Random Political News

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: Random Political News

Postby uscbucsfan » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:14 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:
uscbucsfan wrote:You say lots, but name 1 where users add content and they just choose what is deleted or not. I can't think of any. FOX News, ESPN, CNN, etc. all take stories that may or may not be original to them and place it on their platform usually with added opinions.


I’m not saying it has to be user generated.

What are you saying?

Give the examples of the agencies (TV, radio, print) that don't generate their own content but are still considered publishers and not platforms...we can go from there.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4995
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 113 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:16 pm

WARNING! Actual News Source Ahead

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Marine Corps lance corporal who marched with white supremacists and bragged about violence he committed during last year’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, has been thrown out of the service, after serving a month behind bars.

Vasillios Pistolis served 28 days of confinement at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina after being convicted at a court martial for disobeying orders and making false statements, in connection with his role in the deadly Charlottesville rally, in August 2017.

Pistolis had not been arrested by police in Charlottesville.

A report by ProPublica and Frontline PBS highlighted his involvement with the Atomwaffen Division and Traditionalist Worker Party — two of the most militant groups in the neo-Fascist movement.

According to the report, Pistolis had bragged about his involvement in the Charlottesville violence.

“Today cracked three skulls open with virtually no damage to myself,” he wrote on Aug. 12 — the day of the violent rally and counterprotest, in which Heather Heyer was killed.

Photographs taken at the rally depict Pistolis clubbing a counter-protester with a wooden flagpole.

“There is no place for racial hatred or extremism in the Marine Corps,” wrote Maj. Brian Block in a release published by the Jacksonville Daily News in North Carolina. “Bigotry and radical extremism run contrary to our core values.”
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Stuart » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:20 pm

let em all censor. FB and twitter are left leaning playgrounds. I stopped using long ago.

soon they will be one big circle jerk (even more) and they'll be going into the polls saying we have 72% blah, blah........

then they'll lose because their to stupid to fathom a lot of people have stopped using and they underestimated once again.
Stuart
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:10 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby NYBF » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:33 pm

Stuart wrote: FB and twitter are left leaning playgrounds.


:lol: :lol:
Image
Image
User avatar
NYBF
 
Posts: 6109
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:46 am
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 504 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Stuart » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:44 pm

see what I mean...... oblivious.
Stuart
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:10 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby NYBF » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Stuart wrote:see what I mean...... oblivious.


How many left-leaning nazis do you know?

https://www.newsweek.com/white-supremac ... rge-790286
Image
Image
User avatar
NYBF
 
Posts: 6109
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:46 am
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 504 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Stuart » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:15 pm

never met a nazi....

but I'm not talking about nazis or white supremacist, those are fucktards, just as the extreme left are. I'm talking conservative folks that are tired of being labeled a friggin nazi

seriously, most of the people I know lean left. hard left from what I was seeing on FB etc. I like them and we get along fine, but when I see them spouting **** from notmypresident, resist and every other anti-conservative outlet....it makes me not like them.

it's very divisive and i'm over it.
Stuart
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:10 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby uscbucsfan » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:17 pm

Stuart wrote:
it's very divisive and i'm over it.

Sure seems like it.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4995
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 113 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Rocker » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:27 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:But if you take an upper decker dump in my toilet, I'm going to ask you to leave.



Again, hard pass. I feel like I’ve made my position clear on this.
Image
User avatar
Rocker
 
Posts: 3945
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:23 am
Location: Upper deck of the Old Sombrero
Has thanked: 224 times
Been thanked: 215 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby PrimeMinister » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:17 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:WARNING! Actual News Source Ahead

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Marine Corps lance corporal who marched with white supremacists and bragged about violence he committed during last year’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, has been thrown out of the service, after serving a month behind bars.

Vasillios Pistolis served 28 days of confinement at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina after being convicted at a court martial for disobeying orders and making false statements, in connection with his role in the deadly Charlottesville rally, in August 2017.

Pistolis had not been arrested by police in Charlottesville.

A report by ProPublica and Frontline PBS highlighted his involvement with the Atomwaffen Division and Traditionalist Worker Party — two of the most militant groups in the neo-Fascist movement.

