Jump to content
diazthechamp

Politics thread

Recommended Posts

Decided I'd see what all the fuss is about over this supreme court nomination thingumy.

Storm in a tea-cup springs to mind.  The 2016 "precedent" whilst similar, seems to be different enough that it's just a case of using the system to your party's advantage.  Not sure why anyone is outraged, let alone surprised.  There was a hand-wringing piece on the BBC this morning that was meant to highlight the terrible injustice of it all, but to me just highlighted that the democratically elected senate will be calling the shots in both cases.  Seems fair dinkum to me, and not quite the despotic acts of a dictator that are being implied in some media circles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 6:15 AM, Bubba_Sparks said:

I know, and I appreciate the engagement!

But please... what is the bigger picture? And why shouldn't I condemn someone who uses medical instruments to reach inside a woman's body, grab a child by the leg, crush it's skull and suck it's brains out? That seems a fairly logical thing to condem someone for!

I think it's only a complicated issue because we (as a society) choose to make it thus. It seems quite simple as a supposedly enlightened society to say it's not okay to take another human life. 

We decided as a society that it was okay to take human life a long time ago. We continue to take human life as a society every single day.

This isn’t about saving human life, it’s about enforcing Christian morals on people who don’t give a **** about Jesus. 

When I think about an issue like abortion, I ask myself how the existence of such a practice effects me and I find that it has absolutely no effect on my life one way or the other. 

It’s the “mind your own ****ing business” philosophy. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, I_Take_Roids_m8 said:

 

Yes but the % of these situations that abortions are used for are so low its not even relevant. 

I’d say the percentage of abortions in the U.S of all types versus pregnancies is so low that it’s not relevant.

Women are not using abortion as their preferred birth control method. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bubba_Sparks said:

Decided I'd see what all the fuss is about over this supreme court nomination thingumy.

Storm in a tea-cup springs to mind.  The 2016 "precedent" whilst similar, seems to be different enough that it's just a case of using the system to your party's advantage.  Not sure why anyone is outraged, let alone surprised.  There was a hand-wringing piece on the BBC this morning that was meant to highlight the terrible injustice of it all, but to me just highlighted that the democratically elected senate will be calling the shots in both cases.  Seems fair dinkum to me, and not quite the despotic acts of a dictator that are being implied in some media circles.

The President appoints justices and the senate confirms. Republicans didn’t even let a vote go to the floor on Obama’s nominee, which broke hundreds of years of precedent and political norms. They made up their own rule and are now breaking that same rule in the very next election cycle. 

Supreme Court seats are lifetime appointments, and their decisions shape the laws of the country. Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court are felt far longer than anything else a president does.

If Republicans replace RBG after stealing that seat in 2016, the dems are pushing to increase the number of justices on the court, which they can do if they take the majority.

If both sides keep adding justices to stack the deck in their favor, then the court loses it’s legitimacy.

To put it more simply, Republicans are destroying are cherished institutions.

Edited by 12еr
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bubba_Sparks said:

Decided I'd see what all the fuss is about over this supreme court nomination thingumy.

Storm in a tea-cup springs to mind.  The 2016 "precedent" whilst similar, seems to be different enough that it's just a case of using the system to your party's advantage.  Not sure why anyone is outraged, let alone surprised.  There was a hand-wringing piece on the BBC this morning that was meant to highlight the terrible injustice of it all, but to me just highlighted that the democratically elected senate will be calling the shots in both cases.  Seems fair dinkum to me, and not quite the despotic acts of a dictator that are being implied in some media circles.

It's just the usual overreaction from the left. I think they should wait until after the election but there isn't a rule that says they have to. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 12еr said:

I’d say the percentage of abortions in the U.S of all types versus pregnancies is so low that it’s not relevant.

Women are not using abortion as their preferred birth control method. 

4 million babies are born per year in the US. Over 620,000 abortions are performed. That's not exactly a low percentage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, juice64011 said:

4 million babies are born per year in the US. Over 620,000 abortions are performed. That's not exactly a low percentage. 

