Forgot one: New Zealand is a country founded on colonialism and racism that still exists today.
-
22
-
push it real good wrote:
Forgot one: New Zealand is a country founded on colonialism and racism that still exists today.
You mean like a country founded on slavery and Jim Crow and a racism that still exists today? Nah - America leads the world as usual.
33 -
#1343
This post was removed.
-
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Jeff Wigand wrote:
"Free labor"
lol...
You seriously think you've stumbled onto some hidden nugget of virtuousness by figuring out that slavery is bad in 2022??
While you have only recently seemed to figure out that slavery has always sucked for the slave you still haven't figured out that it was a very good deal for the slave owners...
It's a woman's choice no matter how off topic you can get.
10 -
It's still a woman's choice no matter how off topic you can get.
01 -
2:18 at the casino and way off the grid... wrote:
It's still a woman's choice no matter how off topic you can get.
She still has that choice. It hasn’t gone anywhere. She might just have to travel farther have the abortion. Abortion is still legal. Pretty sure you can still have late term abortions in Colorado, DC, California…
10 -
You are right. A woman can walk 800 to 1,000 miles to her nearby wherever abortion clinic. Some might have to go even further. Explain to what you do in the health care industry?
12 -
2:18 at the casino and way off the grid... wrote:
You are right. A woman can walk 800 to 1,000 miles to her nearby wherever abortion clinic. Some might have to go even further. Explain to what you do in the health care industry?
Lol what is this the 1800s? No one is walking anywhere. besides that, isn’t walking good for your climate change position? Walking 800 miles fights obesity and climate change. It’s a win win.
52 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
Chiselworth wrote:
New Zealanders are incapable of the emotion of shame. As we can see from this message board, they use a strange combination of obsession with America and deflection as a means of compensating for their racist, colonial beliefs against all races, apparently.
Speaking of shame...
New Zealand was the world’s second most democratic country in 2021, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) says in its annual Democracy Index.
The US is in 26th place and isn’t even described as a full democracy, rather it’s classed as a flawed democracy, with its greatest failings considered to be the functioning of its government, and its political culture.
Disgusting. New Zealanders cite fake awards they allegedly receive, while oppressing any Person of Color unfortunate enough to be born or set foot in their hellhole of a country.
21 -
Yawn^23 wrote:
2:18 at the casino and way off the grid... wrote:
You are right. A woman can walk 800 to 1,000 miles to her nearby wherever abortion clinic. Some might have to go even further. Explain to what you do in the health care industry?
Lol what is this the 1800s? No one is walking anywhere. besides that, isn’t walking good for your climate change position? Walking 800 miles fights obesity and climate change. It’s a win win.
Just more emotional nonsense. If travel is such a burden, I’m sure there are some pro-choice activists that will happily pay to fly or drive women to have their abortions.
At the end of the day the fact remains that abortion is still legal, and for a lot of states nothing has changed.
13 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
Chiselworth wrote:
New Zealanders are incapable of the emotion of shame. As we can see from this message board, they use a strange combination of obsession with America and deflection as a means of compensating for their racist, colonial beliefs against all races, apparently.
Speaking of shame...
New Zealand was the world’s second most democratic country in 2021, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) says in its annual Democracy Index.
The US is in 26th place and isn’t even described as a full democracy, rather it’s classed as a flawed democracy, with its greatest failings considered to be the functioning of its government, and its political culture.
US is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
22 -
Chiselworth wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Speaking of shame...
New Zealand was the world’s second most democratic country in 2021, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) says in its annual Democracy Index.
The US is in 26th place and isn’t even described as a full democracy, rather it’s classed as a flawed democracy, with its greatest failings considered to be the functioning of its government, and its political culture.
Disgusting. New Zealanders cite fake awards they allegedly receive, while oppressing any Person of Color unfortunate enough to be born or set foot in their hellhole of a country.
Gee, you really enjoy losing. The only thing you're good at.
22 -
Half true wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Speaking of shame...
New Zealand was the world’s second most democratic country in 2021, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) says in its annual Democracy Index.
The US is in 26th place and isn’t even described as a full democracy, rather it’s classed as a flawed democracy, with its greatest failings considered to be the functioning of its government, and its political culture.
US is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
Like the Roman Republic? We know the US is not a democracy. It's proving it by the day.
22 -
advice to Republicans wrote:
Note Screen Name is Bubble Fish on my other computer.
There is a fire at a fertility clinic.
In one corner, there is a terrified little five-year-old girl.
In the other, there is a container with 100 viable frozen embryos.
You can only save one.
Which do you save?Most people recognize that 100 frozen embryos don't carry the rights of personhood that a 5 year old holds and would save the 5 year old. The people who hold life and rights of personhood begin at conception would save the frozen embryos.
What if you were the last person on Earth who would you choose?
How would you choose between a 90 year old and a five year old? How would you choose between a baby and a 5 year old? Maybe go with the safest bet?
I think your scenario is illustrative of personhood. Here's a more relevant scenario to the debate:
Would you rather save an autographed Galen Rupp singlet or the frozen embryos?
01 -
2:18 at the casino and way off the grid... wrote:
It's still a woman's choice no matter how off topic you can get.
