Jump to content


Verified Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by CoffeeTiger

  1. That has nothing to do with making America an easier place to raise a child. Adoption isn't the magic pill or excuse for why abortion shouldn't be legal. Many children in adoption and foster care have mental/phycological issues from being carried to term during pregnancies from mothers who didn't take care of their bodies, smoked, drank, didn't provide enough nourishment, etc. or from going years growing up without loving parents to nurture them. This sets them up for being harder to adopt and harder to properly grow and adapt into society when they grow into adults. Also there is the issue of abandonment that many adopted children deal with knowing that their original parents didn't want them and just gave them up. They spend a lot of their formative years without the love and care of their natural mother and parents. There may be 1-2 million people in the US waiting or wanting to adopt but that doesn't mean all of them are able/capable/or in a good position to adopt. Adoption agencies have a serious responsibility to ensure they aren't placing children with abusers, people who will give up the child again later, or people who aren't able to afford to raise the child and will lead to a bad standard of living for the child. Adoption is an imperfect solution....it shouldn't be what is encouraged and isn't a system that sets all children up for success and productive, healthy lives. I distinctly remember in college a woman asking out loud which forms of birth control can prevent you from getting HIV. Our schools really fail in regards to sex education and in private households, Especially in conservative/religious households, sex and sex education is considered a very awkward and uncomfortable subject that many people don't want to really talk about. Many parents believe that as long as they drill into their kids to not to have sex until you marry your one life partner then everything else will work out fine. No need for sex education if you live your life by the Bible.
  2. Yeah, I'd be for a compromise like this. Not really much more for me to say on it since this just a thought exercise. The Republican party of today will NEVER consider a bill that would legalize abortion nationally no matter the 'week' constraint or time limits.
  3. Pictured here is Rudy talking police through the assault: He Called the police and had the violent assaulter arrested and hopes his attacker faces death via firing squad for this unforgivable crime. He says he could have easily been propelled forward and cracked his head open on the ground. Luckily this ANTIFA/leftist thug has been arrested and taken off the streets. No word on Rudy's current condition but based on Right wing media articles it is likely he's in the hospital in serious condition currently /s.
  4. I've never given any thought to what anyone on "The View" has to say. It's just a drama talk show for people who don't have dayjobs. That said I do agree that Clarence better watch out. His fellow conservative justices may make him start sitting in the back of the Supreme Court if he keeps helping and encouraging them to roll back the clock on progress.
  5. Yep. College football hasn't been about 'armature athletics' for decades. It's just that people felt a lot better about it when it was only the coaches and administrators getting wealthy off the proceeds. The only reason we're in the "wild west of NIL" now is because the Universities and the NCAA never had any plans or ideas of how NIL would work. They fully intended to keep college athletes locked out of the monetary benefits of college athletics forever and when the courts told them they can't do that then suddenly they are left without direction, flapping in the wind. The NCAA should have had a NIL framework and regulations set up years ago and we wouldn't be having this problem. As for AU if we aren't willing to play the NIL game then I guess we'd better get used to competing with Vandy, MIS ST, Mizz, and Kentucky to see who's the "worst of the worse" in the SEC every year.
  6. Ok, so do you have any explanation on why you believe a fetus/Childs life from rape or incest means less and is subject to being aborted, while you believe that all other cases of abortion should be illegal or not practiced? If you say all life is precious and fertilized fetuses in the womb are real people then why do you support exceptions for abortion in cases of rape/incest/woman's life? You said earlier "Well rape is a crime and is forced" ...but that has nothing to do with the fetus which didn't "choose" to be fertilized via rape. Why would you allow abortion for it and not for others? Logically, a true pro life position for someone who believes all fertilized fetuses are real people with rights should believe that any type of abortion should be 100% illegal in all situations no matter what. Correct?
