Fake World Events by dreamtrove

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
And yet there are significant differences in those who promote the Left and Right agendas.

There are.

But that is like saying there are significant differences between Masser Johnson and Masser Smith. Neither of them address the REAL problem underlying the suffering of the slaves, which is SLAVERY itself.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 4:55 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Not to snark.... I've been saying for years that we need to start thinking of ourselves as Americans, and deal with the problems we have as a people.

I personally think we have too many laws, and these are eating away at our freedoms.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:07 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
I personally think we have too many laws, and these are eating away at our freedoms.

Maybe its the other way around.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
I've been saying for years that we need to start thinking of ourselves as Americans, and deal with the problems we have as a people.

Thank you.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:44 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
And yet there are significant differences in those who promote the Left and Right agendas.
There are.

But that is like saying there are significant differences between Masser Johnson and Masser Smith. Neither of them address the REAL problem underlying the suffering of the slaves, which is SLAVERY itself..

I'm not disagreeing on the point of those who are in D.C. I'm saying that there are basic differences in how the Left and Right view " progress " ,what the fundamental, proper functions of government should be, and the importance of the US Constitution.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 6:18 AM

I'm not sure. How much of the left right on the board is really about "socialized healthcare! socialized welfare!" vs "free trade! big business!" and how much is it about "Pelosi Obama Biden Clinton!" vs "Bush Cheney Reagan!"

One of the two greatly outnumbers the other from my pov.

Besides, it's not like anyone on the left here even LIKES the healthcare bill. Who would? XP

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 6:57 AM

Yes, CTS Hit closest to my pov here: it's massa jones vs massa smith, I'm gettin a whipping either way.

Wulf, I don't have to scroll back very far, you get what I'm saying, so as we mostly agree, maybe we can stop doing it.

Byte is right, these arguments aren't about those dif, they're about hooray/boo for team blue/red! That said, the problem i have next is

Rap. Really, are there? I mean, not words, policies. Cause they look damn similar from here.

Obama has a massive govt. Healthcare spending bill $800 billion which helps insurance companies, Bush had a massive govt. Healthcare spending bill $600 billion which helps drug companies.

That's not a policy difference, that's inflation.

Bush had a war in Iraq, Obama has a war in Afghanistan.

You know damn well I could go the rough a list of a hundred of these. I mean sure there are tax changes here or there but isn't the goal the same: spend as much as you fucking and while keeping the working class from rising out of their rut?

What is anyone whining about it here going to affect?

My main annoyance is this blaming half the country for the other halfs wrongs. It's a trick to keep us fighting.

From now on I'm likely to resort to posting You iz Trollin'

Hero. Really? We can enforce the laws we have now, we started a civil war in mexico by trying, and here we don't try. Do you really want to see a govt. With the size and power necessary to do so?

Oh, don't answer that, you probably do, stormtrooper dreams. But you can't say this and simultaneously be for limit govt.

Yes ther are too many laws, that's true.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 7:14 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:42 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I agree, DT, even tho’ I’m one of those most at fault. I do see some differences...not in ideology so much when you take actual ACTIONS into account, more in GOALS. I see one side working MORE to help the rich and corporations, and the other side working more toward laws INTENDED to help middle class and the poor.

But I do wish there were less of what you describe. I admit a lot of what I post is motivated by the huge amount of anti-Obama, anti-Dem, anti-Liberal material here; I kinda feel like if nobody calls out the other side, it will be nothing BUT those rants. It’s also why I try to put up subjects that have nothing to do with politics; but if you observe, those subjects get FAR less responses than anything having to do with politics. That appears to be what people here are most interested in; maybe in part it goes to people WANTING to attack the “other side” as a way to have an excuse just to attack. But I’d love it if we could focus a bit more on the positive things done by the administration, silly as that hope is. I mean ANY administration; Bush actually did some good stuff, Nixon, Clinton, all of them have done SOME good things, but we ignore them.

I don’t blame you for how you feel, at all. I wish more felt that way. I agree with CTTS, as well; we are manipulated into doing and believing what each side wants us to, and it keeps us on “sides”, when in actuality our government has had specific goals which are deleterious to the American people.

Wulf, if I saw anything that indicated you were able to find fault with the right as well as the left, I might believe you. But your prejudices are so obvious, your terminology SO biased to the right, that I see no effort on your part to be nonpartisan or even conceive of the left doing anything good. Sorry, I don’t buy it.

Byte, I agree; just counting the number of threads which start out “Obama...” or “Pelosi...” which are ALWAYS negative, it’s easy to see which is gone after most. I wasn’t here during the Bush term, but it was probably the same back then. People want someone to blame for what is wrong; Presidents are great targets, and we’re manipulated to lay everything bad at their feet. It works; all too well.

DT, I also agree

Quote:
You know damn well I could go the rough a list of a hundred of these

and definitely

Quote:
What is anyone whining about it here going to affect?

I would find it much more interesting to discuss the myriad things going on in the world that aren’t political, but I don’t think it’s going to happen, given what I said above. People LOVE to debate politics, it’s black and white to most and they can’t see beyond that. The way we are manipulated and the MSM keep our eyes on our political differences, which works for them. Nothing we do or say can change anything, so I wish we more often discussed things of a philosophical or non-political nature. Not gonna happen, tho’.

