Republicans LOVE REGULATION!

Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

farglebargle -> Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (11/30/2012 11:33:39 PM)
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/26/506381/mississippi-abortion-clinic-inspection/ There's nothing more a Republican wants than to pass legislation that interferes with your life. Taxing rich people so they pay their fair share? No. Using regulations to close abortion clinics? Yes. Well, since the Republicans don't seem to be troubled by being intimately associated with the racists running their party, given their failure to expel the racists who made Atwater's racist "Southern Strategy" their official policy, I'm going to guess they're not self-aware enough to even realize their hypocrisy in going "regulation BAD unless we want to close down healthcare providers!" attitudes.

Kirata -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:00:41 AM)
Gee, I can't imagine why anyone would want doctors at abortion clinics to have hospital admitting privileges. What could possibly go wrong? K.

JeffBC -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:19:17 AM)
Come now farglebargle. Look, I'm on your side in this issue but your argument is disingenous at best. Just subsitute the word "murder" for "abortion" in your head and you'll have a better idea why they are willing to "regulate" it. The sort of ridiculous argument you have presented is a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 1:14:06 AM)
That story is about 5 months old. Lets go to something a bit more current. Mississippi's last abortion clinic faces closure November 28, 2012\|Emily Le Coz \| Reuters JACKSON, Mississippi (Reuters) - Mississippi's sole abortion clinic will have to close unless a federal judge halts a new state law requiring its physicians to obtain admitting privileges to local hospitals, according to a court motion filed on Wednesday. The Jackson Women's Health Organization renewed its request for a federal judge to prevent state officials from enforcing the law, which the clinic said was an unconstitutional attempt to ban abortion in Mississippi. Mississippi, which had as many as 14 abortion providers in the early 1980s, has some of the country's strictest abortion laws and one of the lowest abortion rates. It also has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the United States - more than 60 percent above the national average in 2010. .... Advocates of the new law, including numerous state lawmakers, said it was designed to protect women's health. But some also have expressed hope it will shutter the Mississippi clinic. ~~I actually agree they they should have admitting privileges somewhere.~~ The clinic's providers already are board-certified OB-GYNs, but the only one who had admitting privileges at the time of the law's passage provides limited service at the clinic. The two doctors who provide the majority of procedures were denied privileges after a months-long effort by the clinic to obtain them. Clinic owner Diane Derzis told Reuters she sent applications on behalf of all the physicians to every hospital within a 30-mile (48-km) radius. All of the hospitals ultimately rejected the requests or refused to even consider them, she said. "It is now clear that plaintiffs have no hope of being able to comply with the Admitting Privileges Requirement," said the filing by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, which represents the clinic in court. ~~Now I have a problem. Why are hospitals denying them, or not even considering them?~~ U.S. District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III in July allowed the law to take effect despite objections by the clinic and the Center for Reproductive Rights. The judge blocked the state from imposing any criminal or civil penalties on the clinic, its staff or its physicians during the application process. The state Department of Health, tasked with enforcing the law, gave the clinic until January to comply. "They've had ample time to become compliant," said Republican state Representative Sam Mims, who sponsored the measure. But he added: "The legislature doesn't control what hospitals in the Jackson metro area do. They have their own committees and bylaws set up, and they have to make the best decisions." It was unclear when the judge might rule on the motion and when the clinic would have to close if it loses; the state Health Department also has an appeals process. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-11-28/lifestyle/sns-rt-us-usa-abortion-mississippibre8ar18v-20121128_1_jackson-women-s-health-organization-clinic-owner-diane-derzis-strictest-abortion-laws ~~Seems to me some questions need to be asked. Why were these physicians, who are board certified OB/GYNs, denied or refused out of hand?~~

farglebargle -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 7:04:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Come now farglebargle. Look, I'm on your side in this issue but your argument is disingenous at best. Just subsitute the word "murder" for "abortion" in your head and you'll have a better idea why they are willing to "regulate" it. The sort of ridiculous argument you have presented is a part of the problem, not a part of the solution. Yeah, but the people who hear voices in their heads screaming "MURDER" when people say "abortion" are clinically insane. You do not make laws because CRAZY PEOPLE insist on them, do you? I think the problems we have today are caused in a big part by people's reluctance to point out the obvious, such as "Republicans must agree with the racists, because they haven't gotten rid of them or their official policies" and "People who conflate abortion and murder are either insane or ignorant"

