I now know who to blame...

[AlbumAddict]

...for our two party system!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ksq8GAVlB-A&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ksq8GAVlB-A&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I never did like the French...LOL

[Des]

LOL

I actually have a question for you...or just some random thoughts you can respond to it you like. (I tried to answer your thread before, but I'm getting use to this format)

Weren't the terms "left" and "right" coined by analysts to describe the political tendencies of a person/party? Is it really a good thing to identify with one or the other before actually supporting a particular subject?

[Kathianne]

LOL

I actually have a question for you...or just some random thoughts you can respond to it you like. (I tried to answer your thread before, but I'm getting use to this format)

Weren't the terms "left" and "right" coined by analysts to describe the political tendencies of a person/party? Is it really a good thing to identify with one or the other before actually supporting a particular subject?

It's shorthand or averaging topics. Some may likely fall short.

[AlbumAddict]

LOL

I actually have a question for you...or just some random thoughts you can respond to it you like. (I tried to answer your thread before, but I'm getting use to this format)

Weren't the terms "left" and "right" coined by analysts to describe the political tendencies of a person/party? Is it really a good thing to identify with one or the other before actually supporting a particular subject?

I believe that you're right, but fortunately, I no longer believe that there are only two tendencies that apply. It's time for our "two party" system to be overhauled. I for instance, am neither right, left or center. I'm an independent thinking individual who doesn't fit any of the "norms".

I'm:
anti-death penalty
pro-life (100%)
anti-overturning Roe v. Wade
pro-Christian
anti-prayer in schools
pro-welfare, but with "term limits"
anti-SS disability for people who can still have sex (said tongue in cheek as a Judge Judy reference), but my dad had to get an attorney before they'd pay him for his diagnosed MS and I know SEVERAL people receiving it because the have a learning disability...wtf?!
pro-fair tax
anti-federal gov't in education

You see my dilemma?

[Yurt]

I believe that you're right, but fortunately, I no longer believe that there are only two tendencies that apply. It's time for our "two party" system to be overhauled. I for instance, am neither right, left or center. I'm an independent thinking individual who doesn't fit any of the "norms".

I'm:
anti-death penalty
pro-life (100%)
anti-overturning Roe v. Wade
pro-Christian
anti-prayer in schools
pro-welfare, but with "term limits"
anti-SS disability for people who can still have sex (said tongue in cheek as a Judge Judy reference), but my dad had to get an attorney before they'd pay him for his diagnosed MS and I know SEVERAL people receiving it because the have a learning disability...wtf?!
pro-fair tax
anti-federal gov't in education

You see my dilemma?

how do you reconcile those two beliefs?

[Immanuel]

how do you reconcile those two beliefs?

I can answer that sort of.

Overturning Roe v. Wade will not stop abortions. It will only send the issue back to the individual states. After this is done, we will have a hodgepodge of laws throughout the country with some states making abortion for any and every reason even up to and including Partial Birth Abortion, while other states will nearly ban it completely.

All that will do is make things worse. Women in states that have banned abortions will only travel to states that didn't or find other means to get the job done. As much as I would like to see abortions a thing of the past it won't happen by overturning Roe.

It seems to me that the best thing to do is to work to a point where abortion is terminated by other means. Overturning Roe v. Wade may actually make things worse.

Immie

[Yurt]

I can answer that sort of.

Overturning Roe v. Wade will not stop abortions. It will only send the issue back to the individual states. After this is done, we will have a hodgepodge of laws throughout the country with some states making abortion for any and every reason even up to and including Partial Birth Abortion, while other states will nearly ban it completely.

All that will do is make things worse. Women in states that have banned abortions will only travel to states that didn't or find other means to get the job done. As much as I would like to see abortions a thing of the past it won't happen by overturning Roe.

It seems to me that the best thing to do is to work to a point where abortion is terminated by other means. Overturning Roe v. Wade may actually make things worse.

Immie

fair enough immie.

maybe we should have a federal speed limit. or maybe we should allow all drugs to be legal, afterall, by making cocaine/crack illegal, it forces people to get their fix from dirty sources.

[Abbey Marie]

how do you reconcile those two beliefs?

The only way I can see having these two beliefs simultaneously, is if you are against murder of the innocents, but you think state's rights/limiting fed. gov't, actually trump murder as an issue. :dunno:

[Immanuel]

fair enough immie.

maybe we should have a federal speed limit. or maybe we should allow all drugs to be legal, afterall, by making cocaine/crack illegal, it forces people to get their fix from dirty sources.

We do have a federal speed limit, but regardless that is something completely different than abortion. One other thing, I did not say that I would prefer that it be kept legal. My preference would be that it be made illegal, but the chance of that happening is non-existent.

Making drugs legal? Considering the overall success of the war on drugs, it might not be a bad idea. At least if it were legal, it could be monitored and taxed not to mention that those who are addicted would be able to seek help without facing criminal charges.