  7. Here's a opinion piece from Charlie Sykes who is personally pro-life like yourself and hopes like you that the pro-life movement will focus more on building a society to support mothers and the children they care for. Do you have any thoughts on his views? When I was a 19-year-old college student, with few if any significant life skills, I got my 18-year-old girlfriend pregnant. I will spare you the details. The pregnancy, however, could not have come at a more awkward time; it meant that our educational plans would have to be scrapped. No graduate school for me; no undergraduate degree for her. Worse, we were utterly unprepared and unsuited in every possible way for parenthood. And I am not engaging in any sort of false modesty when I tell you that my incapacity for fatherhood at that age cannot really be overstated. Emotionally, financially, and practically, I wasn’t prepared for what was about to happen. I was an English literature major, which I enjoyed and where I learned quite a lot that has held me in good stead. But at the time, it was perhaps the most impractical degree imaginable; there was shockingly little interest among employers in my term papers on Paradise Lost. I was, in other words, utterly unemployable. Even in our contentious times, there was a broad consensus among would-be employers: Not Me. So, by every rational, prudent, sensible, judicious standard in the world, it made no sense to go ahead. But we made a choice; and I fully understand that others may have made a different one. And that choice was the most consequential of our lives. My daughter is named Sandy and she is a beautiful and talented writer and artist. Her children — my grandsons — are named Elliott and Silas, and they are flying in from France for a visit in a few weeks to attend their uncle Alex’s wedding and meet their two cousins — Charlotte and Emilia (with a third on the way). Decades ago, two stupid, incautious teenagers created whole worlds. I need to tell this story to put what follows in context. I spent the next 40+ years very much a part of the pro-life movement. For well over a decade, I was the regular master of ceremonies of Wisconsin Right to Life’s annual dinner. For nearly 50 years I was allied with the folks who are now celebrating their victory in the Supreme Court. So where am I? How do I feel today about the demise of Roe v. Wade? The short answer: it’s complicated. As a legal matter, I shared RBG’s view that Roe itself was poorly decided, and had hoped that it might be modified, or even overturned, without tearing apart the constitutional right of privacy. But the radicalism of the majority’s decision in Dobbs shouldn’t be glossed over for conservatives; nor its lack of prudence and compassion for the real-world consequences of ripping out a law that millions had relied upon for 50 years. The court’s ruling plunges a fateful (and deeply personal) choice into the cauldron of the culture war at a moment of maximum demagoguery, extremism, disinformation, and bad faith. I find myself in special sympathy with Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote, “Both the Court’s opinion and the dissent display a relentless freedom from doubt on the legal issue that I cannot share.” Roberts tried to caution his colleagues against making sweeping and abrupt changes in settled law. “A thoughtful Member of this Court [Justice Felix Frankfurter] once counseled that the difficulty of a question ‘admonishes us to observe the wise limitations on our function and to confine ourselves to deciding only what is necessary to the disposition of the immediate case.’” And America — including the pro-life movement — is not ready for the consequences. ** I still believe that every birth is a miracle and that we should regard every human life as infinitely precious. That means that every abortion is a tragedy and a lost world. But over time I also came to believe that the movement’s focus needed to shift from coercive legislation to addressing the fundamental choice that women had to make under often harrowing circumstances. The widespread use of ultrasound changed the debate, by giving shape and a face to the unborn. But if we were ever to create a culture of respect, that meant changing hearts and minds — rather than criminal statutes. It also meant taking seriously a more holistic approach to a culture of life, which Catholics refer to as the “seamless garment.” That meant addressing crisis pregnancies with compassion and support, as well as strengthening pro-family, pro-child policies that tipped the scales toward choosing life — as we did more than 40 years ago. But as you have undoubtedly noticed, the record of the pro-life movement has been, at best, shaky, even before the toxic transformation of our politics. ** I still think of myself as pro-life, but like my colleague Mona Charen, I’ve changed my attitude toward the movement itself, because I’ve lost my trust in the judgment and good faith of many of my former colleagues. A movement that should have celebrated compassion, yoked itself instead to a politics that celebrated performative cruelty. (Not to mention the many “pro-lifers” who embraced bizarre anti-vax conspiracy theories that have cost hundreds of thousands of lives.) So I share David French’s conflicted reaction. In his weekend newsletter, he reviews his decades of work on behalf of the pro-life movement To be sure, some conservatives (even Marco Rubio) have recognized the need for pro-lifers to embrace pro-child policies. Others have tried to create an infrastructure for post-Roe families. These