Considering that %95 of those abortions are from the Left, that should make conservatives happy....keeping those Democratic voter numbers down, it's easier than purging.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the human zygote merely tissue or is it a human organism (a human being) which is different in molecular composition and which will act differently than a mere cell/tissue?  Science defines an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependent organs (a living being).  The human zygote meets this definition with ease.  Compare that with just a collection of human tissue/cells:  A collection of human cells may carry on some activities of human life, but it will not exhibit planned interactions directed towards a higher level of organization.  The zygote (which is genetically distinct from the parents) acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program for development, that if uninterrupted, proceeds seamlessly through formation of the body, life, and eventually death.  Therefore, science tells us that at the moment of fusions between the sperm and egg, a NEW entity comes into existence (an organism, not a clump of cells or something lesser than), which is Human, Alive, and an Individual ... Distinct ... Living ... Human ... Organism.  The unborn is a whole organism, an individual member of the species - Human.  The unborn isn't just living and human, it's a life and a human.  Dissimilar from say a kidney or skin cell or a sperm cell.

There is a lot more to be said...i've abbreviated a lot just to attempt to keep this short.... but note, everything mentioned above is specifically not religious, and purposefully only scientific.  I believe if everyone would study the definitions and science behind embryology, they would agree with science, which says the unborn is a living individual of the species h0mo sapiens, the same kind of being as us, only at an earlier stage of development.

I believe the first issue is a scientific one, is the unborn a human being in the biological sense - a living human organism...the answer is yes from a scientific standpoint.  The real debate is a moral or philosophical one - how should we treat these human beings who have not yet been born?  Do they have a right to life? 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by SVTContour98
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SVTContour98 said:

Is the human zygote merely tissue or is it a human organism (a human being) which is different in molecular composition and which will act differently than a mere cell/tissue?  Science defines an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependent organs (a living being).  The human zygote meets this definition with ease.  Compare that with just a collection of human tissue/cells:  A collection of human cells may carry on some activities of human life, but it will not exhibit planned interactions directed towards a higher level of organization.  The zygote (which is genetically distinct from the parents) acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program for development, that if uninterrupted, proceeds seamlessly through formation of the body, life, and eventually death.  Therefore, science tells us that at the moment of fusions between the sperm and egg, a NEW entity comes into existence (an organism, not a clump of cells or something lesser than), which is Human, Alive, and an Individual ... Distinct ... Living ... Human ... Organism.  The unborn is a whole organism, an individual member of the species - Human.  The unborn isn't just living and human, it's a life and a human.  Dissimilar from say a kidney or skin cell or a sperm cell.

There is a lot more to be said...i've abbreviated a lot just to attempt to keep this short.... but note, everything mentioned above is specifically not religious, and purposefully only scientific.  I believe if everyone would study the definitions and science behind embryology, they would agree with science, which says the unborn is a living individual of the species h0mo sapiens, the same kind of being as us, only at an earlier stage of development.

I believe the first issue is a scientific one, is the unborn a human being in the biological sense - a living human organism...the answer is yes from a scientific standpoint.  The real debate is a moral or philosophical one - now should we treat these human beings who have not yet been born?  Do they have a right to life? 

 

 

 

 

 

STOP FORCING YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS ON EVERYONE!!

oh wait... you didn't mention God once 🤔

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, juice64011 said:

It's just the usual overreaction from the left. I think they should wait until after the election but there isn't a rule that says they have to. 

Yeah, it feels a bit sneaky but in line with the legendary checks and balances. 

40 minutes ago, 12еr said:

The President appoints justices and the senate confirms. Republicans didn’t even let a vote go to the floor on Obama’s nominee, which broke hundreds of years of precedent and political norms. They made up their own rule and are now breaking that same rule in the very next election cycle. 

Supreme Court seats are lifetime appointments, and their decisions shape the laws of the country. Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court are felt far longer than anything else a president does.

If Republicans replace RBG after stealing that seat in 2016, the dems are pushing to increase the number of justices on the court, which they can do if they take the majority.

If both sides keep adding justices to stack the deck in their favor, then the court loses it’s legitimacy.

To put it more simply, Republicans are destroying are cherished institutions.

You're destroying their cherished statues!

Meh. I have zero skin in this game though. From what I've read, these shenanigans are likely to galvanise voters on both sides. Always nice to have a decent turnout i suppose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SVTContour98 said:

 

I believe the first issue is a scientific one, is the unborn a human being in the biological sense - a living human organism...the answer is yes from a scientific standpoint.  The real debate is a moral or philosophical one - now should we treat these human beings who have not yet been born?  Do they have a right to life? 

