Replies: 33
| visibility 692
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
A small and getting smaller group
Feb 4, 2019, 11:44 AM
|
|
There used to be quite a lot of moderate Democrats, and you could even get the Party's nomination for president as one. I don't think that's the case anymore, as the party's base has become animated by progressive, truly left-wing ideology. In some ways, the platform people like Steve Bannon were promoting is a Blue Dog platform. Jim Webb probably could've been a vessel for that platform, but he simply couldn't get any traction (and there were quite a few pieces written about how he should've run as a Republican).
Even in that article on so-called "moderates," support for government funding of abortion is touted as a "Democratic principle." So it seems that all it takes to be called a "moderate" in the Democratic Party is not being a Democratic Socialist.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Well, one thing we got going is no ultra liberal
Feb 4, 2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
has ever been nominated for president. Mondale and Dukakis maybe but in a old school pro-union, pro-protectionism kind of way. Bill Clinton to his credit, turned the party into free traders.
Obama was liberal but not as liberal as Bernie, Warren, and other nutso leftists who get all the press.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [59971]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22464
Joined: 5/24/17
|
Re: Well, one thing we got going is no ultra liberal
Feb 4, 2019, 12:09 PM
|
|
If Obama hadn’t been so toxic in race relations and inciting the whole, cops are bad monicker and pushed that narrative......I would have voted for him time and again. I think he was a good President, but on the social aspect, he could have told his AG’s to shut their trap and things would have been and would be better now.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
You haven't gotten a full-on leftist, no
Feb 4, 2019, 12:13 PM
[ in reply to Well, one thing we got going is no ultra liberal ] |
|
But both John Kerry and Barack Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate in the years leading up to their nominations. Obama was much further to the left as a legislator than he was as a president, although those colors shined through at times.
I believe McGovern was thought of as being pretty far to the left in 1972, but the Democratic Party has changed a lot since then, and a lot since even the 1990s or early 2000s. Much of that change has been brought about by swiftly liberalizing attitudes about sexuality. At this point, I don't really a think a Democrat can be nominated unless they're far to the left on many issues or they're a well-known figure like Biden (although, in today's climate in both parties, being well-known is interpreted as being corrupt by some).
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: You haven't gotten a full-on leftist, no
Feb 4, 2019, 12:47 PM
|
|
That's very well put. I would only add that we will all be up the creek if we can't stay away from the far ends of the political spectrum.
America has always lived in the middle right. Consensus could be had, the majority were heard and life moved on. The far left under Obama and the far right under Bush/Trump kicked us out of our normal, ideological home.
We need, desperately I feel, to move back closer to the middle. We do great things there.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [41992]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38141
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I hope you're wrong on both sides.
Feb 4, 2019, 2:43 PM
[ in reply to A small and getting smaller group ] |
|
If we've ever needed a moderate on either side, it's now. But it seems we keep getting more extremists to combat another extremist. And I do believe most Americans truly are moderate, even if they don't know they are.
Here's to a few good moderates in 2020 regardless of the letter beside their name.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
Or, you could have an “extreme moderate” like Trump***
Feb 4, 2019, 2:50 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Yeah, my main thought was...you can get as conservative
Feb 4, 2019, 3:02 PM
[ in reply to A small and getting smaller group ] |
|
as you want to as a Democrat, but if you're not completely against the murder of unborn children, just forget it, when it comes to my vote and support, anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Can you be pro-choice and against the murder of
Feb 4, 2019, 3:42 PM
|
|
onborn children?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
"Pro-choice" is a disgusting euphemism.
Feb 4, 2019, 3:47 PM
|
|
I don't use the term. Neither do I use the term "abortion," which is also a disgusting thing to call it, to me.
I do not think people should be allowed to choose to kill children.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15680
Joined: 10/10/02
|
But it sounds so much nicer
Feb 4, 2019, 3:50 PM
|
|
than pro-abortion bc I didn't want to get knocked up.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I will never call it anything other than
Feb 4, 2019, 3:51 PM
|
|
"killing children" or "slaughtering children," etc. I hope it's a constant reminder every time someone reads one of my posts on the subject, and I don't care if it's offensive to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
How do you feel about m a s t u r b a t I o n or the
Feb 4, 2019, 4:00 PM
|
|
killing of potential children?
