Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
I guess my question comes down to this.
How can we ever find agreement with each other if one side will not say exactly what it is that they want?
How do we reach compromise in that case?
It sure appears that way.Most of the party has been in Destroy America mode ever since the Civil War.
Ok, by your lack of an actual response, I can only conclude that no-limit abortion is the goal.
Ie: right up until the day of full-term delivery.
You did say that you talk extensively about this issue with women from all walks of life, but the subject of how long is acceptable never came up?
That's kinda hard to believe, but whatever. Lol
Had the pro-abortion crowd not challenged the 15 week limit in Mississippi, the issue would not have been available for the Supremes to rule on to begin with.Had the supremes simply let Roe stand the way it was we wouldn't be having this chat.
Had the pro-abortion crowd not challenged the 15 week limit in Mississippi, the issue would not have been available for the Supremes to rule on to begin with.
They chose to fight for more, and lost.
Had they not done that, they would still have the "Right" to abort babies.
Taking things to court means that you may or may not win.
I wish someone on your side would just say what they think the limit should be, but apparently no one on that side can articulate exactly what it is that they want.
....and that alone prevents us from finding common ground.
I just find it hard to believe that people who believe that having a Right to abortion is the absolute most important thing to them, also have no opinion on what an acceptable amount of time to have one, would be.Don't have a side and the peeps I talk to are just regular working class / retirees who get together for a few drinks once in a while. Not really political but we do vote.
By that, it sounds as though you/they want no limit at all. Ie: abortion on demand right up until the day of birth.For us it's not a matter of time limits, it's simply personal choice (and privacy) vs being dictated to. Nothing more.
We don't think it's anyone's business what another person does with their own body. health care, money, time, etc
So you are willing to accept the outcome of an election that might come down to a narrow loss of a 49%/51% split, but are unwilling to accept a 2/3rds majority decision in a court case?All we can do is to vote. Who ever wins...........wins. It is what it is,
What about all the other recent SC rulings of late that have gone against big government wishes?but I'll vote for the individual and privacy over the state every time.
Destroying the family structure, telling women that having a 'career' instead of a family is more important, i.e., being 'equal' to men, the 'bother' of children so you farm them out to daycare....I just find it hard to believe that people who believe that having a Right to abortion is the absolute most important thing to them, also have no opinion on what an acceptable amount of time to have one, would be.
I just find it hard to believe that people who believe that having a Right to abortion is the absolute most important thing to them, also have no opinion on what an acceptable amount of time to have one, would be.
By that, it sounds as though you/they want no limit at all. Ie: abortion on demand right up until the day of birth.
Trouble is, that infant, fetus or baby is not "her body". Who is going to protect the unborn if not us? Premeditated murder is unacceptable.Joe..........most of the women I know have shoved aside the "killing babies" way of looking at this and are, instead, focusing on their rights as a human being to decide their own medical care and what goes on with their own bodies.
They feel betrayed by the supreme court and the politicians who feel they don't deserve any rights as far as their own bodies are concerned. I've talked to quite a few women who are registered repubs but who have said this was over the top and want anyone who agrees with the supremes gone. Gone as out of and in some cases gone off the planet. They are royally pissed, and I think they will be out in droves on election day.
Who is going to protect the unborn if not us? Premeditated murder is unacceptable.
We had that, but the pro-abortionists wanted more.looking at this the way you are. It isn't the "right to abortion" it's the who gets to decide. The individual and her doctor or the state.
I'm glad to hear that.I do agree on a time limit.
Why? For an issue that you obviously feel very passionately about, you have not ever thought about where an appropriate limit should be? Edited to add: ...and I'm not asking for an exact number of days. Even a ballpark number would work.As to when the cut off should be is way too far outta my pay league for me to enter into a discussion about it.
Again, that sure sounds like no limit abortion.But once again................it isn't about the actual abortion. It's about someone's right to privacy and their right to decide what's best for them as to their health care and their own body. Not some state official, not some religious zealot, not some know it all political hack. But the individual involved and her doctor.
I could find a compromise on most of the things you mentioned.A lot of things should be considered. Age, rape, incest, is the birth viable, money (sounds cruel but will the child be taken care of) is the woman's health in danger, etc. All of this and more need to be taken into consideration.
