes on for ideologies sake. He also constantly complains about the media, which is really annoying, when he only goes on Fox News which is clearly a biased organization. Cooper says he asks him to be on his program and Cruz denies the invite. Which is because Cruz doesn't want to be asked questions. Then he complains about the time Trump gets on TV.

Good work Anderson Cooper, you at least are trying to be a journalist.

Kasich by the way is killing it. His reasoning for not being able to support Trump?

"I have two 16-year-old twin daughters. And if he happened to be the nominee, I would have to tell them why I would endorse him if I did," Kasich said.

Great answer.
 
Hink said:
"I have two 16-year-old twin daughters. And if he happened to be the nominee, I would have to tell them why I would endorse him if I did," Kasich said.

Great answer.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why Kasich is still behind Trump/Cruz. He's the most reasonable of the bunch. This is a good comment because he's at least showing he will remain true to his word on endorsing the nominee.
 
AG74683 said:
I don't understand why Kasich is still behind Trump/Cruz. He's the most reasonable of the bunch. This is a good comment because he's at least showing he will remain true to his word on endorsing the nominee.
Click to expand...

I think it is because is his representative of the GOP establishment. Cruz is not and Trump is an idiot. But people will follow an idiot in the absence of a true leader or one with bad associations any day.
 
AG74683 said:
I don't understand why Kasich is still behind Trump/Cruz. He's the most reasonable of the bunch. This is a good comment because he's at least showing he will remain true to his word on endorsing the nominee.
Click to expand...

You said it yourself, he's reasonable. People don't want reasonable, they want walls paid for by Mexico and government surveillance of US citizens as long as it isn't them.
 
Once again the rich get a hand out from the rest of us:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsr...-on-earned-social-security-benefits-gao-finds


“Poverty should not be a death sentence,” Sanders, the ranking member on the Primary Health and Retirement Security Subcommittee, said. “When over half of older workers have no retirement savings, we need to expand, not cut, Social Security so that every American can retire with the benefits they’ve earned and the dignity they deserve.”

"The wealthiest Americans are not only living longer and collecting more in Social Security benefits, they are also contributing less of their income toward Social Security. Almost all of the income gains over the past three decades have gone to those earning above the $118,500 earnings cap and have therefore been exempt from Social Security taxes, costing the Social Security Trust Fund over $1.1 trillion."
 
The Terminator said:
Soooo. How bout these panama papers!
Click to expand...

The most interesting thing is the lack of coverage it is getting in the primary media sources in the U.S.

People aren't shocked by this kind of corruption anymore and pretty-much accept it without hope of having any ability to change it. They don't connect the dots to how this kind of corruption directly affects them personally in any way.

Also, the Panama Papers story is way more boring than the GOP clown car show.
 
Yup....

Suburb Repairman said:
The most interesting thing is the lack of coverage it is getting in the primary media sources in the U.S.

People aren't shocked by this kind of corruption anymore and pretty-much accept it without hope of having any ability to change it. They don't connect the dots to how this kind of corruption directly affects them personally in any way.

Also, the Panama Papers story is way more boring than the GOP clown car show.
Click to expand...

Just about every sophisticated multi-millionaire in the USA will be in those Panama papers. Each of those A-Holes are the same people complaining about their taxes (that they aren't paying).
 
The One said:
Just about every sophisticated multi-millionaire in the USA will be in those Panama papers. Each of those A-Holes are the same people complaining about their taxes (that they aren't paying).
Click to expand...

And this is exactly why increasing taxes on the rich will do nothing. Need to close these tax loopholes first.
 
The One said:
Just about every sophisticated multi-millionaire in the USA will be in those Panama papers.
Click to expand...

Very doubtful - if they're using a (legal) tax "loophole" to move money offshore, there's enough of an industry within the U.S. to do that without having to go through a Panamanian law firm.
 
Yeah

Bubba said:
Very doubtful - if they're using a (legal) tax "loophole" to move money offshore, there's enough of an industry within the U.S. to do that without having to go through a Panamanian law firm.
Click to expand...

