Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   Anderson Cooper: You do realize that you're lying about Mitt Romney's views on abortion, right..Debbie? Debbie?... "Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down"   (hotair.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, Mitt Romney, illegal operation, global dimming, Mr. Roboto, blah blah, Robert Duvall, abortions, DNC  
•       •       •

6722 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Aug 2012 at 9:47 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



355 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-24 11:59:06 AM  

HeartBurnKid: There are precisely four people on the planet right now who have more experience as President of the United States than Obama, and two of them are ineligible to run again.


So? I know several people who are the only ones with experience at a particular job, and they should be replaced. Tenure does not imply competence.
 
2012-08-24 11:59:07 AM  

HeartBurnKid: There are precisely four people on the planet right now who have more experience as President of the United States than Obama, and two of them are ineligible to run again.



Oh, don't kid yourself.  Carter is ineligible too.
 
2012-08-24 11:59:32 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: And by Congress, you mean the current Vice Presidential candidate from the Republican party. You don't see Democrats putting forth bills making something illegal that already is illegal.


Except they are:

Introducing, the fight (again) (for the 3rd time) fair pay for women:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76688.html

Ridiculous, apparently Lilly Ledbetter and the Paycheck Fairness Act weren't enough.... and this is a woman saying it.
 
2012-08-24 12:00:08 PM  
skilbride

cameroncrazy1984: According to your post, he does think some rape is okay, because he wanted to make abortion by statutory rape or incest illegal. Why would you do that?

Now you're getting into the legalese of the mess. Here's how it rolls out:

Statutory rape is actually forcible rape no matter how you work is because they aren't considered adults in the eyes of the law and therefore can not make their own decisions.

In instances where a father rapes his teenage daughter, it's statutory and incest.

If a father rapes his 18 year old daughter by drugging her, it's forcible and incest.

The only people really blocked by using federal funding by the bill would have been people over the age of 18 who banged family members.

At the end of the day, the only thing the bill did was block federal funding to abortions which didn't fall under the forcible / statutory rape.



You're taking all the wind out of cameroncrazy1984 sails - and all the fun out of his Friday nights.
 
2012-08-24 12:00:36 PM  

sprawl15: The_Six_Fingered_Man: And you stated it when you said that you had no problem aborting fetuses that could be viable.

Again, state where I have said this.


For some reason I wouldn't have guessed you're pro-life sprawl15. No bigs, just found it interesting.
 
2012-08-24 12:00:45 PM  

skilbride: Ridiculous, apparently Lilly Ledbetter and the Paycheck Fairness Act weren't enough.... and this is a woman saying it.


Uh, point of order: do women have fair pay now? No? Then this act is likely necessary.

Do federal funds go to abortions? No? Then you don't need an act banning it again.

See the difference?
 
2012-08-24 12:00:49 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Abortion as contraception I disagree with.


Most people would disagree with it. The question, however, is legality.

Galloping Galoshes: Until science can tell us when a fetus is a child, I would go the other way.


You really think there's going to be a scientific quorum on when a fetus gains a soul? What the fark is wrong with you?
 
2012-08-24 12:01:34 PM  

sprawl15: Again, state where I have said this.


I'm sorry, did you not state that you were fine with abortions "until the fetus is viable outside of the womb without assistance...?"

But you betrayed yourself when you then said that late term abortions should be legal.

So, according to you, a fetus becomes a person when it can survive outside the womb without assistance (preemies apparently are not people yet), but that abortions of those people are ok if they have not yet seen the light of day?
 
2012-08-24 12:01:37 PM  

karnal: You're taking all the wind out of cameroncrazy1984 sails - and all the fun out of his Friday nights.


Read my next post, sparky.
 
2012-08-24 12:01:41 PM  

lennavan: For some reason I wouldn't have guessed you're pro-life sprawl15.


I'm pro-life, but have no problem with abortions being legal.

Just like how I'm for gay marriage but don't want dicks in my ass.
 
2012-08-24 12:02:49 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Dr Dreidel: Your religion does not get to tell me how I live. If my religion says that I must stone adultresses (and assuming you're a Muslim, Jew or Christian, it does), why keep me from carrying out what my religion demands? If my faith says that your giving blood is akin to murder, can I ban you from giving blood?

I don't get your point.


