...and still the war against women continues by Niki2

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

THAT is just pure bullshit. This has nothing to do with informed consent; forcing women to endure an unnecessary procedure AND LISTEN TO THE HEARTBEAT has nothing whatsoever to do with informed consent. It's totally about harrassing women who seek an abortion. If you don't know that, I'd say hooo, boy are you naive, but I know you're not and your response is nothing but a slur! "Women don't need "state-scripted" counseling before they consent to a procedure they have already considered". THAT's what it's about. There is nothing whatsoever in this new law about "INFORMING" the woman, only that she MUST be subjected to an ultrasound and MUST be made to hear the fetal heartbeat. If you are snarking about "informed consent", then you are being deliberately disingenuous; actually, it's an out-and-out lie.

I'm offended that you are using a Raptor technique to lie about what the actual issue is, then expanding the lie further about all liberals.

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

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 10:09 AM

TRAVELER

What does an ultrasound have to do with being informed? The woman already knows she is pregnant. So what new information does an ultrasound have to offer? How can you force a woman to look at an ultrasound? They have taken her rights away.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 11:06 AM

I believe this horse is not tired, it is dead. Perhaps it's time to try something else. On second thought, keep posting it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 11:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I believe this horse is not tired, it is dead. Perhaps it's time to try something else. On second thought, keep posting it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

Everybody got that? DT's tired of the topic, and as the arbiter of what is discussion worthy, this issue is done.

OR

You have the option of not reading it if you're not interested. Had that not occurred to you in your hurry to bitch?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 2:18 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by traveler:
What does an ultrasound have to do with being informed? The woman already knows she is pregnant. So what new information does an ultrasound have to offer? How can you force a woman to look at an ultrasound? They have taken her rights away.

Agreed. This is emotional abuse as far as I can see.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 2:25 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Great job, North Carolina !

Welcome to the 21st century !

AWESOME !

" 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

Friday, July 29, 2011 2:45 PM

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

Yup, Traveler, that's about it in a nutshell. And yes, Magons, emotional abuse indeed. If some individual forced a woman to watch and ultrasound and listen to the heartbeat before FORCING an abortion on her, nobody'd question whether it was abuse. Of course, when legislators...well, you know...

Sorry you find the issue so boring, DT; we'll try to be more entertaining in other threads. This IS a real world DEVELOPMENT; they just passed it. It's happening in other states, this is just the newest one to come along. Apparently that means nothing to you; to the women of that state, I'd wager it means something.

Tho' of course since it bores you, we won't post about such things again (NOT!).

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

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 3:39 PM

...My understanding is that you can't hear a fetal heartbeat until four months. I'm not exactly sure how this law would even work, aren't there limitations on all this anyway past the first trimestre?

Not that I expect these politicians to understand the very basics of pregnancy, anatomy, or even the fetuses they're concerned about, but this law doesn't even make sense.

EDIT: Hmm. Apparently through a vaginal ultrasound you can pick up the heartbeat earlier. So the law essentially requires a vaginal ultrasound.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 3:47 PM

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

Quote:
Not that I expect these politicians to understand the very basics of pregnancy, anatomy, or even the fetuses they're concerned about, but this law doesn't even make sense.

You answered it yourself, love.

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

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 3:47 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Well, I've already make it clear what my perspective is, this is less about womens rights than the fact that women have rights, which is offensive to the GOP, and shows their true colors every time they do shit like this.

This is about punishing women for daring to exercise their rights, their will, at all, is what it is - the pyschological and emotional version of taking them out back and whipping them into line.

And no less offensive - just because scars on the soul are not as visible as those on the body, doesn't mean damage hasn't been done.

Consider also this - if YOU did something like this to your wife, you'd be very much guilty of spousal abuse, so why the hell should the State get a free pass, and why should any doctor, who mind you swore a fucking oath to do no harm, ever comply with such a horrific act ?

