Thread: Laws, laws, laws

  • avatar
    • 3 years 6 months ago
    • Posts: 1982
    Those Planned Parenthood videos were heavily edited.

    You want to push for legislation about medical procedures. Forgive me for conflating thoughts, but speaking to the conservative view... why is that acceptable, but laws making sure the water supply isn't poisoned and houses don't fall on people so onerous?

    Nobody likes abortion. It's not a thing people do for fun. So outlawing abortion is not going to make it disappear. It's going to push poor women into the alley with coathangers and rich women onto planes to South America or Europe. Reminds me of that old adage, when abortions are outlawed, only outlaws will have abortions. But this time, the outlaws aren't wannabe Clint Eastwood/Charles Bronson types.

    It's unfortunate about Gianna Jessen. She asks, where or what were her rights? I don't think she was voting in the womb. I don't think she was asking for ice cream sandwiches or toys. Rights for parasites. When do they start, is it at the moment of attachment? Just because one has rights now doesn't mean they existed since the dawn of time. An egg is not a chicken and a fetus is not a person.

    I want to know about her birth mother. Perhaps she had a plan, and then it became clear that it wasn't going to work out. Is mom mentioned in Gianna's biography at all? Is there proof that her cerebral palsy was caused by the saline abortion attempt? Whatever the situation was, mom must have been rather desperate to do something like that. She was in some kind of dire straits, I would think. That's quite likely. Is there any Christian compassion for her? Or is she forsaken since her attempt at murder?

    I do think 7 months is too late. It's risky, that's obvious. I was born at approximately 31, 32 weeks. Wouldn't it be sad if I was aborted? Well, if my parents were in such a state to consider abortion, my childhood probably would have been pretty bad. I would surely not be the same person today. So maybe not. Now, adoption is a great alternative to abortion. How many kids are up for adoption now and who is going to adopt them? Let's take care of the kids we already have, before worrying about the ones we might.

    Why are not-fully-formed humans more important than actual children? The conservative line is that every fetus should be carried to term. But if the parents can't afford food for the toddler, they are on their own. When the public school doesn't have arts programming or toilet paper, too bad. Go to a charter school. You screwed up? Didn't know what you were getting into when you had kids? (How many parents do not say that?) Tough! Take personal responsibility. Just get a better job or go back to school if you can't afford food or a babysitter. How come that's not the answer when it comes to paying for light bulbs? Potential blinds the conservative to reality. Potential of the fetus, potential of any adult to do any thing. It all rolls back into individualism, except you can't be an individual when it comes to doing something objectionable.

    You know, whatever. This is contentious, we all know that. My question still isn't answered. Why do you bitch and moan about rules and laws and regulations and things being outlawed, but when it's abortion time, it's all aboard the "government needs to tell everybody what to do" train?
    Quote by tangspot2
    Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
    • avatar
      • 3 years 6 months ago
      • Posts: 474
      I know what you're saying. It gets pretty heated out there... the debate over abortion. Like I said before, I've lived the experience of a family member choosing it. I've seen what it does. How it tears apart families and destroys the emotional and mental state of the would be mother. So it's probably the hottest button in my issue list.

      Abortion is a different beast. I feel that it's not the same as debating whether or not people should be allowed to use an engine break in the city limits or allowed to actually choose the size of their drink cup. It's life and death. And we have precedent for that already in our existing laws. You don't murder people.

      As I've stated to you before, I'm a fan of adoption. We tried that route ourselves to no avail. That's the problem there. It's too difficult, time consuming, and expensive, especially when the mother can bail on you even after you've paid all the money, endured all the paperwork and meetings, and invested your heart and mind into the child. We need to pour our efforts and money into adoption services, not abortion services. As you said, there are so many kids that need a home, and even MORE families that want a kid (and in many cases, multiple kids). It makes sense to streamline and improve adoption.

      Quote by stake
      Those Planned Parenthood videos were heavily edited.


      Yes. I would hope so, as I'm sure few people would bother to watch them if they had included them making small talk, stuffing their faces, and making bathroom trips.

      I would recommend you peruse the report (bought and paid for by Planned Parenthood, so I'm SURE it was completely unbiased) that all the lazy media has trumpeted as gospel and proof that these videos are meaningless.

      But in case you don't have the time, I'll break it down for you.

      - Hey, these videos were edited. Probably to cut out unimportant stuff. But yeah, they still can't be trusted 'cause we say so.

      - Looks like these edits were almost all for time and relevance. But again, it's all crap.

      - So a Hollywood director told us these folks used classic Hollywood tricks to make these seem worse, like adding music. Clearly these videos in their entirety are fabrications.

      - They filmed with more than one camera, which naturally means there is nothing to see here.