Still can’t believe you can’t type that word.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [59971]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22464
Joined: 5/24/17
|
Re: How do you feel about m a s t u r b a t I o n or the
Feb 4, 2019, 4:19 PM
|
|
Prod will say: "I am not familiar with that. What doess that masturbationnn word mean?"
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Is potential lives totally unrelated?***
Feb 4, 2019, 6:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
No. Pro-abortion would mean you support abortion
Feb 4, 2019, 3:57 PM
[ in reply to But it sounds so much nicer ] |
|
over having the baby.
Pro-choice means you support them legally having a choice and not the govt. making that decision for them.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: No. Pro-abortion would mean you support abortion
Feb 4, 2019, 4:30 PM
|
|
Pro-Choice means that one believe's a woman should have the right to choose what happens to her body.
Pro-Life means you are strictly against any option for a woman to have an abortion, and wholeheartedly support forcing women to carry fetuses to term and undergo the birthing process, often times forcing a women to undergo extreme amounts of pain, suffering, and brutal conditions that are potentially life threatening at worst or possibly resulting in permanent damage to her body at best.
My personal opinion, as someone who was adopted, I tend to lean pro-life. I will always personally advocate for pro-life and adoption over abortion. But, as someone who respects human rights and individual rights above all else, my political choices reside in the pro-choice camp. I dont believe the government, or society, has a right to pass laws which control what people may do with their bodies. I may disagree with their personal choices, and will not advocate for that course of action in my own private life, but I realize I have no business forcing someone else to not do it. The 10th amendment reinforces this, as it bars the federal government from having any jurisdiction in this debate.
That is a core tenet of Adam Smith's Natural Law, the school of philosophy our Constitution was built upon, in which Smith explicitly wrote ""Although I am never allowed to will evil, I am not always bound to prevent the existence of evils in the world at large, since I could not cure them without bringing other evils upon myself or my neighbor, so I may sometimes tolerate evil consequences from my own actions, if to abstain from such actions would bring grave evil on myself or others."
This idea, which came from Natural Law, that we are the rulers of our lives and possessions, became the foundation for the bill of rights. Someone may say evil things, like speak racist things on a street corner, but doing so isnt physically violating your rights. To stop that person from speaking freely, even if it were vile things they were saying, would require you cut out their tongue, lock them away in a hole indefinitely, or kill them. To stop them from speaking evil, you would have to commit greater evil to silence them, eventually you would have to resort to violence to do so.
Like it or not, a woman choosing to get an abortion does not violate your rights, or the rights of the greater individual citizenry. In order to ban abortion, we would have to commit greater evil by passing laws which would force women to subject their bodies to great pain, trauma, or dangerous and potentially fatal medical problems under threat of violence (meaning if they violate the ban on abortion the government would send armed men after said women to imprison them, and resisting would result in more government-sponsored violence leveraged against said women for breaking the "law").
I would agree that a late term abortion, aborting a fetus that is viable with no medical problems or fatal risk presented to the fetus or mother, is wrong and is the exception to what I stated above. I am appalled by the new law in New York and the bill in Virginia, but I do not reside in those states or pay taxes to them, thus I have no right to intervene in their policy decisions. I will simply choose to never live there. But in cases where the fetus is too young to be viable, or medical professionals have determined it is not viable and/or poses great health risks to the mother and fetus, our opinions are irrelevant in lieu of the woman's right to decide what she subjects her body to.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Unfortunately, the child doesn't have much choice
Feb 4, 2019, 4:58 PM
|
|
over what's done to his or her body. Don't want to be dismembered? Tough luck, no choice for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Unfortunately, the child doesn't have much choice
Feb 4, 2019, 5:11 PM
|
|
You're getting ahead of this argument. See my response to your other comment, below.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Do you support people having the choice
Feb 4, 2019, 5:10 PM
|
|
Totally irrelevant. That is a completely different situation entirely.
You also lack context. For what purpose is an individual killing another? Self defense? Then yes, but that is not "murder".
