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.

(Yahoo)   National poll reflects that the 20-week-ban bill may actually be a victory for Republicans - who have succeeded in bringing the abortion debate away from the difficult rape-and-incest exceptions in which Democrats insist on exclusively framing it   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 275
    More: Followup, Republican, Democrats, abortion rights, Late termination of pregnancy, Democratic Coalition, Marsha Blackburn, House Republicans, two-thirds vote  
•       •       •

1262 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jun 2013 at 12:43 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-26 02:52:33 PM

dehehn: that 0.7% of women who want abortions because they don't understand their own bodies


Abstinence-only edumakashun FTL.
 
2013-06-26 02:54:17 PM

Chewb1zz: So your arguing against a law that doesn't exist and have gone off into your own imaginary world where everyone is against you and you are the last man standing in the moral high ground.


nope, just talking with someone who originally said she thought there should be no restrictions on abortion. It was a discussion of ideas and of how things are and how someone said they wanted them to be. This isn't terribly confusing. Sorry you were unable to follow along.
 
2013-06-26 02:55:04 PM

Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: to morons, perhaps.

parasites cannot live without a host. A viable fetus, by definition, can. Nothing to do with a "fictitious sky wizard" either. You gotta try a bit harder. Showing your hand so quickly is amateur hour bullshiat

[i1.kym-cdn.com image 680x907]


I saw the jpg at first and thought hey, this is going to be funny. Turns out I was wrong for the first time ever.
 
2013-06-26 02:57:51 PM

Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: to morons, perhaps.

parasites cannot live without a host. A viable fetus, by definition, can. Nothing to do with a "fictitious sky wizard" either. You gotta try a bit harder. Showing your hand so quickly is amateur hour bullshiat

[i1.kym-cdn.com image 680x907]


"Nice Guys Finish Last: Why She Goes for the Asshole" is probably better suited for Cosmo or Playboy, don'tcha think?

// I usually have her finish first - seems more courteous that way
// you do run the risk of the sex-coma before your turn comes up, so YMMV
 
2013-06-26 03:01:02 PM

Dr Dreidel: // I usually have her finish first - seems more courteous that way


you have to - is there anything less interesting than helping your partner finish after you have?
 
2013-06-26 03:02:41 PM

serial_crusher: Oh, also on the "want to punish women for having sex" thing, I'd expect the male partner in a monogamous couple to put up half the cost.


If anything, I'd like to reward women for having sex.  But this isn't a thread about prostitution or marriage, so I'll try not to thread jack.
 
2013-06-26 03:10:29 PM
Actually this is the thread you were responding to.

skullkrusher: People like me? I think defining "elective" as an abortion performed for reasons other than protecting the life and health of the mother is pretty reasonable. Why do you hate reasonable people?

sure until some asshole says something like:

serial_crusher: Be careful how you use the word "health". The like to point out the inherent health risks of pregnancy itself ("oh no, it's almost as risky as driving a car!") or make dubious claims about mental health with ridiculous thresholds for what counts as reasonable mental health protection ("being pregnant makes me sad, boo hoo!")

And makes my point for me.


hehe well he is right. People do often try to expand "health of the mother" to every conceivable possible pregnancy related complication regardless of whether there is an actual risk of it

So not too terribly hard to keep up.  So my point stands.
 
2013-06-26 03:10:53 PM

skullkrusher: Ranger Rover


Would love to, studying for the god-awful bar. I submitted this link, got it approved (first time!), yawned at being called a troll by the kinds of people who think the word "troll" means "anybody who posts something that I disagree with", and have been pleased to watch a mostly intelligent and educating conversation roll out.
Unfortunately, it's led to me taking five minute breaks after every, oh, five or so minutes of studying. Not cool.

What especially interested me about the article, and led me to submit it, was the fact that if legitimate, the study flies in the face of the characterization of the debate as a conservative "war on women." Similar to the problems raised by the branches of feminism that abhor when women want to stay home and be full-time wives or mothers, therefore depriving women of a meaningful choice in the matter, this characterization seems to me to alienate pro-life women (and even moderate abortion-disliking women) from other women with the suggestion that they are acting against the interests of their gender and the universal sorority in general. It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.
 
2013-06-26 03:15:07 PM
I favor post-birth abortions.
 
