Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Omnibus Politics Thread: Campaign 2016 EditionFollow

#77 Sep 24 2015 at 3:04 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,355 posts
Why would we leave it up to crickets to create the next generation?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#78 Sep 24 2015 at 6:03 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Gbaji wrote:
Pro-life means that you support the right of the unborn to live
Forgive me if you have already answered this, but would you extend "pro-life" to after the child is born (i.e., till death) as opposed to just in the womb?

I'm not a fan of abortion, but probably for different reasons than most "pro-life" people.
#79 Sep 24 2015 at 8:29 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
Of course not. Every sperm is sacred. But the poor disadvantaged children are nothing but a drain on the world's biggest economy. Vote Republican and one day you too may be born into wealth!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#80 Sep 25 2015 at 1:13 AM Rating: Good
***
1,064 posts
Quote:
Where the **** is Jon Stewart?


He's dead, he's locked in my basement.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#81 Sep 25 2015 at 6:21 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,253 posts
So Jeb ( we can't say Bush; we are working on cleaning it, but the last name still has bad connotations ) went Mitt way and said that he is not running to give away free stuff to black people. I do give him credit for trying to sway NAACP.

In his defense, the phrasing was better than Mitt's. What are the odds of Bush dropping before Trump?



Edited, Sep 25th 2015 8:23am by angrymnk

Edited, Sep 25th 2015 8:23am by angrymnk

Edited, Sep 25th 2015 8:24am by angrymnk
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#82 Sep 25 2015 at 7:21 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
First off, it's Jeb!. Spell Jeb! right or not at all.

Jeb! is still the establishment favorite with a shit ton of money behind him. He's not going anywhere.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#83 Sep 25 2015 at 7:37 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,730 posts
Debalic wrote:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great
If a sperm is wasted
God gets quite irate
Jophiel wrote:
First off, it's Jeb!. Spell Jeb! right or not at all.
I thought it was spelled ¡Jeb!.

Edited, Sep 25th 2015 10:15am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#84 Sep 25 2015 at 8:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
Not specifically about the campaign, but Boehner is stepping down at the end of October. What will we do without our friendly Grinch?

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#85 Sep 25 2015 at 8:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Wow, Boehner must have realized he was never going to pass a PP defund and wasn't going to survive the coup when he failed.

Edit: Looks like he's giving up his House seat, too. That's something.

Edited, Sep 25th 2015 9:27am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#86 Sep 25 2015 at 8:33 AM Rating: Good
******
49,730 posts
I guess Monday we'll find out how this wasn't in any way part of the months of attempts to oust him from his seat.

Trumps numbers are plateauing, which is at least a decent sign.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#87 Sep 25 2015 at 9:13 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,228 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Wow, Boehner must have realized he was never going to pass a PP defund and wasn't going to survive the coup when he failed.

Edit: Looks like he's giving up his House seat, too. That's something.

Edited, Sep 25th 2015 9:27am by Jophiel


So betting time; Mistress, *** lover, or animal ******?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#88 Sep 25 2015 at 9:24 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
Tom Hanks called up to berate him: There's no crying in politics!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#89 Sep 25 2015 at 9:30 AM Rating: Good
***
1,064 posts
Quote:
So betting time; Mistress, *** lover, or animal ******?


I'm going to say mistress, I don't want you guys stealing the limelight away from our pig fucking prime minister.

Ante is one free Zam premium magazine.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#90 Sep 25 2015 at 9:33 AM Rating: Good
******
49,730 posts
Gay mistress duck.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#91 Sep 25 2015 at 9:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Timelordwho wrote:
So betting time; Mistress, *** lover, or animal ******?

Tired of dealing with the fringe elements of his party. Who are becoming increasingly less of a "fringe" and more of the fabric.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#92 Sep 25 2015 at 9:35 AM Rating: Good
***
1,064 posts
That's more the kind of thing I'd expect from Harper, up in Canarda.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#93 Sep 25 2015 at 9:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
So betting time; Mistress, *** lover, or animal ******?

Tired of dealing with the fringe elements of his party. Who are becoming increasingly less of a "fringe" and more of the fabric.



This is my take on it; and part of me wants to feel bad for the guy, but a much meaner part of me thinks he's just reaping the whirlwind.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#94 Sep 25 2015 at 11:33 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,373 posts
Kavekkk wrote:
That's more the kind of thing I'd expect from Harper, up in Canarda.
That ******* is the fringe.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#95 Sep 25 2015 at 3:29 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,567 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Gay mistress duck.
I think that's an Eagles of Death Metal song.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#96 Sep 25 2015 at 8:06 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I'll just wait while you look up a little history and see if any past governments

A) outlawed abortion and then
b) enforced Mandatory state-directed impregnation and birth.


