You can believe whatever you want to believe. That's out of my control and I tend not to worry about such things. I think Dadika was just trying to cover up the fact that he tends to be long on statements and short on proof.
Anyone surprised at how badly Pelosi cucked Donald yesterday?
- Thread starter ticket2ride04
- Start date
You can believe whatever you want to believe. That's out of my control and I tend not to worry about such things. I think Dadika was just trying to cover up the fact that he tends to be long on statements and short on proof.
I will believe what I want to believe. I always have.
I think Dadika was just making a general observation. I don't think he really cares more than what he said.
And all I did was answer that observation. I disagreed with it and I told him why. I think you guys are making this out to be more than it really is, which is fine by me. I won't be the angry one here.
No, don't take it back, it isn't a big deal. I wouldn't even say I was an alcoholic anyways. It's not like I drank all the time. I just felt I was drinking too much. I still have a drink every once in a while (I had a glass of champaign on New Year's Eve) but I just felt like I needed to calm it down as I start to get older. Trust me, I didn't take your comments personal.
I know they like to present this as championing women's rights (this lighting it up in pink), and I'm not fully-versed on exactly what was put into this new law, but it seems a bit extreme, to me.
I'm not a proponent of abortions at all. But, as I've said, I'm never in a situation that it affects me directly. So, I try to avoid much confrontation over it.
I tend to agree with this, but the thing is you're never going to be rid of abortions. Banning them will only create a black market which will, in turn, create more death and crime.
I am 51 years old. I don't think we will see a full ban on abortion in my lifetime. Not saying that's good or bad.... its just not happening. Even if the Supreme Court got super-stacked with conservatives, pro-lifers, etc. What I COULD see happening, is the Supreme Court overruling abortion being decided at a US federal level, and turning abortion issues back to each state. On this issue, returning to federalism, states rights, tenth amendment.
I'd just personally prefer that laws would be passed and upheld that defends life (all states) in the third trimester, when life has been proven to be viable.
**Not that this matters to the baby in question**.... but while public opinion is opposed to banning all abortions at any stage, public opinion strongly supports defending of life in the third trimester (and I take it that some on this board agree).
**by this comment I marked above**, having public opinion determine the rights of the viable baby - in true democracy form - people vote on whether the viable baby lives or dies - is IMO akin to 3 wolves and a sheep carrying out "democracy" in voting on what to eat for supper. Public opinion and pure democracy can be an assault on individuals and minorities rights, especially ones with no means of defending themselves.
I also totally understand how pro-choice people are very emotional and hostile toward any changes in abortion policy, for fear of a "slippery slope" -an unrelenting incremental march by conservatives until no abortion is allowed. That's why the pro-choice people are unwilling to support any commonly- supported (by non-partisan, non-religious people) compromise.
It's definitely a states rights issue as per the Constitution.
Well, then your sample size of met-people must be pretty small then. I've met several people that believe that, most of whom are "on the left". And...I believe that myself.
It actually shocks me that more on the right aren't ok with this. It's not like the fetuses being aborted are going to be the future leaders of the country. They're being aborted for a reason. And if you don't let it happen, those are the ones you're gonna end up paying for throughout their childhood and probably into their adulthood as well.
Correct - I know its not so popular in some sections of society today, but that's what the founders intended - 50 different states, with their own laws, and with state jurisdiction over most matters for people in the states.
They thought - if you don't like the laws of the state you live in - you could move to a state more in alignment with your views OR (more importantly) you could work to get the laws of your state changed the way you see fit, via grass roots efforts. An individual working to change state law, difficult, but not impossible. An individual changing federal law, nearly impossible.
The states rights issue is important to me, and should be important to all individuals IMO. There is a reason the founders created the electoral college and the US Senate structure- to protect rights of individual states and their inhabitants.
If we just evolve to popular vote, no states rights, no "2 senators for each state" etc that you sometimes hear - how do we become any better than other democracies? What would be the purpose of having states at all at that point? Just for geographical reference?
Welfare incentivizes having multiple children, so unfortunately not all in that situation would go this route.
I agree that more people should have abortions if they can't support a kid. But they shouldn't wait until the third trimester to do it.
I knew a girl who had two kids out of wedlock. She went down to get some help from the government and they basically told her that they couldn't do much unless she had another kid...so she had another kid. The whole system is jacked up.
That is probably my least favorite thing about America. Love this country but god damn we have some awful "regulations".
She messed-up by not being an illegal immigrant. They get all the freebies by just crossing the border.
Do you know how many times I've been behind someone at Walmart, who had two overflowing carts of food, didn't speak English, and they pulled out an EBT card that they didn't even know how to use properly? Now imagine that you're really poor like I was once upon a time and you're scrounging up a couple bucks to buy bologna and bread, just so you can eat. Do you know how that looks to the citizens of this country?
Soooo... the woman who couldn't speak English, at Walmart, with you, and had an EBT card... was fresh from Mexico, or Guatemala, illegally, and getting her Fed freebies?
Do I know how it looks to what citizens outside this country? They see what you see, when you see it?
If you could genuinely only afford bologna and bread then you should easily qualify. And if you wouldn't qualify, then we should expand food assistance programs to ensure that poor folks can eat.
I would ask you to tell me what you think, but I know you already made your decision before you looked at the facts.
Facts? An anecdote of what you claim happened to you... is facts? You don't even know the facts. You just know that, in your story, there is a woman who wasn't speaking English and had difficulty using the EBT card.
What are the facts?
The crazy part of all this was that I was in the process of improving my value to society. Going back to school and getting a better job so that I could pay more taxes to fund worthless people who are only here to get a free handout. Those people also get free medical care. Something that I couldn't afford due to laws like the ACA. Now I'm $100k in medical debt while illegals get free medical care, but I'm sure that's okay with you people as well. I'll be fine. However, how many citizens are you willing to kill with these policies? Poverty is a serious cause of death, and these policies cause poverty.
I'm talking about all the numbers on how much we spend on illegal immigrants. Those numbers are out there on the web. They aren't hard to find.
Liberals aren't the ones cutting social programs. If you couldn't afford food then its liberals that would argue you should be able to get assistance. Its the right wing that would call you a lazy mooch that's stealing other's tax dollars.
https://www.fairus.org/issue/public...n-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers
Just one website. There are many others out there as well.
I understand that, but it really isn't the point I'm trying to make. My point is that we should be doing right by the people in this country, not prioritizing illegal immigrants over our citizens.
Do you think they were born in this country if they couldn't speak any English? Children of immigrants, almost to the person, speak English.
The vast majority of people getting govt assistance are not illegal immigrants. So how are we prioritizing them over our citizens??
Because they shouldn't get s*** until every single citizen is taken care of.
So you knew about the lighting of the building in New York even when you asked me if this was happening in Lynchburg? Was that your attempt at humor?
Last edited:
I mentioned in an earlier poast that I have a hard time reconciling my thoughts on abortion. On one hand, it's hard to say I support the killing of an unborn child - for any reason. But on the other hand, many of these kids will grow up in poverty and many of them go on to be a drain on society. So what do you do?
You're right, I wish we never let the scum like Albert Einstein, Sergey Brin, Oscar de la Renta, Mariano Rivera, Wafaa El-Sadr, and Leo Szilard into this country. We'd be so much better off without these parasites who contributed nothing at all to MAKING AMERICA GREAT! MAGA!
