PDA

View Full Version : Donald!



peggy
3-31-16, 9:45pm
So, Trump has said what every republican thinks, which is why the party fears him, actually.
Women who have an abortion, in his, or any republican Presidents world, would face criminal charges. Stands to reason, doesn't it? If abortion is outlawed, against the law, as the republican platform calls for (actually a huge part of the republican platform) then the woman is a criminal and should face charges.
Isn't this so? Murder is murder, if abortion is murder, then the woman is a murderer. right?

So, you who support the republican platform, what punishment should the woman face? 'Cause of course, you know abortion won't stop just because you make it illegal. If you vote Republican, you vote for this platform. So it would be nice to know up front what punishment you all have in mind for this criminal act.

iris lilies
3-31-16, 10:25pm
So, Trump has said what every republican thinks, which is why the party fears him, actually.
Women who have an abortion, in his, or any republican Presidents world, would face criminal charges. Stands to reason, doesn't it? If abortion is outlawed, against the law, as the republican platform calls for (actually a huge part of the republican platform) then the woman is a criminal and should face charges.
Isn't this so? Murder is murder, if abortion is murder, then the woman is a murderer. right?

So, you who support the republican platform, what punishment should the woman face? 'Cause of course, you know abortion won't stop just because you make it illegal. If you vote Republican, you vote for this platform. So it would be nice to know up front what punishment you all have in mind for this criminal act.
Oh peggy, lots of hyperbole here.

Its not "what every Republican thinks" since even Donald's campaign walked that back pretty fast, within minutes agter he uttered it.

"Voting for this platform" is more misleading talk since the current national election year platform hasn't even been penned. When I read over the last platform of 2012 at www.gop.com I see no reference to abortion penalties. Really I cant even find anything specifcally about abortion law. There is " we oppose FDA approval of RU486 ..." But thats not what you are talking about.

But yes, you are right that if I vote Republican I may be endorsing some things
i dont really like. Thems the breaks in a system with two big bad two parties.

Curious if you, peggy, endorse each and every idea in the Democratic Party platform?

Ultralight
4-1-16, 7:52am
Peggy has a point. If you outlaw something then the people who do it have to be punished. Even jaywalking has a small fine.

iris lilies
4-1-16, 8:20am
Peggy has a point. If you outlaw something then the people who do it have to be punished. Even jaywalking has a small fine.
Its not outlawed.

Williamsmith
4-1-16, 8:26am
So, Trump has said what every republican thinks, which is why the party fears him, actually.
Women who have an abortion, in his, or any republican Presidents world, would face criminal charges. Stands to reason, doesn't it? If abortion is outlawed, against the law, as the republican platform calls for (actually a huge part of the republican platform) then the woman is a criminal and should face charges.
Isn't this so? Murder is murder, if abortion is murder, then the woman is a murderer. right?

So, you who support the republican platform, what punishment should the woman face? 'Cause of course, you know abortion won't stop just because you make it illegal. If you vote Republican, you vote for this platform. So it would be nice to know up front what punishment you all have in mind for this criminal act.

Im very thankful I had surgery to remove all my republican thoughts. I have the card to prove it. As far as abortion goes, I am fine with it as long as it's not mine.

Ultralight
4-1-16, 8:52am
Its not outlawed.

Abortion or jaywalking?

iris lilies
4-1-16, 9:08am
Abortion or jaywalking?
The feds dont outlaw abortion. Nor jaywalking.

LDAHL
4-1-16, 9:09am
I suppose that if your political narrative runs on victims and villains, it's important to set yourself up as the people who are against the people who are against something.

Peggy's insights notwithstanding, I would guess there are about as many Republicans who want to jail women who get abortions as there are Democrats who want to confiscate all the guns.

Jaywalkers, of course, should be summarily executed.

Ultralight
4-1-16, 9:10am
Democrats who want to confiscate all the guns.

There are way, way more of these than you'd think.

