Politician attempting to stifle PP research

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(11-14-2015, 03:18 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm not sure a waiting period is such a bad idea.   More time to get information to prevent an abortion, for those who are on the fence..     more information isn't a bad thing..  I can think we both agree on that notion.

I'm not saying that getting more info is a bad thing.  However it is more than likely that the person who is going to have the procedure done, has probably already put in well more than 3 days trying to make the decision, I see no need to make them wait another 3.  And for those, that have no qualms in having the procedure done...I don't see making them wait 3 days is going to sway them much.  Once the decision is made it needs to be done as soon as possible. 

[GodHatesBengals]

StLucieBengal Wrote:When corporate makes a bond with the govenment to be the propaganda machine.   Yes.   

1. Do you really think the corporate media in America hasn't done that?

2. Even if they didn't, aren't they still dangerous? If you have a conglomerate that has multiple, various economic interests owning a media company, don't you think that's problematic? If the same guy who owns, say, a weaponry company owns a news station, isn't there a conflict of interest when it comes to military/defense reporting?

I'm not arguing for a government takeover of all media, but you're completely kidding yourself if you think journalism in America is not completely screwed due to corporate ownership. And whilst much state-sponsored media is indeed distorted, it can provide a much needed counterbalance to the corporate media in the short-term. The long-term best option, of course, would be the termination of corporate and government ownership.

[StLucieBengal]

(11-14-2015, 05:44 AM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: 1. Do you really think the corporate media in America hasn't done that?

2. Even if they didn't, aren't they still dangerous? If you have a conglomerate that has multiple, various economic interests owning a media company, don't you think that's problematic? If the same guy who owns, say, a weaponry company owns a news station, isn't there a conflict of interest when it comes to military/defense reporting?

I'm not arguing for a government takeover of all media, but you're completely kidding yourself if you think journalism in America is not completely screwed due to corporate ownership. And whilst much state-sponsored media is indeed distorted, it can provide a much needed counterbalance to the corporate media in the short-term. The long-term best option, of course, would be the termination of corporate and government ownership.

We are on the same side here.

I think it is a serious problem currently which is why I support new media. I want an adversarial relationship between media and the government . You can not have that with corporate partnerships with government . Abc, CBS, NBC, fox, MSNBC, CNN, Russia today, aljazeera, bbc, npr, are all part of the problem.

Members of the media should not be able to give to campaigns or PAC's. Or if they do then they should be forced to disclose at the beginning of every news report they do on politics.

[JustWinBaby]

(11-14-2015, 02:50 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: I thought the one thing that most pro-lifers and pro-choicers could agree on is if it is going to happen (abortion that is), the sooner the better. 

Where in the world did you get that idea? And I said I'm not against abortion. I'm shocked (but not really) that people are arguing what should be a very benign and inarguable point.

There's no hyperbole.  If you aren't going to give the fetus any rights, at least give it a better chance than a 12-pack of nuggets.

[JustWinBaby]

(11-14-2015, 03:32 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Once the decision is made it needs to be done as soon as possible. 

Why?  What difference, at that point, would it make?

You act like it's a cancer requiring immediate surgery or the patient dies.

[Rotobeast]

(11-14-2015, 02:50 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Hyperbole much?

I thought the one thing that most pro-lifers and pro-choicers could agree on is if it is going to happen (abortion that is), the sooner the better.  But now you want people to go through out an arbitrary waiting period?  Hell why not a week? How about two weeks?  How long of a waiting period do you want people (that you don't know) to go through to make a decision that affects you in no way?

Like someone buying gun ?
 

The firearm waiting period is to prevent a rash decision and needless death, as is this.

[BmorePat87]

(11-14-2015, 11:18 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Like someone buying gun ?
 

The firearm waiting period is to prevent a rash decision and needless death, as is this.

Since those don't work, can we just scrap both waiting periods?

[Rotobeast]

(11-14-2015, 12:48 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Since those don't work, can we just scrap both waiting periods?

Fine by me.
I'm not a hard-liner on either.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(11-14-2015, 07:16 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Why?  What difference, at that point, would it make?

You act like it's a cancer requiring immediate surgery or the patient dies.

Well the way I see it, the less time it has to develop the better.  Even most pro-lifers agree if it's going to be done...the sooner the better.

You act like some arbitrary waiting period is going to keep it from happening.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(11-14-2015, 11:18 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Like someone buying gun ?
 

The firearm waiting period is to prevent a rash decision and needless death, as is this.

I thought about this to when typing my reply.  But intentionally left it out because I didn't want to bring a gun fight to an abortion thread.

The only waiting period I see needed to buy a gun is however long it takes to do a background check.  But no I don't think arbitrary waiting periods work either in response to gun violence.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(11-14-2015, 12:48 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Since those don't work, can we just scrap both waiting periods?

Agreed.

[StLucieBengal]

I am ok with not having a gun waiting period.

The waiting period on abortion isn't the right way for reform anyway. Any waiting period just aggravates people and probably pushes them towards it more.