5 Men Could Overturn Legal Abortion In America

[HenryChinaski]

Actually, that is rather idiotic.

There are a plethora of options available to prevent, kill, or give away the child, so having one is a deliberate decision on the parent. Why should society be burdened with the costs of raising the child based on the decision of that one person? If anything people should be discouraged from having children if they are not in the financial position to take care of their offspring.

Everything that you just said confirms Carlin’s statements. That’s the problem with conservatives, you people only see black-and-white. Everything is one way or the other. this or that. That’s just not how the real world works. And he is right that You people don’t give a **** about human life after birth.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Double post

 

[Nap]

Everything that you just said confirms Carlin’s statements. That’s the problem with conservatives, you people only see black-and-white. Everything is one way or the other. this or that. That’s just not how the real world works. And he is right that You people don’t give a **** about human life after birth.

Lol, you accuse others of only seeing things in black-and-white and yet in your world view if someone doesn't believe it is the government's responsibility to subsidize bad decisions means they don't care about human life. The fact that there are studies that show that conservatives are more likely to give to charity or volunteer wound insinuate that your black-and-white view of conservatives is rather naive.

 

[Nap]

Is this perhaps the reason why they seem so angry?

That would largely depend on the individual, there are both reasonable people and partisan hacks that view not getting their way as an affront to them personally on both sides.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Lol, you accuse others of only seeing things in black-and-white and yet in your world view if someone doesn't believe it is the government's responsibility to subsidize bad decisions means they don't care about human life. The fact that there are studies that show that conservatives are more likely to give to charity or volunteer wound insinuate that your black-and-white view of conservatives is rather naive.

BS I can throw tons of studies at you saying Liberals are more generous donating to charities and volunteer more. I think it’s about the same. Where it differs is “who” conservatives and Liberals donate and volunteer.

 

[Nap]

BS I can throw tons of studies at you saying Liberals are more generous donating to charities and volunteer more. I think it’s about the same. Where it differs is “who” conservatives and Liberals donate and volunteer.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?nytmobile=0

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/08/study-red-states-more-charitable-079888

I thought the blood donor difference stated in the NYT article was pretty interesting. I just wish he added links to see where he is getting his info from.

Edit: Huffpo Article with a nice infographic breaking down volunteering and charitable donations.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3781505

 

[minnie616]

Lol, you accuse others of only seeing things in black-and-white and yet in your world view if someone doesn't believe it is the government's responsibility to subsidize bad decisions means they don't care about human life. The fact that there are studies that show that conservatives are more likely to give to charity or volunteer wound insinuate that your black-and-white view of conservatives is rather naive.

False.

Both give to charity.
But they give differently.

Conservatives are more likely to count all money given to the church as giving to a charity. Yet most of money is used for expenses of the Church.


From the following Forbes article:

Focusing on the participants who value morals highly, the researchers found that when the charity description emphasized protection from harm, Democrats were much more likely than Republicans to donate. But when the charity description emphasized purity and loyalty to community, Republicans were more likely than Democrats to give their money.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomwat...ally-different-views-of-charity/#7b9921a58d58

 

[Gondwanaland]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5-men-supreme-court-abortion_us_5b44c558e4b0c523e2632f62

Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court would present an immediate threat to Roe v. Wade.

Within a few years, five men could revoke a woman’s right to have an abortion in the United States.

President Donald Trump’s nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court is a clear threat to Roe v. Wade, the court’s landmark 1973 decision that essentially legalized abortion throughout the country. If confirmed, Kavanaugh would likely provide the fifth vote to overturn Roe ― a ruling that his predecessor Justice Anthony Kennedy protected as the court’s swing vote on abortion.
======================================

False. Overturning Roe v. Wade would not make abortion illegal. It would simply turn the decision and laws over to each individual 50 states on what they want their laws to be.

But let's, for a moment, ignore your ignorance of how such basic things work wrt the law and scotus decisions, and address your last part with the assumption that your false claims are actually correct and that overturning Roe would make abortion illegal:

Yup. A for-real 5 man death panel, Republican style.

So.... overturning something that allows millions of children to be murdered..... makes one a 'death panel'..... by stopping rampant slaughter..... ummm.......... okaaaaaay then......

 

[Nap]

False.

Both give to charity.
But they give differently.

Conservatives are more likely to count all money given to the church as giving to a charity. Yet most of money is used for expenses of the Church.


From the following Forbes article:



https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomwat...ally-different-views-of-charity/#7b9921a58d58

I never said there weren't differences in how they give charity, only that conservatives donate more both in monetary terms and that of time in volunteering.

True, conservatives do donate a substantial portion to churches and much of that is used for upkeep, just as "liberals" tend donate a fair amount to to art and education. I think donating to a church running a soup kitchen, orphanage, homeless shelter, etc is more productive than donating to an art museum or help fund the next Library wing at Harvard.

Check out the articles I linked earlier.

Edit: I said more, but meant are more likely to. I believe it is correct that in terms of % of wealth conservatives donate more but don't remember where I seen that statistic to link.

 

[Nap]

False.

Both give to charity.
But they give differently.

Conservatives are more likely to count all money given to the church as giving to a charity. Yet most of money is used for expenses of the Church.


From the following Forbes article:



https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomwat...ally-different-views-of-charity/#7b9921a58d58

Notice at the bottom of the infographic, Republicans were more likely to donate money and volunteer by 9% over Democrats according to HuffPost.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3781505