EPTHow often does this even happen in the US that you need legislation for it?
It sounds like yet another scare conjured up by Republicans for a problem that doesnt exist.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1152
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21528 Posts
How often does this even happen in the US that you need legislation for it? It sounds like yet another scare conjured up by Republicans for a problem that doesnt exist. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:23 xDaunt wrote: It should be self-evident from my post. "It" is the pro-choice movement. All of the senators who opposed the born alive bill did it explicitly on pro-choice grounds as proud pro-choice politicians. Same deal in NY or with the NC governor. There is no pro-choice movement. Only a strawman you are creating to knock down. On February 27 2019 02:25 Gorsameth wrote: It is pretty clear to me that it is fiction that exist to justify a terrible bill that legislators would need to oppose because it is bad. And then the "They support leaving babies to die" ads can be run next election cycle. To even worry about the chance of a fetus being 'alive' and sustainable outside the mother your dealing with late late term abortions, which is only a thing in life threatening situations for the mother. How often does this even happen in the US that you need legislation for it? It sounds like yet another scare conjured up by Republicans for a problem that doesnt exist. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13816 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:25 Gorsameth wrote: To even worry about the chance of a fetus being 'alive' and sustainable outside the mother your dealing with late late term abortions, which is only a thing in life threatening situations for the mother. How often does this even happen in the US that you need legislation for it? It sounds like yet another scare conjured up by Republicans for a problem that doesnt exist. Even if you're correct that this isn't a major problem in need of a solution, Democrats still voted against it for reflexive pro-choice reasons. That was a gross political error. | ||
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:30 Sermokala wrote: There is a pro-chocie movment in the US. Its the counter to the pro life movement. This is basic shit p6. How many pro choice bumper stickers or billboards do you see? How many radio ads do you hear? I see a pro life movement and a bunch of people who are individually pro choice. I wouldn’t call pro choice a movement. xDaunt’s characterization of them as a crowd makes more sense to me. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9132 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:25 Gorsameth wrote: To even worry about the chance of a fetus being 'alive' and sustainable outside the mother your dealing with late late term abortions, which is only a thing in life threatening situations for the mother. How often does this even happen in the US that you need legislation for it? It sounds like yet another scare conjured up by Republicans for a problem that doesnt exist. Why does it matter how often that happens? Mass shootings are also rare and that doesn't stop people from asking for a legislative reaction whenever they occur. On February 27 2019 02:33 KwarK wrote: How many pro choice bumper stickers or billboards do you see? How many radio ads do you hear? I see a pro life movement and a bunch of people who are individually pro choice. I wouldn’t call pro choice a movement. xDaunt’s characterization of them as a crowd makes more sense to me. Edit: misread the question. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:30 Sermokala wrote: There is a pro-chocie movment in the US. Its the counter to the pro life movement. This is basic shit p6. There is no monolithic pro-choice group that makes decisions on what all pro-choice people stand for. At least now who our boy Dauntless describes it. There was no meeting where they all got together and decided to be for or against late term abortions. There are people who think that access to abortions is an critical part of women’s rights to control over their body, but might have a nuanced opinion on late term abortion. But they also identity as pro-choice. But the low effort, crap description of the Pro-Choice Movement as some sort of monolithic body is just a lazy way to back up a lazy argument. It is a stawman, devoid of the complexities that a subject like abortion has. It is a flavor of pro-wrestling as political discussion. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:35 Sent. wrote: Why does it matter how often that happens? Mass shootings are also rare and that doesn't stop people from asking for a legislative reaction whenever they occur. What about christian crosses? Do those not count as pro-life symbols? I’m not sure I understand the question. Christian crosses are a religious symbol of varying significance depending upon the intent of the user. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:33 KwarK wrote: How many pro choice bumper stickers or billboards do you see? How many radio ads do you hear? I see a pro life movement and a bunch of people who are individually pro choice. I wouldn’t call pro choice a movement. xDaunt’s characterization of them as a crowd makes more sense to me. It doesn't matter whether it's a "movement" or a "crowd." It's all semantics. On the abortion issue, there are two sides of the debate: pro-choice and and pro-life. My point is that the pro-choice side has adopted positions too extreme for mainstream America, which is damaging the pro-choice brand. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:40 xDaunt wrote: It doesn't matter whether it's a "movement" or a "crowd." It's all semantics. On the abortion issue, there are two sides of the debate: pro-choice and and pro-life. My point is that the pro-choice side has adopted positions too extreme for mainstream America, which is damaging the pro-choice brand. Are you sure there are just two sides? I'm not convinced there are only two options. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:40 xDaunt wrote: It doesn't matter whether it's a "movement" or a "crowd." It's all semantics. On the abortion issue, there are two sides of the debate: pro-choice and and pro-life. My point is that the pro-choice side has adopted positions too extreme for mainstream America, which is damaging the pro-choice brand. It’s a spectrum. You might as well say that the low frequency part of the visible light spectrum has adopted reds that are too red. It’s not a single movement. That’s not how it works. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:39 KwarK wrote: I’d also be interested to hear from xDaunt which of the five possible Schedule A deductions available to individuals he thinks pushes the tax code into the area of “lots of deductions” and should be removed. And how a deduction acts as an incentive because I still think it’s possible he got his wires crossed with tax credits (which really are incentives). I'd get rid of all deductions and tax credits, though I'd be inclined to consider keeping/adding deductions and credits that encourage child raising. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:43 Plansix wrote: Are you sure there are just two sides? I'm not convinced there are only two options. Are you going to say something important on the topic of whether Democrats' actions are hurting the pro-choice brand or are you simply going to argue semantics? I'm not interested in the latter. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:45 xDaunt wrote: Are you going to say something important on the topic of whether Democrats' actions are hurting the pro-choice brand or are you simply going to argue semantics? I'm not interested in the latter. Your central premise of a pro choice brand is false, the question is invalid. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:46 KwarK wrote: Your central premise of a pro choice brand is false, the question is invalid. There absolutely is a pro-choice brand. It has been a thing in American politics for decades. Every single democrat politician proudly announces their pro-choice bonafides in satisfaction of leftist litmus tests. You can't sweep all of this under rug and pretend that "pro-choice" isn't a thing. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13816 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:33 KwarK wrote: How many pro choice bumper stickers or billboards do you see? How many radio ads do you hear? I see a pro life movement and a bunch of people who are individually pro choice. I wouldn’t call pro choice a movement. xDaunt’s characterization of them as a crowd makes more sense to me. I do see pro choice bumper stickers around actualy. But its so pendantic to not classify pro-choice as "just a group of people" Its a political movment that has 501c3 orgs promoting it as well as PAC's politicians that brand themselves as pro-life. What would it take for it to be a movment to you? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:45 xDaunt wrote: Are you going to say something important on the topic of whether Democrats' actions are hurting the pro-choice brand or are you simply going to argue semantics? I'm not interested in the latter. Am I going to engage in the bad faith argument you made on the terms you set? No likely. Again, you have yet to prove there are only two options. Or that the Democrats are not simply standing by their stance on opposing bad parts of abortion legislation. Because that NY law you are discussing is currently being written. Weirdly enough, parts of the law people think are bad get opposed. Its crazy, I know. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42258 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:49 Sermokala wrote: I do see pro choice bumper stickers around actualy. But its so pendantic to not classify pro-choice as "just a group of people" Its a political movment that has 501c3 orgs promoting it as well as PAC's politicians that brand themselves as pro-life. What would it take for it to be a movment to you? A coherent and organized set of policy goals that are subscribed to by a formalized membership base would be a start. Right now it’s not even clear what someone means if they say they’re pro choice in terms of the criteria in which they’d permit abortions. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9132 Posts
On February 27 2019 02:40 KwarK wrote: I’m not sure I understand the question. Christian crosses are a religious symbol of varying significance depending upon the intent of the user. Nvm, I read pro-choice as pro-life. | ||
| ||
