|
Radish posted:It's why publicly they are stressing shutting down clinics is about safety and they are not making it technically illegal. It's both to get around Roe vs Wade but also so that people don't have to think too hard about women having to prove that their miscarriages were natural and not because they aborted their pregnancies intentionally at the threat of jail time or some other monstrous scenario until it's too late and the damage has been done. I've heard the phrase "The Criminalization of Pregnancy" come up in some progressive outlets to try and describe this, but it hasn't really stuck. In trying to forbid abortion in the way they are, they're achieving the same effect of making abortion mandatory.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
Faustian Bargain posted:NPR had some anti-abortion woman on this morning who was trying to frame abortion as the ultimate anti-feminist act. If it was illegal, they couldn't be forced to do it by evil men That was incredible, even more so because of the bizzaro universe she constructed to house her worldview where doctors just want so badly to perform abortions, so we have to make them illegal so that the can't push women into having them. Like abortions are just doctor heroin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
See the problem is that kids aren't following their abstinence only education and they're having babies which are totally blessings from God.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:It doesn't matter how much calling out a president or media does, there will always be the hardliners that watch Fox News or read The Blaze and nod their head in agreement as they do. That's what I mean. Rupert Mudoch's personal empire will always say what they want, democrats will always be seen as having some agenda, but when supposedly neutral news media are still granting nonsense like the Birthers or Trump-esque rants legitimacy by pretending they are to be debated, that gets me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:That's what I mean. Rupert Mudoch's personal empire will always say what they want, democrats will always be seen as having some agenda, but when supposedly neutral news media are still granting nonsense like the Birthers or Trump-esque rants legitimacy by pretending they are to be debated, that gets me. They get to say that poo poo because real people exist who want to consume the product they offer. Real people support Donald loving Trump. Misanthropy is the only emotion I have left.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:That's what I mean. Rupert Mudoch's personal empire will always say what they want, democrats will always be seen as having some agenda, but when supposedly neutral news media are still granting nonsense like the Birthers or Trump-esque rants legitimacy by pretending they are to be debated, that gets me. Obviously sites like Breitbart, Freep etc. have every right to exist under the 1st amendment, and most aren't directly calling for direct threats for people, just veiled dog whistles. Saying Obama was born in Kenya isn't necessarily a threat, just a dumb wrong statement. Hate speech isn't well defined, because technically saying "I want all <minority> dead!" isn't considered hate speech legally, but "I want <minority> who lives at <address> dead" is because it's more pointed. Neutral news site reporters probably hate having to pander to both sides. Well, some of them at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
The only way the Republican Party collapses is if they choose to do so. Since the 70s it seems the party always "dies" and rebounds hard. There is no amount of media attention that will ever break their spell, if anything it will make their base believe in the party line even more. People in general are not likely to switch parties from where their parents were. People in general are very low information, and just know they vote for "the party". How do you even begin to fix that? There would have to be a gigantic shift in the entire nation consciousness to get rid of the GOP and that simply isn't going to happen. This is just another bumpy ride on the freedom train.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Vargatron posted:See the problem is that kids aren't following their abstinence only education and they're having babies which are totally blessings from God. It funny that this is satirical but I know several couples who have unplanned / unwanted pregnancies and their families refused to describe them as anything other than "A blessing from God." I've seen the issue literally tear families apart because the Daughter has to deal with the grief and stress of the pregnancy and all the additional bullshit, and then hear from their family constantly that this is actually "A Good Thing" and they are just being selfish. Some people are hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
CortezFantastic posted:The only way the Republican Party collapses is if they choose to do so. Since the 70s it seems the party always "dies" and rebounds hard. Between 1974 and 2008 Democrats controlled the White House for 12 years. And for 6 of those years, Republicans controlled Congress. If you think at any point the party died, that's on you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