I think I do now. You object to my imposing my religious tenets on you. However, my position on abortion does not spring from my religion. Frankly, I'm not even sure what my religion's position is on the subject, or if it has a single position. So this argument falls from a faulty assumption.
 
2012-08-24 12:03:29 PM  

Fart_Machine: Late term abortions are already regulated at the state level and happen with such infrequency that his entire argument is an emotion-based canard.


No, it's really not. That argument gets fundamentally at your beliefs. That it is already regulated in a way everyone accepts and is so infrequent should make it a significantly easier one to have. Yet it's not because it forces people to see their own cognitive dissonance.

Why are you pro-choice? What is your reason? Some people say it's because it's a woman's body a woman's choice and that's that. Except they don't actually believe that. As you said, late term abortions are already regulated and we're cool with that because pretty much everyone is against late term abortions. So they don't really believe in that woman's body woman's choice thing. So why are they pro-choice?
 
2012-08-24 12:03:39 PM  

Fart_Machine: happen with such infrequency


[Citation Needed]

The CDC does not keep records of gestational age for abortions, so the number of abortions performed on viable fetuses is not known.
 
2012-08-24 12:04:27 PM  

sprawl15: Galloping Galoshes: Abortion as contraception I disagree with.

Most people would disagree with it. The question, however, is legality.

Galloping Galoshes: Until science can tell us when a fetus is a child, I would go the other way.

You really think there's going to be a scientific quorum on when a fetus gains a soul? What the fark is wrong with you?


No, I don't. That doesn't affect my argument. Unless one can say with certainty when a fetus becomes a person, I would err on the side of assuming at conception. Type 1 error vs type 2 error.
 
2012-08-24 12:05:05 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Uh, point of order: do women have fair pay now? No? Then this act is likely necessary.

Do federal funds go to abortions? No? Then you don't need an act banning it again.

See the difference?


Women do have fair pay now. In fact, statistics show that when all factors are considered -- experience, education, time on the job, etc. -- women make more money than their male counterparts. (http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html) The problem is that women as a whole earning about 80% of what men are making. But that goes into why women stay at home to raise children, why women take part time jobs, But even when you look at women in the workforce, women are also more likely to pursue 'fulfilling' career paths, rather than one that will land them in a high-paying job. For instance, women dominate the interior design field, and the average pay is less than $40,000 a year. Compare that to electrical engineering, where nine out of ten people with a degree in the field are male, and the average salary jumps to almost $80,000.

I'm a woman in project management, my boyfriend has 3+ years experience on me and I make the same as him. But keep enacting a redundant law based on bad math and justify it.
 
2012-08-24 12:06:17 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: I'm sorry, did you not state that you were fine with abortions "until the fetus is viable outside of the womb without assistance...?"

But you betrayed yourself when you then said that late term abortions should be legal.


"Late term" and "viability" are not independent states. There can be non-viable late-term fetuses. Say, a fetus that grew with lungs outside its body but otherwise is perfectly fine can survive the full gestation...but would never survive outside the body. It never becomes a viable fetus.

Again, you have no idea what the terms you're using mean. Go back to Wikipedia.

The_Six_Fingered_Man: So, according to you,


You have no farking idea what I'm talking about. At all. You're just throwing up strawmen as fast as you can beat them down. Take some Naproxen, go for a walk, and when you're not bursting blood vessels you could try asking questions instead of making a total fool of yourself.
 
2012-08-24 12:06:30 PM  

sprawl15: lennavan: For some reason I wouldn't have guessed you're pro-life sprawl15.

I'm pro-life, but have no problem with abortions being legal.

Just like how I'm for gay marriage but don't want dicks in my ass.


Not possible my friend. Either you're against gay marriage or you want a big penis wriggling around in your excrement. There is no middle ground.

And actually I don't get how you're okay with abortion being legal but are pro-life. That makes you pro-choice. No one is actually pro-abortion. But admittedly arguing about the label is stupid so whatevs.
 
2012-08-24 12:06:33 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-24 12:06:34 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: sprawl15: Again, state where I have said this.

I'm sorry, did you not state that you were fine with abortions "until the fetus is viable outside of the womb without assistance...?"

But you betrayed yourself when you then said that late term abortions should be legal.

So, according to you, a fetus becomes a person when it can survive outside the womb without assistance (preemies apparently are not people yet), but that abortions of those people are ok if they have not yet seen the light of day?


