@mgools: Playing videogames isn't 'mentally good for you' either you imbecile. That isn't and shouldn't be the meterstick for what's acceptable in society, elsewise you end up with a culture composed of nothing but neurotic self-flagellating geeks I suspect even a member of the busybody crowd wouldn't want to live in. Am I wrong? Then why not move to Iran or Saudi Arabia or one of those other fundamentalist nightmare nations where anything that's fun, interesting or feels good is banned?
Remember when people used to think only soccer moms and out of touch politicians were tiresome morality busybodies? Well now add hipsters, silicon valley and most of the new media to that list. At least when right wingers did stuff like this everyone else rightly made fun of them for it. Now our cultural gatekeepers and tastemakers have declared that pornography is wrong and immoral. Being a loathsome puritanical won't-somebody-think-of-the-children freak is now 'in'.
@neoprime: >are you like....living in a different dimension or something? What part of any of your posts did you even hint at being pro choice??!
The part in my earlier post where when I described what christians believe in regarding abortion, I prefaced it with the statement that I don't actually agree with them. I can comprehend someone's worldview without agreeing with it.
@tr4newreck: >just the ones i mentioned, and the proof backing up violence against abortion clinics which you so casually dismiss...
A few incidents cherrypicked and repeated ad-nauseam by a partisan media is not nearly the issue you imply that it is. If you want an abortion in the United States and you're in the first twenty four weeks of pregnancy then you can get it, period.
>whos arguing about your agency, if you make a national law, be fair with it, its not agency if you FORCE benefits for some and leave other out... its govt. tyranny on the part of the beneficiaries...
I don't agree with the law requiring you to offer benefits to anybody. If you CHOOSE to offer benefits, you should be allowed to offer whatever benefits you want and if people have a problem with it they're free not to buy from you or work for you.
>no just his voting record, hes a religious and corporate zealot, and his voting record bears that out...
His voting record is unimpeachable, but then you probably think Sotomayor is a good justice.
>..../facepalm
You sure showed me.
>yes you are right they intended to fix problems by empowering corporations or just religious people... and then claiming "oh it potentially fixes problems down the line" ... im sure voters rights and gerrymandering were meant to fix future problems as well ...lol i can almost hear politicians using the bible to justify slavery and claiming that it fixes potential gaps in the law... oh wait that actually happened...
Oh enough of your strawmen. This nonsense is beneath contempt. I offer you a real example of why the Constitution's long view is important and you give me back this garbage.
@tr4newreck: >right the one in texas, literally one clinic in texas where there used to be a lot more
>or the one or two in florida, where there used to be a lot more
Are you seriously implying there's a shortage of abortion clinics in the United States? Or that the reason there's not more is because of the epidemic of them being blown up by right wing domestic terrorists? You're living in a goddamned fantasy land fueled by your left wing persecution complex. Pull your head out of your ass.
>besides the point, they cost more for a women, if you were honest you would take the position of having either none of it for either sex, or all of it for both...
Condoms cost more for women?
>irrelevant, america did not become great because it denied prophylactics...
No, America became great because it offered the individual agency and freedom in a time where all any other nation offered was unthinking devotion to gods and kings. As de Tocqueville states, he was merely the Englishman left to himself. But this sort of 'socially conscious' effort for subsidized population control in the lower classes would not at all have been out of place in any of the aristocracies early Americans were fleeing, and it's certainly not out of place in most of the western world now.
>most of the third world nations in africa are either christian or islamic, and christian missionaries go in there and teach people to not only, not support policy for prophylactics but they teach that its 'baby killing' to bust a nut...
It's funny you should mention that, the mindless charity heaped upon Africa by christian missionaires and their ilk is one of the big reasons the continent is still stuck in the muck. Any effort to be self-sufficient and grow, say, agriculture is immediately sabotaged (with the best of intentions) by UN, US, and private foreign aid raining over the country and burying them in free food. You'll notice the only halfway thriving business in Africa is strip mining of rare earth minerals for electronics and not comestibles, there's a reason for that. When you subsidize someone on the long term you foster dependency, it's as simple as that.