I'd say choosing Donald Trump in full idiot dictator mode is a form of choosing to kill their party. They might rebound but the best case there is the status quo, which is exactly what created trump and two non functioning legislative majorities. The first rebound from Obama was the tea party. Lot of good that did them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:That was incredible, even more so because of the bizzaro universe she constructed to house her worldview where doctors just want so badly to perform abortions, so we have to make them illegal so that the can't push women into having them. To these people, the only possible reason one could have for getting an abortion is that they just hate babies and enjoy killing them. Remember, when the president of NARAL got pregnant not too long ago, pro-lifers were absolutely convinced that she had to be faking it. In their minds, it was an inherent contradiction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Between 1974 and 2008 Democrats controlled the White House for 12 years. And for 6 of those years, Republicans controlled Congress. I don't? That was the entire point. They go through huge scandals and people cry the sky is falling, but they always come back from it. I mean you can push to back to Goldwater and see that. People saying the GOP is done after this election are kidding themselves. The party isn't over unless they themselves decide to tank it, for power or otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
CortezFantastic posted:I don't? That was the entire point. They go through huge scandals and people cry the sky is falling, but they always come back from it. I mean you can push to back to Goldwater and see that. People saying the GOP is done after this election are kidding themselves. The party isn't over unless they themselves decide to tank it, for power or otherwise. Your thesis is "short term predictions are not accurate". This is true. What's not true is extrapolating the failure of short term predictions into a failure of prediction in general. In other words, just because people said something and it didn't happen yet doesn't mean it's not going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
OxySnake posted:It funny that this is satirical but I know several couples who have unplanned / unwanted pregnancies and their families refused to describe them as anything other than "A blessing from God." OTOH, I know a girl who got knocked up in college and the guy was a douchebag loser. She kept it and loves her daughter to death. She made poo poo work. That douchebag loser and his parents tried like hell to get join custody of that girl after she was ~3-4 and super adorable. The nightmare for her wasn't having a kid, it was having to deal with a jackass. As a parent, I feel like it's important to tell people who aren't parents... having kids isn't the end of the goddamn world. The bullshit of abstinence education is a double edged sword, as it convinces droves of people that having kids is horrible and if you have one, your life will be over. Point is, have an abortion if you want one, or don't if you want, who cares? That is the only correct viewpoint.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Between 1974 and 2008 Democrats controlled the White House for 12 years. And for 6 of those years, Republicans controlled Congress. I've been nursing a pet belief that if it wasn't for Watergate the Democratic party wouldn't have made it to the 80's.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:It doesn't matter how much calling out a president or media does, there will always be the hardliners that watch Fox News or read The Blaze and nod their head in agreement as they do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Faustian Bargain posted:growing_ironicat.gif Now now, you're not being fair. Matt Walsh has neither pomp nor publicity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Are there people who believe Iran isn't trying to get nuclear weapons? Watermelon City fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Mar 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I do recognize them as human beings, just very terrible ones. I was talking about the way trump supporters think, not the way you think about them. Clearly trump supporters aren't human
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
I actually had a long conversation with several women about the ethics and morality from the point of a woman and learned a good bit about their perspective. In my mind I think the man should have a say in the decision to abort the baby, with the justification being I would have emotional attachment if I was in that situation. From the perspective of the women I spoke to, that was a little unfair because ultimately they are the ones who have to carry the baby and go through childbirth. I still would like a say in the decision, but ultimately the woman is the one who has the right to have the final decision. I can definitely understand their position.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:I've been nursing a pet belief that if it wasn't for Watergate the Democratic party wouldn't have made it to the 80's. The Democrats in the 70s were acting very similarly to the Republicans today. Their existing base was fracturing and rebelling and all they could do was say how much like [Great President] they were, like they had for the past 30 years (in this case, FDR). The difference is that it's not really that clear who the GOP will pick up. Perhaps, if the US does become minority-majority, they will double down on the white nationalism and create a Party of Whites (GOP) and a Party of non-whites (Dems). Though that will require a very large shift in rhetoric, to the extent that even "liberal" whites will support them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The difference is that it's