Again not all late term abortions are viable and it's regulated on a state by state basis. In fact "viable" is a slippery-slope term since its assumed that every fetus after 20 weeks could be "viable".
 
2012-08-24 12:06:36 PM  

sprawl15: You really think there's going to be a scientific quorum on when a fetus gains a soul? What the fark is wrong with you?


I mean, really? sprawl has already told you that a fetus is a person when it is viable outside the womb without assistance. Why does SCIENCE need to say anything? Sprawl has it covered. Preemie and in NICU? Too bad, aborted.
 
2012-08-24 12:07:26 PM  

skilbride: cameroncrazy1984: And by Congress, you mean the current Vice Presidential candidate from the Republican party. You don't see Democrats putting forth bills making something illegal that already is illegal.

Except they are:

Introducing, the fight (again) (for the 3rd time) fair pay for women:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76688.html

Ridiculous, apparently Lilly Ledbetter and the Paycheck Fairness Act weren't enough.... and this is a woman saying it.


The paycheck fairness act was filibustered by the Republicans and didn't pass. And do you even know what what the LL act did?
 
2012-08-24 12:07:57 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Unless one can say with certainty when a fetus becomes a person


Which is a nonsense question without a static definition of 'person'. Provide one, and science can tell you. The problem is people come up with bullshiat questions like that without a quantifiable goal and then are shocked when science doesn't take their silly concern trolling seriously.
 
2012-08-24 12:09:18 PM  

skilbride: I'm a woman in project management, my boyfriend has 3+ years experience on me and I make the same as him. But keep enacting a redundant law based on bad math and justify it.


So "Math you don't agree with" is "bad math" now? And your idiotic anecdote is supposed to matter how?
 
2012-08-24 12:09:49 PM  

sprawl15: "Late term" and "viability" are not independent states. There can be non-viable late-term fetuses. Say, a fetus that grew with lungs outside its body but otherwise is perfectly fine can survive the full gestation...but would never survive outside the body. It never becomes a viable fetus.

Again, you have no idea what the terms you're using mean. Go back to Wikipedia.


Seriously, there should be a vocab test required before people get to voice opinions on abortion. Add fetus and embryo to that list.

Galloping Galoshes: No, I don't. That doesn't affect my argument. Unless one can say with certainty when a fetus becomes a person, I would err on the side of assuming at conception. Type 1 error vs type 2 error.


Add person to that list. Problem is society gets to define a person however they want. We can even define groups as fractions of people! Personally, I use viability as my key definer of personhood.
 
2012-08-24 12:09:58 PM  

LasersHurt: And your idiotic anecdote is supposed to matter how?


The singular of 'anecdotes' is 'data'.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:13 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Fart_Machine: happen with such infrequency

[Citation Needed]

The CDC does not keep records of gestational age for abortions, so the number of abortions performed on viable fetuses is not known.


The best estimates are less than 1%. If you have something that says differently then by all means show your work.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:40 PM  

Fart_Machine: In fact "viable" is a slippery-slope term since its assumed that every fetus after 20 weeks could be "viable".


And yet sprawl believes that this is when a fetus becomes a person. But it's still ok to abort them.

sprawl15: You have no farking idea what I'm talking about.


Then perhaps you can explain it without contradicting yourself.

You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Late term abortions should be legal.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:06 PM  

LasersHurt: So "Math you don't agree with" is "bad math" now? And your idiotic anecdote is supposed to matter how?


It's not just math I don't agree with. You want to talk paycheck fairness, you compare people in the same job, with the same education, and same experience, and see if they get the same compensation. You don't say as, "Women as a whole are making 20% less than men" and ignore the fact that they are working 20% less than men or taking jobs that on average pay 20% less than men. That's bad math, misleading statistics, and bunk.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:39 PM  
This biatch reminded me of this biatch... Link

You get told but you are so concerned (or stupid) to acknowledge what you hear and just continue on with your agenda because it's what you're supposed to do.

/RIP Patrice
 
2012-08-24 12:11:47 PM  

skilbride: LasersHurt: So "Math you don't agree with" is "bad math" now? And your idiotic anecdote is supposed to matter how?

It's not just math I don't agree with. You want to talk paycheck fairness, you compare people in the same job, with the same education, and same experience, and see if they get the same compensation. You don't say as, "Women as a whole are making 20% less than men" and ignore the fact that they are working 20% less than men or taking jobs that on average pay 20% less than men. That's bad math, misleading statistics, and bunk.