2013-06-26 03:16:12 PM

Chewb1zz: Actually this is the thread you were responding to.

skullkrusher: People like me? I think defining "elective" as an abortion performed for reasons other than protecting the life and health of the mother is pretty reasonable. Why do you hate reasonable people?

sure until some asshole says something like:

serial_crusher: Be careful how you use the word "health". The like to point out the inherent health risks of pregnancy itself ("oh no, it's almost as risky as driving a car!") or make dubious claims about mental health with ridiculous thresholds for what counts as reasonable mental health protection ("being pregnant makes me sad, boo hoo!")

And makes my point for me.

hehe well he is right. People do often try to expand "health of the mother" to every conceivable possible pregnancy related complication regardless of whether there is an actual risk of it

So not too terribly hard to keep up.  So my point stands.


No, your point that I was arguing against something imaginary when I was actually addressing a position someone took does not stand. If it makes you feel better, I'll pretty that it does though.

Well played!

/how's that?
 
2013-06-26 03:16:15 PM
I want abortions safe, legal, and common.
/pro-abortion because, come on...some people should not breed
 
2013-06-26 03:16:45 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "In the emergency room they have what's called rape kits, where a woman can get cleaned out."


That quote is a grammatical abortion.
 
2013-06-26 03:17:15 PM

serial_crusher: Philip J. Fry: serial_crusher: $4.11 per test at Amazon, if you Subscribe-n-Save.

I think you mean $13.  Unless you think Amazon will open the box and send you individual tests?

[notsureifserious.jpg].
Did I miss something?  Do you have to use them all at once?
I figured they were 3 individually-wrapped tests inside the same box


Women don't stock up on pregnancy tests like they're toilet paper or tampons.  When you need one you pay $13, even if you get two free.
 
2013-06-26 03:18:52 PM

Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

Would love to, studying for the god-awful bar. I submitted this link, got it approved (first time!), yawned at being called a troll by the kinds of people who think the word "troll" means "anybody who posts something that I disagree with", and have been pleased to watch a mostly intelligent and educating conversation roll out.
Unfortunately, it's led to me taking five minute breaks after every, oh, five or so minutes of studying. Not cool.

What especially interested me about the article, and led me to submit it, was the fact that if legitimate, the study flies in the face of the characterization of the debate as a conservative "war on women." Similar to the problems raised by the branches of feminism that abhor when women want to stay home and be full-time wives or mothers, therefore depriving women of a meaningful choice in the matter, this characterization seems to me to alienate pro-life women (and even moderate abortion-disliking women) from other women with the suggestion that they are acting against the interests of their gender and the universal sorority in general. It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.


there is, without a doubt, a not insignificant of mouthbreathing shiatheads in the GOP and on the right in general. So many, in fact, that it is hard to take any of them seriously anymore. While I agree that a pro-life position is not necessarily an anti-woman position and have often argued that point, in 2013 it is hard to see how the more vocal people on the right are anything but anti-women.

However, this is Fark and fark nuance cuz nuance is hard.

/good luck on the bar, law talkin guy
 
2013-06-26 03:19:40 PM

skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: // I usually have her finish first - seems more courteous that way

you have to - is there anything less interesting than helping your partner finish after you have?


If she's hot or makes sexy noises, then yes (one ex - I coulda watched her double-click all damn day). Also, some of the women I've been with only need 5min or so before they're good to go again, so (assuming I don't go all sex-coma) they may get a Round 2.

// because where better to talk "Philosophy of Sex" than an abortion thread?
 
2013-06-26 03:23:51 PM

ZombieApocalypseKitten: Some pregnancies are so asymptomatic that the mother still have her period throughout their pregnancy.


True but if we're going to play "who has the better corner case" and I've got to choose between two laws where one enables a woman who had an asymptomatic pregnancy to kill a perfectly healthy 7-9 month old fetus (which for reasonable people is not acceptable), and the other prevents her from doing so, leaving the option of missing a month (or in some cases more) work to have a c-section or give birth and then put it up for adoption, I'd pick the lesser of two evils and spare the baby, and institute some kind of national mandatory 1 month paid maternity leave for the mother (and more assistance should complications come into the picture).

That would be the decent thing to do, however the most vocal people writing abortion laws are hardliners that aren't willing to compromise at all - so we're stuck with Rightards that want to prevent all abortion, always and never give any mother anything, ever in terms of assistance, or healthcare or education, and Libtards that think questioning any woman's decision anytime, ever is always blasphemy committed by white men to punish women for having vaginas.
 