JaneV2.0
4-1-16, 10:40am
What annoyed me most about that exchange was the idea that women seeking abortions are "victims." The notion that women are perpetually childlike, not responsible, and none too bright dies hard.

oldhat
4-1-16, 11:02am
What Trump said does logically follow. If SCOTUS strikes down Roe v. Wade and state legislatures outlaw abortion, abortion becomes a crime. Of course, the laws could be written in such a way as to punish only the doctors who perform abortions or some other subset of the people involved in the actual act. But he was merely articulating the principle that crime should be punished.

This reminds me of the inconsistency inherent in the position of people who say they are pro-life "with exceptions." If a fetus is a human being, then deliberately killing it is wrong, regardless of the circumstances of of its conception. The Catholic church, at least, is consistent on this point--its position is that deliberately ending a life is wrong, period. (That includes capital punishment and euthanasia.)

The Catholic position on abortion isn't one I agree with, but, as I say, it's logical. And in this case, so is Trump.

jp1
4-1-16, 11:11am
Getting a supreme court that will overturn Roe v Wade does seem to be a republican party goal and if/when that happens it shouldn't be a shocker to anyone that a number of states will outlaw abortion outright. Make it illegal. Openly saying that isn't a winning proposition with a majority of americans, so no one has openly said it until Trump did. He only walked it back because he quickly realized that his 'state the obvious things plainly instead of just dog whilstling them like every other republican' method of campaigning had gone too far on this issue. Or maybe it was intentional to say it and walk it back since he'd gotten the message to his supporters regardless of the walk-back. After all, no one really believes that a politician means it when they walk back a statement. A walk back is equivalent to a non-apology apology where someone says something like "I'm sorry if so and so was offended by what I said." instead of a real apology.

peggy
4-1-16, 11:19am
Oh peggy, lots of hyperbole here.

Its not "what every Republican thinks" since even Donald's campaign walked that back pretty fast, within minutes agter he uttered it.

"Voting for this platform" is more misleading talk since the current national election year platform hasn't even been penned. When I read over the last platform of 2012 at www.gop.com I see no reference to abortion penalties. Really I cant even find anything specifcally about abortion law. There is " we oppose FDA approval of RU486 ..." But thats not what you are talking about.

But yes, you are right that if I vote Republican I may be endorsing some things
i dont really like. Thems the breaks in a system with two big bad two parties.

Curious if you, peggy, endorse each and every idea in the Democratic Party platform?

Its not "what every Republican thinks" since even Donald's campaign walked that back pretty fast, within minutes agter he uttered it.

"Voting for this platform" is more misleading talk since the current national election year platform hasn't even been penned. When I read over the last platform of 2012 at www.gop.com I see no reference to abortion penalties. Really I cant even find anything specifcally about abortion law. There is " we oppose FDA approval of RU486 ..." But thats not what you are talking about.

But yes, you are right that if I vote Republican I may be endorsing some things
i dont really like. Thems the breaks in a system with two big bad two parties.

Curious if you, peggy, endorse each and every idea in the Democratic Party platform?[/QUOTE]

Do you deny that overturning Roe V Wade is a huge part of EVERY republican politician's platform? If you do then you haven't been paying attention. Ask them. Each and every one will tell you that yes, they are fighting to overturn this. What do you think overturning it means? It means making it against the law. People don't picket PP and republican governors/legislatures don't de-fund it for fun. Look at republican run states and see how difficult they are making it for women to get abortions. This is huge.
The only reason Donald walked it back was because of the backlash he got from his own base. Funny thing is, all those rabid anti-choice people also criticized him. Why? They want to outlaw it, yet they don't want people to follow the logical result of that which is punishment of the criminal, namely the woman. They realize, of course, if the truth of this is out there, most would not be anti-choice. And they would lose all their good christian crusaders who would balk at the thought of charging these poor women with murder. So they perpetuate the idea that we will criminalize this but only punish those evil mind controlling (apparently) doctors who 'force' this on stupid little women who are really too stupid to know what they are doing. Ha! You believe this? Cause that's what they want you to do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/26/on-abortion-the-gop-presidential-candidates-are-even-more-extreme-than-their-constituents/

For the record, here is where all the republican candidates stand on roe v wade. They all want to overturn it, some with exceptions for rape and mother health, and many for no exceptions. Donald is for exceptions and Ted is against any exceptions. From the article:

"The Roe v. Wade question is critical, because it is all but guaranteed that should a Republican become president, he will appoint only Supreme Court justices who can be counted on to vote to overturn Roe, which would allow states to ban abortion completely. Right now there are four Supreme Court justices ready to overturn the decision; if the right justice (or two) retires, it would be gone."

