StrangeSox

Wallet>children

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 03:04 PM) I am advocating for me to not have to pay for your mistakes. If I chose to help and donate to some charities that do this, that is all good. When you force the charity thru taxation, that is theft. You are advocating for the needless suffering of children who have made no mistakes and are not at fault for their situation.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 03:02 PM) And whose fault would that be? I didn't knock them up, I am not denying them an abortion if they want to pay for one. So why do you keep trying to make it my responsibility? It's certainly not the child's fault. Why are you advocating for the needless suffering of children?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 02:56 PM) Why is that any more awful than the abortion itself? Do you not see a difference between forced sterilization and voluntarily terminating a pregnancy? What do you think your proposal would actually accomplish other than shaming women who get abortions?

That's a spectacularly awful idea, but I'll just note again that the government explicitly does not fund abortions.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 02:36 PM) Well that needs to be fixed. The end game of what you're advocating is children needlessly suffering.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) Not really a fan of Hilary Clinton or Martin O'Malley. Jim Webb is awful. I think Bernie Sanders is the only other one running. He would be by far the best candidate running, but he will never raise the money that anyone else does. basically this but Sanders is struggling to broaden his appeal beyond his economic message

The Jade Helm Military Takeover of the United States paranoia has ramped up to plots to blow up soldiers and shots reportedly fired at training areas.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 08:00 PM) Morals? Principles? Slavery is pretty cost effective, but, you know, it's wrong. But Alpha appeared to be saying that he only opposed it on the grounds of taxpayer funding (which, per the Hyde amendment, is not actually allowed with any federal funds).

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 5, 2015 -> 08:04 AM) A lot of those numbers seem far too low to me. Something odd there. Everyone but Rubio, Sanders and Walker are millionaires and most are multi-millionaires. Federal politicians aren't paupers, but they don't make huge amounts of money either and some of these guys are still relatively young. Walker reportedly has something like $50k in credit card debt and another $100k in student loan debt for his children. The only two that really surprise me are Chafee (born into a ton of wealth, I guess?) and Huckabee (would have thought a few million more given his heavy media presence over the last 8 or so years). I think the numbers come from their legally required campaign disclosure forms.

Lol this team, top to bottom

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 04:43 PM) No, that is where the personal responsibility part comes in. Why is it society's duty to pay for your child? That is where a huge disconnect is here. Society shouldn't have to pay either way for your 'decision'. Keep it or not, you pay for it. Why should the child bear the burden? If life is really this precious gift when it's inside the womb, why does it suddenly become worthless once the child is born? This is not true. The ever-increasing restrictions and regulations on abortion service providers in many states that essentially ban abortions from those states are not about tax-payer funding. The continual push to get Roe v. Wade overturned and to test Casey's "undue burden" limit with every conceivable burden is not about government funding. The protesters routinely picketing the clinic near my house are not picketing because of government funding. For federal funding, the Hyde amendment explicitly bars using any of the funds for abortion services.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 04:40 PM) I can put a real value to the emotional distress that carrying something that came from such a traumatic experience which was completely out of such parties control. Reality is the fetus is going to live inside that person for 9 months and be a constant reminder of an extremely traumatic experience. I wasn't being a smartass and I appreciate that response.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 04:36 PM) If a human life is so important to them they should have no problem paying extremely high taxes to pay to help everyone else. It cant be both ways, you cant argue to cut social services for people who are alive and at the same time argue that unborn lives are so important. Chisoxfn isn't one of them, but there's a strong overlap between people who strongly oppose abortion and also oppose good, useful sexual education for teenagers and widely available reproductive health services/information including contraceptives. Defunding Planned Parenthood would virtually guarantee that the number of unwanted pregnancies would increase.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 04:30 PM) No offense, but I don't f***ing care. We are talking about people. While something could happen to those fetuses naturally that prevents them from being born, the reality is most of them are real lives. The sad part is the people in this situation in the first place and most of them are probably desperate and the mistake is going to change their life and potentially ruin it. I understand those things, but at the same time, the baby is a person as far as I'm concerned. Not going to debate, you either feel that way or you don't, but since I do, I'm not going to throw out some whacky argument around cost / finances. We are talking people's lives. It is why I have actually supported many of the concepts behind Obamacare because I think healthcare is a right, not a privilege. I think a lot of people fail to recognize and remember that fundamental difference in philosophy and I'm glad you pointed it out. Could you (or anyone else who opposes abortion generally except rape/incest/woman's health) explain how you can square those views, though? If the fetus is a person, it's still a person regardless of how the woman got pregnant. What makes it okay to abort that fetus but not one because the woman just doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 04:16 PM) It makes me sick to see how high that abortion number is. Someone might go, well our population is huge so relative, but man, that is 327,000 lives. Okay...I am probably assuming high since some won't end up going full term and miscarriage, but even then, you are talking about 300,000 lives. I won't force the hand of other people and what they should do, I just wish 327,000 people weren't in a position that they were doing that. And lets be honest...number probably isn't 327,000 as I'd presume their are some repeaters on that list (sadly). Continuing to fund reproductive health services like Planned Parenthood (along with solid sex ed) goes a long way towards reducing the number of desired abortions.