According to the report, Pistolis had bragged about his involvement in the Charlottesville violence.

“Today cracked three skulls open with virtually no damage to myself,” he wrote on Aug. 12 — the day of the violent rally and counterprotest, in which Heather Heyer was killed.

Photographs taken at the rally depict Pistolis clubbing a counter-protester with a wooden flagpole.

“There is no place for racial hatred or extremism in the Marine Corps,” wrote Maj. Brian Block in a release published by the Jacksonville Daily News in North Carolina. “Bigotry and radical extremism run contrary to our core values.”


Good on the USMC.
PrimeMinister
 
Posts: 8597
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:34 am
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby MJW » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:42 pm

Q: Is wanting to protect/overturn Roe Vs Wade the only parameter for determing if someone is "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life?" For example, if you found abortion odious, distributed anti-abortion, pro-adoption literature and disseminated such information, prayed for the end of abortion in society, held vigil outside Planned Parenthood, wanted to see all federal funding for abortion eliminated, wanted to end all employer and insurance involvement in paying for abortion...BUT didn't think it was the government's place to make it illegal - would that last part be all that matters?
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8842
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 385 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Alpha » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:49 am

LMAO!

No wonder Ohio is a shit-hole.

Those ****ing nit-wits can't figure out that the Drumphster is ****ing them in the ass...yet smiling while he does it.

You get the leader you deserve.


God bless 'Murica!!11!!!
Alpha
 
Posts: 4008
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:51 am
Location: St. Pete
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby beardmcdoug » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:47 am

MJW wrote:Q: Is wanting to protect/overturn Roe Vs Wade the only parameter for determing if someone is "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life?" For example, if you found abortion odious, distributed anti-abortion, pro-adoption literature and disseminated such information, prayed for the end of abortion in society, held vigil outside Planned Parenthood, wanted to see all federal funding for abortion eliminated, wanted to end all employer and insurance involvement in paying for abortion...BUT didn't think it was the government's place to make it illegal - would that last part be all that matters?


No, of course not. Opinions are nuanced and this is a very complex subject. Don’t get me wrong, if you look at society, and the state of modern discourse, this is not the answer any one would expect just taking a gauge of things. But I’ll be damned if we let the ****ing dimwits in this country make us forget that this is indeed the actual answer


It’s funny, for me, I never gave much thought to the issue and just sort of casually supported the right to abortion because it was the progressive opinion to have. I’m older now, and I’m a father, and I understand the biological aspect of fetal development more than I ever have in my life, and this has made me very against abortion. At the same time though, at this point in my life, I have also realized the necessity for its legality (with certain restrictions- for instance I don’t think you should be able to be a perfectly healthy 8-9 month pregnant woman, with a perfectly healthy baby, and you just finally get around to thinking “oh **** I don’t think I want this” and go in for an abortion. I mean if you actually put the rubber to the road and learn what goes down during an abortion, that’s a hard one to square away).

People have a hard time confronting the fact that sometimes complex issues require complex opinions. People want black and white. But **** those people. We can’t let the conversation be controlled by their lack of nuance
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 3147
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 250 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:41 am

Missouri rejects "Right to work" law 67.5% to 32.5%.

President Trump carried Missouri by 18 points in 2016.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Buc2 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:42 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:Missouri rejects "Right to work" law 67.5% to 32.5%.

President Trump carried Missouri by 18 points in 2016.

So?
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 11540
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 952 times
Been thanked: 400 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:49 am

Buc2 wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:Missouri rejects "Right to work" law 67.5% to 32.5%.

President Trump carried Missouri by 18 points in 2016.

So?

Just pointing out Missouri's redness. I wouldn't have even mentioned this if it were Connecticut.

You're pretty sexy when you're defensive though.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Buc2 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:02 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Buc2 wrote:So?

Just pointing out Missouri's redness. I wouldn't have even mentioned this if it were Connecticut.

You're pretty sexy when you're defensive though.

