2020 Election - Catch-all Thread

55,751 Views | 1652 Replies | Last: 4 min ago by Another Bear
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Interesting thing about Andrew Yang: diehard Republicans, at least online, seem to appreciate what he has to say on the economic front. Below is an interview he did with Ben Shapiro. I haven't watched it, but I did look at the comment section. Extremely (almost absurdly) civil for a YouTube comment section, with Republicans giving him props for his ideas around the economy. And in a small sign that we might be progressing as a country, I didn't see any comment trying to make fun of or discount him because he's Asian (I'm sure there's something buried in there somewhere, but it's refreshing to see him predominantly judged for his ideas and how he communicates).

Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If nothing else, Yang, Mayor Pete and the other bright, young candidates represent a good talent pool Those guys would make good cabinet members or leaders. They bring their own ideas, can communicate, seem open to collaboration and making things work. Of course this is a juxtaposition of the Trump cabinet members who were on the take from the get go...guys who live and crap in the swamp.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
And we wait breathlessly for GB4L to make his first substantive contribution to this forum.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

And we wait breathlessly for GB4L to make his first substantive contribution to this forum.

There was a play written about this: Waiting for Dodot.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Do nothing, making no concrete solutions or input...by golly that's the modern GOP aka RWNJ fruit loops Trumpkin bumpers. Like Trump, not smart, not competent. Empty suit, ginormous lardass.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I really like Yang, he's a Cal product, alum parents met while enrolled. He's got a lot of great ideas, is not ideological, has concrete proposals and is a true outsider, unlike Buttigieg.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

I really like Yang, he's a Cal product, alum parents met while enrolled. He's got a lot of great ideas, is not ideological, has concrete proposals and is a true outsider, unlike Buttigieg.
this is why he's received so well on "conservative" shows. And it's also part of why he has zero shot. Ideological, establishment candidates are predictable, and that bodes well for the establishment and voters generally. If he were a congressman for 20 years with name recognition, he'd have no shot (unfortunately).

When you disagree with Yang, you understand how he got there, and he doesn't demonize or virtue signal. Hearing him talk about the data that helped come up with the $1,000/month option was interesting.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
The embryo ceases to be an embryo at about 10 weeks of gestation.

I"m glad I can count on you to acknowledge the compelling and rational interest the government has in restricting abortion to the 1st trimester and protecting life thereafter.

(Your logic also presupposes a false dichotomy: that we must pick one life (unborn) over the other (mother) in cases of abortion. We do not.)

The Alabama lawmakers passed their bill knowing it will go straight to the courts and overturned. They want it to reach the SCOTUS to be the catalyst to challenging Roe.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
The embryo ceases to be an embryo at about 10 weeks of gestation.
And the new laws are restricting abortion even further than that.

So where are the liberals being inconsistent again?
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
The embryo ceases to be an embryo at about 10 weeks of gestation.
And the new laws are restricting abortion even further than that.

So where are the liberals being inconsistent again?
I"m talking about YOU. You failed to address in the previous thread when during gestation it is rational -- i.e., protected from your moral demonization -- for the government to protect the unborn.

You just stated a premise -- you are ambivalent towards embryos as a rebuttal to calls of moral hypocrisy -- thus I observed the logical conclusion: restricting abortions post-embryo is morally justified (or at least falls in a more acceptable category).

The general liberal/democrat position, as far as I can tell, is resistance to ANY further abortion restriction, pertaining to legislation or access. .
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!



Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
The embryo ceases to be an embryo at about 10 weeks of gestation.
And the new laws are restricting abortion even further than that.

So where are the liberals being inconsistent again?
I"m talking about YOU. You failed to address in the previous thread when during gestation it is rational -- i.e., protected from your moral demonization -- for the government to protect the unborn.

You just stated a premise -- you are ambivalent towards embryos as a rebuttal to calls of moral hypocrisy -- thus I observed the logical conclusion: restricting abortions post-embryo is morally justified (or at least falls in a more acceptable category).

