Where on the political spectrum do you lie? (Mods: Please don't move!)

[reaganyouth84]

One positive thing about Bredesen he is honest. Former Gov. Sunquist, a Republican, nearly ruined our state by being dishonest to voters. He even feathered his own nest with taxpayer money. Remember the road built to his private home. Then the state income tax he proposed after he clearly stated he would never support one.

He is the biggest disapiontment I ever voted for. He thought he could justify one lie by telling another.

Luckly, I was too young to vote back then, or I might have made the same mistake, lol. I'll be honest, the first time I was able to vote, I voted for Van Hillary or Gov, and I voted for Clement over Lamar Alexander for Senate. I'd probably still do it the same way again if I had to.

Talking about Sundquist, I remember the state parks, schools, and other institutions closing because the state couldn't fund them to keep them open. Yeah, Sundquist rocked! (sarcasim)

-Mike

[Amanda]

The biggest hypocrisy of all in my mind is not people who are pro-choice yet anti-death penalty....nor is it those who are pro-death penalty but pro-life on abortion. It's those who claim to be "pro-life" but anti taxes. The culture warriors, who are all too often the same crowd constantly complaining about being overtaxed, appear to be clueless on the financial ramifications of enforced childbirth. Suffice it to say that the cost of government would swell significantly. Let's just take a quick look at a couple of the ways in which the "give me my money back" crowd would have to open up their wallets if they got what they asked for and criminalized abortion....

1. The cost of prohibition. Prohibitions never work. As long as the demand for a good or service prevails, the supply will simply fall into a black market. That was the case with bootleggers in the 1910's, foreign cartels with narcotics as a result of the current "war on drugs", and lawless pimps taking advantage of teenage runaways because of our prohibition against prostitution. Before the Roe vs. Wade ruling, it was also the case with abortion as back-alley abortionists did primitive work on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Such a culture will resurface if abortion is made illegal. Even for those who claim not to care if abortions retreat to the black market in the wake of a legal prohibition, your pocketbook will care. A whole new slough of vice police officers will need to be hired nationwide to enforce the laws against the newly-invented criminals....more bureaucrats will have to be hired at courthouses and probation offices to process the new criminals.....and more prisons will have to be built to lock up the back-alley abortion providers and the would-be mothers seeking their services. Bottom line....somebody has to pay for this massive expansion of government....something not being considered by the "it's my money" crowd as they clamor to infiltrate the courts with judges that would overthrow Roe vs. Wade.

2. Huge new social service costs. Forget about the whole disingenuous "welfare mama" argument and just focus on the simple fact that women who would otherwise be having abortions would be less likely to be good mothers. Whatever socioeconomic background these women come from, they'd be far more likely to be substance abusers during their pregnancy, and thus give birth to children with medical and intellectual deficiencies. Alcoholic and drug-addicted mothers that would have otherwise had abortions will bring about a population boom of needy children and will require a huge surge in public spending to finance a lifetime of special education and extensive health care treatment. Again, these expenses will have to covered, at least in part, by the same people who think they're overtaxed now!

I can't accept the idea that "pro-life" ends when the umbilical cord is cut, but I sense many of the penny-pinching, tax-hating ideologues on the front lines of the abortion war believe their commitment ends once the child passes through mama's loins. I am personally opposed to abortion myself, but could only support the criminalization of abortion if I thought our society was mature enough to deal with the consequences. In no way am I confident that in today's gluttonous and avaricious "it's my money" climate that the loudest voices in the anti-abortion movement would be willing to put their money where their mouth is. Bottom line....be careful what you wish for, "pro-lifers". It just might come true.

[cigar no baka]

I also believe in enforced reversible sterilization of children at the age of 12. Let 'em screw like bunnies, and tell them so. But at the age of 21, let a panel of their peers decide if we reverse the process, or make it permanent. Peers to include clergy if they are religious, parents, other family, friends, etc. It would not be perfect, but I don't think reproduction is a right. If abused, it gets you to....well, where we are now, just look at our society.

So, less children being born - no need for new taxes - and those that are would be more likely be children of stable, well-adjusted people, not the immature mentally stunted people that are having children today. Society in general would benefit enormously. And KEEP THE STATE OUT OF IT - let the community decide, and keep the bureaucrats and politicians out of the whole process.

Plus, we need to re-introduce the concept of shame in to society. People wear their ignorance and irresposible acts like a badge of honor nowadays.

Abortion - NO. I say make all the birth control in the world available for anyone who wants it. But let children be brought to term, and a childless couple who cannot have children of their own but desperately want them can adopt them.

[reaganyouth84]

The biggest hypocrisy of all in my mind is not people who are pro-choice yet anti-death penalty....nor is it those who are pro-death penalty but pro-life on abortion. It's those who claim to be "pro-life" but anti taxes. The culture warriors, who are all too often the same crowd constantly complaining about being overtaxed, appear to be clueless on the financial ramifications of enforced childbirth. Suffice it to say that the cost of government would swell significantly. Let's just take a quick look at a couple of the ways in which the "give me my money back" crowd would have to open up their wallets if they got what they asked for and criminalized abortion....

1. The cost of prohibition. Prohibitions never work. As long as the demand for a good or service prevails, the supply will simply fall into a black market. That was the case with bootleggers in the 1910's, foreign cartels with narcotics as a result of the current "war on drugs", and lawless pimps taking advantage of teenage runaways because of our prohibition against prostitution. Before the Roe vs. Wade ruling, it was also the case with abortion as back-alley abortionists did primitive work on women seeking to terminate a pregnancy. Such a culture will resurface if abortion is made illegal. Even for those who claim not to care if abortions retreat to the black market in the wake of a legal prohibition, your pocketbook will care. A whole new slough of vice police officers will need to be hired nationwide to enforce the laws against the newly-invented criminals....more bureaucrats will have to be hired at courthouses and probation offices to process the new criminals.....and more prisons will have to be built to lock up the back-alley abortion providers and the would-be mothers seeking their services. Bottom line....somebody has to pay for this massive expansion of government....something not being considered by the "it's my money" crowd as they clamor to infiltrate the courts with judges that would overthrow Roe vs. Wade.

2. Huge new social service costs. Forget about the whole disingenuous "welfare mama" argument and just focus on the simple fact that women who would otherwise be having abortions would be less likely to be good mothers. Whatever socioeconomic background these women come from, they'd be far more likely to be substance abusers during their pregnancy, and thus give birth to children with medical and intellectual deficiencies. Alcoholic and drug-addicted mothers that would have otherwise had abortions will bring about a population boom of needy children and will require a huge surge in public spending to finance a lifetime of special education and extensive health care treatment. Again, these expenses will have to covered, at least in part, by the same people who think they're overtaxed now!

I can't accept the idea that "pro-life" ends when the umbilical cord is cut, but I sense many of the penny-pinching, tax-hating ideologues on the front lines of the abortion war believe their commitment ends once the child passes through mama's loins. I am personally opposed to abortion myself, but could only support the criminalization of abortion if I thought our society was mature enough to deal with the consequences. In no way am I confident that in today's gluttonous and avaricious "it's my money" climate that the loudest voices in the anti-abortion movement would be willing to put their money where their mouth is. Bottom line....be careful what you wish for, "pro-lifers". It just might come true.

That's why sex is an ADULT decision with ADULT consequences. Your choice ends after you decide to whip it out. We all know the consequences. BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. We live in an age now where accountability is a distant nusance, because everyone thinks "well, I can always blame it on someone else" or with pregancy its "well, I can be flagrant because I have a choice." Makes me sick.
-Mike

[Amanda]

"Personal responsibility" is not a solution to the financial imposition that would come from criminalizing abortion. Pro-lifers can preach "personal responsibility" until they're blue in the face and the number of unplanned pregnancies will never drop to zero. Whenever I lay out my case for why banning abortion would necessarily grow the tax burden of the very people pushing for the ban, I get clobbered over the head with the "personal responsibility" canard, which is nothing more than pale rhetoric thinly disguised as a strategy.

Birth rates are highest in parts of the country where abstinence is sold as the only real solution to pregnancy prevention, and where birth control is viewed as quasi-abortion. Essentially, these young people are being asked to suppress their natural sexual urges, a feat that has never been successfully accomplished by any civilization in history, try as they may to sell the peasants the premise that abstinence is achievable in sexual beings. So long as this is the case, unplanned pregnancies will continue and the demand for abortion will perpetuate even in the wake of a prohibition. And even for those who use birth control, the Pill has a 1% fail rate...and condoms break. Even those exercising "personal responsibility" will find themselves facing unplanned pregnancies...and often seeking to terminate them.

The strategy of preaching "personal responsibility" as the one-size-fits-all solution to the monstrous problems that would come from a prohibition against abortion reinforces my original position that our society is far too immature--and self-absorbed--to contend with a Roe v. Wade reversal.

