Political Roundtable Part XXVI

[Zonkerbl]

I'm just some idiot but my strategy would be to wait for November, have hearings until June July and then vote to impeach.

Wait to November because Trump's legal team is making some absurdly stupid legal arguments and the judicial system has no choice but to smack them down. Those decisions will come out in a few months. We can wait for *that.* In the meantime, by November we'll also know if Trump has managed to self-inflict a recession on himself with his idiotic trade war. Wait for some truly dismal economic growth numbers to come out, then pick a day after Trump says something stupid, say Tuesday or Thursday, and say "enough! the people have spoken!" He'll be unpopular because POTUS' always are unpopular during recessions. Drag the impeachment proceedings out as long as you can while dripping enough bad news to the press to keep it at the top of the news cycle every day. Depending on how good Pelosi and Nadler are I give them until June or July (a month or two after the Dems choose their nominee). Then have the vote to impeach. Let almost every moment of Trump's pres campaign be saturated with news about the house's impeachment investigation. Get McGahn's and Mueller's testimony on tv if you can. As long as Trump maintains his cartoon villain defense of his tax returns keep going after those as well. "What is he hiding???" is a much better question to have journalists asking than "what exactly qualifies as real estate fraud?"

Because given the traitorous behavior of the GOP, the only way out of this is to get them all voted out, especially of the senate. And having a loud, shrill, constant drumbeat of bad news is the only tool we have right now to do it. And hey it worked against HRC, so let's give them a taste of their own medicine.

[dckingsfan]

Read on Twitter

If you support Trump and you're not in the top 1%, you're either an idiot or you don't value money

We know by now that trickle down just makes our pants wet and stinky.

See, this all just wrong. It isn't a failure of capitalism. It is a failure of government. This ignores history that both parties have obfuscated the tax code to their own benefit. Your talking about the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump administrations.

Show me one administration that's number 1 priority was fixing the tax code.

[JWizmentality]

I'm truly glad to hear you don't approve of family separations or jailing children. That said, while possibly
being the worst example of anti-life policy, it is definitely not the only one, by a long shot.
This admin is a horror shop of bad policies towards families and children.

And I'll note that you didn't address the longer point I made...that in extremis, you would
(hopefully) save a living breathing baby before you would save a freezer full of fertilized embryos.
This is a position completely at odds with the absolutist stance you are taking by calling pro-choicers
baby killers. That's why I suggest and believe you are arguing in bad faith. If push came to shove,
(I hope) you would act contrary to what you are now saying.

When does this scenario come up though? Where you have to act and can only save either baby in a carriage or embroyos? Sicne it's not any kind of realistic occurance, I don't see why that is an argument

As it relates to the first comment, yes I think we cna all agree the separation of the children at the border and puttign them in caps, cages,etc, was completely horrific, traumatizing, and the absolute wrong call

But when you say jailing children, these children yes, they are not criminals. But children, by definition in this country is younger than 18, if there are 15-16-17 year old rapists, murderers, or what have you, I do say jail them. probably a separate issue from what you mentioned, just wasnt sure so thought I'd clarify.

Yes it is purely hypothetical and unlikely to occur. And I can easily understand, given what you have
stated as your position, why you would have a great deal of difficulty addressing this situation.
There are probably a number of other (more likely) hypotheticals that could be put forward that would also
expose your problem, which is that you say a fetus and a baby are morally equivalent, but
would put that position to a serious test and one that most rational people would decide against.

By the way, at what point in the process of conception is personhood achieved?
When the gametes fuse, when the nuclei fuse, when the cell becomes 2 cells, a thousand cells
when implantation occurs?

Which verse in the Bible would provide that answer?

[gtn130]

It's an indictment of American Capitalism.

[daoneandonly]

I'm truly glad to hear you don't approve of family separations or jailing children. That said, while possibly
being the worst example of anti-life policy, it is definitely not the only one, by a long shot.
This admin is a horror shop of bad policies towards families and children.

And I'll note that you didn't address the longer point I made...that in extremis, you would
(hopefully) save a living breathing baby before you would save a freezer full of fertilized embryos.
This is a position completely at odds with the absolutist stance you are taking by calling pro-choicers
baby killers. That's why I suggest and believe you are arguing in bad faith. If push came to shove,
(I hope) you would act contrary to what you are now saying.