2013-06-26 03:25:04 PM

Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: // I usually have her finish first - seems more courteous that way

you have to - is there anything less interesting than helping your partner finish after you have?

If she's hot or makes sexy noises, then yes (one ex - I coulda watched her double-click all damn day). Also, some of the women I've been with only need 5min or so before they're good to go again, so (assuming I don't go all sex-coma) they may get a Round 2.

// because where better to talk "Philosophy of Sex" than an abortion thread?


Used to be able to do the quick back to back sessions but can't do it anymore. Sex then baseball these days for me. Though I agree that watching is still very entertaining even immediately following your own finish. Helping is more of a duty than a pleasure at that time though, imo
 
2013-06-26 03:29:10 PM

Dr Dreidel: skullkrusher: Dr Dreidel: // I usually have her finish first - seems more courteous that way

you have to - is there anything less interesting than helping your partner finish after you have?

If she's hot or makes sexy noises, then yes (one ex - I coulda watched her double-click all damn day). Also, some of the women I've been with only need 5min or so before they're good to go again, so (assuming I don't go all sex-coma) they may get a Round 2.

// because where better to talk "Philosophy of Sex" than an abortion thread?


You can't have abortion without sex.  Possibly some good sex.  Unless we're talking about the Virgin Mary.  Did I just start talking about aborting Jesus?  Should I now have done that?  Good thing I'm atheist, otherwise I could be in some trouble.
 
2013-06-26 03:34:45 PM

skullkrusher: mcsmiley: skullkrusher: sheep snorter: Maybe Republicans need to read their bibles. It has a potion to be used in church in front of the priest, to cause a miscarriage.

nah, it doesn't.

Numbers 5:18-19

5:18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:5:19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:

yeah that doesn't say anything about abortion. Nor does it even mention that the woman is pregnant.


Not exactly. The curs is a reference to a womans monthly cycle. Basically what the "Bitter water" in question does is force a period. Basically a chemical abortion, much like what ru486 does.
 
2013-06-26 03:34:47 PM

skullkrusher: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

Would love to, studying for the god-awful bar. I submitted this link, got it approved (first time!), yawned at being called a troll by the kinds of people who think the word "troll" means "anybody who posts something that I disagree with", and have been pleased to watch a mostly intelligent and educating conversation roll out.
Unfortunately, it's led to me taking five minute breaks after every, oh, five or so minutes of studying. Not cool.

What especially interested me about the article, and led me to submit it, was the fact that if legitimate, the study flies in the face of the characterization of the debate as a conservative "war on women." Similar to the problems raised by the branches of feminism that abhor when women want to stay home and be full-time wives or mothers, therefore depriving women of a meaningful choice in the matter, this characterization seems to me to alienate pro-life women (and even moderate abortion-disliking women) from other women with the suggestion that they are acting against the interests of their gender and the universal sorority in general. It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.

there is, without a doubt, a not insignificant of mouthbreathing shiatheads in the GOP and on the right in general. So many, in fact, that it is hard to take any of them seriously anymore. While I agree that a pro-life position is not necessarily an anti-woman position and have often argued that point, in 2013 it is hard to see how the more vocal people on the right are anything but anti-women.

However, this is Fark and fark nuance cuz nuance is hard.


Thanks; I will need it if I keep posting things on fark and stopping studying every third minute. But it's just so fun....
First bold point, completely agree. It's why I left.
As to second, agree but think the bold sums it up. At this point, I think it's time for a revolution from the ol' silent majority. We've gotten to the point where the vocal crackpots are silencing everyone else. Luckily, I think we're also getting to the point where they're hemorrhaging votes because of it. I would even go so far as to the make the bold assertion that as it stands, anyone who wins in a major GOP primary is at a serious disadvantage in a general election, because of how radical they've made the primary stages. But it's hurting them. I do think there are a significant number of conservatives, Republicans, and women who feel the way you (from reading your posts so far and in the past) and I do on this subject - relatively moderate. Opposing abortion for ourselves, opposing late-term abortions, advocating sense and nuance for situations in between, and reasonable laws with reasonable exceptions. I'd like to think the vocal Todd Akins are the exception - and that's at least partly vindicated by the Republicans' rejection of him and Missouri's electoral stomping of him. But in the end, I think we agree on more than we disagree on - to say the left alienates us (or me, if I should just speak for myself here, that's fine) with its extremity is by no means meant to imply that the right does not as well.