The only way I can see having these two beliefs simultaneously, is if you are against murder of the innocents, but you think state's rights/limiting fed. gov't, actually trump murder as an issue. :dunno:

Actually, isn't that the reason MFM gives for defending a woman's right to choose? He is not for abortion, yet believes that a woman's right to choose trumps the babies right to live. MFM can correct me if I am incorrectly stating his position on this.

Immie

[AlbumAddict]

The only way I can see having these two beliefs simultaneously, is if you are against murder of the innocents, but you think state's rights/limiting fed. gov't, actually trump murder as an issue. :dunno:

Actually, I'm a strong believer in "you can't go back". Look at prohibition. If you make something legal, illegal, it just doesn't work. The backroom abortions before Roe would be nothing compared to the ones after.

That's also why I don't want to see marijuana legalized. If it turns out to be bad idea (big increases in DUI, and DUI deaths, etc) then we're stuck, because you can't go back. I prefer to err on the side of caution. Before legalizing ANYthing that's currently illegal it needs to be excessively and thoroughly thought through. Something our government officials rarely do, unfortunately.

A fiction book, The President by Parker Hudson, got me thinking on these lines. It takes a look at the effects of this fictional president's legislation on his brothers and sisters who have to deal with effects of it. One's in the military, one's a nurse and the other is a SAHM. It's an interesting and thought provoking piece of fiction.

[Yurt]

Actually, I'm a strong believer in "you can't go back". Look at prohibition. If you make something legal, illegal, it just doesn't work. The backroom abortions before Roe would be nothing compared to the ones after.

That's also why I don't want to see marijuana legalized. If it turns out to be bad idea (big increases in DUI, and DUI deaths, etc) then we're stuck, because you can't go back. I prefer to err on the side of caution. Before legalizing ANYthing that's currently illegal it needs to be excessively and thoroughly thought through. Something our government officials rarely do, unfortunately.

A fiction book, The President by Parker Hudson, got me thinking on these lines. It takes a look at the effects of this fictional president's legislation on his brothers and sisters who have to deal with effects of it. One's in the military, one's a nurse and the other is a SAHM. It's an interesting and thought provoking piece of fiction.

i appreciate your thoughts. do you support the legalization of alcohol?

[DragonStryk72]

Actually, I'm a strong believer in "you can't go back". Look at prohibition. If you make something legal, illegal, it just doesn't work. The backroom abortions before Roe would be nothing compared to the ones after.

That's also why I don't want to see marijuana legalized. If it turns out to be bad idea (big increases in DUI, and DUI deaths, etc) then we're stuck, because you can't go back. I prefer to err on the side of caution. Before legalizing ANYthing that's currently illegal it needs to be excessively and thoroughly thought through. Something our government officials rarely do, unfortunately.

A fiction book, The President by Parker Hudson, got me thinking on these lines. It takes a look at the effects of this fictional president's legislation on his brothers and sisters who have to deal with effects of it. One's in the military, one's a nurse and the other is a SAHM. It's an interesting and thought provoking piece of fiction.

The large reason prohibition failed was its attempt to legislate morality, as opposed to punish those who break the law, and the other problems stemmed from that hubris. Note that dueling used to be legal, but no longer is legal, nor acceptable in modern society.

Overall, I am against abortion, I feel that it should only be used in the cases of rape, incest, or high-risk pregnancies where the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy. However, I realize that is not going to be the case for many many years at the current rate of 100% for, or 100% against, since neither side can come to a compromise.

What it needs to start with, I think, is sensically limiting the number of abortions a woman can get (I'm sorry you've gotten yourself pregnant three times, but that lack of judgment is on you, not us), as well as requiring all minors going for an abortion to have informed consent from their parents or legal guardians. It is as simple as understanding the point that there is middle ground that can be attained and worked from, but so far, I haven't seen that coming from either of the two major parties.

[AlbumAddict]

i appreciate your thoughts. do you support the legalization of alcohol?

Alcohol is legal, so that's a moot point, imo. Personally, I enjoy alcohol, and I don't believe it should be illegal. The problem came from attempting to forbid something that was previously legal.

My point in regards to marijuana (and any other thing that is currently illegal which people want legalized, polygamy, same sex marriage, whatever) is that everyone needs to think it all the way through, before passing legislation to make is so. We are too quick in our country to pass laws without fully realizing the potential fallout.

Should marijuana be legalized? Possibly. But before we do that, I think we should get a better handle on illegal alcohol use in our country...underage drinking, DUI, barroom brawls, etc. Let's prove we can make legalized alcohol manageable before we start adding more problems to the pot.

Unfortunately, that leads to an entirely different topic. Weak law enforcement. LOL

[AlbumAddict]

The large reason prohibition failed was its attempt to legislate morality, as opposed to punish those who break the law, and the other problems stemmed from that hubris. Note that dueling used to be legal, but no longer is legal, nor acceptable in modern society.

