Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't oppose abortions at all, I simply stated that people (who do exist, and I have some anecdotal evidence as you stated) who use it as a form of contraception are distasteful. I didn't say I wanted to stop them doing it, it just gets me a bit annoyed.

I think the social welfare system is a great thing, it has just become less of a safety net and more like a hammock for some people. The government/taxpayers shouldn't have to fund somebody to have as many kids as they like. I'm an only child because my parents couldn't afford to have another.

Although charging for abortions is probably a bit of a knee jerk reaction on my part, but it's hard to see how you could rectify the situation. Charging for abortions and reducing child support would probably just cause the number of abortions to sky rocket. I guess i'm staggering my way into a "Abort children that you can't afford" debate that I don't want to touch with a ten foot clown pole.

I do think the NHS gets burdened with these free treatments though. It's like 'free prescriptions for all up here in Scotland', I live in a fairly affluent area and it really annoys me that we shouldn't be paying something towards those prescriptions. I don't know whether it would cost more for the admin. of means testing or what. I'm also not suggesting having to pay for everything on the NHS, but prescriptions could at least be subsidized instead of being free (like they were, I'm sure the most vulnerable/those who need them the most got them free anyway no?).

Free uni fee's for Scottish and EU member states, but not allow English/Welsh students the same free Scottish education? That is most certainly wrong, and pisses me off immensely. I wouldn't be so
annoyed if it was just Scottish students, but the fact that EU students can come in for free is a bit of a slap in the face for the rest of the UK.

I guess my point is not so much on how much we spend on Social Welfare, but how it's spent. Better elderly care would be a good start. Getting more funds by scrapping our ridiculous Nuclear Weapons Program would be another good shout. There might be enough left over to have a proper armed forces again.

Got kind of OT there, but just wanted to point out i'm not against the Social Welfare system, I just have some problems with how it currently operates.

Can we all agree the Off-Topic Forum is for pictures of kittens and wiener dogs and debates that won't end except in a thread lock?

The politician said something that angered others, he redacted what he said as misspeak (it will remain to be seen how much he discusses at length in the future about the same subject and to what conclusions he may or may not come to now that he knows now to string two specific words together), and now we're investing half the posts in this thread to what another poster said.

I think we can move on to the next political hot button.

He's probably just catering to the 'outside of Saint Louis' vote: Most of what's outside Saint Louis is forested and rocky terrain populated with uneducated hillbillies. Going camping, I see the most beautiful scenery absolutely darkened by tar paper shacks with confederate flags painted on them. It's pretty depressing.

I'm kind of with Bikini Sean...er--WarOne, I mean, up there. Just be thankful that McCaskill will probably win, especially after stuff like this, and we won't be blessed with his 'special' kind of wisdom.

This man's comments are morally reprehensible and scientifically wrong.

Anyone in support of this nonsense should be better served moving to a fully misogynistic theocracy. I hear Iran is nice this time of year.

I've never understood the furore surrounding abortions over there. Seriously, if someone wants a termination, what the feth business is it of anyone else?

Bunch of pious tossers, 'pro-lifers'. Mind your own fething business and let people get on with whatever it is they want to do.

 daedalus wrote:
He's probably just catering to the 'outside of Saint Louis' vote: Most of what's outside Saint Louis is forested and rocky terrain populated with uneducated hillbillies. Going camping, I see the most beautiful scenery absolutely darkened by tar paper shacks with confederate flags painted on them. It's pretty depressing.

I'm kind of with Bikini Sean...er--WarOne, I mean, up there. Just be thankful that McCaskill will probably win, especially after stuff like this, and we won't be blessed with his 'special' kind of wisdom.

Not that I'm a fan of McCaskill, but I think she'll have this one in the bag. I've heard it rumored that Akin was who she wanted to face off with in the general election since he's too loony even for MO. Hard to believe, I know. One of his primary opponents was even more inept, she was supported by Palin. Wish she'd won, her ads were hilarious. Akin's are too, but more in a face.palm sorta way.

Also, for the record, it'd be the outside Saint Louis/ KANSAS CITY vote, as KC is a fairly reliable bastion for the Dems. Though your description of rural MO is spot on.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SoweWzwf-Q

This man's comments are morally reprehensible and scientifically wrong.

Anyone in support of this nonsense should be better served moving to a fully misogynistic theocracy. I hear Iran is nice this time of year.

