I mean, the US started on the high-minded ideals of "no political parties" and "just wanting what's best for the country" and that lasted all the way to our second election.
Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion
- Thread starter Piscian
- Start date
I dont think they were actually saying you believed anything when they used believe here
Anyway, I remember about 6mths ago I was discussing abortion again with tstorm. I was asking about how there could be outside influence getting women pregnant. I dont just mean the obvious rape/incest stuff. For example, an IUD or condom might have a defective batch. The man might do stealthing. Some a-hole might prank people and pin prick condoms (eg. I've seen ex-wives claim this to enact vengeance on cheaters.) pretty sire I even gave the example of someone drink getting spiked. Etc.
None of that mattered. To tstorm it was always the woman's fault and they deserved the punishment. But then, you'd might know that their Catholic and this is the exact thing that makes Catholics insufferable. Particularly, when they dont apply the same standard to themselves. You can see this in US evangelicals, and this was picked up by Trump. Everyone in a bad position currently someone deserved it, thus they cannot be helped. Everyone is a good position never did anything wrong because they deserved it (i.e. circular logic to get around any facts of the situation.) Anyone using critical thinking like providing nuance to the situation is just attacking people in power. The worst part is that Catholics think they know how everyone should live and push that standard onto everyone.... despite anyone else opinion. (This is not a Catholic problem. eg. There are some people who I would call woke that fall into this category. Just incapable of understanding that people might see things differently. I've experienced it from Hindus, protestants, Muslims, Atheists and Indigenous Australians.)
For example, you could totally be against abortion and never use it in your life and encourage others not to do it. I can understand this. Going out of your way to ban abortions for everyone else just because YOU don't like it is nonsense, particularly when banning it goes against the Constitution of your own country. (Also, want to make a distinction between banning it and regulating it. I think abortions should be regulated.... sensibly. Worrying about ceiling heights is stupid.)
The whole US constitution was designed to stop the average voter getting power or having their policies implemented and choices matter. Eg. the Supreme court was designed to stop 'bad laws from the masses' getting through. THAT'S why the Supreme Court can be elected. To stop the US citizens from having their votes matter. The Founding Fathers were extremely fearful of poor people. That's why many states banned most men from voting
As another example, Lenin took Marx's stuff and said, 'You know what this anti-hierarchy stuff needs... some supreme leader to take care of everyone.' It's stupid on its face
(This part isn't disagreeing with your points, sorry if it seems that what.)
But I DON'T know if its human nature. I would may be say its the nature of those who want power. I am very wary of calling it human nature because I don't think the average person lives that way and I don't want people to pretend that's how they SHOULD be living
The average person doesn't wield this kind of power. But in every place a person does get that kind of power it gets immediately and completely abused. Political figures, CEO's, Show runners, Rockstars, you name it, when a humen reaches a certain level of power they are corrupted by it.
Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.
I would imagine that the examples you can find where people don't abuse this level of power are far smaller in number than the people who do.
It even happens on smaller scales like Priests, or even just Fast Food bosses that get a big head. Power does something to people, and lower levels of power have a lesser effect on most, but even then it influences them.
Yeah.... I'm starting to think that's not true
You brought up priest. How many priest rape someone under their perview? Because its not that many. Yes, this is not the only abuse they can do, but not every priest abuse their power.
Caveats: 1) institutional corruption is separate from personal. Eg. The church, or many places, covering up rapes is different from the person doing the actual raping. 2) The bigger the power, the more likely the corruption. 3. It's well know that sciopaths dominate CEO positions and as countries leaders
I honestly don't think the scale of power matters (except for the level of competition). Like, how many stories are there of tyrannical middle management, home owners associations, and landlords?
Just as many as there are for spiteful and petty employees who don’t respond to anything other than outrageous bluster, homeowners who allow their properties to fall into disrepair that boarders on dangerous, and tenants who show the property zero respect and trash the shit out of it.
im not talking about the rape thing. I'm talking about scum like Joel Ornstein, and Kennth Copeland who thinks his own congregation are demons and that's why he needs t fly in a private jet. They abuse people's faith to make tax free money and it's corrupt as fuck.
Any policy? Do you want a list?
An individual, functioning life form.
I can tell you that, there isn't a contradiction there.
I'm largely not expressing moral opinions here. If you look at the thread, you might notice which users are attempting to shame people with comments of how barbaric they are.
