And you didn't. Tax dollars did not go to abortions.
Thank God for Trump reality thread
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
And you didn't. Tax dollars did not go to abortions.
Please explain this I do not get this.
Now that your team lost you want the other team's guy to represent everyone. Politicians DO NOT do that.
Politicians ALWAYS give stump speeches on inauguration. You hate on this guy for doing the obvious why?
Here we have Trump who has pledged to represent ever one, has listened to all sided, is to the left of Hillary an Obama. So what are you complaining about?
I doubt he is to their left. But he does have some non GOP positions.
For example the GOP is not happy with his NAFTA and NATO statements/positions.
DutchJazzer
Banned
ok let me put it like this taxdollars are used for aid.
so some organization gets the aid/taxdollarss.
now that organization does good stuff, like family planning eductaion and stuff.
but now that organization says ok what happens if you are pregnant, and you dont want the baby what do you do.
1. abortion. (says some stuff that gives abortiona s a legitimate good option)
2. adoption
3. whatever.
now if some girl is sitting there and now sees abortion as option because the guy/gal/zir paid by aforemention taxdollars spouts that abortion is a good option! she then goes to nearest clinic pays for her abortion out of pocket!
now if this is not the situation that happens i ams orry.
but thanks to those taxdollars/aid some girl/guy/zir can spout pro-abortion talk, which led to an abortion. thanks to the tax dollars!!!!!!!!!!
Red
Well-Known Member
If you don't understand the rationale and necessity of a Resistance, to Donald Trump, there is very little I can do to help you understand at this point. Those who know how I feel, because they feel the same way, understand me perfectly. There may be some differences, I don't pretend to speak for the Resistance. But write I must. It helps clarify things in my own mind. Hours of reading, thinking, and writing. It's my life to an overwhelming degree at this point in time. My friends and acquaintances are encouraging this of me. I'm speaking to their choir more then anyone else, be it here, Facebook, letters to the editor, wherever. Mostly, it helps me clarify to myself. Because I have been honest all along, to myself and others, that I cannot look away, I must understand as clearly as possible the nature of what is happening in America in the still early years of the 21st century.
babe is right. Last Saturday was a carthasis. But I believe there will be a strong counter movement to the movement of populism as seen in Trump's rise to power. And it is largely his fault. Most inauguration speeches will be far more inclusive then the one we heard from Trump. It will no doubt be considered a "fake" statistic to you, but he is the least popular, least liked, winner in modern times. I believe about 40% as he enters the office. Does it not make eminent common sense, under such circumstances, to actually reach out to the 65 million+ individuals who did not vote for him? Considering how incredibly, frightfully divisive the last year+ has been, how can the man not see actually reaching out in an inclusive manner as needed at this point? For his own political good.
Maybe because he cannot lose a base won over by such divisive rhetoric. He is the chief purveyor of lies, as well as the chief executive. Today, his Press Secretary Sean Spicer doubled down on the claim there were 3-5 million votes by illegals in the 2016 election. It's absurd. But, I do believe his base is beyond doubting the guy at all. And so, as with the inauguration crowd size lie, this lie will also cement in his follower's minds that the mainstream media promotes fake news.
Yet, this is nothing else but the Big Lie. Trump believes, and I think he has been proven right, that if you repeat a lie often enough, it will be believed. Think of it as an alternative fact. Trump would have won the popular vote if cheating had not occurred. It's absurd. But it's the administration's alternative fact now. If we are to believe the insider accounts I referenced in the "alternative facts" thread, Trump was really pissed at the inaugural photos. Part of these recent lies, crowd size and election cheating, seem to his effort to virtually rewrite history that is so recent, the ink ain't dry. And it seems to be insecurity and an awesomely fragile, thin skinned, ego.
Which is troublesome enough, simply because he's the President of the United States. But, it may be more then ego. It may be the Big Lie in the interest of destroying the already weakened credibility of the fourth estate. How do I conclude that that is not something worth resisting?
I believe we listened to different speeches. We are seeing the political world from either side of a divide that will only grow wider as Trump continues to call the media "fake". Those efforts to separate his followers from everyone else, through the promotion of the fake news narrative, will surely divide Americans all the more. And that is music to those outside our nation who will be heartened by our weakening unity. Why is he doing this? How is this for the common good? Whose side is he really on?
This was always about the future of America, to a degree that outpaces most of our elections, even though we always hear that term. It's about the future of America. But, sometimes it just does not end with the election. It never does, politics being politics, but this time millions believe a dangerous man has ascended to power. If a man is willing to use the Big Lie to create an alternate universe for his followers, in an inaugural address co written by his white nationalist chief advisor, Steve Bannon, I am not going to sleep through this administration. And I will be a member of the Resistance, and will do everything in my power to help my brethren understand what is happening in early 21st century America.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
But what if the are more abortions without places like planned parenthood receiving funding? Would more abortions make you happy?
DutchJazzer
Banned
yes if i dont get a gun shoved in my face to pay for it.
for example i would not mind paying for ultrasounds before abortion! but i know people don't agree so i am not forcing it!
there are some studies that show when a mother sees an ultra sound she backs out of the abortion more often than not.
i mean if 90 million was invested in womans marhc it shows the left got enough money to do charity abortions.
if i'm wrong and abortion is not immoral, then i'm wrong, and sadly not been involved in a good act
but if i am right and abortions are immoral then don't force me into your immoral acts
They are rightfully informing her of her options. Abortion is an option. She is the responsible party of an abortion happens. Not PP. personal responsibility.
