quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

I'm not in commerce, or politics... I have no business in Canada, why should I waste my valuable time learning about Canadian politics?

More importantly, why the fuck do you? Are you going to immigrate, or illegally vote there? Why is Canada's business your business?

Well, for starters, they are our largest trading partner, and impact us quite a bit. We also share the world's longest border with them, as well as jointly controlling the Great Lakes, 20% of the world's fresh water. The majority of New York's electricity comes from Canadian hydropower.

I'm a one-person free-lance operation, and even small time do business in Canada, the UK, Italy, and Japan.

It's the 21st century, rob.

That still doesn't explain why I should be interested in Canadian politicians, I don't live in NY, I don't do business in Canada. And in case you skipped geography, Indiana doesn't share a border with Canada... But let me set your mind at ease, if Canadian boaters boat across Lake Huron, and down Lake Michigan to break the law in Indiana, or any of those ne'er do well snowbirds driving through the state, decide to rob a convenience store along the way... I'll do my best to bring them to justice... Until then, I couldn't care less about our neighbors to the north.

As far as trade, Canada accounts for 37% of Indiana's exports, but those are mostly automobiles and parts... I'm not in the automotive business Music, should I study the industry leaders too? How about the Mexican politicians, or the Brazilians, or Chinese trade partners too? Should I make the time to learn everything there is to know about all of Indiana's trade partners? Is Canada importing Law Enforcement Officers? Or American laws and nobody told me?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You can be as ignorant as you wish. Candidate George W. didn't see why he should be interested in Pakistan.

Washington D.C. doesn't share a border with Indiana either. Neither does California. Close your eyes--you might get news from there.

Mexico is far away. So stay out of immigration debates--why should you care? Or foreign affairs. Or the economy--the Bank of New York is why the fuck on the East Coast!

But for someone who doesn't and shouldn't care, you certainly have a lot to say.

Ill informed and mostly silly, but a lot.

So here---do something relevant to you:

http://www.in.gov/visitindiana/

quote:

What a stupid argument.

Tell me oh Master of all things, what is the point of electing representatives?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

What a stupid argument.

Tell me oh Master of all things, what is the point of electing representatives?

The point, O Evader of Anything Relevant, is that for someone proudly ill-informed, who hands this over to his elected officials (I'm glad you've come to understand government is good), you have a lot to say on matters you claim to not care about and on which you broadcast and stand behind your own professed ignorance.

When someone talks about trade policy with Mongolia, or the transit system in Utica, 40 minutes from here, I say nothing--because I don't know anything about those topics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Is rape not a weapon that an enemy might use against female military personnel? How can you on one hand fight for the right to be on the front lines, and on the other deny that capture and rape is possible?
Were you or your roommate conscripted, or did you volunteer for service?
Now that we established that military service is an all volunteer service, show me where the us Military has to provide abortion services. It was decided over twenty years ago, when women fought for equal rights in the military, that abortions in military hospitals, performed by military doctors were off the table.

Now shouldn't your ire be aimed at the DoD, and not the GOP? Why do women expect the military, or the government in general be responsible for abortions? especially since you volunteered to serve in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
And your point is WHAT exactly?? That people who are injured in the line of duty have no right to proper medical services from their government? So your argument is that a male soldier who is tortured or injured by the enemy cannot have his healthcare paid for and provided by the U.S. government because he volunteered to serve in the first place? So all those dying Americans on the battlefield. We just leave them there and don't pay for proper medical care and procedures to assist them when injured?

I am American and I am a woman and I have both female and male relatives who have served in the military or are currently serving. You do not know what you are talking about. AT ALL. Give it a rest.

Our military deserve appropriate and safe medical care. Period.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
And your point is WHAT exactly?? That people who are injured in the line of duty have no right to proper medical services from their government? So your argument is that a male soldier who is tortured or injured by the enemy cannot have his healthcare paid for and provided by the U.S. government because he volunteered to serve in the first place? So all those dying Americans on the battlefield. We just leave them there and don't pay for proper medical care and procedures to assist them when injured?

I am American and I am a woman and I have both female and male relatives who have served in the military or are currently serving. You do not know what you are talking about. AT ALL. Give it a rest.

Our military deserve appropriate and safe medical care. Period.

