Irreconcilable Differences?

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
You're presuming most of the women who abort babies are destitute and I'm not sure that's accurate, is there any research on this?
It would have huge social ramifications for sure, and since Roe has lead to a bunch of negative social changes, I have to think that it's repeal would lead to positive ones.
It does not matter if they are destitute, they are people who don’t want a baby. These people aren’t chugging pregnancy vitamins, they are more likely to take drugs, drink alcohol, or smoke while pregnant. Assuming that the procedure just doesn’t go underground, you are forcing women who want to terminate a pregnancy to have a child. Probably not great candidates for parenthood.
This magic wand of reversing Roe is folly if the hearts and minds are not changed as well.
Smoking and drunk driving have been incredibly reduced in my lifetime by a mixture of policies, none of them including banning tobacco or alcohol. The greatest of these has been societal pressure. It just isn’t acceptable to drive drunk anymore, and smoking is something I almost never encounter anymore.
Abortion needs a campaign that is similar, appeals to basic morality, and is secular. You don’t drive drunk because you may hurt somebody, there is no religious argument there. Abortion politics get lost in the weeds because the various denominations are easy to reject in an increasingly secular society. I’m not sure how to make that case, but I believe that is what it will take. Certainly better than finger wagging and having it get all caught up in sexual guilt.
Resources are going to be needed to place children in homes where they will be cared for and loved. The current structure for foster children is bursting at the seams as it is. For all the people who want every baby rescued, too few are willing to step up to raise the ones we have with us now while the parents sort themselves out.
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,871
Reaction score
263
Points
83
My hunch is that he purposefully messes up some words because it gets people to repeat his message. That's really crafty in my opinion. Love it!
Agree. The Covfefe message is now so well established (and repeated!), that it will most likely become a plank in the 2020 GOP platform. Not only crafty, but brilliant! (y)
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,871
Reaction score
263
Points
83
You're presuming most of the women who abort babies are destitute and I'm not sure that's accurate, is there any research on this?
It would have huge social ramifications for sure, and since Roe has lead to a bunch of negative social changes, I have to think that it's repeal would lead to positive ones.
Little known fact: not only both unwanted fetuses, but also impacted stools can be remedied with a coat hanger. Give it a try!
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,506
Reaction score
973
Points
113
they are people who don’t want a baby.
Maybe some day your wife or daughter will be well in her third trimester, and her doctor will give her the devastating news that her baby will die upon delivery, suffocating/drowning to death because of its underdeveloped lungs.

Make sure you tell her that when she makes the awful decision to prevent that suffering, that she didn’t want the baby, OK?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
It does not matter if they are destitute, they are people who don’t want a baby. These people aren’t chugging pregnancy vitamins, they are more likely to take drugs, drink alcohol, or smoke while pregnant. Assuming that the procedure just doesn’t go underground, you are forcing women who want to terminate a pregnancy to have a child. Probably not great candidates for parenthood.
This magic wand of reversing Roe is folly if the hearts and minds are not changed as well.
Smoking and drunk driving have been incredibly reduced in my lifetime by a mixture of policies, none of them including banning tobacco or alcohol. The greatest of these has been societal pressure. It just isn’t acceptable to drive drunk anymore, and smoking is something I almost never encounter anymore.
Abortion needs a campaign that is similar, appeals to basic morality, and is secular. You don’t drive drunk because you may hurt somebody, there is no religious argument there. Abortion politics get lost in the weeds because the various denominations are easy to reject in an increasingly secular society. I’m not sure how to make that case, but I believe that is what it will take. Certainly better than finger wagging and having it get all caught up in sexual guilt.
Resources are going to be needed to place children in homes where they will be cared for and loved. The current structure for foster children is bursting at the seams as it is. For all the people who want every baby rescued, too few are willing to step up to raise the ones we have with us now while the parents sort themselves out.
I’m not forcing anyone to do anything except not abort a baby. How do you know they are doing drugs and smoking?
I don’t think a religious argument against abortion is necessary. Consequence free sex has been a loser for societies throughout history. is your movement going to address that?
I don’t see the connection between the foster movement and abortion.
I don’t think it’s magic. Some states will ban abortion and many or most will not. Let’s see the results.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,506
Reaction score
973
Points
113
Consequence free sex has been a loser for societies throughout history.
You have zero clue if that’s true in the slightest, and you don’t care. You believe in limiting abortions about the same as you believe in limiting private property.

Just another opportunity for you to troll someone on GH.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,506
Reaction score
973
Points
113
It’s only a baby if it’s wanted?
It’s only a baby if it meets the definition of the word baby. The definition isn’t negotiable.

noun
  1. 1.
    a very young child, especially one newly or recently born.

