IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags abortion issues , abortion laws , Texas issues

Closed Thread
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:23 AM   #41
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 11,843
The question we should be asking, the question some people obviously want to avoid, is: What's the purpose of this legislation? What will it accomplish? A. Make abortion more affordable by limiting the number of clinics and thus gaining economies of scale? B. Make getting an abortion more difficult?

I think it's pretty clear the real purpose is B. The people hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation, do you think abortion should be legal? I agree: this is probably part of a political strategy whose goal is to eventually ban abortion altogether. I think it's foolish not to recognize that reality.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:31 AM   #42
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 30,760
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Libertarians have a strange idea of liberty.
It should be legal because the belief it is murder is based on the religious concept of ensoulment, which cannot be legislated to protect any more than any other religious belief.

Furthermore, even if God existed, God would be wrong, as He is an infinite dictator with no more right to force this idea on people than any mortal.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:36 AM   #43
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 11,843
It's clear the political forces aligned behind this legislation -- which requires abortion clinics to maintain surgical-style standards -- are anti-abortion.

This is from the Pro-Life Texas Facebook page:

Quote:
Don't think Planned Parenthood is taking their latest walloping in the courts lying down. They're out at the Capitol today rallying. They'll be out block walking and phone banking tomorrow. If conservatives sit out or take a win in November for granted then we can and will be saying Governor Davis. Get to work!
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:39 AM   #44
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
It should be legal because the belief it is murder is based on the religious concept of ensoulment, which cannot be legislated to protect any more than any other religious belief.

Furthermore, even if God existed, God would be wrong, as He is an infinite dictator with no more right to force this idea on people than any mortal.
I agree. So then why do so many self-described "libertarians" vote for and apologize for a party that is openly devoted to making all abortions illegal, even going so far as to advocate the hanging of the women who have them?

There's nothing in the Democratic Party's platform I find morally reprehensible. If there were, I wouldn't support them anymore.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 12:29 PM   #45
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
It's a great opportunity for abortion advocates to step in and offer rides and other resources. Then publicize what they are doing and why.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 02:55 PM   #46
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The question we should be asking, the question some people obviously want to avoid, is: What's the purpose of this legislation? What will it accomplish? A. Make abortion more affordable by limiting the number of clinics and thus gaining economies of scale? B. Make getting an abortion more difficult?

I think it's pretty clear the real purpose is B. The people hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation, do you think abortion should be legal? I agree: this is probably part of a political strategy whose goal is to eventually ban abortion altogether. I think it's foolish not to recognize that reality.

Surely you realize you've made the cardinal mistake of being rational and sensible in a political thread!? Don't you?
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 04:05 PM   #47
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The question we should be asking, the question some people obviously want to avoid, is: What's the purpose of this legislation? What will it accomplish? A. Make abortion more affordable by limiting the number of clinics and thus gaining economies of scale? B. Make getting an abortion more difficult?

I think it's pretty clear the real purpose is B. The people hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation, do you think abortion should be legal? I agree: this is probably part of a political strategy whose goal is to eventually ban abortion altogether. I think it's foolish not to recognize that reality.
A slight derail, but this is basically the same thing with voter ID. I'm not even against it so long as it's implemented after an election and assistance is given to ensure those who don't have an ID and have difficulty getting one get one.

However, it's fairly obvious that it's only being put in place to suppress votes for democrats. Same thing with the effort to reduce the timeframe in which one can vote.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 04:15 PM   #48
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,465
IMO: If they had an sense, people wouldn't choose to be born in Texas.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 06:18 PM   #49
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 54,327
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The question we should be asking, the question some people obviously want to avoid, is: What's the purpose of this legislation? What will it accomplish? A. Make abortion more affordable by limiting the number of clinics and thus gaining economies of scale? B. Make getting an abortion more difficult?

I think it's pretty clear the real purpose is B. The people hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation, do you think abortion should be legal? I agree: this is probably part of a political strategy whose goal is to eventually ban abortion altogether. I think it's foolish not to recognize that reality.
It's no mystery that lots of people in this country are not in favor of elective abortions. It's no mystery that the government of Texas would, most days of the week, prefer to restrict access to elective abortions to the uttermost limit permitted by the federal government and by the Supreme Court's interpretation of the constitution.

