See ya Planned Parenthood. Disgusting practices.

[MarAzul]

Vincent Black Lightning 1952. By the way.

 

[theprunetang]

Yep. That is a bad bitch.

 

[riverman]

I want a 500 cc British Enfield with a side car...my neighbor has one and I rented one in India...indestructible piece of metal

 

[MarAzul]

The English more often than not, leave clews that it's English. Silver Streak, Silver Cloud, Black Lightning. Names of stuff, you could never find of that colour. That's English! And God help yeah if you need to be the mechanic, the English will make it way more difficult than anybody else.

I checked into a hotel in the south of England, thatch roof and all. Lovely place but the Toilet didn't flush. The front desk said the maintenance man was out and wouldn't be in to fix it until tomorrow. Told the wife, and she just shook her head. So thought, you can do it!

Damn man! What a surprise when I lifted the top off the back tank of that English Crapper! Looked at that awhile and just put the top back on. We got a new room. That toilet was way more complicated than a Jaguar with triple updraft carbs with progressive linkage.

 

[riverman]

My main ride when I was in the Navy in 71...bought it new

 

[MarAzul]

My biking days, on the street. Dirt was a whole different game.

 

[Shaboid]

Girlfriend walks in the door.

Few minutes later...

Me: "Oh geez, there is a conversation about abortion on da forums. I'm not getting involved in this. It is too complicated of an issue for me to have a specific opinion on."

Three hours later...

Me: "I really didn't want to have this conversation."

 

[D-Rock]

In response do D-rock's question, rare, but happens. (The opposite is more likely, the man does not pay child support.)

If you don't want your partner to get pregnant, use a condom, have a vasectomy, explore alternate sexual practices besides heterosexual penis/vagina intercourse.

Child support is for the child, not the parent. It's recognition the child has no control over his/her birth, regardless of circumstances. Taking away child support punishes the child.

If you're saying more likely that the man simply won't pay, then I agree. If you're saying it's more likely that he won't be required to pay, then I disagree.

Isn't this second paragraph a double standard again? The onus is on the guy only? One side, Girl gets pregnant, doesn't want the responsibility for the baby, she gets an abortion regardless of what guy wants. The other side, girl gets pregnant, doesn't want to have the abortion, guy does, but guy is still required to take responsibility for the child. If a girl doesn't want to get pregnant, use a condom, have a hysterectomy, explore alternate sexual practices besides heterosexual penis/vagina intercourse. I'll presume that you agree that it "takes two to tango." So why is it acceptable for the consequences of "the tango" be avoided by the woman unilaterally, but the man has no ability to avoid the consequences if the woman decides to accept the consequences? Does that mean the man's choice was made at the moment of intercourse, but the women has roughly 5 months (or whatever the cut off date for abortion is) to make her choice? Seems like a pretty one sided arrangement.

I definitely agree that it's the child that's punished in that instance. And I think men should be responsible for their children, even in the very sad situations when they want nothing to do with them. It's just strange to me that society considers a women to be held hostage by a pregnancy and that she be allowed, and, in many instances, encouraged to avoid that imprisionment, but the man has no choice in the decision but is still "held hostage" by child support and the other things that go into fathering an unwanted child. Is abortion, then, a kindness to an unwanted fetus, like forcing child support is to a born child? The child/fetus/embryo has no control over it's existence, regardless of circumstances, but it's existence is still being snuffed out.

I hope I'm not coming across as being flippant. It just seems some of the pro choice arguments create a double standard when they are claiming to create gender equality (men don't have to deal with the consequences of sex (i.e. Pregnancy), so women need to ability to choose to be on equal footing) and what is and isn't a punishment to a fetus/child (abortion vs. child support).

 

[rasheedfan2005]

Im rubber you're glue...

 

[rasheedfan2005]

For all my libs

 

[blue32]

Sooooooooooooooooo... Back to the original point of the post..... before this thing went down like Monica in the Oval.

How do you guys feel about the Government funding a program that is allegedly mishandling millions of taxpayer dollars and getting involved in the baby body part sale game, along with the rest of the reports findings?

If found guilty do you still support their cause? Do you want more oversight but to keep them running? Maybe transition the services to alternative sources and shut it down? Shut it down for good? etc. etc.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Bikes are cool, but I feel safer in a car.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sooooooooooooooooo... Back to the original point of the post..... before this thing went down like Monica in the Oval.

