2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[phosgene]

Originally Posted by Onions

If you want to kill your baby, you should decide do it before it is viable on its own. 100% against late term murder as well.

You are on tilt.

What if the mother is in labor during a natural disaster? Wrap your mind around that.

so you're an obstetrician? you have overseen how many complicated pregnancies? it's "god's plan" that that every single pregnancy will never have a complication in the last two weeks?

why is it so hard for "liberty" republicans, "no government interference" republicans, "no oppressive regulations" republicans, "no government healthcare decisions" republicans to accept that a woman's pregnancy and the decision to carry that pregnancy to term (or not) is between her doctor and whatever advisors she chooses and NO ONE ELSE?

[Onions]

Originally Posted by phosgene

so you're an obstetrician? you have overseen how many complicated pregnancies? it's "god's plan" that that every single pregnancy will never have a complication in the last two weeks?

why is it so hard for "liberty" republicans, "no government interference" republicans, "no oppressive regulations" republicans, "no government healthcare decisions" republicans to accept that a woman's pregnancy and the decision to carry that pregnancy to term (or not) is between her doctor and whatever advisors she chooses and NO ONE ELSE?

There is nearly no reason to kill a baby in the final 2 weeks of the pregnancy.

No I'm not an obstetrician, i do have a sister in law that is, are you?

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by phosgene

so if the mother and baby die that is "god's plan"? how many women would have to die before you reversed your short-sighted opinion? is it unlimited? what does it take for the "pro-liberty" party to extend some liberty to women who happen to be pregnant? you reject the possibility that it is possible for there to be late term complications in a pregnancy? is that because god is infallible? how many people die for that belief before we pull back and reassess?

bottom line is the policy is government forces women to have babies. where is the liberty? where is the small government? where is the freewill? where is the low regulation? where is the "rugged individualism"? how long will it take for the party of "liberty" to concede that they have no place in an individual woman's healthcare choices?

I can't tell if you are intentionally trying to pick a fight, but you keep arguing against points that I never said nor even implied. What does God have to do with any of this? I developed my own personal belief based on logic. In the case of a late term abortion decision there are two people involved. When a late term abortion occurs there is 100% certainty of one person being killed and 0% percent chance both people survive. When a late term abortion does not occur there is a chance both people survive.

[phosgene]

so you're someone willing to make binding law based on the difference between "nearly no" and "absolutely no" with complete disregard for the human suffering that causes?

isn't it supposed to be liberals that like it when the government forces people to do stuff? you haven't answered the questions. why is it so hard for republicans to allow women to make their own healthcare decisions? isn't it a pro-woman, pro-liberty party? isn't it against "top down" regulations?

there is only one way you can rationalize the republican position on abortion: conservative christians attempting to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat. it's a secular state. deal with it. the cardinals and baptist ministers have no say, sorry.

conservatives rail about sharia law all the while trying to impose their own form of it...

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by phosgene

so you're someone willing to make binding law based on the difference between "nearly no" and "absolutely no" with complete disregard for the human suffering that causes?

isn't it supposed to be liberals that like it when the government forces people to do stuff? you haven't answered the questions. why is it so hard for republicans to allow women to make their own healthcare decisions? isn't it a pro-woman, pro-liberty party? isn't it against "top down" regulations?

there is only one way you can rationalize the republican position on abortion: conservative christians attempting to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat. it's a secular state. deal with it. the cardinals and baptist ministers have no say, sorry.

conservatives rail about sharia law all the while trying to impose their own form of it...

No, the government should not be involved in abortions. I think I said that already. I am pro-choice. I'm purty shure eye said dat already two. You should...

[phosgene]

Originally Posted by Skipscards

I can't tell if you are intentionally trying to pick a fight, but you keep arguing against points that I never said nor even implied. What does God have to do with any of this? I developed my own personal belief based on logic. In the case of a late term abortion decision there are two people involved. When a late term abortion occurs there is 100% certainty of one person being killed and 0% percent chance both people survive. When a late term abortion does not occur there is a chance both people survive.