Holding your hand grows tiresome.


I honestly have no clue what point you're trying to make with this. I could randomly guess and try to answer what I think you might be saying, but it might be a lot easier if you'd just clarify things a bit. Can you do that?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#97 Sep 25 2015 at 8:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
Holding your hand grows tiresome.
I honestly have no clue what point you're trying to make with this.

I think Bijou is breaking up with you Smiley: frown
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#98 Sep 25 2015 at 8:41 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
Pro-life means that you support the right of the unborn to live
Forgive me if you have already answered this, but would you extend "pro-life" to after the child is born (i.e., till death) as opposed to just in the womb?


In the context of the abortion issue, no. I mean, if we want to expand the scope of things, we could argue that pro-life means wanting to garden a lot (plants are alive, right?), or refusing to swat a fly, or being a staunch vegan, or any of a number of different things we could say is "pro-life". Heck. I believe there must be alien life elsewhere in the universe beyond our planet, does that mean I'm "pro-life"? Context is a useful tool.

Having said that, it's worth noting that pro-life doesn't mean no one can be killed. A pro-life person will allow abortion if required to safe the life of the mother, for example. The issue is with elective abortion absent any legal requirements other than "I want to". Which is important because we also legally make a distinction between elective killing "because I want to" (ie: murder), and killing by the state as a punishment for crimes after a legally defined judicial process. The pro-life person simply believes that the developing embryo/fetus is a human life and deserving of all the same legal protections that all other human life receives under our legal system. I suppose if that embryo is convicted of a crime under which the sentence is death in our legal system, then that would be legal. Point being that there is no inconsistency to holding a pro-life stance on abortion, while supporting the death penalty for those convicted of sufficiently heinous crimes. The fetus' only "crime" is being an inconvenience to the pregnant woman. That's not remotely a standard we'd apply the death penalty for (outside of some strange dystopian world, that is).

Quote:
I'm not a fan of abortion, but probably for different reasons than most "pro-life" people.


Yeah. Hence my point about the labels. In the context of the abortion issue, each label has a specific meaning. What I find interesting is that over time, while "pro-life" has consistently been about the belief that human life begins at conception (however that's specifically defined) and must be weighed as a full human life for all legal questions (such as elective abortion), the label "pro-choice" originally was about claiming that women had some choice with regard to pregnancy termination decisions as opposed to "no choice" as defined by the pro-life position. But the idea that abortion itself was a right was not part of the pro-choice position 40 years ago. It was about the woman's right to control her own body outweighing any nascent rights an embryo/fetus may have during the early stages of pregnancy. Both sides agreed that it was an issue of conflicting rights, but disagreed over where one right outweighed the other. Increasingly, I've seen people calling themselves pro-choice, but arguing for abortion as a right itself. Which, as I've explained above, is very problematic. It leads people to defend legal loopholes in the name of "protecting women's rights", that allow for violations of what most of us believe with regard to abortion.

I just find it interesting that the same people who are shocked to discover doctors secretly performing very late term elective abortions will still insist that any sort of legislative reporting or investigation of clinics where abortions are performed is a horrific violation of the rights of women. Um... But those are the only tools that will prevent the very abuses we all (presumably) agree shouldn't be happening. So it's almost like a split brain thing. No one believes that a woman should be allowed to just decide to terminate her pregnancy in the 8th month, but some people are so caught up in the "us vs them" mentality of the abortion issue that they will steadfastly oppose any methods to prevent that from happening. I just find that bizarre. Even after the whole Dr. Gosnell thing came out, the "pro-choice" (air quotes in this case) groups still circle the wagons on the issue, and steadfastly insisted that no new legislation or regulation or inspection was needed, and blasted anyone who suggested doing such things as opposing women's rights. So yeah, it's hard to say that they're doing anything other than supporting abortion itself, no matter how horrific the form it takes.




Edited, Sep 25th 2015 7:45pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#99 Sep 26 2015 at 4:53 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Gbaji wrote:
In the context of the abortion issue, no. I mean, if we want to expand the scope of things, we could argue that pro-life means wanting to garden a lot (plants are alive, right?), or refusing to swat a fly, or being a staunch vegan, or any of a number of different things we could say is "pro-life". Heck. I believe there must be alien life elsewhere in the universe beyond our planet, does that mean I'm "pro-life"? Context is a useful tool.
Context is a useful tool. In this case, my question was specifically in reference to humans. Since we don't treat humans the same as plants or animals, there is no slippery slope argument that you can provide to legitimately counter my notion.


