Trump 2020

[Kung Wu]

Is two months an unreasonable timeframe to decide? I know a woman doesn't know immediately, but one would think you're most likely to know before 8 weeks. Maybe I'm ignorant here as I've not gone through this process with anyone.

Google says 5.5 to 6 weeks. With a proper law, it becomes your _responsibility_ to know if you are pregnant within five weeks. That means if you are engaging in sex you have a responsibility to [take the pill, take the morning-after pill, use pregnancy tests, whatever else] and make those decisions before you are bearing a human being with a beating heart. Cross that threshold, and you now have created a human being with a right to life equal to your own right to life.

In other words, with sex comes responsibility.

[wufan]

[QUOTE=Shockm;n1276309]

I've seen very few libertarians support such measures as to allow the death of a viable baby. Most that support abortion will say that if the baby can't live outside of the mother, it's fair game. Personally, I believe life is created at birth. I'm open to drawing a line at a heartbeat, which I believe actually happens pretty early in the process, but that's going off the top of my head and based off of the endless debates on the topic that come up. I do also support exceptions like the very rare cases of rape/incest and such, which I believe accounts for less than 2% of abortions. And of course, if there is a medical necessity of saving the mothers life. I also believe this is absolutely a State issue and DC shouldn't be involved.[/QUOTE ]

A viable baby is at least at 6 Weeks and sometimes sooner. Many people in favor of abortion (mostly Democrats), want all abortions to be legal up to birth and sometimes afterward. I agree with Kung Wu but am willing to listen to other POV, that aren't extreme. While I still view the baby as important as you or I, I'm willing to listen to Rape/Incest/ and even the Life of the Mother, POV, but the problem in Kansas when we had that law on our books, and other states too, is that Abortionist Doctors on their paperwork, blamed all abortions to help the life of the mother.



Preventive measures have been available for years. Our schools teach kids about these things at the early middle school and sometimes into elementary school. Teachers who teach this curriculum inform all kids how to obtain birth control, and Nurses in our schools will help their kids (without parental permission) access to birth control or places to get it. The biggest problem that I have with this process is that the family is kept out of these decisions of 11 year old children. This is all outside the family and parental control. 11-17 year old kids in public schools all have this information and parents often or usually don't know about it.



Adoption paperwork is a problem but some Christian Republicans that I know want to fix the problem as much as they can and have stepped up to adopt multiple children, even a child of different races, even though some Democrats refer to them as having a "Plantation" mentality. These families have been involved in supporting anti-abortion agencies in money and in deed.



Republicans don't all agree on abortion except that a large majority say it happens way too often and that there need to be some restrictions. Most would agree that parents of minors should be involved, Democrats don't all agree either except that it happens too often. As you admit, Libertarians don't agree either According to the Constitution, We All have the Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. The problem is that babies don't have that right in most states. Children and babies are definitely "the least of these" in our culture, and I hope that more people speak up for those who don't have a voice.

Gonna try to steal man some pro-choice arguments to the best of my ability. I will likely have a few consecutive posts to separate out some of the arguments. Quoting this post to bring it to the next page for easy reference.

[wufan]

What is a viable baby? One that can live outside the womb seems like a reasonable definition. A baby can live outside the womb as early as perhaps 20 weeks with modern medicine; however that life span (between 20 and 28 weeks) comes with varying degrees of complications. I child less than 28 weeks will have moderate to severe cognitive disorders as well as heart defects, bowl and bladder defects, and often musculoskeletal defects. So there is a potential to draw a line at 28 weeks or perhaps as early as 20 weeks for viability.

[wufan]

The heartbeat can be detected generally at 10 weeks, but as early as six weeks with modern technology and a good clinician. The heart starts beating around 6 weeks, but you still require an umbilical cord to keep the pregnancy viable, and one could argue that the heart alone, in the case of a fetus, is not a significant indication of life. There is an argument to draw a line at 6-10 weeks.

[wufan]

In cases of incest and rape, do you have to convict the individual first? Is accusation enough? I think everyone recognizes the inherent problems with this if you are pro-life or pro-choice.

[wufan]

What’s a terminal condition for a fetus? Kids with Downs have a much shorter lifespan as do kids with CF. Are these terminal? Trisomy 13 babies live days to weeks. Is this terminal? What about conditions where the child expires as soon as the cord is cut? Do we want legislation stating that X is terminal, but Y is not? There’s a lot of legal work to do in defining this, and the mother might be the best to determine.