Political points is all this was. At the cost of women. And it did nothing to stop abortions.
Hannity had someone on yesterday, on the radio, who had organized a research project to see if PP really did other services than abortions, like prenatal care, pregnancy services and other options assistance. Reportedly, only 2 out of 140 PP providers was willing to make an appointment for prenatal care. Some gave referrals, to five PP providers, but three of those said they were over-booked and couldn't make another appointment.
If true, this means almost every dollar PP gets, $500 M in federal tax dollars, pays for abortions. This would make all the public ads and lobbying PP does pretty much a lie. They do 30% of US abortions, so most women go to ob/gyn doctors in the regular medical providers, and this 30% is mostly blacks, mostly poor, mostly outside of financial capability. Some note Margaret Sanger's racism and her strategy of locating PP facilities in black neighborhoods and call it out as whitey systematically reducing the black population. Kinda like the ban on DDT resulting in a resurgence of malaria in tropic and subtropic where people are seriously affected, costing tens of millions of human lives, mostly brown or black.
Lord Cecil Rhodes stroking himself in his tomb at his genius, the father of modern "progressive" organization. An out and out racist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Rhodes
This project proposed by Rhodes led to the organization of the League of Nations, and then the UN.
https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=FinalWarning&C=5.1
So Rhodes, of course, is controversial, and staunchly defended by the British conservatives today:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...removal-of-statue-of-benefactor-a6808426.html
(FWIW, my first wife was a Rhodes Scholar and went to Oxford)
There are Utah-based adoption services that solicit young single black women who are pregnant to let their baby be born and adopted. Every day, in SLC, several such black women get off the plane, are provided hotel and living expenses and doctor care until their baby is born. They get $10K for their baby, the adoptive parents pay oh I think 30K. The hospitals get almost 10K and the lawyers get 10K. I don't know the actual amounts, I'm not an insider on these deals.
I don't know. Is this human trafficking? Is this like selling body parts of aborted infants? It's all pretty big money.
So from what I understand there is a sort of inner city culture where very young black girls take pride in producing a child, and the guys are totally unable to take up the role of father, in part financial and in part cultural.
I think it's a shame to make people like this pawns in our political or financial games.
Last edited:
DutchJazzer
Banned
not everybody sees it like that!
so maybe we should compromise. some people value their principle.
No need to read further.
If a women miscarries, is she guilty?
DutchJazzer
Banned
thats not an argument!
murder is illegal. but if i am working on a roof and my hammer accidentally falls and kills you is it MURDER!? NO
please keep it serious. stop with your stupidity!
what if she knowingly ingests something that causes her to miscarry?
and besides, what if you're known to have an attitude against me, and it appears to witnesses that you intentionally "allowed" your hammer to fall in such a way that it would cause injury? Seems reasonable that you might be accused of murder if that was the case.
approximately 1 out of four pregnancies end in miscarriage, which is defined as an event of nature. Whenever, for whatever reason besides an intentional or uninformed action.
Nobody here has remotely suggested punishment of women for pregnancy decisions, rather what we do with public tax money. People can and do privately donate purposefully to help fund abortions for women who can't afford to pay, and no one here has said anything about punishment for either women choosing abortion or those who want to help pay for abortions.
If Roe v. Wade gets overturned, say, and the issue is left to State lawmakers, I doubt any State would do something like that today. Some States would establish laws more lenient that the Federal law we have, others would make abortion illegal but with exceptions for some cases in consideration for womens' health physical or mental. But if a women goes over a State line to avail herself of services, nobody will be keeping track. All such a political decision or court decision would do is indicate where such care will be openly provided. And put one level of impediment on the use of tax dollars for it.
That's as far as Jeb Bush or Mitt Romneyh would go with it, too.
5000 people have been invited and approved as national members of the CFR, not to mention second tier "committees in virtually every US city. Wonderful folks probably, almost every one beaming with civic pride for being included, and none of them would think anything dark or wrong in their association. Leaders in every profession, people of public stature.
They go to a lunch once a month and associate with movers and shakers of their own stature or better, perhaps. They listen to an invited speaker, and can converse without fear of being quoted in the Press;. They have every kind of opinion on every subject. But there is a point, a direction to it.
Chelsea Clointon and George Clooney are members, for God's sake.
It's like irrigating a field. You create little social channels and open the headgate and watch the people run down the line you want them to go. It is a pretty smart plan for getting things to go the way you wish, created by some British "Philosopher Kings".
There's provision in state law for every circumstance you have mentioned. Intentional actions with consequences fall under such provisions. Taking a pill to induce abortion is legal. People who don't want to pay for the pill shouldn't have to. Buy it yourself. Or get some from PP, or your health insurance company that you choose specifically because of their provision to pay for such things, which can legally write such terms into their policies.
Sure, some folks think it's wrong, and their issue with PP federal funding is like, say, whether we should use Federal funding for assisted suicide for "useless eaters".
Please, not my taxes. Pay for it yourself.
DutchJazzer
Banned
please stop with these irrelevant scenearions.
becayse it seems reasonable i might get accused of murder we should not have murder illegal right??