Any of em who do should be charged with malpractice and have their license revoked, because in *MY* eyes, a sworn oath of person supercedes the law of the State, because you swore that personally, of your own free will, and your obligation to obey the State springs from nothing more than the random chance of being born within its borders.

Oh, and lemme offer this, cause I might not have mentioned it before - shortly after getting certed in personal protection, I offered my services for a mere pittance to clinics and patients as an escort to "run the gauntlet" of nasty bastards hell bent on forcing THEIR will upon others - and on occasion did indeed dish out some hostility of mine own, personal and physical.
I've seen what these scumbags are, at point blank range, and honestly... I *enjoyed* hurting them when they tried to lay hands on my protectee, far more than I should have, sure - but the notion of deliberate abuse toward someone who already has to make that horrible decision enrages me on a level I don't even have words for.

They can protest and bitch all they like, but when one attempts to use force, either of their own, or using the State as proxy for it, it is at that point I've no real issue with using force on them - understand ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 3:51 PM

I stand corrected. Your dead horse still runs. IIRC, last time you forced this debate, it pretty much killed the forum, I have to assume that was the goal. Unfortunately, you think that this issue will win support to the left side, but I am certain it is a losing one.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:04 PM

"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 Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
They won't stop trying to force bad laws on us until we get rid of them, folks. We can only wait and see what's next...and it ain't gonna be good!

Liberals are against informed consent.

There's a slogan for you, 'Vote Democrat so you can make important life decisions with as little information as possible.'

I guess the right to choose means the right to be uninformed.

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.

Remember, people, this is coming from the guy who proudly proclaimed "I voted for Bush twice, and intellegence [sic] have very little to do with it."

Of course, he also supported going to war with as little information as possible... Because, y'know, going to war isn't any kind of "important life decision" or anything.

So again, "Hero" here is somebody who really knows what he's talking about when it comes to being uninformed! He actually makes a living at it!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:05 PM

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

Were you addressing me? I don't believe I've ever "forced" a debate, and we've discussed pro-life v. pro-choice several times since I came here, none of which ever came close to "killing" the forum, so I must be missing something. I get virtually no "notifications", for whatever reason, so I can't know to whom you are responding.

If you think I think this debate "will win support to the left side", you're out of your gourd. It's not political to me, it's a wrong thing, pure and simple. A lot of what Frem said is valid, and I hate, hate, HATE people being able to legally force things like this on women, right or left, and I don't care which side is standing up to call this sort of stuff out, left or right. For me, this leaves politics behind; if anything, it's about religion v. morality, not politics. The unfortunate thing right now is that we have a party whohave come into power and tho thinks it's ultra-religious and that should give it the power to do whatever they want, legal OR illegal, to stop abortions.

But maybe you were addressing Frem, I dunno; if so, ignore the above.

p.s. Good for YOU Frem. I'd volunteer to do some of that, too, only we don't HAVE those kinds of problems in Marin. Maybe not the whole Bay Area, I dunno.

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

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I stand corrected. Your dead horse still runs. IIRC, last time you forced this debate, it pretty much killed the forum, I have to assume that was the goal. Unfortunately, you think that this issue will win support to the left side, but I am certain it is a losing one.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

I don't remember it 'killing the forum' so much; I remember YOU disappearing quite suddenly for a while. Most others were still here, discussing lots of other things.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by traveler:
What does an ultrasound have to do with being informed? The woman already knows she is pregnant. So what new information does an ultrasound have to offer? How can you force a woman to look at an ultrasound? They have taken her rights away.

Somehow, they view THIS government-mandated healthcare as "the good kind", and they view THIS big government intervention as a positive thing. They want to shrink the government to where it's the size that it can get its hands in every woman's vagina.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Great job, North Carolina !

Welcome to the 11th century !

AWESOME !

Fixed that for ya, dear.

