Donald Trump
Comments
-
The deal he made with the christians was to pack the supreme court with nakedly political judges who will overturn Roe v Wade, it looks to have worked. If it happens, I don't see how he doesn't get voted back in, in triumph!
If I were gay and wanting to marry my partner I'd be on it quick sharp...We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
I don't think it's that inexplicable.First.Aspect said:Some of his base will, inexplicably, be women.
And some of his base might be men who own one or more women. And some of those women might be pregnant and might want not to be (or at least their republican owners might not want that).
Wonder how that's going to play out....
It's the only explicitly Conservative option that Americans have.
I can see male or female, that if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion would be an awful sin.
0 -
Yup - if you are a strict Conservative its the only option.
they will ignore all the stuff he has done and they know he will do to get their beliefs into law.
they give ne'er ashit about anyone rlse, just their own echo chamber..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Should keep their nose out of other people’s business.Jezyboy said:
I don't think it's that inexplicable.First.Aspect said:Some of his base will, inexplicably, be women.
And some of his base might be men who own one or more women. And some of those women might be pregnant and might want not to be (or at least their republican owners might not want that).
Wonder how that's going to play out....
It's the only explicitly Conservative option that Americans have.
I can see male or female, that if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion would be an awful sin.
They’re all libertarians until it’s a woman’s uterus, eh?0 -
Have the US Supreme Court ever ruled on vasectomy?rick_chasey said:
Should keep their nose out of other people’s business.Jezyboy said:
I don't think it's that inexplicable.First.Aspect said:Some of his base will, inexplicably, be women.
And some of his base might be men who own one or more women. And some of those women might be pregnant and might want not to be (or at least their republican owners might not want that).
Wonder how that's going to play out....
It's the only explicitly Conservative option that Americans have.
I can see male or female, that if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion would be an awful sin.
They’re all libertarians until it’s a woman’s uterus, eh?
Or wanking into a sock?
Pretty sure that the founding fathers w@nked.
Edit: forgot that this forum uses a Mormon filter and wanking is okay.0 -
There are very countries in the world that don't have any restriction on women's uteri. Wikipedia tells me Canada, some US states, China and North Korea.rick_chasey said:
Should keep their nose out of other people’s business.Jezyboy said:
I don't think it's that inexplicable.First.Aspect said:Some of his base will, inexplicably, be women.
And some of his base might be men who own one or more women. And some of those women might be pregnant and might want not to be (or at least their republican owners might not want that).
Wonder how that's going to play out....
It's the only explicitly Conservative option that Americans have.
I can see male or female, that if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion would be an awful sin.
They’re all libertarians until it’s a woman’s uterus, eh?0 -
-
Whatabout ... I think. Hard to tell.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
0 -
You said "Should keep their nose out of other people’s business" from which I inferred the state should not have any controls over abortion. This is a position adopted by very few countries. Furthermore, I imagine most of those have laws on prostitution, which is also the state interfering with other people's bodies. Basically, I find the argument a bit tedious unless someone actually does want to allow full term abortions, prostitution, kidney sales etc.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
0 -
Prostitution is legal in quite a few American States..
The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
So what arguments on the topic do you not find tedious?TheBigBean said:
You said "Should keep their nose out of other people’s business" from which I inferred the state should not have any controls over abortion. This is a position adopted by very few countries. Furthermore, I imagine most of those have laws on prostitution, which is also the state interfering with other people's bodies. Basically, I find the argument a bit tedious unless someone actually does want to allow full term abortions, prostitution, kidney sales etc.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
0 -
TheBigBean said:
There are very countries in the world that don't have any restriction on women's uteri. Wikipedia tells me Canada, some US states, China and North Korea.rick_chasey said:
Should keep their nose out of other people’s business.Jezyboy said:
I don't think it's that inexplicable.First.Aspect said:Some of his base will, inexplicably, be women.
And some of his base might be men who own one or more women. And some of those women might be pregnant and might want not to be (or at least their republican owners might not want that).
Wonder how that's going to play out....
It's the only explicitly Conservative option that Americans have.
I can see male or female, that if you believe life begins at conception, then abortion would be an awful sin.
They’re all libertarians until it’s a woman’s uterus, eh?