Soooooo you want me to be a different person?
Even better, you want me to be a different person carefully designed for you to ignore?
I'm not so arrogant as to think people who disagree with me are stupid and emotional. Actually, somebody in this thread said basically that about me, that if I didn't automatically agree with them it meant I was unreasonable by default. That's a silly thing. I am not going to speak poorly of people just for disagreeing with me, but I will speak poorly of those who offhandedly disregard all arguments or information that might work against their beliefs and in place of arguments make aggressive comments about people making the arguments. Like, you're calling me a liar, and it's honestly one of the least insulting and aggressive responses I've gotten today. Have you seen the way some of these people behave?
You can't survive without the nourishment provided by other organisms. I've painted myself into the biological definition of life. What a horrible corner to be in.
Oh so we're retreating from organs and self-sustaining reactions now? Give a fetus a salad and tell me how long until it stops moving.
Just to be clear, you're trying argue that a fetus is not a living organism?
I argue with organism since it can't exist independently of it's mother. It certainly doesn't rise above the desires of the mother.
There exist within you thousands of bacteria that would die swiftly if removed from your body. They are definitely organisms.
Glad to know a fetus is comparable to bacteria. Then surely it's okay to take the fetal equivalent of an anti-bacterial to get rid of the infection?
Our politicians at least tried to make themselves look like they gave a damn only just a few decades ago. Now they're all but openly corrupt and don't even try to put on airs that they're not utterly awful anymore.
I've always despised the idea of "power corrupts" because it's not remotely true. Truly good people can and have gotten any amount of power and not abused it. Power doesn't corrupt, it just gives people the ability to do bad things and get away with them. The greater the power, the more they can get away with. A person who gets power, gets "corrupted", and starts doing bad things with that power was always an evil person, they just don't have a fear of consequences stopping them from doing what they've always secretly wanted to do if only could do it without repercussions. What's more, power gives these sorts of people the ability to do far more harm than they ever could have done on their own even if they could've gotten away with doing bad things.
I'd say corrollation doesn't equal causation here, it may even be the reverse, that rather than power making people evil, the evil people end up getting power and then abusing it much more often than good people get power and use it for good because evil people are much much more motivated to try to get power than good people. Precisely because evil people know they can use the power to do whatever they want.
I wouldn't bother, I'd advise everyone on this forum to just ignore Tstorm. The reason being that they will never be reasonable, ignore all facts no matter how much because they have no intention of ever being convinced of or even slightly conceding to anything whatsoever, and throw out appeals to emotion and other logical fallacies left and right to try to justify their position despite the fact that they have nothing to justify it with. In my experience Tstorm has never and I suspect never intended to actually make a logical argument at any point. They might as well just say "abortion is bad and should be banned because I say so" because that's no more logically or factually valid than anything they've ever said.
It was a rhetorical question, dude. Anyone who has been paying attention knows the anti-abortion crusade is only about power. It's a pretty difficult conclusion to escape.
But now you're pretending a fetus isn't human.
You are being exactly what you are accusing me of. You are dismissing my words as meaningless and dishonest rather than engage with them because you have no intention of ever conceding anything, and you may as well say "abortion is good and should be legal because I say so". Why are you even here if you're just going to ignore anyone who disagrees?
You're not reaching that conclusion. You're rationalizing that premise. There are hundreds of perfectly bipartisan bills that have supported people raising children, but you've convinced yourself that Republicans vote against these things because it makes it easier to dismiss them.
I thought the reason you were against abortions was because a fetus was alive? What makes it human?
Last edited:
Nah, that's just the bullshit high school history version of the formal creation of the USA. The image of the framers sitting around a campfire singing Kumbaya and blowing each other is one of the biggest, most laughable, fictions in a historical narrative that is nothing but huge, laughable, fictions.
That shit was well underway even during the process of nominating delegates to the Philadelphia Convention; the process of ratifying the damn thing was such a catastrophic shitshow it nearly kicked off a civil war on the spot. Hancock, (Samuel) Adams, and James Madison single-handedly saved the process, and even then, Federalists were still trying to ratfuck...including Madison, the literal author of the fucking Constitution, for having the temerity to insist on not reneging the Massachusetts Compromise.
The Federalists were simply biding their time for their first, best opportunity to fuck the Anti-Federalists all the way to the nearest prison, and the XYZ Affair happened to be it.