The Taliban cheers North Carolina's new law. No wonder the tea-bagging GOP are so into it!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:24 PM

TRAVELER

The people screaming that big government is terrible and then they create laws like this that give government power over peoples rights. This is what I call big government. So big it smothers your civil rights.
First they try to tell women they don't have rights over their own bodies and then they try to submit this. Actually forcing their will on these women's bodies. This is BS. Civil liberty rules against any such acts. This law will not stand.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:32 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

It'll stand, because it infringes on no one's civil liberties.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The first of these Rights being so aptly pointed out, and for good reason.

" 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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:41 PM

TRAVELER

The government has no right to inflict any procedure on person without due process. There is no crime here. So the government has no rights to touch another persons body in a obtrusive way. No court will allow this. The police don't have such rights.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I stand corrected. Your dead horse still runs. IIRC, last time you forced this debate, it pretty much killed the forum, I have to assume that was the goal. Unfortunately, you think that this issue will win support to the left side, but I am certain it is a losing one.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

I don't remember it 'killing the forum' so much; I remember YOU disappearing quite suddenly for a while. Most others were still here, discussing lots of other things.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

Some folk think that if they don't see it, it isn't there. Most outgrow this right out of the peek-a-boo phase, some not so quickly.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

It'll stand, because it infringes on no one's civil liberties.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The first of these Rights being so aptly pointed out, and for good reason.

" 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. "

Good ol' Rethug thinkin'!

Government bad! Unless it keeps women in their place.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

It'll stand, because it infringes on no one's civil liberties.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The first of these Rights being so aptly pointed out, and for good reason.

Where is that in the Constitution? (Hint: Herman Cain doesn't know either!)

By the way, nice to see that you fully support the government being able to order you to have medical procedures without your consent.

How very "libertarian" of you.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 4:58 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Politicians vote for this kind of legislation because they believe that it'll get them re-elected. In some places (like North Carolina) it probably will. Unfortunately, in some cases the will of the people isn't what some of us think is appropriate. Folks who think this legislation is wrong have to convince the voters who support it that they may have an incorrect perception of the situation. Screaming that they're bigots, sexists, or at war with women isn't gonna convince them. It'll just harden them in their erroneous position.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 5:08 PM

HERO

Found out an abortion clinic is opening downtown. Despite my personal feelings I look forward to prosecuting anyone who illegally interferes with their right to operate their facility or interferes with those who choose to make use of their services.

I'm as much a pro law guy as a pro life guy.

Ironically I hate Thai food, but I make the same pledge about the Thai place two doors down from the clinic. The fracking used car dealer is on his own.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 5:26 PM

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

Aw-Right Hero! You go, man, you're a person of principle! We may not like one another (I know you don't like ME), but on this issue, I respect your decision.

Quote:
Politicians vote for this kind of legislation because they believe that it'll get them re-elected.

Geezer, you're absolutely right and of course this is at the bottom of the new laws. What you missed is that it wasn't the "will of the people" in the FIRST place! These neophite Republicans/Tea Partiers were elected out of fear, hoping they'd improve the situation because they kept screaming "Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!" What the people GOT was union busting and anti-abortion legislation. I don't believe it was the will of the majority of people at ALL.

Over in another thread I started a joking "Raptor Rules". This fits, too, so I'll add it.

Raptor's Rules

1. You can always tell what an entire political movement stands for by the worst actions of any one of its members

2. Big government is terrible except when WE create laws that give government power which WE determine doesn't infringe on anyone's civil rights.

Anyone suggest a #3?

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

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 5:27 PM

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

Damn. Double post. That hasn't happened in a while...

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 5:41 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
What you missed is that it wasn't the "will of the people" in the FIRST place!