/That said, the people who march around asserting that if you don't support late-term abortions, or support any kind of abortions as "basic health care" - and they are out there - then you hate women - those people bother me probably as much as the Todd Akins.
 
2013-06-26 03:37:45 PM
Hell, parents should be able to abort their kids up to 5 years in to the child's life.
 
2013-06-26 03:41:43 PM
Sorry for the huge text-wall; could have cut that down.
 
2013-06-26 03:50:20 PM

pacified: Hell, parents should be able to abort their kids up to 5 years in to the child's life.


I support it up to the age of 18; you have to give the bastard/biatch a chance to prove their life has merit.
 
2013-06-26 03:50:33 PM

Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

 It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.


because the pro-life position is anti-choice, whats so hard to understand about that
 
2013-06-26 04:01:45 PM

Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

Would love to, studying for the god-awful bar. I submitted this link, got it approved (first time!), yawned at being called a troll by the kinds of people who think the word "troll" means "anybody who posts something that I disagree with", and have been pleased to watch a mostly intelligent and educating conversation roll out.
Unfortunately, it's led to me taking five minute breaks after every, oh, five or so minutes of studying. Not cool.

What especially interested me about the article, and led me to submit it, was the fact that if legitimate, the study flies in the face of the characterization of the debate as a conservative "war on women." Similar to the problems raised by the branches of feminism that abhor when women want to stay home and be full-time wives or mothers, therefore depriving women of a meaningful choice in the matter, this characterization seems to me to alienate pro-life women (and even moderate abortion-disliking women) from other women with the suggestion that they are acting against the interests of their gender and the universal sorority in general. It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.

there is, without a doubt, a not insignificant of mouthbreathing shiatheads in the GOP and on the right in general. So many, in fact, that it is hard to take any of them seriously anymore. While I agree that a pro-life position is not necessarily an anti-woman position and have often argued that point, in 2013 it is hard to see how the more vocal people on the right are anything but anti-women.

However, this is Fark and fark nuance cuz nuance is hard.

Thanks; I will need it if I keep posting things on fark and stopping studying every third minute. But it's just so fun....
First bold point, completely agree. It ...


for lack of a more accurate label, I am a libertarian. I am not an anarchist or even a minarchist, however. I have never been a member of the GOP nor have I ever voted for one for national office. Maybe I am a really liberal Republican. Maybe I am a super conservative Democrat. Perhaps a combination of both. Like I said, libertarian is the best label I guess. Idealistically, a minarchistic government is best. Practically, it's a terrible terrible terrible idea. I like preemptive environmental protections. I support a logical and effective safety net that not only keeps people fed but helps them bounce back. I'm a pacifist. I an pro-life for me, pro-choice for thee. I am the most pro-gay straight dude in the universe. I support immigration reform. I am not terribly troubled by people wanting to make English the national language. People learning English is one of the most fundamental steps that must be taken to succeed here. I liked what Occupy set out to do but really can't stand its fans or what it became. Until (or unless, perhaps, is more suitable) the conservative movement returns to its original principles of liberty and freedom for all people with minimal governmental involvement, I cannot even consider voting for one of them.

As I said earlier - I think it was in this thread - I just really, really like arguing with liberals. Specifically the know it all, no-nothing dishonest shiatbags that infest the Fark politics tab ;)
 
2013-06-26 04:02:51 PM

mcsmiley: skullkrusher: mcsmiley: skullkrusher: sheep snorter: Maybe Republicans need to read their bibles. It has a potion to be used in church in front of the priest, to cause a miscarriage.

nah, it doesn't.

Numbers 5:18-19

5:18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:5:19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:

yeah that doesn't say anything about abortion. Nor does it even mention that the woman is pregnant.

Not exactly. The curs is a reference to a womans monthly cycle. Basically what the "Bitter water" in question does is force a period. Basically a chemical abortion, much like what ru486 does.


The "curse" being referred to is infertility. The "bitter water" refers to the potion itself.
 
2013-06-26 04:04:37 PM

ohioman: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

 It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.

because the pro-life position is anti-choice, whats so hard to understand about that


Agreed. Pro-lifers aren't actually pro-life or they'd support welfare and support for single moms and women's reproductive rights and universal health care and sex eduction. But they support none of those, and then support the death penalty.
 
2013-06-26 04:11:43 PM

skullkrusher: As I said earlier - I think it was in this thread - I just really, really like arguing with liberals. Specifically the know it all, no-nothing dishonest shiatbags that infest the Fark politics tab ;)


And I just really, really like being a flaming douchenozzle.
 
