|
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 August 07 2016 08:32 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Unsurprising considering Johnsons campaign is heavily backed by Koch.
Expect to see more Republicans come out in support of Johnson (and thus, Koch).
|
On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 04:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:As if we needed a millionth reason to vote against Trump/Pence, it looks like Pence pushes for Creationism to be taught in public schools' science classrooms; the video of him speaking repeatedly shows him misusing the word [scientific] "theory" and him having basically no understanding of evolution or science. Sigh. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/abletochoose/2016/08/mike-pence-evolution/ No you must be wrong, Creationism being taught in school is not something Republicans are big on, Introvert made that very clear to me. Surely someone wanting creationism taught in public school science classrooms couldn't possibly be in the potential Republican VP slot. Or perhaps the Republican is as assbackwards as I've been saying for years? I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities. Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health.
Again, there is so much here. But one thing:
No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well.
|
|
|
On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 04:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:As if we needed a millionth reason to vote against Trump/Pence, it looks like Pence pushes for Creationism to be taught in public schools' science classrooms; the video of him speaking repeatedly shows him misusing the word [scientific] "theory" and him having basically no understanding of evolution or science. Sigh. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/abletochoose/2016/08/mike-pence-evolution/ No you must be wrong, Creationism being taught in school is not something Republicans are big on, Introvert made that very clear to me. Surely someone wanting creationism taught in public school science classrooms couldn't possibly be in the potential Republican VP slot. Or perhaps the Republican is as assbackwards as I've been saying for years? I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities. Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point...
Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd.
|
The analogy to military ops is not absurd; one may disagree on the equivalence of the situation; but the analogy is clear and demonstrative.
at any rate; the hate on PP is just political scummishness rather than any real attempt at problem solving.
|
United States41991 Posts
On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
No you must be wrong, Creationism being taught in school is not something Republicans are big on, Introvert made that very clear to me. Surely someone wanting creationism taught in public school science classrooms couldn't possibly be in the potential Republican VP slot. Or perhaps the Republican is as assbackwards as I've been saying for years? I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities. Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd.
No, you missed my point.
I'm not comparing a fetus to a terrorist, I'm comparing Planned Parenthood, a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding, to the military, which is also a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding. The whole defund strategy is absurd. It's "if we can't get what we want then we'll just fuck with unrelated things until, well, not until you give us what we want because we lost that fight and it's not getting a do over but I guess we'll just fuck with things until we stop fucking with things?".
Although given you apparently want to compare the two I will add that I suspect the founding fathers would have an awful lot more to say about the President ordering the extrajudicial military execution of American citizens than they would have to say about abortion.
|
On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
No you must be wrong, Creationism being taught in school is not something Republicans are big on, Introvert made that very clear to me. Surely someone wanting creationism taught in public school science classrooms couldn't possibly be in the potential Republican VP slot. Or perhaps the Republican is as assbackwards as I've been saying for years? I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities. Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd.
I believe the more relevant phrase is "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater".
If an organization is doing something that breaks laws, then you punish them for that and make them stop. It's really not that hard to bring civil/criminal charges against an organization.
And if it's not against the law, then have the guts to campaign to make it against the law. Not some wishy-washy political doublespeak.
|
The only problemail is the pro-life zealots who won't let it be. Most have accepted reality and the law of the land but as always there are some crazy idiots and their dumbest representatives that won't let it go.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 07 2016 10:49 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities.
Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd. No, you missed my point. I'm not comparing a fetus to a terrorist, I'm comparing Planned Parenthood, a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding, to the military, which is also a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding. The whole defund strategy is absurd. So vague as to be useless. People wouldn't oppose funding PP if they didn't do abortions. (I mean many would because wtf are we subsidizing them, but that's besides the point). They perform hundreds of thousands a year, This is the issue. Comparing a pregnancy test to an abortion is disingenuous. They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service. Meanwhile, who else is going to do the drone strikes? And if people could strip the funding or stop paying their taxes to drone strike US citizens I bet many of them would. On August 07 2016 10:52 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities.
Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd. I believe the more relevant phrase is "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater". If an organization is doing something that breaks laws, then you punish them for that and make them stop. It's really not that hard to bring civil/criminal charges against an organization. And if it's not against the law, then have the guts to campaign to make it against the law. Not some wishy-washy political doublespeak. I'n PP case, they really are throwing out the baby.
You know what I'm spoilering this. I don't want to go down this train of thought again. I was originality trying to point out defunding pp =/= "teaching bible in school."
|
On August 07 2016 10:56 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:49 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd. No, you missed my point. I'm not comparing a fetus to a terrorist, I'm comparing Planned Parenthood, a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding, to the military, which is also a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding. The whole defund strategy is absurd. So vague as to be useless. People wouldn't oppose funding PP if they didn't do abortions. (I mean many would because wtf are we subsidizing them, but that's besides the point). They perform hundreds of thousands a year, This is the issue. Comparing a pregnancy test to an abortion is disingenuous. They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service. Meanwhile, who else is going to do the drone strikes? And if people could strip the funding or stop paying their taxes to drone strike US citizens I bet many of them would.
