Politics The 3rd Presidential Debate - Turd Sandwich vs Giant Douche!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
dviss1 said:
It was superbly racist.
Click to expand...

Sigh you liberals are all the same. Don't like something you hear, you scream "racist". 'the fuck outta here with that shit.


moving on...

While I don't fully support Trumps stance on it, Hillary's stance on abortion alone is appalling, let alone the inherent corruption.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I agree! And you notice she refused to even discuss abortions in the 10th, 11th, and 12th months.
Click to expand...

LOL. Quit trollin'. ;)

My opinion, I am all about the right to choose when it comes down to certain circumstances, rape, incest, medical issues, etc. But when it comes to just using it as a form of birth control, no thanks. Hillary however takes it to the extreme and wants to allow this to happen regardless. I find it appalling. If people can't support a family stop having sex, be responsible for your actions instead of using 'abortion' as BC.
 
blue32 said:
LOL. Quit trollin'. ;)

My opinion, I am all about the right to choose when it comes down to certain circumstances, rape, incest, medical issues, etc. But when it comes to just using it as a form of birth control, no thanks. Hillary however takes it to the extreme and wants to allow this to happen regardless. I find it appalling. If people can't support a family stop having sex, be responsible for your actions instead of using 'abortion' as BC.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as an abortion in the 9th month so it can't be used as a form of birth control.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
There is no such thing as an abortion in the 9th month so it can't be used as a form of birth control.
Click to expand...

From what I understand at the moment, Federal law makes it legal to abort babies into the 9th month of a pregnancy, and there are some states that allow it until birth.

:dunno:

Edit: Also, I wasn't implying that people wait that long to abort. It's used quite often a lot earlier.
 
Last edited:
blue32 said:
From what I understand at the moment, Federal law makes it legal to abort babies into the 9th month of a pregnancy, and there are some states that allow it until birth.

:dunno:
Click to expand...

Again, that is not a thing. That is not an abortion. In the 9th month it's either inducing birth or performing a c-section.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Again, that is not a thing. That is not an abortion. In the 9th month it's either inducing birth or performing a c-section.
Click to expand...

People have done 36 week abortions before, for various reasons. Stop. The point he is trying to make is that she is for late-term abortion regardless of reason.
 
And Sly, I know you like to harp on semantics here, but the point is, she wants no rules when it comes to these things and Donald does want some rules.

I land in the middle..... and I find Hillary's stance terrible, as I believe there should be some regulation around it.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
At 36 weeks they medically terminate the pregnancy via inducing or c-section.
Click to expand...

Fine, if that's how you want to read it, then go ahead. It's on their "Abortion" page. So take it how you want to take it.

The point he is making and I am making still stand.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
At 36 weeks they medically terminate the pregnancy via inducing or c-section.
Click to expand...

Late Term Abortion, not inducing birth or c-section.

I'm sure it happens, rarely. If the woman goes to 9 months, she's almost certain to actually want the baby. I'm also sure that if/when it happens in month 9, it's due to some very serious complication that demands it.
 
I've got two beautiful grandsons who were both premies born at 32 weeks, so the concept of late term abortions resonates with me. I'm also a Christian who believes that life begins at conception. I've wrestled with the issue of abortion pretty long and hard. I don't claim to have the answer as to what should be a universal opinion on the subject and I'm well aware that a lot of well-meaning people on either side of the issue can have differing opinions that are just as valid as my own. All of that said, this is what I've come up with as my opinion:

1. We do not live in a theocracy. Regardless of what my religious views on the subject may be, I no more want the government to impose them by law any more than I would want the views of another religion imposed upon me if that religion happened to be the dominant one in our country.

2. Roe v. Wade is bullshit, IMHO, without any true basis in the Constitution, but it's been the accepted law of the land for more than 40 years. Despite the presidential election bluster that we have on the subject every four years, I seriously doubt that any Supreme Court is going to be willing to roll that decision back.

3. A "Woman's Right to Choose" mantra is equal bullshit, again IMHO, because really what you're saying is that each and every woman has the right to determine the point at which life begins. I can't think of any other legal definition that we've left so open-ended. I don't claim to be an attorney or have any real idea of how the courts handle this issue, but there have to be places where it's determined that an unborn child has some rights. When they do in-utero surgery on a baby, insurance companies must accept that the infant has the right to coverage. If a pregnant woman is stabbed, killing the unborn baby, what's the charge? Does it vary if she was on the way to the abortion clinic?

