Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 6:04 PM, F250 said:

Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity go together like oil and water. The frequent use of Pharisses as a pejorative in the New Testament kind of drives home the point. 

Generally speaking anything in the Old Testament is dismissed or cherry picked as one sees fit.

 

 

Expand  

10 commandments.  Religion is all cherry picking by those with a fundamentalists brain.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 5:20 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Let's not lose sight of the fact that the rabid pro-life movement, at least in the US, pretty much started gaining steam in the second half of the 20th century, and it was conceived as a more palatable rallying point than the true impetus behind the movement:  maintaining segregation, particularly in schools.  It was easier to get the masses going in one direction by being "pro-baby" than by being "pro-entrenched-racism".

I mean, the Southern Baptist Convention outlined and subsequently reaffirmed its hardly-conservative stance on abortion in the years before AND after Roe V Wade.

Expand  

This is good advice. The Prolife movement within Protestant Christianity is about as old as most Millennials. It's a pretty new movement in Christianity outside of Catholicism. A big difference though is Catholicism is consistent with anti-abortion, anti-death penalty and pro social gospel. The Protestant movement is just anti-abortion.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 6:04 PM, F250 said:

Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity go together like oil and water. The frequent use of Pharisses as a pejorative in the New Testament kind of drives home the point. 

Generally speaking anything in the Old Testament is dismissed or cherry picked as one sees fit.

 

 

Expand  

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 5:53 PM, Willfully Horn said:

Outlawing abortion relies on invoking fetal rights. While arguing about fetal “life” is more moot than persuasive (and I am a breath of life believer,) what Liberty does a fetus possess? 

Expand  

I was leaning on the "Life" part of the phrase.  Again, I agree with you, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 2:46 AM, DDD Dad said:


Well they don’t have a majority in the senate even with Kamala so it’s academic.

Expand  

I don't think that's accurate.  As much of a pain in the ass as Manchin and Sinema are, I'm pretty sure both are pretty reliably pro-choice.

I don't think there's any senator in the Democratic caucus who would be opposed to enshrining Roe/Casey in legislation (and anybody who did would put him-/herself in serious risk of a primary challenge).

But it requires busting the filibuster.  And as we've seen repeatedly with respect to voting rights, a Senate rule is more sacrosanct than the Constitution.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 5:14 PM, wildcat09 said:

The deftness with which Anastasis flits back and forth between the reasonable-sounding "look I don't think pro-choice people are monsters and I agree that some restrictions on abortion that have been enacted are bad, but can't we all agree that we should try to reduce repeat abortions?" and "anyone who supports legal abortion is pro-holocaust" is really impressive. You almost forget he's doing it.

Expand  

I’ve always said he is our most talented troll for a reason. 

Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 3:46 PM, Neonmoon said:

Some people think a ball of human fetus cells with the potential to become a birthed human child require the same protections as an actual birthed human child. 

Some people think that it is a women's right to choose to advance that ball of human fetal cells to the next stage since it requires a woman's commitment to keep said human ball of cells alive through proper nutrition. 

One of these groups wants the government involved to force all potential balls to become birthed children. 

Expand  

There’s a reason we use the term “living, breathing human being.” The breathing part is kind of important. 

Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 6:51 PM, JimmyJames said:
If the Dems lose the senate in 2022 you might be right. 
 
If they keep it there’s a definite path forward. But if they lose it, it’s open season on democracy. 

It’s already lost and they have the majority.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 5:14 PM, wildcat09 said:

The deftness with which Anastasis flits back and forth between the reasonable-sounding "look I don't think pro-choice people are monsters and I agree that some restrictions on abortion that have been enacted are bad, but can't we all agree that we should try to reduce repeat abortions?" and "anyone who supports legal abortion is pro-holocaust" is really impressive. You almost forget he's doing it.

Expand  

I mean if you agree that taking a human life is bad, then you should be able to acknowledge that an abortion past the point of viability is at a minimum morally problematic, even if you agree a woman has an absolute right to do it.

That is unless you think that a human’s physical location is a reasonable criterion to use to determine their right to life

Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 7:22 PM, elfenix said:

both abortion and forcing a woman at the end of a gun to carry a pregnancy to term are morally problematic, which is why this is a hard fucking question that shouldn't be left up to a bunch of old white men who've never had a moment of difficulty in their country club harvard law lives and instead should be made by the person closest to the matter.

Expand  

Well, that plays into the notion that it should be a decision made by white men of various ages and reactionary women, dozens of them, in dozens of state legislatures nationwide. 😬😬

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 7:27 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Well, that plays into the notion that it should be a decision made by white men of various ages and reactionary women, dozens of them, in dozens of state legislatures nationwide. 😬😬

Expand  

nope, it's between the pregnant person, her doctor, whoever else she wants to consult, and her god. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 7:18 PM, Neonmoon said:

Did anyone argue for abortion past viability?

Expand  

Did anyone exclude it in their argument? It’s in the discussion. In fact for most people it is the discussion. 

Which is a problem in and of itself because it is getting earlier all the time

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 6:36 PM, Ghost of LL said:

I don't think that's accurate.  As much of a pain in the ass as Manchin and Sinema are, I'm pretty sure both are pretty reliably pro-choice.

I don't think there's any senator in the Democratic caucus who would be opposed to enshrining Roe/Casey in legislation (and anybody who did would put him-/herself in serious risk of a primary challenge).

But it requires busting the filibuster.  And as we've seen repeatedly with respect to voting rights, a Senate rule is more sacrosanct than the Constitution.