No, people wouldn't campaign to stop funding drone strikes. They'd campaign to stop drone strikes.
|
intro -> I disagree with that conclusion; there is a clear equivalency in pandering to a base by pushing plans that are unsound policy. both are instances of that.
|
On August 07 2016 10:56 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 07 2016 10:49 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 10:36 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:34 BallinWitStalin wrote:On August 07 2016 10:29 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 10:01 KwarK wrote:On August 07 2016 09:40 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:51 Plansix wrote:On August 07 2016 08:44 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 08:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 07 2016 08:32 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I never denied they existed, and they clearly have influence in certain localities.
Like potential VP of the entire US "localities"? Let me know when he starts running on it. They don't run on it. They just get elected and then inflict it on whatever states they can. No one runs on making voter ID laws that target blacks, they just passed the laws once they are in office. Its this top secret plan of the GOP, they don't say they are going to do shitty things during the election season. No one is running on the "Defund PP and teach bible in school" platform. There is so much in this short post, but I will just say it's really funny you equate defunding PP with "teaching Bible in school" (which i take to mean creationism generally. Edit: and people do run on defunding pp Running on defunding PP because you're against abortion is like running on defunding the military because you're against drone strikes on American citizens. If you don't like Roe vs Wade then oppose that, don't try and strip funding from an organization which spends the vast majority of its resources on non abortion related women's health. Again, there is so much here. But one thing: No pro-life person I know accepts your analogy, for a multitude of reasons. You should try convincing one that someone who leaves to help ISIS or Al Qaeda is the same as an unborn child, I'm sure it will go over well. I feel like you missed Kwark's point... Nah, his point was basically to take the good with the bad. Fight the law, instead. Which is of course an absurd stance if you believe the fetus is a person. In that case it should be fought at every opportunity, and equating PP to military operations is also absurd. No, you missed my point. I'm not comparing a fetus to a terrorist, I'm comparing Planned Parenthood, a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding, to the military, which is also a big umbrella organization that does a lot of very different things with their funding. The whole defund strategy is absurd. So vague as to be useless. People wouldn't oppose funding PP if they didn't do abortions. (I mean many would because wtf are we subsidizing them, but that's besides the point). They perform hundreds of thousands a year, This is the issue. Comparing a pregnancy test to an abortion is disingenuous. They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service. Meanwhile, who else is going to do the drone strikes? And if people could strip the funding or stop paying their taxes to drone strike US citizens I bet many of them would. You know what I'm spoilering this. I don't want to go down this train of thought again. I was originality trying to point out defunding pp =/= "teaching bible in school."
Defunding PP had always been one of the most asinine arguments from the right. Yeah, let's take away tools that lower income mothers can use to try and care for their babies. The obvious consequence of defunding PP would be a massive increase in unsafe "backalley" abortions. Such counterproductive and extremist thinking.
|
I think the point is still being missed.
The point is that defunding the entire military to stop drone strikes or whatever (because you think they are bad) is stupid in the same way as defunding the entirety of Planned Parenthood to stop abortions (because you think they are bad) is stupid.
Whether you or I or anybody in particular thinks one or the other of those things is bad or not is completely irrelevant. Defunding the entire military or the entirety of PP is not an appropriate response to either of those problems, no matter what your opinion on those problems is.
|
Dbl post, opps. Rushing too much.
|
United States41991 Posts
They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service.
Are the defund PP people advocating funding women's health organizations that don't do abortions? I've not seen any evidence to that.
Not including those weird scam ones that have billboards saying "Pregnant and in trouble? Call us" that is. Those just tell women who are 20 weeks pregnant and want abortions that they can absolutely help them with that and to come back in 2 weeks for pre-abortion tests before they schedule it and then tell them the test results will take 2 weeks and then the moment they're past the legal abortion cutoff just kick them out. Fuck those groups.
|
On August 07 2016 11:03 Aquanim wrote:
I think the point is still being missed.
The point is that defunding the entire military to stop drone strikes or whatever (because you think they are bad) is stupid in the same way as defunding the entirety of Planned Parenthood to stop abortions (because you think they are bad) is stupid.
Whether you or I or anybody in particular thinks one or the other of those things is bad or not is completely irrelevant. Defunding the entire military or the entirety of PP is not an appropriate response to either of those problems, no matter what your opinion on those problems is.
I will try to say this one more time, hopefully it gets through.
Abortion is the issue. If you believe it is child killing, you wouldn't support funding it, espeically when there are other options available. It doesn't matter if PP "does other things." (Their 3% number obfuscates the hundreds of thousands they do, but whatever.)