So far only 200 from the USA......and Nevada plays a big roll in tax avoidance schemes.
 
;) :-o :lmao:

image.jpg
 
Can we just be done with election season already?

In November, we will elect a new president. If it is one of the current candidates, NOTHING they do will actually make your life better. The rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer, and our tax system will get more complicated and the middle class will continue to pay more. Health care and access to it will continue to get more expensive, the environment will not change, and special interest groups will still run this country with a puppet in the oval. College will not be free, student loans will not get paid off, social security will continue to go bankrupt, and the US will not be any safer if a wall is built or the military grows. Right now, 5 people are making promises that they know they can't keep, coming up with plans that they will not follow through on, and structuring programs that won't actually improve our lives.

Vote for who ever you want because in 4 years when we do this all over again, you will see that it hasn't really mattered.
 
My wife is a bit upset. Her division of the OR (cardiac and vascular) was slow today and the heads of the hospital sent up an abortion for her division to preform.. She expressed her opposition and another nurse offered to fill in. She talked with her supervisor and explained our religious opposition and explained that he is a member of the cardiac team and not the general OR partly because she agrees with the procedures that she was hired to do. Abortions are not one of them. She also explained that she will not participate in one even if it results in her being fired.

She told be about all this after the fact, and I support her 100%. She still has a job right now, and it sounds like her supervisor will do his best to keep her off the cases, but could not guarantee it.

After all, if a pregnant woman is murdered, it is double homicide, but the killing of an unborn child is legal. The killing of unborn children is illegal only when it is convienent and politically helpful for liberal candidates and justices.
 
michaelskis said:
My wife is a bit upset. Her division of the OR (cardiac and vascular) was slow today and the heads of the hospital sent up an abortion for her division to preform.. She expressed her opposition and another nurse offered to fill in. She talked with her supervisor and explained our religious opposition and explained that he is a member of the cardiac team and not the general OR partly because she agrees with the procedures that she was hired to do. Abortions are not one of them. She also explained that she will not participate in one even if it results in her being fired.

She told be about all this after the fact, and I support her 100%. She still has a job right now, and it sounds like her supervisor will do his best to keep her off the cases, but could not guarantee it.

After all, if a pregnant woman is murdered, it is double homicide, but the killing of an unborn child is legal. The killing of unborn children is illegal only when it is convienent and politically helpful for liberal candidates and justices.
Click to expand...

Your wife should not have to be forced to perform or assist with abortions and should not be fired for her unwillingness, after all it's not like she's forcing her view on anyone, just expressing disagreement. No healthcare provider should be forced to percorm them if they do not agree with it, but it should remain legal. That is true individual liberty.

I personally am opposed to Abortion and my spiritually informs that view (however lapsed of a Catholic as I am).

However I will fight to keep it legal, I will stand up for Planned Parenthood, I am unashamed to be Pro Choice because I don't think Legislative Bodies should have the power to legislate bodies.

that's my two cents.
 
The Terminator said:
Your wife should not have to be forced to perform or assist with abortions and should not be fired for her unwillingness, after all it's not like she's forcing her view on anyone, just expressing disagreement. No healthcare provider should be forced to percorm them if they do not agree with it, but it should remain legal. That is true individual liberty.

I personally am opposed to Abortion and my spiritually informs that view (however lapsed of a Catholic as I am).

However I will fight to keep it legal, I will stand up for Planned Parenthood, I am unashamed to be Pro Choice because I don't think Legislative Bodies should have the power to legislate bodies.

that's my two cents.
Click to expand...

I like the Bill Clinton view: safe, legal, and rare...

...and I will now flee this topic.
 
michaelskis said:
My wife is a bit upset. Her division of the OR (cardiac and vascular) was slow today and the heads of the hospital sent up an abortion for her division to preform.. She expressed her opposition and another nurse offered to fill in. She talked with her supervisor and explained our religious opposition and explained that he is a member of the cardiac team and not the general OR partly because she agrees with the procedures that she was hired to do. Abortions are not one of them. She also explained that she will not participate in one even if it results in her being fired.