Having been born in the South and having lived among the folks there for a good bit of my life, I have to respectfully disagree. I would say that a majority of them, including some of my kinfolk, have no problem with this type of legislation. Fifty years ago they had no problem with 'Seperate but equal', but eventually saw that it wasn't right. Change is slow there, and takes gentle, logical persuasion. Saying it ain't so, or treating them as wrongheaded, will just get their backs up and then they'll never change, even if they realize it's the right thing to do.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 5:48 PM

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

You're absolutely right, Geezer, you know the state better than I ever could. Given such a law wouldn't have an iceburg's chance in hell in Califorian, I don't know shit about 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

Friday, July 29, 2011 6:11 PM

Kwicko: That's not fair, even I've been a little scarce lately. And when I'm not scarce I've been spamming the RWED because all the topics are about economics and the tea party.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 6:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Kwicko: That's not fair, even I've been a little scarce lately. And when I'm not scarce I've been spamming the RWED because all the topics are about economics and the tea party.

Which rather proves my point that discussion of abortion in no way is "killing the forum".

I get tired of people whinging about this or that thing "killing the forum". If a forum dedicated to a half-season TV show that was cancelled nearly a decade ago hasn't been killed yet, then I don't really worry that discussing a single divisive issue is going to be the death knell for it.

This is probably about the thirty-seventh thing that I've heard people claim is "killing this forum", and I bet nobody even remembers what the other 36 were.

We talk about things that are in the news. DT talks about fracking, which few people seem to want to discuss in much detail or with much vigor. I don't accuse him of "spamming" the place with it, or of "killing the forum" with it. Everybody has their own issues that are close to their heart and important to them. For Niki, reproductive choice is one of those issues, as it is one of mine, even though I'll never have an abortion in my life.

DT seems to be insisting that Niki stop posting about an issue that she cares about, simply because (a) he's against it, and (b) he's been unable to support his position with facts and win others over to his position. So rather than simply accepting the truth of the matter and simply staying out of such threads, he feels the need to try to portray himself as superior and talk down to everybody in telling them how uncouth they are for "killing the forum" by discussing something which he doesn't want to discuss.

My simple advice for anyone who doesn't want to discuss an issue is this: Shut the fuck up about it, then. DON'T discuss it if you're against discussing it.

And if you're against abortion, my advice is this: Don't have one.

Is it really that hard?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 7:00 PM

Sure.

But it's also not cowardly to lose interest in the board for a while either.

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 7:42 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

It'll stand, because it infringes on no one's civil liberties.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The first of these Rights being so aptly pointed out, and for good reason.

Where is that in the Constitution? (Hint: Herman Cain doesn't know either!)

By the way, nice to see that you fully support the government being able to order you to have medical procedures without your consent.

How very "libertarian" of you.

Never said it was in the Constitution, genius.

And further more, what 'medical procedure' is being ordered here ? No one is ordering, or denying any gorram procedure.

I think you have a problem with your brain being missing.

" 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

Friday, July 29, 2011 9:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

It'll stand, because it infringes on no one's civil liberties.

LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The first of these Rights being so aptly pointed out, and for good reason.

Where is that in the Constitution? (Hint: Herman Cain doesn't know either!)

By the way, nice to see that you fully support the government being able to order you to have medical procedures without your consent.

How very "libertarian" of you.

Never said it was in the Constitution, genius.

Then what makes you think that it's a "right"?

Quote:

And further more, what 'medical procedure' is being ordered here ? No one is ordering, or denying any gorram procedure.

You honestly don't think an ultrasound sonography is a medical procedure?

Do you think you can stop off and pick one up at the 7-11? Do you think they're performed by the guy at the Jiffy Lube? If it's such an important decision, are you NOT requiring that the procedure be performed by a licensed medical professional? Really?

Speaking of which, who is paying for this mandated procedure? Are you planning on taking MY money and using it to pay for these medical procedures? Or are you planning on telling every pregnant woman that she MUST have such a procedure, and MUST pay for it out of her own pocket? I thought you used to have a problem with government telling people how and where to spend their money...

I think it is you who has a problem with your brain being missing. Certainly seems that way.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Friday, July 29, 2011 10:00 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

You shouldn't even be forced to have one even if you intending on carrying through with the pregnancy.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 12:55 AM

I actually counted posts. They slowed down considerably, and if you discount abortion threads: came to a stand-still.