Thanks. :oops:
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 11540
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 952 times
Been thanked: 400 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:49 am

beardmcdoug wrote:
MJW wrote:Q: Is wanting to protect/overturn Roe Vs Wade the only parameter for determing if someone is "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life?" For example, if you found abortion odious, distributed anti-abortion, pro-adoption literature and disseminated such information, prayed for the end of abortion in society, held vigil outside Planned Parenthood, wanted to see all federal funding for abortion eliminated, wanted to end all employer and insurance involvement in paying for abortion...BUT didn't think it was the government's place to make it illegal - would that last part be all that matters?


No, of course not. Opinions are nuanced and this is a very complex subject. Don’t get me wrong, if you look at society, and the state of modern discourse, this is not the answer any one would expect just taking a gauge of things. But I’ll be damned if we let the ****ing dimwits in this country make us forget that this is indeed the actual answer


It’s funny, for me, I never gave much thought to the issue and just sort of casually supported the right to abortion because it was the progressive opinion to have. I’m older now, and I’m a father, and I understand the biological aspect of fetal development more than I ever have in my life, and this has made me very against abortion. At the same time though, at this point in my life, I have also realized the necessity for its legality (with certain restrictions- for instance I don’t think you should be able to be a perfectly healthy 8-9 month pregnant woman, with a perfectly healthy baby, and you just finally get around to thinking “oh **** I don’t think I want this” and go in for an abortion. I mean if you actually put the rubber to the road and learn what goes down during an abortion, that’s a hard one to square away).

People have a hard time confronting the fact that sometimes complex issues require complex opinions. People want black and white. But **** those people. We can’t let the conversation be controlled by their lack of nuance


People try to make a complex issue like abortion into a binary choice that flooded with talking points and euphemisms. But the unborn deserve a voice and to me it's just a moral issue.

The fact is that America has the most liberal abortion laws in the world. Even the progressive Nordic and Scandinavian countries people love to champion have more restrictions on legalized abortion than we do in the US. So for me I'd prefer to keep the practice legal in all 50 states, but have a good faith debate on restrictions.

Like you said, healthy mothers deciding to kill healthy babies just doesn't sit right with me. I have difficulty understanding how people defend that position other than the natural feeling/fear around most issues that become politcal where ceding ANY ground is deemed a failure that will only motivate the opposition to move the line further (think Gun Control).

There are many situations where I support abortion (rape, incest, physical health of the baby or mother, mental health of the baby, etc). These are obviously very personal and difficult situations where I wouldn't advocate for the government controlling the decision.

At the end of the day abortion should not be birth control is the position I hold and thus would like to see RvW remain the law of the land with some additional restrictions so the practice isn't abused by irresponsible people and that our laws are more in line with other 1st world nations.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 541 times
Been thanked: 570 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:34 am

A little left wing drivel from the ultra pinko Salt Lake Tribune

George Pyle: Anything that isn’t welfare for the rich is now ‘socialism’


It is amazing to some folks, Republican and Democrat, that anyone would stand up and call themselves a socialist and, even more astounding, that they would win elections. Sanders notwithstanding, it is kind of a generational thing. Most older folks identify the word with things like the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which actually was about as socialist as the Spanish Inquisition was Christian.

Didn’t expect that, did you?

A younger generation is more likely to associate the term with, well, the civilized world. The United Kingdom, France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, etc., etc. Nations where the democratically elected government serves its constituents by setting tax rates high and putting the money toward a wide range of public services, everything from clean and efficient public transit to extended paid maternity leave to universal health care provided through one or another pipeline.

If socialism sounds radical — pleasantly or not — it is because the U.S. is so much like a Third World kleptocracy where all is set to transferring income from the bottom to the top that anything that isn’t welfare for the rich has that label attached to it.


:soapbox:
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Babeinbucland » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:59 am

DreadNaught wrote:
beardmcdoug wrote:
No, of course not. Opinions are nuanced and this is a very complex subject. Don’t get me wrong, if you look at society, and the state of modern discourse, this is not the answer any one would expect just taking a gauge of things. But I’ll be damned if we let the ****ing dimwits in this country make us forget that this is indeed the actual answer


It’s funny, for me, I never gave much thought to the issue and just sort of casually supported the right to abortion because it was the progressive opinion to have. I’m older now, and I’m a father, and I understand the biological aspect of fetal development more than I ever have in my life, and this has made me very against abortion. At the same time though, at this point in my life, I have also realized the necessity for its legality (with certain restrictions- for instance I don’t think you should be able to be a perfectly healthy 8-9 month pregnant woman, with a perfectly healthy baby, and you just finally get around to thinking “oh **** I don’t think I want this” and go in for an abortion. I mean if you actually put the rubber to the road and learn what goes down during an abortion, that’s a hard one to square away).