When does this scenario come up though? Where you have to act and can only save either baby in a carriage or embroyos? Sicne it's not any kind of realistic occurance, I don't see why that is an argument

As it relates to the first comment, yes I think we cna all agree the separation of the children at the border and puttign them in caps, cages,etc, was completely horrific, traumatizing, and the absolute wrong call

But when you say jailing children, these children yes, they are not criminals. But children, by definition in this country is younger than 18, if there are 15-16-17 year old rapists, murderers, or what have you, I do say jail them. probably a separate issue from what you mentioned, just wasnt sure so thought I'd clarify.

Yes it is purely hypothetical and unlikely to occur. And I can easily understand, given what you have
stated as your position, why you would have a great deal of difficulty addressing this situation.
There are probably a number of other (more likely) hypotheticals that could be put forward that would also
expose your problem, which is that you say a fetus and a baby are morally equivalent, but
would put that position to a serious test and one that most rational people would decide against.

By the way, at what point in the process of conception is personhood achieved?
When the gametes fuse, when the nuclei fuse, when the cell becomes 2 cells, a thousand cells
when implantation occurs?

Which verse in the Bible would provide that answer?

it's not a Christian thing, or Muslim, or Hindu, or any, again, if I was on some Christian soapbox again, I'd talk about how the Dems pushed so hard and successfully allowed same sex marriage to be a thing. I disagree with it, but I don't care because there's not a victim in a same sex marriage. You can argue differently, but there is a victim in an abortion, and contrary to what dirt, jwiz and que like to say, no it';s not the mother who had to make the heart wrenching decision she was supposedly agonizing over.

[Ruzious]

Read on Twitter

If you support Trump and you're not in the top 1%, you're either an idiot or you don't value money

We know by now that trickle down just makes our pants wet and stinky.

See, this all just wrong. It isn't a failure of capitalism. It is a failure of government. This ignores history that both parties have obfuscated the tax code to their own benefit. Your talking about the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump administrations.

Show me one administration that's number 1 priority was fixing the tax code.

It's semantics, to an extent there - the author used the term "American capitalism" - presumably to include the American tax system.

[dobrojim]

When in the process of conception is personhood achieved?

Why is that the deciding point?

[Zonkerbl]

When does this scenario come up though? Where you have to act and can only save either baby in a carriage or embroyos? Sicne it's not any kind of realistic occurance, I don't see why that is an argument

As it relates to the first comment, yes I think we cna all agree the separation of the children at the border and puttign them in caps, cages,etc, was completely horrific, traumatizing, and the absolute wrong call

But when you say jailing children, these children yes, they are not criminals. But children, by definition in this country is younger than 18, if there are 15-16-17 year old rapists, murderers, or what have you, I do say jail them. probably a separate issue from what you mentioned, just wasnt sure so thought I'd clarify.

Yes it is purely hypothetical and unlikely to occur. And I can easily understand, given what you have
stated as your position, why you would have a great deal of difficulty addressing this situation.
There are probably a number of other (more likely) hypotheticals that could be put forward that would also
expose your problem, which is that you say a fetus and a baby are morally equivalent, but
would put that position to a serious test and one that most rational people would decide against.

By the way, at what point in the process of conception is personhood achieved?
When the gametes fuse, when the nuclei fuse, when the cell becomes 2 cells, a thousand cells
when implantation occurs?

Which verse in the Bible would provide that answer?

it's not a Christian thing, or Muslim, or Hindu, or any, again, if I was on some Christian soapbox again, I'd talk about how the Dems pushed so hard and successfully allowed same sex marriage to be a thing. I disagree with it, but I don't care because there's not a victim in a same sex marriage. You can argue differently, but there is a victim in an abortion, and contrary to what dirt, jwiz and que like to say, no it';s not the mother who had to make the heart wrenching decision she was supposedly agonizing over.

It's like I'm just chopped liver.

[daoneandonly]

Yes it is purely hypothetical and unlikely to occur. And I can easily understand, given what you have
stated as your position, why you would have a great deal of difficulty addressing this situation.
There are probably a number of other (more likely) hypotheticals that could be put forward that would also
expose your problem, which is that you say a fetus and a baby are morally equivalent, but
would put that position to a serious test and one that most rational people would decide against.

By the way, at what point in the process of conception is personhood achieved?
When the gametes fuse, when the nuclei fuse, when the cell becomes 2 cells, a thousand cells
when implantation occurs?