>and you can pretend all you want but THAT is the reason people like scalia vote against issues like reproductive rights for women, not this faux concern you present, which btw i agree with on the face
You're claiming for yourself the ability to peer into Antonin Scalia's heart. I reject that. The man practically invented constitutional originalism and was the bulwark against state power grabs for many many years, not the least of which was stuff like District of Columbia vs Heller which had nothing to do with religion but still defended the individual's rights.
>of it if you are earnest and would you agree to get rid of hobby lobbies support for viagra and vasectomies? if not you are a hypocrite.
How does that follow? No, I do not believe Hobby Lobby should be forced to stop supporting male reproductive issues. I don't believe they should be forced to do anything. They should be able to cover solely male issues, or solely female issues, or no issues at all or both. The government shouldn't interfere in any case and if people feel strongly about it they should punish them by not buying or working for them, THAT is what I believe.
>america is not great anymore btw, you have the biggest wealth gap in 1st world nations, no public medicine, you incarcerate more people than stalin did during his height of power.... your argument would ring more true 40-50 years ago.
I really have no interest in some non-American's recriminations about my country. The wealth gap is the result of government bailing out and subsidizing multinationals while allowing small business to collapse, socialized healthcare is the foolest notion that ever passed through the head of a man and while I vehemently disagree with the drug war to compare it with Stalin's political incarcerations is asinine at best.
>it has to be relatively foreseeable, not some fictitious bullshit pulled out of the air to justify a horrible law at this point in time
No, it doesn't have to be 'relatively forseeable' as that is a subjective notion and leaves a gap wide open for the state to jump through. Large, sweeping, uncompromising interpretations of constitutional intent is the reason the first amendment covers something as inconceivable to the founders as the internet is.
@tr4newreck: Wow, a handful of incidents. That sure is proportional response to something that is, in their view, the wholesale slaughter of hundreds of thousands of children. If America was a country that actually had a significant number of 'religious fanatics', abortion clinics wouldn't survive the week. Period. I can almost guarantee you're one of those people that seizes on what little first world christian violence there is but totally ignores islamist abuses because they're 'misunderstood' or 'oppressed' but of course since christians are 'privileged' then they're fair game. You're all hypocrites and it makes me sick.
>on the face of it i agree with the notion that all people should pay for their own condoms(the ones that can afford it should), except when they cant afford it... the social cost of unwanted children or spread of std's is more expensive than providing some simple prophylactics
The average cost of a premium quality condom in America is less than a dollar. You know damn well you can afford that and if you can't then don't have sex or just take your chances, the point is that you are owed NOTHING. You get a salary and you should be free to spend it on whatever you choose, even if what you choose is hard drugs or prostitution, but the only person obligated to take care of you is you. Let the social cost be born by the individual, let people face the consequences of their actions.
>do you know why prophylactics are given out free in 3rd world countries? can you venture a guess?
Can you guess why no third world country has ever climbed to the rank of first world country since the terms were invented? Could it have anything to do with the tinpot dictator nanny state governments they all have in common where they think patronizing acts like this towards 'the plebs' are a good idea? I have no interest in subsidizing people's sexuality and neither should anybody else.
>btw you would have somewhat of a point if the hobby lobby ruling didnt cover viagra or vasectomies... what!? no outrage on that? no bitching about precedents being set for possible future abuses....?
If businesses CHOOSE to cover things like that then fine, that's their decision. I do not agree for a second that they should be obligated to, I detest decisions like that made on people's behalf, as much buying power and freedom as is feasibly sound should be transferred directly to the worker to spend on what he or she chooses. If they want to be irresponsible and not buy health insurance because they're young and immortal, fine, that is their right. And the consequences are their responsibility.
>100 years down the line they'l have double-parked my space car on mars, maybe we should create parking laws for that as well...
I really can't believe you're still pretending you don't understand why a Constitution that takes a long view of things and works hard to prevent precedents for government abuses being set is unimportant.
DrYnot's comments