The general liberal/democrat position, as far as I can tell, is resistance to ANY further abortion restriction, pertaining to legislation or access. .
Personally? I have zero moral qualms about aborting a fetus prior to viability outside of the womb. To me the fetus doesn't count as a "person" until it can survive without being inside the mother. Late-term abortion like that is vanishingly rare and only done in extreme medical emergencies, so I don't know why anyone is worried about that.

I also see why others don't necessarily share the same view, so much like with gun control I may be open to compromise. The laws passed in Georgia and Alabama clearly go too far.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Contrast with:
kelly09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

BI leftists: we care about saving lives

States seek to save more lives by placing more restrictions on aborting the unborn

BI leftists: women-hating bigotry!


Soon, ACB willr be on the court. Yessirreebob!
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:



Personally? I have zero moral qualms about aborting a fetus prior to viability outside of the womb. To me the fetus doesn't count as a "person" until it can survive without being inside the mother. Late-term abortion like that is vanishingly rare and only done in extreme medical emergencies, so I don't know why anyone is worried about that.

I also see why others don't necessarily share the same view, so much like with gun control I may be open to compromise. The laws passed in Georgia and Alabama clearly go too far.
Then why cite embryos? If it's marker is not of any moral relevance for you or anybody else who subscribes to viability outside the womb as the crucial moral or legal marker, why cite such a red herring (nor does the Left concern itself with prohibiting 3rd trimester abortions. Their position is always more access, not less)? I know why, I just wanted to plant a flag there. And nevermind that the central nervous system, heartbeat, spine, and brain develop during 1st trimester.

I don't expect to convince you or anybody else, no matter how many illogical premises are litigated, such as the bodily autonomy trope. There will always be a moving of the goal posts on this issue. It's more immune to argument than most issues. If the "it's just a bundle of cells" trope fails the audience's moral reasoning, resort to bodily autonomy. Or vice versa. At the end of the day if those fail, ascribe religious zealotry and sexism to pro-lifers to attempt to discredit their views.



sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

Then why cite embryos?
Because that's literally what the passed laws in Georgia and Alabama are trying to do? Outlaw abortions that are literally still in the embryonic stage? Seems like your problem is with them, not me.

You keep coming in here with flowery language acting like you've caught me and the other "libs" in a contradiction, but you haven't really.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With the immorality of their racism and their pro death penalty stance, and their support of the morally bankrupt tRump, methinks the Pro Life position of Southerners has little to do with respecting the fetus and a whole lot to do with controlling women.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

With the immorality of their racism and their pro death penalty stance, and their support of the morally bankrupt tRump, methinks the Pro Life position of Southerners has little to do with respecting the fetus and a whole lot to do with controlling women.
That's your conjecture, and it would be amusing to see you actually layout the argument for that. It's also not an argument, as regardless of the motivations of some number of the religious, the secular arguments for pro life are at play here.

When you can ascribe an ulterior motivation -- a serious one at that: sexist, physical oppression on the basis of religious belief -- you no longer have to engage with the arguments. Your correctness and moral righteousness is deemed to be axiomatic.

Your bigotry lends a charge of racism to Pro Life southerners, then strawman their moral consistency by conflating death penalty ("guilty" life) and the unborn ("innocent life").
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

Then why cite embryos?
Because that's literally what the passed laws in Georgia and Alabama are trying to do? Outlaw abortions that are literally still in the embryonic stage? Seems like your problem is with them, not me.

You keep coming in here with flowery language acting like you've caught me and the other "libs" in a contradiction, but you haven't really.
This isn't hard. Citing Embryos is irrelevant if one's position is the fetus has no moral worth.

And IF viability is the appropriate marker, it would be reasonable to conclude one's position be against 3rd trimester abortions, which certainly isn't the narrative of the Left. The narrative is "increase access and stop restrictions"
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

Then why cite embryos?
Because that's literally what the passed laws in Georgia and Alabama are trying to do? Outlaw abortions that are literally still in the embryonic stage? Seems like your problem is with them, not me.

You keep coming in here with flowery language acting like you've caught me and the other "libs" in a contradiction, but you haven't really.
This isn't hard. Citing Embryos is irrelevant if one's position is the fetus has no moral worth.