I’ll do my part and try to find more non-political subjects so you can see. Most threads will continue to be about politics, and less interest will be paid to anything else. Watch, you'll see. I know, because I've observed it.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 9:35 AM

JONGSSTRAW

All this is real:

Obama
Tea Party
Liberals
Conservatives
Abortion
Iran
Economy
Mexican Border
N Korea
Terrorism
Taxes
Radical Islam
Energy production
Unemployment
Guantanamo

Those things aren't "created" by the media. They're there, for real. There are legitimate differences of opinion by rational people on all of them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 9:40 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Wulf, if I saw anything that indicated you were able to find fault with the right as well as the left, I might believe you. But your prejudices are so obvious, your terminology SO biased to the right, that I see no effort on your part to be nonpartisan or even conceive of the left doing anything good. Sorry, I don’t buy it."

Thats some bs

I was NEVER for the Patriot act. Nor the TSA.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:15 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Those things aren't "created" by the media. They're there, for real. There are legitimate differences of opinion by rational people on all of them.

Yes, but the media helped SHAPE those opinions, depending on which media people watch. Ergo, Fox shapes opinion one way, MSNBC shapes it the other. The MSM shapes it whichever way it does at any given time.

We can never know if people were able to leave behind all their preconceptions, then presented with nothing but REAL facts, if their opinions would truly be that different.

Ergo, yes, the opinions differ. But as I see it, mostly because politicians and ideologues SHAPE which way people view things.

Nonetheless, aside from all that, yes, there is a vast difference on each topic between right and left. The reasons are, to me, what divides us, and the reasons are manipulated to keep us from focusing on the important idea of working together rather than just taking sides and dissing one another.

ETA: Okay, Wulf, so you weren't for those two things. How come we never hear you diss the right, complain about the Republicans, or find ANYTHING positive about democrats, liberals, etc.? You're simply not nonpartisan; if you truly believe you ARE, you're deluding yourelf.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:27 PM

Does it matter if he is or is not? I thought you had committed to reducing the amount of left-right-ing in response to this thread.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:32 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Had doctor's appointment and a tons of other stuff (plus a MADDENING husky who was just spayed so can't go out, so walks around with her favorite squeaky toy in her mouth, CRYING!); I haven't put up ANY news stories today, nor will I have time to. You read my post wrong; I said I would try and find news to put up that weren't about politics, I never said I wouldn't RESPOND to political statements. Sorry you misunderstood.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:52 PM

Hmm. Okay then. I guess I took that to mean arguments about who is and isn't right/left wing as well, such as shooter Loughner, or Wulf. But such speculation will probably always be part of the board.

Poor puppy. :( Give her hugs for me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:39 PM

I don't think it matters who is left or right, what matters is that we allow ourselves to be left right divided as readily as if it were North and South, or Black and White.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:45 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

Not to snark.... I've been saying for years that we need to start thinking of ourselves as Americans, and deal with the problems we have as a people.

I personally think we have too many laws, and these are eating away at our freedoms.

Think bigger. Start thinking of ourselves - AND OTHERS - as HUMANS. Your country doesn't care about you in any way, shape or form. Your corporation doesn't, either.

Start treating the rest of the world like actual, real, live people, and stop treating them like the shit you scrape off your heel, and you're off to a good start. Otherwise, it doesn't matter WHAT the hell we start thinking of ourselves as at home - the rest of the world will still hate us, and they'll come here to express that hatred. Stop treating them like shit, and you'll alleviate most of that, and the vast majority of their sympathizers will vanish as well.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:54 PM

Jong

Not real:

Obama is not an issue. He's a man.

Mexican Border is a dumb wedge issue. It's also an imaginary line. I want that border open, in case I need to cross it. ;)

Radical Islam is our name a collection of valid belief systems. See my earlier thread.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=47070

Liberals vs Conservatives. The more they think about it, the more people are both. This separation is an illusion.

Energy production is probably being manipulated to reduce supply and increase costs. I think both parties and most foreign countries endorse this plan. Until very recently I didn't have a problem with it myself. Now I am not sure how I feel. I guess I'd like to see the price and industry collapse, but at the same time, I think exploration methods have become recklessly destructive.

Iran is a nation of 80 million people. It's a first world country, much like Germany or Korea. It's not a political issue, unless someone invades it. It seems that both parties are down with the current plan for war, or siege. As an issue, it's not real, because the issue you're probably referring to is the illusory threat from Iran. At the risk of being a modern day Bertrand Russell, I would like to declare it absurd, though not as much as the assertion by both parties that remote tribes in Afghanistan are a threat to the US.

Real

N Korea is threatening to invade South Korea. This is not a partisan issue. Neither the democrats, republicans, nor anyone else on the planet as I can see save some extremists in Beijing are in favor of the idea, outside of KJI himself, and his cronies.

Terrorism is also not a partisan issue. No one is in favor of it. It also is not on the rise, and hasn't been. We have been ignoring it for a century.

Abortion is real, but also a wedge issue, and not a policy decided by politicians. It's allowed in the US, by supreme court decree. Decades of a republican dominated court has not changed this, or moved to change it that I can recall. I don't think anyone supports abortion, but if you want to divide people, you can always use that.