Which verse in the Bible would provide that answer?

it's not a Christian thing, or Muslim, or Hindu, or any, again, if I was on some Christian soapbox again, I'd talk about how the Dems pushed so hard and successfully allowed same sex marriage to be a thing. I disagree with it, but I don't care because there's not a victim in a same sex marriage. You can argue differently, but there is a victim in an abortion, and contrary to what dirt, jwiz and que like to say, no it';s not the mother who had to make the heart wrenching decision she was supposedly agonizing over.

It's like I'm just chopped liver.

Oh I actually give you respect by not including you in the bunch that either name calls, ridicules people's religious beliefs and try to pass that off as a political argument (again when no one brought up religion), or paint the people having the abortion as the victims

As it relates to your point, I did read them, I can appreciate your thoroughness and knowledge on the subject, I think it's just a matter of respectfully disagreeing. I believe a zygote fetus whatever folks want to call them, deserve a chance at life. The majority of abortions are due to nothing more than a consensual sex unplanned pregnancy, and that is not reason enough to terminate an abortion. if you are talking the mother or baby's life being in danger, or rape, then sure, those circumstances should be discussed accordingly, but not the whoops. Abortion shouldn't be treated as a birth control option.

And what you mentioned about McConnell, while you have a point regarding him as a person, same can be said for AOC, Warren, and Sanders.

[dckingsfan]

We know by now that trickle down just makes our pants wet and stinky.

See, this all just wrong. It isn't a failure of capitalism. It is a failure of government. This ignores history that both parties have obfuscated the tax code to their own benefit. Your talking about the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump administrations.
Show me one administration that's number 1 priority was fixing the tax code.

It's semantics, to an extent there - the author used the term "American capitalism" - presumably to include the American tax system.

Gotcha - American politics, capitalism, all things America.

But the tweet and accompanying comments obfuscate the issues. "capitalism" continues to do a nice job keeping the economy going. What hasn't happened is either party doing a good job allocating the resources provided by our capitalist base. If you want to get picky about it - I think the Ds in NY pushing a reduction in taxes on capital gains my have been the worst single event (well, except for NY).

Really - if we want to set this country straight, it needs to be the number 1 issue. But it really doesn't even break out top 10.

[Zonkerbl]

it's not a Christian thing, or Muslim, or Hindu, or any, again, if I was on some Christian soapbox again, I'd talk about how the Dems pushed so hard and successfully allowed same sex marriage to be a thing. I disagree with it, but I don't care because there's not a victim in a same sex marriage. You can argue differently, but there is a victim in an abortion, and contrary to what dirt, jwiz and que like to say, no it';s not the mother who had to make the heart wrenching decision she was supposedly agonizing over.

It's like I'm just chopped liver.

Oh I actually give you respect by not including you in the bunch that either name calls, ridicules people's religious beliefs and try to pass that off as a political argument (again when no one brought up religion), or paint the people having the abortion as the victims

As it relates to your point, I did read them, I can appreciate your thoroughness and knowledge on the subject, I think it's just a matter of respectfully disagreeing. I believe a zygote fetus whatever folks want to call them, deserve a chance at life. The majority of abortions are due to nothing more than a consensual sex unplanned pregnancy, and that is not reason enough to terminate an abortion. if you are talking the mother or baby's life being in danger, or rape, then sure, those circumstances should be discussed accordingly, but not the whoops. Abortion shouldn't be treated as a birth control option.

And what you mentioned about McConnell, while you have a point regarding him as a person, same can be said for AOC, Warren, and Sanders.

Why do men bear no responsibility or consequences for unplanned pregnancies?

[daoneandonly]

It's like I'm just chopped liver.

Oh I actually give you respect by not including you in the bunch that either name calls, ridicules people's religious beliefs and try to pass that off as a political argument (again when no one brought up religion), or paint the people having the abortion as the victims

As it relates to your point, I did read them, I can appreciate your thoroughness and knowledge on the subject, I think it's just a matter of respectfully disagreeing. I believe a zygote fetus whatever folks want to call them, deserve a chance at life. The majority of abortions are due to nothing more than a consensual sex unplanned pregnancy, and that is not reason enough to terminate an abortion. if you are talking the mother or baby's life being in danger, or rape, then sure, those circumstances should be discussed accordingly, but not the whoops. Abortion shouldn't be treated as a birth control option.

And what you mentioned about McConnell, while you have a point regarding him as a person, same can be said for AOC, Warren, and Sanders.

Why do men bear no responsibility or consequences for unplanned pregnancies?

Who says they dont? They are just as responsible, it takes 2 to tango

[dckingsfan]

Responsibility: Noun: the state or fact of having a duty to deal with something

Men often have "no" responsibility. Men are sometimes rapists as well - more often than we want to stomach.