Presidential candidates' net worth, data from here trump 10B fiorina 59M chafee 50M clinton 21.5M bush 20.5M carson 10M santorum 5M huckabee 5M webb 4.6M christie 4M cruz 3.1M perry 3M jindal 2.7M kasich 2.5M paul 1.3M graham 1M rubio 443k sanders 330k walker -71k (???)

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 03:49 PM) So what do they do there that can't be done elsewhere thanks to Obamacare? "Obamacare" is not a healthcare services provider. You still need doctors and medical facilities to administer healthcare. I'm not sure if Jake means that "one visit/panel" counts as one service or if a 5-STD panel in a single visit would count as 5 services, but either way, those numbers and their other services still dwarf abortions.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 03:48 PM) I can see the link, but as is often the case here at work, it doesn't always go to the links. So yeah, I checked it out as well as you checked the unedited videos. This argument doesn't make any sense, either. I have not watched the full, unedited videos, but a lot of people have, and they have reported the various ways the edited versions are heavily misleading. They and others have also pointed out that there is zero wrong-doing shown in the videos, even if what they are discussing sounds unpleasant or 'gross' to many people. I'm sure the process to harvest organs from an organ donor isn't very pleasant sounding either and hospitals do recoup costs there as well, but that doesn't mean we should oppose organ donation. That's not similar to you balking at a simple factual claim, linking to The Federalist saying that they don't offer mammogram services (which I didn't claim they did), balking when both Balta and I provided with links to the information indicating there services and then trying to turn this string of bad-faith arguments back on me.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 03:31 PM) O'Malley, quoting a press release, from PP, on Politifact. Get me a CBO link or something. I linked you to PP's annual report. Politifact also contains a link to that same report, and they even do you the favor of pulling out the numbers from the report for analysis. Why do you think the Congressional Budget Office would be documenting the different services provided by Planned Parenthood?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 02:55 PM) A judge that is a major Obama supported and bundler, of course. No bias there, either. All liberals should recuse themselves from all remotely political issues that come before the court.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 03:05 PM) Really? Got a link for that? What else do they do, mammograms? because according to this, they don't operate ANY mammogram facilities. http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/03/guess-...arenthood-runs/ I'm sure an article that starts out with this is an honest, good-faith take on the situation: Even if they don't operate any "mammogram facilities," that doesn't say anything about their overall funding or service structure. I hope you realize that your argument there doesn't really say anything. They do perform breast exams and refer people to mammogram facilities if needed. If you want to know what services they provide and how they come to their 3% number, you can read through their annual report. You'll find that the majority of their services are for STD testing/treatment/prevention, contraception and pregnancy testing.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 02:54 PM) They are accused of selling body parts. They CLAIM they have permission ahead of time to sell for research, to 'recoup' their costs. However that remains to be seen, since the make profits in the multi millions. Abortions are something like 3% of their total business. For fetal tissue donations, they receive less than $100--about what it costs to process medical material in a safe, sterile and controlled manner. This is almost as bad as being duped by The Onion "abortion megaplex" articles. People have been making stuff up about Planned Parenthood (and other reproductive services providers) forever. Unsubstantiated accusations aren't worth anything. First, they release the heavily edited and misleading videos. That gets people all worked up, that's what gets the headlines. When people actually comb through the entire thing, it's apparent that the initial presentation was all a big lie, but that doesn't get the coverage and the circulation like the initial edits do, and it certainly doesn't stop Congressmen from embarrassing themselves by voting to remove funding from Planned Parenthood. It's like James O'Keefe all over again. PP still provides valuable services to millions of Americans annually.

There is no scandal. It's a dumb, heavily edited video.

QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Aug 4, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) Thanks Stannis.. I loved that line in the show