[wufan]

Can’t steal man the poor life conditions of mom/baby after birth. That’s just life.

[wufan]

On adoption, the way it is handled is horrible! A friend of mine has been raising a child for 6 years and lost that baby in o the paternal grandmother just after Christmas. Parental rights were terminated within weeks of birth. Grandma decided when the baby was 4 that she wanted to adopt, and so they lost the child.

Another friend had to do $5000 worth of remodel on their home to be considered. This is despite the fact that the home was new and met every code in the city. They then lost rights to the child after they said they didn’t want to take in the twins that mom had (one of which had severe mental disorders and this was child 7 and 8 from mom with 5 dads, none in her custody). The state revoked the rights since all children couldn’t be together and took the child out of the home that had been with them for two years. After 6 months of court battles, the child was returned.

A second court battle ensued when when the second cousin to mom, in Kentucky, said they wanted to adopt. The state of Kansas took the child and shipped it off to Kentucky. 10 weeks later this couple decided they didn’t want it.

It’s horrible!

[C0|dB|00ded]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/29/trump-russia-asset-claims-former-kgb-spy-new-book

‘The perfect target’: Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years – ex-KGB spy

The ex-major recalled: “For the KGB, it was a charm offensive. They had collected a lot of information on his personality so they knew who he was personally. The feeling was that he was extremely vulnerable intellectually, and psychologically, and he was prone to flattery.

“This is what they exploited. They played the game as if they were immensely impressed by his personality and believed this is the guy who should be the president of the United States one day: it is people like him who could change the world. They fed him these so-called active measures soundbites and it happened. So it was a big achievement for the KGB active measures at the time.”

Soon after he returned to the US, Trump began exploring a run for the Republican nomination for president and even held a campaign rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. On 1 September, he took out a full-page advert in the New York Times, Washington Post and Boston Globe headlined: “There’s nothing wrong with America’s Foreign Defense Policy that a little backbone can’t cure.”

The ad offered some highly unorthodox opinions in Ronald Reagan’s cold war America, accusing ally Japan of exploiting the US and expressing scepticism about US participation in Nato. It took the form of an open letter to the American people “on why America should stop paying to defend countries that can afford to defend themselves”.

Kinda spooky.

Sometimes a reliable way of discovering hidden agendas is by ignoring what is said and focusing on what each party stands to gain.

The #1 bane of Russia is a united West a.k.a. NATO. Trump spent more time attacking our western alliances than any president in history. Is it plausible that Trump was sincerely concerned about the tiny pittance of $25B that is spent annually on overseas bases considering the global strategic advantages they afforded us? Why do you think our foreign adversaries would want the U.S. out of the 80 countries it currently has bases in?

[Kung Wu]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...b-spy-new-book
‘The perfect target’: Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years – ex-KGB spy

I didn't expect you to be the type so easily duped by stupid conspiracy theory silliness.

Unplug.

[C0|dB|00ded]

I didn't expect you to be the type so easily duped by stupid conspiracy theory silliness.

Unplug.

Well... the motives for continuing Russia-Gate now are not nearly as strong as before. Trump is out of office. Logically the veracity of these claims goes up the less and less one has to benefit from making them IMO.

I also enjoy entertaining new angles in light of the fact that I lost my Trump blinders. It is truly bizarre how far one's perspective can shift (Reading: "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman at the moment - relevancy plug).

And before you criticize a shifting perspective; the flexibility of one's mind to see new "truths" as they present themselves, is what separates the mental giants from the boys IMO.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

The feeling was that he was extremely vulnerable intellectually, and psychologically, and he was prone to flattery.

I think this quote was actually from China about the Biden family...

#unity

[pinstripers]

Ryan James Girdusky
@RyanGirdusky
Suffolk University poll: Trump supporters opinion of QANON
Favorable: 4%
Unfavorable: 31%
Never Heard of: 43%
Undecided: 21%

[Atxshoxfan]

Ryan James Girdusky
@RyanGirdusky
Suffolk University poll: Trump supporters opinion of QANON
Favorable: 4%
Unfavorable: 31%
Never Heard of: 43%
Undecided: 21%

Most of us have heard the name QANON and heard others opinions, but do many of them know enough to form their own opinion, or are they just passing the opinion of others.

What can you tell us about QUANON, pinstripers?

[pinstripers]

Most of us have heard the name QANON and heard others opinions, but do many of them know enough to form their own opinion, or are they just passing the opinion of others.

What can you tell us about QUANON, pinstripers?

I have no idea what it is