Gbaji wrote:
Having said that, it's worth noting that pro-life doesn't mean no one can be killed. A pro-life person will allow abortion if required to safe the life of the mother, for example. The issue is with elective abortion absent any legal requirements other than "I want to". Which is important because we also legally make a distinction between elective killing "because I want to" (ie: murder), and killing by the state as a punishment for crimes after a legally defined judicial process. The pro-life person simply believes that the developing embryo/fetus is a human life and deserving of all the same legal protections that all other human life receives under our legal system. I suppose if that embryo is convicted of a crime under which the sentence is death in our legal system, then that would be legal. Point being that there is no inconsistency to holding a pro-life stance on abortion, while supporting the death penalty for those convicted of sufficiently heinous crimes. The fetus' only "crime" is being an inconvenience to the pregnant woman. That's not remotely a standard we'd apply the death penalty for (outside of some strange dystopian world, that is).
*I'm not* advocating that being "pro-life" beyond the womb means no death for anyone. The scenario in question is that once the mother has the child, all attention and vigor to ensure that child has a good life decimates.


Gbaji wrote:

Yeah. Hence my point about the labels. In the context of the abortion issue, each label has a specific meaning. What I find interesting is that over time, while "pro-life" has consistently been about the belief that human life begins at conception (however that's specifically defined) and must be weighed as a full human life for all legal questions (such as elective abortion), the label "pro-choice" originally was about claiming that women had some choice with regard to pregnancy termination decisions as opposed to "no choice" as defined by the pro-life position. But the idea that abortion itself was a right was not part of the pro-choice position 40 years ago. It was about the woman's right to control her own body outweighing any nascent rights an embryo/fetus may have during the early stages of pregnancy. Both sides agreed that it was an issue of conflicting rights, but disagreed over where one right outweighed the other. Increasingly, I've seen people calling themselves pro-choice, but arguing for abortion as a right itself. Which, as I've explained above, is very problematic. It leads people to defend legal loopholes in the name of "protecting women's rights", that allow for violations of what most of us believe with regard to abortion.
Once abortion has become legal, continuing to fight to limit abortion transitions the fight against the choice of the woman. To make it incredibly difficult for women in Texas to have abortions, but not in California because you are unable to reverse the ruling, is attacking a woman's choice. Granted, attempting to reverse the ruling would equally be seen as an attack on choice, but that's the divisive political world that we live in.


Gbaji wrote:
I just find it interesting that the same people who are shocked to discover doctors secretly performing very late term elective abortions will still insist that any sort of legislative reporting or investigation of clinics where abortions are performed is a horrific violation of the rights of women. Um... But those are the only tools that will prevent the very abuses we all (presumably) agree shouldn't be happening. So it's almost like a split brain thing. No one believes that a woman should be allowed to just decide to terminate her pregnancy in the 8th month, but some people are so caught up in the "us vs them" mentality of the abortion issue that they will steadfastly oppose any methods to prevent that from happening. I just find that bizarre. Even after the whole Dr. Gosnell thing came out, the "pro-choice" (air quotes in this case) groups still circle the wagons on the issue, and steadfastly insisted that no new legislation or regulation or inspection was needed, and blasted anyone who suggested doing such things as opposing women's rights. So yeah, it's hard to say that they're doing anything other than supporting abortion itself, no matter how horrific the form it takes.
Pro-life people are equally stuck in the "us vs them" mentality that they are willing to shutdown the government over distorted videos. To reiterate, I'm not a fan of abortion, but if it's legal, then why close the government over using cell tissue to further science in a positive way when the alternative is simply disposing them?





Edited, Sep 27th 2015 1:01am by Almalieque
#100 Sep 27 2015 at 6:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sounds as though Boehner is planning to run votes on a clean CR, reauthorization of the Ex-Im bank and a highway funding bill, all stuff that had been held up by a faction of the GOP, on Democratic votes. Some mumbling that he might take up the immigration bill that's been languishing for two years but I sort of doubt it. Still, prove me wrong, Boehner.

Also, Alma and Gbaji need to move their coming debate on "pro life" to the PP thread or something.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#101 Sep 27 2015 at 8:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,237 posts
I am bemused by Tea Partiers moaning about how that tricky quisling Boehner is conspiring to make the government continue to function after his departure. I guess whoever said the only form of government they'll accept is a purely punitive one was right.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 89 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (89)