She told be about all this after the fact, and I support her 100%. She still has a job right now, and it sounds like her supervisor will do his best to keep her off the cases, but could not guarantee it.

After all, if a pregnant woman is murdered, it is double homicide, but the killing of an unborn child is legal. The killing of unborn children is illegal only when it is convienent and politically helpful for liberal candidates and justices.
Click to expand...

So getting into the abortion debate is probably pointless, as I am certainly not going to convince you of why science and fact matter, but here it goes...

I would say that 95% of all people in medicine understand that this isn't murder. I have yet to meet a gynecologist that agrees with the absurd definition of life that some people try to put after conception. They understand why these are performed, and generally support a women's choice. Even though every physician I know hopes and prays that someone doesn't have to make that choice, they support the process and option being available. Be careful to separate your religious beliefs from actual science when it comes to this topic.

I certainly respect her choice, and I hope she doesn't get fired for it, but in medicine, science should always win. Always. We are on a slippery slope when we determine life choices on someones religious beliefs and not on studies or facts. I think my main point to people who are completely anti-abortion is this - if you want to force someone to have a baby then make sure you have a societal safety net that allows them to care for that child and bring it up. The hypocrisy of the far right is that they want every "child" (which I use loosely, as science would not agree that a fetus is a child up to a certain point), but then want to cut social services because people are living off the government. They want to stop welfare. They want to make it harder to raise that baby.

There are people who are in bad situations, who either by mistake, rape, or otherwise, get pregnant. They are unfit or unwilling to be parents. These people deserve to have a choice. If we are unwilling as a country to invest in our social services, and protect these kids once they are born, we are being insanely hypocritical.

I hope and pray that no one ever has to make that choice. I hope and pray that if someone does have to make that choice, that they reconsider and give the baby to a family that is unable to have a baby. I hope and pray all those things. But I also understand that as a man, and a white man at that, I cannot understand the trials and tribulations, nor can I understand that insanely difficult and painful choice that has to be made by some of these women to have an abortion.

Glad we could have this talk.
 
touchy subject, but I'll throw in a couple thoughts anyway. The court ruled on this long ago. We need to stop abusing women and let them have choice. I'm of the opinion that the government should keep it's hands off women's bodies. It's my job to put hands on women.:p

I also recognize the difference between religious beliefs and government regulations. If a doctor doesn't want to do an abortion based on religious belief they shouldn't have to except maybe if some life balance is in question, but there are always a million what if scenarios we can play. I just don't want to see the government tying the doctor's hands saying he can't do it for some reason. At the same time refusing service to gay people because it's against your religion is just discrimination. The difference to me, one is dealing with the 10 commandments, the other is just pulling from other parts to form a belief and ignoring the parts that contradict it.
 
Hink said:
So getting into the abortion debate is probably pointless, as I am certainly not going to convince you of why science and fact matter, but here it goes...

I would say that 95% of all people in medicine understand that this isn't murder. I have yet to meet a gynecologist that agrees with the absurd definition of life that some people try to put after conception. They understand why these are performed, and generally support a women's choice. Even though every physician I know hopes and prays that someone doesn't have to make that choice, they support the process and option being available. Be careful to separate your religious beliefs from actual science when it comes to this topic.
Click to expand...

I am interested in the very last part of your comment... "From Actual Science when it comes to this topic." Can you expand on that? At what point does life become life and is that theory or absolute measurable result that is consistent across the board? Am I wrong with my understanding that when a pregnant woman is murdered, it is classified as double homicide? So on that stance the law classifies it as life. But not when it is the mother's decision? Is there science to explain that double standard?

