electoral college

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2810053
Since I just stated I agreed with the current law.... No.
So basically you are for absolving people of their responsibilities based off of choices they make as an adult. See this is how I see it. And far to much in this country do we look to free a burden from those that have made poor decisions as adults....thus teaching there are no consequences. Actions such as these do not make a society better but ultimately turn society into people that shirk responsibility.
Give you an example. The CEO's of AIG and other loan agency through poor decisions squandered their company's ability and capital thus effectively bankrupting them. Yet you and many other call for their acountability. Yet you will allow grown adults shirk their responsibilities regarding their actions and bear no accountability for having ---, which everyone knows can cause children.
This is my whole issue with this country, we have become a society that freely shirks our responsibility for our actions.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2810221
So basically you are for absolving people of their responsibilities based off of choices they make as an adult. See this is how I see it. And far to much in this country do we look to free a burden from those that have made poor decisions as adults....thus teaching there are no consequences. Actions such as these do not make a society better but ultimately turn society into people that shirk responsibility.
Give you an example. The CEO's of AIG and other loan agency through poor decisions squandered their company's ability and capital thus effectively bankrupting them. Yet you and many other call for their acountability. Yet you will allow grown adults shirk their responsibilities regarding their actions and bear no accountability for having ---, which everyone knows can cause children.
This is my whole issue with this country, we have become a society that freely shirks our responsibility for our actions.

The problem with your logic is you're wrapping totally seperate groups into one category. I honestly don't think there are as many 'convenience' abortions that you think there are. You say women who get an abortion are shirking their responsibility, but you have no idea what transpired for them to get pregnant, and what their emotional, physical, and financial situations are in order to raise an unwanted child. As you said, the only sure way to avoid pregnancy is abstinance. Unfortuantely, the days of courting a woman and only holding hands and getting an occassional kiss went away in the late 1900's (post WWII). Short of getting a tubal ligation or hysterectomy, NO birth control is 100%. So accidents happen. And you think they should change their lives for the next 18 years to support an 'accident'? And what of the women who are raped? Because they don't want a child that was conceived by force by a man that they will have nightmares about for the rest of their lives, and have to see that man in their child, aborting that child is shirking their responsibility? Sorry, but comparing them to a bunch of CEO's who knew what they were doing, not 'accidentally' bankrupting their businesses, is completely wrong.

 

[yerboy]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2809439
Would not also agree then abstinance should be taught as an option in schools as it is the only 100% way to avoid pregnancy?
Hey that even failed once! atleast according the Bible.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2810444
The problem with your logic is you're wrapping totally seperate groups into one category. I honestly don't think there are as many 'convenience' abortions that you think there are. You say women who get an abortion are shirking their responsibility, but you have no idea what transpired for them to get pregnant, and what their emotional, physical, and financial situations are in order to raise an unwanted child. As you said, the only sure way to avoid pregnancy is abstinance. Unfortuantely, the days of courting a woman and only holding hands and getting an occassional kiss went away in the late 1900's (post WWII). Short of getting a tubal ligation or hysterectomy, NO birth control is 100%. So accidents happen. And you think they should change their lives for the next 18 years to support an 'accident'? And what of the women who are raped? Because they don't want a child that was conceived by force by a man that they will have nightmares about for the rest of their lives, and have to see that man in their child, aborting that child is shirking their responsibility? Sorry, but comparing them to a bunch of CEO's who knew what they were doing, not 'accidentally' bankrupting their businesses, is completely wrong.
Of course there isn't any good #'s on this, but I've seen it polled as high as 60%...

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2810444
The problem with your logic is you're wrapping totally seperate groups into one category. I honestly don't think there are as many 'convenience' abortions that you think there are. You say women who get an abortion are shirking their responsibility, but you have no idea what transpired for them to get pregnant, and what their emotional, physical, and financial situations are in order to raise an unwanted child. As you said, the only sure way to avoid pregnancy is abstinance. Unfortuantely, the days of courting a woman and only holding hands and getting an occassional kiss went away in the late 1900's (post WWII). Short of getting a tubal ligation or hysterectomy, NO birth control is 100%. So accidents happen. And you think they should change their lives for the next 18 years to support an 'accident'? And what of the women who are raped? Because they don't want a child that was conceived by force by a man that they will have nightmares about for the rest of their lives, and have to see that man in their child, aborting that child is shirking their responsibility? Sorry, but comparing them to a bunch of CEO's who knew what they were doing, not 'accidentally' bankrupting their businesses, is completely wrong.