This is completely apart from my feelings on the subject, or my strong suspicion that every time we bring it up we're handing the republicans an automatic victory, just as the GOP does for us on immigration. Just consider the demographics: The national is absolutely filled with christians and latinos, who are almost all catholics. If either party wanted to win debates, it would be the democrats forcing debates on immigration and the republicans forcing debates on abortion.

But why win debates? That's not what we're here for. From the point of view of FFF, I will say what I have posted many times over the years on such threads: "That's what really interested me about Firefly: The abortions."

This is idiocy. So, now let's make it 66 threads about abortion. Yay. It's an emotional issue and we are easily tricked into a pointless debate. People posting nasty stuff are not douchebags, they have been emotionally affected and so they go off. I did it, Frem did it, everyone can do it.

As for the issue? I posted a thread on women's issues, and only Byte and Magon were at all interested in the topic, and both also went on to post about abortion. It just derails the conversation. Everyone posting is looking to gain an upper hand against their fellow browncoats by doing so. This is not a constructive way for us to collectively behave.

Mike,

Me and Byte off board came to the conclusion that ultrasound basically served as a form of female infanticide. This argument might not work if you're not RTL, but statistically, it's worth measuring in to your equation.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 5:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
You shouldn't even be forced to have one even if you intending on carrying through with the pregnancy.

Exactly. You shouldn't be FORCED to have one, period.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 6:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Mike,

Me and Byte off board came to the conclusion that ultrasound basically served as a form of female infanticide. This argument might not work if you're not RTL, but statistically, it's worth measuring in to your equation.

There are absolutely risks and side effects, and not all of them are known. Forcing it on people seems about as well-advised as pRick Perry's attempt to force Gardasil on every schoolgirl.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 6:37 AM

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

Wow

Quote:
what 'medical procedure' is being ordered here ? No one is ordering, or denying any gorram procedure.

It is, as Mike said, DEFINITELY a medical procedure, and it is DEFINITELY being "ordered", if the woman has chosen to have an abortion. It's being ordered BY LAW. It's the equivalent of forcing men to watch a gory movie about abortion and get lectured about the sanctity of life if they want to get a vasectomy. Those aren't even medical procedures, but the concept is similar.

The basic premise is that the government shouldn't have it's fingers in reproductive rights, and it's obvious that these people do NOT want smaller government, they just want government to enforce what they want. It's not fiscally responsible, either, given it requires people to do the procedures and those people have to be paid; all for a totally unnecessary procedure THEY're also forced to do by law.

As to DT, "what Mike said". The board isn't any slower that I can see than it's been since I came. If anything, it's less vicious right now, and a LOT of people were either driven off or come less often because of the ugliness here; you wanna make the forum busier? Put up your own posts on other subjects. This IS the Real World Events forum; this IS a real world event (given, as I said, the law was JUST passed), and your remark about Firefly is stupid. Virtually every other forum here is about Firefly or Firefly related, etc., you can go to those if you wish. This one is about events which we're interested in.

Essentially your argument is purely "I don't want to see any more threads on this subject", but nobody's forcing you to even read any thread on the subject, much less contribute to the thread. Saying they came to a "stand still" is insane; I come here every morning, and there are ALWAYS active threads and ALWAYS new threads about things besides abortion. Actually, your statement that "if you discount abortion threads: came to a stand-still" is a prime example of why we disagree. It's not true, yet you state it as a fact. It might be your IMPRESSION, but that doesn't make it true, and it definitely isn't.

Quote:
People posting nasty stuff are not douchebags, they have been emotionally affected and so they go off

BullSHIT! We have people who are nasty because that's their WAY, they don't care about being civil and they make that completely obvious and you know it.

