The Glade 4.0

I'm Pro Tits and Pro Abortion

In fact, I'm pro people being responsible for themselves and staying out of other people's lives.

Sadly, I think if people were "responsible for themselves," most abortions wouldn't be necessary in the first place.

How does this even make any kind of sense? If people were responsible, they wouldn't need to have an abortion at all(except in the case of rape. I'm pretty sure I'm fine with abortion in the case of rape).

_________________
Los Angeles Kings 2014 Stanley Cup Champions

"I love this **** team right here."
-Jonathan Quick

I'm pretty ok with abortion up until about the 63rd trimester or so.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

This was such a pain in the ***. My company matches my charitable donations 100% and I used to give $20 per pay direct deduction to them because of what happened in the past. Then I found out about the PP **** so I stopped donating two years ago.

When the news hit that SGK was stopping funding for PP I went in and signed up for my $20 again... two days later I had to submit a request to freaking stop it again.

God what a pain in the balls.

_________________

Having an abortion is taking responsibility. It's much more responsible than having a child you are not prepared, willing, or able to raise.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Marginally. It's about more responsible than driving your car into another car rather than driving it into through a bunch of pedistrians.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

Why would any of you do any business with Susan G. Komen and her profiteering is beyond me ...

_________________

Is Susan G. Komen an actual living person? I thought she was someone who died of breast cancer and got a foundation named after her.

Anyhow, the bottom line here seems to be in the OP:



The allegation of that is the reason that the funds were pulled. The people that went apeshit over it either A) don't know that B) don't care or C) don't think the allegations are justified. Of those, only C is a reasonable reason to want the funding to continue.

I don't see the actual abortion debate as material. If I donate to a charity, I want the money to be used responsibly; I do not want it to be misspent, including giving it to another organization. If my charity donates to other organizations they should be equally responsible. The nature of the cahrity in the first place is irrelevant; I would never donate to either a breast cancer charity (I'd donate to "cancer in general" research regardless of whether it included breast cancer or not) or to an abortion organization, but I have to wonder about the sort of person that is so in love with "abortion rights" that they are unconcerned that the organization providing abortions might be misusing funds.

If it were two completely different charities, there would be no uproar because the allegations could not simply be dismissed amidst howling about "conservatives."

As for Penn State.. it's not under investigation for misuse of funds, and I'm not certain what link there could be between it's football program and its cancer research.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

yeah, she died 31 years ago.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

This

_________________
"None is more important, none more legitimate, than that of rendering the people safe as they are the
ultimate guardians of their own liberty."- Thomas Jefferson

"Yeah, I'm rehearsing my poker face. I don't handle stupid well. *sigh*" - Farsky

The drive to **** that has been placed in humans by evolution will pretty much override any amount of "personal responsibility." Arguing based on moralistic nonsense is pointless. People are going to screw and do so in ways that are ill advised. Homo sapiens are just animals, and are every bit as "in control" of their actions as a dog in heat. We do what we are programmed to do. Accidents will happen. You cannot adjust that behavior. That's not the issue. The issue is what's the best things to do about such situations when they happen.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Human beings are vastly more in control of their actions than a dog in heat is. Yes, we're "programmed" with a powerful sex drive, but that does not mean people should just throw their hands in the air and surrender to their desires. That can just as easily be an argument to justify rape.

That said, expecting that there won't be unwanted pregnancies if people are just more "responsible" is nonsense. The fact is that everyone isn't going to be responsible. This isn't because people can't control themselves sexually (some can't other's can) but because of irresponsibility in general. People who are getting pregnant when they don't want to are also vastly more likely to be those having issues because of irresponsible behavior in other areas of their life.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You have proven my point of why I argue against abortion entirely. Not for morality but science and evolution. Whatever God people believe is not my business and I don't argue against abortion for God. I argue from a darwinist point of view. You have to ask yourself what is the ultimate purpose of that animalistic sex drive anyway? Evoultion states to continue the species to reproduce. We wouldn't have a sex drive if it wasn't for the inherent need to reproduce. So if you have sex you are doing what nature, which you state above, is meant for us to do, so therefore in the long run you are expected and required to reproduce. Only so many animals mate for pleasure, humans being one of them, so also therefore we choose to be responsible for our intended or unintended off-spring actions. Like what DE said since we are able to think logically and are able to control that "Programmed" sex drive, be willing to accept the fact that you are doing what nature intended you to do and reproduce or just don't do it and be responisble enough to not bring off-spring into the world. If it happens, "Oh well!" You were only doing what nature intended you to do.