How do you guys feel about the Government funding a program that is allegedly mishandling millions of taxpayer dollars and getting involved in the baby body part sale game, along with the rest of the reports findings?

If found guilty do you still support their cause? Do you want more oversight but to keep them running? Maybe transition the services to alternative sources and shut it down? Shut it down for good? etc. etc.

That report is intentionally misreporting what happens during the processing of human tissue. I asked you a few different times just to look at blood and how it's processed. Blood is donated but is charged for when it is given to the the hospital and charged for when it is given to the patient. None of that is illegal. When human or in this case baby tissue is donated it must be properly processed. Temperatures, cleanliness, etc. strict regulations must be followed. It's not like they're selling dead babies in garbage bags out the back of the clinic. PP is allowed to charge for that. There is a cost to them in properly handling that. The company that receives these tissues have even further processing and testing to do. Blood typing, drug and disease testing, genetic testing, etc. all very expensive to and all required. Once again, that costs money and they have to charge for that. So the price of that tissue when sold is higher than what they paid PP for.

It's just like McDonald's, what they pay for beef and what they sell it for are very different. The reasons for that are common sense.

About the mishandling of funds. If happening it has to stop. Refunds and/or fines are the appropriate "punishment". But again, mishandling of funds is not uncommon in healthcare. Google it. You'll find a ton of non PP organizations that have fucked up. But no one is talking about shutting them down and forcing their services to be offered by others.

PP is not the only one offering abortions. They are not doing 100% of the abortions in the country. Lots of other large healthcare organizations offer and provide them. Yet none are being threatened with the loss of federal funding. Why?

 

[crandc]

Sooooooooooooooooo... Back to the original point of the post..... before this thing went down like Monica in the Oval.

How do you guys feel about the Government funding a program that is allegedly mishandling millions of taxpayer dollars and getting involved in the baby body part sale game, along with the rest of the reports findings?

If found guilty do you still support their cause? Do you want more oversight but to keep them running? Maybe transition the services to alternative sources and shut it down? Shut it down for good? etc. etc.

As Planned Parenthood has been repeatedly investigated by states and by Congress, in states and Congressional committees openly hostile to PP, and no misuse of funds or legal violations or selling baby body parts or anything else has been discovered, it's a false question. There are no "alternative sources", and why throw away something that works? It's sort of like the Obamacare replacement we're still waiting for.

 

[crandc]

No double standard, D Rock. I do think women need to prevent pregnancy, but if a man is absolutely determined no child and does not trust his partner, or wants to use double protection, he should. I mean, there are men who poke holes in condoms. There are women who sabotage their birth control. Not the most common situation but does happen. So best practice if you are not totally sure of your partner, protect yourself.

I absolutely do not agree that "abortion is murder". But consider the implications of saying it is. How many years imprisonment should a woman receive? 25? Life? Death penalty? In some Latin American countries women are serving 20, 30, even 40 years for abortion. Many of them insist it was a miscarriage but the burden of proof is on the woman; if she can't prove it happened naturally, she's presumed guilty. The person who drives a woman to an appointment becomes accessory to murder, how many years imprisonment should they receive? You can close all clinics but you can't confiscate knitting needles, coat hangers, the acids and bleaches women squirted into their uteri, the herbs that in massive doses cause uterine contractions and hemorrhage. You won't be ending abortion, just safe abortion.

How would you be able to tell if a woman self-aborts at home? In Romania under Ceaucescu every woman had to undergo mandatory monthly pelvic exams. If she showed signs of recently terminated pregnancy she was interrogated by police. Do you want that? Small government conservatives?

Ever hear of abortion tourism? It's exactly what it sounds like; women travel from countries where abortion is illegal to countries where it is legal Some countries set up roadblocks to try to catch these women when they return. If a woman fits the profile - young, made overnight trip, carrying sanitary pads - she is pulled aside for a forced pelvic exam. Do you want to build another wall to keep American women from traveling to Canada for legal abortions, or just have forced pelvics?

Since 1 in 3 American women have abortions, how would you pay for all the prisons? Trump and Congress have already announced another massive tax cut for the rich, and if there is anything more sacred than sperm, it's tax cuts for the rich. What programs would you cut/eliminate to build prisons for, say, a million new women each year, plus anyone who helped them?

