America - The Official Thread
- Thread starter ///M-Spec
- 39,554 comments
- 1,783,368 views
McLaren
Premium
- 45,590
- Texas
Only once before under a single President.
Sept. 30th, 1977 - Oct. 13th, 1977
Pres. Jimmy Carter
Democrats controlled both House & Senate.
http://wiredpen.com/resources/polit...l-guide-balance-of-power-congress-presidency/
Carter became the President on Jan. 20th, 1977, so it had not even been a full year til' the beginning of the "Abortion Shutdowns"; there would be 2 more shutdowns in 1977. He had a shutdown in 1978 & 1979 as well. Excluding 1978, I believe Carter's shutdowns were over disputes regarding using Medicaid to pay for abortions.
Some of the media (& somewhat hysterically, Sanders given his age) are currently acting like Trump's presidency is the first to do so. The only difference is Carter's did not lead to employees being furloughed.
Most of us in here will never agree on Trump, but I have never seen anyone in here who despises Trump to the fullest even make such a low life remark....
Last edited:
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Low life remark? It's no secret that he puts a great deal of absolute garbage into his body, and that he is not a fit individual (239lbs? Hah!). Combine that diet with someone who is supposed to be as busysomeone of his station ought to be--reducing opportunity for exercise--and the stress of taking that role seriously, and it's not all that unlikely for a medical issue to arise.
Was "infidel" seen as particularly offensive? Given the word is defined as "a person who does not believe in religion or who adheres to a religion other than one's own," it seems to me it plays right into the topic of providing protection for those who assert religious beliefs as cause to deny medical services.
I merely posited a situation wherein a Muslim doctor, one whose faith has been mocked by the target of the original comment, was given an opportunity to deny life-saving services based on religious differences, and openly wondered--as to invite discussion--if these protections would still be provided.
If anything, I'd imagine the comment regarding my hope that these events might transpire is what would be deemed a low life remark.
Why shouldn't I feel this way? Not to drag discussion too far into climate change, particularly when a comment has recently been made to move the thread dedicated to such discussion to the top of the forum list, but I am one of those individuals who believes how we affect the environment determines how the environment affects us, and I take his tasking of minions to kneecap the EPA as a threat to my health, the health of those I love, and the health of those I don't even know.
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
So you're saying inaction (in this instance, not preventing death because of religious differences) is wrong? Welcome to my side.
In the hypothetical, someone will have sought medical help with the reasonable expectation of getting it, but be refused because the one expected to intervene doesn't share their beliefs.
Last edited:
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
- 6,293
- Canada
Kind of seems like the left is eating itself alive, in front of our very eyes.
This, regarding the end of the government shutdown
#YoudontspeakformeLinda is one off the top trending things on twatter. I guess Linda Sarsour made some comments along the lines of 'we would still be out here marching even if Hillary won," to which a lot of women replied, "ok she's off the team!" It's kind of funny to watch.
And this has to be my favourite sign from the women's marches over the weekend
"Trans women are men. Truth is not hate. Don't believe the hype. Trans ideology is misogyny and homophobic. Woman is not a feeling, costume, or performance of a stereotype. Woman is a biological reality. There is no moral duty to lie to soothe a male ego."
This, regarding the end of the government shutdown
https://amp.businessinsider.com/dem...e-government-2018-1?__twitter_impression=true
#YoudontspeakformeLinda is one off the top trending things on twatter. I guess Linda Sarsour made some comments along the lines of 'we would still be out here marching even if Hillary won," to which a lot of women replied, "ok she's off the team!" It's kind of funny to watch.
And this has to be my favourite sign from the women's marches over the weekend
"Trans women are men. Truth is not hate. Don't believe the hype. Trans ideology is misogyny and homophobic. Woman is not a feeling, costume, or performance of a stereotype. Woman is a biological reality. There is no moral duty to lie to soothe a male ego."
McLaren
Premium
- 45,590
- Texas
I find it very concerning coming from someone who has "threatened" to ignore others for making posts/comment he doesn't like, would in turn, not only hope the President is denied medical attention to result in his death in a specific situation, but backs that statement up because of how Trump has dealt with the EPA....
- 13,905
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Honestly, wishing death on other people is pretty poor taste. I'm far from the world's biggest Trump fan, but I don't wish life-threatening conditions on him, nor would I hope that he wouldn't receive treatment if he were to be in that situation.
It's one thing to disagree with a guy. It's another to hope for his death.