It's funny because that's not how the data is calculated at all.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:48 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Late term abortions should be legal.


Yes.

What's confusing about that?
 
2012-08-24 12:11:59 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: sprawl15: You really think there's going to be a scientific quorum on when a fetus gains a soul? What the fark is wrong with you?

I mean, really? sprawl has already told you that a fetus is a person when it is viable outside the womb without assistance. Why does SCIENCE need to say anything? Sprawl has it covered. Preemie and in NICU? Too bad, aborted.


What the fark do you think science is going to say on the matter? The whole goddamn debate is about what constitutes a person. There is no universal scientific truth to what personhood is. You can't run a series of experiments to figure out what the real definition of person is, dipshiat.
 
2012-08-24 12:12:25 PM  

skilbride: 'm a woman in project management, my boyfriend has 3+ years experience on me and I make the same as him.


Cool story sis.
 
2012-08-24 12:12:33 PM  

lennavan: Fart_Machine: Late term abortions are already regulated at the state level and happen with such infrequency that his entire argument is an emotion-based canard.

No, it's really not. That argument gets fundamentally at your beliefs. That it is already regulated in a way everyone accepts and is so infrequent should make it a significantly easier one to have. Yet it's not because it forces people to see their own cognitive dissonance.

Why are you pro-choice? What is your reason? Some people say it's because it's a woman's body a woman's choice and that's that. Except they don't actually believe that. As you said, late term abortions are already regulated and we're cool with that because pretty much everyone is against late term abortions. So they don't really believe in that woman's body woman's choice thing. So why are they pro-choice?


So how does this not make it an emotion based appeal? If you're using loaded term like "killing children" then we've already fallen into that territory. B
 
2012-08-24 12:13:08 PM  

LasersHurt: It's funny because that's not how the data is calculated at all.


You want to provide a study that proves that? Because I'm 100% positive you're wrong. (Especially since I provided a link to prove I was right.)
 
2012-08-24 12:13:11 PM  
Unfortunately, even for those of us who support the Dems, campaigning is still a typical political (ie: dishonest) exercise at the end of the day. That means half-wits like DWS will still be sent out on the trail to spout whatever rhetoric their people think will garner votes.

I hate it when the RNC does it, and I hate it when the DNC does it. Since it's inevitable, we need to learn to just tune all that crap out and try and gather the facts without the spin. Easier said than done, but worth it.
 
2012-08-24 12:13:20 PM  
Strike that B. My phone needed to cough up a character.
 
2012-08-24 12:13:31 PM  

sprawl15: The_Six_Fingered_Man: You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Some Late term abortions should be legal.

Yes.

What's confusing about that?


Well, some late term abortions should be legal. There are plenty of late term fetuses that fit your definition of person.
 
2012-08-24 12:14:45 PM  

skilbride: LasersHurt: It's funny because that's not how the data is calculated at all.

You want to provide a study that proves that? Because I'm 100% positive you're wrong. (Especially since I provided a link to prove I was right.)


... no you didn't. Unless you mean you posted it long before we were discussing the issue.
 
2012-08-24 12:14:47 PM  

lennavan: Add person to that list. Problem is society gets to define a person however they want. We can even define groups as fractions of people! Personally, I use viability as my key definer of personhood.


I hear you, but "viability" is not a static measure. What was not viable 20 years ago is viable now. What is not viable now may be in 20 years. I have trouble with defining a person differently based on the state of medical science.
 
2012-08-24 12:16:35 PM  
We can solve this debate.  Ask Republicans if they knew...absolutely knew...that their fetus was going to grow up to be a Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, would they still favor an absolute ban on abortion?
 
2012-08-24 12:16:35 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Fart_Machine: In fact "viable" is a slippery-slope term since its assumed that every fetus after 20 weeks could be "viable".

And yet sprawl believes that this is when a fetus becomes a person. But it's still ok to abort them.

sprawl15: You have no farking idea what I'm talking about.

Then perhaps you can explain it without contradicting yourself.

You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Late term abortions should be legal.


Except that what is technically viable (arbitrarily decided at 21 weeks and even then that's debated) is very different that what will actually survive unassisted.
 
2012-08-24 12:17:18 PM  

sprawl15: The_Six_Fingered_Man: You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Late term abortions should be legal.

Yes.

What's confusing about that?


