Jump to content

David Dennison

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    32,416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by David Dennison

  1. 1 hour ago, RandomIdoit said:

    More like life panels, AKA doctors. They should be able to determine if the mother's life is at risk. If they are shady and lie to skirt the rules, they will have consequences also.

    Or we can leave it up to the person who is pregnant.

    #CommonSense

  2. 10 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

    I think if you were raped, you might have a good reason to get checked out within 6 weeks. I do agree with the posters that have said they might be too traumatized to deal with it and that could be a reason they don't get checked out. Or maybe they are too embarrassed to tell anyone. 

    What about the women who aren't raped? Do you still judge them after 6 weeks if they had no way of knowing they were pregnant?

  3. 5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    His biggest flaw. It’s why he gets walked all over by Putin and the Republicans.  

    You might want to go over his accomplishments again. They are unmatched by any president in your lifetime.

  4. 6 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

    I can't and don't understand. I'll admit that. And I wouldn't judge someone that cannot come to a decision within 6 weeks. I wouldn't think they are a bad person. I am saying that after 6 weeks, I would oppose anyone having an abortion for any reasons other than the health of the mother is at risk or the baby has some condition that would cause it to live a horrible life. 

    Some women don't even know they are pregnant after six weeks.

  5. 7 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

    This is the one that sticks out. More than half were not "bad decisions". 

    If we overturn Roe, our budget for welfare/WIC/etc will be quadrupled. 

    And it will be going to the red states that already receive more from the federal government than they put in. 

     

     

  6. 9 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

    This is sooo typical of this place and all of you guys.  The only reason there is even any kind of "smell test" is because, as usual, the media print a small part of the actual story and you guys just lap it up like dogs.  Do you ever get tired of relying on half truths in the media to form opinions?  

    Hugo asked what he posted that wasn't non-factual.  Actually, almost everything that makes this look suspicious is un-factual.

    The only facts are 1) At one time Kennedy's son worked at De, and 2) Trump made development/construction loans with De during part of the time that Kennedy's son was there.  That is it.  Everything else being discussed is half truths and outright lies that are very easy to investigate.

    The biggest claim that is non-factual is this supposed claim that Kennedy's son was Trumps personal banker or something like that.  It is a complete and total falsehood.  Kennedy never made any construction/development loans and he never had any role in that side of the business.  Kennedy was a trader.  He traded in mortgage backed securities.  Traders do not make loans.  It is a completely different division of the bank.  Kennedy had exactly zero input in any of the De loans to trump co.   Zero.

    Trump started his relationship with De before Kennedy even worked there. Trump did have a relationship with a De banker and that was the guy that basically started the commercial real estate lending office in NY for De.  Lots and lots of articles about it.  The guy knew he was taking a risk on Trump but did it anyway.

    Your Citizens United point is incredibly stupid.  Citizens United was decided in January of 2010.  Kennedys son was long gone from De at that point and was running a small real estate investment firm that, according to the only records I could find, made exactly zero political contributions.  Your point is absurd.

    Yes De was fined for money laundering related issues.  From what I can tell they deserved to be.  But the division in question was based in Moscow.  Just like every single other big I Bank had offices there.  De is a massive institution.  This happened in 2017.  Of course, Kennedy never worked on anything russian related or had any connection whatsoever to the russian division when he worked there and he had been gone from the company for 8 years when the fines were handed down..  

    It appears that Kennedy has a friendly relationship with the trump kids.  That is neither unusual or surprising considering their backgrounds and work.

     

    Tell us what you think about Uranium One.

  7. 10 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

    So, just to keep track of it all - so far just on this thread we've seen you advocate for "changing" our racist constitution, abolishing the electoral college, and importing as many voters as possible.  That's a great platform.  Very "Common Sense".  

    I agree. It is a great platform and will make America better. 

  8. 9 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

    In my personal opinion, if the child is the product of rape or incest, the mother's health is at risk, or the child has some kind of condition that means it will suffer for it's entire life, then I think it would be acceptable. That is how I feel. Not using birth control, being careless, and making poor decisions are not valid reasons to have an abortion in my opinion.

    So abortion is acceptable if the unborn child has the misfortune of being the product of rape or incest?

    Does Down Syndrome qualify as condition of lifetime suffering?

     

  9. 5 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

    Legit question:

    Those who consider themselves Pro-Life: Is their a point where it's just "cells" and you are ok with an abortion?

    Those who consider themselves Pro-Choice: Is their a point where it's a "baby" and shouldn't be aborted?

    Personally, I think viability is a good standard as long as pregnancy doesn't affect the health of the mother.

    • Like 1
  10. 6 minutes ago, RandomIdoit said:

    The argument I have read is that if the baby can survive outside the womb, even with machines, then it is viable. Before then, no. I don't believe this because I remember seeing the sonogram with a heartbeat and would never be convinced that my child was not a person yet.

    So in your opinion, when, if ever, should it be legally acceptable to terminate this person prior to birth? 

  11. 8 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

    At some point between conception and it's 18th birthday it becomes a living human being with it's own rights.  Killing a human being is against the law and it should be.

    The argument really needs to be defining the point at which it's no longer a clump of cells and becomes a human.  Personally, I don't believe that point is at conception but I also don't think you suddenly become human upon passing through the birth canal.  I think most people share that view but I could be wrong.

    This is an argument in favor of safe and legal abortion.

  12. 6 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

    If Plan B works why should abortion be an option? The fact is that about half of americans think that abortion is morally wrong. Likely most of them because they believe that an unborn life deserves rights. So arguing from the point of view that it doesn't deserve those rights doesn't do anything but show all you really care about is looking down on those who disagree with you.

    Why shouldn't abortion be a legal option along with Plan B? 

×
×
  • Create New...