Nobody's hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation. There's just no ulterior motive. Nobody is trying to fool anybody about the purpose of this law.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 06:36 PM   #50
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,732
The arguments giving vague, handwaving support to the law in this thread are almost as disingenuous as the arguments the state's lawyers are putting forth.
Quote:
Attorneys for the state have denied that women would be burdened by fewer abortion facilities, saying nearly 9 in 10 Texas women would still live within 150 miles of a provider.
150 miles is a very long way for anyone without a solid car and/or without the ability to take time off work (assuming they have a job in the first place). Hell, it's been years since I went more than 100 miles away from my home.

Besides, one would think Republicans would line up against this law. It's unnecessary government regulation and it's anti-business.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 07:09 PM   #51
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,749
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's no mystery that lots of people in this country are not in favor of elective abortions. It's no mystery that the government of Texas would, most days of the week, prefer to restrict access to elective abortions to the uttermost limit permitted by the federal government and by the Supreme Court's interpretation of the constitution.

Nobody's hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation. There's just no ulterior motive. Nobody is trying to fool anybody about the purpose of this law.

Wait, what? Nobody? Perry and Abbott both have said that the law is only to protect women's health.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 07:28 PM   #52
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Besides, one would think Republicans would line up against this law. It's unnecessary government regulation and it's anti-business.
No, no, no! You must not have gotten Chapter 2 in the mail order "Convenient Dicta" course that Karl sent out. Unnecessary government regulation is when progressives use the Commerce Clause to stifle the freedom of speech of anti-abortion bullies. Necessary government regulation is when a local government steps in to protect our God-Given Right to wield weapons in a Chuck E. Cheese's.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 08:18 PM   #53
bynmdsue
Graduate Poster
 
bynmdsue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,892
Kermit Gosnell had a flea infested cat wandering his clinic leaving its feces on the floor. Sure that was the least of his crimes but wouldn't that appear to be perhaps symptomatic of the larger problems? People that don't care about cat **** probably don't care about basic sanitation or sterilization. Maintaining surgery-style standards might go a long way to cutting down on MRSA on any number of other infections that could occur. Or is the important thing to simply terminate the pregnancy and to Hell with the woman's health?
bynmdsue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 08:29 PM   #54
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
"Libertarians".

__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 08:39 PM   #55
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by bynmdsue View Post
Kermit Gosnell had a flea infested cat wandering his clinic leaving its feces on the floor. Sure that was the least of his crimes but wouldn't that appear to be perhaps symptomatic of the larger problems? People that don't care about cat **** probably don't care about basic sanitation or sterilization. Maintaining surgery-style standards might go a long way to cutting down on MRSA on any number of other infections that could occur. Or is the important thing to simply terminate the pregnancy and to Hell with the woman's health?
Well, from testimony we know that he had cats wandering around his "clinic" but did we call in the VP (veterinary police) to find out that it had fleas? Or is that hyperbole, 'cuz it sounds dirtier?
(ETA: No argument from this quarter that the place wasn't filthy and unsafe nor that Gosnell was anything less than a disgusting ********* and deserved to be buried under the jail.)

Gosnell was/is the poster boy for the RtL crowd. They had themselves an actual Satan and of course tried to use the miscreants mis-deeds as a way to assure that there would be more Kermit Gosnell's... greedy ************ who exploit desperate women. The pro-choice side looks at Gosnell and sees as horrible a monster as the purest-thinking God-fearing right-to-lifer. The right-to-lifer, though, doesn't see how the saddling of more and more bureaucratic hurdles onto the poor and desperate is going to inevitably create WTG(worse than Gosnell) scenarios.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

Last edited by Foolmewunz; 3rd October 2014 at 08:43 PM.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:14 PM   #56
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,057
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Well the conservatives won in Texas. Abortion is now banned in the state.
This...

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
The purpose of the law is to make it hard to access abortion, especially for those in the poor, rural areas. It's just another step towards the ban that Conservatives want.
...<> this.

Explain.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:19 PM   #57
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 54,327
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Wait, what? Nobody? Perry and Abbott both have said that the law is only to protect women's health. : confused :
Political rhetoric. I don't take it as a serious attempt to fool anyone--the same way I don't take the title of this thread as a serious attempt to fool anyone.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:22 PM   #58
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
This...