efforts need to be extended and expanded. But it seems naïve to think that the pro-life GOP will suddenly pivot toward creating the kinds of help that young mothers will need. Just look at a map with an overlay of abortion bans with the lack of prenatal care and Medicaid expansion. Unfortunately, the states with the most draconian bans will be the least likely to also pass legislation that enhances the social safety net of programs for children and families. So instead of a renewed reverence for life, post-Roe America will be even more bitterly polarized. In recent years, our debates over everything from masking to race have become more shrill and tribal. Litmus tests overwhelm reason, and rage drowns out prudence. And now, out of some great cosmic karma, we get to do abortion. The results are already ugly. As French writes: ** Because the arc of the right now bends toward perpetual outrage and escalation, it will only get worse. We shouldn’t look for either compromise or restraint. The GOP will be far more passionate about attempting to ban abortion pills than they about expanding child tax credits or parental leave laws. The party is already shape-shifting from supporting states’ rights, to pledging to enact a sweeping national ban. Don’t be surprised when purists object to 15-week bans (if its murder, why allow it at all?), or appear indifferent to crises like ectopic pregnancies. Nor should you be surprised if the focus of punitive legislation turns toward women. Consider this remarkable proposal touted by the Heritage Foundation’s Jay Richards. (Richards is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow in Heritage’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society.) The “really thoughtful proposal”? The authors point out the inconsistency of considering abortion murder, but not sanctioning women themselves. “We don’t want to criminally prosecute women who illegally abort,” they write. “Nor do we want to shrug and wink, as if women were all hapless victims, or abortion weren’t really a monstrous crime, as it is.” Their idea? To treat women “who illegally abort the way we treat failed suicides.” (Yes, forcing women into “mandatory psychiatric custody” would indeed be a “political suicide pill.”) ** And then we get to the larger issue of privacy. I’ve written a book on the subject, so I’ll have a lot more to say on this later. We should actually be grateful that Clarence Thomas highlighted the larger implications of rejecting a constitutional right of privacy, While Justice Samuel Alito went to considerable pains to distinguish abortion from other issues like contraception, criminalized sodomy, and same sex marriage, Thomas went there: In future newsletters, I hope to make the case that conservatives should not follow Thomas into this black hole by rejecting privacy. For the moment, Thomas stands alone. But we’ve been warned.
  8. So you're saying that you DO NOT believe that an unborn fetus is a real human being. You are saying you oppose Abortion, not because of the issue of human life, but because you believe it's too easy of a solution for unplanned pregnancy's and you want people who make what you consider irresponsible decisions to be punished with children they don't want? Am I expressing your views accurately here?
  9. You're saying you're against abortion except for cases of rape, incest, and risk to the mothers life. How is this a consistent belief? Does the unborn "child's" life or "opinion" matter less if it's conceived because of rape or incest? Why is it's life not deemed as valuable as the mothers life? Why do you believe so strongly that abortion is wrong except for these specific situations that you apparently deem it appropriate/acceptable? What is your justification for this?
  10. Don't have to be black to advocate for Black rights. Don't have to be gay to advocate for Gay Rights. Don't have to be a woman to advocate for women's rights.
  11. I just don't get all the: "Oh, it doesn't matter if half the country outlaws abortion because places like California allow it, so it's really no big deal." Like, this isn't how "rights" are supposed to work. We aren't supposed to allow some citizens to have more basic freedoms in some states while more restricted in others. Nothing "small government" about going from "Abortion is available to anyone but nobody is ever forced to have one" to " Half of the US is now forbidden to have an abortion regardless of their wishes or needs unless they have to do a cross country trip to have a medical procedure." This isn't good...this isn't progress. I also like how the author chastises progressives for worrying about things like contraceptives and same sex marriage when Clarence Thomas specifically stated in his opinion that he WANTS the court to go back and look at those things based on this new Roe ruling. Progressive's are only responding to what the court justice himself is saying....author conveniently doesn't address this though. This entire article is just a bad faith argument that ignores the actual issues.
  12. Eh, I can answer this one. The logic goes that God will use bad people to accomplish "good" things but if a bad person does bad things then that's satans influence. There are multiple instances in the Bible of God elevating or giving power to formerly or currently evil men to fulfill his will. If a US president is someone Christians like or does things Christians like = Gods will/nobodys perfect/God uses bad people for his will etc. If a US President is someone Christians dislike= Satans influence on this lost world.