People have a hard time confronting the fact that sometimes complex issues require complex opinions. People want black and white. But **** those people. We can’t let the conversation be controlled by their lack of nuance


People try to make a complex issue like abortion into a binary choice that flooded with talking points and euphemisms. But the unborn deserve a voice and to me it's just a moral issue.

The fact is that America has the most liberal abortion laws in the world. Even the progressive Nordic and Scandinavian countries people love to champion have more restrictions on legalized abortion than we do in the US. So for me I'd prefer to keep the practice legal in all 50 states, but have a good faith debate on restrictions.

Like you said, healthy mothers deciding to kill healthy babies just doesn't sit right with me. I have difficulty understanding how people defend that position other than the natural feeling/fear around most issues that become politcal where ceding ANY ground is deemed a failure that will only motivate the opposition to move the line further (think Gun Control).

There are many situations where I support abortion (rape, incest, physical health of the baby or mother, mental health of the baby, etc). These are obviously very personal and difficult situations where I wouldn't advocate for the government controlling the decision.

At the end of the day abortion should not be birth control is the position I hold and thus would like to see RvW remain the law of the land with some additional restrictions so the practice isn't abused by irresponsible people and that our laws are more in line with other 1st world nations.


There is no where in this country that abortion is legal at eight or nine months :roll:
User avatar
Babeinbucland
 
Posts: 4695
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 9:24 pm
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Swashy » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:00 pm

MJW wrote:Q: Is wanting to protect/overturn Roe Vs Wade the only parameter for determing if someone is "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life?" For example, if you found abortion odious, distributed anti-abortion, pro-adoption literature and disseminated such information, prayed for the end of abortion in society, held vigil outside Planned Parenthood, wanted to see all federal funding for abortion eliminated, wanted to end all employer and insurance involvement in paying for abortion...BUT didn't think it was the government's place to make it illegal - would that last part be all that matters?


I'm for leaving it alone because more legislation repealing it, modifying it or making it iron clad to survive eternity isn't going to fix anything. Overturn it and all we're gonna get is little girls who neither sufficiently understand the science of the human life cycle and/or don't care abortion is illegal poking themselves with coat hangers again because they are not thinking clearly about what they are doing. As for the case of my friend's now deceased girlfriend/would've been fiance, you cannot put a ban on medically necessary terminations of pregnancy either because hers was an ectopic pregnancy and she didn't even know and just thought she was dealing with nasty abdominal pain. Because of things like congenital conditions of the mother, ectopic, molar pregnancies you're going to have a need for specific cases where it's now about protecting the life of the mother.

Want to fix the abortion issue? Really, REALLY fix abortion? Empower women against the unwanted sexual advances of men and find ways to help prevent high risk individuals from becoming victims of things like rape and incest. Our youth need to be better taught the benefits of birth control and abstinence and that it's okay to give up your child for adoption if you are unfit to be a parent because if you find the proper channels; that you can find a good family for your baby. I want to be neither pro choice or pro life, I want to be aggressive in amending unsafe sexual practices. Gun to my head I'm pro life because I think no matter what stage of the life cycle it's in, you are terminating a human being. But my personal beliefs don't speak for a gender that I am not a part of. Because of that, I'm for teaching America to keep its clothes on to neutralize the issue. If you change American culture enough, unwanted pregnancies will drop, adoptions will increase and we can shape a generation into using it as a last resort. People can be taught, values can be realized and achieved and things can change.

This is exactly like the gun issue. Stop relying on laws that affect millions upon millions of people because we are too lazy to sit down and help people and thereby address the issue at the source.
Swashy
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 12:11 pm
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 108 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:12 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:A little left wing drivel from the ultra pinko Salt Lake Tribune

George Pyle: Anything that isn’t welfare for the rich is now ‘socialism’


It is amazing to some folks, Republican and Democrat, that anyone would stand up and call themselves a socialist and, even more astounding, that they would win elections. Sanders notwithstanding, it is kind of a generational thing. Most older folks identify the word with things like the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which actually was about as socialist as the Spanish Inquisition was Christian.