Guantanamo is an issue but not a left right one. Both parties seem content to keep it, and many secret prisons, as well as "extraordinary rendition" aka, outsourcing torture.

Not sure:

Taxes effect me personally, but I still recognize that they were made up. As was money. I don't think the two parties really disagree here.

Tea Party is not an issue either. IMHO, it's a reiteration of the constitution. It might be staged, and then, not real.

Unemployment is a factor of the economy. I think politicians mention it, I don't think it really has anything to do with them. I would not be happy with any politician who took it upon themselves, as FDR did.

I guess technically it's not real. People spend their time doing stuff. How many of them left an official corporate or govt. roll in the last 6 months to do something else, probably completely arbitrary.

Economy is not a partisan issue. I've found presidents and congress have little effect on it. America's economy is influenced by the private sector, barring extremists like Hoover and FDR. The business of America is business. Still, economics is largely manipulated

I consider the economy to be an entirely artificial construct.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 4:18 PM

Quote:
Mike:
Your country doesn't care about you in any way, shape or form. Your corporation doesn't, either.

Start treating the rest of the world like actual, real, live people

Echo with edit

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 4:45 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Mexican Border is a dumb wedge issue. It's also an imaginary line. I want that border open, in case I need to cross it. ;)

No kidding.

The joke down here in Texas is that we want that border open, just so our kids can go into Mexico and attend a school and get an education! (I'm only half-joking about that, by the way - the state has decided that the solution to our budget problems is to fire the teachers, close the schools, and sell the properties.)

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 26, 2011 7:58 PM

Mike

Sounds typical, they did that here about 15 years ago.

I was searching earlier today for decadent videos of no moral value and I found one of this Mexican woman at an american border town rodeo. I thought that the image really should be broadcast, because the redneck contingent was basically on their knees begging for the attention of this chicana, and I will guarantee you that at that moment not a one of them cared if she was an illegal immigrant.

Notice the images broadcast are always criminals, or families with "too many kids" whatever.

Mexicans!

Their coming here!
Quick!
We have to build a wall to keep them out!

I figure at least 1 in 12 illegal immigrants is a a hottie, most of them are young, and sure, some not hot, but still, that means kicking out a million hotties. Maybe learning spanish is a better idea.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 2:25 AM

Well damn your eyes Mikey, for making ME redundant.

I was gonna say that, only I woulda been a lot less nice about it despite being in a better mood after gettin some violence fix offa some dimwitted purse snatcher yesterday - dumbass tried to jump out the door and run past me with someone elses purse in his hands and it's owner screeching and in pursuit, totally depending on that whole meek cooperation with crime we've been conditioned to for so long...

Uhhh...erm, she got her purse back.
More than that I'll not say.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 7:08 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Start treating the rest of the world like actual, real, live people, and stop treating them like the shit you scrape off your heel, and you're off to a good start

Well, Mike, we don’t know how he “treats” other humans, but if his mentality is anything to judge by, you may be right. I would say “start THINKING OF OTHER PEOPLE (not just the rest of the world; he could do without his preconceptions of numerous groups right here in America...they always say “think globally, act locally”, right? It would be a good first step, anyway.

DT, excellent post!

Quote:
Decades of a republican dominated court has not changed this, or moved to change it that I can recall. I don't think anyone supports abortion, but if you want to divide people, you can always use that.

I certainly don't support abortion; but I support a woman's rights over her own body.

The LAW and the COURTS haven’t made it illegal or impossible, but the anti-abortion crowd has done a real good job of making it damned difficult to obtain on a local/state level, and putting every roadblock imaginable (and they’ve developed damned good imaginations), to the point where it might as WELL be illegal to most Americans. That IS real, tho' yes, it's used as a wedge issue constantly. Just sayin’, the law means nothing when you can find legal ways around it.

Quote:
Iran is a nation of 80 million people. It's a first world country, much like Germany or Korea. It's not a political issue, unless someone invades it. It seems that both parties are down with the current plan for war, or siege. As an issue, it's not real, because the issue you're probably referring to is the illusory threat from Iran. At the risk of being a modern day Bertrand Russell, I would like to declare it absurd, though not as much as the assertion by both parties that remote tribes in Afghanistan are a threat to the US.

Oh, well SAID! .

Quote:
Energy production is probably being manipulated to reduce supply and increase costs.

Funny you should mention that. Our gas prices have skyrocketed recently, I mean like in the past few days. SEVERAL facilities have taken their plants off line for “annual repair” at the same time. Gee.....

Mike,

Quote:
the state has decided that the solution to our budget problems is to fire the teachers, close the schools, and sell the properties

Here, too.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 8:00 AM

Niki

Thanks.

Re: Abortion, this is all I'm going to say, because I think it's not a real world event unless the law changes:

Quote:
I certainly don't support abortion; but I support a woman's rights over her own body.

Sorry, is a talking point.

The counter talking point would be "babykilling" which I just used but try to avoid. In justification I would say that my use of it is fair: When someone murders a women who is 8 1/2 months pregnant, it is a double murder, because if that baby were to have been born through forced labor at a hospital while the mother was alive, it would have lived, with probably very limited problems. But he can't survive in a dead womb because there's no oxygen. Also, killing the baby was undoubtedly part of the intent, so it's matricide and fratricide on the little boy's part.