Hink said:
I certainly respect her choice, and I hope she doesn't get fired for it, but in medicine, science should always win. Always. We are on a slippery slope when we determine life choices on someones religious beliefs and not on studies or facts. I think my main point to people who are completely anti-abortion is this - if you want to force someone to have a baby then make sure you have a societal safety net that allows them to care for that child and bring it up. The hypocrisy of the far right is that they want every "child" (which I use loosely, as science would not agree that a fetus is a child up to a certain point), but then want to cut social services because people are living off the government. They want to stop welfare. They want to make it harder to raise that baby.
Click to expand...
Once again, you reference science. Where is the science? Is it your personal opinion and is the science definitive saying life begins at X? At what point would you say life is life? I agree that there needs to be improved social programs in this country and it needs to be structured differently. If we found a single cell microbe on Mars, would science call that life?

Hink said:
There are people who are in bad situations, who either by mistake, rape, or otherwise, get pregnant. They are unfit or unwilling to be parents. These people deserve to have a choice. If we are unwilling as a country to invest in our social services, and protect these kids once they are born, we are being insanely hypocritical.
Click to expand...
Bad situations happen, I get it. But in most situations, we do things with the understanding of the risks associated with our activities. You drink too much and cause an accident causing injury to another, you deal with the legal system. You drive too fast and cause injury to yourself or another, you deal with the legal system, you light off fireworks and it burns down someone's house or causes damage, you deal with the legal system. Do people deserve a choice in those situations?

Think about the irony of it for a moment. A pregnant woman could be driving to an abortion clinic and be killed in a car accident by someone who accidently runs a red light. He would be charged with the death of 2 people.

Hink said:
I hope and pray that no one ever has to make that choice. I hope and pray that if someone does have to make that choice, that they reconsider and give the baby to a family that is unable to have a baby. I hope and pray all those things. But I also understand that as a man, and a white man at that, I cannot understand the trials and tribulations, nor can I understand that insanely difficult and painful choice that has to be made by some of these women to have an abortion.
Click to expand...
There is no question it is a painful decision and we were presented with this decision once and immediately rejected it. If we had taken that option, our second son would not have been born. We did not know what level of birth defects he would be born with, if we would be born at all. But despite his Autism and developmental delays, is is a phenomenal happy little guy that brings so much joy to everyone that he comes in contact with. I know 2 people who made this decision, one because she got pregnant while she was in law school and it was an inconvenient time for her and her husband, and the other was because she wasn't married and her and her boyfriend were still in college. While I don't respect the decision that they made, I still respect them. One of them (the one who had it in college) has stated that she regrets the decision and would have much rather given the baby up for adoption.

Norma Leah McCorvey, who is better known as Jane Roe, is now pro-life and she never had the abortion. Instead she gave the baby, a girl, up for adoption. So now there is a 46 year old woman out there somewhere, who by your personal position, should not be alive. She might be someone's wife and mother. She might be a school teacher, doctor, or even a planner. If she were standing before you today, ask her what her life is worth. Would she rather her mother gotten the abortion and ended her life before she was born? What about her kids, her husband, or all the people that she comes in contact with everyday. Does their opinion if she should be around or not matter? With abortion, that life never has an opportunity to express that opinion, nor does everyone that they could have come in contact with.
 
michaelskis said:
Once again, you reference science. Where is the science? Is it your personal opinion and is the science definitive saying life begins at X? At what point would you say life is life? I agree that there needs to be improved social programs in this country and it needs to be structured differently. If we found a single cell microbe on Mars, would science call that life?
Click to expand...

Sure a single microbe is life on Mars. It is on earth too. It isn't human life though. If your arguing that life begins at conception I don't disagree. We could argue that is does even before conception. Viable human life doesn't though. That is a very big difference. I could throw lots of examples, but I will leave it with ectopic or tubal pregnancies. If you are not aware of what they are, look them up. They are horrendous, devastating, and lots of other things. But the life argue gets weak when you look at them objectively.

