I'm from Texas. I support Abortion. No contraceptive is 100% effective, not even if you combine them. If you don't understand that, study how percentages work.

Secondly, kids are hormonally driven creatures. They are literally under the influence of natural chemicals driving them to procreate.

Not every school or parent teaches them about contraceptives. In fact, you will find most 'Christians" only support abstinence. This is the equivalent of telling a chemically dependent addict to "Just Say No!" How well did that work in the drug war back in the day? (Hint: However, despite DARE's bold claims, research has shown that the program has failed spectacularly.)

Third, the people who are most affected by this new law are the people that can least afford the better contraceptives or having a child in a non-stable family environment. This won't bother a middle class or rich family at all, they can just send the kid off to an "aunt" in another state until the issue is resolved. Those kids from poor families will just be forced to have the kid and likely it will ruin their lives. This doesn't even take into account that the new law doesn't have ANY exceptions for rape or incest.

Fourth, the USA was founded on religious freedom. In other words, you get to believe what you want and others get to do the same. This means that if a religious person tells another person that something they are doing is forbidden due to morality contained in their religion, that other person can tell you to fuck right off. Church and State are supposed to be separate, but the Christian right think they should be able to legislate their religious ideas on others. Do you not see the hypocrisy here?

I'm nominally a conservative. Sadly that means that I get lumped in with you ultra far right wackos that want to turn the USA into a religious state like Iran or Afghanistan. I'm not leaving my home state because some religious nut jobs think it is OK to kill adults by lethal injection but that it is BAD to kill some cells that are multiplying.

Btw, the cardiac activity detected on ultrasound at six weeks is not a true heartbeat. It results from electrical activity, but the valves of the heart have not yet formed. And the sound does not indicate the pregnancy is viable. Women typically don't notice they are pregnant until they miss a period. So if they are unlucky, they may already be close to four weeks pregnant. That leaves them two weeks to confirm it with a doctor, since home tests are not 100%, get together money for the abortion, find a clinic, and schedule an appointment that falls within the remaining time period. Since this law will cause even more clinics to close in Texas, you can add travel and patient backlog to the time. A teen could do everything right and still miss out on the lottery for an appointment, dramatically changing their life for years.

But at least some smug religious person can sip their coffee and be proud they enforced their morality on some evil women that dared sleep around out of wedlock.

Just a protest that went too far....you mean like the vast minority of BLM marches that ended with rioting? No, sorry, this was planned, organised, executed, and was planned by and supported from the Whitehouse, "it's gonna be wild", not a spontaneous over exuberance by people demanding they not be murdered by police where the organisers immediately and strongly denounce those causing damage and injuries and call for them to stop.


How is what you copied and pasted one word different from what I said?
The fbi released the information about him, including photos of him dressed in all black with his glasses hood and mask in the capitol and his posts and discussions with under cover agents outlining his intention to try to frame Antifa for the riot/coup by dressing like them in a press release, there's no crime of impersonating Antifa, nor a crime for having his friends do surveillance in public areas without an actual illegal action attached, but it will all be brought up at his trial and sentencing for....

Knowingly Enter or Remain in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority to do so and Knowingly, and with Intent to Impede or Disrupt the Orderly Conduct of Government Business or Official Functions, Engage in Disorderly or Disruptive Conduct in, or Within Such Proximity to, Any Restricted Building or Grounds, When, or so that, Such Conduct, in Fact, Impedes or Disrupts the Orderly Conduct of Government Business or Official Functions

Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds

Obstruction of an Official Proceeding....


In other words, charges for his actions during the failed violent coup for Trump that his supporters attempted that killed 5 and that he attempted to blatantly falsely blame on Antifa, just like you do.

Don't be surprised if conspiracy and terrorism charges come soon.