And IF viability is the appropriate marker, it would be reasonable to conclude one's position be against 3rd trimester abortions, which certainly isn't the narrative of the Left. The narrative is "increase access and stop restrictions"

You really haven't been following this argument at all, have you?

Stop conflating my position with the one from "The Left" (which you made up).
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Neither GBear4Life or Bearforce2 ever post anything of substance. Rarely provide source or references and when they do, it's RWNJ diarrhea-mouth dribble.

Of course the question is: a) are they the same troll, and b) what's their other username on BI

GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:




You really haven't been following this argument at all, have you?

Stop conflating my position with the one from "The Left" (which you made up).
How am I conflating your position? Your citing of embryos was a red herring because both you and the Democratic position doesn't cite fetuses as having value worthy of legal protection either. They're not objecting to the new abortion bills on the basis of valuing "human life over embryos", which of course is also a false dichotomy as I noted, because abortion is not choosing between two lives.

Again, to use your words, your post about embryos is nonsense.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Neither GBear4Life or Bearforce2 ever post anything of substance. Rarely provide source or references and when they do, it's RWNJ diarrhea-mouth dribble.

Of course the question is: a) are they the same troll, and b) what's their other username on BI


You're interfering with my echo chamber of confirmation bias!

Please - this is all you do, just straight partisan ad hominem vitriol that your tribe won't call out. Spare me.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:




You really haven't been following this argument at all, have you?

Stop conflating my position with the one from "The Left" (which you made up).
How am I conflating your position? Your citing of embryos was a red herring because both you and the Democratic position doesn't cite fetuses as having value worthy of legal protection either. They're not objecting to the new abortion bills on the basis of valuing "human life over embryos", which of course is also a false dichotomy as I noted, because abortion is not choosing between two lives.

Again, to use your words, your post about embryos is nonsense.

None of this is even close to what I've been arguing. Thanks for playing.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LOL stop it. You're the one playing games.
Quote:

Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
There is no choosing one life over another. The embryo is not the compelling marker for pro-choice activists including yourself (your own words).
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

LOL stop it. You're the one playing games.
Quote:

Correct, we care about the lives of actual humans more than embryos.
There is no choosing one life over another. The embryo is not the compelling marker for pro-choice activists including yourself (your own words).

You seem to have made one sentence stand in for the entirety of my commentary here. I think I've identified your problem.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:



You seem to have made one sentence stand in for the entirety of my commentary here. I think I've identified your problem.
And you keep denying it and dismissing it (your own posts) lol and unable to clarify this mistake
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:



You seem to have made one sentence stand in for the entirety of my commentary here. I think I've identified your problem.
And you keep denying it and dismissing it (your own posts) lol and unable to clarify this mistake
Not my fault you can't follow a logical progression of thought. We're done here.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:



You seem to have made one sentence stand in for the entirety of my commentary here. I think I've identified your problem.
And you keep denying it and dismissing it (your own posts) lol and unable to clarify this mistake
Not my fault you can't follow a logical progression of thought. We're done here.
"I'm just going to insist I'm correct and you're wrong, claiming failure of logic without pointing that out, and leave it at that"
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:



You seem to have made one sentence stand in for the entirety of my commentary here. I think I've identified your problem.
And you keep denying it and dismissing it (your own posts) lol and unable to clarify this mistake
Not my fault you can't follow a logical progression of thought. We're done here.
"I'm just going to insist I'm correct and you're wrong, claiming failure of logic without pointing that out, and leave it at that"
No need to quote yourself here.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

GBear4Life said:


"I'm just going to insist I'm correct and you're wrong, claiming failure of logic without pointing that out, and leave it at that"
No need to quote yourself here.
I thought we were done? Or is this like Unit2's false tantrum of superiority?

You've accomplished your goal: deflect deflect deflect and sustain a lack of good faith long enough ("I know you are but what am I") to where it becomes a pis sing contest and not about the issue.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Weird

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Real good use of a pardon, tRumpelstiltskin:

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

You've accomplished your goal: deflect deflect deflect and sustain a lack of good faith long enough ("I know you are but what am I") to where it becomes a pis sing contest and not about the issue.

I have never seen so much projection in my life.
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This board's never been all that great, but it really went downhill two months ago when that turd joined
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.