By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - So an Abortion limiting bill passed in my state, Texas

dsgrue3 on 07 August 2013
Etech7 said:
Killing babies is wrong. It is selfish to abort your baby just cause you don't want to care for it. This is what is wrong with America. People are for the right to own guns and abort babies. While these issues may be supported by different sides they are morally wrong.

There are a few problems I wanted to address with you.

1. How is owning a weapon morally wrong? Is owning a spoon morally wrong too? Just curious about how purchasing a tool is a moral issue.

2. A fetus isn't a baby. A fetus doesn't have any conscious brain activity until the currently imposed 20? week limit. When we consider someone dead, it's because of the brain as well. If the heart dies, you can grab a new one. If the brain dies, you're dead. 



Around the Network
the2real4mafol on 07 August 2013
Screamapillar said:
the2real4mafol said:
What's wrong with us all chipping in some money/ taxes to have socialised healthcare? Because of the inequality caused by capitalism, we NEED socialised healthcare. It is actually better as the health of the poor is much improved and surely if we are all healthier, the economy will benefit from fewer sick days.

I think your opinion is very backward and actually quite selfish, for just one major reason. Just look at the current American healthcare system, 35 million people have no health insurance and therefore "can't afford to get ill" because it is dominated by private companies who only care about profit rather than people's health. The profit motive has no place in healthcare. Fortunately, a disease can't tell the difference between a rich and a poor person and so infects anyone. Are you telling you would yet someone who can't afford to pay potentially die unneccesarilly despite all the medicine that exists? That's just wrong. And to prove further that private healthcare isn't efficient, 18% of US GDP is spent on healthcare. Come to the UK, where we have the NHS and we only spend 9% of GDP on healthcare according to World Bank (that % is similar across other countries with socialised healthcare). It's cheaper to have socialised healthcare and it is also moral, everyone just needs to dip into too their pocket for the greater good. And to think you get a free and decent service in return for slightly higher taxes. I don't see the problem here. 

1. Yeah but in the UK, you guys have notoriously horrible healthcare, same with all socialized health systems.  Longer times to see an actual doctor, meaning when you do actually get to see one, it might be too late to do anything about it.  Doctors get paid less, therefore there are fewer people who want to become doctors, and thus fewer specialists, hence why so many people fly to the United States and a select few other countries to see specialists, i.e. the best in the world.

2. The problem is that we already all "chip in some money", it's called Medicare and Medicaid.  Both of which are terrible systems.  Doctors hate them, there's too much backlog, bureaucracy, and it's so wasteful that many Doctors either don't accept them or they retire early just so that they don't have to deal with them.  To the detriment of the people you claim should be helped.

3. So your forceful way of dealing with all of this is never going to work.  Europe is bankrupt, they have nothing but pyramided debt.  They have low birth rates among middle and high income people, many of which are even below the replacement rate.  

4. Your continent is literally dying, and as we're already seeing in France and elsewhere, eventually your entire society is going to be overrun with Muslims.  Muslims, once there are enough of them to be in power in Europe, are not going to support your socialized systems, and they're not going to support women's rights or a welfare state.  So, you talk about me "being backward", well, look in the mirror.  Also, look at the demographics in France.  I would prefer that that not happen here in the US.

5. Not to mention that you cannot force someone to be charitable.  If we had a healthy economy, and there were actual jobs in the US, we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because there wouldn't be so many people who can't afford health insurance.  So no matter how hard you try, or how much you want it, you cannot legislate poor people into prosperity.  It doesn't work.  It has never worked, ever.  All of these socialized programs that progressives and conservaties love to throw around "energy independence", "education", "food stamps", the common theme you hear is that "Well, if we just increased funding, this would all be solved."  The problem is, every time funding is increased, it makes the problem even worse than it was before.

