Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]


BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort

Ebbie 06 Mar 13 - 02:02 AM
Richard Bridge 06 Mar 13 - 02:48 AM
JohnInKansas 06 Mar 13 - 03:00 AM
gnu 06 Mar 13 - 06:58 AM
Bobert 06 Mar 13 - 08:48 AM
GUEST,999 06 Mar 13 - 10:48 AM
Steve Shaw 06 Mar 13 - 11:10 AM
Ebbie 06 Mar 13 - 11:55 AM
Steve Shaw 06 Mar 13 - 12:14 PM
GUEST,999 06 Mar 13 - 12:17 PM
Steve Shaw 06 Mar 13 - 12:33 PM
GUEST,999 06 Mar 13 - 12:45 PM
frogprince 06 Mar 13 - 02:05 PM
gnu 06 Mar 13 - 02:50 PM
Steve Shaw 06 Mar 13 - 03:34 PM
Bill D 06 Mar 13 - 05:46 PM
Richard Bridge 06 Mar 13 - 05:51 PM
Richard Bridge 06 Mar 13 - 05:54 PM
Steve Shaw 06 Mar 13 - 06:42 PM
Bee-dubya-ell 06 Mar 13 - 08:17 PM
Bill D 06 Mar 13 - 09:24 PM
ChanteyLass 07 Mar 13 - 12:37 AM
Steve Shaw 07 Mar 13 - 05:29 AM
gnu 07 Mar 13 - 07:09 AM
Richard Bridge 07 Mar 13 - 06:43 PM
Bill D 07 Mar 13 - 07:28 PM
Don Firth 07 Mar 13 - 08:07 PM
Greg F. 07 Mar 13 - 08:21 PM
Steve Shaw 07 Mar 13 - 08:27 PM
Steve Shaw 07 Mar 13 - 08:31 PM
Bobert 07 Mar 13 - 08:36 PM
Don Firth 07 Mar 13 - 08:42 PM
Bill D 07 Mar 13 - 09:00 PM
Steve Shaw 07 Mar 13 - 09:13 PM
Elmore 07 Mar 13 - 10:06 PM
Bill D 07 Mar 13 - 10:16 PM
Steve Shaw 08 Mar 13 - 08:19 AM
Greg F. 08 Mar 13 - 09:27 AM
Bill D 08 Mar 13 - 10:10 AM
Steve Shaw 08 Mar 13 - 10:30 AM
Bill D 08 Mar 13 - 11:00 AM
GUEST,pete from seven stars link 08 Mar 13 - 11:06 AM
Ebbie 08 Mar 13 - 11:43 AM
Elmore 08 Mar 13 - 01:58 PM
Steve Shaw 08 Mar 13 - 04:35 PM
Ebbie 08 Mar 13 - 09:07 PM
Bobert 08 Mar 13 - 09:26 PM
Steve Shaw 09 Mar 13 - 08:57 AM
Jeri 09 Mar 13 - 09:41 AM
Steve Shaw 09 Mar 13 - 09:47 AM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 02:02 AM

As I've mentioned before, I am on the online mailing list for a couple of right-wing publications so that I can see what they are saying.

Today, Townhall.com presents a new tack: Rand Paul is seeking signatures in the 'pro-life' debate by attempting to get a bill passed that "Life begins at conception", thereby "in effect, bypassing Roe vs. Wade." Direct quote.

I think they realize they can't over-turn R vs W- but this tactic could work.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 02:48 AM

Arseholes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 03:00 AM

Several states already have anti-abortion laws prohibiting abortions after much shorter gestation periods than specified as acceptable by Roe vs Wade (legal generally considered about 20 to 24 weeks, but can depend on fetal development which does vary).

Arkansas just passed a law prohibiting any abortion after 12 weeks. The law was vetoed by the governor, who pointed out that it was unconstitutional, but the Arkansas State Senate voted to override the veto the next day. The State House still has to vote on an override.

The ACLU is preparing the lawsuit to contest constitutionality.