He's seems pretty confident in what he says there. He starts off saying that from what understands from Doctor's it's pretty rare (pregnancies resulting from rape) and that in cases of 'legitimate rape' (I assume to help us differentiate from those 'she changed her mind afterwards' cases) the female body can 'shut it down' but maybe it 'didn't work for some reason'. Although at that point he's more interested in talking about punishing the rapist which is a much safer topic to be on because I don't think anyone has much sympathy there.

I'm not getting the ambiguity being argued here. It's pretty clear what he said, he's not tripping over his words. You bet he misspoke.

 Albatross wrote:
I've never understood the furore surrounding abortions over there. Seriously, if someone wants a termination, what the feth business is it of anyone else?

Bunch of pious tossers, 'pro-lifers'. Mind your own fething business and let people get on with whatever it is they want to do.

Absolutely and totally.

This faction loves to tout notions of freedom and independence and the ridding of 'big government' from personal choice until it's matters of religion. They don't want the government or state anywhere near your health if you're dying of cancer or suffer a crippling accident, but want absolute authority over you if you've become fertilized, whether that fertilization was voluntary or not...

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
This man's comments are morally reprehensible and scientifically wrong.

Anyone in support of this nonsense should be better served moving to a fully misogynistic theocracy.

That comment is not fair. Telling people to 'move to a different country' is unpractical. Have you actually ever tried to just move to Canada, much less a country like Iran.

Instead I would push for more states rights. Let the southern states ban all abortion if they want. If people don't want to live there, they can easily move to California, or some other state that does not have religious zealots in their state congress.

Perhaps move all of the religious right to Texas, set off a few charges and push it out into the Atlantic.

They could make it their own country, like COBRA island...

 Albatross wrote:
I've never understood the furore surrounding abortions over there. Seriously, if someone wants a termination, what the feth business is it of anyone else?

Bunch of pious tossers, 'pro-lifers'. Mind your own fething business and let people get on with whatever it is they want to do.

Ive told you, I only really have two proper issues with these Creationist Christian types in America, but its such a big two I absolutely loathe them.

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia

How can people not be as outraged as I am, when they could affect any of us?

Namely, if some blokes gang rape my missus, and I happen to get terminal cancer a week later. They will try and force her to have the kid she concieved through no fault of her own, and force me to live as long as possible even if I'm proper proper fethed.

What's it got to do with them bastards?!

I'm alright ignoring gak that doesn't effect me too much being as easy going chap and all that, and I still wouldn't make a sign and go on a march or anything.. but being as their Hitler style "everyone must do what we decide" tactics on the assisted suicide/abortion debate could affect every family in America, I'm stunned more people aren't as outraged as I am.

This gak could actually affect me one day, so I find it really hard not to get super pissed with them!

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Albatross wrote:
I've never understood the furore surrounding abortions over there. Seriously, if someone wants a termination, what the feth business is it of anyone else?

Bunch of pious tossers, 'pro-lifers'. Mind your own fething business and let people get on with whatever it is they want to do.

Absolutely and totally.

This faction loves to tout notions of freedom and independence and the ridding of 'big government' from personal choice until it's matters of religion. They don't want the government or state anywhere near your health if you're dying of cancer or suffer a crippling accident, but want absolute authority over you if you've become fertilized, whether that fertilization was voluntary or not...

See, it's issues like this that make me pretty much a card-carrying secular stormtrooper. It completely infuriates me. Sure, practice your religion as much as you like, within the confines of your home or church, or within reasonable parameters as part of your community - no problem at all with that.

Practice it on me, however, and the first life I abort will be yours, pal.

They have absolutely zero right to force people to follow the tenets of a religion they do not subscribe to. That's just fething medieval. They can dress it up in all the sophistry they like, but what they believe basically boils down to this: If some scumbag rapes you, it's probably your fault (because of licentiousness, inappropriate or immodest clothing, refusing the sexual advances of your husband...) and even if by some slim chance it isn't your fault, you can't terminate the unwanted pregnancy because it would make Baby Jesus cry. Again, this what these fething lunatics actually believe. It's 2012!

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Perhaps move all of the religious right to Texas, set off a few charges and push it out into the Atlantic.

They could make it their own country, like COBRA island...

That's just as bad as when southerners say that they hope all the lefties move to California and it falls off into the ocean.