- 1,944
- It's cold here
- The_EH_Team_43
- 29,357
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Joey D
Premium
- 47,481
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I don't think in most states you can even have a late term abortion, so if he meant "abortion" or "torn" then I'm not sure what he's on about. And even then, I believe most doctors won't do to past 9 weeks gestation.
I hate that the government gets involved in this anyway. Abortion is a medical procedure and should only be a concern between the patient, the doctor, and the insurance company.
I hate that the government gets involved in this anyway. Abortion is a medical procedure and should only be a concern between the patient, the doctor, and the insurance company.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,316
- United States
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I couldn't agree more. Though it isn't so much wishing for death as it is for a very specific set of circumstances that tests his comments and actions. But I'll take that blow.
Want more? I limited comments regarding my motivations to that which I thought was sufficiently demonstrative of his contempt for...well...anyone who isn't Donald J. Trump or willing to do something for Donald J. Trump.
What of Muslims? They're all terrorists, right? When people talk like he does as publicly as he does, those with ill intent have an easier time finding likeminded individuals in the form of those who have been marginalized, who have been told their entire belief system is wrong. I feel his comments threaten us. "Obama founded ISIS"? How about: "Trump's its head of HR"?
Let's not forget our neighbors to the south, those "rapists and murderers," the Mexicans.
And hey, since he likes to blame an administration, and thus the head of it, for events that transpire, despite the true cause going back farther than said administration...he killed Otto Warmbier! (Yeah...that was intended to be ridiculous.)
My thoughts on the "man" (he doesn't act like one) weren't formed overnight, and, believe it or not, I don't actually wish him dead, but my grandmother liked to say "hate is a strong word," and I'd joke that "despise" and "loathe" are even stronger...well...they're not strong enough.
Don't forget...G-g-g-god.
So the government can't act to restrict religious beliefs, but those in government can use their religious beliefs to back laws that prevent actions they believe are wrong because some long-hair walked on wine.
Last edited:
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
One dead and at least 5 injured in Kentucky school shooting; shooter in custody.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentuc...l-county-hs-students-shot-today-live-updates/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentuc...l-county-hs-students-shot-today-live-updates/
Joey D
Premium
- 47,481
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
Don't forget...G-g-g-god.
So the government can't act to restrict religious beliefs, but those in government can use their religious beliefs to back laws that prevent actions they believe are wrong because some long-hair walked on wine.
#Murica
For a country founded on a principal that religion and state should be separated, we don't do a very good job. Although the Constitution went on the window long ago, so I guess it's not terribly surprising.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,481
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I do think much of the Constitution still applies if we take it at face value instead of trying to finagle things into it. At its essence, pretty much follow the Bill of Rights and let states run their own affairs.
There are things in the modern world that do have a hard time fitting into the current document, but instead of trying to figure out where they fit, just see if they violate any of the current rights granted by the Constitution. If they do, then it should be illegal, if it doesn't, then it's legal.
There's other members on here with a better understanding of the Constitution than I, so I'll let them chime in with a more intelligent answer than I can give you.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
While it invites a whole host of problems, I'm inclined to believe The Constitution should never been so hard-lined, and should act more as a living document.
Mind you a big proponent of that belief is based on the gun control debate, but I don't propose changes "here" but not "there."
That presents a muddy situation, as does the [significant] potential for [significant] abuse, so in that regard it's probably better the document is as firm as it is.
Edit: I realize the country may not be what it is if the document were more easily changed. It could be better, but it'd probably be worse.
Mind you a big proponent of that belief is based on the gun control debate, but I don't propose changes "here" but not "there."
That presents a muddy situation, as does the [significant] potential for [significant] abuse, so in that regard it's probably better the document is as firm as it is.
Edit: I realize the country may not be what it is if the document were more easily changed. It could be better, but it'd probably be worse.
Last edited:
- 2,865
- Australia
I'm still back on part of a post that received an oddly high number of likes, from some members I wouldn't have expected the approval of......
Essentially "I hope that Trump has a tumour that renders him brain dead". To me it seems counter to the standards that this forum is known for. I'm a little surprised that it survived, to be honest.
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
As was/am I. I like to think people understood the intent behind the remark, but it could be as simple as they "liked" another remark--it's like a bill whose original aim is desirable across the board but doesn't pass because of negative attachments.
[Edited for formatting ("another" italicized).]
Last edited:
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Trump is a highly polarizing figure. Many people hate him with a real passion; it's extremely difficult to be objective where he is concerned. Passionate hatred evidently justifies overlooking normal human compassion/etiquette that would be invoked if the term "your ailing father" were substituted for Trump.
- 29,981
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