John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: gnu
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 06:58 AM

Sick B*******!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 08:48 AM

The angry white man party is going to go out screaming and kicking every inch of the way but they will go out... America has passed them by...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 10:48 AM

Life does begin at conception; however, viable life doesn't occur until pregnancy. The problem with that type of legislation passing would be the next logical step: declare sperm and eggs to be state property. There's the rub (as it were).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 11:10 AM

Life began in some slimy puddle of ooze three and a half billion years ago and has never had to begin again ever since. Now let that be the last sterile, pointless assertion of this thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 11:55 AM

Look it up, Steve S. It's not pointless. There have been several efforts in the recent past to make aborting a pregnancy at any point a crime on behalf of the baby-to-be. If this one succeeds, it will be on the basis of a ruling that the baby is to be protected as early as the tiny blob. Roe vs Wade would be superfluous.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 12:14 PM

I see the threat all right. The point I was trying to make was that what we don't need is that awful, useless, sterile, futile, inflammatory stuff about "when exactly does life begin" here in this thread. Of all conversations on any forum I've ever been on, that one is the most depressing, soul-destroying and pointless of all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 12:17 PM

Maybe so, Steve, but that is your view. Not everyone's view. And that is precisely what Ebbie is saying.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 12:33 PM

So let's see if I have this right. You think it would be fruitful for us to discuss (again) exactly when human life begins. Great. Don't forget to tell me where you think that will get us.

If we're going to discuss abortion again let's try to figure out a way towards some solutions. Let's begin by saying that ignorance, lack of sex education, denial of contraception, moralising, preaching and the belittling of women's place in the world are the very opposite of the right answers. By those criteria, the Catholic church is one of the major champions of abortion. I just said in another thread here (with a man talking red alert thrown in) that I want all women to have the unfettered right to have abortions. Unfettered means no charge, no delays, no "counselling" and no conditions. None. But I'm far more "against" abortion than any pope or Mother Teresa. I want to live in a world in which abortions are rare. Abortions are not individual failures of women or couples. They are one hundred percent always all our fault, all of us. Society's fault. So let's address all that ignorance, lack of sex education, denial of contraception, moralising, preaching and belittling. There is no other way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 12:45 PM

"So let's see if I have this right."

You don't.

As for the rest, I agree, Steve. With all of it. I think abortion should be a last resort to save a child or a mother. I strongly disagree with abortion on demand while at the same time recognizing the view you have which I think is correct.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: frogprince
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 02:05 PM

Steve, I respect your position so much, and agree with most of it so completely, but I have to disagree with you when you say "Abortions are not individual failures of women or couples. They are one hundred percent always all our fault, all of us. Society's fault."

The rate at which abortions have occured, and do occur, is certainly very much society's fault, for the reasons you've indicated. But provide all the education there is to provide, make contraception readily available and let everyone know it...and there will be decent young couples who start an evening together with no intention of having sex, and end up with a pregnancy. They're not "guilty" if it happens, and society isn't "guilty" because it happens.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: gnu
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 02:50 PM

"no "counselling"" required. Hmmm... I think I think (yes, I meant that) it should be the case for women under the age of majority but it should be standardized for an entire country and such standards should be developed by the most qualified docs that can be had. If religions wanna put in their two cents, fine.

Of course, this does bring up the question re the best before date. I dunno the answer but perhaps the date should be extended in the case of a minor who does not receive counselling prior to that date?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 03:34 PM

Sorry, I meant to say compulsory counselling, something mooted in the UK recently. I agree with counselling without moralising or preaching. Damn poor reviewing on my part.

The rate at which abortions have occured, and do occur, is certainly very much society's fault, for the reasons you've indicated. But provide all the education there is to provide, make contraception readily available and let everyone know it...and there will be decent young couples who start an evening together with no intention of having sex, and end up with a pregnancy. They're not "guilty" if it happens, and society isn't "guilty" because it happens.

Well that's right, but we can't exonerate ourselves as society until we know that we have done our best to educate, to make contraception freely available, to show young people how to respect others and themselves and to remove inequality. And your decent young couple would then possess the savvy to seek the morning-after pill, right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 05:46 PM

Let's cut to the chase.
The absolute, rock-bottom basis of most attempts to totally ban abortion is the religious notion that a 'soul' enters the zygote at the moment of conception.
First, it is highly presumptuous of anyone, even if they are sure of their belief in a god, to state categorically how the 'god' works.
Second, if "freedom of religion" means anything, it must include the right to NOT be religious! Therefore, there should be no compulsion to accept any specific claim about 'souls' or their creation.
Third, it should be obvious that this and many other similar issues are matters of personal opinion, and should not be subject to votes. They, like hair style and sexual preference are a matter for subjective consideration.

