Michelle Bachmann

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

unless we force the government into peoples lives by inserting infertility chips into their body that you cant remove until you actually WANT to have a child, then it will just get worse and not better.

you cant count on a population to become more responsible. back in the days before modern medicine and technology, survival of the fittest would help with this problem. now any irresponsible idiot can live til they are 100.

Don't forget social spending. Get rid of welfare and a lot of irresponsible behavior would go away - not just reproductive irresponsibility.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

unless we force the government into peoples lives by inserting infertility chips into their body that you cant remove until you actually WANT to have a child, then it will just get worse and not better.

you cant count on a population to become more responsible. back in the days before modern medicine and technology, survival of the fittest would help with this problem. now any irresponsible idiot can live til they are 100.

Right wing wants what they want at NO Cost and without any government Interference and if there is a cost its the dam Dems fault. So ****<ing out of touch with reality that it is funny.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

why is that? its a room where you can spew with your opinion and curse out anothers opinion. its perfect for a horse racing board.

That was funny, and very much on point.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Don't forget social spending. Get rid of welfare and a lot of irresponsible behavior would go away - not just reproductive irresponsibility.

So then do we spend what we spent on welfare on jails and more police force as anarchy will prevail. We can't even come close to employing those who want to be employed. You act as if it is 1999 and anybody that can work could find a job.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

why is that? its a room where you can spew with your opinion and curse out anothers opinion. its perfect for a horse racing board.

Because it's a horse racing board. It's usually the same 5 people having the same arguement over and over again. No one's opinion ever changes.

It never leads to anything good, which is not something you can say about other rooms on the board.

Do people go to a political board and discuss horse racing?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by jms62

So then do we spend what we spent on welfare on jails and more police force as anarchy will prevail. We can't even come close to employing those who want to be employed. You act as if it is 1999 and anybody that can work could find a job.

He's out of touch with reality. But that won't stop him from telling you how he thinks you should live. Brilliant.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Because it's a horse racing board. It's usually the same 5 people having the same arguement over and over again. No one's opinion ever changes.

It never leads to anything good, which is not something you can say about other rooms on the board.

Do people go to a political board and discuss horse racing?

How about the guys who don't hurl personal insults. Can they get bonus points?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by joeydb

How about the guys who don't hurl personal insults. Can they get bonus points?

You have flung your share of insults this thread. Would you like me to remind you?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You have flung your share of insults this thread. Would you like me to remind you?

I'm sure I have. But I'm cutting down. Not every post.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Because it's a horse racing board. It's usually the same 5 people having the same arguement over and over again. No one's opinion ever changes.

It never leads to anything good, which is not something you can say about other rooms on the board.

Do people go to a political board and discuss horse racing?

that isnt a good reason to close the room though. It says "politics/society" so you know what you are going to get when you click the link. some people enjoy bitching about political opinions. i kind of enjoy getting Riot all riled up.

I'm all about the least amount of censorship as possible.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

that isnt a good reason to close the room though. It says "politics/society" so you know what you are going to get when you click the link. some people enjoy bitching about political opinions. i kind of enjoy getting Riot all riled up.

I'm all about the least amount of censorship as possible.

Me too.

The description even says "flame-war fodder". He means incendiary emails, lest anyone think that was a Dahoss-style perversion reference.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

that isnt a good reason to close the room though. It says "politics/society" so you know what you are going to get when you click the link. some people enjoy bitching about political opinions. i kind of enjoy getting Riot all riled up.

I'm all about the least amount of censorship as possible.

I'm for the least amount of censorship also. But it's a horse racing board. There is more "discussion" about this sh.it than people talking about racing. Probably not what Byk had in mind when he started the board.

The two boards I read aren't helped out by the politics rooms, they take away from the board.

I'll ask again, do people go to political forums to discuss horse racing?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Me too.

The description even says "flame-war fodder". He means incendiary emails, lest anyone think that was a Dahoss-style perversion reference.