Find a new, accurate word to troll people with.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
I’m not forcing anyone to do anything except not abort a baby. How do you know they are doing drugs and smoking?
I don’t think a religious argument against abortion is necessary. Consequence free sex has been a loser for societies throughout history. is your movement going to address that?
I don’t see the connection between the foster movement and abortion.
I don’t think it’s magic. Some states will ban abortion and many or most will not. Let’s see the results.
Yes! Exactly right! Deciding these issues at the state level increase freedom and give us a better view of what works and what doesn't work. For example, it would be the end of America if California laws were extended to the nation. Because they are not, the whole nation doesn't have to suffer. People can move away from it- as they do. Likewise with abortion we would get to see the affect that banning it versus legalizing it versus just limiting it might have and maybe a lot of lives are saved in the process. Personally, I think that the cure for cancer and many other great inventions have already been aborted.
 

Crosby

Active member
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
111
Reaction score
75
Points
28
Yes! Exactly right! Deciding these issues at the state level increase freedom and give us a better view of what works and what doesn't work. For example, it would be the end of America if California laws were extended to the nation. Because they are not, the whole nation doesn't have to suffer. People can move away from it- as they do. Likewise with abortion we would get to see the affect that banning it versus legalizing it versus just limiting it might have and maybe a lot of lives are saved in the process. Personally, I think that the cure for cancer and many other great inventions have already been aborted.
Good commentary and I think it gets to the heart of this OP. I am really starting to think we'd be better off by separating. We need to give people some real choices. It would be tricky, I know. Maybe it's not doable. But it has happened all over the place in Europe. Abortion is just one of the issues that will never be agreed upon by a far majority. And there are many other issues like it. Let's peacefully separate, provide choices, and everybody can decide for themselves what they want to do and where they want to live. I can just hear it now, no matter who wins the election... "now is the time for unification, not division, etc." Guess what... not gonna happen. We will continue to be more divided than we have ever been. And this will happen until people have some real choices on the table. Choices that are guaranteed by individual country constitutions. Oh, you don't like it here? You should move to (insert whatever state/country). They have a system you would like. Easy solution.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
213
Points
63
Speaking of awkward writing....you highlighted another statement in bold, but now you refer to that. Well okay. My assumption is that the women who get abortions, simply to eliminate the inconvenience are ones that want abortions. There are different discussions to be made if the woman is having an abortion to save her own life, but that situation is exceedingly rare.
So, speaking to the lion's share of abortions- which are the OPTIONAL killing of human life, Democrats want it to be readily available without question. And if you disagree with that stance, then you are at odds with the current Democrat party.
Do you think Democratic voting women are the only women choosing to terminate pregnancies?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
Good commentary and I think it gets to the heart of this OP. I am really starting to think we'd be better off by separating. We need to give people some real choices. It would be tricky, I know. Maybe it's not doable. But it has happened all over the place in Europe. Abortion is just one of the issues that will never be agreed upon by a far majority. And there are many other issues like it. Let's peacefully separate, provide choices, and everybody can decide for themselves what they want to do and where they want to live. I can just hear it now, no matter who wins the election... "now is the time for unification, not division, etc." Guess what... not gonna happen. We will continue to be more divided than we have ever been. And this will happen until people have some real choices on the table. Choices that are guaranteed by individual country constitutions. Oh, you don't like it here? You should move to (insert whatever state/country). They have a system you would like. Easy solution.
Almost like we should just go back to the structure of the country at the founding? A very limited federal government for national defense, settling disputes. And broad powers to the states. Hey Virginia, want to ban guns? Under the old system you could!
But Democrats don't want that system. They want to control all of us. It's too bad.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Almost like we should just go back to the structure of the country at the founding? A very limited federal government for national defense, settling disputes. And broad powers to the states. Hey Virginia, want to ban guns? Under the old system you could!
But Democrats don't want that system. They want to control all of us. It's too bad.
The pro-life movement would not, if it had the power, to ban abortion federally? States rights movements mostly are based on the immediately possible, and rarely on principle. Same sex marriage and cannabis activists suddenly discovered states rights too, and most are full on lefties.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
I remember taking my first carry permit course, and hanging out on the message boards in those heady days. The number of people who wanted the federal government to ensure their permits were honored by all 50 states was astounding, given that a switch of power could also produce a 50 state ban by the same stroke of the pen, were it possible...
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
The pro-life movement would not, if it had the power, to ban abortion federally? States rights movements mostly are based on the immediately possible, and rarely on principle. Same sex marriage and cannabis activists suddenly discovered states rights too, and most are full on lefties.
It's a foundational principle that was destroyed in an illegitimately ratified amendment. Without it, sure, everyone will take whatever they can get. You make a good point. I wouldn't be arguing that the left opposes states rights generally if they weren't constantly harping how racist it is.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,475
Reaction score
1,272
Points
113
It does not matter if they are destitute, they are people who don’t want a baby. These people aren’t chugging pregnancy vitamins, they are more likely to take drugs, drink alcohol, or smoke while pregnant. Assuming that the procedure just doesn’t go underground, you are forcing women who want to terminate a pregnancy to have a child. Probably not great candidates for parenthood.
This magic wand of reversing Roe is folly if the hearts and minds are not changed as well.
Smoking and drunk driving have been incredibly reduced in my lifetime by a mixture of policies, none of them including banning tobacco or alcohol. The greatest of these has been societal pressure. It just isn’t acceptable to drive drunk anymore, and smoking is something I almost never encounter anymore.
Abortion needs a campaign that is similar, appeals to basic morality, and is secular. You don’t drive drunk because you may hurt somebody, there is no religious argument there. Abortion politics get lost in the weeds because the various denominations are easy to reject in an increasingly secular society. I’m not sure how to make that case, but I believe that is what it will take. Certainly better than finger wagging and having it get all caught up in sexual guilt.
Resources are going to be needed to place children in homes where they will be cared for and loved. The current structure for foster children is bursting at the seams as it is. For all the people who want every baby rescued, too few are willing to step up to raise the ones we have with us now while the parents sort themselves out.
This. If they really cared about reducing abortions, they would help promote sex-ed and contraception as well as adoptions. Instead they pass laws to shame women, require doctors to tell them lies and worst of all requiring them to undergo unnecessary invasive medical procedures. Then they close clinics with BS red tape and picket and threaten the ones that remain. It's about punishment/shame of those who disagree with them and keeping their base stoked to vote.