2013-06-26 04:18:20 PM

ohioman: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

 It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.

because the pro-life position is anti-choice, whats so hard to understand about that


Maybe the same thing that makes it so hard to understand that a woman's right to choose is not the only thing at issue. Some people (and I'm unsure and undecided myself, and have no trouble admitting that) believe that what's at issue, in any given stage of of a pregnancy, is a human life. If that's the case, the right to choose, and its relation to feminism, might not be much more relevant than it would be in a woman's right to choose to walk down the street and open fire on someone.
Now, I do understand those are not direct analogies. The person on the street that the woman kills is not within her body, dependent on her body for support, and, usually, able to cause harm to her body or even potential death. But this isn't a black and white debate, at least not to me, and that's why nuance and being willing to listen to the points of the other side matters. The point is, if one can admit that perhaps another component is involved in the debate, in addition to the woman's rights - like the potential and debatable rights of the embryo or fetus upon conception or later in development - then the debate becomes about more than simply the right to choose. Which would mean....that a pro-life position, in the end, could be built on more than just an arbitrary opposition to a woman's right to choose.

Both sides can play tricks with words too. If pro-life is just another term for anti-choice, is pro-choice just another term for pro-abortion?
 
2013-06-26 04:21:26 PM

Serious Black: skullkrusher: As I said earlier - I think it was in this thread - I just really, really like arguing with liberals. Specifically the know it all, no-nothing dishonest shiatbags that infest the Fark politics tab ;)

And I just really, really like being a flaming douchenozzle.


you're in green - you aren't the type I was referring to... besides, do we really ever argue? Not to any great degree that I can recall
 
2013-06-26 04:22:02 PM

Philip J. Fry: serial_crusher: Philip J. Fry: serial_crusher: $4.11 per test at Amazon, if you Subscribe-n-Save.

I think you mean $13.  Unless you think Amazon will open the box and send you individual tests?

[notsureifserious.jpg].
Did I miss something?  Do you have to use them all at once?
I figured they were 3 individually-wrapped tests inside the same box

Women don't stock up on pregnancy tests like they're toilet paper or tampons.  When you need one you pay $13, even if you get two free.


hwuh?
I'm suggesting that you take one regularly if you're sexually active and consider abortion an option, so as to avoid being "surprised" 20 weeks into your pregnancy.  It would be smart to change that particular buying habit if you were going to do that.

/ Sure, somebody like you might not get laid enough to need the whole box before their abortion dates, but for most people...
 
2013-06-26 04:22:56 PM

skullkrusher: stickmangrit: Can someone please explain what a harlequin baby is exactly? Because thanks to these abortion threadsiI am now terrified of googling it for fear of pictures.

it's farking terrifying.


You people have the weakest constitutions....
fashion.russiaregionpress.ru
 
2013-06-26 04:25:17 PM

Mike Chewbacca: ohioman: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover

 It's led to the assertion (and perhaps even the deeply held belief, for some) that a pro-life position, or again, even a moderate one, is fundamentally inconsistent with a feminist outlook. This to me is questionable, and troubling.

because the pro-life position is anti-choice, whats so hard to understand about that

Agreed. Pro-lifers aren't actually pro-life or they'd support welfare and support for single moms and women's reproductive rights and universal health care and sex eduction. But they support none of those, and then support the death penalty.


How much does it take the wind out of your sails when you run into people for whom your sweeping statements aren't true?
Okay, okay, granted they are true of the frightening majority of Republicans, at least the most vocal ones. But part of what I've been arguing in this thread is that in the midst of the extremism on both sides, there ARE people with moderate or centrist views in this debate, who want to advocate for some sort of reasonable middle ground, and they need to speak up!
Those are excellent points, I think, regarding especially health care and sex education, but I don't think the death penalty point is as apt of an analogy here as a lot of people tend to think it is. Both deal with the sanctity of life and the whole yada yada yada of that argument, but at a baseline, they do seem to me to deal with two fundamentally different kinds of life - innocent, untainted life which has not yet had a chance to see what we're like and how it's going to deal with us, on the one hand, as opposed to life which has been around with us for a while, and raped, murdered, and hurt to the point where we have banished them and as a society want to deprive them of life.
/Not a huge proponent of the death penalty, and see a lot of the points against it. But had to nod at the nuances above when they were pointed out to me. Is there more to it? Sure.
 