Perhaps the questions you should ask your candidate is, what punishment for the woman? Murder is murder, and there will be punishment. We know where Donald stands, even if he walked it back due to backlash. Where does Ted stand?
This is important iris, since all of these republicans are advocating a huge number of women, teenagers, poor, sick, raped...be charged with murder. You can't trivialize this. This isn't a minor component of their platform. And for someone like Ted Cruz, bringing the country under 'gods law' IS his platform.

By the way, poll the republican candidates, state and national level, and ask them if overturning roe v wade is part of their platform and each and every one will say yes.
then poll democratic candidates, state and national level, and ask them if taking away peoples guns is part of their platform. I don't think you'll find one who says yes. Better regulations, yes. Confiscation, no. And really, this lie is well past it's shelf life.
You deny what republicans actually say, on record, and make up what you think democrats might say.
If you want, i could find hundreds of links to republicans saying they will overturn roe v wade, but I think you know they are out there. Now you find me links to democratic pols saying they want to take everyone's guns away.

iris lilies
4-1-16, 11:30am
I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

peggy
4-1-16, 11:34am
Getting a supreme court that will overturn Roe v Wade does seem to be a republican party goal and if/when that happens it shouldn't be a shocker to anyone that a number of states will outlaw abortion outright. Make it illegal. Openly saying that isn't a winning proposition with a majority of americans, so no one has openly said it until Trump did. He only walked it back because he quickly realized that his 'state the obvious things plainly instead of just dog whilstling them like every other republican' method of campaigning had gone too far on this issue. Or maybe it was intentional to say it and walk it back since he'd gotten the message to his supporters regardless of the walk-back. After all, no one really believes that a politician means it when they walk back a statement. A walk back is equivalent to a non-apology apology where someone says something like "I'm sorry if so and so was offended by what I said." instead of a real apology.

You know, I thought it was funny that Trump 'suddenly' has an 'emergency' meeting with McConnell and other GOP leaders. Trump isn't using the approved dog whistles and code words, as you pointed out. He is laying out the game plan in simple to understand words that even the most uninformed can figure out.(he does talk at a 6th grade level after all) This is a danger to the GOP. Can't have folks actually understanding what they are voting for. Gotta wave the flag and utter 'Freedom' and 'Patriot" and "Family values' to walk it back. Gotta talk about 'Making America Great Again'...you know, back when women were murders for having an abortion.

peggy
4-1-16, 11:40am
I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

Really? Then why are the GOP in the senate refusing to even give Obama's nomination a hearing? Why are they balking at a very centrist nomination? They loath the though of giving up the advantage they have enjoyed for 30 years, which brought us Hobby Lobby and Citizens United, among others.

The people did have a voice and they choose President Obama. He is the President, now. He gets to choose.

iris lilies
4-1-16, 11:49am
Peggy, i thnk its silly for Republican Congress to say upfront that they wont consider anyone put forward by Presdient Obama.

But neither will I accept, without looking int it, that his candidate is hinky dorky foe Repubs. Yes, Ive heard that he is cnsdiered "moderate" and etc. Perhaps he is, but just because the New York Times says he is amoderate that we shpuld all,acept dowsnt mean
I will accept their word on it. kinda like the NYT endorsng Kasich as the guy I should vote for. unh-hunh.

jp1
4-1-16, 12:09pm
I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

While you're right that it's unlikely that a republican president could find another jiggery pokery pretzel logician like Scalia, they would undoubtedly try. The long term goal is undoubtedly to get the supremes to reverse roe v wade. Thankfully Scalia died before they were able to do it so they've been set back significantly in this goal.