Quote:
the anti-abortion crowd has done a real good job of making it damned difficult

Shouldn't they? I mean, I get that you disagree with their position, but by not changing the law, banning the practice or blowing up clinics, they were able to reduce abortions, they should be lauded, even by their opponents.

The way I understand it, the opposition's fear is that the mother's life will be sacrificed (or, to use a term I find despicable "her future" because the child's future is also in balance.)

It is well known by well, basically everyone that the demand for adoption of newborns vastly exceeds supply. This is true for children of all races, such that the market price for a non-white infant is over $30,000.

Now, consider this. Any woman, or girl, who is not able to support a baby could undoubtedly use $30,000 cash, right?

So it's hard to sympathize with the elective act of abortion.

Now consider it from the RTL perspective for a second, which I know is a hard one for anyone with a political point of view, but this forum is just the sort of place where you end up having to do so all the time. I always have to look at things from pro-2nd a, death penalty, and even, positions which I think are basically socialist or imperialist.

1) The Right to life perspective is more statistical than personal. Even if Pirate News' 80 million is high, it's certainly ballpark.

2) Even a cursory study of the dawn of pro-choice to roe v wade reveals it to be a eugenics program, the principle goal of which is to reduce the world population, specially, the population of the poor.

3) The problem with "family planning" is that not all couples are equal. Roughly 1/4 of women are unable to have children, and another 1/4 don't want to. All men cannot have children. That means that only 1/4 of the population can have children.

In order for the population to sustain itself even at zero population growth, each mother needs to have four children.

4) Children die, as do parents. In the lifelong quest to grow up and have four children, there will be some attrition. This raises the number to between 5 and 6. That's a pretty tall order to put on the women of America

5) Simple solution: Those who don't want children should donate their to those who do. This spreads it out a lot. Now we're back down to 2-3 children per women.

6) No one is saying that anyone should be forced to have children, but if pregnant women take no action, the result will be children. This fills the need.

7) The need remains real as long as people die. Someone has to replace the person who dies.

I live in an area where since the introduction of Roe v. wade, the population has fallen by 1/2. I find this is true across all local townships. There are empty houses everywhere. Yards are childless. There are no swingsets or swimming pools.

The reason: Simple. Women here cannot *afford* to have children. This is a social construct, also of eugenics. Because we're poor.

This is so extreme that the state has been coming through and actually removing all of the playgrounds. I gather this is for psychological impact, because an empty playground, like an empty school, creates awareness of the problem.

I feel like a frog on slow boil. If the US govt. had come in and forcibly killed 60-80 million people a la Stalin or Mao, people would notice. The effect here is the same.

Imagine if the govt. had decided that every criminal, asshole, abusive backstabbing individual that might annoy the hell out of you were to be killed by a huge govt. program of genocide.

Now picture who our children might have become, if they had existed. Someone of them would have been assholes, sure.

So, yes, I favor an end to abortion, not a legal one, a logistical one. This is the best way to ensure that no woman is allowed to die so that some baby might live.

Also, I think that it's absolutely necessary to have some economic stability, removing the eugenics pressures, but even now, there's enough options where children would have gone somewhere.

I know a few woman who couldn't have children, and yet were quite wealthy. I don't see which they shouldn't have houses filled with children. Part of this is social stigma, and part of it is a logistical failure, but there's a main final point here:

Our society promotes abortion to those women who either don't want to be mothers, or who are even *unsure* about whether or not they want to be, or can afford being mothers.

Those who promote adoption are RTLer, often christians, and are viewed by the establishment as more or less "terrorists." I find this reprehensible when TPTB are terminating 10 times the number of lives as the holocaust.

It might be mercenary of me to say "let the free market handle this one" but that's the best solution we have until we can reach a level of "the village raises the child."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 8:35 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Well, I would NEVER argue that abortion at that late date isn’t murder! It’s a matter of opinion when a pregnancy is “viable”, and I won’t go into that one...again!

Quote:
The Right to life perspective is more statistical than personal

I think you’d find that’s not true with most anti-abortion people. When one is willing to kill and die for one’s actions, it’s pretty personal; statistics don’t make people kill. And how about killing doctors...you really laud that, along with blowing up buildings? Wow; that’s all I can say. Lastly, no, I don’t find getting around laws anything but reprehensible; just my opinion.

We’ll have to agree to disagree about eugenics; I don’t buy it. As to adoption; if what you say is correct, why are there so MANY children waiting for adoption??? I've always said that any RTLer who adopts a child, I have NO disagreement with their beliefs. How many do? Not many, "statistically".

Reasons for population decline can be myriad, I’m afraid I don’t accept your observations. How do you know people haven’t moved away, leaving only an elderly population? It’s happened around here; people are still having babies, but because of economics and house prices (and fucking Prop 13), people hang onto their homes until they are too old to stay. Economics can cause people to move, as can many other reasons; blaming less children visible doesn’t work for me.

I can't believe you can say that those who promote adoption are considered "terrorists". I've never heard that and I doubt it's true. It's people who want to force women to bear children, who blow up clinics and kill doctrs, who are considered terrorists...and that's just what they ARE. If it were Muslim terrorists who killed doctors and blew up buildings, we'd certainly call them that!

The rest of your post I simply have to disagree with; I don’t want to ramble on as to all my reasons, so again I’ll have to respectfully agree to disagree.