On the other hand, I have to give cigar_no_baka points for originality with his "sterilize the children" solution. Somehow, I don't expect a groundswell of public support when the "party of less government" proposes to mandate that government employees slice up the genitalia of pre-teens.

[reaganyouth84]

"Birth rates are highest in parts of the country where abstinence is sold as the only real solution to pregnancy prevention, and where birth control is viewed as quasi-abortion."

Well, personally, I have never seen someone abstaining from sex get pregnate, but that's just me.

I mean you've laid out the ground work though, made very good points. It's obvious that abortion is the only solution. We can teach kids a great life lesson, "do whatever you want, there are no consequences!" You know, I think right now I'll go give my 12 year old sister a bag of contraseptives and tell her to go like a rabbit. After all, you can't control your urges, it's just a myth that you can control yourself. Besides, society is to blame.



-Mike

[cigarsarge]

I don't think Amanda get's what personal responsibility is. Personal responsibility is taking proper precautions to prevent an unwanted event. Personal responsibility is also taking care of a mistake you could have prevented instead of my tax money going to support your mistake.

I work in a field where I deal with personal irresponsibility on a day to day basis. It costs more money than you can dream of to support these folks.

I am pro-life. There would be no need for us to talk about abortion if people would take personal responsibility into their life.

[reaganyouth84]

I don't think Amanda get's what personal responsibility is. Personal responsibility is taking proper precautions to prevent an unwanted event. Personal responsibility is also taking care of a mistake you could have prevented instead of my tax money going to support your mistake.

I work in a field where I deal with personal irresponsibility on a day to day basis. It costs more money than you can dream of to support these folks.

I am pro-life. There would be no need for us to talk about abortion if people would take personal responsibility into their life.

AMEN!!! I've been in TONS of situations that would have been easy to say, "you know what it, I'm gonna do it even though I know what could happen." I never have though, character is built on things like this. I have friends with babies that were unplanned, and sure the event that led to it was irresponsible, but at least they have stared adversity and public opinion in the eye, and rose to theresponsibility and challenge of supporting another human life.
-Mike

[cigar no baka]

When I say "sterilize the children". I assume we can find some chemical or non-"slice their genitalia up"way to sterilize them. We can put some kind of sterilization chemical in their milk and cool aid at school that lasts long term but not forever.

[cigarsarge]

When I say "sterilize the children". I assume we can find some chemical or non-"slice their genitalia up"way to sterilize them. We can put some kind of sterilization chemical in their milk and cool aid at school that lasts long term but not forever.

How about we just whack their pee-pee?

[reaganyouth84]

How about we just whack their pee-pee?

Hell, the way it's going now, we could just sew their private parts up to look like the Barbie and Ken dolls, because they won't need them with all this cloning and what not. Hell, we are getting so lazy as a race of people that we don't even like to put the energy forth to pro-create, haha.
-Mike

[cigar no baka]

How about we just whack their pee-pee?

Cause it would hurt and all the little boys would sing falsetto. It would ruin rap music for good.

[Amanda]

I am fully aware of the definition of personal responsibility. In interpersonal relationships, there is no value more productive in the formation of a well-rounded individual. Good parents will instill the value of personal responsibility in their children, as would teachers in students, preachers to parishioners, social workers to clients, etc., etc. However, an official government position of "personal responsibility" as the lynch pin of a major public policy overhaul is patently worthless.

The scenarios I suggested in my original post on this topic are not "maybes", they are inevitable consequences to prohibitionary policy. If abortion is outlawed, a back-alley abortion black market WILL arise.....new police officers WILL be required to enforce the new prohibition....new bureaucrats WILL have to be hired to process the criminals through the legal system....new prisons WILL have to built to lock up offenders of the prohibition....the number of special-needs children WILL explode if women who fill their bodies with poison are required by law to have their children.....and taxpayers WILL have to foot the bill for the massive expansion of government that comes with prohibition.

If an official government position of "personal responsibility" advocacy is all it takes to reverse supply-and-demand laws, why didn't the government use that line to stop the bootleggers from illegally seizing the liquor industry during alcohol Prohibition? And are you suggesting that if Reagan had cautioned Americans to exercise "personal responsibility" at the very beginning of the war on drugs, the underworld criminal elements that have flourished because of the prohibition would have retreated?

The case I am making about the consequences of a prohibition against abortion is an irrefutable lesson in basic economics that boils down to supply-and-demand. For pro-lifers to counter with the "personal responsibility" talking point is, to put it mildly, comparing apples to oranges. It also tells me just how much (or rather how little) thought pro-life ideologues have given to the pocketbook consequences of the criminalization of abortion they seek. Deluding one's self into believing the financial burden would be zero may help one sleep at night for now.....at least until reality hits and the demand for abortion isn't erased overnight following the collective call from pro-lifers for "personal responsibility."