"true conservatives" argue that there are THREE parties involved, the government being one of them. most people would believe it is a decision between a woman and her doctor, but not right wingers. love it how you guys play dumb like this has never been controversial on the right. well, in a sense, it hasn't, you carry the fetus to term regardless of whether you die or not. that is your only government sanctioned option. since when do true patriots fall in line with that reasoning?

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by phosgene

"true conservatives" argue that there are THREE parties involved, the government being one of them. most people would believe it is a decision between a woman and her doctor, but not right wingers. love it how you guys play dumb like this has never been controversial on the right. well, in a sense, it hasn't, you carry the fetus to term regardless of whether you die or not. that is your only government sanctioned option. since when do true patriots fall in line with that reasoning?

[Onions]

Originally Posted by phosgene

"true conservatives" argue that there are THREE parties involved, the government being one of them. most people would believe it is a decision between a woman and her doctor, but not right wingers. love it how you guys play dumb like this has never been controversial on the right. well, in a sense, it hasn't, you carry the fetus to term regardless of whether you die or not. that is your only government sanctioned option. since when do true patriots fall in line with that reasoning?

Doctor phosgene, please list the medical reasons to kill a viable baby in the final weeks ot a pregnancy based on the safety of the mother.....Excluding natural disasters.

Thank you.

[bowefan]

Originally Posted by jerryw

Trump is here to grab vagina and make America great again and he is all out of vagina

That is seriously funny. You made my day. Now I am Dazed and Confused

[bowefan]

Originally Posted by phosgene

so if the mother and baby die that is "god's plan"? how many women would have to die before you reversed your short-sighted opinion? is it unlimited? what does it take for the "pro-liberty" party to extend some liberty to women who happen to be pregnant? you reject the possibility that it is possible for there to be late term complications in a pregnancy? is that because god is infallible? how many people die for that belief before we pull back and reassess?

bottom line is the policy is government forces women to have babies. where is the liberty? where is the small government? where is the freewill? where is the low regulation? where is the "rugged individualism"? how long will it take for the party of "liberty" to concede that they have no place in an individual woman's healthcare choices?

You need to calm down. Your up in arms claiming that the right doesn't respect women and their choices, but in the same statement you have no respect for other people choices to be against late term abortions. You can't have it both ways. I agree that women have choices, one being if you don't want a baby in the first place and will abort it, keep your legs shut, have the man wear a condom, take the pill or have oral sex.
Now on the other hand, in case of incest or rape, then I have no problem with abortion. As far as late term abortion, I am against it. There are procedures like c section to remove the child without aborting and killing the mother.
Now I talked to my wife about this issue and she told me that the role of a mother is to love and nurture and protect a child, even lay down their life for their child. She is against late term abortions and sides with me on my other opinions on abortion that I stated above. We are not republican or religious.
Are you telling me, that your opinion overshadows ours, just because you believe in abortions at any point of the pregnancy. Sounds like your closed minded and only want your opinion to be gospel and the law of the land, without taking in someone else's beliefs and morals.
Are you taking away my Pro-Choice to disagree with you?
Better yet are you taking away my wife's Pro-Choice to disagree with you, without being labeled as a monster because we believe all lives matters. Whether out of the womb or in the womb with a beating heart.

[bowefan]

Phosgene,

A man walks up to a pregnant woman on the way to the abortion clinic to have an abortion, and shoots her dead.The child dies too. The man is caught a block away and goes to jail. Should the man be charged with 1 murder or 2 murders(unborn baby)?
I really like to hear your answer and I am not being sarcastic.

[Anderdale]

Don't feed the phosgene troll. He/she can murder babies if he/she wishes.