Also the father’s choice and the people’s right to draw some lines unless you are literally saying it’s the woman’s choice to cut off the child’s head instead of the umbilical cord because it is still attached to her, hence bodily autonomy.
20 -
dababykilla wrote:
advice to Republicans wrote:
Note Screen Name is Bubble Fish on my other computer.
There is a fire at a fertility clinic.
In one corner, there is a terrified little five-year-old girl.
In the other, there is a container with 100 viable frozen embryos.
You can only save one.
Which do you save?Most people recognize that 100 frozen embryos don't carry the rights of personhood that a 5 year old holds and would save the 5 year old. The people who hold life and rights of personhood begin at conception would save the frozen embryos.
What if you were the last person on Earth who would you choose?
How would you choose between a 90 year old and a five year old? How would you choose between a baby and a 5 year old? Maybe go with the safest bet?
I think your scenario is illustrative of personhood. Here's a more relevant scenario to the debate:
Would you rather save an autographed Galen Rupp singlet or the frozen embryos?
Well let's say the last person who was female and had a medical team... dope.
00 -
dababykilla wrote:
advice to Republicans wrote:
Note Screen Name is Bubble Fish on my other computer.
There is a fire at a fertility clinic.
In one corner, there is a terrified little five-year-old girl.
In the other, there is a container with 100 viable frozen embryos.
You can only save one.
Which do you save?Most people recognize that 100 frozen embryos don't carry the rights of personhood that a 5 year old holds and would save the 5 year old. The people who hold life and rights of personhood begin at conception would save the frozen embryos.
What if you were the last person on Earth who would you choose?
How would you choose between a 90 year old and a five year old? How would you choose between a baby and a 5 year old? Maybe go with the safest bet?
I think your scenario is illustrative of personhood. Here's a more relevant scenario to the debate:
Would you rather save an autographed Galen Rupp singlet or the frozen embryos?
These types of philosophical questions don’t provide practical answers.
Does anyone here think it okay to cut off a baby’s head instead of the umbilical cord even as it is trying to come out? That’s what I thought.
Now you are just squabbling about a cutoff (see what I did there) date. Who decides that date? Each individual woman in isolation? Sorry, that makes no sense from any moral, medical, or political principle. The people as a whole decide that. That’s how a democracy works. What happened last week is just that: scotus returning the buck to democratic legislation.
The only morally and intellectually honest opposition to the above can be from someone who sincerely believes in the sanctity of life and therefore can accept no cutoff date after fertilization no matter what the people of the state want. Yet, the shrillest complainers on this thread are the Roe apologists.
00 -
Wise Old Man wrote:
roller coaster wrote:
An (R) or (D) after your name doesn't determine whether you're a liberal. The Warren court is widely recognized as liberal.
I love it, three Nixon appointees and two Eisenhower appointees and now they are liberals? Maybe they were simply wise and got it right. Fundamentally, the law is what we say it is. Roe was not wrongly decided, it was simply decided. In a vacuum, Dobbs was not wrongly decided either, but when you throw out the super precedent of Griswold and the reaffirmed precedents of Roe/Casey, that’s dangerous legal ground and a shock to the rule of law. In the end this shock was the product of a single justice (Gorsuch replacing Garland). If Garland was on the court, Robert’s would have written this 5-4 decision upholding the central argument of Roe and reaffirming Griswold. So in the end, a political trick played by McConnell has led to this dramatic change in our jurisprudence. Whatever your view of Roe and abortion rights, you can see why this is a destabilizing event, inviting more chaos, division, rancor and skepticism.
00 -
44561 wrote:
Wise Old Man wrote:
I love it, three Nixon appointees and two Eisenhower appointees and now they are liberals? Maybe they were simply wise and got it right. Fundamentally, the law is what we say it is. Roe was not wrongly decided, it was simply decided. In a vacuum, Dobbs was not wrongly decided either, but when you throw out the super precedent of Griswold and the reaffirmed precedents of Roe/Casey, that’s dangerous legal ground and a shock to the rule of law. In the end this shock was the product of a single justice (Gorsuch replacing Garland). If Garland was on the court, Robert’s would have written this 5-4 decision upholding the central argument of Roe and reaffirming Griswold. So in the end, a political trick played by McConnell has led to this dramatic change in our jurisprudence. Whatever your view of Roe and abortion rights, you can see why this is a destabilizing event, inviting more chaos, division, rancor and skepticism.
Yeah, and if the moons of Jupiter were aligned with uranus, this wouldn’t have possibly happened, so it’s all the fault of uranus coming in the way.
It was our constitutional democracy working as designed. The senate has always had the power to not confirm. It’s not a courtesy ornamental event. McConnell is a shrewd bustard, good for the republicans. The dems only wish they had a turtle like him.
21 -
Politically this will have not have a big impact. The country is in a terrible place economically and that is what affects people's daily lives. Abortion isn't something normal people spend their day contemplating, or concerning themselves, plus now it's been pushed to the state.
Whatever, if any "fire" is left for the prochoice/prolife people they will have to concentrate their efforts state by state. The President is no longer a player in the abortion games. On the Federal level this is a non issue for the foreseeable future. Unless the Dems want to start running on platform that includes a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion on demand.
10
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.