Such language does not contribute to any conversation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mattyrm wrote:
What's it got to do with them bastards?!

What blows my mind is that this is the same group that will scream about "Government being to big" and "Government needs to leave us alone!"

Its why I don't have respect for 80% of Republican views. Ron Paul's views are an exception. If you want to have smaller government, I can understand the logic, but make it across the board -- not only where corporations are giving you kickbacks.

Part of the problem I have with a lot of the pro-life folks that I know is that they think that pro-choice = pro-abortion.

I would love to see abortion go away, or at the very least be something that only happens in the most extreme circumstance. But I also think that legislating it away does nothing to actually stop it and will only make it more dangerous for the women who are going to have them. Abortion is a choice, and I don't think it is one that is made lightly and for the majority of women it is a last resort. Taking legal abortions away is only going to bring back the days of motel/backroom abortions that left many women dead.

I think the best way to minimize abortions is to make sure that support systems are in place. Make sure that a mother can be fully confident that she and her baby will be taken care off after birth (insert comment about how nice it would be if conservatives cared as much about the baby after it is born as they do before). Increase adoption services and assistance to people who cannot have children. Provide as many alternatives as abortion as you possibly can, while leaving abortion legal and available as well.

Let the woman choose not to have an abortion because the services and support are there, that is why I am pro-choice. I realize that some women are going to have abortions and I want them to have that option available if they need it and I want it so be safe and legal. But if we actually support pregnant women and single parents then I hope less women will choose to have one.

 d-usa wrote:
I think the best way to minimize abortions is to make sure that support systems are in place. Make sure that a mother can be fully confident that she and her baby will be taken care off after birth (insert comment about how nice it would be if conservatives cared as much about the baby after it is born as they do before). Increase adoption services and assistance to people who cannot have children. Provide as many alternatives as abortion as you possibly can, while leaving abortion legal and available as well.

Adoption services are great for caucasian babies -- of which there is a waiting list to adopt. Sadly, many unwanted pregnancies happen with minorities, and there is much less demand for adoption of those children.
It sucks, but its true.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I think the best way to minimize abortions is to make sure that support systems are in place. Make sure that a mother can be fully confident that she and her baby will be taken care off after birth (insert comment about how nice it would be if conservatives cared as much about the baby after it is born as they do before). Increase adoption services and assistance to people who cannot have children. Provide as many alternatives as abortion as you possibly can, while leaving abortion legal and available as well.

Adoption services are great for caucasian babies -- of which there is a waiting list to adopt. Sadly, many unwanted pregnancies happen with minorities, and there is much less demand for adoption of those children.
It sucks, but its true.

One of the many hurdles, that is true. And that situation would be focused more on the "have confidence that mother and baby will be supported" aspect of reform. I think there is a lot we could do to hopefully minimize abortion and encourage women to have the child without resorting to making abortion illegal and causing the return of unregulated illegal abortions that will kill pregnant women. If we can help parents choose to carry the baby I would be happy, but I realize that we still need safe and legal abortions for women that don't make that choice.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
On the plus side of those rather sad numbers, that is about 30,000 less reported rapes then 1991. So you can take that to be 30,000 less people reporting, or maybe the world has actually decided to suck a little less.

I'd like to hope, but, what would explain such a significant drop? Sex offender lists? Harder sentences? Better reeducation programs?

Would harsher sentencing actually dissuade morons that couldn't understand that ''NO YOU SICK FETH'' actually means no?

Easy access to Pr0n maybe?

 d-usa wrote:
The amount of convoluted mind bending in this thread in order to defend a politician despite all logical odds is giving me a headache...

Yeah... no kidding... ouch

 daedalus wrote:
He's probably just catering to the 'outside of Saint Louis' vote: Most of what's outside Saint Louis is forested and rocky terrain populated with uneducated hillbillies. Going camping, I see the most beautiful scenery absolutely darkened by tar paper shacks with confederate flags painted on them. It's pretty depressing.

I'm kind of with Bikini Sean...er--WarOne, I mean, up there. Just be thankful that McCaskill will probably win, especially after stuff like this, and we won't be blessed with his 'special' kind of wisdom.

This is mostly true... except for the "uneducated" part... we are educated, gun-loving hillbillies

But, McCaskill is done... MO will vote for anyone beside her... and yes that includes Atkins. He's a known quality here and I don't think this comment will hurt him, if at all.