"According to the court record, at the time of his arrest he had several guns, including an AK-47, and the material to make 50 molotov cocktails. Not what you need for a peaceful protest, more what you bring to a violent government overthrow.
An undercover officer with the D.C. police first encountered Duong at the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the government. Duong described himself as an “operator” and later explained that he wore all black to look like an anti-fascist activist, the government alleged in court documents. In video later seen by investigators, Duong is identified in court documents as shouting “We’re coming for you Nancy” and pushing a fellow protester toward the doors on the Senate side of the building.

"They stayed in touch, and a week later Duong allegedly told the undercover officer he was part of a “cloak and dagger” group that will “build resistances . . . for what will inevitably come.” In March, he told associates, “Keep your guns and be ready to use them.”

"He and others held “Bible study” where they discussed firearms explosives and other training, according to court documents; Duong also brought someone he described as a “three percenter” to one meeting. The right-wing Three Percenters movement, formed in 2008, is named after the false claim that only 3 percent of colonists fought in the American Revolution, many of it's members have been charged in the Jan 6 failed coup.
He talked about surveilling the Capitol building, and in February an associate took some footage of it, according to prosecutors. He also talked about freeing alleged rioters who were behind bars, saying, according to the government, “I see that as an opportunity. With every great revolution, you go to the prisons and you break them out.”
According to the court documents, he and the undercover agent toured the jail in Lorton, Va., where he talked about testing out explosives. He told the agent, the government alleged, that he was working on a “manifesto,” saying, “If I get into a gun fight with the feds and I don’t make it, I want to be able to transfer as much wisdom to my son as possible.” Prosecutors say he also discussed how far he could shoot on his family’s property in the event of a raid and said it could be the site of a second Waco.
He said at a meeting in June that he had collected Styrofoam and more than 50 wine bottles to make molotov cocktails but had held off on buying fuel “to avoid . . . being hit with a conspiracy charge,” according to the complaint filed against him. He told the undercover agent he had been saving motor oil from his car for that purpose."

Yep, sure sounds like a peaceful right wing protester to me, not another anti government right wing terrorist trying to blame their deadly anti American violence on the left....nooooooo.

My recollection is, from maybe as early as Feb 2020, immunologists had studied the DNA and rna of the virus and said unequivocally that it was not "created" using any known method of gene manipulation or DNA recoding. Since that's what most people think China is being accused of, it's important to be clear that this possibility was ruled out early and without question....all known methods of creating viruses by gene/DNA manipulation leave tell tale evidence that can identify the exact type/method of manipulation done, and none was found.

It's possible that the lab, through unnatural selection, developed the natural disease into something more dangerous then lost containment...I don't see how, without records indicating they did that, it would be possible to differentiate between that and natural selection in the wild. IMO it's most likely to have spread from wet markets while also being studied in the lab that exists because these diseases are prevalent naturally in the area.

Where you start greatly impacts where you end up.

One party wants to offer 4 more years of public education, and your party is dead set against it.

Yes, there are plenty of poor white people, but far more poor blacks per capita by race.

The fix is multi fold with many unknowns, but an equal justice system where black defendants aren't 10 times more likely to go to prison based on the same evidence and circumstances would be a great start. Many fathers are MIA because they're in prison for minor drug offences while white defendants of similar charges usually get probation.

Pay better attention, the issue now is people don't want those low paying jobs and companies can't fill them, not a lack of them.

Lack of roads and bridges and electricity and an educated work force kill jobs and GDP. There are more than enough infrastructure jobs to do to jot only keep the entire construction industry busy for decades, there are constantly more as infrastructure ages. They may be part time projects, they are full time permanent jobs.

Look at GDP last year, fool. Under those tax cuts we had the largest drop in GDP ever. Holy fuck! The total rise in GDP under Trump is barely 1% in 4 years, disastrous, not flourishing.

Your dad didn't go to prison for fitting the description.

Just like not all those white kids had all those head starts, not all black kids have none. They needed to work harder and overcome more in almost all cases to be successful, and had to defend their right to success repeatedly, just ask one. Sports superstars are under what, 2000 people, not all of which make millions. Exceptions often prove the rule.....Remember his question about going to school on a non athletic scholarship? Relegating people to one or two professions they are allowed to be successful in based on race is definitely racist.

