South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers

[Dreadnaught]

The actual issue is the GOP trying various ways to limit (if not outright eradicate) a legal medical service for women---abortion---by defunding PP for ALL its services.

Once again, defunding =! outlawing. Just because the government doesn't pay for something doesn't mean it's illegal. When did you become such a statist?

Not to burst your bubble, but 300,00 abortions aren't performed in NYC alone. We know you have issues understanding the outside world, but this isn't a NYC only thing. Thats the message you missed. See, the idea of the internet is that you can access sites from almost anywhere. That website thatsabortion, thats accessible from outside NYC, they even address this as a nationwade issue on their homepage

but its so hypocritical he rants againist khen's style in one of the other active threads, but this by far his most common reaction when he makes a defensive post.

Jesus dude, you think there's no reason chose to put a sign up about African-American abortion rates in a city where people are debating high African-American abortion rates?

Obviously they are a national organization, but the sign clearly also reflects a legitimate local debate. One that I brought here weeks ago.

I criticize Khend's tone because he's always disproportionately hostile. Different issue than a simple phrase that makes you disproportionately hostile.

Which is a god-damned curious juxtaposition given where we live.

And please don't use 'bro'

After being effectively demonized by Republicans in 2004, I just don't think it's constructive.

[Ominous Gamer]

Jesus dude, you think there's no reason chose to put a sign up about African-American abortion rates in a city where people are debating high African-American abortion rates?

Well damn, your soda wars must be insane. Here I was thinking that billsboards aim for exposure.


Sure wish we had some of that tasty coke down here in Florida

I wonder how the abortion debate differs in Wisconsin



or Georgia


maybe Florida's abortions taste the best?

I criticize Khend's tone because he's always disproportionately hostile. Different issue than a simple phrase that makes you disproportionately hostile.

I don't know if you're actually trying to downplay the the passive insults, or if you're perhaps trying to bring a 4 year old's "I'm NOT touching you" game into the internet

[GGT]

Once again, defunding =! outlawing. Just because the government doesn't pay for something doesn't mean it's illegal. When did you become such a statist?

What the hell. You say Planned Parenthood provides valuable services, and acknowledge that ~33% of their funding comes the federal government. Why would you think it's okay to remove 1/3 of their funding, just because a tiny percent of their services means abortions.....not abortions paid for with federal dollars.... but abortions on their property?

[Ominous Gamer]

Starve the Beast has become a popular GOP tactic lately.

[GGT]

When did you become such a statist?

When did you become such an ass hole?

[Dreadnaught]

Well damn, your soda wars must be insane. Here I was thinking that billsboards aim for exposure...
I don't know if you're actually trying to downplay the the passive insults, or if you're perhaps trying to bring a 4 year old's "I'm NOT touching you" game into the internet

You actually think I think there aren't anti-abortion posters outside of New York? St. Petersburg, FL is where I saw the first anti-abortion poster in my life. I was 12 and it blew my mind, we don't really have those in New York. This poster in Soho is a big exception.

As often happens, it's not clear what your point is anymore. That abortion is a national issue? Nor am I clear about why you are so paranoid/offended by my pro-choice-but-not-going-to-demonize-the-opposition viewpoint.

What the hell. You say Planned Parenthood provides valuable services, and acknowledge that ~33% of their funding comes the federal government. Why would you think it's okay to remove 1/3 of their funding, just because a tiny percent of their services means abortions.....not abortions paid for with federal dollars.... but abortions on their property?

When did you become such an ass hole?

I think a large amount of their expenditure goes towards subsidized abortions. And I support that. I support using federal dollars to subsidize abortions. But I understand why that makes people uncomfortable and I won't judge them for being uncomfortable with that.

You, however, seem to have a conniption and are calling me an asshole because I believe that a legal choice is still a legal choice even if the government doesn't pay for it.

[Nessus]

Once again, defunding =! outlawing. Just because the government doesn't pay for something doesn't mean it's illegal. When did you become such a statist? .

It does effectively rule it out for a huge load of people, though. Did you know there's a world outside Manhattan? With brown people in?

After being effectively demonized by Republicans in 2004, I just don't think it's constructive.

What was demonized? Abortion? It's not 'constructive' after a political campaign? This is one of those times when we don't speak the same language.