Didn’t expect that, did you?

A younger generation is more likely to associate the term with, well, the civilized world. The United Kingdom, France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, etc., etc. Nations where the democratically elected government serves its constituents by setting tax rates high and putting the money toward a wide range of public services, everything from clean and efficient public transit to extended paid maternity leave to universal health care provided through one or another pipeline.

If socialism sounds radical — pleasantly or not — it is because the U.S. is so much like a Third World kleptocracy where all is set to transferring income from the bottom to the top that anything that isn’t welfare for the rich has that label attached to it.


:soapbox:


That is some nice high level drivel. But what role does Capitalism and free enterprise play in however we're describing 'Socialism'?

A big issue is nobody can agree how we are defining Socialism these days and I'm not sure that isn't intentional b/c it's easy (and lazy imo) to defend high-level platitudes like "putting the money toward a wide range of public services, everything from clean and efficient public transit to extended paid maternity leave to universal health care" until you have to answer how with specifics and what effects those have on the current system. Mainly how that would change our current free market system and who is paying for what and by how much.

Healthcare for all is a great idea. But if my tax rate is going to double in addition to increased sales tax when I buy stuff in order to subsidize it then no thank you. Not to mention the quality of healthcare would inevitably decrease as it does IN EVERY instance of socialized medicine. So "healthcare for all" is nice platitude until you realize your paying way more via taxes for shittier healthcare in order to subsidize the cost for people that decided not to finish HS and are too lazy to improve their situation. Perhaps we can find an alternative solution that makes healthcare more affordable (maybe through idk... competition) without putting bureaucrats and lobbyists in charge of it.

I like the idea of good life choices and hard work allowing people the OPPORTUNITY for upward economic mobility that is afforded under Capitalism. You start chipping away at that and expanding government control in everyone's life (including those that don't want or need it) and you start taking away individual liberties and letting the government decide what an individuals ability and worth is (to paraphrase Marx). Socialism (regardless of how it's defined) seems antithetical to the ideals I love about America and why others around the world want to live here.

Competition is a great ideal, it drives innovation and wealth the world has never seen before. I'm not against the increase in public services/social programs, but I can never advocate for a system that would impede on what has been BY FAR has been the most prosperous economic model in the history of humanity just so we try to do Socialism right the next time (which would be the first time).
Last edited by DreadNaught on Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 541 times
Been thanked: 570 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:25 pm

Hi, I'm with the government and I'm here to help you
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby bucfanclw » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:31 pm

DreadNaught wrote:People try to make a complex issue like abortion into a binary choice that flooded with talking points and euphemisms. But the unborn deserve a voice and to me it's just a moral issue.

The fact is that America has the most liberal abortion laws in the world. Even the progressive Nordic and Scandinavian countries people love to champion have more restrictions on legalized abortion than we do in the US. So for me I'd prefer to keep the practice legal in all 50 states, but have a good faith debate on restrictions.

Like you said, healthy mothers deciding to kill healthy babies just doesn't sit right with me. I have difficulty understanding how people defend that position other than the natural feeling/fear around most issues that become politcal where ceding ANY ground is deemed a failure that will only motivate the opposition to move the line further (think Gun Control).

There are many situations where I support abortion (rape, incest, physical health of the baby or mother, mental health of the baby, etc). These are obviously very personal and difficult situations where I wouldn't advocate for the government controlling the decision.

At the end of the day abortion should not be birth control is the position I hold and thus would like to see RvW remain the law of the land with some additional restrictions so the practice isn't abused by irresponsible people and that our laws are more in line with other 1st world nations.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on abortion as well.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 3856
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 162 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:39 pm

Babeinbucland wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
People try to make a complex issue like abortion into a binary choice that flooded with talking points and euphemisms. But the unborn deserve a voice and to me it's just a moral issue.