To me, FORCING a woman have a baby is tantamount to slavery, whatever the reasons may be. If we have the right to anything, it should be our own damned bodies.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 8:46 AM

You're... arguing about abortion?

DT? Didn't you just say this was a wedge issue?

Thread derailment commences in t-positive count.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 8:53 AM

Quote:
And how about killing doctors...you really laud that, along with blowing up buildings? Wow; that’s all I can say. Lastly, no, I don’t find getting around laws anything but reprehensible; just my opinion.

DT caveated what he said to EXCLUDE instances of bombs, doctor killings, or terrorism.

Maybe you misread him, but don't mistake his meaning.

Quote:
I think you’d find that’s not true with most anti-abortion people. When one is willing to kill and die for one’s actions, it’s pretty personal; statistics don’t make people kill.

You make an assumption here most anti-abortion people are all killers, or support killers. Might want to watch that. Anti-abortion people could make the same point about pro-abortion people, and both would be examples of inflammatory rhetoric and situational ignorance.

On the anti-abortion side it's ignoring the suffering of the mother and the good intentions of (most?) of the doctors. On the pro-abortion side it's, well, those ARE human fetuses. If the ones in question could survive to term, I can see why they might think it'd be better to live in any case, no matter how craptacular the world. At least they'd get the chance to try.

I suspect that the number of anti-abortion people who kill in the abortion argument are a very small percentage of the population engaged in the argument. And that there are other issues at hand which make them susceptible to becoming killers.

Similarly, the number of people who kill on the pro-abortion side are similarly very small, provided we remember that late-term abortions are rare and usually performed only to save the mother in the case of medical complications.

Neither side is monstrous, guys, except maybe for the people making policies about abortion. Even doctors are just trying to do their jobs. There's only a few people on either side saying "hey, make those uppity women have them babies so they can get back to cooking up dinner" or "dang, I'm feeling particularly bloodthirsty today, I'm going to vacuum suck a fetus out of the womb and eat it."

People are probably split 50/50 on abortion. Otherwise it wouldn't be such a hot issue. It is also, as mentioned, a wedge issue (the 50-50 split is what makes it such an effective one).

I don't have an opinion either way. Kill a life versus condemning a life to long term suffering. Who can honestly promote either one as better than the other? Not me. These are the kind of bullshit triage moral dilemmas where I like to take a third option.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:23 AM

Quote:
It is well known by well, basically everyone that the demand for adoption of newborns vastly exceeds supply. This is true for children of all races, such that the market price for a non-white infant is over $30,000.

Bull. Shit.

You may be able to sell that line of bolus to the ignorant, but you sure as hell have no chance of selling it to ME, that's for damn sure - You, sir, are a liar, and THAT one borders on Rappy-ism.

And don't even get me started on how the same fucking bastards that make every single effort to forestall proper sex education, and block or restrict birth control of any kind at any point - are the same scumbags who then decry and try to roadblock the INEVITABLE, and INTENTIONAL, result of those efforts as a deliberate attack on the notion of women as equals instead of baby-factories, cause in the end that is what this shit is about, do not deny it.

The same pissants who kept knowledge away and produced ignorance, the same dickheads who prevented access to the means to prevent pregnancy because most of the time they're from fucked up religions based on denial of ones own humanity up to and including natural human insticts, then go and try to block the only route a women has left after their social manipulation comes to that result, and scream and whine and cry about a situation they created on purpose with a political agenda, and I am supposed to buy this bullshit about how it's all about the sanctity of life when the conduct of those VERY SAME PEOPLE is the most heinous, murderous, exploitive sociopathy I have ever witnessed in my entire goddamn life ?

Hey, fuck you.

THIS is where your argument here ends, especially when you start it with lies.
‘Ceausescu’s children’ still paying the price of disastrous social policies
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6953987.ece

I don't give a fuck what you *call* it, but to me this whole fucking thing is one issue, a method of social extortion by fuckwads to push women back into the kitchen "where they belong" - but by focusing ONLY on the endpoint, without acknowledging their determined and intentional efforts at the beginning to make SURE there ARE unwanted/unplanned pregnancies, no one else wants to call the sleazebags on it.

But then, what else can you expect from religious wacko sociopaths who wanna return this country to the "good ole days" of Feudalism, it's all part and parcel of who they are, what they do.

And there's you, DT, not only trying to support their argument, but lying through your teeth to do it.
True colors shining through at last, are they ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:29 AM

Although I disagree with your assertion that neither side is monstrous, Byte - I will acknowledge that most anti-abortion folk are unaware (and yes, some deliberately or by design) that the same folk decrying abortion are the ones in part responsible for the unplanned/unwanted pregnancies in the first fuckin place.

THOSE people, to me they *are* monstrous, that very behavior defines them as such by any moral standard you care to name.

And I too believe in a third option, firstoff, calling it for what the hell it is, as I have just done...

And stomping the slimy little gits flat every time they try to block access to education and birth control in order to prevent unplanned/unwanted pregnancies from happening in the first damn place, all the while pointing out their damn culpability at creating a horror for political gain.

YURUSENAI!

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:40 AM

Quote:
You may be able to sell that line of bolus to the ignorant, but you sure as hell have no chance of selling it to ME, that's for damn sure - You, sir, are a liar, and THAT one borders on Rappy-ism.