[Ominous Gamer]

[Dreadnaught]

It does effectively rule it out for a huge load of people, though. Did you know there's a world outside Manhattan? With brown people in?

What was demonized? Abortion? It's not 'constructive' after a political campaign? This is one of those times when we don't speak the same language.

Once again, what are you an OG talking about? When did I ever suggest that abortion isn't a national issue? OG posted a picture of an anti-abortion billboard in Manhattan, and I suggested there is probably a link to a debate we're having in New York City about high abortion rates among minorities.

The demonization in 2004 was the suggestion that the anti-war, pro-gay views of New Yorkers were basically un-American and antithetical to the bedrock of our nation. That coastal liberals basically had to be saved from ourselves by a strong and gay-free military.

[Ominous Gamer]

this is clearly in reference to the controversy we've been having in New York

≠

I suggested there is probably a link to a debate we're having in New York City

[Nessus]

Once again, what are you an OG talking about? When did I ever suggest that abortion isn't a national issue? OG posted a picture of an anti-abortion billboard in Manhattan, and I suggested there is probably a link to a debate we're having in New York City about high abortion rates among minorities.

The demonization in 2004 was the suggestion that the anti-war, pro-gay views of New Yorkers were basically un-American and antithetical to the bedrock of our nation. That coastal liberals basically had to be saved from ourselves by a strong and gay-free military.

What I meant was, if it isn't subsidized by tax payer money, poor people can't have it. And I'd argue poor families are places where we want to put kids the least. And a poor 15-year-old black girl isn't doing so hot to begin with, but if she gets stuck with Jerome's little bastard on top of that, she's going to have one Hell of an uphill swim ahead. This is why I asked whether you were aware of the existence of brown people, and jokingly hinted that your social life resembles that of Patrick Bateman.

Pubbies used hyperbole to smear an issue? Say it ain't so. I still don't understand what you meant by "not constructive". Are you saying anything the Pubs manage to smear is thereafter off limits? What is the purpose of even having a second party in that situation?

[Dreadnaught]

This is why I support subsidized abortions. But it doesn't mean I have such tunnel vision that I can't understand why people don't support subsidized abortions.

And, more generally, on principle I don't think societies should get in the habit of conflating "choice to do __" with "get __ free from the government".

[Nessus]

This is why I support subsidized abortions. But it doesn't mean I have such tunnel vision that I can't understand why people don't support subsidized abortions.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I don't understand the people who don't like abortions? I don't understand conservatives? What?

And, more generally, on principle I don't think societies should get in the habit of conflating "choice to do __" with "get __ free from the government".

Obviously no one is seriously going to suggest governments subsidizing snorting blow off a gold plated hooker's ass, that's an incentive to get little kids into the career path towards being a CEO. But basic services that benefit not just the recipient but society at large should at least be considered up for government subsidization. So long as embryos can't be grown in artificial wombs, I'd say subsidized abortions are about on par with having public schools, cops and so on.

[Dreadnaught]

I'm saying that you're going hyperbolic over an issue that's not that shouldn't be that surprising. People who don't support abortion don't want their government paying for it.

My problem with the "basic services" issue is that people seem to be unable to prioritize and separate "basic services" from other things. I think subsidized abortions are important and worthwhile, but I wouldn't characterize them as a "basic service" and the world is ending if those subsidies are ended because of fiscal or ideological reasons.

[Nessus]

I'm saying that you're going hyperbolic over an issue that's not that shouldn't be that surprising. People who don't support abortion don't want their government paying for it.

Yeah, thanks.

My problem with the "basic services" issue is that people seem to be unable to prioritize and separate "basic services" from other things. I think subsidized abortions are important and worthwhile, but I wouldn't characterize them as a "basic service" and the world is ending if those subsidies are ended because of fiscal or ideological reasons.

Yes, you have made that abundantly clear.

[Dreadnaught]

So why are you making me out to be an anti-abortion Republican extremist? I'm neither anti-abortion nor a Republican.

[Nessus]

Is that what this was about?

[Illusions]

Dreadnaught, is it possible that the giving and withholding of money can be a method of speech, and not only a method of increasing or decreasing how much money someone has?