 

Absolutely they have the right to life.

 

Excellent piece SV.

Edited by TwennyFo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, juice64011 said:

4 million babies are born per year in the US. Over 620,000 abortions are performed. That's not exactly a low percentage. 

We are 1/3rd of the way there on COVID deaths and the right says they don’t matter. Someone’s grandmother is worth more than an a couple cells

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, 12еr said:

We are 1/3rd of the way there on COVID deaths and the right says they don’t matter. Someone’s grandmother is worth more than an a couple cells

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3-10 times that number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

An 80 year old is not worth more than a baby. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, juice64011 said:

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3 times the number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

 

 

They're funny like that/  if Trump suddenly flip-flopped > The Dem leadership would epiphanise    🙃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 12еr said:

I’d say the percentage of abortions in the U.S of all types versus pregnancies is so low that it’s not relevant.

Women are not using abortion as their preferred birth control method. 

600k in 2016 according to the CDC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, juice64011 said:

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3-10 times that number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

An 80 year old is not worth more than a baby. 

 

Yeah i mean echnically nursing home patients are just clumps of cells. 

I could go on about that subject and how the government or the legal system doesn't value your life if youre over the average life expectancy. But that's for another day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 12еr said:

We are 1/3rd of the way there on COVID deaths and the right says they don’t matter. Someone’s grandmother is worth more than an a couple cells

Only 10k covid deaths are directly related to covid. The other 180k are due to having an average of 2.8 co-morbities per case. 

 

Average age of death of a covid patient is 76. 

 

What goal post do you want to move next m8?

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, juice64011 said:

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3-10 times that number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

An 80 year old is not worth more than a baby. 

 

Conception doesn't equal a "baby". A first trimester embryo is a 2 to 3 inch long clump of cells. Somebody look up the percentage of abortions by trimester and get back to me with the numbers. LOL at saying all lives are sacred, then saying one life is worth more than another life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, classicboxer said:

Conception doesn't equal a "baby". A first trimester embryo is a 2 to 3 inch long clump of cells. Somebody look up the percentage of abortions by trimester and get back to me with the numbers. LOL at saying all lives are sacred, then saying one life is worth more than another life. 

Not positive on stats but conception equals a baby about 85-90% of the time after its known the person is pregnant. 

As for the bold, Lol at you making **** up. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, juice64011 said:

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3-10 times that number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

An 80 year old is not worth more than a baby. 

 

bullchit its not! i would much rather put my d1ck in an 80 year old grandmother than a dead baby.

but 175k was so yesterday bro.  we're at 200k yanks dead from their political flu now. congratulations, you filthy grandma and  unborn fetus killers.  you should wear your stupid masks, and have butt sex instead.

Edited by -idyb-
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, I_Take_Roids_m8 said:

Only 10k covid deaths are directly related to covid. The other 180k are due to having an average of 2.8 co-morbities per case. 

 

Average age of death of a covid patient is 76. 

 

What goal post do you want to move next m8?

 

Considering your assertion here is debunked misinformation, I’ll go ahead and move those goal posts back to where they were.

Even if it were true, it’s an irrelevant game of semantics. If COVID causes an otherwise manageable health condition to turn deadly, then you are being killed by COVID. 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, classicboxer said:

Conception doesn't equal a "baby". A first trimester embryo is a 2 to 3 inch long clump of cells. Somebody look up the percentage of abortions by trimester and get back to me with the numbers. LOL at saying all lives are sacred, then saying one life is worth more than another life. 

You won’t get into heaven because some 17 year old 3000 miles away got an abortion. Everyone knows that.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, juice64011 said:

The left are crying about 175,000 deaths in one year due to a virus but don't care when we kill 3-10 times that number every single year for decades because they would need to take responsibility for their actions. 

An 80 year old is not worth more than a baby. 

 

 

48 minutes ago, classicboxer said:

Conception doesn't equal a "baby". A first trimester embryo is a 2 to 3 inch long clump of cells. Somebody look up the percentage of abortions by trimester and get back to me with the numbers. LOL at saying all lives are sacred, then saying one life is worth more than another life. 

nothing in juice's post says one life is worth more than another. In fact he specifically says a life is not worth more than another. 

