figmentPez
Staff member
Should we just deny health care to someone who gets in a car accident? After all, they knew that car crashes happen. They went out and drove anyway. They should take responsibility for their actions and just accept their fate. Their organs can be used to save someone else who wasn't out in a car asking to be in an accident.
Believing that one can fly unaided isn't a position held with the purpose of splatting into the ground, but if you jump off a building, that's what happens anyway.
A collection of cells with no blood, no brain function, and no independent ability to be life is not a baby.
Oh gee there hasn't been any evidence of that before this is such a surprise loljk trump is a known rapist nobody cares because republicans aren't held to any standards since their party is literally evil (yeah yeah bill clinton I know I was 5 years old at the time I don't give a shit) in fact him raping women is a good thing since it triggers the libs.
figmentPez
Staff member
Link?
He said anyone who is pro-choice supports murder.
figmentPez
Staff member
I though of a better scenario. You're out driving your car. Knowingly endangering other people with your death machine that weighs thousands of pounds and travels at speeds that can easily kill. Someone jumps out into the street and you hit them. You were well rested, not under the influence, you were driving the speed limit, you had insurance, took all the precuations possible for driving. It was totally the fault of the guy who jumped out into the street. But you've still got to take responsibility, because you were driving, and you knew the risks. You knew it could happen that your driving could cause an accident. The guy you hit survives, but his kidneys are damaged irreparably. He needs a transplant in order to live. Should you be legally compelled to give him one of your kidneys because you should be held responsible for the dangerous act of driving?
Wasn't it you that once drew my attention to teh fact that, during the most puritan period of AMERICA, they had a lot of out-of-wedlock births etc?
Saying they're responsible for their actions doesn't change the fact that most unwanted kids grow up poorly, and end up causing problems for society overall...
I mean, there's a reason why the immigrants most people object to come from countries with religious backgrounds that discourage birth control.
In the end, the consequences aren't just for the people making the mistakes... like, even if they held Cheney responsible, the other guy would have still had to deal with a shotgun to the face...
See: blotsfan's post.
So it’s not a libertarian position at all. That’s what I figured honestly cause I can’t see it being okay to drive without any kind of proficiency test but not okay to end a nonviable pregnancy.
I don't really care about civility. I get that you think abortion is murder and anyone who gets one is therefore a murderer and anyone who is pro-choice such supports murder. I'm just saying if youre going to come into a conversation where abortion wasn't even being discussed to say "well you guys support murdering babies so you shouldn't care" you shouldn't expect to be treated "civilly." Just because you surround the shitty things you say in multiple paragraphs doesn't make them less shitty.
Like you weren't gonna do that anyways.
Giant Abraham Lincoln seen descending from his monument, walking towards the White House as he rolls up his sleeves.
Bitch please, I was singing C is for Cookie.
GasBandit
Staff member
Should we forgive any property damage they cause when they do?
Now you're conflating a legal opinion with a fact of physics. The real fact is, that we as a society decide collectively when and what constitutes murder, what constitutes a life, and what constitutes a baby. And it largely gets decided by committee and compromise.
That's your opinion (and mine, for the most part). We have our opinion, Steinman has his, and as long as we have discourse, there is progress. What I won't agree with, however, is shouting him down and making him feel unwelcome. I get that emotions run high, but compare how you, Blots, and Tiger dealt with it to how Zappit, Celt Z, and others did.
I'm not even going to quote Tiger's. It was bad enough to earn Dave's admin censure.
But the above are the sort of things that people with nothing but emotions to back up their arguments say, to silence and dehumanize those who don't agree with them. And I'm going to call it out when I see it, even if it is in support of a position I share.
For everyone else trying to engage me on Abortion - I'm not arguing against abortion. I'm arguing that reasonable people can oppose abortion without being monsters, and can make their case rationally, and we just treated one who did so very badly.
Maybe he meant among current republicans.
No, I just understand that steiny isn't going to be swayed by facts or else he already wouldn't be anti-abortion. My "shut the fuck up" was over him shoehorning it into a place where it wasn't talked about just so he can defend trump like he always does while still claiming he isn't a trump supporter.