      Yeah. That report is pretty much self defeating. And yet they still manage to come up with the conclusion that the videos are totally unreliable in every respect. Go figure. I wonder what those results cost Planned Parenthood on the taxpayer's dime?
      signature
      • avatar
        • 3 years 6 months ago
        • Posts: 1982
        Quote by Ghost
        How it tears apart families

        How does it do that? When people think the pregnant woman is making a wrong decision?

        there are so many kids that need a home, and even MORE families that want a kid

        My childhood best friend and his wife were having trouble conceiving. I suggested abortion. He said no, he wants his kid to be his own, and it takes a very special kind of person to be selfless enough to adopt.

        Even before the obstacles you mentioned, I bet this attitude is widespread. "I want a little me." "When a woman becomes pregnant, a channel or line of communication opens up between her ‘heart’ and that of her baby."

        But, eventually they were able to have a baby of their own. Four years later, they're divorced. I asked what happened. He said "this is just the kind of thing that happens when you have kids." So families get torn apart by the results of pregnancy no matter how it goes.

        Personally, I'm glad because now I can visit him and not put up with his wife's two yappy little dogs who never, ever shut the hell up.

        BTW IDK his current politics but I do know he voted for McCain in 2008.

        peruse the report

        That report is from completely the wrong angle. It's trying to disprove, and I really think they should just own up to what was said. Here's what the problem really is with the videos, to me: it's callous. It's crass. It's not "politically correct". It's offensive. You don't like how the lady talked about "baby heads" and whatnot. I totally understand that that seems gross. You should hear how some EMTs and coroners and cops talk about people (who have lived and experienced) that they work with sometimes though. Quite insensitive.

        You're just going to keep saying "it's murder", and I'm just going to keep saying "no it's not". This is a difference of perspective that cannot be resolved. So the solution is if you don't want one, don't have one, and that doesn't mean anything about anyone else. A person has a right to abortion until viability.

        I wonder what those results cost Planned Parenthood on the taxpayer's dime?

        Don't ring that bell, man. Government funding of PP is like 18 cents per taxpayer who makes $50k a year. So, less for me, but I'll still give you two dimes to make up for it, with interest. Just remember, these kind of services prevent greater public cost (welfare etc) further down the line.


        If I may shift the topic back towards the direction of the OP.
        We don't want (too many) laws and taxes suck. OK. I can go along with these concepts. However, clearly society cannot function with none. So aside from the ten commandments, what laws are acceptable? And what is acceptable in terms of taxing and spending?
        Quote by tangspot2
        Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
        • avatar
          • 3 years 6 months ago
          • Posts: 1982
          Quote by NowhereMan1966
          I got toss off because of that. The guy who ran the board claims "he is on a mission from God."


          Quote by NowhereMan1966
          Let me add that overall,back in the day, we needed the Progressive Movement for things like basic food and drug laws, a few sensible environmental regulations, correcting inequality, some labor laws and so on, but over the years, the goal posts kept on moving. Some call it "The Overton Window," especially if your a Glenn Beck listener (I listen to him) or I prefer this term from the Vietnam War, "mission creep." We went from the time of needed reforms and they were needed to being more overbearing.

          "Glenn Beck... LOL" ◄ this is proper debate technique, yes?

          I agree with a lot of what you say especially how people should be left alone if they are not hurting each other.

          Here is the thing, those abuses that were rampant "back in the day" are just itching to come back if the restraints are cut. We've got Nestle and Exxon doing all they can to profit with total disregard for the environment. We have Amazon working people to exhaustion and firing them when they can't take any more, and Uber refusing to recognize as employees the people who make their company work (and Uber drivers refusing service to blind people). Schools get closed in poor neighborhoods but never rich ones. Power hasn't stopped trying to take more. That is what it does. Government should hold it back.

          I certainly don't want a libertine society coupled with over-regulation by government and a weak country as to where we seem to be headed now,

          Not my own words, but I like them: "It’s understandable to hate the government, because it’s easy and satisfying, but the government didn’t foreclose on your house, cut your paycheck or send your job to China. Ranting and raving about the government never helped anyone do anything."

          Yet someone keeps thinking that if we close the door after giving all the Halloween candy to first ten kids that show up, we can trust them to distribute it to all the others.
          Quote by tangspot2
          Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
          • avatar
            • 3 years 6 months ago
            • Posts: 474
            I do agree that government needs to restrain these giant companies that do things dangerous to society and the environment. I think few people would disagree with that. It's when government goes too far and to ludicrous lengths to control and manipulate that I begin to loathe it.

            In regards to the quote:

            No. Government didn't forclose on your house. It just created the bubble that burst your housing market by forcing lenders to give loans to people who clearly could not afford them.

            No. Government didn't cut your paycheck. It just drove the economy into the tank so your job became less valuable, and then passed a healthcare bill that forced companies to lower your hours because they couldn't afford to offer a giant healthcare benefit to you.

            No. Government didn't send your job to China. It just created the tax burden and incentives to make doing so the most profitable and feasible answer.
            signature
            • avatar
              • 3 years 6 months ago
              • Posts: 1982
              Quote by Ghost
              I do agree that government needs to restrain these giant companies that do things dangerous to society and the environment. I think few people would disagree with that.