Because you posted about something and there was little interest has nothing to do with anything. I post stuff every day (or try to) and a number of those threads don't catch on, or else they get thread-jacked. I don't mind, I CERTAINLY don't take it personally as you seem to; people contribute to threads they're interested in. I don't even read some threads whose titles indicate something of no interest to me. You can do the same. There are many threads on unimportant topics posted here; some issues come back up because of recent developments, some are purely personal diatribes, some are silly. The content is up to those who put threads up, whether they take hold or not is up to what interests people.

It comes down, basically, to something I used to get accuse of when I'd plead for civility: That you want to control us. You disapprove of this subject, for whatever reason(s), and want us not to discuss it further. You have no right to do so. End of story.

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

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 6:50 AM

Quote:
...and your remark about Firefly is stupid. Virtually every other forum here is about Firefly or Firefly related, etc., you can go to those if you wish. This one is about events which we're interested in.

Excellent point, Niki. To paraphrase DT, "You know what drew me into Firefly? All the talk of hydraulic fracturing and deforestation."

We get it, DT: Women's reproductive rights aren't your thing. But you are absolutely free to NOT comment on them. You have that power.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 9:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
...and your remark about Firefly is stupid. Virtually every other forum here is about Firefly or Firefly related, etc., you can go to those if you wish. This one is about events which we're interested in.

Excellent point, Niki. To paraphrase DT, "You know what drew me into Firefly? All the talk of hydraulic fracturing and deforestation."

We get it, DT: Women's reproductive rights aren't your thing. But you are absolutely free to NOT comment on them. You have that power.

Notice me not commenting on them, but please don't lie: this has nothing to do with women's reproductive rights, which, like all women's rights are perpetually stamped on by the proponents of this recurrent wedge issue. Just see how the support for that issue among the core abortionists holds up when it comes to quiverfull, flds, eugenics or issues like abolishing one child policies. Rather, they seem to tend to criticize those who choose to reproduce quite harshly, i've seen a fair number of references to breeding idiots, etc. I exempt Frem and Magon from this snark, as I can't recall them ever taking this position. But it's a common one. Anyone who really csred a out "reproductive rights" would be really concerned about eugenics. I think a limitation on the number of children you can have, or on custody, or stealth coersion and forced sterilizations are an issue, as is adoption, a very major one: if you can't afford to support the child but with to have it, then they absolutely have the right to have it, as we all know there are many out there willing and able to take care of it.

So, yes, I have and will call rigt-to-lifers who don't support a comprehensive world view hypocrites, but I damn well am going to do the same to pro-choicers. If someone's not comprehensive and consistent, you're left with two possibilities: they're either a hypocrite, and are hiding some other agenda, or they are dupes of some agenda monkey and should really think about it more, one side or the other.

I suspect there are a couple depopulationists here on the board, but if they claim that their position is womens rights, that's hypocritical, iow they're lying.

I don't think niki really has a position, i think she's playing a political game, because i think she's far more like finn than like anyone else. That's perfectly okay with me, but I reserve the right to point it out to you guys when she does it, just as I do when anyone does it. You remember my systematic deconstruction of Finn's right wing power gaming political threads, right? That's all I'm doing here: shooting skeets.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 9:09 AM

Can you show me any instances of Planned Parenthood sponsoring legislation which would, BY LAW, restrict the number of children a woman may have?

By the way, I reserve the right to point out when you're pushing an agenda as well.

And you've consistently lied and invented facts in your narrative against reproductive rights. As you yourself said, you have no intention of being fair when it comes to this issue.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 9:30 AM

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

Now you're starting to really piss me off, so this will be the last thing I have to say before I start sounding like Sig or Mike:

Quote:
this has nothing to do with women's reproductive rights

BULLSHIT!!! It's about just that, the right to choose what to do with our bodies, whether we wish to procreate or not. That's what it's about for ME, and "quiverfull, flds, eugenics" don't come into it for me; I don't even know what the first two ARE and eugenics is your obsession, not everyone's, not mine, and I don't believe it's anything LIKE the issue you obviously do. You've never, EVER heard "breeding idiots" from me, or anything even close to it!