That's because you can't cut it in the horse racing rooms. You have nothing to offer up there. That's why you don't see many people post in both.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

That's because you can't cut it in the horse racing rooms. You have nothing to offer up there. That's why you don't see many people post in both.

Well admittedly I don't play every day. I do read through the paddock often and have learned a few things. I don't post political stuff anywhere else but here - which is why we have this board.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I'm for the least amount of censorship also. But it's a horse racing board. There is more "discussion" about this sh.it than people talking about racing. Probably not what Byk had in mind when he started the board.

The two boards I read aren't helped out by the politics rooms, they take away from the board.

I'll ask again, do people go to political forums to discuss horse racing?

how do they possibly take away from the board? you have to click on the link and if you click that means you want to view it.

Byk doesnt give a crap about the politics section.

why would people not talk politics if there is a section called "politics?" it takes nothing away from all the other subforums.

its purely your opinion, which i strongly disagree with.


the only thing that takes away from the horse racing board, IMO, is the lack of good racing. Shoot, I watched the ESPY's last night and it showed Zenyatta's second place finish like 5 times, but no other races and no mention of Blame, the winner of the race. That says something about the state of horse racing in 2011.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

That's because you can't cut it in the horse racing rooms. You have nothing to offer up there. That's why you don't see many people post in both.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK - I like statistics. None of these tell us how many of the abortions were medically necessary to save the mother's life or were necessary because of a rape-caused pregnancy.

The racial composition is irrelevant to the question of whose life should be preserved, obviously. All new life is precious, and every individual has the same right to live.

We already know that abortion is used for unintended pregnancy. The question is how many really were necessitated by the need to save the mother's life or because a crime was committed where the woman never would have consented to the act in the first place.

no, it wasn't a full list. like i said, it probably is impossible to know just how many were caused by crime-i don't think some victims admit that they were just that.
but i didn't realize just how many pregnancies were unintended-and i think it also said something on there about other birth control having been used but failed.
at any rate, i am not trying to change your mind on anything-i'm just trying to explain why i think the right should remain.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

that is a shitload of irresponsible women. its shameful.

I cannot possibly understand how so many people have an unwanted pregnancy. there are tons of ways to prevent it.

get on the pill, take it at the same time every day, and use a condom... and in only the rarest of rare circumstances will someone become pregnant. certainly not half of all cases. maybe less than 1% of all cases.

if you cant do the above and dont want to get pregnant than dont have sex. or live up to your responsibility.

abortion is plain disgusting (obviously cases that occur from a crime or when its a health risk are different). but unfortunatly it is neccesary because we are filled with a population who are irresponsible. men and women. all they think about is now now now.

no doubt one segment of unintended pregnancy was birth control failure. i met a lady a few years back who was in her third trimester. she'd had her tubes tied a few years before-you'd think that would be fool proof-but it's not. i had to sign a paper back when i had mine done acknowledging there was a slight chance of pregnancy.
then there are guys who have had vasectomies-that's not 100% either. neither is the pill, condoms, etc.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by jms62

I got the solution, we vote on it and if the Pro-Lifers win then no more abortions HOWEVER a woman still can choose not to have the baby and it is assigned via lottery to one of the lucky winners that voted to eliminate abortions.

it's funny, ironic, and sad at the same time that most of those against abortion are also against any aid to mothers, children, etc.
and life isn't sacred to most of them when it comes to the death penalty either!


edit~oho, case in point. i had posted the above before proceeding to this post:

Don't forget social spending. Get rid of welfare and a lot of irresponsible behavior would go away - not just reproductive irresponsibility.

[Danzig]

i'm glad this section is here-as i'm sure some have noticed. it's a shame that more don't post here, but i think it has more to do with how some discussions degenerate than it is about the topics.
i love the debates, the different angles, hearing differing viewpoints.

i don't enjoy the hijacking so people can call names back and forth.