4. I would not support a law to outright ban abortion, but it seems to me that there should be a range of factors that are considered that increase the closer the unborn child is to its due date. As just an example: First three months - no restrictions. Second trimester - woman's health, baby's complications, rape, incest. Third trimester - woman's health, significant complications for the baby. That's just off the top of my head and would need to be thoroughly discussed before any law was adopted.

I know that whatever is proposed isn't going to sit well with some significant portion of society, but it seems to me that there has to be well-considered legal position on this that would allow us to move past this issue as a country. Yeah, I know, I'm dreaming.
 
e_blazer said:
I've got two beautiful grandsons who were both premies born at 32 weeks, so the concept of late term abortions resonates with me. I'm also a Christian who believes that life begins at conception. I've wrestled with the issue of abortion pretty long and hard. I don't claim to have the answer as to what should be a universal opinion on the subject and I'm well aware that a lot of well-meaning people on either side of the issue can have differing opinions that are just as valid as my own. All of that said, this is what I've come up with as my opinion:

1. We do not live in a theocracy. Regardless of what my religious views on the subject may be, I no more want the government to impose them by law any more than I would want the views of another religion imposed upon me if that religion happened to be the dominant one in our country.

2. Roe v. Wade is bullshit, IMHO, without any true basis in the Constitution, but it's been the accepted law of the land for more than 40 years. Despite the presidential election bluster that we have on the subject every four years, I seriously doubt that any Supreme Court is going to be willing to roll that decision back.

3. A "Woman's Right to Choose" mantra is equal bullshit, again IMHO, because really what you're saying is that each and every woman has the right to determine the point at which life begins. I can't think of any other legal definition that we've left so open-ended. I don't claim to be an attorney or have any real idea of how the courts handle this issue, but there have to be places where it's determined that an unborn child has some rights. When they do in-utero surgery on a baby, insurance companies must accept that the infant has the right to coverage. If a pregnant woman is stabbed, killing the unborn baby, what's the charge? Does it vary if she was on the way to the abortion clinic?

4. I would not support a law to outright ban abortion, but it seems to me that there should be a range of factors that are considered that increase the closer the unborn child is to its due date. As just an example: First three months - no restrictions. Second trimester - woman's health, baby's complications, rape, incest. Third trimester - woman's health, significant complications for the baby. That's just off the top of my head and would need to be thoroughly discussed before any law was adopted.

I know that whatever is proposed isn't going to sit well with some significant portion of society, but it seems to me that there has to be well-considered legal position on this that would allow us to move past this issue as a country. Yeah, I know, I'm dreaming.
Click to expand...

People have a right to control their bodies - what they eat, what medical procedures they're willing to undergo, what medicines they'll take, and even what ideas are acceptable. This is most definitely a constitutional right to privacy. In this sense, Roe is well founded.

The woman, and only the woman (with consultation from a doctor), has the right to choose. Each and every woman has the right to not share her body with even another human. It's her body.

The proposals you suggest for abortion law is already the law.

Roe says 1st trimester is the woman's choice, 2nd trimester the state can regulate (but not outlaw) abortions, 3rd trimester the state can outlaw abortions.
 
Denny Crane said:
People have a right to control their bodies - what they eat, what medical procedures they're willing to undergo, what medicines they'll take, and even what ideas are acceptable. This is most definitely a constitutional right to privacy. In this sense, Roe is well founded.

The woman, and only the woman (with consultation from a doctor), has the right to choose. Each and every woman has the right to not share her body with even another human. It's her body.

The proposals you suggest for abortion law is already the law.

Roe says 1st trimester is the woman's choice, 2nd trimester the state can regulate (but not outlaw) abortions, 3rd trimester the state can outlaw abortions.
Click to expand...

The proposals I suggested are not the law throughout the country, they are simply what is allowed by Roe. What is allowed varies significantly from state to state:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/18/us/politics/abortion-restrictions.html?_r=0

Note that good old blue Oregon is one of nine states with no protections for late-term pregnancies.
 
Last edited:
Geez I wish we could stop having this abortion debate every four years. Roe vs Wade is rediculous just as e-blazer says, no basis in this Constitution. It is also ridiculous to expect a national answer to the issue, except by the 10th amendment. Let the individual states set their standard and let people vote with their feet or use their feet to obtain a different result like travel to get the abortion.