The best way to handle these types of problems, and it's in line with the original intent of the United States, is to give people as much freedom as possible.  I don't think the tyranny of the government being the central provider of services is going to turn out well.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

1. If my countrie's healthcare is so horrible, then thats because of the current government who are intent are fragmenting the NHS to privatise it. It must be stopped before it happens. And yes i understand longer waiting times is a common critique of the NHS but what's better waiting a few hours to get treatment or having to pawn off some of your valuables? I know what i would do.

And talk about propaganda "USA! USA! USA! we're number 1!" yeah right! A lot of people actually come to the UK for health tourism because it is free and of a good standard. And also if pay is so important for a doctor, then why do Cuba have some of the best doctors? They get paid the same as everyone else in that country. It's a developing country with better health than the USA. And you think it's better for doctors to pocket more money when that money could just be invested into improving the health service in the first place. 

2. I agree medicare and mediaid are terrible and that's for one reason, they are not universal . They are nothing like the NHS at all, which was set up more efficiently.

3. So what if we are facing bankruptcy we had it far worse after ww2 and guess what? Our government nationalised healthcare for the benefit of the british population and as a result health massively improved. Our debt was 200% of GDP after ww2, today our debt is 75% of GDP so there is no excuse to cut services or not even provide them. There is just no political will to serve people like they are supposed to, instead most western governments only serve corporations now. Also, only Germany has a declining population out of everyone in Europe

4. And so what if Muslims choose to live here? They move around like everyone else. I don't see the problem and i did look at French Demographics and only 10% are Muslim. In the UK, 23% are non-religious. Big deal! I just love how people think all Muslims are terrorists, the Muslims are invading Europe and bringing it down. It's all nonsense and i find it laughable. And regardless of what you think, i think Islam is slowly modernising despite all the conflict and people like Malala (a Pakistani girl who is fighting to get education for girls) prove it. Also, places like Dubai and Islamabad are doing great aren't they? Also, look up Afghanistan before 1979 (when war started thanks to the USSR, only to be continued by the USA) and you'll see modern and muslim society can happen, if it has the chance. 

5. Since when were taxes ever a choice? The government sets the rate, the people and the business must pay the rate that is set for them. Pretty simple. Government also decides how to spend and if it's reasonable it will spend sufficently on stuff like healthcare, education, environment, local services, helping to set up business with loans etc and not massively in one area like military which is what America does. $700 billion on all military activity, i can't emphasise that enough. Also, the problem is that the rich don't pay enough because of legal loopholes like tax havens. 

Also by having socialised healthcare that is not meant to make the poor wealthy, it just brings modern healthcare to the working class who would be priced out of it otherwise which would keep society backwards as the newest technology and medicine would be kept from the majority of people. The NHS has actually helped me so much in my 18 years on this Earth, i couldn't imagine life without it. People shouldn't have to choose between getting an operation and their house. As for the welfare state, it is meant to make life less of a struggle for ordinary people. No one would be a millionaire from being on welfare, that's just common sense. Also, there is one thing that would massively benefit from increased budget in the USA, your education it is currently terrible.

Finally, how is government ensuring a minimum standard of health for it's population tryanny? You are not forced to go to hospitals/ dentists etc for checkups, you are not forced to do anything you don't want to do. But by removing the price barrier, the option is there for everyone. In fact, in the UK people are free to use private alternatives if they so wish and some jobs even offer insurance, the NHS is just the minimum standard so that everyone has access. Also, all the government tries to do at least in European countries is to try to reduce inequality between rich and poor. The nature of capitalism is really one of winners and losers, i feel the "losers" in the population need to boosted by the government by taxes from the "winners" to have a good standard of life in everyway. In fact, most of us would live in slums if we were given ultimate "freedom". Something that is slowly fading in America today. 



Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030

ninetailschris on 07 August 2013
dsgrue3 said:
Etech7 said:
Killing babies is wrong. It is selfish to abort your baby just cause you don't want to care for it. This is what is wrong with America. People are for the right to own guns and abort babies. While these issues may be supported by different sides they are morally wrong.

There are a few problems I wanted to address with you.

1. How is owning a weapon morally wrong? Is owning a spoon morally wrong too? Just curious about how purchasing a tool is a moral issue.

