|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On April 28 2015 06:08 cLutZ wrote:
That sounds fine with me, granted that the prison population comprises people who deserve to be in prison.
Interesting assumption given the fact the the US has more people in prison than China. And even if that were the case I still don't think you should be able to slave-labour yourself out of prison. Either you are in prison and then your sentence is justified and you should sit it out, or you're not. It's not supposed to be some kind of cheap labour supplement.
|
In my opinion, prison should never be about "repaying a debt to society" or some other mumbojumbo like that. You are not repaying any debt by sitting in a room doing nothing and costing loads of money.
Prison should have exactly two goals: Rehabilitating those who can be rehabilitated, and keeping those who can't away from doing additional harm to society. Doing meaningful work can help accomplishing those goals. But that should always be the point of the whole deal, prisoners work to help with rehabilitation, they should not work to save the state money. Which is why such a program needs to be very carefully implemented, as soon as you start seeing prisoners as a source of cheap labor, your prison system is becoming perverted into some weird mess. If it is implemented reasonably well, it can be a very good idea.
|
I agree with the statement, "there are too many prisoners" and the statement that "many of them don't deserve to be in jail". You two are just conflating two different things.
In my opinion, the program makes a bad system slightly less bad. I don't know why that blows your mind GH. To me it seems that you are so against the criminal justice system that anything that occurs within it you reflexively are against.
|
WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services.
Source
|
On April 28 2015 06:28 cLutZ wrote:
I agree with the statement, "there are too many prisoners" and the statement that "many of them don't deserve to be in jail". You two are just conflating two different things.
In my opinion, the program makes a bad system slightly less bad. I don't know why that blows your mind GH. To me it seems that you are so against the criminal justice system that anything that occurs within it you reflexively are against.
Mostly this part.
Unless you have evidence that California is trying to get more prisoners
|
On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source
All aboard the "Choose All the Wrong Battles" Republican Presidential Campaign Shit Train!
|
On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source
I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument.
|
Loving Shep Smith on Fox right now. He is ripping into "The Five"'s coverage of Baltimore
|
Sad that idiots are trying to defund planned parenthood.
|
On April 28 2015 06:35 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument.
Conditioned Federal-State transfer payments are frequently structured in this sort of itemized fashion, to the benefit of states, so taking issue with that aspect of how Planned Parenthood receives funding is to miss the forest for the trees.
|
As an outsider something puzzles me. Why are so many black people getting shot by the police? Surely not every single one of these events should necessitate deadly use of force?
|
On April 28 2015 06:51 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2015 06:35 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument. Conditioned Federal-State transfer payments are frequently structured in this sort of itemized fashion, to the benefit of states, so taking issue with that aspect of how Planned Parenthood receives funding is to miss the forest for the trees.
Well, I'm not much of a fan of those programs either, but I thought the Planned Parenthood case was unique because the debate goes like this:
1. Some guy has an idea for some sort of federal health subsidy program.
2. Some of that money is going to go to Planned Parenthood, the pro-life community objects to "funding abortions".
3. Legislation amended so that funding is limited to only providers that don't provide abortions, Planned Parenthood people object, saying "we provide all these other services".
4. They propose this "Chinese wall" situation and argue that taxpayers will not be funding abortions.
Step 4 is a lie, which is what I take issue with. And I don't take issue with it just because of the context, I take issue with it because its just absolutely idiotic and it doesn't make any sense that people even pretend its true.
|
On April 28 2015 06:58 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2015 06:51 farvacola wrote:On April 28 2015 06:35 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument. Conditioned Federal-State transfer payments are frequently structured in this sort of itemized fashion, to the benefit of states, so taking issue with that aspect of how Planned Parenthood receives funding is to miss the forest for the trees. Well, I'm not much of a fan of those programs either, but I thought the Planned Parenthood case was unique because the debate goes like this: 1. Some guy has an idea for some sort of federal health subsidy program. 2. Some of that money is going to go to Planned Parenthood, the pro-life community objects to "funding abortions". 3. Legislation amended so that funding is limited to only providers that don't provide abortions, Planned Parenthood people object, saying "we provide all these other services". 4. They propose this "Chinese wall" situation and argue that taxpayers will not be funding abortions. Step 4 is a lie, which is what I take issue with. And I don't take issue with it just because of the context, I take issue with it because its just absolutely idiotic and it doesn't make any sense that people even pretend its true.