  13. In the United States less than 1% of Reported rapes ever lead to conviction or punishment for the rapist. For any given woman who is raped, there is a very, very low likelihood that the justice system will ever punish her rapist no matter what she does. Safe and reliable access to abortion for the pregnancy for the rape is the very least our society can offer. That you don't care if that is made harder, more difficult, more expensive for rape victims says something.
  14. I think that's a very cherry picked way to look at the data. About half of Christians are willing to admit in a poll that the bible influences their thinking over reason, logic, science, and philosophy, which is higher than what I'd think. When you combine that with the very clear fact that the more religious a person is the more likely they are to oppose abortion, I think indicates a very very strong correlation between religion and opposition to abortion. You can argue that that's just a massive coincidence and that their religion really doesn't have much to do with it...but I'll disagree with you on that. Yes, there are unreligious anti-abortion people, but they are in the small minority. Voting doesn't matter in this instance. The supreme court is a lifetime appointment of 9 unelected Judges. The "settled law" of row v wade has been overturned by a majority portion of the court that was nominated and placed by one overwhelmingly unpopular Republican president who lost the popular vote in his "election" This supreme court and it's opinions are not Democratic, it's not a representation of the United states, it's not a representation of the opinions and wishes of a majority of the people or the constitutionality of anything. It's a Representation of the Religious, The Federalist Society, and the Republican Party...that's all this decision and this Court represent.
  15. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/atheist/views-about-abortion/ https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/atheist/views-about-abortion/ About 11% of Atheists are against Abortion. yes, they exist, but they aren't statistically relevant when we're talking about nationwide attempts to make abortion illegal. The Anti-Abortion movement in America is overwhelmingly a religious movement led by people who oppose Abortion based on religious and biblical grounds. 53% of people who are absolutely certain of their belief in God oppose Abortion 32% of people who are fairly certain about their belief in God oppose Abortion 20% of people who are not very certain about their belief in God oppose Abortion 17% of people who are not sure if they believe in God oppose abortion. 11% of people who do not Believe in God at all oppose abortion 52% of people who oppose Abortion say they look to the Bible over philosophy, science, or reason for their opinions on what is right and wrong.
  16. The dissent is spicy ... ... The minority dissent making it clear that the decision today on Rowe has nothing to do with constitutional law, and EVERYTHING to do with the majority of the court being picked for the express purpose of doing what is now happening.
  17. A raped woman will just be shunned and blamed for having sex outside of marriage and for putting herself in the situation to be raped to begin with.
  18. Alito's opinion: Thomas's concurrence: Alito acts all offended that anyone would have the audacity to suggest that they're also looking at contraception and gay marriage, only for Thomas to jump in and helpfully point out that they're definitely looking at those too. Lol...these Republican Judges can't even get their own messaging straight. I guess ole Thomas didn't get the memo that they weren't supposed to let the cat out of the bag on all that just yet.
  19. We need some Supreme Court reform immediately. -lifetime appointments are dumb -Allowing wildly unpopular Presidents who lose the popular vote in their elections being able to nominate 1/3 of the court and affect the country for decades is dumb. The legitimacy and respect of our supreme Court is crumbling. It's effectively an arm of the Republican Party at this point. A lot of young high school girls in Red states are going to get alcohol poisonings from trying to drink their fetus to death.
  20. Looking forward to seeing JHS updated in the new game hopefully coming out next year.
  21. 11 Democrats objected to the certification of the 2016 Election. And these were all house members who couldn't even find a Senate Democrat willing to sign on to their objections for a congressional vote. 147 Republican's objected to the certification of the 2020 election. And you're justification is exactly what Trumps plan was. If he can find enough votes to not have the election certified then it must be legal. Who's gonna stop him? Certainly wouldn't be the Republican Supreme Court led by Clarence Thomas and his Qanon MAGA wife.
  22. https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/broken-arrow-open-carry-incident-raises-law-enforcement-questions/article_a5f4a2d8-edb3-11ec-806d-bb938b4a6b13.html
  23. If believing that the Republican Party should have to earn it's governmental power through popular support and good policy is "elitist" then sure...I guess I'm elitist.
  • Create New...