Frem, you sure about this, or is the difference between his view and yours a fault of the much hated and very abusive adoption system?

It could be that there really IS such a price (not that I want to think about it because of the possible implications of human trafficking involved), and that price is caused by asshole bureaucrats who fully intend to funnel children into a broken foster system (child abuse yields increased crime and murder among poor populations - eugenics) and keep people from adopting as often as possible?

Quote:
And don't even get me started on how the same fucking bastards that make every single effort to forestall proper sex education, and block or restrict birth control of any kind at any point - are the same scumbags who then decry and try to roadblock the INEVITABLE, and INTENTIONAL

This is fair, but it's really not about feminism. It's about slave labour and debt.

Quote:
True colors shining through at last, are they ?

No, he let himself get carried away by the rhetoric of people who want to pit us against each other. After denouncing that was their intention.

Frankly, Frem, Niki, DT, all of the sides have a point here. The fact is, what we really need is the third option I was talking about.

Which is probably some form of adoption, but not the broken damn thing we do now that exists only to screw people over and make them slaves to the machine and increase crime so standards of living stay low. Something new, possibly involvement with a revolution in community values on a local level. People starting to actually give a damn about each other, AND the kids, the whole bit.

EDIT: Yes, and your point about contraceptives and education, also a good solution.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
If we have the right to anything, it should be our own damned bodies.

That is MY guiding principle.

However, I keep running into people who are pro-choice, but support some or all of the following legislation:

1. Mandating vaccines on children in school, with no opt-out.
2. Mandating seatbelt and helmet use.
3. Outlawing suicide.
4. Outlawing assisted suicide.
5. Outlawing the sale and use of recreational drugs.
6. Outlawing alternative health care drugs, products, or services.
7. Outlawing the sale of food that consumers don't complain about, like raw milk.
....etc.

It seems everywhere I turn, my right to my own damned body only applies if I want to terminate a pregnancy and doesn't apply under any other circumstance. Apparently, everything else I do to my own damned body affects society in such a significant way that I must be forced to take action I may not agree with and prohibited from taking action I may want to take.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:51 AM

Quote:

Although I disagree with your assertion that neither side is monstrous, Byte

I expect it to be so, it's an issue that touches nerves on both sides.

But it's also fair to disagree, and thanks for not ripping me a new one. :)

Quote:
same folk decrying abortion are the ones in part responsible for the unplanned/unwanted pregnancies in the first fuckin place.

Well, yes, the ones making the policy, definitely. That's why I specifically called them out. But DT, heck DT would probably agree with you about your safe-sex more condoms make trojan man a national hero points. He's not one of these guys. We've got to pick the right targets, the actual monsters, and stake their asses to the ground. It doesn't do any good to take each other apart for arguments which we can solve.

Quote:
THOSE people, to me they *are* monstrous, that very behavior defines them as such by any moral standard you care to name.

Absolutely. They're pro-slavery. So are the eugenicists, when it comes down to it, they're two sides of the same coin.

Quote:
And stomping the slimy little gits flat every time they try to block access to education and birth control in order to prevent unplanned/unwanted pregnancies from happening in the first damn place, all the while pointing out their damn culpability at creating a horror for political gain.

All for this.

Fixing adoption system and how people treat kids, also a good plan.

Let's do both.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:07 AM

Well hell yes - remember I've gone rounds with MARE before, and prettymuch got told when I was still with the ex that my religious beliefs made it a dead letter, and yeah verily, I am still nursing a grudge about that.

And yes, adoption is indeed ludicrously expensive, I think the CHEAPEST one I ever saw pulled off came in at about $8900.00USD - versus Foster Care which can be pretty lucrative, I'm sure you've heard the endless horror stories.

That $30K figure means a white infant with a clean medical record and family history lacking various genetic markers and hereditary issues, with no felony convictions or other "bad history" on behalf of the parents - and *those* get snapped up pretty quick, in fact there's been many occasion of abuse of CPS/Foster Care to jack them out from under actual decent parents by force.

But if you're race-mixed, minority, criminal history, genetic defects, hereditary ones, that value goes down very, very sharply and quickly.

The fact that I know the going rates should tell you something about how ugly my perspective of the world can be some days.

If there is a Hell, it's not some metaphyisical afterlife, it is the places unwanted children wind up when no one wants to adopt them.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:19 AM

Quote:
If there is a Hell, it's not some metaphyisical afterlife, it is the places unwanted children wind up when no one wants to adopt them.

It's true. and something we need to fix. And something that everyone who isn't a monster wants to fix. I think we're all agreed on this point. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
It's true. and something we need to fix. And something that everyone who isn't a monster wants to fix. I think we're all agreed on this point. :)

You go, girl! That was some pretty impressive peacemaking.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:37 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Goodness, didn't this thread start about wedge issues which are "fake world events"?

I'm not going any further with this, as my opinion has been pretty well covered by others. I'm not one of those who is in favor of the things on that list, but I also draw a distinction between things we eat and do, etc., and something growing in my body which others want to force me to live with. Just my opinion.