2. A fetus isn't a baby. A fetus doesn't have any conscious brain activity until the currently imposed 20? week limit. When we consider someone dead, it's because of the brain as well. If the heart dies, you can grab a new one. If the brain dies, you're dead. 


Question I read your quote by Friedrich Nietzsche .

Did you read his books? Did you know his stance on morally(did you agree),what type of person he was, or what he is known for?

I'm curious because if your willing to quote him, I would believe you take him as a creditable person on something.

I'm asking this because my follow up question will be related to the topic.



"Excuse me sir, I see you have a weapon. Why don't you put it down and let's settle this like gentlemen"  ~ max

-CraZed- on 08 August 2013
Mr Khan said:
Screamapillar said:
Mr Khan said:
 

Such a response is wholly unfounded. You just assume that the system would not be properly funded, for one. Two, it is the role of the state to provide goods for which the free market is an inefficient provider, health care being a *huge* thing here. Third, different countries use different systems, and not all of them (indeed, not many of them) involve the government seizing direct control or totally monopolizing the system (just mostly monopolizing it. The United Kingdom still has a small private health system that the very rich can take advantage of). In many countries, it's simply a matter of the government distributing funds to a system that otherwise looks much like our own, just that the bill ultimately comes from the top. In Japan, everyone pays into national health insurance (including anyone on a visa more than 90 days), and they pay according to their income, and get deductibles set according to their income. The wealthy pay more into the system, and are on the hook for more when they get care, but everyone is guaranteed to get it, which is simply justice.


Forgive me, but it seems as though that is an incentive to not be a successful person.  As in, a disincentive to obtain a career with a higher-paying job in order to obtain "free" health insurance, but at the same time, not have to work very hard for it.  Thus, it leaves the door open for the more industrious to feel "Why am I bothering to work so hard when other's are getting health insurance for doing far less?", even though most are more capable than that?

Let me be absolutely clear.  I am a compassionate person, it seems like you are as well, I just feel very strongly that your philosophy of how this all should be handled is going to create more problems than it's going to solve.  I think in general, that welfare programs, and programs like Social Security and Medicare, are a disincentive to save for retirement, and a disincentive to budget enough money from your own salary to pay for your medical bills.  I don't think it's fair to expect someone to pay for someone else who was, for the most part, less careful about making good life choices and exercising good judgement.

Because we're only talking about the essentials of life as far as income goes. In the welfare state I would advocate, the poorest would get full nutrition, healthcare, shelter, education, and the minimum in clothing, but these are not really the ingredients for a fulfilling life on the whole. If you want a house, a good car, the leisure to watch movies or read books or surf the internet or video games or what have you, you still have to work.

Some people aren't going to work, and are going to exercise poor judgment and yet expect someone to cover for their mistakes, but even they deserve the basics, but how many people are going to be satisfied with the basics? Wealth and success are their own incentives beyond mere survival.

The problem with your theory is it is completely false and assumes that those in charge of the distribution are altruistic and benevolent. We know this is patently false. The welfare state can only be paid for by plunder. The plunder of those who seek to be able to afford things like video games, a good car leisure time etc. etc. In fact leisure time is even harder to come by when you do actually work. The welfare state is the antihesis to freedom and liberty. It indentures one group to another with NO origin of debt. Save for some mythical Social Contract that apparently we all sign at birth if we are not aborted within that welfare sate. Besides what happens when the takers out number the givers?

Welfare is the worst form of slavery and has done nothing but destroy the lives of those unfortunate enough to have to rely on it. Look at the destruction of the Back family it has wrought. Welfare is a way to garner power through the inevitable voting blocks formed by those who have come to rely on the government dole. Promise the world, deliver misery and the people will come crawling back for more. It also pits the haves against the supposed have nots. It robs people of the sense of dignity and accomplishment of earning something. It encourages envy on all sides. Don't believe me? Look around. Doe s our society not seem even more divided these days as our welfare state has grown even larger?