The sad thing is not that they lie about it. Its that they have to lie to be able to provide all the things they do (not even counting abortions) because some backwater people would rather scrap the whole thing then allow a single penny to be spend on an abortion.
|
On April 28 2015 07:09 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2015 06:58 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:51 farvacola wrote:On April 28 2015 06:35 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument. Conditioned Federal-State transfer payments are frequently structured in this sort of itemized fashion, to the benefit of states, so taking issue with that aspect of how Planned Parenthood receives funding is to miss the forest for the trees. Well, I'm not much of a fan of those programs either, but I thought the Planned Parenthood case was unique because the debate goes like this: 1. Some guy has an idea for some sort of federal health subsidy program. 2. Some of that money is going to go to Planned Parenthood, the pro-life community objects to "funding abortions". 3. Legislation amended so that funding is limited to only providers that don't provide abortions, Planned Parenthood people object, saying "we provide all these other services". 4. They propose this "Chinese wall" situation and argue that taxpayers will not be funding abortions. Step 4 is a lie, which is what I take issue with. And I don't take issue with it just because of the context, I take issue with it because its just absolutely idiotic and it doesn't make any sense that people even pretend its true. The sad thing is not that they lie about it. Its that they have to lie to be able to provide all the things they do (not even counting abortions) because some backwater people would rather scrap the whole thing then allow a single penny to be spend on an abortion.
well to be fair, for people that consider human life with all its dignity, vulnerability and rights starts at conception this whole issue is magnitudes worse than the holocaust, and they are therefore totally justified to make it exactly a minor point in a political debate about spendings appropriations and nothing more.
|
On April 28 2015 06:51 Bleak wrote:
As an outsider something puzzles me. Why are so many black people getting shot by the police? Surely not every single one of these events should necessitate deadly use of force?
As far as I know, there are not any more black people getting shot by police than usual. There are still about 3 white people shot by police for every black person shot by police.
|
On April 28 2015 06:27 Simberto wrote:
In my opinion, prison should never be about "repaying a debt to society" or some other mumbojumbo like that. You are not repaying any debt by sitting in a room doing nothing and costing loads of money.
Prison should have exactly two goals: Rehabilitating those who can be rehabilitated, and keeping those who can't away from doing additional harm to society. Doing meaningful work can help accomplishing those goals. But that should always be the point of the whole deal, prisoners work to help with rehabilitation, they should not work to save the state money. Which is why such a program needs to be very carefully implemented, as soon as you start seeing prisoners as a source of cheap labor, your prison system is becoming perverted into some weird mess. If it is implemented reasonably well, it can be a very good idea.
I think they should have to work at least enough to cover the cost of their incarceration, but mostly I agree with this. I really hate the idea of it being profitable to jail people. That's just so fucked up.
At least a little work is good. It helps some people turn their lives around. Even the ones who are beyond any hope of rehabilitation should work some. It can cover the cost of their incarceration, and any time spent making license plates or whatever is time not spent on participating in prison gang activity.
But it definitely has to be limited. I don't want the prison-industrial complex getting any bigger.
|
On April 28 2015 05:57 zlefin wrote:
danglars -> I'm having trouble following what you're saying; but I can say that there is a racial issue in the results, that's found all over, and is not just a result of localized bad actors; and there's enough stats to back that up (several have been cited in the reports I listed). It also doesn't appear to be a result of direct racism, but of more complicated and subtle effects as a result of race; there's a lot of discretion in law enforcement, so the cumulative effect of many levels of mild implicit bias can really add up.
There is a racial issue in blacks killing other blacks at high numbers, well in excess of other publicized white-cops-on-blacks violence, and much ignored by media and racial activists. That's indeed a racial issue, and one that extends to cultural issues, societal issues, and political issues. We're in agreement in part!
Will you enunciate your proposition for the actors and effects of some kind of stacking of levels of implicit racial bias? When you talk of subtle effects and mild implicit bias, I know looking at bulk statistics like arrest rates involve many complex phenomena like those I previously mentioned, which I hope you read. If this doesn't involve actual malice but some kind of suffused racial prejudice, how are we to know that its bases aren't simply in distinct propensity to crime in inner cities that happen to demographically contain one or more groups that constitute minorities in the state or locales? Was that arrest racially motivated or simply a police officer responding to a call and following the evidence? I hate to drag the dead horse of correlation and causation here, but have you actually considered it? I see all kinds of conclusions offered with results highlighted, but the causes are glazed over like racists are assumed and other explanations denied.