It was just reported the abortion rate declined in the past few years in this country. Not because of the male legislators' manic glee passing hundreds of new vagina restrictions, but because there are fewer unwanted pregnancies. Mostly due to Affordable Care Act, which mandates that all insurance, not just that sold through ACA, cover contraceptives with no co-pay. While the nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Service, a male millionaire, claims he never knew of a woman unable to afford birth control, in fact there are quite a few and cutting funds to Planned Parenthood made that worse, as they had to start charging for services they used to provide free. Even for women who had employer paid health insurance, many plans covered prescriptions and devices but explicitly excluded birth control, despite the fact that 98% of heterosexually active American women use birth control at some point in their lives, including conservative women. The Hobby Lobby decision, that said secular for-profit businesses could exclude birth control if Jesus said so, was a blow to both women's rights and religious freedom, but fact is for most corporations their god is profit. Unpregnant employees cost less than pregnant ones. Ending the Affordable Care Act could cost as many as 65 million American women their access to birth control.And increase the demand for abortion.

That's a hell of a lot of women to lock up. I guess the "lock her up" chants at Trump rallies did not just apply to Hillary Clinton.

 

[oldfisherman]

Crandc, I appreciate the time and effort you put into explaining your position. To be clear, I am very pro-birth control, and very anti-abortion. The topic of who should pay for each is another layer that complicates the 2 controversial subjects.

I believe we are entering a transition period on both subjects. And I predict the answer will be found on the birth control side, by science. If we can find a good solution to the birth control issue, then abortion will be less of an issue.

 

[Denny Crane]

Abortion is certainly killing, but it's not murder.

There's absolutely nothing to discuss, on either side, if that's not agreed to.

There are many circumstances where killing is permissible. This just happens to be one of those.

 

[crandc]

Well, Denny, every cell is living, if you bleed, you are killing blood cells. And don't mention what men do....

In an ideal world, birth control would be always available and never fail. Every person would have comprehensive sex education. Every sexual encounter would be fully consensual and all parties agree on expectations. All marriages, same sex or opposite sex, would be based on mutual love, respect, and equality. All parents would unconditionally love their children, talk frankly with them about sex, always be willing to listen without condemning and help when needed.

The world is not perfect. Until it is abortion access is needed. Because legal or not women will have abortions. Only question, will it be a qualified medical practitioner or a knitting needle?

 

[Denny Crane]

Well, Denny, every cell is living, if you bleed, you are killing blood cells. And don't mention what men do....

In an ideal world, birth control would be always available and never fail. Every person would have comprehensive sex education. Every sexual encounter would be fully consensual and all parties agree on expectations. All marriages, same sex or opposite sex, would be based on mutual love, respect, and equality. All parents would unconditionally love their children, talk frankly with them about sex, always be willing to listen without condemning and help when needed.

The world is not perfect. Until it is abortion access is needed. Because legal or not women will have abortions. Only question, will it be a qualified medical practitioner or a knitting needle?

The fetus has it's own unique DNA.

Scientifically, I'd call that "life."

To me the issue is a legal one. Who has the right to the woman's body, the fetus or the woman. It's a slam dunk - the woman.

 

[Nate]

Abortion is necessary, I encourage it to a lot of people.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

The fetus has it's own unique DNA.

Not if they are monozygotic twins.

 

[Denny Crane]

Not if they are monozygotic twins.

The DNA is distinct from either parent.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

The DNA is distinct from either parent.

You didn't say distinct, you said unique.

 

[Denny Crane]

You didn't say distinct, you said unique.

Whatever. I also said fetus, not plural.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Whatever. I also said fetus, not plural.

I'm fine with you wanting to give special snowflake status to the unborn.

 

[Denny Crane]

I've never used the term snowflake.

But sure.

The reasoning stands, regardless. Based in science. Religion has no place in it.

 

[MarAzul]

I absolutely do not agree that "abortion is murder".

Is it Homicide?

 

[MarAzul]

I've never used the term snowflake.

Ha! I'm still trying to figure out where it fits.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Ha! I'm still trying to figure out where it fits.

I consider you a special snowflake.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Whatever. I also said fetus, not plural.

What is the plural of fetus? Is it Festus? Just trying to figure out whether Festus Ezili is somehow connected to all of this.