Far too much energy and time has been wasted on this issue over the past 50 years. Enough! It should be a state issue and nothing to do with whom is President.
 
Awesome headline:

Ernst and Young struggle to account for Trump

TERRE HAUTE, Ind. — Republican elected officials like Sen. Joni Ernst and Rep. Todd Young are having a tough time explaining Donald Trump's statement that he may not accept the results of the presidential election.
Click to expand...

barfo
 
blue32 said:
Sigh you liberals are all the same. Don't like something you hear, you scream "racist". 'the fuck outta here with that shit.


moving on...

While I don't fully support Trumps stance on it, Hillary's stance on abortion alone is appalling, let alone the inherent corruption.
Click to expand...
I'm not a liberal and I immediately thought it was racist
 
Denny Crane said:
Roe says 1st trimester is the woman's choice, 2nd trimester the state can regulate (but not outlaw) abortions, 3rd trimester the state can outlaw abortions.
Click to expand...

Nothing in the Constitution even remotely comes close to granting the court the power to issue these edicts.
 
The Professional Fan said:
I'm not a liberal and I immediately thought it was racist
Click to expand...

Why? He used a Spanish word (for man) in referencing the illegal aliens that pour in from Mexico that cause crime. What he said was true.


Do you get pissed when people end emails with "gracias" after they wrote English through the entire thing?
 
riverman said:
That's going to go over big....hear that folks....sex requires money!
Click to expand...

River come on. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know having unprotected sex can lead to unexpected pregnancy. The point I was making is that, either abstain, or use proper birth control, aside from abortion.

How people can so eagerly accept taking another person's life is nuts....
 
B_wg024VEAA4yDA.jpg
 
MarAzul said:
Nothing in the Constitution even remotely comes close to granting the court the power to issue these edicts.
Click to expand...

Sure it does.

14th amendment, section 1:

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...​

The woman's LIBERTY is the question that is resolved.

The 4th also suggests a right to privacy:

...to be secure in their persons...​
 
blue32 said:
River come on. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know having unprotected sex can lead to unexpected pregnancy. The point I was making is that, either abstain, or use proper birth control, aside from abortion.

How people can so eagerly accept taking another person's life is nuts....
Click to expand...
Not all people define life the same....or the taking of it but I respect your choices..do what gives you great joy but don't dictate what others justify as necessary...we're not an endangered species ....then there's the death penalty..taking people's life...then war....taking people's lives is not confined to abortion. I've never heard of any woman aborting a fully formed child....I've never met one who would risk an abortion past 3 months. How many sperm cells have you left to die in a tissue? Is that life? I'm completely pro choice and in 3 decades of marriage...had one child. I don't think people should have 8 babies but they are free to do so even if I choose not to
I'm very happy to live where there are these options and freedoms
 
The cops take peoples' lives. Those who argue against "taking a life" tend to defend it when cops do it.

Soldiers take peoples' lives. It's perfectly legal.

People kill in self defense. Or are allowed to be hunted in Florida (stand your ground). Those who argue against "taking a life" defended taking a life then.

Even if you concede that a fetus is a human being, this is a situation where taking the life is just as acceptable. The fetus has NO RIGHT to the woman's body without her permission.
 
Denny Crane said:
Even if you concede that a fetus is a human being, this is a situation where taking the life is just as acceptable. The fetus has NO RIGHT to the woman's body without her permission.
Click to expand...

And you say this based on what legal precept? If you concede that a fetus is a human being then you have a problem with a law that allows for depriving a person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law... A generic law allowing for abortions wouldn't constitute due process for each individual fetus.

I hate that this is an issue where people try to lawyer up to support their viewpoint. I'd much prefer that the issue be dealt with directly through legislative process to come to a standard that the majority of Americans support and then people just deal with the adopted law.
 
Denny Crane said:
Sure it does.

14th amendment, section 1:

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...​

The woman's LIBERTY is the question that is resolved.

The 4th also suggests a right to privacy:

...to be secure in their persons...​
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, we have heard these before and I am not about to discuss the meaning of liberty or the stretching of the meaning. But tell us how you derive the court dictating the text of a law.
Denny Crane said:
1st trimester is the woman's choice, 2nd trimester the state can regulate (but not outlaw) abortions, 3rd trimester the state can outlaw abortions.
Click to expand...

You know, which trimester is for this or that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top