|
if you ask me, the worst thing about the holocaust is not that many people died. its how they died. the unbelievable inhumanity that lead to the death of these millions.
so if i "kill" millions of embryos, i wouldn't say its worse than the holocaust.
if i drop a bomb and kill 20 million people in a few seconds, i wouldn't say its worse than the holocaust.
but maybe thats only me.
|
On April 28 2015 07:15 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2015 07:09 Gorsameth wrote:On April 28 2015 06:58 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:51 farvacola wrote:On April 28 2015 06:35 cLutZ wrote:On April 28 2015 06:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:WASHINGTON -- Jeb Bush supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to one of his senior advisers.
Jordan Sekulow is a prominent Christian evangelical attorney and joined the former Florida governor's team last month as a senior adviser. He spoke Saturday at the Faith and Freedom Summit in Iowa, where nine presidential hopefuls appealed to the group of conservatives in attendance. Bush, who is exploring a run and widely expected to jump into the field, skipped the event and sent Sekulow in his stead.
"We have got to defund Planned Parenthood, by the way, and Gov. Bush supports those efforts," said Sekulow to applause from the crowd.
Generally, legislation targeting Planned Parenthood prevents federal money from going to the family planning provider's clinics until it can certify that it no longer offers abortions -- even though Planned Parenthood only uses federal money for non-abortion services. Source I dont really care about the abortion issue, but its not possible to "only use money for non-abortion services", because money is fungible. If they use federal money on a service, say contraception, that is less money from other sources they need to spend on that, which means more money for abortions. Unless they weren't going to provide contraceptive services without federal money, but that would basically mean that PP is an abortion provider that, because of federal money does other stuff, which I don't think would placate people either. Its a 100% BS argument. Conditioned Federal-State transfer payments are frequently structured in this sort of itemized fashion, to the benefit of states, so taking issue with that aspect of how Planned Parenthood receives funding is to miss the forest for the trees. Well, I'm not much of a fan of those programs either, but I thought the Planned Parenthood case was unique because the debate goes like this: 1. Some guy has an idea for some sort of federal health subsidy program. 2. Some of that money is going to go to Planned Parenthood, the pro-life community objects to "funding abortions". 3. Legislation amended so that funding is limited to only providers that don't provide abortions, Planned Parenthood people object, saying "we provide all these other services". 4. They propose this "Chinese wall" situation and argue that taxpayers will not be funding abortions. Step 4 is a lie, which is what I take issue with. And I don't take issue with it just because of the context, I take issue with it because its just absolutely idiotic and it doesn't make any sense that people even pretend its true. The sad thing is not that they lie about it. Its that they have to lie to be able to provide all the things they do (not even counting abortions) because some backwater people would rather scrap the whole thing then allow a single penny to be spend on an abortion. well to be fair, for people that consider human life with all its dignity, vulnerability and rights starts at conception this whole issue is magnitudes worse than the holocaust, and they are therefore totally justified to make it exactly a minor point in a political debate about spendings appropriations and nothing more.
I guess people don't see where this all heads? Obviously what ends up happening if we accept the whole abortion is murder argument is eventually when women get pregnant someone will have to sort out who needs to be charged with murder for aborting their fetus and who just was too stupid and sat in a hot tub for too long or whatever.
Then you also have to separate the people who didn't know they were pregnant and did something that terminated their pregnancy from those who know and did it on purpose.
Like every other part of the justice system you end up putting innocent people in prison because something tragic happened to them.
Or worse yet...
DES MOINES | A woman is raped, becomes pregnant and carries the child.
Her attacker is arrested, tried and found guilty, yet still sues the mother for custody of the child.
It's a scenario that is possible in Iowa, one of 17 states that does not have a law that terminates the parental rights of a convicted rapist.
Source
So in those states you could end up having the 'criminal justice system' protect the rights of a rapist to force his victim to carry his child of rape to term and then give him custody.
Add to that a law to correct this is currently opposed by Republicans, one in particular called the law "feel good legislation". They aren't trying to fix the law so it addresses their concerns with it, they are just protecting rapists custodial rights to their children of rape.
If republican politicians and pundits never mentioned anything related to sex it would be doing themselves a favor. At almost every turn they stick their foot in their mouth or worse.
|
Ohh great now the rioting is getting serious in Baltimore. 7 cops reported injured, the O's game canceled, wide spread looting. And their goes any chance of getting any positive changes done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