...<> this.

Explain.
Conservatives don't want to ban abortion???
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:29 PM   #59
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,057
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Conservatives don't want to ban abortion???
According to the OP, abortion was banned in TX. Then it wasn't. I was just asking for an explanation.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:36 PM   #60
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,749
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Political rhetoric. I don't take it as a serious attempt to fool anyone--the same way I don't take the title of this thread as a serious attempt to fool anyone.
Greg Abbott argued that 'political rhetoric' in court defending the law, at least when it was ruled against before the latest appeal.

I'd like to see the new ruling to see if it played a part in that decision as well. Maybe it seriously fooled an appeals court judge whether or not Abbott was serious in that line of argument.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 09:59 PM   #61
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 54,327
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Greg Abbott argued that 'political rhetoric' in court defending the law, at least when it was ruled against before the latest appeal.

I'd like to see the new ruling to see if it played a part in that decision as well. Maybe it seriously fooled an appeals court judge whether or not Abbott was serious in that line of argument.
It's not a matter of fooling the judge, it's a matter of demonstrating what the law allows. Nobody's fooling anybody when a criminal gets off on a technicality. Nobody was fooled when Capone got sent away for tax fraud instead of murder or racketeering.

"I'm against elective abortions. The law won't let me ban them outright, but it will let me restrict access by imposing strict health and safety requirements, so that's what I'm going to do."

"You're not fooling anyone! The truth is that you're against elective abortions!"

"What tipped you off? The part where I said I was against elective abortions?"

Last edited by theprestige; 3rd October 2014 at 10:00 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:28 PM   #62
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
According to the OP, abortion was banned in TX. Then it wasn't. I was just asking for an explanation.
Who cares? According to the OP, it just got much harder for women to exercise their freedom. Isn't that more important than scoring internet points for a self-described "conservative"?

Haha, just kidding.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2014, 10:43 PM   #63
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Elective abortions are legal in Texas, and there are several clinics in the state that offer the service.

Originally Posted by crescent View Post
So, if Texas only allowed guns to be purchased in 7 locations, that would be okay? After all, it wouldn't be a ban, so it should be fine, right?
Guns are a constitutional right. Liberty.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 04:49 AM   #64
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 35,610
God I'm about to hate myself for saying this.

I'm not stupid. I know full well this has nothing to do with any actual concern over the medical standards of these clinics. I know this is a well used legislative tactic that has been used in the past and will sadly probably be used in the future. I have zero doubts as to the real motivation of the people pushing this law forward. I harbor no illusions as to any hope that this law is honest in intent or will be implemented fairly.

That all being said... feet to the fire, truth or dare, warts and all honest I can't get that outraged over an abortion clinic being held to the same outpatient medical clinic standards as a place where you get liposuction or Lasik and by its letter, if not its meaning, I don't see this law doing anymore then that.

I won't lie my first reaction to a law requesting abortion clinics be held to medical clinic standards is "You mean they weren't already?"
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 06:16 AM   #65
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
That all being said... feet to the fire, truth or dare, warts and all honest I can't get that outraged over an abortion clinic being held to the same outpatient medical clinic standards as a place where you get liposuction or Lasik and by its letter, if not its meaning, I don't see this law doing anymore then that.
If this is true, and I don't know that it is, is there data showing such clinics closing? Is there data showing the mortality rate is higher or that people are harmed for lack of these regulations?

IMO: There should be a compelling interest on the part of the state to interfere in people's medical affairs. What is the claimed compelling interest and can that claim be supported?

Tu quoque is a bad basis for public policy.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 07:16 AM   #66
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,152
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
That all being said... feet to the fire, truth or dare, warts and all honest I can't get that outraged over an abortion clinic being held to the same outpatient medical clinic standards as a place where you get liposuction or Lasik and by its letter, if not its meaning, I don't see this law doing anymore then that.

I won't lie my first reaction to a law requesting abortion clinics be held to medical clinic standards is "You mean they weren't already?"
Can you point to the wording in this law that holds an abortion clinic and a colonoscopy clinic to exactly the same standards?

Also, did this law come about because the medical profession was concerned about the risk to patients or because Jesus told the legislature that the babies of rapists needed to be saved?