I'm one of the most pro-CB posters but this is shoddy work. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 12еr said:

You won’t get into heaven because some 17 year old 3000 miles away got an abortion. Everyone knows that.

CB aint getting into heaven anyways, because the hockey gods have never been a fan of the sharks.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend the new Edward Snowden discussion on JRE. 

I was against him right away but after listening to him a few times and doing more research, I think he did the right thing and did it how he thought was the best way. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SVTContour98 said:

Is the human zygote merely tissue or is it a human organism (a human being) which is different in molecular composition and which will act differently than a mere cell/tissue?  Science defines an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependent organs (a living being).  The human zygote meets this definition with ease.  Compare that with just a collection of human tissue/cells:  A collection of human cells may carry on some activities of human life, but it will not exhibit planned interactions directed towards a higher level of organization.  The zygote (which is genetically distinct from the parents) acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program for development, that if uninterrupted, proceeds seamlessly through formation of the body, life, and eventually death.  Therefore, science tells us that at the moment of fusions between the sperm and egg, a NEW entity comes into existence (an organism, not a clump of cells or something lesser than), which is Human, Alive, and an Individual ... Distinct ... Living ... Human ... Organism.  The unborn is a whole organism, an individual member of the species - Human.  The unborn isn't just living and human, it's a life and a human.  Dissimilar from say a kidney or skin cell or a sperm cell.

There is a lot more to be said...i've abbreviated a lot just to attempt to keep this short.... but note, everything mentioned above is specifically not religious, and purposefully only scientific.  I believe if everyone would study the definitions and science behind embryology, they would agree with science, which says the unborn is a living individual of the species h0mo sapiens, the same kind of being as us, only at an earlier stage of development.

I believe the first issue is a scientific one, is the unborn a human being in the biological sense - a living human organism...the answer is yes from a scientific standpoint.  The real debate is a moral or philosophical one - how should we treat these human beings who have not yet been born?  Do they have a right to life? 

 

 

 

 

 

If the bold is the definition of a living organism then the internet's social media is a living organism albeit powered by projections of the human limbic system. So are corporations  & financial markets in a sense. 

Currently we have an over population problem. That gets more dangerous as time goes on but there may be a time when we actually have a de-population problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, juice64011 said:

I recommend the new Edward Snowden discussion on JRE. 

I was against him right away but after listening to him a few times and doing more research, I think he did the right thing and did it how he thought was the best way. 

Agreed it was excellent. 

I can't wait for Elon to go back on. I'm super pumped about what he may have for battery day tomorrow. Solid state batteries perhaps? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, StompGrind said:

If the bold is the definition of a living organism then the internet's social media is a living organism albeit powered by projections of the human limbic system. So are corporations  & financial markets in a sense. 

Currently we have an over population problem. That gets more dangerous as time goes on but there may be a time when we actually have a de-population problem. 

Do you mean globally, or just in the states?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bubba_Sparks said:

Do you mean globally, or just in the states?

Globally. Next decade or two we're really gonna feel it when all this new tech really hits. 

If we can avoid war & solve many problems, have major break throughs & curb civil unrest from displacement of jobs we may eventually need to restart the breeding more because people will live much longer. 

Sounds counter intuitive but that comfy lifestyle will promote less people having kids & we're gonna need a large % of exceptional smart people in a more comfy complacent world to keep the train from going off the tracks. 

 

 

Edited by StompGrind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 12еr said:

Considering your assertion here is debunked misinformation, I’ll go ahead and move those goal posts back to where they were.

Even if it were true, it’s an irrelevant game of semantics. If COVID causes an otherwise manageable health condition to turn deadly, then you are being killed by COVID. 

 

 

LOL at misinformation. Bro, I work in this chit everyday. Do you forget that? You're not talking to someone who is at home on unemployment. I've been working in the trenches the past 7 months. 

 

We have had numerous staff test POSITIVE nad were directed by the department if health that they are good to work as long as they are asymptomatic because transmission is extremely low. 

 

Our hospital system employees 70k people, 5k got infected, 12 died. 

 

We had 1200 cases come through our hospital system, 13 died. Out of the 13, 12 were nursing home patients with IDDM, CRF, COPD, CHF, etc. 1 had terminal end stage cancer. Average age or mortality at my hospital system was 79. 

