On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:50:29 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

On Oct 10, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message


The difference is much too subtle for you.


How you haven't seen this is beyond me. But, you probably wear
safety
glasses when brushing your teeth, so anything's possible.-

You probably don't understand why this is odd.- Hide quoted text -




What is with the constant accusations that folks that don't agree with
you "don't understand' or "don't read" or "don't care"... Do you
understand the concept of a Democratic Republic?? Do you understand
that the country is bigger than your basement apartment and a stack of
playboy magazines? I think you are stuck in a teenage fantasy, go back
to Jon Stewart, he seems to think at your level... Intolerant, and
ignorant...


His technique of debate has been well studied. Those with *very* liberal
viewpoints often take on a pseudo-superior, "I am smart, you are dumb"
attitude when engaged in otherwise informative and meaningful discussion
with someone who does not agree with him. In other words, if you don't
agree, you are ill-informed or stupid or both.

If you read his comments, you'll see that it is a consistent approach to
debate.


Eisboch


Perhaps you should read what he was responding to before passing judgement
this time, Eisboch.

Never mind. You won't.


I rest my case.

Eisboch


ROTFL!

"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Not at all. But, let's stick with a specific issue: "socialized
medicine".
How do you define that?

I thought sticking with the specific issue, was judging the performers
of the Republican candidate debate.....


Yeah. It took a left turn off a cliff, as usual.

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:45:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


What do you think should happen if:

- A 16 year old girl is raped and becomes pregnant
- Her parents are fully aware of the rape
- Her parents are dead set against her having an abortion


How many abortions are performed due to rape versus the number performed
following consenting sexual relations that results in an inconvenient
pregnancy?

Eisboch


I don't know. Why is a statistic important to a girl who doesn't want to
carry a baby that was conceived in an act of violence?


The 'morning after' pill seems designed for just such an eventuality. I
think it should be part of any post-rape treatment.

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:05:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:45:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:hMidneFBRJUzgZDanZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@giganews .com...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


What do you think should happen if:

- A 16 year old girl is raped and becomes pregnant
- Her parents are fully aware of the rape
- Her parents are dead set against her having an abortion


How many abortions are performed due to rape versus the number
performed
following consenting sexual relations that results in an inconvenient
pregnancy?

Eisboch


I don't know. Why is a statistic important to a girl who doesn't want to
carry a baby that was conceived in an act of violence?


The 'morning after' pill seems designed for just such an eventuality. I
think it should be part of any post-rape treatment.

Good for you. Unfortunately, certain cults think that pill is as bad as
having an abortion a month or two later.



In my scenario, there is no 'knowingly' killing a kid. That's how I can
resolve the issue.

John, that pill is pretty successful at doing its job, which is to kill a
fetus. And yet, you think it should be part of any post-rape treatment. How
do you resolve these apparently opposing concepts?

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:44:47 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:19:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:15:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:11:32 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Which stance did Romney take on reproductive rights?

I'm constantly amused by the phrase - "reproductive rights".

What exactly are "reproductive rights"?

Example: Deciding whether to continue a pregnancy after a woman's been
raped.

That's abortion rights.

I want to know what "reproductive rights" are.

Same thing.

No they are not the same thing.

OK. We're done with this branch of the thread. Have a nice day.

What? I thought you were intellectually curious - give it a good
debate.

Here's the crux of the issue. The issue is abortion rights, not
reproductive rights.

My/mine and you/yours and everybody else here have "reproductive"
rights - meaning that we have the right to reproduce if we so choose
to do so.

"Reproductive rights" has no meaning in the context of abortion.

Changing the name from abortion rights to reproductive rights doesn't
make the subject more palatable except to idiot liberal do-gooders who
seem to think that they can reframe the argument and make people
swallow the pill if it's less offensive.

I would have thought you might have not swallowed that kind of kool
aid.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:44:47 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:19:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:15:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
news:47qpg3hak6887fq1cfs7mkankl3sch1mcu@4ax. com...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:11:32 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Which stance did Romney take on reproductive rights?

I'm constantly amused by the phrase - "reproductive rights".

What exactly are "reproductive rights"?

Example: Deciding whether to continue a pregnancy after a woman's been
raped.

That's abortion rights.

I want to know what "reproductive rights" are.

Same thing.

No they are not the same thing.

OK. We're done with this branch of the thread. Have a nice day.

What? I thought you were intellectually curious - give it a good
debate.