No it is is not different. at any point have you seen me mention that a raped women had a choice in that matter? Every ADULT knows their financial situation, their risk involved with the act that creates babies. Condoms, birth control, and the morning after pill are freely given at clinics. If a person knowingly lies down with another and then shirk their responsibility because they were lazy, then suffer the consequences. Yes you have to be lazy to get pregnant now days. Then they are no different than AIG CEOs.The raped victims are the 401K investors that held stock in AIG and fannie.
I am talking about knowingly conscentual ---. That is all I have ever been talking about, amongst adults. Which is a good portion of abortions. How many adults in College have abortions per year? Grown adults...

 

[reefreak29]

anyone who believes its ok to abort a child obviosly has never been involved in makeing that decision. If you ask any woman that has had an abortion there is deep remorse and regret in that decision , most times even being persuaded by the clinics to have one. the reprocusions are great and for obviose reason. Its murder

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefreak29
http:///forum/post/2810644
anyone who believes its ok to abort a child obviosly has never been involved in makeing that decision. If you ask any woman that has had an abortion there is deep remorse and regret in that decision , most times even being persuaded by the clinics to have one. the reprocusions are great and for obviose reason. Its murder
You're reading too much of that Pro Life material. I know several women who've had abortions. Remorse? Sure, it's a traumatic experience, and something they'll remember for the rest of their lives. However, none of them indicated they were coerced into their decision. They willingly agreed to have the procedure. To you it's murder. To them, it was a personal descision based on their current status. You say it's murder, I say it's not. You can agree to disagree. That's your option.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2810582
No it is is not different. at any point have you seen me mention that a raped women had a choice in that matter? Every ADULT knows their financial situation, their risk involved with the act that creates babies. Condoms, birth control, and the morning after pill are freely given at clinics. If a person knowingly lies down with another and then shirk their responsibility because they were lazy, then suffer the consequences. Yes you have to be lazy to get pregnant now days. Then they are no different than AIG CEOs.The raped victims are the 401K investors that held stock in AIG and fannie.
I am talking about knowingly conscentual ---. That is all I have ever been talking about, amongst adults. Which is a good portion of abortions. How many adults in College have abortions per year? Grown adults...
You have a warped sense of reality with your analogies. Like I've said repeatedly, BIRTH CONTROL IS NOT 100%. NONE OF IT IS. Accidents happen dude. That's just the way it is. Even with knowingly consentual intercourse, accidents happen. Those are the major types of abortions that occur. And for whatever reason, financial, psychological, emotional, pick one, women have a right to do what they please with their bodies. Regardless of what's inside them, they have a right to choose. Not you, not Uncle Sam, not the Pro Lifer who thinks abortion is murder. Why don't you go rail the women who dump their babies at a fire station, hospital, or church for 'shirking their responsibility'? No, that's doing the right thing for the child.
And don't even talk about the 'morning after pill'. Pro Lifers even consider that abortion. There are cases out there where women have gotten unwanted pregnancies because some radical pharmacist refused to dispense the pill due to 'personal and religious beliefs'. They do nothing to the idiot. Should take away their license.

 

[veni vidi vici]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2812668
You're reading too much of that Pro Life material. I know several women who've had abortions. Remorse? Sure, it's a traumatic experience, and something they'll remember for the rest of their lives. However, none of them indicated they were coerced into their decision. They willingly agreed to have the procedure. To you it's murder. To them, it was a personal decision based on their current status. You say it's murder, I say it's not. You can agree to disagree. That's your option.
Ask any murderer in prison if his/her crime was justifiable and see what kind of answers you get. I'm sure they will tell you " it was a personal decision based on their current status"

 

[veni vidi vici]

Back to the original question.I do not like the Electoral College Sytem.I would much rather have elections decided by the popular vote.Even if it meant my candidate looses. If im not mistaken Illinois has more republican voters than Democratic. I will have to verify that but either way my vote does not count in a presidential election .

