Roe Vs Wade Overturned

[CJD]

(09-14-2022, 04:19 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: As if they give a shit about any rights. Let's not forget that StATe'S rIhGtS is just code for 'we wanna own black folks'.

Are you telling me that the conservative party in the United States of America is using the State's Rights jargon as a euphemism in the service of oppressing a specific non-cishet, white male demographic?

Honestly, I can't believe it. Nothing in our history could have possibly led us to believe that this could have happened! It's simply inconceivable.

[*pally*]

(09-14-2022, 04:31 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I assume this is in response to the KS referendum blowing up in their faces.  It was supposed to show that red states were all for the ban and the surprising number of red state republicans who will vote pro choice caught them off guard.  If a state that hasn't gone blue in almost 60 years can't be trusted to vote the way they want, which states can?

GOP - State's rights!
RED STATE - We want legal access to abortion.
GOP - National mandate!

Some think it is a reaction to so many GQP Senate candidates being behind in the polls.  Lindsey is trying to motivate the base and pro-birthers to vote by letting them think that they will get national legislation

[*Nately120*]

(09-14-2022, 06:37 PM)pally Wrote: Some think it is a reaction to so many GQP Senate candidates being behind in the polls.  Lindsey is trying to motivate the base and pro-birthers to vote by letting them think that they will get national legislation

I'd assume they're behind because they are too extreme to get the independent vote, so I'm not sure why continuing to appeal to the most extreme parts of their base is the GOP's strategy.  Maybe Lindsey just went rogue on this one, I don't know.

I guess we will see how things go. I know the GOP is powerful, but this whole method of appealing to 3 or 4 people out of 10 and then claiming it was rigged if you don't win strategy might go the way of Putin being sure he'd conquer Ukraine in 2 weeks...or it might not.

[BigPapaKain]

(09-14-2022, 07:20 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'd assume they're behind because they are too extreme to get the independent vote, so I'm not sure why continuing to appeal to the most extreme parts of their base is the GOP's strategy.  Maybe Lindsey just went rogue on this one, I don't know.

I guess we will see how things go.  I know the GOP is powerful, but this whole method of appealing to 3 or 4 people out of 10 and then claiming it was rigged if you don't win strategy might go the way of Putin being sure he'd conquer Ukraine in 2 weeks...or it might not.

If Lindsey went rogue, why did Rubio back him?

I think they're all just boned in the brain.

[*Nately120*]

(09-14-2022, 08:05 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: If Lindsey went rogue, why did Rubio back him?

I think they're all just boned in the brain.

I think the GOP is convinced it can appeal to 3 or 4 people out of 10 and still win, and I'm not convinced they are wrong.  Are you?

[BigPapaKain]

(09-14-2022, 08:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I think the GOP is convinced it can appeal to 3 or 4 people out of 10 and still win, and I'm not convinced they are wrong.  Are you?

Given how hard they've gerrymandered the country...

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-14-2022, 08:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I think the GOP is convinced it can appeal to 3 or 4 people out of 10 and still win, and I'm not convinced they are wrong.  Are you?

66.8% voter turnout in 2020.
So less than 7 people out of 10 voted.
4 people out of 10 would be enough for a landslide majority vote win if all of those 4/10 show up to vote.
Even if you get 3.5/10 to show up and vote for you, that'd be 52.4% of the vote (based on 2020 turnout).

Obviously not sure how it would line up as far as electoral votes go, but it's not an inherently doomed strategy to focus on motivating a smaller group that's has a more reliable voter turnout rate.

Obviously not me endorsing it, and this shit won't get my vote, just thinking about it from purely a strategical standpoint. As with all campaigns, it's all about turnout. Support or opposition mean nothing if you don't vote and there's far too many people who don't.

[*Nately120*]

(09-16-2022, 10:38 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 66.8% voter turnout in 2020.
So less than 7 people out of 10 voted.
4 people out of 10 would be enough for a landslide majority vote win if all of those 4/10 show up to vote.
Even if you get 3.5/10 to show up and vote for you, that'd be 52.4% of the vote (based on 2020 turnout).