 

I'll let the infectious disease doctors and ICU docs know your opinion tomorrow and I'm sure they will change everything we have been doing. 

 

So yeah, keep moving them goal posts. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, StompGrind said:

Globally. Next decade we're really gonna feel it when all this new tech really hits. 

If we can avoid war & solve many problems, have major break throughs & curb civil unrest from displacement of jobs we may eventually need to restart the breeding more. 

Sounds counter intuitive but that comfy lifestyle will promote less people having kids & we're gonna need a % of smart people to keep the train from going off the tracks. 

 

 

Hmm. The general view seems to be that the global population will level off around the 9-10 billion mark. Most European countries, plus Japan and China are forecasting population decreases over the next 30 years. 

That said every article I've ever read on the subject has been heavily weighted with conjecture and multiple variables.

Personally I'd rather we deal with a population crisis by managing consumption more efficiently than through abortion though. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse me while I go get laid, all this baby talk has me worked up....later.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bubba_Sparks said:

Hmm. The general view seems to be that the global population will level off around the 9-10 billion mark. Most European countries, plus Japan and China are forecasting population decreases over the next 30 years. 

That said every article I've ever read on the subject has been heavily weighted with conjecture and multiple variables.

Personally I'd rather we deal with a population crisis by managing consumption more efficiently than through abortion though. 

 

I believe those projections are low assuming we don't have some major set-backs. Evolution of renewable energy, robotics, medical advances etc. I think we're in for a big population boom initially then it tapers off in 20-30 yrs

I think some of the stuff Elon is doing is the answer but it comes with huge risk. Problem is when all these tech advances bearing fruit it will also shake the world up due to the rapid change & the when early versions of AGI integration merges with humans basically everyone becomes Einstein practically over night starting from the top down. 

Could be great but the people that get it first become god emperors. The danger factor for fighting is exponential especially as it trickles down it increases dramatically. 

Imagine if ISIS has the technical knowledge to create nukes or bio weapons. Imagine some Antifa idiots suddenly become as organized as Bezo's or Zuck etc. 

Gov's currently especially in the US move way too slow on laws & people working on all this stuff hardly see the dangers until it's too l8. 

Everyone is too curious & optimistic thinking nothing will go wrong. 

 

 

Edited by StompGrind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StompGrind said:

If the bold is the definition of a living organism then the internet's social media is a living organism albeit powered by projections of the human limbic system. So are corporations  & financial markets in a sense. 

Currently we have an over population problem. That gets more dangerous as time goes on but there may be a time when we actually have a de-population problem. 

This has been emphatically debunked many times m8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bwana said:

Excuse me while I go get laid, all this baby talk has me worked up....later.

stay safe. use a glory hole!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, I_Take_Roids_m8 said:

 

LOL at misinformation. Bro, I work in this chit everyday. Do you forget that? You're not talking to someone who is at home on unemployment. I've been working in the trenches the past 7 months. 

 

We have had numerous staff test POSITIVE nad were directed by the department if health that they are good to work as long as they are asymptomatic because transmission is extremely low. 

 

Our hospital system employees 70k people, 5k got infected, 12 died. 

 

We had 1200 cases come through our hospital system, 13 died. Out of the 13, 12 were nursing home patients with IDDM, CRF, COPD, CHF, etc. 1 had terminal end stage cancer. Average age or mortality at my hospital system was 79. 

 

I'll let the infectious disease doctors and ICU docs know your opinion tomorrow and I'm sure they will change everything we have been doing. 

 

So yeah, keep moving them goal posts. 

Doesn’t matter if you work in a hospital, it is incorrect to say that only 9K people have died of Covid. You don’t need a degree to know that is incorrect, you just need to be able to read and find legitimate sources. 

The infectious disease doctors are the ones who dispelled that propaganda. You know it’s not true, so I don’t know why you are trying to convince me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 12еr said:

When I think about an issue like abortion, I ask myself how the existence of such a practice effects me and I find that it has absolutely no effect on my life one way or the other.

when i think about an issue like abortion, i ask myself why my mother wasnt able to have one

Edited by -idyb-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, -idyb- said:

when i think about an issue like abortion, i ask myself why my mother wasnt able to have one

 

perhaps CCO  (Canadian Conscientious Objector)-

image.png.ff19675b32347b530782dac262a6f3ba.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...