What is confusing is your inability to admit that you condone the killing of a viable person. Also, I can think of a few preemies that wouldn't be alive today if your beliefs were law. I'd like to think that they appreciate that they couldn't aborted post delivery since, according to you, they were not yet a person.
 
2012-08-24 12:17:21 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: HeartBurnKid: There are precisely four people on the planet right now who have more experience as President of the United States than Obama, and two of them are ineligible to run again.

So? I know several people who are the only ones with experience at a particular job, and they should be replaced. Tenure does not imply competence.


No, but you didn't say the choice was between hope and competence (if you did, I'd laugh you out of the thread for implying that Mitt Romney is competent at anything but looting companies). You said the choice was between hope and experience. Experience arguments don't work against an incumbent. Sorry.

/not sorry
 
2012-08-24 12:17:51 PM  

skilbride: LasersHurt: So "Math you don't agree with" is "bad math" now? And your idiotic anecdote is supposed to matter how?

It's not just math I don't agree with. You want to talk paycheck fairness, you compare people in the same job, with the same education, and same experience, and see if they get the same compensation. You don't say as, "Women as a whole are making 20% less than men" and ignore the fact that they are working 20% less than men or taking jobs that on average pay 20% less than men. That's bad math, misleading statistics, and bunk.


Taking jobs that pay less than men... why would they do that? Its almost as if they are being offered jobs that pay less than men.
 
2012-08-24 12:17:55 PM  

skilbride: cameroncrazy1984: And by Congress, you mean the current Vice Presidential candidate from the Republican party. You don't see Democrats putting forth bills making something illegal that already is illegal.

Except they are:

Introducing, the fight (again) (for the 3rd time) fair pay for women:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76688.html

Ridiculous, apparently Lilly Ledbetter and the Paycheck Fairness Act weren't enough.... and this is a woman saying it.


Beyond the point I made earlier - that the Paycheck Fairness Act was never passed - I have to say, it's impressive that both you and your boyfriend are in 'project management.'

That's like one gay lion tamer meeting another gay lion tamer. What are the odds??

/RIP Greg
 
2012-08-24 12:19:23 PM  

lennavan: Well, some late term abortions should be legal. There are plenty of late term fetuses that fit your definition of person.


Ed Zachary.

The_Six_Fingered_Man: What is confusing is your inability to admit that you condone the killing of a viable person.


Again, state where I've said that. So far, you've just managed to look like a retard trying to hump a doorknob by not knowing what "words" mean.
 
2012-08-24 12:19:46 PM  

sprawl15: Galloping Galoshes: Unless one can say with certainty when a fetus becomes a person

Which is a nonsense question without a static definition of 'person'. Provide one, and science can tell you. The problem is people come up with bullshiat questions like that without a quantifiable goal and then are shocked when science doesn't take their silly concern trolling seriously.


Science is concerned with things that can be measured. Perhaps this is not a measurable thing. That doesn't necessarily make it bullshiat. Frustrating, yes, but not necessarily bullshiat. Science can generally tell when a fetus is viable. But is viability the measure of a human being? Is what is a human being based on the current state of medicine? Or where the mother is? Is a fetus in, say, third world Africa not a human being, but the same fetus, if it were in Seattle, is a human being because in Africa the fetus is not viable but in Seattle it is because of the availability of modern medicine?
 
2012-08-24 12:20:33 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: sprawl15: The_Six_Fingered_Man: You believe the following:

1) That a fetus is a person when it can survive outside of the womb without assistance.
2) Late term abortions should be legal.

Yes.

What's confusing about that?

What is confusing is your inability to admit that you condone the killing of a viable person. Also, I can think of a few preemies that wouldn't be alive today if your beliefs were law. I'd like to think that they appreciate that they couldn't aborted post delivery since, according to you, they were not yet a person.


So where do you think personhood begins? You seem to avoid establishing what you, personally, believe.
 
2012-08-24 12:21:12 PM  

sprawl15: lennavan: Well, some late term abortions should be legal. There are plenty of late term fetuses that fit your definition of person.

Ed Zachary.

The_Six_Fingered_Man: What is confusing is your inability to admit that you condone the killing of a viable person.

Again, state where I've said that. So far, you've just managed to look like a retard trying to hump a doorknob by not knowing what "words" mean.


I'm sorry, did you not just say that you are ok with late term abortions?
 
Displayed 50 of 355 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report