JeffBC -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 8:44:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "People who conflate abortion and murder are either insane or ignorant" OK, color me ignorant then. Why don't you go ahead and explain these crystal clarities to me because I gotta tell you that they are NOTHING but unclear to me. Again, fundamentally I agree with pro-choice position but I cared enough to really study the pro-life position and to talk to people who hold that position. I have enough empathy to understand it. So now why don't you go ahead and tell me how it is that this thought chain is "insane"... Human life begins when a sperm and an egg get it on. Any time after that point we have ended a human life. Ending human lives is called "murder". And I'm not even getting into the surrounding religious contexts here... that's just the purely pragmatic view. How is that insane exatly? Or which part of it is ignorant? Oh, and howsabout we don't go moving the goal posts all over the field here and you stay focused and on point. This discussion has nothing to do with "republicans" or "racists". It has to do with whether an abortion is murder or not. Because if you want to go down that road I'll tell you what the very dictionary definition of "insane" is. It's believing that Obama is going to do anything other than continue crafting the police state he's been working on so assiduously.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 9:39:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Human life begins when a sperm and an egg get it on. Incorrect. Your religion says that a human live begins at conception even though there is nothing in the Bible that says so. The first reference to ensoulment at conception was a 5th century monk who had no scriptural backup. Other religions hold that a fetus becomes a human at different times during pregnancy from 'quickening' (defined as when the woman can feel movement) to actual birth. Religion is not the law of the land due to a thing called the Constitution. At least it's not supposed to. As for the situation down there, I'd be interested in knowing why the hospitals are refusing admission priveleges to the doctors. Might someone be organizing against them on a professional level? That would be a violation of the Sherman antitrust act. It could also be potentially prosecutable under RICOH.

JeffBC -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 9:57:17 AM)
quote: Your religion says that a human live begins at conception even though there is nothing in the Bible that says so. The first reference to ensoulment at conception was a 5th century monk who had no scriptural backup. Other religions hold that a fetus becomes a human at different times during pregnancy from 'quickening' (defined as when the woman can feel movement) to actual birth. For starters it's not "my religion". I don't have a religion. Second, I don't really see how you've shown that statement wrong. What you've shown is that it is one possible interpretation among many. Nor was I speaking of "ensoulment". I was talking about the moment in time when you have a self-replicating bit of human DNA doing it's thing. I myself don't really agree with the viewpoint but calling it "insane" is just ridiculous. I call it "one possible interpretation" that hasn't been thought out very carefully by it's proponents at the pragmatic level. I, for one, would be really happy if someone would stop worrying about their freakin ideology long enough to ponder some questions like "what are we going to do with all those unwanted infants?" -- you know -- think of the children and all that. quote: Religion is not the law of the land due to a thing called the Constitution. At least it's not supposed to. That's disingenuous. The law is a description of our shared morality. The fact is that my morality is not [directly] derived from religion bu other people's are. The fact is that in the end we must come to some agreement on some common ground somehow.

Lucylastic -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 10:00:19 AM)
If the fertilised egg isnt planted in the uterus, there is no life... it gets passed out of the body, of it plants in the fallopian tube, it will likely be an ectopic pregnancy, which is so very very rarely viable its practically unheard of. 99.9% will need to be terminated.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 10:02:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC [I was talking about the moment in time when you have a self-replicating bit of human DNA doing it's thing. By that definition, a cancerous tumor is human. As for the DNA argument, You have more bacterial cells and DNA in your body than human.