Not to mention the frivolous misuse of welafre benefits to purchase things like video games and luxury items those very funds were never meant to purchase. Well then you say we need laws to prevent that. We sure do but then what has happened to ours and your freedom to live as you like? And who is to say these new laws meant to prevent welfare recipients from buying these things can even be enforced. Ever seen what happens with food stamp fraud? Even EBT cards can't stop it.

If you wish to know why I believe I know what I am talking about? It's because I grew up on welfare and I am one of the lucky and fortunate people who actually got away from the cycle of poverty induced by the welfare state. The county I lived in San Bernardino recently went bankrupt and not just in money... It was one of those areas of the country where a large percentage of the population were receiving welfare benefits.

My mother and both of my brothers are still living there with dead end jobs (when they can get one) absentee from their children (so their baby momma's can collect those checks and food stamps) and are either using drugs or drinking heavily. Why? because they never knew any better. Because the environment of the welfare state sucked them in and stole their drive and their sense of self worth.... How can you feel worthy of something when you never earn it?

 

Sorry bud but you are just wrong, wrong, wrong.





Mr Khan on 08 August 2013
-CraZed- said:
Mr Khan said:

Because we're only talking about the essentials of life as far as income goes. In the welfare state I would advocate, the poorest would get full nutrition, healthcare, shelter, education, and the minimum in clothing, but these are not really the ingredients for a fulfilling life on the whole. If you want a house, a good car, the leisure to watch movies or read books or surf the internet or video games or what have you, you still have to work.

Some people aren't going to work, and are going to exercise poor judgment and yet expect someone to cover for their mistakes, but even they deserve the basics, but how many people are going to be satisfied with the basics? Wealth and success are their own incentives beyond mere survival.

The problem with your theory is it is completely false and assumes that those in charge of the distribution are altruistic and benevolent. We know this is patently false. The welfare state can only be paid for by plunder. The plunder of those who seek to be able to afford things like video games, a good car leisure time etc. etc. In fact leisure time is even harder to come by when you do actually work. The welfare state is the antihesis to freedom and liberty. It indentures one group to another with NO origin of debt. Save for some mythical Social Contract that apparently we all sign at birth if we are not aborted within that welfare sate. Besides what happens when the takers out number the givers?

Welfare is the worst form of slavery and has done nothing but destroy the lives of those unfortunate enough to have to rely on it. Look at the destruction of the Back family it has wrought. Welfare is a way to garner power through the inevitable voting blocks formed by those who have come to rely on the government dole. Promise the world, deliver misery and the people will come crawling back for more. It also pits the haves against the supposed have nots. It robs people of the sense of dignity and accomplishment of earning something. It encourages envy on all sides. Don't believe me? Look around. Doe s our society not seem even more divided these days as our welfare state has grown even larger?

Not to mention the frivolous misuse of welafre benefits to purchase things like video games and luxury items those very funds were never meant to purchase. Well then you say we need laws to prevent that. We sure do but then what has happened to ours and your freedom to live as you like? And who is to say these new laws meant to prevent welfare recipients from buying these things can even be enforced. Ever seen what happens with food stamp fraud? Even EBT cards can't stop it.

If you wish to know why I believe I know what I am talking about? It's because I grew up on welfare and I am one of the lucky and fortunate people who actually got away from the cycle of poverty induced by the welfare state. The county I lived in San Bernardino recently went bankrupt and not just in money... It was one of those areas of the country where a large percentage of the population were receiving welfare benefits.

My mother and both of my brothers are still living there with dead end jobs (when they can get one) absentee from their children (so their baby momma's can collect those checks and food stamps) and are either using drugs or drinking heavily. Why? because they never knew any better. Because the environment of the welfare state sucked them in and stole their drive and their sense of self worth.... How can you feel worthy of something when you never earn it?

 

Sorry bud but you are just wrong, wrong, wrong.