2013-06-26 04:25:55 PM

serial_crusher: Sure, somebody like you might not get laid enough to need the whole box before their abortion expiration dates


must... hit... preview.... button
 
2013-06-26 04:26:29 PM
skullkrusher:
Re the summary of your political positions, we might be the same person. Hell, I've never seen us in the same room at the same time.
 
2013-06-26 04:26:41 PM

BSABSVR: skullkrusher: stickmangrit: Can someone please explain what a harlequin baby is exactly? Because thanks to these abortion threadsiI am now terrified of googling it for fear of pictures.

it's farking terrifying.

You people have the weakest constitutions....
[fashion.russiaregionpress.ru image 350x488]


I spent all my stat points on wisdom, intelligence and penis
 
2013-06-26 04:27:24 PM

Ranger Rover: skullkrusher:
Re the summary of your political positions, we might be the same person. Hell, I've never seen us in the same room at the same time.


hehe. If only there were more of us.
 
2013-06-26 04:33:34 PM

Ranger Rover: How much does it take the wind out of your sails when you run into people for whom your sweeping statements aren't true?


It doesn't. It actually makes me very, very happy. Because those are people who are consistent in their beliefs. I have one good friend who thinks all abortion is murder, and so he supports no abortion rights unless the mother's life is in danger or the fetus is incompatible with human life. If abortion is murder, then it's ALWAYS murder. However, he also supports free birth control pills for anyone who wants them, and he thinks kids should be taught all about how to not make babies, because not making babies when you don't want them is the best and easiest way to avoid abortions. Did I mention he's Catholic? He also supports marriage equality because he understands that our government is secular, and that legalized gay marriage doesn't affect his church in any way.
 
2013-06-26 04:37:25 PM

skullkrusher: Serious Black: skullkrusher: As I said earlier - I think it was in this thread - I just really, really like arguing with liberals. Specifically the know it all, no-nothing dishonest shiatbags that infest the Fark politics tab ;)

And I just really, really like being a flaming douchenozzle.

you're in green - you aren't the type I was referring to... besides, do we really ever argue? Not to any great degree that I can recall


Even if we disagree, I don't think we argue much. And I have you green as well (technically yellow with the rest of the more libertarian-leaning Farkers I have faved).
 
2013-06-26 04:38:15 PM

Serious Black: skullkrusher: Serious Black: skullkrusher: As I said earlier - I think it was in this thread - I just really, really like arguing with liberals. Specifically the know it all, no-nothing dishonest shiatbags that infest the Fark politics tab ;)

And I just really, really like being a flaming douchenozzle.

you're in green - you aren't the type I was referring to... besides, do we really ever argue? Not to any great degree that I can recall

Even if we disagree, I don't think we argue much. And I have you green as well (technically yellow with the rest of the more libertarian-leaning Farkers I have faved).


agreed. SHIAT, it happened again.
 
2013-06-26 04:39:28 PM

Ranger Rover: As to second, agree but think the bold sums it up. At this point, I think it's time for a revolution from the ol' silent majority. We've gotten to the point where the vocal crackpots are silencing everyone else. Luckily, I think we're also getting to the point where they're hemorrhaging votes because of it. I would even go so far as to the make the bold assertion that as it stands, anyone who wins in a major GOP primary is at a serious disadvantage in a general election, because of how radical they've made the primary stages. But it's hurting them. I do think there are a significant number of conservatives, Republicans, and women who feel the way you (from reading your posts so far and in the past) and I do on this subject - relatively moderate. Opposing abortion for ourselves, opposing late-term abortions, advocating sense and nuance for situations in between, and reasonable laws with reasonable exceptions. I'd like to think the vocal Todd Akins are the exception - and that's at least partly vindicated by the Republicans' rejection of him and Missouri's electoral stomping of him. But in the end, I think we agree on more than we disagree on - to say the left alienates us (or me, if I should just speak for myself here, that's fine) with its extremity is by no means meant to imply that the right does not as well.

/That said, the people who march around asserting that if you don't support late-term abortions, or support any kind of abortions as "basic health care" - and they are out there - then you hate women - those people bother me probably as much as the Todd Akins.


Problem being that your last statement is currently hand in hand with the first.  It's not that the vocal crackpots are just silencing everyone else, but that the laws are being written to keep them mollified (if not actually by them).