[Lockdown32]

With so many different ways to prevent pregnancies now abortion shouldn't even be a topic we need to discuss. If you are getting pregnant and not trying to it's one of three main things. No protection, rape, or protection failed. If you feel you are responsible enough to have sex then you should be ready for the consequences of those actions. This goes for the men and women.

With the high percentage rates that so many forms of protection have now the numbers we are seeing shouldn't exist. They do because people we call adults aren't acting like adults. Protection failing isn't why there are so many unwanted pregnancies now. It's people who think they can go out and have unprotected sex and not have to face the consequences because they can just go to the doctor and bam no more baby.

In extreme cases such as rape I completely understand women having a choice to have an abortion. I don't agree with abortion, but in such a traumatizing instance I completely understand the need for it to be an option.

When you have consentual sex you have to remember there can be enormous consequences and if you can't deal with them then go take a cold shower!

[corndog]

Originally Posted by phosgene

if it were true. republicans have held up aid for some disasters. just wondering what your definition of "conservatism" is? most people that call themselves "true conservatives" do not believe in any government spending that is not directed by the constitution. ron paul, when he was in congress, voted against disaster aid all the time.

if you seek a "true conservative" to be the chief executive of the united states, invest some time to research what that really means and what the consequences are.

Phosgene,
You are only listening to one side of the story as usual.
Conservatives/Republicans are totally for disaster aid and know that it is needed. The problem arises when billions of dollars in pork belly items (money that has nothing to do with the disaster) are added to the disaster relief bill by politicians to get things done in their own districts or states. Politicians (especially Democrats) are notorious for attaching pork to disaster relief money bills because they know that the country will scream bloody murder if the bill isn't passed by those "mean uncaring Republicans". Sure enough, when the bill either doesn't pass or gets many "no" votes, the fingers point directly at those who "don't care".

When your wife is cooking dinner and hurriedly sends you to Walmart for items that she needs to finish cooking, do you arrive back home with a 32 inch HDTV, a singing fish, and a nifty new shirt or do you just bring back what she asked for and needs right now?

This is just one of the millions of reasons that Washington needs to be turned upside down and term limits is a good start.

[bowefan]

Originally Posted by corndog

Phosgene,
You are only listening to one side of the story as usual.
Conservatives/Republicans are totally for disaster aid and know that it is needed. The problem arises when billions of dollars in pork belly items (money that has nothing to do with the disaster) are added to the disaster relief bill by politicians to get things done in their own districts or states. Politicians (especially Democrats) are notorious for attaching pork to disaster relief money bills because they know that the country will scream bloody murder if the bill isn't passed by those "mean uncaring Republicans". Sure enough, when the bill either doesn't pass or gets many "no" votes, the fingers point directly at those who "don't care".

When your wife is cooking dinner and hurriedly sends you to Walmart for items that she needs to finish cooking, do you arrive back home with a 32 inch HDTV, a singing fish, and a nifty new shirt or do you just bring back what she asked for and needs right now?

This is just one of the millions of reasons that Washington needs to be turned upside down and term limits is a good start.

I, as an American citizen, approve this message

[sonnyday]

Originally Posted by corndog

When your wife is cooking dinner and hurriedly sends you to Walmart for items that she needs to finish cooking, do you arrive back home with a 32 inch HDTV, a singing fish, and a nifty new shirt or do you just bring back what she asked for and needs right now?

You know half this forum is stopping in the card aisle to look at blasters

[TheHeel]

Originally Posted by sonnyday

You know half this forum is stopping in the card aisle to look at blasters

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by sonnyday

You know half this forum is stopping in the card aisle to look at blasters

I try to walk by that section without looking but you know what happens. Hahaha

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Do you realize that I actually started chuckling before reading your last line about chuckling?

Quite the prediction! Perhaps you should tell me who's gonna win because while my mind says Clinton does have it in the bag (As Calc said above); I also see tens of thousands of people at Trump rallies everyday in cities across all swing states. Perhaps I should be praying for a little rain and wind in Florida on election day to keep the uninspired home and dry?

i suspect Trump rallies are so populous because people that generally hide their beliefs are excited to be in a crowd of like-minded people.