No one should be forced TO endure an abortion, and no doctor who is against abortion should be asked to perform one.

Abortion is, at best, a sad and unfortunate decision and society should pursue as many **non-coercive** ways as possible to reduce the incidence, but the ultimate decision must be left to those directly involved...parents and their chosen physician.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 05:51 PM

With all die respect, the last time the doctor has a choice about performing surgery is when he qualifies as a doctor. After that he should not be a capitalist but a servant of his patient.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 05:54 PM

* due* - but the mis-type was amusing!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 06:42 PM

no doctor who is against abortion should be asked to perform one.

I think this is completely wrong. A doctor need not enter the specific field of medical care that might involve abortions if he or she doesn't want to. But once a doctor is working in that field they have an absolute moral and professional obligation to serve the patient's needs as long as the request is within the law. Otherwise they should be struck off. To allow doctors such scope would be the thin end of the wedge. You might then get general practitioners who refuse to treat overweight or smelly people, schools which refuse to have children from broken homes, dentists who refuse people who eat garlic. You want to be a doctor and you oppose abortion? There are plenty of fields of medicine you can work in that won't conflict with your horrid prejudice, so stay out of obstetrics and make yourself useful elsewhere. Look at this from the patient's point of view. They need an abortion but they run up against a doctor who refuses them "on moral grounds". What a trauma for that woman. Time is of the essence. She has been made to feel like a piece of trash and she still has to find another doctor (and you can bet your life the refuser won't make it easy). If that's the scenario you wish to justify, Bill, well I think you're seriously misguided.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 08:17 PM

So, does a doctor have a right to refuse to perform abortions on grounds of personal safety? Does the Hippocratic Oath compel him to place himself in the gunsights of the next nutcase who decides he's performing God's will by eliminating a baby murderer? The majority of OB/GYNs where I live don't perform abortions for precisely that reason. They refer abortion requests to clinics who are willing to take the risk.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 09:24 PM

Steve.. I take a practical view. On easpect of that is that there is no perfect answer.
   There ARE doctors... even OB/Gyns ..who are Catholic, and patients seek out such to share conform with their belief systems. Those who are not Catholic should be careful about which doctors they consult. There should, thus, be a system to advise potential patients about possible conflicts. Now... areas where there will be only a limited selection of doctors (very rural places) should require any doctor to pledge that they will honor the patient's preferences! Thus, Catholic doctors who refuse such limitations should limit their practice to certain venues.
Now, being a practical man, I also realize that this system is far from being reality, so my overriding concern is that no laws be enacted that restrict the rights of patients to have a choice! Several states in the US have used flimsy laws to do as this thread title says and sneak in rules to make abortions almost impossible to obtain, while not specifically ruling them illegal. This must be stopped!
Do you propose a system of laws and a design of a medical licensing setup which will achieve your ideal situation?

(and as an aside, your metaphor about GPs refusing to treat the obese is just not relevant.. ("slippery slope" fallacy)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: ChanteyLass
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 12:37 AM

Thank you, Ebbie, for starting this thread to let us know what "the other side" is trying to do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 05:29 AM

I don't care if a doctor makes a seamless, fast, moralising-free referral to another doctor. The bottom line is that no-one, whether a doctor or "the system", should have the right to put even the tiniest obstacle in the way of a woman who wants an abortion, and that includes, crucially, a time delay of any kind. What I would object to is any doctor taking it upon himself to be obstructive or preachy. If a doctor fears for his personal safety, it's a matter for the police.

Fallacy, eh? You haven't heard the murmurs in some quarters about obese people potentially being refused treatment?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: gnu
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 07:09 AM

Bill D. Very well said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 06:43 PM

Well said SS.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 07:28 PM

Steve..You are a hard guy to agree with... I **do** think that any woman **should** be able to make her choices freely... but you didn't respond to my question about how your ideal situation might be achieved.

When I say I favor a practical step to get a bit closer to what we both seem to favor, you merely condemn any idea short of total agreement. Did you never hear the old saw: "50% of something is better than 100% of nothing."? I want an end to the system (at least here in the US) that allows rights that should not be messed with to be voted on and/or legislated by states, the Congress or the courts. In the meantime, we MUST be aware that there are Catholic doctors and deal with that reality.