I've always failed to see how some people can reconcile being anti-abortion and pro-death penalty. It defeats me; yes, I've heard all the arguments, but if you're pro-life, you're pro-life, and anything else is hypocrisy. Especially given it costs more and takes up more of the government's time to kill someone than it does to keep them for the rest of their lives. Just don't make sense to me.

I could say a lot of things about the state of adoption in this country, but I think Frem did a pretty good job, and I don't buy that there are more people wanting to adopt than there are adoptable children. Sure, people want a brand-new baby, all cute and cuddly, but in my opinion anyone in the anti-abortion crowd who adopts a kid who was already born and suffered because of not being wanted has a LOT more to say on the subject which I would consider valid.

As to the "statistics" thing being more important than personal feelings, I still disagree. When I see the protesters at a clinic, I see people acting out of emotion, and little else. I don't see them being reasonable and offering statistics, I see them carrying signs of deat fetuses and expressing hatefulness.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:46 AM

You had some good points up there about choice too, you know. I am whenever possible for choice.

If you want to get into the practicality of what I'm saying, this is going to be hard to implement, because parts of it will take some time.

Right now, we don't have anything to grow fetuses that wouldn't survive removal from the woman, though the ages which fetuses will survive that are getting younger and younger. Non-fatal removal techniques, coupled with more sex-education so more of the children are wanted in the first place are quick fixes but perhaps can do for now. At least until the adoption system/society in general is put to right.

Women who had the fatal abortive techniques prior to the introduction of the non-fatal techniques were under duress and there we go maybe. Let's see if someone comes in and objects, we can try to refine this further until everyone is good.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:55 AM

Quote:
Goodness, didn't this thread start about wedge issues which are "fake world events"?

It did, this is just what happens whenever someone brings up abortion.

Quote:
Sure, people want a brand-new baby, all cute and cuddly, but in my opinion anyone in the anti-abortion crowd who adopts a kid who was already born and suffered because of not being wanted has a LOT more to say on the subject which I would consider valid.

Niki, that's fair, but what about Frem's other point about educating people about contraception so more of the kids born are wanted, so the kids who would otherwise be aborted have a better chance? And fixing the adoption/foster care system, among other things.

Quote:
When I see the protesters at a clinic, I see people acting out of emotion, and little else. I don't see them being reasonable and offering statistics, I see them carrying signs of deat fetuses and expressing hatefulness.

That's a product of the rhetoric, and also the person. Remember, just like not everyone of them is going to go out and kill a doctor, not everyone of them is going to be vile arguing their point. DT argued with statistics.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:16 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

I've always failed to see how some people can reconcile being anti-abortion and pro-death penalty.

Really? You've always failed to see? Hmmmm....

Well I fail to see how you can be for abortion, and against the death penalty.

At least with the conservative view, we value the life of the innocent, and we condemn a murderer to death. Liberals value the life of a murderer, and condemn an innocent baby to death.

I say that makes liberals rather despicable in that regard.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:22 AM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Wedge Issue Wedge Issue Abort the thread!

er...umm... awkward...

But I agree with Frem on

Quote:
And don't even get me started on how the same fucking bastards that make every single effort to forestall proper sex education, and block or restrict birth control of any kind at any point

though not as harshly, and I also find the DT stats hard to believe, but I won't press him for details, he already said he just wanted to drop his opinion on it and be done with the wedge issue. I'll just share my thoughts on it.

Abstinence only education doesn't work, and yet we insist on that method in so many of our schools and what do we find? Pregnant high schoolers, hell, even a few pregnant middle schoolers! They need to be taught about birth control, what it does and what it does not/ do. How many of us were taught only to 'wait for marriage' and how many of us actually made it that far? Hell, I'm surprised I made it until halfway through college with that mindset before hormones got the best of me and lets just say it's a good thing my partner was prepared.

Pregnancy prevention should be taught, but terminating a pregnancy IMO, no matter how early in the term, is terminating another life. You best have a damn good reason for it. 'Pro life' is not the same is 'anti-woman's rights.' Why does everyone jump to that conclusion? Sure a woman has the right to use her body as she see's fit, but what about her child's body? Also, some man's got himself invested in half of that, but what's more important are the child's rights. When a child's life is on the line the woman's rights argument tends to sound selfish. It's not my belief that they are, please don't flame me too harshly for that comment. But, from a certain point of view, it can sound like "It's my right to kill this growing person inside me and that shouldn't be oppressed."

Terminating a pregnancy is terminating a life, so I hope whoever is unfortunate enough to have to make that kind of decision is doing so carefully. Those people deserve our sympathy, I sincerely doubt they are making that kind of decision lightly.

EDIT

Quote:
I've always failed to see how some people can reconcile being anti-abortion and pro-death penalty. It defeats me; yes, I've heard all the arguments, but if you're pro-life, you're pro-life, and anything else is hypocrisy. Especially given it costs more and takes up more of the government's time to kill someone than it does to keep them for the rest of their lives. Just don't make sense to me.

I agree, and for the record I am 'pro-life' in both respects. I don't understand how any Christian wouldn't be (but not understanding is NOT the same thing as criticizing or disapproving, it's not my place to judge). After all, how can a person redeem themselves after you kill them? I believe everyone deserves a second chance, and a third, etc... and that doesn't have to involve turning a blind eye to their past and setting yourself up for a back stab either.