Ultralight
4-1-16, 1:06pm
So, Trump has said what every republican thinks, which is why the party fears him, actually.
Women who have an abortion, in his, or any republican Presidents world, would face criminal charges. Stands to reason, doesn't it? If abortion is outlawed, against the law, as the republican platform calls for (actually a huge part of the republican platform) then the woman is a criminal and should face charges.
Isn't this so? Murder is murder, if abortion is murder, then the woman is a murderer. right?

So, you who support the republican platform, what punishment should the woman face? 'Cause of course, you know abortion won't stop just because you make it illegal. If you vote Republican, you vote for this platform. So it would be nice to know up front what punishment you all have in mind for this criminal act.

Excellent article on this issue here: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/donald-trumps-abortion-comments-make-perfect-sense-20160331

Tenngal
4-1-16, 2:06pm
is having an illegal abortion not punishment enough? If it were a man's body, we would not be having all these discussions.

Alan
4-1-16, 2:19pm
is having an illegal abortion not punishment enough? If it were a man's body, we would not be having all these discussions.Sure we would. It's not the sex of the parent, it's the life of the child.

bae
4-1-16, 2:19pm
Do you deny that overturning Roe V Wade is a huge part of EVERY republican politician's platform? If you do then you haven't been paying attention. Ask them. Each and every one will tell you that yes, they are fighting to overturn this.

Nope. #NotEveryRepublicanPolitician

Throughout the last election cycle I was a Republican. An elected Republican politician in fact. And now in my second term. Elected in the most Democratic-Party-dominated county in my state. And I'm pro-choice, and make no secret of that fact. And argued strongly for platform reforms that eliminated these sorts of "virtue-signaling" pandering to various special-interest groups.

The county's Republicans even sent me as a delegate to the previous cycle's presidential conventions.

So, you over-reach. As usual.

JaneV2.0
4-1-16, 2:45pm
I've long felt the rabid anti-abortion stance taken by Republicans was mostly meant to fire up their base. It's good to get out the vote among evangelicals and men who like to keep their women barefoot and pregnant. I can't believe many of them really care about the lives of poor, unborn constituents--or their families.

LDAHL
4-1-16, 3:08pm
I've long felt the rabid anti-abortion stance taken by Republicans was mostly meant to fire up their base. It's good to get out the vote among evangelicals and men who like to keep their women barefoot and pregnant. I can't believe many of them really care about the lives of poor, unborn constituents--or their families.

Is it really so difficult for you to conceive of someone believing a fetus is a human being without ulterior motives? I can certainly agree that there are moral ciphers pontificating on both sides of this particular issue, but I think that there are genuine beliefs on both sides.

Ultralight
4-1-16, 3:20pm
is having an illegal abortion not punishment enough? If it were a man's body, we would not be having all these discussions.

Isn't the high a pot smoker gets when smoking illegal pot punishment enough!?

LDAHL
4-1-16, 3:35pm
Isn't the high a pot smoker gets when smoking illegal pot punishment enough!?

No, but paying good money to make yourself stupid is. We should decriminalize pot and add it to the list of idiotic but legal things adults are free to do to themselves.

CathyA
4-1-16, 3:59pm
Just when you think he can't act any stupider..........

I'm really starting to think he has a personality disorder. I wonder how he was raised? Seems like something back then wasn't very healthy.
I don't think he ever wanted to be president. I think he just wanted to win the title.......just to be sure he COULD win.
I really think he's a mental case.

peggy
4-1-16, 4:25pm
Nope. #NotEveryRepublicanPolitician

Throughout the last election cycle I was a Republican. An elected Republican politician in fact. And now in my second term. Elected in the most Democratic-Party-dominated county in my state. And I'm pro-choice, and make no secret of that fact. And argued strongly for platform reforms that eliminated these sorts of "virtue-signaling" pandering to various special-interest groups.

The county's Republicans even sent me as a delegate to the previous cycle's presidential conventions.

So, you over-reach. As usual.