Quote:
If someone's not comprehensive and consistent, you're left with two possibilities: they're either a hypocrite, and are hiding some other agenda, or they are dupes of some agenda monkey and should really think about it more, one side or the other.

Gawd, that really makes me madder than hell: YOU judge that unless someone is what YOU consider "comprehensive and consistent", they're a hypocrite hiding something or a dupe. Your judgments are YOURS, and yours alone, they are not fact, and I don't give a SHIT about comprehensive and consistent (tho' my position on choice has always been consistent and always will be).

Although I recognize the many aspects of the issue, some valid, some not, it's a very simple issue for me: Women should have the right to choose whether to have a child or not. I recognize that right would be abused by some, but consider them the minority, and I have the brains to recognize that abortion WILL HAPPEN, whether legal or not, whether pro-lifers' efforts to circumvent the law of the land is successful or not, whether they find a MILLION ways to minimize women's access to abortion. It's just plain WRONG, period. Certainly I'm as prejudiced about the issue as you are about MANY, for the same reason: Your relatives endured the holocaust, so things related to that are things you feel strongly about. My mother had an illegal abortion in her youth; it screwed her up and affected our family seriouly. If abortion was legal then, I'd have sisters and/or brothers. It's what she wanted and I'd have loved it, so the issue is personal to me as others are personal to you. Tho' I chose not to have children and am too old to choose otherwise now, my heart is with women like my mother and their RIGHT to have children or not.

I'm playing a political game, eh? I don't play games. It should be obvious to anyone here with half a brain by now that I say what I think, whether anyone agrees with me or not. Mike plays games with others; I don't. I believe Raptor plays (and I KNOW Kane played) games. It sickens me when people play games, political or otherwise, and it's part of the reason I'm not very social anymore. I've been around long enough to see games of all kinds, too many kinds to list, and a lot of them aren't even intentional, they're subconscious; I don't want to play them, so I don't. I'm really seething now; I KNOW you do these things, make flat statements that you believe (or say?) "everyone knows", which are actually so far out of reality NOBODY actually believes them, but now it's getting personal, you're accusing me of lying and being a hypocrite.

I have NEVER accused you of deliberately being anything negative, I've said I think you make flat statements which are in reality only your opinion; I've lamented that you don't put up facts and figures to back up your points; I've disagreed heartily with some of the things you've said; I've also agreed with you at times, and I believeD (past tense) that a lot of the things you write come from a subconscious bias, not a conscious desire to harm. Wwhat you've perceived many times as "personal attacks", viewed objectively, were no such thing, while at the same time you've used some pretty harsh language about ME.

You have the right to express your BELIEFS...you have absolutely no right to "point out" that I'm something I'm not. You've finally lost any shred of whatever respect I still had for you with this attack--and ironically, I still had some. And that's all I'll say lest I completely lose control and get down in the gutter with Raptor and Kane and their ilk, which I refuse to do to ANYONE, despite how foully you have abused me. To do so would harm ME more than you, and you're not worth 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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 11:28 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Considering I defended the FLDS, up to and including personal involvement to the point of on-site, hands-on (I drove some of em back to their folks) - despite the fact that I seriously despise them, which is entirely mutual I assure you...

You're damn well told I don't have any position on reproduction other than one should have that choice, and my opinion on stealth or forced sterilization - which no one bloody asked me, but to end any possibility of assumption, is that it's downright evil, ESPECIALLY when done under cover of vaccination cause that also demeans and undermines the trust of the medical establishment and further discredits the idea of vaccination itself, which despite there obviously being better alternatives, still does have a use in much of the third world since we've not invested the proper time and research into those alternatives to make them viable.

Far as it goes, my position is what it ALWAYS is - you gotta right to do your thing, what you AIN'T got, is the right to *force* OTHERS to, whether you deliver that force yourself or misuse the machinery of Government as your fucking proxy.

When it comes to civil rights infringement, I'll stand up for anyone, Fred Phelps, the FLDS, Rightwing sorta-nazi wackjobs - ANYONE.