[Khendraja'aro]

Pubbies used hyperbole to smear an issue? Say it ain't so. I still don't understand what you meant by "not constructive". Are you saying anything the Pubs manage to smear is thereafter off limits? What is the purpose of even having a second party in that situation?

The US has a second party? I always thought there only was "right wing" and "even more right wing".

Anecdote: A German student stayed in the US for a year and took a test to determine where he stood on the political scale. He then decided to answer every question like someone from the right-wing part of our conservative party (CDU).

The test told him that he was a dirty liberal and communist.

[Dreadnaught]

Dreadnaught, is it possible that the giving and withholding of money can be a method of speech, and not only a method of increasing or decreasing how much money someone has?

Err...sure, yes. Where are you going with this?

The US has a second party? I always thought there only was "right wing" and "even more right wing".

Anecdote: A German student stayed in the US for a year and took a test to determine where he stood on the political scale. He then decided to answer every question like someone from the right-wing part of our conservative party (CDU).

The test told him that he was a dirty liberal and communist.

Any of those flimsy tests will -- to some extent -- rely on issues that are hot topics here, but aren't in Germany. EG is abortion really a political issue in Germany at all?

[Khendraja'aro]

Any of those flimsy tests will -- to some extent -- rely on issues that are hot topics here, but aren't in Germany. EG is abortion really a political issue in Germany at all?

That word "anecdote", do you know it? Put it there for a reason.

Congratulations for taking a not-to-be-taken-seriously-post seriously. The current big thing in medicinal ethics is euthanasia, by the way. The way you're lagging behind in such issues, I'd guess you'll talk about that one in, say, a hundred years when you've finally left the medieval era.

[Nessus]

Their political landscape suggests they're moving towards it, not trying to leave it.

[Khendraja'aro]

Their political landscape suggests they're moving towards it, not trying to leave it.

Then they'll be dragged kicking and screaming into the Century of the Fruitbat!

[Nessus]

I'm afraid it won't be us doing the dragging.

[Dreadnaught]

That word "anecdote", do you know it? Put it there for a reason.

Congratulations for taking a not-to-be-taken-seriously-post seriously. The current big thing in medicinal ethics is euthanasia, by the way. The way you're lagging behind in such issues, I'd guess you'll talk about that one in, say, a hundred years when you've finally left the medieval era.

I know it's an anecdote, doesn't mean it's not subject for discussion.

I would be able to distinguish when you're not being serious if you started posting with less hostility all the time.

[Khendraja'aro]

I know it's an anecdote, doesn't mean it's not subject for discussion.

I would be able to distinguish when you're not being serious if you started posting with less hostility all the time.

The "dirty liberal and communist" should've been another hint, though.

[Illusions]

Err...sure, yes. Where are you going with this?

So your main point is that you can understand if people don't want their tax dollars go towards funding what they believe to be essentially murder, correct? But in actuality the money going to Planned Parenthood compared to all of the actual money we spend is really, really tiny. Going even further, the amount of money Planned Parenthood actually spends on abortions is a tiny percentage. Also Federal money can't go towards abortions anyway. So since this is an inconsequential amount of money that could be somehow tangentially used for abortions, do you think this is more about saving money and keeping money from being used for abortions, or instead to be a form of speech?

[Dreadnaught]

If you think abortion is murder, any funds going towards Planned Parenthood are facilitating murder.

At about $80 million last year, the funding comprises 33% of Planned Parenthood's budget. That's a decent chunk of money, all of which goes to an organization that does promote increasing access to abortion. These funds also free up plenty of money for Planned Parenthood to deliver subsidized abortions.

I don't think it's worth arguing that this money doesn't facilitate abortions in some way. I think the more substantial debate is whether the government should be subsidizing something legal like abortion. Which I think it should.

[Illusions]

That doesn't answer my final question at all. If you had answered it, you would have discovered that whether or not a government should be subsidizing something legal, like abortion, is not what is actually being determined by this legislation, or why it exists in the first place, and has about as much merit being discussed in relation to it as which Nazi uniform, Grey, Black, or Brown, is more fashionable is relevant or has merit in discussing WWII. If you are wondering why this last part is so ridiculous it is because you are acting this way.

If you stopped trying to discuss what you think is important about this debate, and instead discussed what everyone else feels is important about this debate maybe you'd find yourself in a better position for discussing anything at all.

[Aimless]

2:30