Riddle me this: could you have gotten out of the cycle of poverty if you had not had welfare support? If you had been homeless and starving and sick, could you have achieved what you have?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
-CraZed- on 08 August 2013
Mr Khan said:
-CraZed- said:
Mr Khan said:
 

Because we're only talking about the essentials of life as far as income goes. In the welfare state I would advocate, the poorest would get full nutrition, healthcare, shelter, education, and the minimum in clothing, but these are not really the ingredients for a fulfilling life on the whole. If you want a house, a good car, the leisure to watch movies or read books or surf the internet or video games or what have you, you still have to work.

Some people aren't going to work, and are going to exercise poor judgment and yet expect someone to cover for their mistakes, but even they deserve the basics, but how many people are going to be satisfied with the basics? Wealth and success are their own incentives beyond mere survival.

The problem with your theory is it is completely false and assumes that those in charge of the distribution are altruistic and benevolent. We know this is patently false. The welfare state can only be paid for by plunder. The plunder of those who seek to be able to afford things like video games, a good car leisure time etc. etc. In fact leisure time is even harder to come by when you do actually work. The welfare state is the antihesis to freedom and liberty. It indentures one group to another with NO origin of debt. Save for some mythical Social Contract that apparently we all sign at birth if we are not aborted within that welfare sate. Besides what happens when the takers out number the givers?

Welfare is the worst form of slavery and has done nothing but destroy the lives of those unfortunate enough to have to rely on it. Look at the destruction of the Back family it has wrought. Welfare is a way to garner power through the inevitable voting blocks formed by those who have come to rely on the government dole. Promise the world, deliver misery and the people will come crawling back for more. It also pits the haves against the supposed have nots. It robs people of the sense of dignity and accomplishment of earning something. It encourages envy on all sides. Don't believe me? Look around. Doe s our society not seem even more divided these days as our welfare state has grown even larger?

Not to mention the frivolous misuse of welafre benefits to purchase things like video games and luxury items those very funds were never meant to purchase. Well then you say we need laws to prevent that. We sure do but then what has happened to ours and your freedom to live as you like? And who is to say these new laws meant to prevent welfare recipients from buying these things can even be enforced. Ever seen what happens with food stamp fraud? Even EBT cards can't stop it.

If you wish to know why I believe I know what I am talking about? It's because I grew up on welfare and I am one of the lucky and fortunate people who actually got away from the cycle of poverty induced by the welfare state. The county I lived in San Bernardino recently went bankrupt and not just in money... It was one of those areas of the country where a large percentage of the population were receiving welfare benefits.

My mother and both of my brothers are still living there with dead end jobs (when they can get one) absentee from their children (so their baby momma's can collect those checks and food stamps) and are either using drugs or drinking heavily. Why? because they never knew any better. Because the environment of the welfare state sucked them in and stole their drive and their sense of self worth.... How can you feel worthy of something when you never earn it?

 

Sorry bud but you are just wrong, wrong, wrong.

Riddle me this: could you have gotten out of the cycle of poverty if you had not had welfare support? If you had been homeless and starving and sick, could you have achieved what you have?

By leaving home at 16 and working my ever loving butt off. By leaving behind the place from where I came, cutting ties with those from where I came and dedicating myself to the famliy I have made. I lived in a Salvation Army shelter while I was in Junior High school because my parents couldn't keep a place over our heads. I remember my school bus stop was within sight of the shelter so I would walk around the block the long way so the other kids wouldn't see where I came from. Starvation is NOT a problem in this country even for the homeless. Food banks, and cheap staples are abundant why do you think obesity is so prevelant amongst the poor? Also remember, I am the exception out of 4 other family mambers. That is the norm where I am from and in many places where welfare is the primary source of income.

