| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
Poll: For those who would vote for Obama: Please give your reason. (Vote): I find him inspiring. (Vote): I just believe that he is the best candidate for too many reasons to name. (Vote): Simply to keep McCain from winning. (Vote): I know and agree with the majority of his policies. (Vote): He has one specific position that is very important to me. (Vote): He seems intelligent. (Vote): Because he is black. (Vote): I believe he will change things. | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:43 MYM.Testie wrote: Phoned, to be honest I doubt it. I don't think the republicans will ever win an election again as the population becomes more intelligent and older people begin to die off. Their party line is too outdated, and they really need to split into two factions. The religious crazies can form one party, true republicans can form another party. In a plurality voting system, there is no such thing as needing to split into two factions. The tone will change, and the platform will probably be revised in minor ways, but there will be no splitting of the party. | ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:43 MYM.Testie wrote: Phoned, to be honest I doubt it. I don't think the republicans will ever win an election again as the population becomes more intelligent and older people begin to die off. Their party line is too outdated, and they really need to split into two factions. The religious crazies can form one party, true republicans can form another party. Ridiculous. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:18 Phoned wrote: On the other side of the abortion debate, Republican Santorum says that suicides by women, and also crime, "got worse, much worse" after Roe. But in fact, the female suicide rate is one-third lower now than in 1973. And the Justice Department's annual survey on crime victimization shows a 69 percent drop in property crime and a 53 percent drop in violent crime since Roe. http://www.factcheck.org/society/abortion_distortions.html You can ask me to validate every word with 10 citations from reputable sources, but you and I both know that my list isn't very controversial. Unwanted births would create plenty of financial and social problems. You specifically claimed (among other things) that abortion reduces crimes. You gave no causal link whatsoever. WHEN was there a 69% drop in property crime and 53% drop in violent crime? What years are being compared? With the information given, there is zero reason to attribute the drop in crime rates to abortions. And this entire claim, popularized by Steven Levitt in Freakonomics, IS controversial and there are plenty of people who object to it, for example here and here. Just because Santorum is against abortion and said some counterfactual nonsense doesn't mean the facts support the claim that abortion prevents crimes. I'm not using the word "progress" to push any political agenda. When I say "progress," I mean human progress. Moral stances aside, abortion benefits the human race. When a woman decides to abort her pregnancy, it's because she has made a decision that she does not want to care for her child. It hurts our species when we have children that aren't being raised in a caring, supportive environment. "Human Progress" is an ideological concept that entails the belief that humanity has been shackled by unjustifiable traditions and is now marching toward ever more freedom and equality by erasing those traditions. It is not known whether and how much abortion benefits the human race. Human societies are extremely complex systems and you can't use such crude arguments as "it hurts our species when children are raised in an environment where they might have been aborted" without concrete data to back it up. There is currently no sufficient data to make a claim about this one way or the other. I only pointed that out to show that there could be a correlation between a country's abortion laws, and its state of development. It's no secret that the quality of life for the average person in a 3rd world country is lower than that of someone in a country which is more developed. Use that statistic however you'd like, but it did help me put things into perspective. So if the US makes abortions illegal, or at least subject to vote, we will become a less developed country - because less developed countries also outlaw abortions? Are you kidding? It seems to be that if you don't want America to move in the direction of 3rd world countries, a good first step would be to stop importing 3rd world populations en masse and fundamentally and irreversibly changing the country's demographics. | ||
|
aRod
United States758 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:43 MYM.Testie wrote: Phoned, to be honest I doubt it. I don't think the republicans will ever win an election again as the population becomes more intelligent and older people begin to die off. Their party line is too outdated, and they really need to split into two factions. The religious crazies can form one party, true republicans can form another party. Actually, the population is becoming less intelligent. But don't let facts get in the way! | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
They were fighting an uphill battle no matter who came out of the Obama/Clinton race. They just didn't put up any strong candidate this year. No matter how much people want to bitch about it - McCain was not a good candidate. Just look at how awful his campaign is. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
ProTech_MediC
United States498 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:53 HnR)hT wrote: You specifically claimed (among other things) that abortion reduces crimes. You gave no causal link whatsoever. WHEN was there a 69% drop in property crime and 53% drop in violent crime? What years are being compared? With the information given, there is zero reason to attribute the drop in crime rates to abortions. And this entire claim, popularized by Steven Levitt in Freakonomics, IS controversial and there are plenty of people who object to it, for example here and here. Just because Santorum is against abortion and said some counterfactual nonsense doesn't mean the facts support the claim that abortion prevents crimes. I went ahead and read the Levitt claim and the criticisms here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect I see that there are some controversies with how to prove on paper that this was the case after the Roe vs. Wade ruling. I want to look at other country's scenarios where abortion was made illegal before making a final judgement, but my initial hypothesis hasn't changed. I still think that crime rates would increase if abortion was made illegal. On October 28 2008 05:35 HnR)hT wrote: I'm not here to write a research paper, I'm only using logic. Logic leads me to believe that if a mother is forced to