Moonhead -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 10:02:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC I, for one, would be really happy if someone would stop worrying about their freakin ideology long enough to ponder some questions like "what are we going to do with all those unwanted infants?" -- you know -- think of the children and all that. Fuck all. They think that children the parents don't want to be stuck raising aren't their problem once they've stopped the abortion. For myself, I find it incredibly offensive that it's always the same dickheads who want to ban abortions who are rabidly opposed to all welfare spending...

Lucylastic -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 10:06:53 AM)
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/29/maddow-rips-mississippi-republicans-over-abortion-crack-down/ actually puts it in some actual context

subspaceseven -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 10:17:36 AM)
I do not really think you can call it a "pro life" position with your definition of murder. Because then every person who voted for the wars we are in, or the money for continuing the murdering of people is committing murder. So why don't you call it murder???? It is ending human life??? Is that not murder as per your post???? Tell us have you written your congressman and asked that he stop paying for the murder of 1000's of children overseas???? To stop supporting the murder of humans with our weapons overseas?????? One would think that all life needs to be saved if one is truly "pro life" No, I think it is more of an "anti choice" position. You want people to conform your your religious views of when life begins, or your personal beliefs and force them on others, no matter what the Law states. You are entitled to your beliefs and but not your own facts That is not pro life, I mean true pro lifers would be bitching about all the funding cuts for programs going to the babies that are born in that state alone... Tell me are they cutting social programs which feed these babies they worked so hard to save or are they cutting them???? Are they giving money to educate those babies or cutting it so the top 1% do not have to pay taxes in that state "It also has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the United States - more than 60 percent above the national average in 2010." Gee the cuts to sexual education seem to be working (or laws forbidding science of birth control to be taught) and just tell teenagers that having sex is wrong and a sin...It appears it is working as well in this state as it did for Palins daughter....

JeffBC -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 11:10:21 AM)
You know ss7... frothing at the mouth seldom accomplishes much. I have three questions for you and all of them are meant to be serious rather than snark. A) Have you actually read anything I posted -- read for comprehension? B) How do you feel about your shift of the topic from abortion to war? C) Do you realize that you and I agree pretty much point by point... all except for the fact that I have empathy that you, apparently, lack.

erieangel -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 11:42:28 AM)
quote: Ending human lives is called "murder". No it's not, since murder is a legal term defining the UNLAWFUL ending of human life. Since abortion is legal, it isn't murder. I will grant you, that depending on when you consider human life to begin, abortion could be called killing, but never murder. I'm basically pro-life, in that I would never have an abortion myself and I would be heartbroken if a family member chose abortion. However, I also realize that some women just don't have a "mothering instinct" and still others don't want children or don't want another child. Abortion needs to be safe and legal for these women as well as for those who have the procedure for health reasons. It always strikes me as highly hypocritical that a large number of pro-life, anti abortionists are also anti-welfare, anti-school lunch program, anti-medicaid and pro-death penalty. In other words, these people have compassion for life only when it is in the womb, once born, however, it is "every man for himself" even if that person is an unwanted, unloved, child growing up in extreme poverty.

meatcleaver -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:02:02 PM)
There is no greater intrusion into a person's private life as a state deciding what is best for a woman regarding her fertility and any feotus she might or might not wish to carry. We can discuss when new life exists but I don't see how new life can be claimed to exist independently as long as it is not viable outside the mother's womb. Let's be honest (if you believe in god) god dumps millions of feotus' everyday through natural rejection by the female body so god doesn't see any big deal in abortion, why should the government?

Bigsqueezer -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:23:03 PM)
Adding some specificity - both sides of this argument seem to choose titles and names that really bend the debate. The "Pro-Life" position MIGHT be truly pro life if they came out against war and the Death Penalty. They might be Pro-Life if they cared about that baby after it was born. No, they fail on some crucial tests of someone loving life. They are "Anti-Abortion." And that seems to end their concern. Pro choice might be pro-choice if they also came out in favor of other freedoms like the freedom to choose to drive my motorcycle without a helmet. They are "Pro-abortion." No matter how hard you want it to be true, eliminating a part of your body is not as same as stalking a neighbor and shooting him. It never is. No matter how hard you try to paint someone trying to live their life in accord with their religion as a lover of war and regulation without them saying so is madness. This debate has abused reason in so many ways on both sides spending BILLIONS of dollars and sucking up time that could be used fixing a number of the problems brought up in the debate its revolting! The Republicans had both houses of congress, the Presidency, and the Courts for 4 years. They NEVER TRIED to end abortion. They however tried 38 times to end Obamacare over the last 2 years. Get serious, they do not WANT abortion illegal. They make too much money keeping it a battle. This topic breeds madness.