_________________
"None is more important, none more legitimate, than that of rendering the people safe as they are the
ultimate guardians of their own liberty."- Thomas Jefferson

"Yeah, I'm rehearsing my poker face. I don't handle stupid well. *sigh*" - Farsky

And I pretty much disagree with this entirely. There are tons of animalistic urges that humans go through every day. Everything from sex to violence can be pure animal urges.

Yet we're told that violent urges are wrong and that we need to suppress them, but sex urges are ok.

Yes, there's a difference between the two in end result, but one we're told we can and should suppress (violence) and the other in many cases we're told is "natural" and to embrace it (sex).

Frankly, you can't have it both ways. If people can (and do) suppress other urges, they can suppress sexual ones as well.

Controlling them is another influence no different from an "animalistic urge." Humans are just animals, and animals are just biological machines. We are completely governed by our biology and our programming. There's no special choice ever made by anyone. At a macro-level, we can control, to various degrees, through advertising campaigns or laws or other ways, various types of input that influence the decisions people make. But in the end, every decision you or I or anyone else makes, is just a complex mathematical equation with your nature and nurture filling in the variables and operations performed. It is no more a choice than the answer to 2+2 is a choice.

This is not to say we should not attempt to influence people away from destructive behavior. This is the reason for speed limits and fines and such, it influences people to drive more safely. However, I think that in this case, you are fighting a losing battle. Humans will act like humans, and this isn't a bad thing. I'm also not convinced abortion is a bad thing. (To counter Oonagh's comments, the majority of abortions happen in lower socioeconomic environments. I would say from a darwinian perspective, they help (insufficiently) to counter the fact that people of lesser drive, ambition, and intelligence tend to have more children than the rich and the geniuses do. I'm rather of the opinion that human evolution might be stagnating and some of the reasons have distasteful implications against altruism and what we consider "goodness.") I'm not particularly convinced we should consider a lump of unthinking and unfeeling cells "human beings," or give them any particular legal protections/rights. I am still of the opinion that "viability" needs to be where we place the legal line, if only for ideological consistency.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

People who make responsible choices are being outbred by the lazy and shiftless who are being rewarded for their irresponsible behavior by our welfare system. Relying on personal responsibility alone is a fool's errand.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Even assuming this is true, it's irrelevant. We have absolutely no chance whatsoever of even coming close to the amount of data we'd need to predict anything based on it, so for functional purposes, we ARE making our own choices. (This is disregarding the entire argument over determinism which frankly I regard as a lot of hot air on both sides)

We do know that we can influence behavior through inputs, but even that tends to be crude and unpredictable even when undertaken by the best professionals working with individuals.

I tried like hell to influence my father to get the help he needed to stop drinking. The people helping him tried their best. It failed utterly with him; with other people it works. I think one would be hard-pressed to accurately predict which is which ahead of time.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Ha. yeah, good point. "Responsibility" appears to be a negative trait for passing along one's genes to the next generation. Abortion would be one of the few counter-influences to this.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

From that standpoint, the modern trend of having 1 or 2, maybe 3 at the outside kids because you want to party longer and more appears less responsible. You may never get pregnant and need an abortion (or cause that for a girl) but you're contributing to the stupidity of society, not to mention our eventual overrun at the hands of the Chinese, Indians, and Moslems.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

This, sadly, is quite true. The more successful, affluent, and advanced the society, the fewer kids they have, as an average.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

And people wonder why I value nuclear superiority.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Put them up for adoption. A whole lot of people out there incapable of having children themselves and I know here in the US, many states have laws in place that will allow you to drop new born children off at police stations no questions asked.

_________________
Los Angeles Kings 2014 Stanley Cup Champions

"I love this **** team right here."
-Jonathan Quick

It's a little silly to say that the only responsible people are those whom don't get pregnant. Accidents happen to everybody. If you're gonna go the route of, "Well they shouldn't be having sex if they don't want to accept a baby," you might as well call the entirety of the human race irresponsible.


Certainly an option, but not the only one many people would consider responsible.

I think you mean those who get pregnant when they don't want to. Clearly, no one is saying anyone who gets pregnant at all is irresponsible.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."