Expand  

It’s cute how you think those two wouldn’t take the R line on this issue to avoid getting voted out of office. 

Posted

You know what’s not cute? The proliferation of using cute, adorable, etc. in a patronizing manner. I literally (not figuratively, I mean it) roll my eyes almost every time I encounter it now. It’s a plague on this board. 

(Nothing personal DDD, I guess I’m just in the Festivus spirit and airing grievances. Oh and in before the obligatory “it’s cute that you think that” responses.)

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 9:20 PM, DDD Dad said:

It’s cute how you think those two wouldn’t take the R line on this issue to avoid getting voted out of office. 

Expand  

Let's take those two one at a time:

Sinema is a bought-and-paid for corporate shill.  She's going to vote to lower taxes on the rich.  But rich people don't give a shit about abortion, and anti-abortion constituencies aren't funding her gravy train.  So much like with other social issues, her vote isn't really in question.

Manchin is a much bigger question mark.  I think he might favor that legislation, so long as there is something in it that federal dollars will never support abortions.

But even if you lost Manchin, you could probably pick up a Republican vote or two (e.g., Collins or Murkowski).

But none of that does any good if they won't get rid of the filibuster.

Posted (edited)

  

  On 12/3/2021 at 10:37 PM, formermav43 said:

You know what’s not cute? The proliferation of using cute, adorable, etc. in a patronizing manner. I literally (not figuratively, I mean it) roll my eyes almost every time I encounter it now. It’s a plague on this board. 

(Nothing personal DDD, I guess I’m just in the Festivus spirit and airing grievances. Oh and in before the obligatory “it’s cute that you think that” responses.)

Expand  

 

now we're really getting down to the important topics 🙄

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 10:37 PM, formermav43 said:

You know what’s not cute? The proliferation of using cute, adorable, etc. in a patronizing manner. I literally (not figuratively, I mean it) roll my eyes almost every time I encounter it now. It’s a plague on this board. 

(Nothing personal DDD, I guess I’m just in the Festivus spirit and airing grievances. Oh and in before the obligatory “it’s cute that you think that” responses.)

Expand  

 

53A770ED-9814-4DBB-9717-C9318A94AB21.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 12/3/2021 at 10:52 PM, Ghost of LL said:

Let's take those two one at a time:

Sinema is a bought-and-paid for corporate shill.  She's going to vote to lower taxes on the rich.  But rich people don't give a shit about abortion, and anti-abortion constituencies aren't funding her gravy train.  So much like with other social issues, her vote isn't really in question.

Manchin is a much bigger question mark.  I think he might favor that legislation, so long as there is something in it that federal dollars will never support abortions.

But even if you lost Manchin, you could probably pick up a Republican vote or two (e.g., Collins or Murkowski).

But none of that does any good if they won't get rid of the filibuster.

Expand  

Hey man, cut me some slack. I’ve been high on OxyContin all day. 

Posted

Just getting to volokh.  

https://reason.com/volokh/

Worth the time.  

Below from David Post.

It's liberty your honor....

  Reveal hidden contents

 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Jonathon Mitchell, the drafter of much of the legislation, has made it clear he is interested in pursuing birth control next; that if a women does not want to get pregnant that she should abstain from sex. Men's sexual health is taken for granted and they are free to do as they please, but a woman's is irrelevant since she has but one purpose in his view. He also is on the record as looking to overturn Obergefell.

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
  On 12/4/2021 at 11:05 PM, Poolflood said:

Just getting to volokh.  

https://reason.com/volokh/

Worth the time.  

Below from David Post.

It's liberty your honor....

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

08281148-c34c-440d-bede-6ed90c40aaab_tex

Posted
  On 12/5/2021 at 8:52 PM, DDD Dad said:


Rotator cuff surgery on Friday. Still pretty drugged up.

Expand  

Hope you get your slider back by Spring.  Save me some pills.

Posted
  On 12/6/2021 at 6:26 PM, Sawbonz said:

A human egg is not a human jfc

Expand  

Parsing between adjective and noun.  Obviously, you're correct, a human egg is missing the secret sauce (oh dear lord) that might allow a little human to appear.  Calling a human egg "human" is akin to calling a human kidney "human".  OK, so what?

Posted
  On 12/6/2021 at 6:39 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Parsing between adjective and noun.  Obviously, you're correct, a human egg is missing the secret sauce (oh dear lord) that might allow a little human to appear.  Calling a human egg "human" is akin to calling a human kidney "human".  OK, so what?

Expand  

Did you read the context?

Posted
  On 12/6/2021 at 5:54 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:


Talks about how the abortion issue was AstroTurfed by evangelical leaders in the 70s for fundraising purposes and subsequently used by Republicans to win elections.  

Expand  

Great video, thank you... and it's well documented that the Schaeffers were "in the room where it happened". Tangentially, this is a really interesting book about the folks who were early on pressing for "social justice" issues (like abortion).

Posted
  On 12/6/2021 at 6:39 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Parsing between adjective and noun.  Obviously, you're correct, a human egg is missing the secret sauce (oh dear lord) that might allow a little human to appear.  Calling a human egg "human" is akin to calling a human kidney "human".  OK, so what?

Expand  

 

  On 12/6/2021 at 6:40 PM, Sawbonz said:

Did you read the context?

Expand  

YARN | We're you listening to the dudes story | The Big Lebowski | Video  gifs by quotes | 8c020d9d | 紗



×
×
  • Create New...