And in the end it comes to remedy as with all thing litigious. Who are you going to jail. What new war are we going to create? We were so successful with Prohibition, the war on drugs and tough on crime. Shall we put a new generation into prison? Or should we put doctors that treat the after affects of RU486 in prison?

And about those women that are raped? You are just being selfish?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/23/opinion/abortion-legislation-rape.html

[pancakes3]

cruelty. clap. is. clap. the. clap. point. clap.

Read on Twitter

[pancakes3]

Read on Twitter

[Zonkerbl]

Oh I actually give you respect by not including you in the bunch that either name calls, ridicules people's religious beliefs and try to pass that off as a political argument (again when no one brought up religion), or paint the people having the abortion as the victims

As it relates to your point, I did read them, I can appreciate your thoroughness and knowledge on the subject, I think it's just a matter of respectfully disagreeing. I believe a zygote fetus whatever folks want to call them, deserve a chance at life. The majority of abortions are due to nothing more than a consensual sex unplanned pregnancy, and that is not reason enough to terminate an abortion. if you are talking the mother or baby's life being in danger, or rape, then sure, those circumstances should be discussed accordingly, but not the whoops. Abortion shouldn't be treated as a birth control option.

And what you mentioned about McConnell, while you have a point regarding him as a person, same can be said for AOC, Warren, and Sanders.

Why do men bear no responsibility or consequences for unplanned pregnancies?

Who says they dont? They are just as responsible, it takes 2 to tango

Name one consequence for men.

[daoneandonly]

Why do men bear no responsibility or consequences for unplanned pregnancies?

Who says they dont? They are just as responsible, it takes 2 to tango

Name one consequence for men.

And what exactly is the consequence for the woman (and her partner in crime) who have abortions? Not one iota of a thing.

What about the cases when the man wants the child but the woman aborts them, what about his rights?

[Zonkerbl]

Who says they dont? They are just as responsible, it takes 2 to tango

Name one consequence for men.

And what exactly is the consequence for the woman (and her partner in crime) who have abortions? Not one iota of a thing.

What about the cases when the man wants the child but the woman aborts them, what about his rights?

Answer the question or forfeit the argument.

[daoneandonly]

Name one consequence for men.

And what exactly is the consequence for the woman (and her partner in crime) who have abortions? Not one iota of a thing.

What about the cases when the man wants the child but the woman aborts them, what about his rights?

Answer the question or forfeit the argument.

Consequence for fathering a child? Is it a punishment of some kind, the way you phrase it is absurd

Men pay child if they dont have the balls to step up and be a dad, or if the mother is a selfish person and doesnt allow him to do so

Now I ask you, what's the consequence for a woman (and her willing partner) having an abortion?

[doclinkin]

And what exactly is the consequence for the woman (and her partner in crime) who have abortions? Not one iota of a thing.

What about the cases when the man wants the child but the woman aborts them, what about his rights?

Answer the question or forfeit the argument.

Consequence for fathering a child? Is it a punishment of some kind, the way you phrase it is absurd

Men pay child if they dont have the balls to step up and be a dad, or if the mother is a selfish person and doesnt allow him to do so

Now I ask you, what's the consequence for a woman (and her willing partner) having an abortion?

Having her insides vacuumed out in an expensive and painful procedure. Censure and societal judgement by people who do not know her circumstances and don’t care. Shame and humiliation if she actually does care about their opinion. Worries that she may be unable to have kids later when she chooses.

Few people have an abortion without it being a serious and heavy decision. Reproductive choice though has allowed more women to participate in the workforce and add value to our country’s economy and success. This has been significant in many mostly positive ways, ensuring that fewer children are born into crushing poverty. These kids have no choice to be born poor into a society that then judges and locks them up for their poverty.

Women who choose not to carry a pregnancy to term and undergo a safe medical procedure before the developing cells can become a human being do deal with the consequences of that single decision. Women who are prevented from choosing that decision deal whether or not they voluntarily became pregnant end up with two lifetimes worth of hard consequences. It is only sensible, no matter how upsetting and hard the decision, that women do take the choice that allows them to decide what to do with the rest of their life.

Developing cells with no brainwave activity that cannot live without the full support of the womb inside someone are not yet people. The woman hosting that _potential_ life is undoubtedly a person. Only one gender bears the consequences of childbirth. They should have the greatest say in when and whether their bodies will serve this purpose.

Get pregnant yourself. Then talk about who bears what consequence.