The fact is that America has the most liberal abortion laws in the world. Even the progressive Nordic and Scandinavian countries people love to champion have more restrictions on legalized abortion than we do in the US. So for me I'd prefer to keep the practice legal in all 50 states, but have a good faith debate on restrictions.

Like you said, healthy mothers deciding to kill healthy babies just doesn't sit right with me. I have difficulty understanding how people defend that position other than the natural feeling/fear around most issues that become politcal where ceding ANY ground is deemed a failure that will only motivate the opposition to move the line further (think Gun Control).

There are many situations where I support abortion (rape, incest, physical health of the baby or mother, mental health of the baby, etc). These are obviously very personal and difficult situations where I wouldn't advocate for the government controlling the decision.

At the end of the day abortion should not be birth control is the position I hold and thus would like to see RvW remain the law of the land with some additional restrictions so the practice isn't abused by irresponsible people and that our laws are more in line with other 1st world nations.


There is no where in this country that abortion is legal at eight or nine months :roll:


That statement is false. Later term abortion laws vary from state to state with unique language but it mainly focuses on the 'health of the mother' as legal justification and a second physician must attend or atleast approve of it.

But to what I believe was your intended point, it is much more difficult to have a legal abortion once you reach the 20-24 week (post-fertilization with a normal pregnancy being 38 weeks post-fertilization or 40 weeks from last menstrual period) mark, I'd agree. I'm certainly not against abortion under those circumstances regardless of the stage. It's a terrible situation for a mother/family to deal when health concerns are involved and I sure as **** don't want the gubmit making that call in an individuals life under those life & death health related circumstances.

As medical science continues to improve the viability of a fetus outside the womb will continue to move to earlier stages. There are stories where babies are surviving going onto live normal healthy lives that are born at 24-25 weeks. We know babies feel pain at around 20 weeks. Many countries have restrictions around 12-15 weeks whereas most the US states expand that out to 20-24.

I agree with Swashy that education is important, access to birth control as well. For me the debate is around healthy mothers making the decision to kill healthy babies and restrictions that would further protect the otherwise healthy unborn. We as a society don't permit mothers to kill their babies post birth, nor do we permit the killing of people in a coma. So where is the line drawn when mitigating issues (rape, incest, health) don't apply?

Maybe one day decades from now we'll reach the "utopia" where people are all sterilized and if you want to have a baby you'd have to apply for one and the gubmit will issue you one. Or maybe grow one in some type of artificial environment if you have enough money.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 541 times
Been thanked: 570 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby uscbucsfan » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:56 pm

I guess my perspective on this is that most who "care about unborn children" don't really care about living people or children or the conditions they live in. It doesn't make much sense. It's not affecting your life, why selectively push your morals on others in these situations and not others? I don't think the government should offer any assistance or help to get accomplish it in any facet, because it is against so many people's morals, but I don't think it should be illegal. I wouldn't do it myself unless it was an issue of health of the mother or child (including disabilities of the child), rape, or other extreme circumstances, but I'm not against others doing it. Sure, I think less of those that use it as a form of birth control (I know a girl who has had 5 abortions), but I'm sure she doesn't care about my opinion of her and it's not keeping me up at night.

I was going to word smith this to be less callous and more elegant, but we are talking about killing babies here.

edit: And to those saying, "It's not life until _____". You are full of **** and deep down you know it.
Last edited by uscbucsfan on Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4995
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 113 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:57 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:A little left wing drivel from the ultra pinko Salt Lake Tribune

George Pyle: Anything that isn’t welfare for the rich is now ‘socialism’



:soapbox:


That is some nice high level drivel. But what role does Capitalism and free enterprise play in however we're describing 'Socialism'?

A big issue is nobody can agree how we are defining Socialism these days and I'm not sure that isn't intentional b/c it's easy (and lazy imo) to defend high-level platitudes like "putting the money toward a wide range of public services, everything from clean and efficient public transit to extended paid maternity leave to universal health care" until you have to answer how with specifics and what effects those have on the current system. Mainly how that would change our current free market system and who is paying for what and by how much.