That comment is not fair. Telling people to 'move to a different country' is unpractical. Have you actually ever tried to just move to Canada, much less a country like Iran.

Instead I would push for more states rights. Let the southern states ban all abortion if they want. If people don't want to live there, they can easily move to California, or some other state that does not have religious zealots in their state congress.

I can get behind this...

This topic is really explosive. I get tired of hearing "Legitimate Rape"... or "Rape-Rape" or any other euphemism.

Rape is simply that... Rape.

I'm honestly torn on this subject...

On the one hand, Rape is one of the worst thing you can do to another human.

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

I've known people who've been raped (male/female) and seen the long-term damage...

On the contrary, I've befriended 2 people who were the byproduct of rape. Wonderful, normal people that their mothers chose to keep them. (or was unable to get abortion).

Also, in a candid moment with my mother... mom/dad "discussed" getting an abortion on their 3rd child (my brother) because if the hard times they were in... but, luckily, they couldn't do it and now my Bro is kicking azz and taking names.

However, I truly believe that FEDERAL government needs to stay out of this... this is a states issue.

How's that for a twister?

I am truly in awe of the women who are able to carry a child to term that is the result of a rape, and I am amazed at the love they can show to a child that is also a constant reminder of that horrific crime against them.

I would imagine that the majority of women might not have the strength to do that, and I don't think any less of them for it though.

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

By that definition, taking antibiotics is also willfully killing another life.

Do you mean human life? Because that's up for debate.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
You seem very keen to dismiss the possibility that he only 'misspoke' in the sense that he was a bit too forthright and unguarded about his views. Sometimes when a politician or someone in power does something like this, it isn't a miscommunication so much as them letting the mask slip for a moment and them being a bit too open about their opinion on a matter. Talking about how they 'misspoke' after the fact is little more than back peddling because they're out of their depth and likely to become unpopular.

If you don't mind a quick divergence for a second, this is why I believe Obama is so adamant about using a teleprompter. I know some small section of the right wing likes to mock him for using a teleprompter because they see him as an idiot (who, inexplicably, became president) but in my feeling, the real reason he uses it is somewhat less practical and more craven; specifically it appears when he doesn't use the teleprompter he goes off-message and accidentally says how he really feels about stuff, often in politically unpalatable ways (i.e. clinging to guns and religion).


edit 3x, worst spelling EVAR

 mattyrm wrote:
What's it got to do with them bastards?!

What blows my mind is that this is the same group that will scream about "Government being to big" and "Government needs to leave us alone!"

Its why I don't have respect for 80% of Republican views. Ron Paul's views are an exception. If you want to have smaller government, I can understand the logic, but make it across the board -- not only where corporations are giving you kickbacks.

Ron Paul is about as much of a Republican as I am and the Republican party is not in favor of smaller government. It's voting record and the growth of the federal government over the last couple decades proves that Democrats and Republicans are two halves of the same party, the big government party.

and Ouze I /like/ clinging to my guns, don't judge :p

 Melissia wrote:

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

By that definition, taking antibiotics is also willfully killing another life.

?? I'm a red-necked hillbilly... I don't follow this...

 d-usa wrote:
I think there is a lot we could do to hopefully minimize abortion and encourage women to have the child without resorting to making abortion illegal and causing the return of unregulated illegal abortions that will kill pregnant women. If we can help parents choose to carry the baby I would be happy, but I realize that we still need safe and legal abortions for women that don't make that choice.

On this we agree.

 whembly wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

By that definition, taking antibiotics is also willfully killing another life.

?? I'm a red-necked hillbilly... I don't follow this...

Bacteria and other microscopic creatures are life forms. Penicillin kills them. We kill other life forms all the time. Had any meat or veggies in a meal in the last 24 hours?

 Ahtman wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

By that definition, taking antibiotics is also willfully killing another life.

?? I'm a red-necked hillbilly... I don't follow this...

Bacteria and other microscopic creatures are life forms. Penicillin kills them. We kill other life forms all the time. Had any meat or veggies in a meal in the last 24 hours?

The argument against that is that non-human life is not sentient and therefore does not count.

Its a garbage argument IMHO, but that's what I've heard from the mouth of many people.

 Ahtman wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

On the other hand, I do believe that abortion is willfully killing another life (how can it not?).