Blatant homicide, simply to murder someone in cold blood? I already addressed that in my statement above. We do not have a right to violate the rights of another. The right to life is tantamount to the other list of human rights. A living, breathing, biologically autonomous human has the right to exist and defend its life. It can think freely, speak freely, act freely, and live autonomously.
A fetus is a symbiotic state, up to a point. It lives WITHIN the mother. It is symbiotic, not autonomous. It cannot speak freely, think freely, etc. It does not have its own nervous system, endocrine system, etc. The only difference is the point at which it is viable outside the womb. That is the only difference in it being autonomous and symbiotic.
In it's symbiotic state, a fetus is part of the mother. Once it is determined it can be viable outside the womb, at that point you have the argument to preserving it and preventing an abortion, if that is the battle you choose to fight in your state of residence. If you wish to pass laws banning the abortion of viable fetuses, you may do so within your state of residence as the 10th Amendment instructs (a glorified "stay in your lane" Constitutional right). If you live in SC, sure, you have the right to push for that ban in SC, but under the Constitution and Natural Law, it is only permissible to do so if it is determined that the fetus is viable outside the womb. Regardless, you dont have the right to try and influence what Virginia or New York do, and you dont have the right to get the Federal Government to enact a law banning abortion. You can only try and influence what happens in South Carolina, if that is the state in which you reside.
But, until it is determined viable, the mother's right to choose takes precedent and holds supremacy over whatever law you want to propose, as neither you, nor I, nor the government have any right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body, especially when us forcing her to take the actions we want her to take is enforced by government-sponsored violence.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Do you support people having the choice
Feb 4, 2019, 6:11 PM
|
|
Random trivia. The most premature baby ever to survive was 22 weeks old at birth.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I couldn't care less what the laws or Constitution says.
Feb 5, 2019, 9:06 AM
|
|
We arent talking about killing children. We are talking about abortion. A fetus is a fetus. A child is a child.
Also, the 10th Amendment makes it very clear: You do not have the right to interfere with political issues in other states. If you are a resident of South Carolina, you have no right to try and influence what happens in Virginia or New York. Likewise, powers not delegated to the Federal government under the Constitution, are left to the individual states. That means you also dont have the right to get the Federal government involved either. However, that also means the feds dont have the right to fund Planned parenthood as well.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I'm not trying to influence anything, anywhere.
Feb 5, 2019, 9:08 AM
|
|
I'm simply saying killing children is wrong.
You can call it whatever you want to make yourself feel better about it, but that doesn't change anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I'm not trying to influence anything, anywhere.
Feb 5, 2019, 2:41 PM
|
|
No, you are sharing your opinion. Your opinion is also very, very detached from biological facts about human fetal development.
Yes, killing children is wrong, but children are autonomous humans. A fetus is a symbiotic organism, it is not autonomous and requires a host to survive. That host is the mother.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Well, like I’ve previously said on here, because of the
Feb 4, 2019, 6:34 PM
[ in reply to Do you support people having the choice ] |
|
great budgetary problems we have because of people living so long and draining Medicare, I think you should get free whiskey and Marlboros at age 80, and if you aren’t dead at 85, the govt. kills you.
I’M DOWN. ??
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [50635]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43019
Joined: 12/3/98
|
i'll get back to you in 2041***
Feb 4, 2019, 8:51 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82964]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80109
Joined: 11/29/99
|
You’d be sittin pretty in 2036.***
Feb 4, 2019, 9:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17070
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Re: A small and getting smaller group
Feb 5, 2019, 7:40 AM
[ in reply to A small and getting smaller group ] |
|
Sadly the party is becoming a bit like the Republicans and taken over by the crazies.
Sad time in American politics.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73644
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: A small and getting smaller group
Feb 5, 2019, 8:07 AM
[ in reply to A small and getting smaller group ] |
|
old school liberal, you mean like Eisenhower i the 1950s? Ever consider that the GOP went off the rails in the 1970s and has been moving further and further to the right since and it is your party that is divorced from reality on pretty much every issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17216]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14179
Joined: 12/14/98
|
Just pulled out my copy of “The Little Red Book” ...
Feb 4, 2019, 12:46 PM
|
|
Think I should work on my golf game. Harvey Pennick words are timeless.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 692
|
|
|