Healthcare for all is a great idea. But if my tax rate is going to double in addition to increased sales tax when I buy stuff in order to subsidize it then no thank you. Not to mention the quality of healthcare would inevitably decrease as it does IN EVERY instance of socialized medicine. So "healthcare for all" is nice platitude until you realize your paying way more via taxes for shittier healthcare in order to subsidize the cost for people that decided not to finish HS and are too lazy to improve their situation. Perhaps we can find an alternative solution that makes healthcare more affordable (maybe through idk... competition) without putting bureaucrats and lobbyists in charge of it.

I like the idea of good life choices and hard work allowing people the OPPORTUNITY for upward economic mobility that is afforded under Capitalism. You start chipping away at that and expanding government control in everyone's life (including those that don't want or need it) and you start taking away individual liberties and letting the government decide what an individuals ability and worth is (to paraphrase Marx). Socialism (regardless of how it's defined) seems antithetical to the ideals I love about America and why others around the world want to live here.

Competition is a great ideal, it drives innovation and wealth the world has never seen before. I'm not against the increase in public services/social programs, but I can never advocate for a system that would impede on what has been BY FAR has been the most prosperous economic model in the history of humanity just so we try to do Socialism right the next time (which would be the first time).

Outside of competition and innovation and wealth which you just described, what are the other ideals about America that you love and serve as the justification of why others around the world want to live here?

You say "socialism" is antithetical to these things, but perhaps the discussion would be better served if we clarify what those things are.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby NYBF » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:08 pm

Stuart wrote:let em all censor. FB and twitter are left leaning playgrounds.


Left leaning twitter allows jackass who urges his followers to harass grieving parents of kids who were killed to the point where they're unable to visit their child's graves to keep on tweeting: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45107687
Image
Image
User avatar
NYBF
 
Posts: 6109
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:46 am
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 504 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby uscbucsfan » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:09 pm

NYBF wrote:
Stuart wrote:let em all censor. FB and twitter are left leaning playgrounds.


Left leaning twitter allows jackass who urges his followers to harass grieving parents of kids who were killed to the point where they're unable to visit their child's graves to keep on tweeting: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45107687

Good.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4995
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 113 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Random Political News

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:15 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
That is some nice high level drivel. But what role does Capitalism and free enterprise play in however we're describing 'Socialism'?

A big issue is nobody can agree how we are defining Socialism these days and I'm not sure that isn't intentional b/c it's easy (and lazy imo) to defend high-level platitudes like "putting the money toward a wide range of public services, everything from clean and efficient public transit to extended paid maternity leave to universal health care" until you have to answer how with specifics and what effects those have on the current system. Mainly how that would change our current free market system and who is paying for what and by how much.

Healthcare for all is a great idea. But if my tax rate is going to double in addition to increased sales tax when I buy stuff in order to subsidize it then no thank you. Not to mention the quality of healthcare would inevitably decrease as it does IN EVERY instance of socialized medicine. So "healthcare for all" is nice platitude until you realize your paying way more via taxes for shittier healthcare in order to subsidize the cost for people that decided not to finish HS and are too lazy to improve their situation. Perhaps we can find an alternative solution that makes healthcare more affordable (maybe through idk... competition) without putting bureaucrats and lobbyists in charge of it.

I like the idea of good life choices and hard work allowing people the OPPORTUNITY for upward economic mobility that is afforded under Capitalism. You start chipping away at that and expanding government control in everyone's life (including those that don't want or need it) and you start taking away individual liberties and letting the government decide what an individuals ability and worth is (to paraphrase Marx). Socialism (regardless of how it's defined) seems antithetical to the ideals I love about America and why others around the world want to live here.

Competition is a great ideal, it drives innovation and wealth the world has never seen before. I'm not against the increase in public services/social programs, but I can never advocate for a system that would impede on what has been BY FAR has been the most prosperous economic model in the history of humanity just so we try to do Socialism right the next time (which would be the first time).

Outside of competition and innovation and wealth which you just described, what are the other ideals about America that you love and serve as the justification of why others around the world want to live here?

You say "socialism" is antithetical to these things, but perhaps the discussion would be better served if we clarify what those things are.


Opportunity, individual liberty, individual self-determination. These are ideals that are not synonymous with Socialism past or present.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 541 times
Been thanked: 570 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Brazen331 and 12 guests