Obviously not sure how it would line up as far as electoral votes go, but it's not an inherently doomed strategy to focus on motivating a smaller group that's has a more reliable voter turnout rate.

Obviously not me endorsing it, and this shit won't get my vote, just thinking about it from purely a strategical standpoint. As with all campaigns, it's all about turnout. Support or opposition mean nothing if you don't vote and there's far too many people who don't.

True but then you get into support among likely voters and what a likely voter is and how we can stop voters we don't like from being so likely to vote, and so on. 

I find the gops muti pronged strategy of pushing unpopular policy along with voter suppression and outright refusal to acknowledge results they don't like to be uncomfortably effective. 

[Arturo Bandini]

You should have seen my face when I learnt that it costs thousand of dollars to give birth in America ... I didn't know why I laughed when they said that taking your newborn in your arms was billed ... Never been that much in confusion for a while.

And yes, it's effing free out there.

Imagine being raped, having to keep the baby of your rapist and paying 10 000$ for that.

And some dude here talked about decency.

[GMDino]

(11-26-2022, 05:10 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: You should have seen my face when I learnt that it costs thousand of dollars to give birth in America ... I didn't know why I laughed when they said that taking your newborn in your arms was billed ... Never been that much in confusion for a while.

And yes, it's effing free out there.

Imagine being raped, having to keep the baby of your rapist and paying 10 000$ for that.

And some dude here talked about decency.

My wife and I easily cleared the $1.5 million mark for our two preemies.  Luckily Pennsylvania does have a program (or did 20 years ago) that helps with medical bills if the baby is born under a certain weight/too early.

We were also fortunate that neither has any long term affects from it.

I also like to note when I share that story that the NICU charged for oxygen on the quarter hour.  So if something happened within the hour you still got charged for the fifteen or thirty minutes anyway.

We have a bad system.  I'm not even mad my daughter doesn't want kids.

[Arturo Bandini]

(11-28-2022, 10:18 AM)GMDino Wrote: My wife and I easily cleared the $1.5 million mark for our two preemies.  Luckily Pennsylvania does have a program (or did 20 years ago) that helps with medical bills if the baby is born under a certain weight/too early.

We were also fortunate that neither has any long term affects from it.

I also like to note when I share that story that the NICU charged for oxygen on the quarter hour.  So if something happened within the hour you still got charged for the fifteen or thirty minutes anyway.

We have a bad system.  I'm not even mad my daughter doesn't want kids.

This is just gross, inhumane, pathetic. I'm mad to read that. 

All of this is free in France. And we don't spend our time in church.

[Leon]

(11-28-2022, 01:03 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: This is just gross, inhumane, pathetic. I'm mad to read that. 

All of this is free in France. And we don't spend our time in church.

thats unfirtunate sir

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(11-28-2022, 01:03 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: This is just gross, inhumane, pathetic. I'm mad to read that. 

All of this is free in France. And we don't spend our time in church.

When my son was born in March of this year, we had:

- pre-birth room (for 1 day)
- Caesarian performed
- PRIVATE post-birth room (for 3 days)
- 7 lunches (4 for my wife)
- 6 dinners (3 for my wife)
- 7 breakfasts (3 for my wife. Was weird at what times we ate lol)
- unlimited snacks and sandwiches (whatever they had available, of course)
- 2 dedicated nurses, 'round the clock and their 2 aides
- Toques (beanies), blankets, baby nutrition books, a few other goodies.

Total cost of all that? $47.90. And that was only because I had to pay for my meals: my wife's were free.

US health system is so ass-backwards (like a ton of things in the country), it is laughably saddening.

[Arturo Bandini]

(11-29-2022, 05:07 PM)Leon Wrote: thats unfirtunate sir

Maybe we already get the message of sharing, respecting and helping each others. 

One man once said it's wasn't useful to go on a church to make other people see how much of a believer you are. 

