US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1976

On May 17 2015 08:37 coverpunch wrote:
Why don't you go outside for a run instead of worrying about what conservatives around here are thinking.

On May 17 2015 08:27 GreenHorizons wrote:



Really it would take more time to just say something about what you think should be done when contraception fails, just a loose idea, anything... instead of the several replies you've already put forth...?

Not that I was asking you specifically, but it's kind of bullshit to say there is a reasonable alternative on the right that we are ignoring or diverting attention from by talking about the more extreme positions (being legislated in certain states), and then suggest the reason conservatives don't mention it is because they don't like who's asking or the typical issues with internet discussion.

@EDIT: What the hell are you talking about with immigration?

This "I don't like the way you talk about conservative opinions on that issue, but conservatives refuse to opine because they don't like how you talk about the issue " is next level silly.

On May 17 2015 08:45 Introvert wrote:



Why do I have to? That wasn't what I was talking about. Seriously, stop trying to change the subject.

Also, it's hilarious that you take my unwillingness to discuss such a topic right here, right now as conservatives "refusing to opine." If you haven't figured it out, even most of the right leaners here have basically your stance on abortion. There isn't a wide pool here.

I chimed in with a very particular point, and now you want me to dive in deep. No thanks.

On May 17 2015 09:08 Introvert wrote:
Uh, the data you provided shows that there is a discussion to be had that's not around extremes. ONly 16% were for banning in all cases, and only 22% of Republicans. Don't extrapolate what is happening here to the overall debate.

On May 17 2015 09:25 Introvert wrote:
Did that poll establish what "most" meant? It sounds like you are just extrapolating from this discussion.

Anyway, abortion for "extreme cases" is rare and people who oppose all abortion are also in a small minority. Therefore, it makes no sense to focus on that. Especially since after Roe v. Wade it would be impossible for anyone to ban all abortions. it is, for the last time, a diversion tactic. End of story, gg.

On May 17 2015 06:21 oneofthem wrote:
danglars batter up

On May 17 2015 11:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


Well it's for charity, so I give him props for that

It'll be the second time in four years that he gets wrecked by a black guy though.

On May 17 2015 09:25 Introvert wrote:
Did that poll establish what "most" meant? It sounds like you are just extrapolating from this discussion.

Anyway, abortion for "extreme cases" is rare and people who oppose all abortion are also in a small minority. Therefore, it makes no sense to focus on that. Especially since after Roe v. Wade it would be impossible for anyone to ban all abortions. it is, for the last time, a diversion tactic. End of story, gg.

On May 17 2015 15:02 Leporello wrote:


You yourself say that people who oppose all abortions are a small minority.

What you're basically saying is the vast majority of the pro-life movement doesn't actually believe the things they're saying.

Why do conservatives never like talking about the "extreme cases" of abortion, while pro-choicers do like to talk about it?

a) Because it matters. These "rare" cases are also, incidentally and arguably, the most important cases to consider.

b) Because it shows the ridiculous double-standards that arise when creating absolutist policies. It's astonishing that we have a LARGE number of politicians in high offices who officially have the position that abortion is baby-murder.... but sometimes that's okay and we should go ahead and murder that baby. You yourself admit that banning all abortions isn't a popular position amongst the crowd that is telling all of us that abortion is the murder of a small, new human being, as innocent a human as could possibly exist.

If the pro-life movement had any integrity or conviction at all, then the whole "extreme cases" subject might not be breached so much. Pro-life would be a very simple position, it wouldn't need caveats. But as it turns out, making the millions of women who abort their pregnancy into murderers turns out to be a pretty messy affair. So go ahead, lady who was raped, murdering that baby is fine.

I'm convinced there is no political position in current affairs more brazenly bizarre and spineless than the mainstream pro-life position that you claim. I want to ask how you could vote for someone who makes exceptions to what he/she defines as baby-murder, but I realize you do the same thing. How? If you can make excuses for one abortion... why do the others bother you sooooooo much, that you have to make the lives of so many women so much more difficult? Why?


Conversely, when it comes to "extreme cases", it's much easier to deal with for people who are against the death-penalty. It's much more reasonable and easier to say I'm against the death-penalty but I'd make exceptions for extreme cases (ex: Who wouldn't kill Hitler?), than it is to say I'm pro-life but I'd make exceptions for extreme cases (Go ahead and kill that unborn baby because its mother was raped). Because, again, a baby is as innocent as a human gets.

So I admit being pro-life must not be fun, and I've never seen anyone enjoy talking about it in these threads. Only in front of abortion clinics.

On May 17 2015 15:24 Introvert wrote:


You are making the same argument KwarK did. I don't buy it, because that's not why or how pro-choice people use it. It's used to label people, not start some philosophical debate.

Which I am still not going to participate in.

HERSHEY, Pa. — A group of female GOP lawmakers is trying to pressure the Republican leadership team to make changes to a 20-week abortion ban the House is set to vote on next week.

Led by Rep. Renee Ellmers of North Carolina, the lawmakers are protesting language that requires a rape victim to formally report her assault to police to qualify for an exemption from the legislation’s abortion restrictions.

The House approved a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy in a party-line vote on Wednesday.

The legislation, which also requires a 48-hour waiting period, informed consent forms and mandatory counseling for victims of rape and sexual assault before abortions, passed 242-184, with 4 Republicans in opposition.

Four Democrats voted for the measure. Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) voted present.

The bill was initially scheduled for a vote in January, but had been abruptly cancelled after some Republicans voiced concerns about a requirement that rape victims have to report to the police before they have the procedure.
Several of the Republicans who raised complaints back then, including Reps. Renee Ellmers (N.C.) and Jackie Walorski (Ind.), voted for the bill Wednesday.

The bill stands almost no chance of becoming law while President Obama remains in office, though Republicans say it is part of their long game to force the issue back into the courts.

Because that gets so much attention, even right now in this thread. It's such a small % that if we were searching for common ground or some compromise on a law, it would be the last thing talked about, not the first.

The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life

Faithful to the “self-evident” truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud U.S. House Republicans for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take comfort in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.

On May 17 2015 16:26 coverpunch wrote:
Weird to question Republican positions without simply going to the source:

On May 17 2015 16:47 GreenHorizons wrote:

So is that what we are to call the reasonable position? With so many thinking life begins at conception that makes the majority opinion that IUD's are abortion if I'm not mistaken?

It is notable in this position that it makes no mention of the definition of life and takes no position on birth control. As such, I would say those aren't the majority opinion and certainly not an opinion with which to paint all Republicans or by extension, conservatives.

We oppose the FDA approval of Mifeprex, formerly known as RU-486, and similar drugs that terminate innocent human life after conception.