About fallacies... your particular analogy is still fallacious, even IF 'some' have murmured silly things about the obese. It is perfectly possible to make a statement that is vaguely true, but arrive at it and use it in a fallacious way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:07 PM

One solution that should be viable (if I can use that term in this context) is what is known as "Plan B," the "morning after pill. Birth control should be available to any woman who wants it, and should she have unprotected sex, she should have "Plan B" available as a backup.

What this does, as I understand it, is prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall. "Pro-lifers" object to this as merely another form of abortion, but there are two unknowns here.

1) Perhaps the ovum in question was NOT fertilized, hence not a potential person.

2) Who knows how many ova that have been fertilized fail to implant?

Good sex education and available birth control should prevent the problem of unwanted pregnancies in the first place, but if all else fails, abortion should be available to any woman who wants one.

If a woman is using abortion AS a method of birth control, she should be able to have the abortion, but should also receive a severe talking to and a swift kick in the butt!

One thing for sure:   if abortion is flat outlawed in this country, that won't stop wealthy women from taking a little vacation to somewhere where it is legal. Only the non-wealthy will be stuck with unwanted pregnancies.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:21 PM

You bet, Don - a real back to the future. 1950 all over again. And its ALWAYS the poor that bear the brunt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:27 PM

If a woman is using abortion AS a method of birth control, she should be able to have the abortion, but should also receive a severe talking to and a swift kick in the butt!

Fine, Don, but it takes two to shag effectively, remember?

I agree with all the rest!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:31 PM

but you didn't respond to my question about how your ideal situation might be achieved.

I respond to all manner of people all the time but I have a life to live as well. Responding to you is something that is quite frequently very low down my list of priorities, frankly. If I don't respond you are perfectly at liberty to draw whatever conclusions you like.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:36 PM

Lotta folks perhaps need a refresher on what brought about Row v. Wade...

At the time the decision was very much about civil rights and opportunity...

Women of means (think white here) where taking those little vacations to Mexico (wink, wink)...

Women of no means were dieing in makeshift backroom abortion dens in gas stations and dry-cleaners by people who, frankly, knew ver4y little about medicine...

I think that someone needs to remind the folks (mostly Republicans) that that is the way it went down and guess what???

The women who were going to Mexico were of class who now are Republicans...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 08:42 PM

Steve, both of the parties need a swift kick in the butt. There's a shared responsibility there which a lot of guys tend to forget in the heat of the moment.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 09:00 PM

"Responding to you is something that is quite frequently very low down my list of priorities..."

Oh, I'm sure... especially when I ask a hard one. You certainly can pour out long paragraphs at almost any other time ...*wry grin*

"... but I have a life to live as well."

I'll take that as a "no, I can't think of how to actually make it all work."

As I said... you are hard to agree with.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 09:13 PM

Take it how you like. I don't know what makes you think your posts are so important that you can demand responses from specific people. Post and be damned. If anyone wants to take you up, great. You are incredibly woolly and patronising. Especially patronising.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Elmore
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 10:06 PM

This has to be deja vu. A bunch of guys squabbling over women's reproductive rights. Am I back in the fifties?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 10:16 PM

Steve... My posts are no more...or less..important than anyone else's. I didn't "demand", I asked a question. You have taken twice as long ridiculing my posts as it would have taken to give an answer...

Ok fine.. so be it. I'll still argue for women's rights to choose, whether you think I am too conservative on the topic or not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 08:19 AM

I tend to avoid your posts if possible because of your excessive and tiresome use of capitals, dots, dashes, spaces, asterisks, bold and speech marks. It makes you look patronising, didactic and wholly distrustful of our ability to understand what you're saying. So if I don't answer one of your precious points it will be because I gave up the will to live before I reached that point in your post. Hope this helps.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 09:27 AM

Am I back in the fifties?