[Iced T]

Last time I checked, there were more people that wanted children than people with unwanted children. There's no solid reason that a woman should have an abortion besides medical reasons. Someone who is past the "personal responsibility" phase (which I agree with) should carry out the pregnancy and either keep the child, or if not able to financially, give up for adoption. I hate the "back-alley abortion" argument because even where abortion is legal, there are incidences of people killing unborn children. This argument says that "they're going to do it whether we like it or not, so we have to make it legal and safe." That's convenient. The death-penalty/abortion comparison isn't even applicable because they are fundamentally different acts. Abortion is the destruction of an unwanted, innocent child at the decision of a mother or father. The death penalty is an action of law taking the life of a convicted murderer, in a society where as an adult, and through trial, it has to be proven that they knew what they did was wrong. "Prohibitions never work." Of course you can never completely eliminate something like alcohol or drug sales/use, but as the definition of a prohibition states, something that "prohibits a certain act or procedure," you are not trying to eliminate something, but legally disapprove or disallow it. (the elimination of something prohibited could be a consequence). As it has been proven by Poland in the years since the fall of the iron curtain (thanks RR), When abortion is criminalized, the demand drastically drops, not increases.

Whatever socioeconomic background these women come from, they'd be far more likely to be substance abusers during their pregnancy, and thus give birth to children with medical and intellectual deficiencies. Alcoholic and drug-addicted mothers that would have otherwise had abortions will bring about a population boom of needy children and will require a huge surge in public spending to finance a lifetime of special education and extensive health care treatment.

One word. Eugenics. This country does not kill children when it is discovered that they are disabled.

"pro-life" ends when the umbilical cord is cut, but I sense many of the penny-pinching, tax-hating ideologues on the front lines of the abortion war believe their commitment ends once the child passes through mama's loins.

I'm sure many people that dislike high taxes (as I) would not be classified as "penny-pinchers." I would also dare to say that many pro-lifers would also not approve of the murder of innocent children outside of "mama's loins." Like I said before, I'm sure that many pro-lifers would be happy to contribute to funds/programs that aided abortion alternatives. As I believe they already do! Something that you didn't mention however is that many pro-abortion advocates, and even some pro-lifers would say that the government has no business in their bodies. I'd have to disagree. When what you do to your body affects a seperate life inside you, some would call that murder. (I wouldn't, but I'm close). Point is, that the government can criminalize something that furthers the destruction of Americans and the American family, like murder, drugs, or abortion.

[reaganyouth84]

Where is hex? This thread needs to be closed FAST!!!
-Mike

[Iced T]

I agree.

[cigar no baka]

Amanda I can't agree with some of your assumptions. You don't need to lock up women who get abortions. Just criminalize the act of performing an abortion and lock up the back-alley abortionists for 40 years to life and you'd remove a lot of the incentive to perform back-alley abortions.

Second, there are plenty of people dying to adopt who can't get a baby to adopt.

Third, charitable organizations would pick up a lot of the slack, and many people (I for one) would greatly increase my giving to charities that helped place unwanted babies.

[cigar no baka]

Where is hex? This thread needs to be closed FAST!!!
-Mike

Why? This is the politics forum, and I thought it was no holds barred here.

[Iced T]

There are some arguments that are generally best avoided to maintain civility... Like abortion. But does it really matter, I guess not.

[cigarsarge]

[QUOTE=Amanda


The case I am making about the consequences of a prohibition against abortion is an irrefutable lesson in basic economics that boils down to supply-and-demand. For pro-lifers to counter with the "personal responsibility" talking point is, to put it mildly, comparing apples to oranges. It also tells me just how much (or rather how little) thought pro-life ideologues have given to the pocketbook consequences of the criminalization of abortion they seek. Deluding one's self into believing the financial burden would be zero may help one sleep at night for now.....at least until reality hits and the demand for abortion isn't erased overnight following the collective call from pro-lifers for "personal responsibility."[/QUOTE]


Amanda...Personal responsibilaty for ones own actions would reap far more financial rewards than the killing of an unborn child. You just don't get it.

I hope life experences will give you the education you need. I hope that when you become a taxpayer instead of a student you will see the light.

I had liberal views at one time of my life. When you join the real world liberalism takes a back seat to reality.