have a child in the United States in 2008, that the child would have additional risks."Human Progress" is an ideological concept that entails the belief that humanity has been shackled by unjustifiable traditions and is now marching toward ever more freedom and equality by erasing those traditions. It is not known whether and how much abortion benefits the human race. Human societies are extremely complex systems and you can't use such crude arguments as "it hurts our species when children are raised in an environment where they might have been aborted" without concrete data to back it up. There is currently no sufficient data to make a claim about this one way or the other. Pregnant Mother A: wants child Pregnant Mother B: doesn't want child Argue the details all you want, but my bet is that the kid born from Pregnant Mother A has a better chance in this world. On October 28 2008 05:35 HnR)hT wrote: What? Where are you getting this from? I never said we would become a less developed country, but I think we would be exhibiting a characteristic of lesser developed countries.So if the US makes abortions illegal, or at least subject to vote, we will become a less developed country - because less developed countries also outlaw abortions? Are you kidding? | ||
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
| ||
|
boghat
United States2109 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
is that really all you guys can come up with? lame | ||
Klogon
MURICA15980 Posts
er..... BARACK OBAMA IS SECRETLY no wait... | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 28 2008 07:20 Ace wrote: I don't think the Republicans had as much as chance to win as you think Phoned. They were fighting an uphill battle no matter who came out of the Obama/Clinton race. They just didn't put up any strong candidate this year. No matter how much people want to bitch about it - McCain was not a good candidate. Just look at how awful his campaign is. I am still baffled as to how McCain could have possibly won the nomination, even taking into account the media bigotry against Romney and the sheer stupidity of many prominent conservative pundits. If there are enough registered Republicans voting for McCain in the primaries for him to get the nomination, even though, on top of being the least conservative candidate on the list, he has the disadvantage of being a too-old senator of mediocre intellectual ability and no clear redeeming qualities, the inescapable conclusion would seem to be that conservatism is a minority position even within the Republican party. It's a given that any Republican, no matter how moderate or left-leaning his actual views, will be portrayed as a right-wing reactionary by the Democrats and their allies in the press. But now it appears that, among the Republican rank-and-file itself, in order to be approved as a "conservative" all it takes is to be a warmonger and anti-abortion. For real conservatives, this was *the* alarming revelation of the year. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 28 2008 07:52 Phoned wrote: I went ahead and read the Levitt claim and the criticisms here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect I see that there are some controversies with how to prove on paper that this was the case after the Roe vs. Wade ruling. I want to look at other country's scenarios where abortion was made illegal before making a final judgement, but my initial hypothesis hasn't changed. I still think that crime rates would increase if abortion was made illegal. I'm glad to see you changed your position and now admit that the link between abortion and crime is merely a "hypothesis", not a solid incontrovertible fact that you have made it out to be. I'm not here to write a research paper, I'm only using logic. Logic leads me to believe that if a mother is forced to have a child in the United States in 2008, that the child would have additional risks. Pregnant Mother A: wants child Pregnant Mother B: doesn't want child Argue the details all you want, but my bet is that the kid born from Pregnant Mother A has a better chance in this world. But your previous post was about effects on "society", or even "THE HUMAN RACE", not just the child itself. My whole point is that you can't extrapolate your reasoning to society as a whole. A human society is much more than a collection of isolated individuals. A person brought into the world as an "unwanted" child is not forever destined to be "unwanted" and unvalued by the entire society. Almost always an additional person is much more a "benefit" to his society than a problem to be eliminated. And this doesn't even take into account the whole moral or religious dimension of abortion. What? Where are you getting this from? I never said we would become a less developed country, but I think we would be exhibiting a characteristic of lesser developed countries. That's loaded language. It's not a characteristic of less developed countries, it's a characteristic that happens to be shared by many less developed countries. There is nothing inherent in the act of legally restricting abortions that necessarily has to do with economic and cultural development in itself. To bring up this connection in making the case for abortion is to make an emotional appeal, not an intellectual appeal. | ||
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
On October 28 2008 08:14 boghat wrote: I listened to the whole 53 minute discussion with Obama and two other law professors and that video above is obvious trash and is completely taken out of context. It is pathetic. And actually if you know anything about constitutional law and the Civil Rights Movement, even though that video provides no context to why he is saying it, it's essentially just basic facts, but the uniformed wouldn't understand that obviously. Note there were two other law professors there that agreed with Obama. Anyone that knows anything about constitutional law knows the constitution is interpreted broadly on many, many issues. I agree. I'm actually surprised that they would put this as a headline. How you can take a 4 minute excerpt of a conversation, with overlays that clearly state things he never said, and put that as a front page link is pretty low. | ||
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 28 2008 06:47 Savio wrote: Thats scary. Although I hate his policies, an assassination of Obama would be one of the worst things that could happen to our country. An interesting view says that Obama's cult followers are secretly, perhaps subconsciously, wishing for him to be taken out before he has a chance to become another shitty president and disappoint their mythomaniac fantasies.  | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games Grubby3512 FrodaN1244 Mlord402 C9.Mang0189 Sick185 ArmadaUGS127 shahzam59 UpATreeSC48 Chillindude33 JuggernautJason10 |
|
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