Last edited by Kestrel; 4th October 2014 at 07:25 AM.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 07:49 AM   #67
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,057
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Who cares? According to the OP, it just got much harder for women to exercise their freedom.
Which is not the same as "banned". One of these things is not like the other.

We'll consider the OP withdrawn.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Isn't that more important than scoring internet points for a self-described "conservative"?
I have no idea. You'd have to ask a "conservative".
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 07:57 AM   #68
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Which is not the same as "banned". One of these things is not like the other.

We'll consider the OP withdrawn.

I have no idea. You'd have to ask a "conservative".
You've claimed to be one on this forum. We'll consider that withdrawn.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:10 AM   #69
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 54,327
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
You've claimed to be one on this forum. We'll consider that withdrawn.
It's turtles point-scoring all the way down, then?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:29 AM   #70
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,213
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's turtles point-scoring all the way down, then?
It certainly seems so. Otherwise Unabogie's question would have been answered by now.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:35 AM   #71
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post

Nobody's hand waving away the notion that there is an ulterior motive behind this legislation. There's just no ulterior motive. Nobody is trying to fool anybody about the purpose of this law.
Funny because I've heard it from legislators, candidates, pundits, media, and gop supporters. Every time it's brought up in fact.


Your claim is absurd.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:36 AM   #72
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,213
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Funny because I've heard it from legislators, candidates, pundits, media, and gop supporters. Every time it's brought up in fact.


Your claim is absurd.
Oh, but you see, those don't count because you're not meant to take any of them seriously... or something.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:40 AM   #73
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 31,886
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Funny because I've heard it from legislators, candidates, pundits, media, and gop supporters. Every time it's brought up in fact.


Your claim is absurd.
he's admitting that even conservatives knows they are lying. any means to an end. at least he's honest about it I wonder if the honesty comes out in the voter ID threads as well.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.

Last edited by thaiboxerken; 4th October 2014 at 08:46 AM.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:53 AM   #74
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
he's admitting that even conservatives knows they are lying. any means to an end
I'm sure many of the legislators and pundits pushing the talking point do. I'm also sure many citizens believe it. I'd also bet some people pushing it have argued it so many times they now believe it themselves.

But the idea that no one believes it is absurd. He's basically claiming that all gop supporters are perfectly comfortable with their legislators/candidates pushing legislation based on lies. That they themselves know its a lie and repeat it and support it anyway.

On second thought I'll go with that. All GOP supporters are corrupt liars.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:58 AM   #75
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's turtles point-scoring all the way down, then?
I don't know. Isn't the point of the OP that Texas is passing laws that curtail freedoms? Shouldn't people at least try to address that point rather than picking at the wording?
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 08:59 AM   #76
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Republicans, the party of small govt.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 09:12 AM   #77
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
According to the OP, abortion was banned in TX. Then it wasn't. I was just asking for an explanation.
Yes, clearly the issue is merely one regarding the precision of language in hyperbolic statements, which is why you expressed equal dismay at this demonstrably untrue hyperbolic statement:
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Nobody is trying to fool anybody about the purpose of this law.

Nope, you're not trolling at all. Just here to keep everyone on the straight and narrow.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 09:37 AM   #78
Sherman Bay
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Nothing in Texas is "a bit of distance" from anything.
Nor is cheap public transportation from Panhandle to Gulf common, either.

I find it disingenuous of abortion opponents who claim that this law makes women safer. How safe are coat hangers and bleach douches?
Sherman Bay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 10:02 AM   #79
Damien Evans
Up The Irons
Tagger
 
Damien Evans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 34,458
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Nothing in Texas is "a bit of distance" from anything.
Oh please, it's not Western Australia or Siberia.
__________________
i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp.

Last edited by Damien Evans; 4th October 2014 at 10:05 AM.
Damien Evans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th October 2014, 10:20 AM   #80
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Originally Posted by RandFan View Post
Republicans, the party of small govt.
Your sarcasm is noted, and supported 100%.

Of all the things the government needs to get involved in, I question this being one of them. This is IMO bad law passing.

The energy spent on this, allegedly a health care issue, was not spent on a wide variety of other health care issues important to all citizens.

*shakes head*

Can't wait for The Hair to leave. Without him as the poster boy for this, I don't think the political momentum and support would have been there.
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.