I would also say my twins are both people. How does life start at conception if an egg splits? Can we create people now? ;) I am glad we can, as I like my kids....

michaelskis said:
Bad situations happen, I get it. But in most situations, we do things with the understanding of the risks associated with our activities. You drink too much and cause an accident causing injury to another, you deal with the legal system. You drive too fast and cause injury to yourself or another, you deal with the legal system, you light off fireworks and it burns down someone's house or causes damage, you deal with the legal system. Do people deserve a choice in those situations?
Click to expand...

Yes. If someone could stop a fire after it happened, I would say, I would like them to do so. Especially, if it means that they can live the life they want. It is their life, not mine. We all make choices every day. I don't think lots of people's choices are right. It isn't my place to judge them. It certainly isn't my place to tell them how to live their life or how their future should be lived.

michaelskis said:
Think about the irony of it for a moment. A pregnant woman could be driving to an abortion clinic and be killed in a car accident by someone who accidently runs a red light. He would be charged with the death of 2 people.
Click to expand...

Why is that ironic? If you don't know the women is pregnant, you wouldn't be charged with two murders. If conception had occurred in the last month, you likely wouldn't even know she was pregnant on testing.

michaelskis said:
There is no question it is a painful decision and we were presented with this decision once and immediately rejected it. If we had taken that option, our second son would not have been born. We did not know what level of birth defects he would be born with, if we would be born at all. But despite his Autism and developmental delays, is is a phenomenal happy little guy that brings so much joy to everyone that he comes in contact with. I know 2 people who made this decision, one because she got pregnant while she was in law school and it was an inconvenient time for her and her husband, and the other was because she wasn't married and her and her boyfriend were still in college. While I don't respect the decision that they made, I still respect them. One of them (the one who had it in college) has stated that she regrets the decision and would have much rather given the baby up for adoption.
Click to expand...

I am very happy for you and for anyone else who didn't make that decision. I certainly hope it doesn't come off as me saying that I think they are good, or a welcomed option. What I don't like is people trying to tell others how to live their lives. The same with my bedroom. Get government out of the "religious" decisions. I am glad that libertarians and D's alike are all on the same page, as it continues to reduce the numbers of people who want to have government dictate how you live your life.


michaelskis said:
Norma Leah McCorvey, who is better known as Jane Roe, is now pro-life and she never had the abortion. Instead she gave the baby, a girl, up for adoption. So now there is a 46 year old woman out there somewhere, who by your personal position, should not be alive. She might be someone's wife and mother. She might be a school teacher, doctor, or even a planner. If she were standing before you today, ask her what her life is worth. Would she rather her mother gotten the abortion and ended her life before she was born? What about her kids, her husband, or all the people that she comes in contact with everyday. Does their opinion if she should be around or not matter? With abortion, that life never has an opportunity to express that opinion, nor does everyone that they could have come in contact with.
Click to expand...

I agree, adoption is the best alternative. But that isn't my choice to make. Forcing a women to carry a baby for 9 months, when she may not want it, is not right. Especially those that think she should have to do so after someone forced themselves on her.

My main point is to keep your conviction. Believe everything that you want to be believe. Just don't push those ideas on others, or on the government to regulate them. You, nor I, can ever understand what child birth is like. We cannot understand the pain and suffering of carrying a baby for 9 months. We cannot understand the shame or otherwise, for decisions either voluntarily or involuntarily made to get pregnant. I respect your decisions, and I respect those who make such a tough choice. I would prefer those that have to make the hardest choice of their lives can do it in a safe and professional setting. Not in an non-sterile or unsafe environment. Because in the end, no matter what regulations we have in place it is going to happen, sadly.

Glad we can have an open and reasonable discussion on this topic. It is hellfire to discuss, but I think it is a good topic to be open about.
 
Hink said:
Sure a single microbe is life on Mars. It is on earth too. It isn't human life though. If your arguing that life begins at conception I don't disagree. We could argue that is does even before conception. Viable human life doesn't though. That is a very big difference. I could throw lots of examples, but I will leave it with ectopic or tubal pregnancies. If you are not aware of what they are, look them up. They are horrendous, devastating, and lots of other things. But the life argue gets weak when you look at them objectively.