Because to do *any* less is to reduce civil rights to a fucking caste system, which we already have regarding youth, which we did at one time regarding women, and the folks behind this wish to roll back the clock to that time.

What you DO with those rights, is up to you, no matter how offensive your use of em, no matter that the manner in which you express em makes me grind my teeth - cause for damn sure the way *I* express and use mine prolly drives a lotta folk batshit, but hey, that's ok, so long as it's a level playing field.

Either the rules apply to EVERYONE, or they apply to NO ONE.
Break that maxim, and you'll wind up crossing irons with me, guaranteed.
Is *THAT* clear enough ?

Frem
PS. Seriously, DT, don't be such a whiner, it makes you look like a petulant little brat and does no wonders for your own credibility.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 2:28 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

As for the issue? I posted a thread on women's issues, and only Byte and Magon were at all interested in the topic, and both also went on to post about abortion. It just derails the conversation. Everyone posting is looking to gain an upper hand against their fellow browncoats by doing so. This is not a constructive way for us to collectively behave.

I'm not like you, DT. I don't mind threads that meander on and off topic. Thread hijacks don't worry me. I basically reply to posts as they come up and interest me.

I've started a number of threads that have had no or little response, which is disappointing but that is just the nature of these boards. There are also numerous threads which don't interest me and I don't often comment in them.

I don't find the abortion issue to be any more or less destructive than any other thread, it's just that its one that people tend to feel passionate about, one way or another. We may never persuade one another of anything on these boards, but most of us still enjoy coming in for the debate. I get that you are tired of the issue and don't think it is a useful conversation to have. Well, don't have it and leave it to those who wish to do so. Sounds easy to me.

Quote:

Me and Byte off board came to the conclusion that ultrasound basically served as a form of female infanticide. This argument might not work if you're not RTL, but statistically, it's worth measuring in to your equation.

They might lead to infanticide, but they are not a form of it. They can be useful for other reasons. As someone who had an ectopic pregnancy, I had lots of them, not always with happy results. But they saved my health and possible my life on a number of occasions.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 4:31 PM

Quote:
Mike,

Me and Byte off board came to the conclusion that ultrasound basically served as a form of female infanticide. This argument might not work if you're not RTL, but statistically, it's worth measuring in to your equation.

...I don't remember that at all... Are you sure it was me? Maybe it was CTS.

But, I'm against this vaginal ultrasound law thing anyway I think, so I'd definitely be open to hearing the specifics.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 5:52 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"... presented with an ultrasound image of the fetus under an informed consent law passed on Thursday ..."

I thought informed consent was about MEDICAL things you needed to know before a treatment or procedure. Couldn't the legislature be held liable for practicing medicine without a license?

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 6:18 PM

Firefly, by post count, is clearly mostly about abortion. It's just gorram pathetic.

It is not that I am personally tired of the subject, it's that it's an emotional and manipulative topic. I recall posting an abortion thread with a spoiler up top that said "If you respond to this post you are a mindless sheep" and it got a good few hundred responses posted. Around post 100, I reposted that line without the spoiler brackets, and the next 100 posts rolled on anyway without a hitch.

My problem is while y'all are busy being mindless sheep, you're not out solving the world's problems, whatever they might be, you're being manipulated.

Frem,

I did exempt you and Magon that snark.

But I'm *so* not interested in the wedge issue, only in that it silences intelligent debate, as it does routinely.

Magon

Threadjacks don't worry me either. It was rather the somewhat totalitarian stamping out of them I was referring to.

Ectopic pregnancy is pretty rare, but sure, good point, but I thought they had some pretty obvious secondary symptoms.

Since ultrasound is already well established to cause mental deficiencies in the child I think it is generally now avoided unless there is already a complication; the reference was to third world applications. Anyway, statistically, it's worth noting that 75% of abortions that follow an ultrasound are, or would have been, girls.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

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

Saturday, July 30, 2011 9:01 PM