Is it possible to truly believe that abortion is murder and not be a misogynist asshole?  Sure.  It's a difficult line to straddle however.  And it's not just Todd Akin talking about legitimate rape, or Foster Freiss talking about birth control is holding an aspirin between your knees.  It includes:

- forcing abortion clinics to close due to number of broom closets
- closing planned parenthood clinics that don't even provide abortion
- Mandating that women be given disinformation in order to get an abortion.
- Mandating arbitrary waiting periods for abortion.

Even if you set aside all of the "slut pills" and "no pregnancy is ever a risk for the mother" rhetoric, the actions themselves say "we don't trust women to make a smart decision on their own,  women are emotional beings that need to be convinced via scary rhetoric rather than facts, and  stopping abortion is so important to us, that we are willing to adopt a scorched earth policy when it comes to women's health."

Also that older men apparently believe abortion involves a lot of brooms.
 
2013-06-26 04:42:43 PM
Mike Chewbacca:
It doesn't. It actually makes me very, very happy. Because those are people who are consistent in their beliefs. I have one good friend who thinks all abortion is murder, and so he supports no abortion rights unless the mother's life is in danger or the fetus is incompatible with human life. If abortion is murder, then it's ALWAYS murder. However, he also supports free birth control pills for anyone who wants them, and he thinks kids should be taught all about how to not make babies, because not making babies when you don't want them is the best and easiest way to avoid abortions. Did I mention he's Catholic? He also supports marriage equality because he understands that our government is secular, and that legalized gay marriage doesn't affect his church in any way.

Your friend and I have a hell of a lot in common. Skullkrusher, maybe there are more of us. It's nice to hear that, and your friend is exactly the kind of guy that I want to hear speaking up on the political scene - a person who doesn't feel so constrained by party politics and the prevailing polar system to have consistent views.

As a side note, I've resented for some time the partisan-ing [for lack of a better term I'm making an awkward one up, since I don't think "politicizing" really works here - every issue that matters to people in a democratic society is ultimately political in one way or the other] of issues that really have nothing to do with each other or with a consistent worldview. To have to feel one way about gun control because you feel a certain way about abortion, or one way about healthcare because you feel a certain way about foreign policy, is a sad and depthless way to go about life and politics. This is not where I try to de-rail thread into third-party-need discussion, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that the two polar parties do not speak for even a majority of their own adherents on a majority of issues, and that makes it really disconcerting that they remain the only viable options. Something's amiss. Abortion is obviously one of those issues, and that's what I hope keeps that point relevant to the rest of the thread.
 
2013-06-26 05:09:11 PM

Ranger Rover: ohioman: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover


Both sides can play tricks with words too. If pro-life is just another term for anti-choice, is pro-choice just another term for pro-abortion?


No, you are the one playing tricks with words.

Pro-choice is about the woman being able to choose between terminating her pregnancy or carrying it to term. Pro-life is about eliminating one of those options
 
2013-06-26 05:22:24 PM

randomjsa: Gun suicide is a bigger killer than gun homicide

This one is always a 'What?' moment for me.

It does not matter one whit how somebody committed suicide. In the complete and total absence of ready access to firearms, people would just use another method.


The only problem with that obviously framed "lets slip in a pro-gun statement in here" post of yours is that most of the other methods require large amounts of prescription and/or otherwise not in every home medications, huge amounts of alcohol or getting someone else to do the work for you / clean up after you (suicide by cop, stepping in front of a bus, jumping off a building ). Most of the rest available to normal people, or people ill enough to contemplate suicide, take too long or are too painful, over an extended time. People who are considering suicide aren't looking for extended pain - they are trying to avoid it.

Guns are efficient. That's what they were designed for - killing things. Target shooting is a fun sport, and mechanically guns are fascinating gadgets. Ignoring the fact that they can be efficient killing machines that can be abused in the wrong hands is burying your head in the sand.

What the hell am I saying, you didn't want a reasoned response.

\sorry for wasting your time
\\back to they usual foaming at the mouth and tri-cornered hat wearing
 
2013-06-26 05:35:44 PM

ohioman: Ranger Rover: ohioman: Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Ranger Rover


Both sides can play tricks with words too. If pro-life is just another term for anti-choice, is pro-choice just another term for pro-abortion?

No, you are the one playing tricks with words.