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2812698
You have a warped sense of reality with your analogies. Like I've said repeatedly, BIRTH CONTROL IS NOT 100%. NONE OF IT IS. Accidents happen dude. That's just the way it is. Even with knowingly consentual intercourse, accidents happen. Those are the major types of abortions that occur. And for whatever reason, financial, psychological, emotional, pick one, women have a right to do what they please with their bodies. Regardless of what's inside them, they have a right to choose. Not you, not Uncle Sam, not the Pro Lifer who thinks abortion is murder. Why don't you go rail the women who dump their babies at a fire station, hospital, or church for 'shirking their responsibility'? No, that's doing the right thing for the child.
And don't even talk about the 'morning after pill'. Pro Lifers even consider that abortion. There are cases out there where women have gotten unwanted pregnancies because some radical pharmacist refused to dispense the pill due to 'personal and religious beliefs'. They do nothing to the idiot. Should take away their license.

Ok stop with the group mentalities. You (and the majority on here) lump people in a group. "pro-lifers, reppublicans, and what not". I am debating this with you on a personal level so stop with the Pro-lifers arguement. It doesn't fly. I am not one of those that wants to see abortion overturned with a passion. I would like to see the decisions back in the states hands where it belongs, but that is it.
I obviosly stated they could get the morning after pill so I am fine with that. Are you telling me they don't go get it because prolifers see it as a type of abortion? Yet they feel comfortable getting an abortion. My argument is laziness, yours is accidents. If you take the morning after pill there is no laziness. If the pharmacists refuses to give you, well golly gee Beaver, guess the other pharmacists in the city are not an option. No it is laziness pure and simple....
I don't have to rail on mothers that dump their children in public places for abandonment, When found they are prosecuted....under the law....The law takes care of that for me. The law does not take care of someone being lazy.
If women have a right to decide what to do with their bodies then so do I. And since my income DIRECTLY affects how my body is cared for then they have no right to demand child support. After all taking money from me affects my body to one degree or another...I after all have to work more now to maintain a basic living because she chose to keep the baby I didn't want. It is a two way street, but unfortunately, the woman has final say so, If I want to keep the baby she can say, to bad I am aborting it. If she wants to keep it and I want nothing to do with it, she can say to bad, pay me for 18 years buddy. It is as much an accident on my part so should I get a choice as well...after all the loss of money affects MY BODY!...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2813988
Ok stop with the group mentalities. You (and the majority on here) lump people in a group. "pro-lifers, reppublicans, and what not". I am debating this with you on a personal level so stop with the Pro-lifers arguement. It doesn't fly. I am not one of those that wants to see abortion overturned with a passion. I would like to see the decisions back in the states hands where it belongs, but that is it.
I obviosly stated they could get the morning after pill so I am fine with that. Are you telling me they don't go get it because prolifers see it as a type of abortion? Yet they feel comfortable getting an abortion. My argument is laziness, yours is accidents. If you take the morning after pill there is no laziness. If the pharmacists refuses to give you, well golly gee Beaver, guess the other pharmacists in the city are not an option. No it is laziness pure and simple....
I don't have to rail on mothers that dump their children in public places for abandonment, When found they are prosecuted....under the law....The law takes care of that for me. The law does not take care of someone being lazy.
If women have a right to decide what to do with their bodies then so do I. And since my income DIRECTLY affects how my body is cared for then they have no right to demand child support. After all taking money from me affects my body to one degree or another...I after all have to work more now to maintain a basic living because she chose to keep the baby I didn't want. It is a two way street, but unfortunately, the woman has final say so, If I want to keep the baby she can say, to bad I am aborting it. If she wants to keep it and I want nothing to do with it, she can say to bad, pay me for 18 years buddy. It is as much an accident on my part so should I get a choice as well...after all the loss of money affects MY BODY!...
I don't get the logic behind getting "the decisions back in the states hands where it belongs". Why does it matter who controls it if you're not completely against it? Put it back in the states hands, then you have all the moralistic bible thumper states abolishing it. Again, it'll come down to economics. Instead of them traveling outside the US, they have to go to a state that didn't abolish it to have the procedure performed.
Sorry, but your logic about the morning after pill is hypocritical. You see no problem with them taking it, but as stated, Pro Lifers see that still as abortion. So if you have no problem with that, then you should have no problems with first trimester abortions. Not to mention, you're adament about a majority of abortions being done out of convenience. Talk about convenience -- pop a pill and wait a day, and BOOM, not pregnant!
There have been many cases about pharmacists refusing to dispense the pill. I've wondered myself why they just didn't simply go to another