Originally Posted by Onions

What is it with you and disaster aid? It's gonna be OK. Even the most conservative among us will approve rebuilding disaster areas.

I feel like Ted Cruz voted against it for Sandy or Katrina (can't remember which), and immediately voted for it when something affected Texas.

Originally Posted by Lockdown32

With so many different ways to prevent pregnancies now abortion shouldn't even be a topic we need to discuss. If you are getting pregnant and not trying to it's one of three main things. No protection, rape, or protection failed. If you feel you are responsible enough to have sex then you should be ready for the consequences of those actions. This goes for the men and women.

With the high percentage rates that so many forms of protection have now the numbers we are seeing shouldn't exist. They do because people we call adults aren't acting like adults. Protection failing isn't why there are so many unwanted pregnancies now. It's people who think they can go out and have unprotected sex and not have to face the consequences because they can just go to the doctor and bam no more baby.

In extreme cases such as rape I completely understand women having a choice to have an abortion. I don't agree with abortion, but in such a traumatizing instance I completely understand the need for it to be an option.

When you have consentual sex you have to remember there can be enormous consequences and if you can't deal with them then go take a cold shower!

i just wanted to address this regarding "so many ways to avoid pregnancies". Sure, most educated Americans know how birth control and condoms work. Unfortunately, a lot of states have hacked their sex education programs to pieces and/or replaced them with abstinence only programs (which, as Bristol Palin shows us, works just great).

Couple the assault on sex ed programs along with the assault on Planned Parenthood clinics (even clinics that do not provide abortion services), you've got lots of idiot kids that can't keep it in their pants that either don't know how to avoid STDs/baby or just don't have access to the tools to prevent them from occurring.

anyway, the plan b pill is like 500 bucks. what kid can afford that? granted, if you've gotten that far, chances are you didn't have the money for birth control in the first place.

I don't have the figures in front of me, but i feel like it was in Colorado where they cemented more clinics and sex ed programs in place and their teen pregnancy rate fell dramatically. I'll have to hunt around for that story from a few years ago if people are interested or wish to dispute it.

[NeedChapmans]

Another awesome refugee story. 65,000 a year comin'

Iraqi refugee who raped a boy in Germany has conviction overturned | Daily Mail Online

[Brobocop]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Another awesome refugee story. 65,000 a year comin'

Iraqi refugee who raped a boy in Germany has conviction overturned | Daily Mail Online

Good to know that we have a 0.0% crime rate here and nothing ever bad happens.

[silverandblack]

Originally Posted by Brobocop

Good to know that we have a 0.0% crime rate here and nothing ever bad happens.

Ok so even if we take the crimes committed out of the equation how does the govt plan to.take care of this massive influx of people. I havent researched it so maybe im way off base here but my guess is the vast majority of these people just hop right on welfare. Which just adds to an already huge problem. 35% of the population is already on welfare so lets just grow that number by the day. Makes sense cause im sure none of us are sick of paying for other people to live already

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by silverandblack

Ok so even if we take the crimes committed out of the equation how does the govt plan to.take care of this massive influx of people. I havent researched it so maybe im way off base here but my guess is the vast majority of these people just hop right on welfare. Which just adds to an already huge problem. 35% of the population is already on welfare so lets just grow that number by the day. Makes sense cause im sure none of us are sick of paying for other people to live already

Would work similar to this, but stretched out for 18 months.

https://www.dshs.wa.gov/esa/communit...ash-assistance

Cash payments on gift cards in addition to housing & medical insurance. The amount to be determined.

[no10pin]

Originally Posted by sonnyday

You know half this forum is stopping in the card aisle to look at blasters

Half? Did you mean 99%?

[trixstar]

Some early numbers from Nevada

The Nevada Early Voting Blog - Story