2012 US Presidential Election

[Zalis]

It's always best to not allow emotions to interfere with long-term decisions.

I agree, but applying that to its logical, behavioral conclusion would prevent a lot of these unwanted pregnancies in the first place...

Forcing women to see their fetus on ultrasound just means that you are force-tripping their emotions in order to trick them into something that they really never wanted, and probably won't want once they have their senses back again - after the birth.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do that, which is why I didn't say that, but I do think that the availability should probably be there.

Also, it's a bit unrealistic to say that all unwanted pregnancies result in perpetually "unwanted" children. My ex-gf from years ago, for example. She screwed around and got pregnant, but I'll give her credit that she didn't abort the child because of her mistakes. She has since gotten married and had another child with her now-husband. Both kids are in a very loving environment, and I know for a fact that that little boy does not feel unwanted or burdensome. Why? Because she sucked it up and loved her child. Sure, that doesn't happen in every case, but it's equally naive to think that parents will never love their 'unplanned' children.

Other examples: My dad's mother was advised to seek an abortion, which would have been illegal. She gave birth anyway and died shortly after, but our entire family is the result. My sister had to have her triplets at 23 1/2 weeks, and the doctors gave them 0% chance of any surviving. We're celebrating their 3rd birthday in September, and they've mostly caught up to their peers in development. Also, I was an oops baby, as my parents had had difficulty conceiving and had pretty much given up on having a third.

[raspberry jam]

I agree, but applying that to its logical, behavioral conclusion would prevent a lot of these unwanted pregnancies in the first place...

lol well you do have a point.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do that, which is why I didn't say that, but I do think that the availability should probably be there.

I was referring to your "more restrictions" line. Apparently some US states force/want to force women to get ultrasound before abortions. In quite invasive ways, too.

[Tender Wolf]

I knew I shouldn't have opened this thread...darn politics.

I'll jump to the chase - I'm voting for Obama since he actually cares about the people, and Romney is a total jerk who's obviously hiding something because he won't release something as simple as his tax records. Plus his primary goal is getting Obama out of the White House rather than running the country. And he's brainwashed too many people into thinking he actually gives a crap.

[Alaris]

I knew I shouldn't have opened this thread...darn politics.

I'll jump to the chase - I'm voting for Obama since he actually cares about the people, and Romney is a total jerk who's obviously hiding something because he won't release something as simple as his tax records. Plus his primary goal is getting Obama out of the White House rather than running the country. And he's brainwashed too many people into thinking he actually gives a crap.

This actually is a pretty decent overview of why exactly people should vote against Romney.

[sorudo]

if i may, when observing American politics it becomes clear that going for president-ship is just about making a fool of the other party.
just look at how they do this, while one makes fun of someones army history the other makes fun of some kind of speech.
it's like looking at school kids, they can't talk like adults they have to be childish and make someone look black (no pun intended) just so they come out better.
pathetic i say, just pathetic.

[MixedVariety]

This actually is a pretty decent overview of why exactly people should vote against Romney.

Just out of curiosity, how exactly does one vote against someone? Because I think that would be pretty cool; a choice to use your vote either for one candidate, or as a negative that actually subtracts one vote from a candidate.

[Alaris]

Just out of curiosity, how exactly does one vote against someone?

Well, voting for whoever else is likely to win (strategic vote) would be closest to that.

At the moment, a lot of people want to vote against Jean Charest in Quebec, but the problem is that we can't agree who should be in power. That unfortunately means that the anti-Charest votes are getting divided up amongst the other parties, or worse, some will vote Charest anyway because they don't see alternatives that they prefer (given most other parties are separatists, an idea I am not in favor of either).

[Tender Wolf]

Really Alaris? You agree with me? lol That's funny, I think hell froze over.

Hmm...MV, that's a good question. Voting against someone rather than for someone. That would be an interesting concept.

[Alaris]

Really Alaris? You agree with me? lol That's funny, I think hell froze over.

Nah, I think we agree on a lot of stuff. But we also disagree on a lot of stuff hahah.

Romney though, I have a hard time believing that he has a chance to get in. He is sooooo evil!

[RD]

Romney though, I have a hard time believing that he has a chance to get in. He is sooooo evil!

Here's hoping, anyway.

Tapatalk'd