not really that clear who the GOP will pick up. Perhaps, if the US does become minority-majority, they will double down on the white nationalism and create a Party of Whites (GOP) and a Party of non-whites (Dems). Though that will require a very large shift in rhetoric, to the extent that even "liberal" whites will support them. Short of them replacing their entire caucus with some sort of Eisenhower clone and the Democrats running some guy who promises vote for me = whitey literally to the camps, I can't see myself ever pulling the lever for the GOP. I'd rather beat up on the business suck-ups in my own party and build on the growing minority/white progressive coalition that we have going here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Republicans on TV are saying Trump's comment about punishing women who get abortions is unacceptable. Excuse me but if you outlaw abortion - which the mainstream GOP has been trying to do for years - and a woman gets an abortion, wouldn't that be "illegal" and make her subject to punishment? No, because women are non-human cattle meant for producing more men, and are thus blameless in the act of an abortion. Their feeble minds are easily tricked into it by the abortionists. They are the ones who should be punished for damaging men's property.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Vargatron posted:I actually had a long conversation with several women about the ethics and morality from the point of a woman and learned a good bit about their perspective. In my mind I think the man should have a say in the decision to abort the baby, with the justification being I would have emotional attachment if I was in that situation. From the perspective of the women I spoke to, that was a little unfair because ultimately they are the ones who have to carry the baby and go through childbirth. I still would like a say in the decision, but ultimately the woman is the one who has the right to have the final decision. I can definitely understand their position. A man should have the right to express his feelings on the topic but the decision on keeping the child should alway rests with the mother.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Watermelon City posted:Iran can scare the west with phantom nuclear weapons which don't exist, so why waste money when the same effect is achieved? I'm convinced Iran is basically trolling US and Israeli politicians with pantomime. Pardon my ignorance but isn't that partially what did Iraq in? I mean wasn't there some level of pantomime on Saddam's part because he needed the boogieman of having chemical weapons. I know he didn't and we had no proof that he did but at least to his potential enemies all he had left was his potential weapons of mass destruction? Again, not defending the invasion of Iraq. In the end couldn't he have called the west's bluff and said we don't have anything and inspect wherever you want but wasn't he at least somewhat reluctant to keep his capabilities close to his chest? Even if it was just paranoia?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
The Ape of Naples posted:Pardon my ignorance but isn't that partially what did Iraq in? I mean wasn't there some level of pantomime on Saddam's part because he needed the boogieman of having chemical weapons. I know he didn't and we had no proof that he did but at least to his potential enemies all he had left was his potential weapons of mass destruction? This is not accurate. When Saddam and chemical/illegal weapons he actually went for them, for use against local dissidents and Iran. Once he was trounced by the US all through the 90s, and especially after 9/11, they dropped the whole WMD thing like a hot coal, because they knew it was a death sentence before the international community. They let inspectors in all over the place. Heck, Dubya's 'official' war declaration to the media actually included an aside to tell UN inspectors and personnel to leave the country so bombing could start in earnest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Indiana prosecuting women for killing their unborn children makes it clear what will happen once abortions are again illegal in the US. Pro-lifers, at least the ones that have the power to make decisions, are absolutely ready to start investigating every miscarriage in order to determine if women are aborting their pregnancies illegally and prosecuting them if they feel the miscarriage wasn't on the level. Look forward to more court cases determined by men if a woman who just had the pain of losing her child has to prove that she didn't have it happen intentionally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
No but you see God didn't want that pregnancy to happen... wait what?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
If God wanted that embryo to survive he would have saved it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
As an added bonus of course there will be a few clinics allowed to keep up service so that the affluent people who are behind this still have access while the poor are criminalized for yet another thing in this god forsaken country.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Dexo posted:If God wanted that embryo to survive he would have saved it. You can apply this great logic too so many other things to piss people off who would otherwise believe it: "If God wanted Ronmey/Trump to be President, he would have saved his campaign." "If God wanted that 'religious freedom' bill passed he would have stepped in." "If God wanted the double chicken gordita to stay on the menu forever..."