Edit: Studies show professional whites make about 1/3 more than blacks and even more compared to Hispanics even as lawyers, and whites make up over 85% of lawyers and 60% of the population while blacks are about 5% of lawyers and over 18% of population.
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/a_law_degree_provides_a_larger_earnings_boost_to_whites_than_minorities_res
https://www.mycase.com/blog/aba-2019-report-lawyer-demographics-earnings-tech-choices-and-more/
The head starts never end.

The people working minimum wage hated it enough that they aren't going back and businesses can't find low wage employees....so.....

Wow, we agree on your last point. Your party, and definitely Trump absolutely disagree 100%. Their agenda is to ensure that is never the case but instead (successfully) argue that affluenza should excuse even murder and should definitely shield them from any lesser charge.

They invented lead pipes (1), dumbing us all down (2)?

1.https://www.fluencecorp.com/brief-history-lead-water-supplies/
2.https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/28/521644395/study-suggests-childhood-exposure-to-lead-can-blunt-iq-for-decades

After 25 years it's forgiven? Only if you've paid every single payment in full and on time for 25 years without a single late, deferred, or partial payment ever which would leave no balance....so I call bullshit. My 75+ year old mother in law is still paying hers.

But @bobknight33 is anti education, so not a surprise he's uneducated on the facts here.

Jr College is about $1000 for a full year, that's what's going to be free, not Stanford and Harvard. These credits usually transfer, so successful students get freshman and sophomore year cheap then can go to an expensive four year university for only two years, unsuccessful students don't waste the time and money. I just kept going to Jr college to learn for 10+ years because I didn't care about a diploma, just the knowledge. I studied under some of the highest ranked teachers in America for pennies.
Even welders and plumbers need education, Bob. I know, I was a welder/fabricator before I retired. Physics and math were tools I used daily.

Such stupidity, Bob. You think college isn't worth it if society pays for it, but is definitely worth it and something to brag about and lord over the uneducated if daddy paid for it. Incredibly unAmerican, comrad, and stupid.

An educated public is far more productive. This helps the entire country.

Absolutely, that's just, like, my opinion, man. It holds no sway over others, who cares what a newt thinks?

I don't think it's a certainty that the GHSB would have prevented all deaths, or even avoided the pandemic, just likely, but that's enough to assign blame imo, and usually under the law too. There's zero chance he would be prosecuted, so it's all academic.

You have a link for the Lancet study? I would be interested to find what they include as "Trump's policies" and what isn't considered. Edit:Derp....I scrolled up and see you already posted it, thanks.
Even 40% is over 200000 deaths in his lap. That's 200000 more than are acceptable.

You could say that about climate change, and in a rational world it would be true, but that <3% are used to justify nearly 50% of policy and nearly all opposition to progress, so yeah, it does still matter.

I respect you too, and you're welcome to your opinion, but when you say I can't lay blame where I think it belongs, I feel obligated to explain how I came to my opinion.

Absolutely on Bob. It's infantile and ignorant at best, and a cynical lie aimed at the gullible.

What we are still talking about is your opinion. You feel that him removing the GHSB led to all of the pandemic deaths. I understand that and you have the right to have that opinion.

I am going off the report that was made by the Lancet Journal. The Lancet is one of the two oldest, most respected and most widely read medical journals in the world. They were established in 1823 and are ranked often first or second among general-interest medical journals by their “impact factor,” the frequency with which their studies are cited in other research.

They said 40% and that is also influenced by the state our health system was already in when he became President.

I will give you an analogy. If 97% of the world's climate scientists believe that, based on science, we have man made climate change, it really doesn't matter what the opinions of the other 3% are. We have man made climate change.

I respect you, but I disagree with your opinion. OTOH, I agree that Bob is an ass for even posting this. Trump fucked up and arguing it is pointless at this time.