And if they achieve their dream and get a nationwide ban, they are not prepared to even acknowledge, much less deal with the consequences. It will be another dog caught the car moment, just like repealing the ACA.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
This. If they really cared about reducing abortions, they would help promote sex-ed and contraception as well as adoptions. Instead they pass laws to shame women, require doctors to tell them lies and worst of all requiring them to undergo unnecessary invasive medical procedures. Then they close clinics with BS red tape and picket and threaten the ones that remain. It's about punishment/shame of those who disagree with them and keeping their base stoked to vote.

And if they achieve their dream and get a nationwide ban, they are not prepared to even acknowledge, much less deal with the consequences. It will be another dog caught the car moment, just like repealing the ACA.
We've had sex ed and contraception and adoption for decades. Where are the results?
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
This. If they really cared about reducing abortions, they would help promote sex-ed and contraception as well as adoptions. Instead they pass laws to shame women, require doctors to tell them lies and worst of all requiring them to undergo unnecessary invasive medical procedures. Then they close clinics with BS red tape and picket and threaten the ones that remain. It's about punishment/shame of those who disagree with them and keeping their base stoked to vote.

And if they achieve their dream and get a nationwide ban, they are not prepared to even acknowledge, much less deal with the consequences. It will be another dog caught the car moment, just like repealing the ACA.
If anyone really cared about reducing abortions, it would be made mostly illegal and we would shut the welfare system down for all but the physically and mentally disabled. Welfare leads to more lazy behavior. Rewarding failure with safety nets, creates a host of problems including the loss of a sense of self worth.
 

Veritas

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2019
Messages
1,485
Reaction score
385
Points
83
Irreconcilable differences? Thats what happened in the 1860s.
Yes, and can happen again. If the Democrats had accomplished their goal of overturning the election I would have joined the civil war faction. If we are not going to have elections that matter than war becomes the only choice left.
 

Veritas

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2019
Messages
1,485
Reaction score
385
Points
83
Man, you're first part is just bonkers. Trump wanted to work together early on??? Give me a break. You can't campaign to chants of "Lock Her Up" and expect people to suddenly be like, "No big deal; we're cool now".
The person who wins the election as president gets to rule within the guidelines of the Constitution. This person that I did not vote for was never given that chance by the Democrats who never accepted the results of the election. Hillary and her Clinton Foundation was always an illegal scam and shakedown opporation.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
If anyone really cared about reducing abortions, it would be made mostly illegal and we would shut the welfare system down for all but the physically and mentally disabled. Welfare leads to more lazy behavior. Rewarding failure with safety nets, creates a host of problems including the loss of a sense of self worth.
Do homeless shelters increase the number of homeless people?
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
All these people who are getting jobs the first time in the Trump economy, why are they not staying on welfare?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,475
Reaction score
1,272
Points
113
If anyone really cared about reducing abortions, it would be made mostly illegal and we would shut the welfare system down for all but the physically and mentally disabled. Welfare leads to more lazy behavior. Rewarding failure with safety nets, creates a host of problems including the loss of a sense of self worth.
Lazy chicken and egg argument that doesn't address the problem. No one wants unwanted pregnancies to occur. But the right isn't interested in addressing that part of the issue except to blame poor people and bang their Bible.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
Do homeless shelters increase the number of homeless people?
If they are permanent- yes. Homeless people to a large degree are a natural byproduct of the welfare system except in times of depression. They are also a direct result of society turning away from God and morality.

If you read my post- however- I do offer that mental and physical disability are set asides that do need special help and I wish we would and could do better here. Instead we have millions of lazy able bodied people sucking up the assets. Most homelessness involves some mental illness.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Lazy chicken and egg argument that doesn't address the problem. No one wants unwanted pregnancies to occur. But the right isn't interested in addressing that part of the issue except to blame poor people and bang their Bible.
An unwanted pregnancy is a failure. We can't reward failure. It's tough love.
 
Top Bottom