Here's the crux of the issue. The issue is abortion rights, not
reproductive rights.

My/mine and you/yours and everybody else here have "reproductive"
rights - meaning that we have the right to reproduce if we so choose
to do so.

"Reproductive rights" has no meaning in the context of abortion.

Changing the name from abortion rights to reproductive rights doesn't
make the subject more palatable except to idiot liberal do-gooders who
seem to think that they can reframe the argument and make people
swallow the pill if it's less offensive.

I would have thought you might have not swallowed that kind of kool
aid.

I don't view the two terms as having vastly different "flavors", so to me,
they're interchangeable.

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:57:22 -0000, Tim wrote:


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

Not at all. But, let's stick with a specific issue: "socialized medicine".
How do you define that?

I thought sticking with the specific issue, was judging the performers
of the Republican candidate debate.....

LMAO!

Right on!

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:52:37 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
news
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Oct 10, 12:18?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:02:59 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
If Rudy prevails for the R's, much of the Christian right is ready to
defect. Should that happen, the next POTUS will be a D, not an R.
But who gives a darn which mob boss is in charge of the pimps and
thieves in the federal government, or even which mob is temporarily
king of the hill? One batch of *******s steals for one set of special
interests, and the other batch of *******s steals for another.
Larry? Is that you?

Certainly isn't worth getting all excited about, and definitely not
worthy of a fight between friends.
Friends? Didn't you just lecture me on the fact that you aren't
anybody's "friend" on Usenet - only an aquantaince and a dubious one
at that?

Sorry that you perceived the expression of my opinion as a "lecture."
There is no fighting among friends in a forum like this, just
fighting.
Fighting among friends would occur in other venues where people are
actually acquainted with one another, and occurs frequently during
political campaigns.

In any event, there is nothing to be gained by arguing politics. One
side or the other will "win". Big deal. How does that old lyric go?
"Meet the new boss- same as the old boss"?

Most of what the right wing has to say about the Democratic Party has
some foundation in fact. Unfortunately, most of what the left wing has
to way about the Republican Party is also well founded. Choosing a
party and candidate to run the country is like deciding whether you'd
rather be executed in the electric chair or by hanging.


*Both* parties would do well to consider what a very wise man once
said:

"For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which
you measure will be measured out to you.

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not
perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?

How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from
your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye?

You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you
will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye."








Gosh...to think I started this by merely commenting on the performance of
the participants, and not the content of their messages. Wow.

Hey...I tried to avoid the content, but sometimes, you just can't stop the
bluegills from biting.


False. You immediately trolled for a political fight.

Truth doesn't hurt.

Yes, I said, "you".

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:05:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:45:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:hMidneFBRJUzgZDanZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@giganew s.com...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


What do you think should happen if:

- A 16 year old girl is raped and becomes pregnant
- Her parents are fully aware of the rape
- Her parents are dead set against her having an abortion


How many abortions are performed due to rape versus the number
performed
following consenting sexual relations that results in an inconvenient
pregnancy?

Eisboch


I don't know. Why is a statistic important to a girl who doesn't want
to
carry a baby that was conceived in an act of violence?


The 'morning after' pill seems designed for just such an eventuality. I
think it should be part of any post-rape treatment.

Good for you. Unfortunately, certain cults think that pill is as bad as
having an abortion a month or two later.



In my scenario, there is no 'knowingly' killing a kid. That's how I can
resolve the issue.

John, that pill is pretty successful at doing its job, which is to kill a
fetus. And yet, you think it should be part of any post-rape treatment.
How do you resolve these apparently opposing concepts?

Do you believe there is a "fetus" the morning after?

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:05:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:45:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:hMidneFBRJUzgZDanZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@giganews. com...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


What do you think should happen if:

- A 16 year old girl is raped and becomes pregnant
- Her parents are fully aware of the rape
- Her parents are dead set against her having an abortion


How many abortions are performed due to rape versus the number performed
following consenting sexual relations that results in an inconvenient
pregnancy?

Eisboch


I don't know. Why is a statistic important to a girl who doesn't want to
carry a baby that was conceived in an act of violence?


The 'morning after' pill seems designed for just such an eventuality. I
think it should be part of any post-rape treatment.

Good for you. Unfortunately, certain cults think that pill is as bad as
having an abortion a month or two later.



In my scenario, there is no 'knowingly' killing a kid. That's how I can
resolve the issue.