But they do have access to medical treatment, just not abortion. Do you understand why the military has that policy in place? Did you know that SOP is to remove any personnel who are raped from the area within 14 days of the incident, and sends them back to their families, so they don't have to face the choice of abortion alone? They implemented that policy so that the raped isn't pressured to rejoin the ranks within days of the procedure by their commanding officers and peers?

Do you really object to that policy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Women face abortion and even pregnancy alone in all kinds of situations. Spare me. But leaving that aside, let us return to the crux of the matter.

I know from my extended family that returning is not always a possibility. Are you kidding me? As of now, abortion is a legal procedure for Americans citizens. And abortion is a procedure that is time sensitive - waiting too long increases risks of complications.An American serving abroad is entitled to safe and proper medical care where ever they are serving. Anything else is a travesty.

What exactly is your expertise in any of this that you feel qualified to opine here? That you are American? Yes, well in AMERICA, abortion is LEGAL. I don't know what America you are talking about.

quote:

Sen. Shaheen’s amendment would have lifted the ban on military insurance coverage for victims of rape and incest that sought abortions. Past legislation had granted such coverage, but it was dropped back in 1984. The current law, enacted in 1996, keeps DoD medical personnel from performing abortions and another provision keeps Pentagon funds from covering the procedure except in cases where it threatens the life of the mother.

“This policy is fundamentally unfair to the more than 200,000 women serving in our military," Shaheen said this week.
"They are fighting to protect our rights, and they should have the same rights to reproductive health care as our civilian employees."

"I'm very disappointed that we will not have a chance this week to debate this critical issue," Shaheen tells Huffington Post,"but we'll keep fighting for it as long as we have to."

quote:

(a) Restriction on Use of Funds.— Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.
(b) Restriction on Use of Facilities.— No medical treatment facility or other facility of the Department of Defense may be used to perform an abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or in a case in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

subrob, the actual issue at hand is the following: if a woman serving abroad as a member of the U.S. military is raped, her military health plan will NOT provide for an abortion if she becomes pregnant. This is the current state of actual military policy.

If you feel the way you do, then why don't you petition Congress for a law that requires males who serve in the military to pay for their own healthcare as a result of injuries or conditions sustained while on duty?

It seems your main objection is that we should not as a society pay for the cost of treating those in the military for things they sustain as part of their active duty. Fine. Then come out and say that.

Again, in AMERICA, abortion is LEGAL. There is absolutely no valid reason for why an abortion due to rape should not be covered by military health plans for someone who sustained her injury during active duty. Why don't you go tell male soldiers they have to pay out of pocket to get a bullet removed? After all, why should we cover that? Why single out abortion as something that should not be covered?

quote:

(a) Restriction on Use of Funds.— Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.
(b) Restriction on Use of Facilities.— No medical treatment facility or other facility of the Department of Defense may be used to perform an abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or in a case in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

subrob, the actual issue at hand is the following: if a woman serving abroad as a member of the U.S. military is raped, her military health plan will NOT provide for an abortion if she becomes pregnant. This is the current state of actual military policy.

If you feel the way you do, then why don't you petition Congress for a law that requires males who serve in the military to pay for their own healthcare as a result of injuries or conditions sustained while on duty?

It seems your main objection is that we should not as a society pay for the cost of treating those in the military for things they sustain as part of their active duty. Fine. Then come out and say that.

Again, in AMERICA, abortion is LEGAL. There is absolutely no valid reason for why an abortion due to rape should not be covered by military health plans for someone who sustained her injury during active duty. Why don't you go tell male soldiers they have to pay out of pocket to get a bullet removed? After all, why should we cover that? Why single out abortion as something that should not be covered?

Got a citation for your claim, I posted the US code, do you have evidence that says http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/1093 is a lie?

Here is the jist of the code, in case you don't click links...

quote:

(a) Restriction on Use of Funds.— Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.
(b) Restriction on Use of Facilities.— No medical treatment facility or other facility of the Department of Defense may be used to perform an abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or in a case in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

So remind me again what Senator Shaheen is lobbying for?

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Uh, the issue is about PAYMENT. The law you cite specifically restricts use of funds to abortions where the life of the mother is in danger. I believe the lobbying is for coverage of a wider range of abortions than that. Is that clearer?

The part of the law that you bold is irrelevant. That is about PROVISION of services not PAYMENT.

I, personally, am talking about the payment aspect of this - I've even bolded my statement in my quoted post to make it quite clear. Where am I talking about provision?