I would also say my twins are both people. How does life start at conception if an egg splits? Can we create people now? ;) I am glad we can, as I like my kids....
Click to expand...

Viable Human Life... interesting choice of words, however what is the determination of viable? I am sure you are not talking about the necessity for outside intervention such as a respirator, feeding tube, or one of the hundreds of exterior measures that are being used to help babies in the NICU survive while the progress to develop. Can you clarify viable human life for me?


Hink said:
Yes. If someone could stop a fire after it happened, I would say, I would like them to do so. Especially, if it means that they can live the life they want. It is their life, not mine. We all make choices every day. I don't think lots of people's choices are right. It isn't my place to judge them. It certainly isn't my place to tell them how to live their life or how their future should be lived.
Click to expand...

Someone can't stop a car accident after it happened.

Hink said:
Why is that ironic? If you don't know the women is pregnant, you wouldn't be charged with two murders. If conception had occurred in the last month, you likely wouldn't even know she was pregnant on testing.
Click to expand...
Yes, you could be. I personally know of once case where a 22 year old college student was driving drunk, got into an accident, and killed a pregnant woman in another vehicle. The woman was a total stranger to him but he was charged with the death of the mother and the unborn child. It was in Lansing Michigan.


Hink said:
I am very happy for you and for anyone else who didn't make that decision. I certainly hope it doesn't come off as me saying that I think they are good, or a welcomed option. What I don't like is people trying to tell others how to live their lives. The same with my bedroom. Get government out of the "religious" decisions. I am glad that libertarians and D's alike are all on the same page, as it continues to reduce the numbers of people who want to have government dictate how you live your life.
Click to expand...
This is one the cases that I am different from the libertarians because I view life at the point of conception. Killing of a born child is wrong, therefore killing of an unborn child is also wrong.

Hink said:
I agree, adoption is the best alternative. But that isn't my choice to make. Forcing a women to carry a baby for 9 months, when she may not want it, is not right. Especially those that think she should have to do so after someone forced themselves on her.

My main point is to keep your conviction. Believe everything that you want to be believe. Just don't push those ideas on others, or on the government to regulate them. You, nor I, can ever understand what child birth is like. We cannot understand the pain and suffering of carrying a baby for 9 months. We cannot understand the shame or otherwise, for decisions either voluntarily or involuntarily made to get pregnant. I respect your decisions, and I respect those who make such a tough choice. I would prefer those that have to make the hardest choice of their lives can do it in a safe and professional setting. Not in an non-sterile or unsafe environment. Because in the end, no matter what regulations we have in place it is going to happen, sadly.

Glad we can have an open and reasonable discussion on this topic. It is hellfire to discuss, but I think it is a good topic to be open about.
Click to expand...

I like that we can have these conversations without personal attacks (less you are a liberal politician who uses it for political points...) I know my comments are unlikely to get you to change your mind but I believe that through conversation, the worse that can happen is we can agree to disagree on some points and find common ground on other points.
 
michaelskis said:
This is one the cases that I am different from the libertarians because I view life at the point of conception. Killing of a born child is wrong, therefore killing of an unborn child is also wrong.
Click to expand...

What sort of punishment would you suggest in the case of an illegal abortion? Should both the woman and the doctor be charged with murder?
 
WSU MUP Student said:
What sort of punishment would you suggest in the case of an illegal abortion? Should both the woman and the doctor be charged with murder?
Click to expand...

The doctor should absolutely. They are the ones who are doing the actual termination of life.

In terms of punishment, I don't know.
 
Lets end this abortion debate once and for all!

Michael -sorry bro, but obvs less and less people agree with you as the climate on women's rights is changing. However, Lets talk about something we both agree on, the 2nd Amendment! I personally like the Walther PPK because James Bond and its versatility, conceal-ability and that it takes .380 ammo. LOCK N LOAD!!

Hink - I pretty much agree with you, but make sure to use some more strategery when making your arguments.

Neal - Hey if she gets pregnant that means you get to give out cigars!
 
Back
Top