And people do both, if you haven't noticed. Kwark's criticism is dumb because pro-life activists fight abortion everywhere, from government funding to state laws.
There is no military to pp equivalence. At least not one worth mentioning.
On August 07 2016 11:07 KwarK wrote:Are the defund PP people advocating funding women's health organizations that don't do abortions? I've not seen any evidence to that. Not including those weird scam ones that have billboards saying "Pregnant and in trouble? Call us" that is. Those just tell women who are 20 weeks pregnant and want abortions that they can absolutely help them with that and to come back in 2 weeks for pre-abortion tests before they schedule it and then tell them the test results will take 2 weeks and then the moment they're past the legal abortion cutoff just kick them out. Fuck those groups.
Some did, but the left is ideologically committed to abortion, so it gets drowned out.
|
I think the big problem with the abortion debate in the US is that Roe v. Wade has circumvented the central problem, which is the status of personhood of the fetus and has declared it an issue of privacy and bodily autonomy although this should have happened the other way around.
Singer has summed this problem on the pro choice side up long ago
|
United States41991 Posts
On August 07 2016 11:10 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 11:03 Aquanim wrote:
I think the point is still being missed.
The point is that defunding the entire military to stop drone strikes or whatever (because you think they are bad) is stupid in the same way as defunding the entirety of Planned Parenthood to stop abortions (because you think they are bad) is stupid.
Whether you or I or anybody in particular thinks one or the other of those things is bad or not is completely irrelevant. Defunding the entire military or the entirety of PP is not an appropriate response to either of those problems, no matter what your opinion on those problems is. I will try to say this one more time, hopefully it gets through. Abortion is the issue. If you believe it is child killing, you wouldn't support funding it, espeically when there are other options available. It doesn't matter if PP "does other things." (Their 3% number obfuscates the hundreds of thousands they do, but whatever.) And people do both, if you haven't noticed. Kwark's criticism is dumb because pro-life activists fight abortion everywhere, from government funding to state laws. There is no military to pp equivalence. At least not one worth mentioning. Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 11:07 KwarK wrote:They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service. Are the defund PP people advocating funding women's health organizations that don't do abortions? I've not seen any evidence to that. Not including those weird scam ones that have billboards saying "Pregnant and in trouble? Call us" that is. Those just tell women who are 20 weeks pregnant and want abortions that they can absolutely help them with that and to come back in 2 weeks for pre-abortion tests before they schedule it and then tell them the test results will take 2 weeks and then the moment they're past the legal abortion cutoff just kick them out. Fuck those groups. Some did, but the left is ideologically committed to abortion, so it gets drowned out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment
They're just fucking with PP at this point. There is no end game.
|
United States41991 Posts
On August 07 2016 11:12 Nyxisto wrote:I think the big problem with the abortion debate in the US is that Roe v. Wade has circumvented the central problem, which is the status of personhood of the fetus and has declared it an issue of privacy and bodily autonomy although this should have happened the other way around. Singer has summed this problem on the pro choice side up as well
The Supreme Court are in no way qualified to rule on issues of philosophy and theology, nor would they wish to.
|
On August 07 2016 11:13 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2016 11:10 Introvert wrote:On August 07 2016 11:03 Aquanim wrote:
I think the point is still being missed.
The point is that defunding the entire military to stop drone strikes or whatever (because you think they are bad) is stupid in the same way as defunding the entirety of Planned Parenthood to stop abortions (because you think they are bad) is stupid.
Whether you or I or anybody in particular thinks one or the other of those things is bad or not is completely irrelevant. Defunding the entire military or the entirety of PP is not an appropriate response to either of those problems, no matter what your opinion on those problems is. I will try to say this one more time, hopefully it gets through. Abortion is the issue. If you believe it is child killing, you wouldn't support funding it, espeically when there are other options available. It doesn't matter if PP "does other things." (Their 3% number obfuscates the hundreds of thousands they do, but whatever.) And people do both, if you haven't noticed. Kwark's criticism is dumb because pro-life activists fight abortion everywhere, from government funding to state laws. There is no military to pp equivalence. At least not one worth mentioning. On August 07 2016 11:07 KwarK wrote:They could fund health care groups that don't provide the service. Are the defund PP people advocating funding women's health organizations that don't do abortions? I've not seen any evidence to that. Not including those weird scam ones that have billboards saying "Pregnant and in trouble? Call us" that is. Those just tell women who are 20 weeks pregnant and want abortions that they can absolutely help them with that and to come back in 2 weeks for pre-abortion tests before they schedule it and then tell them the test results will take 2 weeks and then the moment they're past the legal abortion cutoff just kick them out. Fuck those groups. Some did, but the left is ideologically committed to abortion, so it gets drowned out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_AmendmentThey're just fucking with PP at this point. There is no end game.
I am aware of that. I never said they directly used government funds.
Edit: and the democrats want to get rid of that amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