And I never said I was sick... I'm not Tiny effing Tim I'ma grown ass man who pulled himself up by his boot straps and by the grace of God I made myself into a productive member of society (even if I did make some mistakes along the way.)



finalfantasystud on 08 August 2013

I love all this the parent's right's this the parents right's that what about the poor child who cant defend himself? by that logic I guess its ok to abuse your kid since they are YOURS! bullshit, there should be consequences for all these people irresponsibly having kids and abortions. Why is it ok for people to murder other people (abortion) yet the minute someone smokes a joint or does some other drug minding their business not hurting anyone they get ridiculed and bashed as the scum of society. But these little teenage whores go get knocked up and live off the government the rest of their life is just fine and dandy they wonder why this world is in a recession THERE IS TO MANY PEOPLE!! and nobody seems to think this is a problem, Everyone should be allowed only 2 kids and have to get fixed after that since people aren't gonna grow up and and be responsible on their own. Or some kind of jail system for these whores and manwhores we need to get this under control and stop celebritising these 16 year olds for being dumb whores (males actually are the worst but they don't get a show for being a worthless daddy) people need to start being responsible for their actions instead of being rewarded with free money and food and healthcare every month when all they did was lay down and get fucked. Its fuckin nuts, they try to make you feel bad for these dumb irresponsible teens "my life is over" "poor me,poor me" nobody feels sorry or helps a kid for drinking they give him an MIP instead not free money food and healthcare.



the2real4mafol on 08 August 2013
-CraZed- said:
Mr Khan said:

Riddle me this: could you have gotten out of the cycle of poverty if you had not had welfare support? If you had been homeless and starving and sick, could you have achieved what you have?

By leaving home at 16 and working my ever loving butt off. By leaving behind the place from where I came, cutting ties with those from where I came and dedicating myself to the famliy I have made. I lived in a Salvation Army shelter while I was in Junior High school because my parents couldn't keep a place over our heads. I remember my school bus stop was within sight of the shelter so I would walk around the block the long way so the other kids wouldn't see where I came from. Starvation is NOT a problem in this country even for the homeless. Food banks, and cheap staples are abundant why do you think obesity is so prevelant amongst the poor? Also remember, I am the exception out of 4 other family mambers. That is the norm where I am from and in many places where welfare is the primary source of income.

And I never said I was sick... I'm not Tiny effing Tim I'ma grown ass man who pulled himself up by his boot straps and by the grace of God I made myself into a productive member of society (even if I did make some mistakes along the way.)

You can work as hard as you like but if the pay ain't good enough, you will be stuck in the poverty trap. Just look at farmers, they work really hard but aren't exactly rich are they? 



Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030

dsgrue3 on 08 August 2013
ninetailschris said:
dsgrue3 said:
Etech7 said:
Killing babies is wrong. It is selfish to abort your baby just cause you don't want to care for it. This is what is wrong with America. People are for the right to own guns and abort babies. While these issues may be supported by different sides they are morally wrong.

There are a few problems I wanted to address with you.

1. How is owning a weapon morally wrong? Is owning a spoon morally wrong too? Just curious about how purchasing a tool is a moral issue.

2. A fetus isn't a baby. A fetus doesn't have any conscious brain activity until the currently imposed 20? week limit. When we consider someone dead, it's because of the brain as well. If the heart dies, you can grab a new one. If the brain dies, you're dead. 


Question I read your quote by Friedrich Nietzsche .

Did you read his books? Did you know his stance on morally(did you agree),what type of person he was, or what he is known for?

I'm curious because if your willing to quote him, I would believe you take him as a creditable person on something.

I'm asking this because my follow up question will be related to the topic.

Why not simply ask the question?

There is no justifiable leap or congruence between one subject and the next so I cannot comment upon whether or not I agree on a separate issue.



Kasz216 on 08 August 2013

I think one thing that gets overlooked is that the US actually has some of the most liberal abortion laws in the world.

Pretty much the USA and China are top of the list.

Europeon laws on average are FAR more restrictive, and the cut off date to get an abortion is far sooner.

A LOT of Western Europeon countries put the ban on abortions at 12 weeks.

 

Let alone the various hoops you have to do to get an abortion.   Needing specific reasons or they won't give it to you, talking to a psychologist, proving your poor etc.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/in-liberal-europe-abortion-laws-come-with-their-own-restrictions/278350/

 

Abortion activism is a lot like gun activism in the US.  Quite different due to american's greater value in individuality.