              And yet they continue to do those things. What can be done about it? Continuing to talk about how no one should hurt others and everyone should take responsibility, and hoping they decide to listen one of these days, doesn't seem like it's going to work.

              No. Government didn't X... It just Y...

              At whose behest? Free trade and housing bubble absolutely benefited certain people or groups of people, who took advantage of lack of regulations, or in some cases took active steps to repeal them (cough Glass-Steagall cough). The bubble caused the crash and none of the people who caused it and reaped those aforementioned benefits were negatively affected.
              Our current system is of course heavily and widely corrupt, which is what allows that to happen. But you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's all about the moneyed interests, who also want less rules.

              Lenders were not forced. They were very happy to do that. They don't care one whit about borrowers, or consequences, because for them, there are none.

              Like payroll, health insurance is sort of a cost of doing business, and if you can't take that, perhaps the model needs some rethinking. The flip side of this is the healthcare industry in this country is one of the most expensive anywhere, and has been relatively unregulated for many years. That's not a coincidence, and the expense didn't start two years ago when the faintest inkling of regulation began. That did put a little hurt on some people (myself included). But it helped many more people, and correction takes time. What political fix has immediate results?


              Why is the economy in the toilet? How? There is more money than ever. The stock market is near record highs, as are corporate profits.
              Quote by tangspot2
              Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
              • avatar
                • 3 years 6 months ago
                • Posts: 474
                Quote by stake

                And yet they continue to do those things. What can be done about it?


                Question with a question: What companies are defying regulations and getting away with it? Why are they getting away with it?


                Lenders were not forced. They were very happy to do that. They don't care one whit about borrowers, or consequences, because for them, there are none.


                Oh I agree they didn't care. At least the large ones didn't. But there was definitely government pressure placed on them to get into sub-prime lending.

                Regulators instructed banks to consider alternatives to traditional credit histories because CRA targeted borrowers often lacked traditional credit histories. The banks were expected to become creative, to consider other indicators of reliability.

                Similarly, banks were expected by regulators to relax income requirements. Day labors and others often lack reportable income. Stated-income was a way of resolving the gap between actual income of borrowers and reported income. The problem, of course, comes when the con-artists and liars come into the game.



                Like payroll, health insurance is sort of a cost of doing business...


                Uh... no. It's not. Small businesses like ours that DO offer health insurance (albeit high deductible insurance with health savings accounts) are an outlier. Oh sure, if you work for a big outfit, you more than likely have it... but if your working in America's backbone... small business, your chances of having employer funded health insurance were, and are still, lower than you might expect.

                Why is the economy in the toilet? How? There is more money than ever. The stock market is near record highs, as are corporate profits.


                I'm no financial expert, so I couldn't give you anything aside from more links to those that are. But I do know that our economy is not nearly as robust as the spinsters would have us think.

                Unemployment is super low! Except...

                Jobs reports are improving every month! Except...

                The stock market is rockin'! Except...
                signature
                • avatar
                  • 3 years 6 months ago
                  • Posts: 1982
                  Quote by Ghost
                  Question with a question: What companies are defying regulations and getting away with it? Why are they getting away with it?

                  I listed a couple of well-known companies earlier. They're not really breaking rules right now. That's why they're getting away with bad practices that "few people would disagree" are bad. They are doing things that there aren't rules about. That's what I'm saying.

                  Oh I agree they didn't care. At least the large ones didn't. But there was definitely government pressure placed on them to get into sub-prime lending.



                  Pressure to help people become homeowners. In which wolves saw opportunities to scam the system. There are many people finding loopholes in laws by which to enrich themselves. There is a difference between "caused" and "allowed". Lack of those laws would not make things any better. They need to be stronger and smarter.

                  but if your working in America's backbone... small business, your chances of having employer funded health insurance were, and are still, lower than you might expect.

                  Alright. So they were low to begin with, and even lower now. I'm not convinced the former is good, even if it might have been slightly better. If I allow that RomneyObamacare is a less than optimal implementation, how do you think people should have access to healthcare? Or should they at all? Is it a right?

                  Thing! Except...

                  Exactly. This is what I am driving at. The rich are richer than ever and their taxes are lower than ever. Where is the job creation? Where is the trickle down?

                  "We need to cut spending," as our infrastructure crumbles. Who is going to fix it?
                  Quote by tangspot2
                  Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
                  • avatar
                    • 3 years 6 months ago
                    • Posts: 474
                    It's occurred to me that we are pretty much keeping this place from collecting more cobwebs right now. LOL. Can't say we aren't doing our part.
                    signature
                    • avatar
                      • 3 years 6 months ago
                      • Posts: 4137
                      This thread has touch some nerves.
                      Forum Staff
                      Super Admin: Vertex
                      Super Mods
                      Search