GasBandit
Staff member
So, since I know there are a number of topics on which YOU won't be swayed, is it authoritative for me to just start telling YOU to "shut the fuck up" every time you yoloroffle out a one line opinion like it is fact, or rAnDomLy CaPitaLizE SenTencEs to memetically invoke ridicule instead of discourse, Charlie? Sorry, Blotsfan?
figmentPez
Staff member
Making reparations for property damage is completely different than violating someone's bodily autonomy.
What I'm doing is pointing out that motivation doesn't change what results. Regardless of what the motivation is behind trying to stop all abortions, the result is limiting women's choices. Even if we accept that abortion is a choice with two lives in the balance, we still have to respect bodily autonomy and recognize that sometimes the woman's life takes precedence.
Yeah, well I've fucking had it with strawman arguments bringing up unrelated issues. We were talking about the unethical business practices of formula companies; not abortion. There was no talk of limiting women's options to choose formula. Only talk of censuring inappropriate marketing. Or are we going to let medical companies talk people into unnecessary surgical procedures, too? I'm not apologizing for blowing up at Steinman. If he wants to have a civil discussion he can stop the bullshit.
Should we discuss Brett Kavanaugh and his worth as a potential SCOTUS justice?
He seems kinda... Ok? As far as Republican-aligned justices go. Obviously Ds would prefer a far more moderate pick, and many Rs would prefer someone with harsher stances, but he's as establishment and stereotypically credentialed as they come.
Waiting on the hot takes to die down a bit, but lawsphere people I trust (like Volokh) don't seem outraged.
Obviously he still entails a conservative hold on the court, but the same is true of anyone else Trump would pick, so it's not really an interesting point to bring up about him specifically. I wonder if any senators (of either side) will flip over any of his positions, once those become better known.
He seems kinda... Ok? As far as Republican-aligned justices go. Obviously Ds would prefer a far more moderate pick, and many Rs would prefer someone with harsher stances, but he's as establishment and stereotypically credentialed as they come.
Waiting on the hot takes to die down a bit, but lawsphere people I trust (like Volokh) don't seem outraged.
Obviously he still entails a conservative hold on the court, but the same is true of anyone else Trump would pick, so it's not really an interesting point to bring up about him specifically. I wonder if any senators (of either side) will flip over any of his positions, once those become better known.
figmentPez
Staff member
He thinks assault weapons bans are unconstitutional, and is a proponent of greater presidential power.
Incorrect. He is only ok with greater presidential power when it's a republican in charge.
GasBandit
Staff member
That's too bad. I like you, Pez, and you're better than this, when you don't let your emotions carry you into hysterics. When has Steinman ever treated anyone here the way he has been treated the last couple pages of this thread?
And that's how you make Trump supporters feel better about their vote.
I don't care about winning their minds. They voted for donald trump to be president. They're idiots. Every single one. Well, other than the rich people. They're just awful.
Dave
Staff member
Agree with point #1 but disagree with point #2. The right only gives a shit about civility when they are so very, very obviously wrong and are taking shit for it. It's about time dems stepped up and started flinging the shit right back at them instead of rolling over and taking it. (Something, something, Nick's prom night something...)
Then prepare yourself for more of this, Don Quixote.
If someone was dumb enough to vote for donald trump the first time, nothing I say will change their minds. The key to winning is to get people who stayed home to vote. Not flipping the trumpsters.
Incidentally the Republican Party knows this which is why they work so hard to put up voting barriers.
Incidentally the Republican Party knows this which is why they work so hard to put up voting barriers.
GasBandit
Staff member
The ones on TV, you mean. But the millions upon millions who decided to hold their nose and vote for Trump don't all fit that mold. And the Blotsfans of the world nudge them farther along that path every time they raise the "fuck civility" banner.
Dave
Staff member
Great point. You are correct, sir.
So you seem to subscribe to a pretty rigid, deterministic view of human nature in which people will never change. Okay. So how is your being rude to people going to inspire anyone whatsoever to go vote, let alone the people you want them to vote for?
That seems like a very bland and common conservative stance.
The article you linked was an interesting read, and directly contradicts your statement. Did you link it for the headline, or the content? His statements about shielding sitting POTUS from investigations (re: his involvement in the Clinton impeachment) were made during the Obama presidency.
Some might change but they're outliers. If you were too dumb to see what trump was in 2016 then I'm not gonna waste my time hoping you're an outlier. Nothing that's happened has been surprising.
Being rude to trump voters has nothing to do with getting others to vote. They're two seperate things.