Not quite yet, Elmore, but just give it time, just give it time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 10:10 AM

Very strange, Steve. What you have recently been remarking on is my reasoning and analysis. In the 3 major posts I made on the current topic, beginning with 06 Mar 13 - 05:46 PM, I used very few speech marks, and those only for emphasis, to emulate as closely as possible how I would talk. If you interpret that as patronizing, I suggest you are going out of your way to find fault. You did reply to the content, with no remarks about style. Now I am informed that my style is your major complaint. In 15 years, no one else that I can remember has been put off by it. In deference to your delicate sensibilities, I write this with no embellishment, but with an admitted modicum of patronizing.
   My post of 06 Mar 13 - 05:46 PM, was not specifically directed at you. Because a post in an open forum is for all to read, I will continue to compose my thoughts in my standard style. It will not be a terrible loss if you choose to avoid and ignore them. Somehow, I will manage to carry on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 10:30 AM

A terrible loss to whom? Why don't you just do your own thing, quit the patronising and give out what you think from the hip? I am very mindful of how your approach, for example, makes pete ten times worse and gives him succour. Every time I see one of your posts full of your flowery embellishments I think you think we're all pete. Like everybody else round here, I pick up on points that I feel I have something to say about. There is nothing more annoying than someone telling me I didn't answer their points. If I've picked up on random things you've said it's because I felt I had something to say. If I don't pick up, it's because I have to do the shopping/cooking/learn tunes/go for a kip. Or have nothing to add or that I agree but don't feel the need to do a me-too post. Get over it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 11:00 AM

I'm totally over it...
I did suspect that your disapproval of how I conversed with pete was at the root of your attitude toward me. I still think I could talk to him in person, even though I disagree with him. Though I usually agree with you on substance, I doubt we'd get along. Very strange.

"give out what you think from the hip" I thought I was! I just don't think that insulting folks is part of being candid.
-----------------------------------------------------------

YOU need to get over my *flowery embellishments * ;>)

bye...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 11:06 AM

i had not even joined this post yet steve.i,m sure you can more or less guess what my opinion is .maybe you are not up to a discussion with bill even though he is as generally liberal on the subject as you , so you try to broaden it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 11:43 AM

Let's just close this thread...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Elmore
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 01:58 PM

Amen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 04:35 PM

Whether Bill is as liberal as me is not exactly beside the point (I don't really know what "as liberal" is supposed to mean, frankly - I'd rather define myself differently, if I really have to define myself at all). I find that patronising, quasi-avuncular, sneery attitudes get in the way of good debate. Let's be straightforward, put our points, not demand responses from particular individuals (we're not debating in the Oxford Union here) and see what happens. As for you, pete, you appear to understand nothing about anything, but you already know I think that so I won't bother saying it.

Oops...

And close the thread? Now how many times have I seen that failure of courage expressed on abortion threads...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 09:07 PM

"And close the thread? Now how many times have I seen that failure of courage expressed on abortion threads..."

Steve, you are missing it- it is not a failure of courage. I suggested closing this thread not because of the subject but because you are attacking a participant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 09:26 PM

I don't much want to fight with fellow Catters but if Eb wants this thread closed then close it 'cause ol hillbilly loves her...

BTW, I wish all the baby lovers loved 'um half as much after they were born than when they were residing in variuos stages in mommy's tummy...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 08:57 AM

I need the participant I am "attacking" to stop being patronising and condescending (which is precisely his way of attacking). He has a history of this in other threads. He is far from being the guru of all things he seems to profess to be. I tend to be fairly direct when I don't like what's going on. If that's a fault, well that's me. I would heartily welcome a return to a straightforward exchange of points. Thank you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 09:41 AM

Virtual thread closure in effect:
If you think it should be closed, don't open it
If you are stupid enough to open it, don't bitching about it to the world. As in "I think this thread is shit and should be closed, but as long as I'm here, I'll just add to the shit..."

We don't close threads because they're shit, because every now and then, a little blue flower grows out of the shit. Sometimes not, and it's yellow instead,or it's a stupid pine tree. Sometimes, it's just shit, but you keep walking around it, and eventually it sinks into the ground.
We don't close threads because someone gets their panties in a bunch over it.
If that were a valid reason to close, I'd get rid of every thread about politics, religion, or what sort of behavior is advisable around small wild animals.
Some people try way harder than they have to to be assholes. It's the internet. Read the comments on YouTube, and you'll realize that some of those attention-starved hate whores* are here. It's just the way things are. If you like fighting with them, you're as much of an asshole as they are. Maybe more, since you're ripe for them or anyone like them who comes along next time.

*That wasn't meant to be about Rand Paul. (If he's the future of the "party of 'stupid'", we're gonna have to come up with an adjective.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Roe vs Wade ByPass Effort
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 09:47 AM

Oi, I like pine trees. :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 5 December 5:30 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.