If I want to talk to God, I can do it in my room. 

[Arturo Bandini]

(11-29-2022, 05:15 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: When my son was born in March of this year, we had:

- pre-birth room (for 1 day)
- Caesarian performed
- PRIVATE post-birth room (for 3 days)
- 7 lunches (4 for my wife)
- 6 dinners (3 for my wife)
- 7 breakfasts (3 for my wife. Was weird at what times we ate lol)
- unlimited snacks and sandwiches (whatever they had available, of course)
- 2 dedicated nurses, 'round the clock and their 2 aides
- Toques (beanies), blankets, baby nutrition books, a few other goodies.

Total cost of all that? $47.90. And that was only because I had to pay for my meals: my wife's were free.

US health system is so ass-backwards (like a ton of things in the country), it is laughably saddening.

This is what being civilized means. 

Country of freedom my ***.

[GMDino]

(11-29-2022, 05:15 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: When my son was born in March of this year, we had:

- pre-birth room (for 1 day)
- Caesarian performed
- PRIVATE post-birth room (for 3 days)
- 7 lunches (4 for my wife)
- 6 dinners (3 for my wife)
- 7 breakfasts (3 for my wife. Was weird at what times we ate lol)
- unlimited snacks and sandwiches (whatever they had available, of course)
- 2 dedicated nurses, 'round the clock and their 2 aides
- Toques (beanies), blankets, baby nutrition books, a few other goodies.

Total cost of all that? $47.90. And that was only because I had to pay for my meals: my wife's were free.

US health system is so ass-backwards (like a ton of things in the country), it is laughably saddening.

Yeah, but you pay higher taxes!!! 

All seriousness aside MY taxes went to that card from the state that covered most of our bills, and for the life of me I can't understand why more people don't want that for themselves and others.

My wife had surgery last year and among the $3500.00 not covered my insurance was an hourly charge for her to sit in a room and recover.  I honestly said out loud that had I known that I would have rented a room at the local hotel for her to sit it in and saved thousands of dollars.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-14-2022, 04:19 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: As if they give a shit about any rights. Let's not forget that StATe'S rIhGtS is just code for 'we wanna own black folks'.

Three months and not  one of you challenged this?  SMH  

[hollodero]

(12-06-2022, 11:32 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Three months and not  one of you challenged this?  SMH  

Alright, I don't think states' rights is just code for 'we want to own black folks'.

[Dill]

(12-06-2022, 11:32 AM)michaelsean Wrote: BigPapaKain Wrote:As if they give a shit about any rights. Let's not forget that StATe'S rIhGtS is just code for 'we wanna own black folks'.


Three months and not  one of you challenged this?  SMH  

Right. Well I am challenging it now.

It's not just bLaCk FoLkS.  LGBQT+ will also be owned. 

Not to mention women who cannot get abortions. 

Big P is way off on that one. 

[MrRager]

(12-06-2022, 11:43 AM)hollodero Wrote: Alright, I don't think states' rights is just code for 'we want to own black folks'.

While I agree with you, I think it is pretty easy to see where someone would come to that conclusion. In my experience, states' rights, comes up most often when talking about the Civil War. Somehow it became a talking point to claim the Civil War was fought over states' right and had nothing to do with slavery. 

The other times I hear people use states' rights is usually about taking people's rights away. Abortion, gay marriage, interracial marriage, trans rights, book banning in education. Based on all of that, you have to be pretty leery of someone pounding the table for states' rights. 99% of the time I hear it, it's to punish a group of people, or rewrite history to lessen the horrible reason the Confederacy seceded.

The other 1% of the time I hear it, is about weed legalization, which yeah that's cool.

As an aside, I don't know where I stand on states' rights in general. I think I might be more of a Federalist. I don't really care which state someone lives in, they should be afforded a basic baseline of rights, like the ones mentioned above. Once those baselines are met, then the states can go their own way, but for anyone to act like, "whelp, Ohio voted to ban interracial marriage, I guess we just need to accept that," is absurd to me.