The EU has open borders and free travel amongst the various nations if you are a citizen of a member nation. I will agree our per capita death rate is higher, but still (based on the well researched Lancet study) you cannot lay more than about 40% of the deaths at Trump's feet. I don't deny he could have handled the pandemic much better, but it has been some time since we have had a pandemic on this level. Multiple leaders have handled it differently and time will eventually label them for the history aspect of it.

I go by the facts. Not conjecture, and not opinion. I also don't consider Birx to be even remotely a good source since she rode down the trail willy nilly with the same person you are blaming all the deaths on. I will never trust or vote for Trump again, but you cannot lay the percentage you are proposing on him solely. Just like we cannot move Biden to almighty status for his handling of the situation when he is currently running a similar death rate on par with the same time last year, WHILE having massive vaccination.

Has he made steps that have helped? Certainly and I would say he is definitely doing a better job than Trump, but by your own admission almost anyone could. The fact of the matter is, as I said last year, you cannot fight a pandemic like this without having the martial law like power China had or being in a situation to isolate yourself from outside contact.

Try it. If she takes the kid and bolts, it's legal. Even if you manage to get a court order before she leaves state, chances are you won't get equal custody unless she's a documented certifiable nutjob. I say this because you live in a fault state which are invariably the same states backwards enough to automatically give women custody and force fathers to prove the mother is unstable and dangerous, and even then you'll share with her as primary without documented abuse.

So you've been together 20 years and share nothing. What a way to live.

Shared assets when not married aren't divided by the courts. If you want their help, gotta be married or sign an ownership contract with every purchase.

I can find no instance where I said my brother "won". He got custody, that's different from "winning". Be real. If you're going to quote me, please don't make up the quotes. Spending over $100000 on a two week marriage isn't winning by my definition.

That link is off topic. Find a study of similar jobs with similar hours worked and compare salaries, not a study that says average women work X ammount less so overall earning should be X amount less but instead it's X-1 less, so women are overpaid. That's not what their study showed, they're extrapolating there, and ignoring that the lower hours are usually not their choice, but their superiors orders to avoid paying overtime and full benefits to women. Also, they said Married men managers without kids also earn more for each hour at work: they earn $38.40 per hour while married women without kids earn only $28.70. That means that for each hour spent at their jobs, male married managers without kids earn about 34% more than women. 34% more for each hour. Did you read it? Mic drop.

See, more insulting dismissiveness...those women couldn't possibly be more competent or harder workers, they must be succeeding because of preferential treatment. In case you missed it, that's incredibly misogynistic.

What?! Prove it.....with data not an anecdote.

So....You wouldn't marry a crazy person only because of what divorce would cost. Yeah....right.

" I wouldn't even consider marrying anyone that has any adverse indicators" sounds like personal issues to me, they aren't good enough to marry....because of divorce....Again ignoring the prenup that dictates divorce splits.

Lol. Such utter bullshit. Maybe if they have an impairment and no lawyer, and can prove it in court, not because they say so.

Ashley Maddison.

Wedding rings are aphrodisiacs. It's why I don't wear one, hit on repeatedly wearing it, never once without it. My experience differs from your assumptions and statistics, same with my friends. I'm 5'9", so not tall cute and photogenic....but two out of three ain't bad.

Bob said it, you agreed with him and more.

An uncodified partnership is one of convenience or even imaginary. Nothing to stop either of you walking tomorrow if you meet your new soul mate. That's not a stable partnership. It may be exactly what you want. It seems you made up your mind that marriage=bad for men long ago, in which case you should not partake. I hope your path leads to at least half the happiness mine has.

Newt

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

You are projecting.

Marriage takes the honesty away from a relationship.
It's no longer me and you.
It's me and you and uncle sam.
I want *consensual* relations where me and my partner set our rules, not some 3rd party, and not when the rules are stacked against me.

Congratulations to your brother. Lucky him.

I never said women don't work.

I said that men make more personal sacrifices for their work - a true statement about men as a group. Exceptions don't alter the rule.

Yes, women under 35 out earn men now. And as legacy earners retire, we will be facing a situation where women out earn men at any age. Preferential admittance and hiring tend to have that effect. It's by design.