Uh, bae...weren't you actually a Libertarian who had to register Republican in order to get elected? Yeah, you're a republican for the ballot box...unless you have switched ideology. Which I'm guessing your neighbors don't have a problem with. Libertarians generally don't try to impose their religious ideology on everyone else. So, I'm not sure you actually count as a 'true believer'.
However, to accommodate the very small percentage of republicans who may not want this, 95% of the republicans declare that overturning roe v wade is their goal.

peggy
4-1-16, 4:34pm
Sure we would. It's not the sex of the parent, it's the life of the child.

Oh honey, it is totally about the sex of the parent. No man would allow another one, especially a five celled one, to hi-jack and enslave his body for their own purpose. Men understand body autonomy, especially for themselves. Women, being lesser beings (according to the wishes of no-choice advocates) should gladly sacrifice their own bodies for another 'potential' human. Yeah, not even fully human, but worth more than living breathing grown women, apparently. Or more worthy.

peggy
4-1-16, 4:48pm
Is it really so difficult for you to conceive of someone believing a fetus is a human being without ulterior motives? I can certainly agree that there are moral ciphers pontificating on both sides of this particular issue, but I think that there are genuine beliefs on both sides.

Of course there are. I don't think anyone is denying that. The real question, or issue is though, does a woman have the right of body autonomy or not?
One body, two 'entities' if you will, to use it. The owner of the body does not want to share it with the other entity. The other entity is little more than a parasite at this stage (and by that I mean not capable of independent life outside of the host body). Yes it is a life, but unwanted by the host body. Who gets to say how the body is used? The owner of the body or the parasite?
Sure the fetus is life, but it's really a pretty simple question, with a simple answer if you believe all that stuff about freedom and your right to your own body/life (is that a god given right?)
We don't force anyone to donate blood or kidneys or bone marrow, even if it saves a life. An existing life. Heck, we don't even harvest tissue/eyes/etc... from corpses without express permission. So how is it ok to say a woman must give up her body/life for nearly a year to some other not-even-fully-human? And you can't say it's because she created it. Someone helped her, and even then we don't force biological parents to donate kidneys or bone marrow or such to their living children.
Essentially, you say the woman must give up her body/blood/tissue/life for this potential person, but after it's born we couldn't possibly force the bio father to donate a kidney to it.

JaneV2.0
4-1-16, 4:53pm
I see Reefer Madness is still winning hearts and minds. I don't use cannabis much these days--I still have half the few grams I bought las summer (legally, natch)--but wnen I did use it with some frequency, I was setting the world on fire--working one or two jobs while going to school full time, still had the time and energy for a social life. Didn't notice that I lost any IQ points (I tested to make sure :D). Maybe I should step up my consumption. :~)

I heard The Donald and Chris Matthews bloviating about marijuana and lack of motivation blah blah blah and I wondered if they and their friends ever enjoyed a glass of wine or a cup of coffee--or any one of a number of pharmaceutical drugs to "take the edge off." Or if they ever enjoyed much of anything, frankly.

ETA: And I still haven't made up a batch of cannabis salve. I obviously need a round TUIT.

LDAHL
4-1-16, 5:18pm
I see Reefer Madness is still winning hearts and minds. I don't use cannabis much these days--I still have half the few grams I bought las summer (legally, natch)--but wnen I did use it with some frequency, I was setting the world on fire--working one or two jobs while going to school full time, still had the time and energy for a social life. Didn't notice that I lost any IQ points (I tested to make sure :D). Maybe I should step up my consumption. :~)

I heard The Donald and Chris Matthews bloviating about marijuana and lack of motivation blah blah blah and I wondered if they and their friends ever enjoyed a glass of wine or a cup of coffee--or any one of a number of pharmaceutical drugs to "take the edge off." Or if they ever enjoyed much of anything, frankly.

I certainly agree with you that the stupidity-inducing effect seems mostly temporary. I also certainly agree with you that there are many other forms of recreational stupidity, both legal and illegal. My point was that adults should generally have the right to do what they wish absent any harm to others.

I see no need for the sort of Reefer Madness moral panic you're talking about, but I do reserve the right to a certain distaste for dumb, empty activities like pot smoking or ice fishing.

iris lilies
4-1-16, 5:30pm
Oh god, another abortion thread...

JaneV2.0
4-1-16, 5:38pm
I certainly agree with you that the stupidity-inducing effect seems mostly temporary. I also certainly agree with you that there are many other forms of recreational stupidity, both legal and illegal. My point was that adults should generally have the right to do what they wish absent any harm to others.

I see no need for the sort of Reefer Madness moral panic you're talking about, but I do reserve the right to a certain distaste for dumb, empty activities like pot smoking or ice fishing.

You won't catch me ice fishing, that's for sure. Or pursuing any one of a number of activities that seem dumb to me, but not to you. That's what makes the world an interesting place.

razz
4-1-16, 5:56pm
Canada seems to be getting set to ease on on the personal use. Unfortunately, I hear that some legal growers are now stinking up the neighbourhoods with their grow-ops.
Just a query; I am hearing that the legalization of MJ has led to the undesirable gangs moving in the buy and take over the grow-ops for sale elsewhere. Is it still too early to tell.
Someone told me that Portugal had no restrictions on drugs and that eased the problems. When I was there last December I asked about this. Turns out that the individuals who use drugs are not charged which enables them to seek help as needed with addiction but the dealers are charged harshly.

I agree, IL, this is probably another abortion type of thread.

Miss Cellane
4-1-16, 6:07pm
If a woman has to be "punished" for having an abortion, then I think the man who contributed to the pregnancy should get the exact same punishment.

Ultralight
4-1-16, 6:11pm
If a woman has to be "punished" for having an abortion, then I think the man who contributed to the pregnancy should get the exact same punishment.

After he ejaculates in her birth canal he no longer has any legal wherewithal to prevent or mandate an abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term.

Rogar
4-1-16, 6:14pm
I've read in two separate mainstream sources that Obama has had a strong resurgence in popularity. They both speculated that the current political line up has provided examples of what a bad leader could really be like.

Williamsmith
4-1-16, 9:52pm
I don't know, I would like to see Mrs. Trump do the Tango. But not while ISIL is still blowing people up.

Miss Cellane
4-2-16, 9:34am
After he ejaculates in her birth canal he no longer has any legal wherewithal to prevent or mandate an abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term.


Oh, I know that.

But I'm tired of seeing unwanted pregnancy treated as though the woman got pregnant in a vacuum. There's a second party to every pregnancy, and there's no reason we can't change the laws to make that second party more accountable.

It's like when I was in grad school and there was a rash of sexual assaults on women on campus. The administration's solution? Women should stay in their dorms after dark. Regardless of whether or not they had evening classes or needed to use the library or computer lab. Why not switch things around and give the men, the potential assailants, a curfew?

We still have a very, very patriarchal view of women and pregnancy, that needs to change.

ApatheticNoMore
4-2-16, 1:23pm
But I'm tired of seeing unwanted pregnancy treated as though the woman got pregnant in a vacuum. There's a second party to every pregnancy, and there's no reason we can't change the laws to make that second party more accountable.

well they have somewhat less and less effective options of birth control, not that women's choices are all that wonderful (yes, imagine men having hormonal nausea from the pill or something :) imagine men getting stuff inserted in them and proper pain medication would actually be prescribed not just 'grin and bear it'). But its mostly condoms, unless they are sure they don't want any or more kids with anyone ever in which case they really should start thinking about the big V.

bae
4-2-16, 1:27pm
Uh, bae...weren't you actually a Libertarian who had to register Republican in order to get elected?

Nope. And don't identity-police. This wave is all about intersectionality, didn't you get the memo?

creaker
4-3-16, 9:12am
well they have somewhat less and less effective options of birth control, not that women's choices are all that wonderful (yes, imagine men having hormonal nausea from the pill or something :) imagine men getting stuff inserted in them and proper pain medication would actually be prescribed not just 'grin and bear it'). But its mostly condoms, unless they are sure they don't want any or more kids with anyone ever in which case they really should start thinking about the big V.

A generation ago "the big V" was 85% reversible - I'm sure they would have had no trouble figuring out how to get that to almost 100% since then. But then that would make it "the man's responsibility".