Pro-choice is about the woman being able to choose between terminating her pregnancy or carrying it to term. Pro-life is about eliminating one of those options


No, YOU are. And I'm rubber and you're glue.....or something.
Look, you didn't respond to my actual point. If you can say I'm against choice, sweepingly, without asking me, because I identify as pro-life (which, sure, I will, for purposes of this argument) than I can can say you're pro-abortion, sweepingly, without asking you, because you identify as pro-choice. You are in favor of abortions every bit as much as I'm against choice, in the imaginary world you've created.
And: "Eliminating one of those options." For fun? Because we just hate women so much and want to take away their rights to make choices? Because an abortion is just like their right to choose any other medical procedure? Because there are no countervailing societal priorities at issue?
 
2013-06-26 05:40:17 PM

Ranger Rover: For fun? Because we just hate women so much and want to take away their rights to make choices?


For some? Yes.

Because an abortion is just like their right to choose any other medical procedure?

Yes.

Because there are no countervailing societal priorities at issue?

Every bit of good evidence shows that freely available abortion is a societal good.
 
2013-06-26 05:40:43 PM

BSABSVR: Problem being that your last statement is currently hand in hand with the first. It's not that the vocal crackpots are just silencing everyone else, but that the laws are being written to keep them mollified (if not actually by them).

Is it possible to truly believe that abortion is murder and not be a misogynist asshole? Sure. It's a difficult line to straddle however. And it's not just Todd Akin talking about legitimate rape, or Foster Freiss talking about birth control is holding an aspirin between your knees. It includes:

- forcing abortion clinics to close due to number of broom closets
- closing planned parenthood clinics that don't even provide abortion
- Mandating that women be given disinformation in order to get an abortion.
- Mandating arbitrary waiting periods for abortion.

Even if you set aside all of the "slut pills" and "no pregnancy is ever a risk for the mother" rhetoric, the actions themselves say "we don't trust women to make a smart decision on their own, women are emotional beings that need to be convinced via scary rhetoric rather than facts, and stopping abortion is so important to us, that we are willing to adopt a scorched earth policy when it comes to women's health."

Also that older men apparently believe abortion involves a lot of brooms.


Good points, although I'm not sure I understand what you mean about my first and last sentence. I definitely get what you're saying in general, though; may not agree with it all, but I see it. What is the misinformation provided? Are there laws out there that mandate women be given questionable scientific information relating to abortion or pregnancy?
 
2013-06-26 05:41:34 PM

CheapEngineer: randomjsa: Gun suicide is a bigger killer than gun homicide

This one is always a 'What?' moment for me.

It does not matter one whit how somebody committed suicide. In the complete and total absence of ready access to firearms, people would just use another method.

The only problem with that obviously framed "lets slip in a pro-gun statement in here" post of yours is that most of the other methods require large amounts of prescription and/or otherwise not in every home medications, huge amounts of alcohol or getting someone else to do the work for you / clean up after you (suicide by cop, stepping in front of a bus, jumping off a building ). Most of the rest available to normal people, or people ill enough to contemplate suicide, take too long or are too painful, over an extended time. People who are considering suicide aren't looking for extended pain - they are trying to avoid it.

Guns are efficient. That's what they were designed for - killing things. Target shooting is a fun sport, and mechanically guns are fascinating gadgets. Ignoring the fact that they can be efficient killing machines that can be abused in the wrong hands is burying your head in the sand.

What the hell am I saying, you didn't want a reasoned response.

\sorry for wasting your time
\\back to they usual foaming at the mouth and tri-cornered hat wearing


Man, I can't believe I missed randomjism's Boobies.

Yes, it actually DOES matter how somebody tries to commit suicide. This study found that people who try to commit suicide using a gun are twice to three times as successful as people who use the second most popular method to try and commit suicide (strangulation). Putting a gun in your mouth and pulling the trigger makes it virtually impossible for you to reconsider after you've started the attempt. Any other method offers some time for you to realize what you've done and try to stop your death.

Basically, I agree fully with you, CheapEngineer, and I think randomjism needs to control where he ejaculates.
 
2013-06-26 05:44:09 PM

Ranger Rover: Are there laws out there that mandate women be given questionable scientific information relating to abortion or pregnancy?


You clearly don't pay much attention to current events.
 
2013-06-26 05:44:52 PM

Ranger Rover: Good points, although I'm not sure I understand what you mean about my first and last sentence. I definitely get what you're saying in general, though; may not agree with it all, but I see it. What is the misinformation provided? Are there laws out there that mandate women be given questionable scientific information relating to abortion or pregnancy?


Yes.
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report