And women don't get paid less for the same work - the studies saying that don't account for hours worked and don't provide any breakdown of job title. E.g. Women doctors get paid less - because the type of doctor they choose to be is more likely to be a pediatrician than a heart surgeon or anesthesiologist. But within each category of doctor, per hour worked, and per year experience, their income is essentially identical.

And you don't need to be a home maker to get paid in a divorce. Just make less than your partner.
Historically the divorce rewards scale higher for women given mirror situations.

Why would I want to deal with a 50/50 split when I brought 90% of the assets into the marriage? A 50/50 split would set me back decades. I just want to keep my stuff, I did pay for it after all, which cost me money, which cost me time, which cost me life.

And why should /anyone/ have their life supported by anyone else?
(*context=spouses. Not interested in some bad faith out of context argument bringing up children or retirees supported by taxes, etc)
Are you able bodied? Then get working.
Is it tough? Too bad.
It's harder for both people supporting themselves alone, you aren't special. You were in this situation before you got married, you can go back to it.

In any case, the homemaker job argument is senseless. There are benefits (time with kids), and there are pitfalls (hole in your resume). You make your choice, and you deal with the consequences.
You are paid by the home over your head and the money you're given while you are a home maker. What other job do you get to leave and still be paid. People act as if the working partner was just chilling this whole time. Where are the working partner's continuing post divorce benefits?


I have no mindset about women. More projection.
I couldn't care less if I marry a stripper with 2 kids - so long as in the event of a divorce we go our separate ways with ZERO obligations to one another.

I have a mindset about the dangers of divorce, and the fact that most marriages end in divorce, and most divorces are initiated by the female partner.
I am on average more likely than not to face a divorce.
Hence the risk reduction by being more 'picky'.


I am in a nearly 20 year happy relationship - unmarried.
She's the boss of the relationship. And I'm fine with that because I *consent* to it. I can always walk away if I decide otherwise.

So long as laws and family court are how they are, I won't even consider marriage.

-scheherazade

Not only did he abolish it, but it was one of the highest priorities of the GOP once Reagan came in. Haynes Johnson writes extensively about this in his frighteningly-prescient book 'Sleepwalking Through History'. The GOP was already following the lead of Roger Ailes (later of Fox News) after he polished the turd named Nixon and the GOP understood if they controlled the narrative, they could stay in power. Newt Gingrich, and the shitshow that followed, was the natural extension of Ailes's methodology. Abolishing the Fairness Doctrine will be studied for centuries as one of the single greatest acts of self-destruction in world history.

Let’s hope so. He knows what he’s doing. If Obama is really pulling the strings then I assume you won’t be insulting Biden anymore since he’s not really in charge, right? Derp.

I disagree, but ok, kill off “conservative” media and we’ll get rid of the half that’s all lies, media issues solved. Just get rid of all opinion programming and channels masquerading as news and the effect is the same.

But to be sure, they didn’t cause all the division, but they did help Trump exploit and amplify it by misdirecting republicans so thoroughly that pederastic vampire cabals that get political power and youth through infant blood cocktails and the fictional recreational use of adrenochrome sounds real and reasonable to half of them... (ridiculously taking fantasy scenes from Clockwork Orange and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas as factual accounts, recreational use has never happened and the few clinical studies indicated it causes Schizophrenia and other obvious mental disorders) ...so idiotic they convinced conservatives a foreign president who has been dead over 8 years actively interfered in the last election....so deceptive they gladly and knowingly repeated the lies Trump fed them about election fraud as if they were fact to the point they were sued for billions in damages their lies caused American companies while not reporting that every agency tasked with election security contradicted their specious and spurious claims....with evidence to back them up unlike the claims of fraud.
Without the division right wing nut job conspiracy theories (and those who believe, repeat, and amplify them) have done, yes, America would be rocking. Sadly, you and your ilk have not returned to reality yet....tens of millions of you are just waiting for Q to tell them why reality is wrong and they’re correct.