[hr]
. All of them in their town couldn't be so close-minded. I do know that if you don't take the pill with 24 hours, it's useless. So I guess having to find a physician to prescribe it may be costly (forced to go to the ER or specialized clinic = $$$$$), and may only leave you a few hours to get the presciption filled. Also, some women can't take the pill for medical reasons. The morning after pill wasn't meant to be a form of birth control.
You're stuck on the laziness issue. A couple of people I know WERE using protection. One girl had a IUD, and her boyfriend was using a condom, and she still got pregnant. Another was on the pill. Devine intervention? Who knows. But it wasn't due to being lazy. It was an accident plain and simple.
I think I see the root to your anomosity towards abortion based on your last comment. Sounds like the scenario you described happened to you, and you're still bitter about it. Don't know the outcome, but that debate has been done as well. Again, you want to control what a woman does with her body based on your rights. I've read where the rights went both ways depending on where the case was handled - the woman was granted rights to abort, and the 'father' won the rights to force the woman not to terminate the pregnancy. I don't agree with the latter, because if the woman doesn't want to spend 8 - 9 months going through a pregnancy, what stops her from doing something that will force a miscarriage? She get thrown in jail for it? What if she has complications during the pregnancy an dies? Can her family sue the father for forcing her to carry a baby she didn't want? That's the problem with allowing any form of government deciding the fate of a woman who gets pregnant who doesn't want the baby in the first place.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2814017
I think I see the root to your anomosity towards abortion based on your last comment. Sounds like the scenario you described happened to you, and you're still bitter about it. Don't know the outcome, but that debate has been done as well. Again, you want to control what a woman does with her body based on your rights. I've read where the rights went both ways depending on where the case was handled - the woman was granted rights to abort, and the 'father' won the rights to force the woman not to terminate the pregnancy. I don't agree with the latter, because if the woman doesn't want to spend 8 - 9 months going through a pregnancy, what stops her from doing something that will force a miscarriage? She get thrown in jail for it? What if she has complications during the pregnancy an dies? Can her family sue the father for forcing her to carry a baby she didn't want? That's the problem with allowing any form of government deciding the fate of a woman who gets pregnant who doesn't want the baby in the first place.
Two things, NEVER assume one status regarding real life. You will just end up looking like an ass. Many times I debate things from the opposite side of the fence because my view changed on something. However in this case, Myself and my first long term girlfriend had a baby at a young age. She originally wanted an abortion, I did not. When we separated years later after our child was born (which we both decided was best) I contacted the lawyers (not her) and had the paperwork drawn up for Child support and what not...so stop Assuming you know anything.
My point about child support is it is the same thing. The amount of money a person makes and how hard they have to work and for how long directlt affects the body. So, if it is the woman's body and her choice. Why can't the man sign a document giving up his parental rights and thus relieving himslf and his body from an obligation for 18 years...It is the same thing. That is my only point, I have no personal stake in this outcome and truly don't care what happens.
When "we" got pregnant, it was laziness....she forgot to take her pill for a few days and the condom ripped.....walla your accident.........however most accidents are caused by not paying attention or being lazy.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2814036
So, if it is the woman's body and her choice. Why can't the man sign a document giving up his parental rights and thus relieving himslf and his body from an obligation for 18 years...It is the same thing.
Ya know, thats a really good question....

 

[jennythebugg]

So, if it is the woman's body and her choice. Why can't the man sign a document giving up his parental rights and thus relieving himslf and his body from an obligation for 18 years.
QUOTE]
because of all the jackholes that will just go around knocking women up and signing the paper to be rid of the situation

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2814036
Two things, NEVER assume one status regarding real life. You will just end up looking like an ass. Many times I debate things from the opposite side of the fence because my view changed on something. However in this case, Myself and my first long term girlfriend had a baby at a young age. She originally wanted an abortion, I did not. When we separated years later after our child was born (which we both decided was best) I contacted the lawyers (not her) and had the paperwork drawn up for Child support and what not...so stop Assuming you know anything.
My point about child support is it is the same thing. The amount of money a person makes and how hard they have to work and for how long directlt affects the body. So, if it is the woman's body and her choice. Why can't the man sign a document giving up his parental rights and thus relieving himslf and his body from an obligation for 18 years...It is the same thing. That is my only point, I have no personal stake in this outcome and truly don't care what happens.
When "we" got pregnant, it was laziness....she forgot to take her pill for a few days and the condom ripped.....walla your accident.........however most accidents are caused by not paying attention or being lazy.
Sounds to me like I hit the nail on the head. What part did I miss?

Your 'incident' just proves my point that birth control is not 100% effective. You still seem to want ot blame it on laziness, yet the only reason your girlfriend truly got pregnant is because the condom broke. You and your girlfriend decided what was best for you. Congratulations. But that same scenario might not be the same for all couples. You want to force the issue and madate it so that no matter what the circumstances are, the woman should have the child regardless. That's where I disagree.
As far as financial responsibility, if both parties agree to have the baby, then BOTH parties are responsible for paying to raise the child. If the woman chooses to keep the baby, but the father doesn't want it, then I feel the courts should absolve all responsibilities of the father as far as financial obligations or parental obligations to the child. Meaning, the father is not required to pay anything to help raise the child, but he also loses all parental rights to that child. If it's reversed, and the mother doesn't want the child but the father does, then the father pays all medical expenses, and any other expenses the mother requires while pregnant. After the baby is born, the father is responsible in full of all financial obligations to the child, and the mother loses all parental rights to the child. These situations would occur only if either party takes the other to court to dispute an abortion.

 

[acrylics]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2814036
So, if it is the woman's body and her choice. Why can't the man sign a document giving up his parental rights and thus relieving himslf and his body from an obligation for 18 years.
Because from a legal perspective, the financial obligation is to the child and not the mother. The mother cannot "sign off" these obligations to the child. Generally, from a legal perspective, the checks go to "child, c/o mother"
The mother can refuse to use the money, give it back, destroy the checks, whatever, but the obligation is still to the child. This is the consensus of most court decisions I've heard or read on it.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2814175
Sounds to me like I hit the nail on the head. What part did I miss?

Your 'incident' just proves my point that birth control is not 100% effective. You still seem to want ot blame it on laziness, yet the only reason your girlfriend truly got pregnant is because the condom broke. .
You forget one key element. The m issing birth control

[hr]
which we both agreed were necesary. I agreed to where a condom as well to be sure. Her "laziness/fogetfulness" created the baby. we discussed these steps and precautions beforehand. Thus why we felt responsibility dictated we should have the child as we failed to be responsible to prevent the creation of my daughter.
Financially and from a "rights" perspective, you and I see eye to eye. Thus I have no more to debate on. If we are going to allow one to dissolve responsibility we should allow the other.

 

[oscardeuce]

Abortion issues were one of the driving forces removing the Hippocratic oath from Medical School Graduations.

 

[sickboy]

Ok, on abortion. How would you possibly ban abortion without allowing for a ra.pe victims and ra.pe in.cest cases??
In the first case, are we going to pay the ra.pe victim money, like a million bucks, to continue to carry the baby and put up with the ridicule she would receive from friends, co-workers, and maybe even family??? This woman did nothing, she was attacked! Plus, do we want rapist's children born? If you were to ra.pe a woman, there's gotta be something wrong in the head IMO. But, by paying the ra.pe victim, it would be the new form of welfare by people gaming the system.
Then in the in.cest case, do we want these children even born?? I know its horrible to say, but really, think about it for a minute.
So, I personally don't think I can tell someone what is right or wrong, but I would never have urged one of my girlfriends to get one (married now, and trying to have a kid so it really no longer applies to me), even if she didn't want it. But in these cases, how can you tell someone they can't?
Mods: sorry if I can't spell out the words, but I am not using them maliciously.