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Something that really bothers me is when someone who survives a catastrophe says "God was looking down on me", suggesting the people who didn't make it weren't worthy of God's attention. it must make the grieving relatives feel wonderful to hear that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:This is not accurate. When Saddam and chemical/illegal weapons he actually went for them, for use against local dissidents and Iran. Once he was trounced by the US all through the 90s, and especially after 9/11, they dropped the whole WMD thing like a hot coal, because they knew it was a death sentence before the international community. They let inspectors in all over the place. Heck, Dubya's 'official' war declaration to the media actually included an aside to tell UN inspectors and personnel to leave the country so bombing could start in earnest. Fair enough. I misremembered. I thought there was a while at least where he played coy with inspections. And not so much because he still had chemical weapons but because he wanted to keep they mystique that he still had them. He was a fairly paranoid man. In the end I'm not happy anyone has nuclear weapons and I don't want Iran to have them just for the arms race that would happen in the ME. But at least during the 8 year (right) was with Iraq the Ayatollah forbade retaliation with chemical weapons. Now I don't know if that was morality or tactics or politics but in the end I'll give Iran credit for that. I'm also kinda day drunk so I'm a little foggy on the specifics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Man, the RWM sure got their talking points today. Herman Cain, Rush and Hannity were all parroting the same line today regarding figuring out ways to defend Trumps stupid abortion comments. You see, it was a hypothetical question, therefore a "gotcha" question and a trap by the mean old media. I think everyone understood it was a hypothetical question being asked of Trump (Should women who have abortions be punished if abortion were outlawed?) but everything I heard today, as usual, blames the media for Trump's terrifying hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question and is framing the controversy around journalistic dishonesty. I've asked the same question on occasion to pro life people. "What should happen in a punitive sense?" I don't like Chris Matthews much but I think it's a fair question to ask. "What should the punishment be for women or doctors who undertake abortions in the event that it's made illegal?" But every single talk radio host repeated the word "hypothetical" ad nauseam so I'm pretty confident in assuming they all got their directives. edit: Also, shut the gently caress about atheism, God and faith and poo poo unless you can tie it into thread topic and stop deraiing my thread. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/715658511963840513 Walsh is a literal manchild.And what is this crap about NO TRUE CONSERVATIVE(tm) would ever want to punish a woman for having an abortion? Unless I'm mistaken, wasn't there a case recently where some state (Mississippi, I think?) charged a woman with 20 years of jail time for having a late term abortion or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The thing with Trump is that he's saying exactly what a very large number of Republican voters want a candidate to say. He's giving them exactly what they have been wanting but haven't been saying publicly. Now that everybody is seeing just how much spite, rage, and pettiness exist in their platform a great many people are trying to distance themselves from it. Yep. I caught a whiff of this from my boss today who otherwise is a pretty decent guy and I actually like him as a person but - I've posted it before - you can tell he's caught up in the RWM bubble and gets all his information there. He's also "born again" or whatever and very religious. He's one of those dudes who did some time in jail (3 years) and found Christ.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Man, the RWM sure got their talking points today. Always remember that the term "gotcha question" was coined after Palin was asked the softest of softballs ("What newspapers do you read?")
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
I'm hearing the "it was a hypothetical!" argument all over the place now. Like so loving what? Are hypothetical questions asked of presidential candidates unprecedented or something? The local right wing talk show rear end in a top hat here in Seattle (Dori Monson) excused Trump's comment by blaming it on Matthews' sneaky, wily line of questioning. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
I enjoy the Ben Carson flavored "They didn't give him that question in advance". Thankfully the president is issued Ben Franklins crystal ball so he never has to deal with anything he isn't informed about in advance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
Reminder, POSes also believe "My abortion is the only moral one." BS. In the old days the rich/powerful either used medical tourism(or bribe local docs) or had their daughter or wife have a "vacation" for 9 months.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:10
|
|