JeffBC -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:30:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel No it's not, since murder is a legal term defining the UNLAWFUL ending of human life. Since abortion is legal, it isn't murder. I will grant you, that depending on when you consider human life to begin, abortion could be called killing, but never murder. I stand corrected. But the sense of "horror" I suspect is similar. quote: I'm basically pro-life, in that I would never have an abortion myself and I would be heartbroken if a family member chose abortion. However, I also realize that some women just don't have a "mothering instinct" and still others don't want children or don't want another child. Abortion needs to be safe and legal for these women as well as for those who have the procedure for health reasons. It always strikes me as highly hypocritical that a large number of pro-life, anti abortionists are also anti-welfare, anti-school lunch program, anti-medicaid and pro-death penalty. In other words, these people have compassion for life only when it is in the womb, once born, however, it is "every man for himself" even if that person is an unwanted, unloved, child growing up in extreme poverty. You and I see this very similarly. As a male, of course, I have no choices in this matter under the current legal system. But it's pretty certain I would implore the woman to carry the baby to term and then I'd assume responsibility for it. But that is my personal position... at the societal level I recognize things are complex and so I am pro-choice for everyone. quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver There is no greater intrusion into a person's private life as a state deciding what is best for a woman regarding her fertility and any feotus she might or might not wish to carry. So carrying on my argument which is not "devil's advocate" -- it is "let's try to understand" -- I might argue that while I shudder at the thought of the intrusion we're talking about, ending someone's life is a bigger intrusion. quote: We can discuss when new life exists but I don't see how new life can be claimed to exist independently as long as it is not viable outside the mother's womb. Here, let me help you then. One might consider things like when do we believe pain is a thing. One might ponder when self-awareness develops. You really can't see how either of those two things might be relevant? Not at all? quote: Let's be honest (if you believe in god) god dumps millions of feotus' everyday through natural rejection by the female body so god doesn't see any big deal in abortion, why should the government? OK, I'll be honest. I think of myself as a reasoning adult which means I understand the difference between "accidental" and "deliberate". I understand that there is a difference between "negligent homicide" and "premeditated murder". That's my honest assessment. What I do not understand is why is the other side's position so opaque? As much as I am pro-choice, vote that way, donate that way, and agree with the characterization of "war on women", I STILL can grasp, at least dimly, what's going on in the minds of the pro-life folks. The other thing I don't really understand is why folks don't understand that democracy depends on compromise. The end result of a win/lose posture is civil war. Don't you think it'd make more sense to try to empathize with those who's opinions differ from yours. And from that bridge of empathy then seek compromise?

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:32:35 PM)
quote: Pro choice might be pro-choice if they also came out in favor of other freedoms like the freedom to choose to drive my motorcycle without a helmet. They are "Pro-abortion." Pro-abortion means I would push abortion each and every time a woman gets pregnant. Instead, I push Choice... as in... keep my nose out of it because its HER CHOICE to make. I merely support her in making that choice. As far as your helmet laws.... move. There are plenty of states that do not have one, or a modified one for adults. http://bikersrights.com/states/50state.html [;)]

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans LOVE REGULATION! (12/1/2012 12:34:26 PM)
quote: You and I see this very similarly. As a male, of course, I have no choices in this matter under the current legal system. But it's pretty certain I would implore the woman to carry the baby to term and then I'd assume responsibility for it. But that is my personal position... at the societal level I recognize things are complex and so I am pro-choice for everyone. Thankfully the law recognizes the inherent risks in forcing a woman to carry to full term based upon the promise of the other to raise the child.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125