US Presidential Election, Nov 5th 2024

Status
Not open for further replies.
The blue phantom said:
But they are saying a heartbeat should never be stopped. Life is absolute a must. I'll have to find the clip of this pro lifers views who destroyed these cockwombles to their faces. It was a good watch
Click to expand...
Nonsense.

It's the potential life that's at issue. All those eggs and sperm - potential life unrealized. It's a sin to menstruate, obviously. All potential sentience must be preserved!

FFS.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Does it? Is not the cell or the sperm, alive? Would not scientists - having found something resembling a sperm - on another world - say Europa - rightly claim that they'd found life?

As a former catholic - and firm believer in science - I suppose what we're looking for is sentience. Can a being feel and know its surroundings. Perhaps that's the point at which abortion becomes unethical.

And yet, what about non-humans. Clearly animals feel and have sentience at some point in their lives.

It's a morally difficult question - but the notion of "soul" - IMO - an unprovable, untestable concept - should have nothing to do with matters - but of course, religion will argue otherwise.
Click to expand...
Agreed with all of this. I often wonder about animal rights activists and their recognition that merely by taking a shower or walking outside they kill millions of organisms. When you start drawing the line in hard-to-mark spots, the line becomes very fuzzy indeed. Which is why birth and death seem like such obvious start/stop points for policy (fetuses don’t get social security numbers). That we’ve carried abortion backwards to viability is/was a compromise to which few if any objected. But those who want to go whole hog want to legislate a question of moral ambiguity. As such, the individual should decide. Same as why adultery isn’t illegal.
 
Any unborn life is sacred but post birth can get to fuck. They don't want public healthcare, abject poverty in places, you can buy a gun and kill as many as you like and they execute their criminals . It really is a backward country at times.
 
The "US Politics" thread still isn't open insofar as I can tell so I'll post this here...

Dems got stomped in the election. Still, one (I'm a Dem) would like to remain positive - to find some silver lining....

The best I could come up with is that Kari Lake lost her bid for Senator in AZ by some miraculous happenstance.

Arizona 2024 Election Live Results - 270toWin

Results from the Arizona 2024 election held November 5.
www.270towin.com www.270towin.com

I temper, even this small solace, with the realization that Kari is well-liked by Trump.

My prediction - Trump forms an "Election Integrity" panel - with powers to be determined - and with Kari as its chair.
 
Doesn't go far enough of you ask me

Should be able to abort the little fuckers up until they're eighteen.
 
mrbelfry said:
I addressed that in an earlier post but it's to do with who provides the support - government or charitable organisations/individuals. I've heard it said that republicans give to charitable organisations at a significantly higher rate than democrats so I'll strongman the argument a little (making huuuuge generalisations) - it's much more caring and principled for me to support a family individually than it is for some faceless drone in an office to issue a welfare cheque.
Click to expand...

I think at least one of the studies that identified that funding difference had a few important caveats...

It didn't try to adjust for taxation rate differences in blue vs red states which in turn might impact giving.

Perhaps the bigger one which I guess Mr K is alluding to is because there is such a wide range of organisations allowed to fall within the tax legislation around charitable giving, no one really knows or at least appears to have studied where the money actually ends up.

I'm not sure there is the data to identify if "consumption philanthropy" is what is happening, that said neuroscience suggests we have more 'natural' empathy for those who are like us than those who are not, so it's definitely possible.

I keep meaning to look for some meta studies/analysis about the differences between people who view the world through individualistic vs collective lenses and similarly state vs the individual etc. but can never seem to find much which strikes me as odd.
 
Interesting take by one Fareed Zahkaria who has a weekly show on CNN and is by no means a right winger. Hell, he has a show on CNN FFS!! His take was the Dems made three big errors:
1) The border...."there was blindness to the collapse of the immigration system and the chaos at the border" Check

2) Over the top wokeness "there was a dominance of identity politics on the left" ie they took extreme positions Check

3) Attacking a political opponent using the justice system. There was "an overzealous misuse of the law to punish trump" Check

Now I know number 3 will be like catnip to those of you who totally hate Trump. I get it. You think he is the devil.

I was excoriated when I posted that his convictions would HELP him in the election. Many voters saw what the cases were about and the main actors behind them and thought "No I am not having this."

Alvin Bragg and Tish James. Now i dont expect the audience on here (mostly living in England) to be familiar with the Manhattan DA and the Attorney General of the state of New York. Both are horrible human beings.

Bragg is a no bail guy and doesnt like locking up violent criminals. hell, when the radical students of Columbia university took control and unleashed mayhem and violence on its Manhattan campus he didnt prosectue anyone. They even used violence and held a poor working stiff janitor hostage! Nothing to see here.
James is the Attorney General of the state, an elected position. She got the nomination of the Democratic Party. A potted plant would win the office if they had a D at the end of their names! If we had an over/under bet on her IQ and the number was 90 I would bet my lungs out on the UNDER!!

I also predicted that his convictions would get overturned on appeal. I am certain the Appeals court in NY state is infested with rabid right wingers-NOT!

Also if Trump is Hitler, which is all we heard for months, how the hell can Harris certify his election?

I am telling you if the Democrats dont have more of an introspection about the direction of the party and its core positions they MIGHT NOT take back one of the houses of Congress in the mid term elections in 2026. That is if the elections will actually happen. Trump will do what Lenin did when Russia had free elections in 1917. When Lenin lost, he declared to results null and void and took power-SARCASM ALERT.

I find it almost painful hearing and watching the Democrats sniping at each other-especially the octogenarians Sanders/Pelosi/Schumer.
 
threespires said:
I think at least one of the studies that identified that funding difference had a few important caveats...

It didn't try to adjust for taxation rate differences in blue vs red states which in turn might impact giving.

Perhaps the bigger one which I guess Mr K is alluding to is because there is such a wide range of organisations allowed to fall within the tax legislation around charitable giving, no one really knows or at least appears to have studied where the money actually ends up.

I'm not sure there is the data to identify if "consumption philanthropy" is what is happening, that said neuroscience suggests we have more 'natural' empathy for those who are like us than those who are not, so it's definitely possible.

I keep meaning to look for some meta studies/analysis about the differences between people who view the world through individualistic vs collective lenses and similarly state vs the individual etc. but can never seem to find much which strikes me as odd.
Click to expand...
We are probably all looking at the same Google results page :) I was only really trying to make a super generic point that the uncaring republican trope isn't really the whole story. It's too simple to boil the argument down to which side cares the most about poor babies. I'd also point out that pro lifers aren't just in favour of poor kids not being aborted but also those born into privilege and wealth.

I'm also a little bit salty about the quick dismissing of church charitable giving as I am suffering from a painful back caused by supporting the charity my church runs that educates, clothes and feeds abandoned kids in Romania and India. I guess it would have been kinder to just let the British government handle it through my tax contributions and subsequent foreign aid
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.