You're ignoring the fact that it is a baby in there, not a cancerous tumor of some sort.Having some holier than thou state governor make a proclamation that under no circumstances will abortions be allowed in his / her state is tantamount to him or her acting like they are a god and you are their dirtbag subject with no rights.
Now we're back to unlimited abortions up to the day of birth., I say let the woman and her doctor decide
I could find a compromise on most of the things you mentioned.
....but what about its use as a form of birth control? Which account for the reason for an overwhelming number of abortions. Things like rape and incest resulting in the need for abortions represent a very small percentage of the abortions that have been performed.
You're ignoring the fact that it is a baby in there, not a cancerous tumor of some sort.
Now we're back to unlimited abortions up to the day of birth.
??? Was just attempting to discuss with the the subject that you chose to bring up.
No offence, but you appear to think we still have elections in this country. Which moron is being run is the least of our problems.Really? Did you watch the disaster they called a debate? Fetterman has no business being in gov. He could have an R or an L by his name, and I'd say they same thing. It's nothing personal about him, just that his condition after his stroke has left him mentally disabled and obviously unfit for public office.
Edited to add: not to mention the fact that he doesn't pay his own taxes, but would vote to increase your taxes. Lol
??? Was just attempting to discuss with the the subject that you chose to bring up.
Says the most prolific poster I've ever encountered in my 25 years of interwebs. LolYou're a pro. I'm not. lol
Quantity doesn't equal quality...Says the most prolific poster I've ever encountered in my 25 years of interwebs. Lol
Says the most prolific poster I've ever encountered in my 25 years of interwebs. Lol
True, but to be fair I found quite a bit of @searcher 's extensive GIM postings to be interesting, and on a wide variety of subjects.Quantity doesn't equal quality...
Should it not? Why should people suffering from high crime rates vote for a guy who wants to release a large percentage of those currently serving time, back into their community that is already rife with crime?Was reading an article in today's paper about Fetterman's stance on crime vs Oz's. Had forgotten about that. Philly is rife with crime and gun violence. That's gonna hurt Fetterman big time.
Do you really think those people are gonna want to vote for him? I sure don't.
Add to that those who feel their taxes are already too high and are being asked to vote for a guy who wants to raise 'em even more.
....and who doesn't pay them himself.
Ok, but is it not true?Had me laughing with this one.
Ok, but is it not true?
What is funny about people who think their taxes are too high, not wanting to vote for a guy who wants to raise their taxes even more?Yeah......it's true. But funny.
What is funny about people who think their taxes are too high, not wanting to vote for a guy who wants to raise their taxes even more?
....or are you implying that him running at all, is the joke? If so, then yes it is funny.
those who feel their taxes are already too high and are being asked to vote for a guy who wants to raise 'em even more.
....and who doesn't pay them himself.
Ok, per your link, he apparently paid them. I'll give ya that one.The "............and who doesn't pay them himself" was funny as hell.
Fetterman is a parasite, never worked a day in his life, Lives off Mommy, Daddy, and Sis. Sister bought him the house he lives in, and he doesn't pay his taxes, the family pays them.To be honest........I had a little help. But those days are long gone.
_________________________________________
Was reading an article in today's paper about Fetterman's stance on crime vs Oz's. Had forgotten about that. Philly is rife with crime and gun violence. That's gonna hurt Fetterman big time.
Ok, per your link, he apparently paid them. I'll give ya that one.
However, there is still the crime issue and him advocating releasing lots of criminals. Is he also one who supports no bail for those arrested for serious and/or violent crimes?
Agree with or not, Searcher is iconic.Says the most prolific poster I've ever encountered in my 25 years of interwebs. Lol
Absolutely!Agree with or not, Searcher is iconic.
I agree with you, 100% on that. My ideal political candidate would create a bill to completely eliminate the Controlled Substances ActHe wants bail reform as well as to see less people in prison for non-violent crimes. Don't want to go off a tangent here but we (the US) has more people in prison per capita than any other country in the industrialized world. Something's wrong with that.
So what is China ?He wants bail reform as well as to see less people in prison for non-violent crimes. Don't want to go off a tangent here but we (the US) has more people in prison per capita than any other country in the industrialized world. Something's wrong with that.....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?