By that definition, taking antibiotics is also willfully killing another life.

?? I'm a red-necked hillbilly... I don't follow this...

Bacteria and other microscopic creatures are life forms. Penicillin kills them. We kill other life forms all the time. Had any meat or veggies in a meal in the last 24 hours?

Really...

As Mellissia mentioned earlier, I was talking about "human life"...

 whembly wrote:
As Mellissia mentioned earlier, I was talking about "human life"...

What makes a human life is up for debate. A zygote is little more than a cell/cluster of cells that may eventually become a human being under the right circumstances. The body may naturally flush it out of its system in what we refer to as miscarriage-- sometimes without the woman ever actually knowing that she was pregnant in the first place. That's also "killing", if a zygote is human.

People have been put in jail for far less than that.

Or perhaps you haven't thought your "right to life" argument out very carefully? I know the Republican party hasn't. It's just a political tool used to motivate the base, and the worst thing that could happen to them is for it to actually get passed.

 Melissia wrote:

 whembly wrote:
As Mellissia mentioned earlier, I was talking about "human life"...

What makes a human life is up for debate. A zygote is little more than a cell/cluster of cells that may eventually become a human being under the right circumstances. The body may naturally flush it out of its system in what we refer to as miscarriage-- sometimes without the woman ever actually knowing that she was pregnant in the first place. That's also "killing", if a zygote is human.

Right... I understand how "we make babies"...

There's a difference between the body's "natural abortion" (aka, miscarriage) vs actually going to the abortion clinic.

And to pre-empt this: *I* don't consider using contraceptive as "willfully killing" either... I have no problem with it.

People have been put in jail for far less than that.

So true...

Or perhaps you haven't thought your "right to life" argument out very carefully? I know the Republican party hasn't. It's just a political tool used to motivate the base, and the worst thing that could happen to them is for it to actually get passed.

BOTH sides aren't making their case IMHO.

Look, let's call a spade "a spade".

Abortion kills a human life... there's no question to this.

The debate is really about whether or not this is acceptable.

 whembly wrote:
Abortion kills a human life... there's no question to this.

Yes, there is. Hell, it was really; only relatively recently in history that we accepted that all full grown adults were human, to be treated as actual people with rights.

You admitted just now, for example, that a zygote isn't human. And yet abortion bans would also protect zygotes as "human life", despite the fact that they are nothing more than a collection of cells that might possibly become human if given a very specific environment and a very specific set of nutrients, hormones, and etc over the course of approximately nine months.

Similarly, why is killing a child (if you MUST consider a zygote a child) okay in a miscarriage when it isn't okay in an abortion, which is just a chemically induced miscarriage?

 Melissia wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Abortion kills a human life... there's no question to this.

Yes, there is. Hell, it was really; only relatively recently in history that we accepted that all full grown adults were human, to be treated as actual people with rights.

Imagine that... the human species does learn!

You admitted just now, for example, that a zygote isn't human.

Not sure I follow... are you saying that my having no issues with contraceptives is implicit belief that a zygote isn't human?

Twisted logic there...

And yet abortion bans would also protect zygotes as "human life", despite the fact that they are nothing more than a collection of cells that might possibly become human if given a very specific environment and a very specific set of nutrients, hormones, and etc over the course of approximately nine months.

More twisted logic here...

Look, I understand where you're coming from... I just disagree that there's a timeframe/stage/magical level that delinates a zygote from a human life. They're all one and the same at different stage.

So, when I "say" I have no problem with contraceptives and that it can potentially kill a fertilized egg... yes, that was human life that was destroyed whereas had the women NOT taken the contraceptive, she probably would've remained pregnant.

It's acceptable now to use contraceptive (mostly)... and yes, that's a harsh way of looking at this.

Again, the debate remains as "when/how is it acceptable to kill life"? Instead of getting into an endless debate of "when does life begin?"... ugh.

And for the record, the "pro-life" crowd bugs me just as much as the "pro-choice".



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Similarly, why is killing a child (if you MUST consider a zygote a child) okay in a miscarriage when it isn't okay in an abortion, which is just a chemically induced miscarriage?

Did the woman walk up to Mrs. Nature and ask for a "natural miscarriage"?? No...

A woman choosing to get an abortion procedure is killing an unwanted life.

There is a distinct difference.

Again, until we can have an honest discussing of when it's okay to kill life, this issue will never end.