What it needs to start with, I think, is sensically limiting the number of abortions a woman can get (I'm sorry you've gotten yourself pregnant three times, but that lack of judgment is on you, not us), as well as requiring all minors going for an abortion to have informed consent from their parents or legal guardians. It is as simple as understanding the point that there is middle ground that can be attained and worked from, but so far, I haven't seen that coming from either of the two major parties.

You raise good points. Of course there are things that were previously legal that are no longer legal, like slavery...and dueling. However those are also things that easily affect society as a whole. Oppression and stray bullets, for example. :laugh:

Things like alcohol, drugs, and abortion, imo, are more "personal" issues. Yes, I know they have an impact on society, but not to the degree some other issues do.

I also agree that attempting to legislate morality is a core issue in all of these cases. I believe there is some morality that can and should be legislated... basic human rights, for one example.

As for the specific abortion ideas...I think they're good ideas for reform. It's too serious of a medical procedure (and emotional ordeal), imo, to use as a birth control method. I 100% support parent consent, but in no way do I think Roe v. Wade should be overturned. The dangers it would present are far too great.

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

maybe we should have a federal speed limit. That should happen about Jan 21 2009..... Back when Peanut brain carter was president they passed the 55 mph speed limit the only thing it did was raise the revenue for the City and County courts

[Yurt]

Alcohol is legal, so that's a moot point, imo. Personally, I enjoy alcohol, and I don't believe it should be illegal. The problem came from attempting to forbid something that was previously legal.

My point in regards to marijuana (and any other thing that is currently illegal which people want legalized, polygamy, same sex marriage, whatever) is that everyone needs to think it all the way through, before passing legislation to make is so. We are too quick in our country to pass laws without fully realizing the potential fallout.

Should marijuana be legalized? Possibly. But before we do that, I think we should get a better handle on illegal alcohol use in our country...underage drinking, DUI, barroom brawls, etc. Let's prove we can make legalized alcohol manageable before we start adding more problems to the pot.

Unfortunately, that leads to an entirely different topic. Weak law enforcement. LOL

it is not moot at all...it goes entirely to your view about what should or should not be legal. marijuana/cocaine was previously legal, in the same way booze was....e.g., the drugs were not illegal until the government said so. weed/ganja used to grow wild, hence the term "weed". coca...used to be in coca cola....hence the name.

[Yurt]

That should happen about Jan 21 2009..... Back when Peanut brain carter was president they passed the 55 mph speed limit the only thing it did was raise the revenue for the City and County courts

i heard it raised blood pressure too :coffee:

[AlbumAddict]

it is not moot at all...it goes entirely to your view about what should or should not be legal. marijuana/cocaine was previously legal, in the same way booze was....e.g., the drugs were not illegal until the government said so. weed/ganja used to grow wild, hence the term "weed". coca...used to be in coca cola....hence the name.

Since you only appear to read random portions of my posts. I'll stop responding now. Cheers to you! :beer:

[Little-Acorn]

they passed the 55 mph speed limit the only thing it did was raise the revenue for the City and County courts

I was living in Colorado when the question came up whether to abandon the 55mph speed limit.

One fellow expressed my own point of view succinctly:

"I like the 65mph speed limit better than the 55mph limit. It's a lot easier to slow down from 80 to 65, than from 80 to 55."

[Yurt]

Since you only appear to read random portions of my posts. I'll stop responding now. Cheers to you! :beer:

:lame2:

[Des]

I believe that you're right, but fortunately, I no longer believe that there are only two tendencies that apply. It's time for our "two party" system to be overhauled. I for instance, am neither right, left or center. I'm an independent thinking individual who doesn't fit any of the "norms".

I'm:
anti-death penalty
pro-life (100%)
anti-overturning Roe v. Wade
pro-Christian
anti-prayer in schools
pro-welfare, but with "term limits"
anti-SS disability for people who can still have sex (said tongue in cheek as a Judge Judy reference), but my dad had to get an attorney before they'd pay him for his diagnosed MS and I know SEVERAL people receiving it because the have a learning disability...wtf?!
pro-fair tax
anti-federal gov't in education

You see my dilemma?

I missed talking with you, too :)

I agree, though. The system is set up to pit people against one another without actually findinf solutions. I have been called a dirty liberal hippie before many times, and I agree with you on all points except being pro-life 100 percent (I am pro choice, as in, medical decision). I'm not even Christian, but I am "pro-Christian", if it means that religion is important to others and the right to practice it is too.

I just find too many people using the labels "left" or "right" once an opinon comes up, without realizing that even with people who may vote the same way on one issue, there are differing reasons for it.

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

i heard it raised blood pressure too :coffee: I think the 55mph limit was what started Road Rage :dance: