USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
- Thread starter FlagDUDE08
- Start date
- Status
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
The "Laci and Connor Law" - written and introduced by Republican Melissa Hart in 2003. That, and similar state laws, are designed to trigger the "collapse" clause of the original Roe v Wade ruling.
The "Laci and Connor Law" - written and introduced by Republican Melissa Hart in 2003. That, and similar state laws, are designed to trigger the "collapse" clause of the original Roe v Wade ruling.
Shirtless Guy
Old Dirty Basterd
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
Thank you, so if its meant to create a conundrum to have roe vs wade overturned why haven't liberals rescinded the law?
The only thing that keeps Rover up at night is when he puts away too many Makers and cokes at the hockey game before he goes to bed.
However, its entirely reasonable to ask if a law change is part of a greater effort. So, I think legalizing gay marriage will lead to man on dog unions (the Rick Santorum take) is obviously absurd. An effort to do an end around Roe v Wade? I'm inclined to take that more seriously.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
Politics. You want to campaign against something named in memory of Laci Peterson? There has never been enough support in Congress to overturn the law. Any attempt to do so would languish in the House. Also, it is the opinion of many liberals that despite its intentions, this law (and similar ones) will not trigger the "collapse" clause of Roe so there is no need.
Politics. You want to campaign against something named in memory of Laci Peterson? There has never been enough support in Congress to overturn the law. Any attempt to do so would languish in the House. Also, it is the opinion of many liberals that despite its intentions, this law (and similar ones) will not trigger the "collapse" clause of Roe so there is no need.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
I think Shirtless is talking about 2009-2010 when you had the triple threat.
I think Shirtless is talking about 2009-2010 when you had the triple threat.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
Also, it is the opinion of many liberals that despite its intentions, this law (and similar ones) will not trigger the "collapse" clause of Roe so there is no need.
Also, it is the opinion of many liberals that despite its intentions, this law (and similar ones) will not trigger the "collapse" clause of Roe so there is no need.
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
It would have been fascinating had Roe vs Wade been indexed for technology: in other words, no abortions allowed past the date that an unborn child can survive on its own outside the womb.
Obviously, the mother would not be required to continue to carry the child inside her body, since by definition it could survive outside her. The child would merely be removed and then kept alive instead.
It's sad how frequently our supposedly "wise" people forget that few things in life are static and adjust their long-term views accordingly.
It would have been fascinating had Roe vs Wade been indexed for technology: in other words, no abortions allowed past the date that an unborn child can survive on its own outside the womb.
Obviously, the mother would not be required to continue to carry the child inside her body, since by definition it could survive outside her. The child would merely be removed and then kept alive instead.
It's sad how frequently our supposedly "wise" people forget that few things in life are static and adjust their long-term views accordingly.
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
Switching gears, looks like the IRS scandalmongering has blown up in Issa's face after Cummings released the entire transcript of the interviews with IRS employees. Can we all agree, in the spirit of bipartisanship, that Issa is a fraud and a BS artist? Glad to see someone else on the committee had to do what the Chairman promised to do weeks ago. When exactly does he plan on holding those public hearings that he promised with Pickering and Mullen over Benghazi also? That's two public promises the guy seems to have no inclination to follow through on.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52248197/...ter-release-transcripts/?lite=&lite=obnetwork
Switching gears, looks like the IRS scandalmongering has blown up in Issa's face after Cummings released the entire transcript of the interviews with IRS employees. Can we all agree, in the spirit of bipartisanship, that Issa is a fraud and a BS artist? Glad to see someone else on the committee had to do what the Chairman promised to do weeks ago. When exactly does he plan on holding those public hearings that he promised with Pickering and Mullen over Benghazi also? That's two public promises the guy seems to have no inclination to follow through on.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52248197/...ter-release-transcripts/?lite=&lite=obnetwork
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
You realize that surviving on it's own, and being "kept alive" are not the same thing right?
You realize that surviving on it's own, and being "kept alive" are not the same thing right?
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
And huff-and-puffers are the ones on the accusation high horse about knuckledraggers and libertarian sociopaths blowing things out of proportion... http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2013/06/the_pain_threshold_banning_abo.html#incart_river_default
And huff-and-puffers are the ones on the accusation high horse about knuckledraggers and libertarian sociopaths blowing things out of proportion... http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2013/06/the_pain_threshold_banning_abo.html#incart_river_default
My point exactly but I'm not sure people stop and think about that much who are making this argument.
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
Wait a second - Are you really trying to prove that people who require medical care do not deserve to be alive? Talk about a "fundie."
Wait a second - Are you really trying to prove that people who require medical care do not deserve to be alive? Talk about a "fundie."
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
And yet he's trying to protect people's "right to health care".
Wait a second - Are you really trying to prove that people who require medical care do not deserve to be alive? Talk about a "fundie."
And yet he's trying to protect people's "right to health care".
P
Priceless
Guest
Wait a second - Are you really trying to prove that people who require medical care do not deserve to be alive? Talk about a "fundie."
You must have used a trampoline or a slingshot to jump all the way to that conclusion.
Relax. Geezer's just lobbing grenades in the hopes that somebody takes it seriously. Unfortunately I think he caught some righties with his fishing pole.
P
Priceless
Guest
Relax. Geezer's just lobbing grenades in the hopes that somebody takes it seriously. Unfortunately I think he caught some righties with his fishing pole.
I'm intrigued about the mental gymnastics required to go from what was written to you saying they "don't deserve" to live. You usually only see that level of dexterity every four years at the Olympics.
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines
OK, I'll ask you to put it in your own words: What do you think should be done to a person who is born in critical need of health care services in order to stay alive? ("person", of course, can also be spelled "fetus" or "parasite", depending on your mood and level of sociopathology)Relax. Geezer's just lobbing grenades in the hopes that somebody takes it seriously. Unfortunately I think he caught some righties with his fishing pole.
If its you I'm pulling the plug! To answer your question however a newborn in critical need should be treated to the best of the hospital's ability provided the parents are also in agreement. This is no different than a choice older Americans have to make to take somebody off of life support (who has not already made their wished known beforehand). Now there are a thousand hypotheticals that people can and I'm sure will come up with, but that's the basics.
- Status