Finance related stuff. Those are fascinating.rick_chasey said:
So what arguments on the topic do you not find tedious?TheBigBean said:
You said "Should keep their nose out of other people’s business" from which I inferred the state should not have any controls over abortion. This is a position adopted by very few countries. Furthermore, I imagine most of those have laws on prostitution, which is also the state interfering with other people's bodies. Basically, I find the argument a bit tedious unless someone actually does want to allow full term abortions, prostitution, kidney sales etc.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
0 -
As you are aware, I hate to be critical about people who post on topics they don't know about based on a cursory Wiki search (because who likes a hypocrite eh Big Bean?) but what do you mean by "any controls"?TheBigBean said:
You said "Should keep their nose out of other people’s business" from which I inferred the state should not have any controls over abortion. This is a position adopted by very few countries. Furthermore, I imagine most of those have laws on prostitution, which is also the state interfering with other people's bodies. Basically, I find the argument a bit tedious unless someone actually does want to allow full term abortions, prostitution, kidney sales etc.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
You seem to be arguing that the proposed restrictions in states such as Missouri are okay because, well, there are some restrictions in other places.
Sorry, what?0 -
Ones that don't frame the discussion as a binary choice between "life begins at conception" and "my body, so I will do what I want".rick_chasey said:
So what arguments on the topic do you not find tedious?TheBigBean said:
You said "Should keep their nose out of other people’s business" from which I inferred the state should not have any controls over abortion. This is a position adopted by very few countries. Furthermore, I imagine most of those have laws on prostitution, which is also the state interfering with other people's bodies. Basically, I find the argument a bit tedious unless someone actually does want to allow full term abortions, prostitution, kidney sales etc.rick_chasey said:What's your point?
0 -
-
No I'm not, but don't let me get in the way of your rantings.First.Aspect said:
You seem to be arguing that the proposed restrictions in states such as Missouri are okay because, well, there are some restrictions in other places.0 -
No, I see now that you are arguing against how people argue about topics you don't want to argue about.TheBigBean said:
No I'm not, but don't let me get in the way of your rantings.First.Aspect said:
You seem to be arguing that the proposed restrictions in states such as Missouri are okay because, well, there are some restrictions in other places.0 -
That's a better summary.First.Aspect said:
No, I see now that you are arguing against how people argue about topics you don't want to argue about.TheBigBean said:
No I'm not, but don't let me get in the way of your rantings.First.Aspect said:
You seem to be arguing that the proposed restrictions in states such as Missouri are okay because, well, there are some restrictions in other places.0 -
Current abortion controls are an act of compromise. Essentially medical experts have taken a view that there is a upper week limit on when you can get an abortion. This is a middle ground between those who think conception is the point and those who think when little Johnny is causing a ruckas on a Sunday afternoon down the pub and ruining their quiet pint is still a reasonable killing point.
This compromise allows women to have control of their bodies and make what are important life decisions for them. Maybe a lot of these objectors would be less willing to remove abortion if women had the right to bring the baby to their house and they had to take care of it for 18 years as only they wanted it. Call it a contract signed with sperm if you will.0 -
There was a good line in a drama series I recently watched.
The pregnant daughter from a low income home is facing opposition from external groups to having an abortion.
Relaying this to her mother, her mother replies.
“They’re only pro-life while it’s inside. The moment it’s born it’s a burden to society”.
Sums it up really.0 -
morstar said:
There was a good line in a drama series I recently watched.
The pregnant daughter from a low income home is facing opposition from external groups to having an abortion.
Relaying this to her mother, her mother replies.
“They’re only pro-life while it’s inside. The moment it’s born it’s a burden to society”.
Sums it up really.
Can't remember where I read it, but it was about why the religious right have taken on the unborn as a totem: they have no voice. The thought that a supposedly enlightened society would force a victim of rape/incest to have a baby at, say 14, (with all the costs in US healthcare), is horrific.0 -
It is hard to explain difficult and nuanced decisions to simpletons. And I tend towards anyone who believes in all powerful overseeing entities and an afterlife being on the simpleton end of things. Possibly this isnt a universally popular opinion, but it's hard to deny the broad correlation.1
-
First.Aspect said:
It is hard to explain difficult and nuanced decisions to simpletons. And I tend towards anyone who believes in all powerful overseeing entities and an afterlife being on the simpleton end of things. Possibly this isnt a universally popular opinion, but it's hard to deny the broad correlation.
It always bemuses me the hoops that clever people go through to explain away all the illogicalities of believing in all-powerful overseeing entities, as opposed to the 'shït happens all by itself' explanation.1 -
-
Of course you don't.rick_chasey said:I know plenty of very smart people who are religious. I don’t see the correlation.
0 -
Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
Etc.0 -
-
Flippant is a better word.rick_chasey said:Lol I am as atheist as they come but don’t be so arrogant.
And statistically, there is a correlation.0 -
no its not.First.Aspect said:Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
Etc..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
1 -
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23921675/#:~:text=A meta-analysis of 63,religious beliefs than religious behavior.rick_chasey said:Lol I am as atheist as they come but don’t be so arrogant.
This is an interesting analysis....
(See what I did there?)0