((it took me three attempts to get this to post, so I apologize if I'm repeating something that's already been covered. Not sure how it got half italic'd))

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:55 AM

You had your end-slash mark outside of the brackets when you did your italics.

On topic: I'm in much the same way HT. If we could do it, I'd like to spare all the lives.

Keeping that in mind, I can see some argument where a girl just made a bad decision, and for nine months she's got to go through a hell of hormones and indigestion and that's not even getting into how expensive it can be or medical complications. Compare that to what a father with no particular involvement in the pregnancy might experience, and I can see some argument for leveling the playing field if just from a being able to work and earn money stand point.

To that end, I'm really liking this idea about non-fatal abortions.

But to do that, we'd really have to fix the adoption system, and we'd also have to figure out a way that it doesn't break the back of the medical system. Which I think is also doable, especially once you remove the stigma of abortion being attached to "murder," insurance company coverage and possibly even new charities might crop up to help would be mothers and the would be child especially if adoption is planned for afterward.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
I agree, and for the record I am 'pro-life' in both respects. I don't understand how any Christian wouldn't be ...

I'm a Christian, and I believe that life starts at conception. So yes, I believe abortion is murder. I am pro-life in that I am against the taking of all human life, whether before they're born or after.

But I vote pro-choice. Why? Because

1) I believe that I have absolutely no rights on another woman's body, and
2) I believe that I have absolutely no right to force another person to live by MY religious beliefs.

What happens to the poor child who is growing inside a mother who doesn't want it? He/she is S.O.L., that's what. That kid is just as SOL as a child born in a country where he gets sold as a sex slave or to demine a mine field or slowly starve to death.

Life is horribly unfair. I can't solve the gross injustices of the world by making them illegal, and I'm not to going try with a law that is grossly unjust in and of itself.

In addition, whatever my personal beliefs are, I believe in compassion towards women who have had to make that difficult choice to abort. Not everyone believes it is murder. I don't feel I get to judge them by my yardstick, if they are ok with their decision.

I know you aren't judgmental, Happy, but I wanted to let you know where one pro-choice-voting Christian is coming from.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:35 PM

Happy

Quote:

Terminating a pregnancy is terminating a life, so I hope whoever is unfortunate enough to have to make that kind of decision is doing so carefully. Those people deserve our sympathy, I sincerely doubt they are making that kind of decision lightly.

Well said.

In my experience, they deal with it one of a few ways
1) They place that blame where it belongs, IMHO, some cretinous necrophiliac eugenicist, and become RTL
2) They decide a foetus isn't alive and become pro-choice.
3) They never forgive themselves for being talked into aborting their own child and become RTL
4) They develop a world view in which they're not responsible for the actions of their former self, and become pro-choice.

It's really these people who are completely immovable on the topic because they have a huge psychological investment in it. For them, reversing their position means unraveling their world view.

I think person 1) and 2) are healthier mentally, but all four would have to abandon their self analysis to switch views, and this would leave them very vulnerable to a fairly extreme amount of self-blame.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:43 PM

CTS,

I see a disagreement I think I would have with the entire board. I don't see the familied life as sacred, or the solo life as an abomination. I dealt with runaways, they were family-less. Often they find family in something else. Sometimes they choose to walk alone.

I don't think any of my politicians care about this issue on either side. Not one wit. If anyone cared, they would work on the human end, and not legislation, which is bound to go nowhere anyway.

Consider it for a sec:

If someone were truly pro-life, they'd support better adoption policy.

If someone were truly pro-choice, they'd support family services. After all, pro-choice would mean that she could have the baby if she wanted to, in spite of her economic and social situation, if someone were helping her.

And maybe some politicians care, but none that I get to vote for.

I never vote wedge issues. Most of the politicians I vote for are pro-choice, some are pro-life. I ignore this as much as I ignore their gay marriage position. I'm more concerned with whether they will start/continue WWIII or destroy the environment.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:52 PM

Oh, and to everyone:

My above response to Niki's post was in the interests of clarity on where the opposition was coming from, logically.

I respect that Niki has actually put forth a concerted effort in her time here to actually understand where the other side is coming from.

Yes, she is on the left, and not likely to move, but she wants to comprehend her opposition, and that's commendable, on all accounts.

re: abortion

I was not up for a discussion on the topic. Eugenics is real, but changing abortion policy is not. It's all doublespeak. It's a fake world event.

That said, some things were said that required that I defend myself. Hence the rant. My initial post to Niki was my best attempt to explain the position.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:15 PM

Quote:
I see a disagreement I think I would have with the entire board. I don't see the familied life as sacred

Not from me. That's sort of what I was suggesting above about changing the social system as well as the adoption system.

In Sioux villages and a number of other native American tribes, kids had recognized parents, but weren't raised exclusively by those parents. The whole tribe pitched in.

Arguably, there used to be some element of this in european-dominant American communities. School and church were part of it, but also, people just knew each other and knew the kids, and everyone kind of watched out for each other. If help was needed, they stepped in, if discipline was needed, a fair punishment was decided on, usually involving work for a brief time with the maligned party.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:19 PM

Quote:
Oh, and to everyone:

My above response to Niki's post was in the interests of clarity on where the opposition was coming from, logically.

Ah. I didn't understand why you were getting into it. Sorry about the snark then.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:56 PM