Poll: Abortion, Roe v. Wade

[Colonel_Klinck]

Fed up of hearing ‘the black community’, ‘lgbt community’ etc. do they all live in one neighbourhood together?

Load of rubbish. It’s just some language sugarcoating which, with the 2 examples above, translates to ‘the blacks’ and ‘the queers’. But if we stick community at the end of it, it sounds less prejudicial, and yet it is.

Stop treating people as part of a homogenous blobs and as individuals.

So you don't believe that there should be any groups based on collective interest? Clearly people are placing themselves in those "blobs" as you put it because they tend to vote together and campaign together. Maybe why they feel like they need to do that is the question you should be asking.

 

[Werewolf]

So you don't believe that there should be any groups based on collective interest? Clearly people are placing themselves in those "blobs" as you put it because they tend to vote together and campaign together. Maybe why they feel like they need to do that is the question you should be asking.

Yup

They tend to work together because their rights and issues tend to not be based on which street they live in, but across the state or country.

 

[C Kent]

The GOP are playing by different rules. Its time the Dems woke up to this fact and stopped playing nice. They should ditch the filibuster and pass legislation protecting abortion rights and while they are at it, gay marriage rights and contraception, as the SC will come for those soon enough.

Yeah instead of blocking garlands nomination like they did it would have been much better if the republicans brought a woman with zero credibility from 40 odd years in his past when he was at college to fake rape and sexual assualt charges. ' Democrats play nice eh, don't make me laugh.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Yeah instead of blocking garlands nomination like they did it would have been much better if the republicans brought a woman with zero credibility from 40 odd years in his past when he was at college to fake rape and sexual assualt charges.

In your opinion she had zero credibility. Funny that the other man involved refused to testify under oath and why didn't the FBI investigate it? Are you suggesting her testimony should have been ignored?

 

[C Kent]

In your opinion she had zero credibility. Funny that the other man involved refused to testify under oath and why didn't the FBI investigate it? Are you suggesting her testimony should have been ignored?

Yes because she lied her arse off, the accusation would have been laughed out of 'real' court - When did it take place? Can't remember. Where did it take place? Can't remember. The woman was a liar, a tool for false accusations at the behest of the democrats.

 

[Werewolf]

Yes because she lied her arse off, the accusation would have been laughed out of 'real' court - When did it take place? Can't remember. Where did it take place? Can't remember. The woman was a liar, a tool for false accusations at the behest of the democrats.

You have any proof she was a liar?

IIRC it wasn't investigated by the FBI, and neither were any of the financial oddities of Kvanagh's situation, IIRC various of his debts suddenly got paid off with no explanation or method by which he could have afforded to pay them.

His whole defence amounted to "hehehe I didn't drink" and "I can't recall".

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Yes because she lied her arse off, the accusation would have been laughed out of 'real' court - When did it take place? Can't remember. Where did it take place? Can't remember. The woman was a liar, a tool for false accusations at the behest of the democrats.

In your opinion she was a liar. It wouldn't have got to court because the federal statue of limitations is 20 years for rape unless she was a minor at the time. So in your opinion as someone who has extensive experience with historical sexual assault/rape, the victim always remembers every detail of the event 40 years later even if they'd been drinking?

 

[dowie]

Oh come on guys, the Kavanaugh accusation was incredibly weak and pure partisan nonsense, it was pretty embarrassing for the main accuser.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

You have any proof she was a liar?

IIRC it wasn't investigated by the FBI, and neither were any of the financial oddities of Kvanagh's situation, IIRC various of his debts suddenly got paid off with no explanation or method by which he could have afforded to pay them.

His whole defence amounted to "hehehe I didn't drink" and "I can't recall".

yeah I'd love to know who paid off all his debts in 2017

 

[C Kent]

In your opinion she was a liar. It wouldn't have got to court because the federal statue of limitations is 20 years for rape unless she was a minor at the time. So in your opinion as someone who has extensive experience with historical sexual assault/rape, the victim always remembers every detail of the event 40 years later even if they'd been drinking?

Well she was apparently 15 at the time she made her original accusation as she said it occurred in 1982 (that makes her a minor) this then miraculously changes to the mid 80s later on so she can't even get the year correct. Her story then changed many times, like I said she had zero credibility.

Oh and then there was the I'm scared of flying nonsense, and it was shown she took annual trips abroad to Europe and the like. More lies.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Oh come on guys, the Kavanaugh accusation was incredibly weak and pure partisan nonsense, it was pretty embarrassing for the main accuser.

Oh another expert on sexual assault/rape accusations. This is the same expert who told us Derek Chauvin would be acquitted of murder as there was no evidence he was guilty

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

edit

 

[Mason-]

So you don't believe that there should be any groups based on collective interest? Clearly people are placing themselves in those "blobs" as you put it because they tend to vote together and campaign together. Maybe why they feel like they need to do that is the question you should be asking.

Evidently that’s not what I said. Assuming people belong to one is what I take issue with. Assuming people belong to one because of their race, sex, etc is abhorrent, yet incredibly widespread.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Well she was apparently 15 at the time she made her original accusation as she said it occurred in 1982 (that makes her a minor) this then miraculously changes to the mid 80s later on so she can't even get the year correct. Her story then changed many times, like I said she had zero credibility.

Oh and then there was the I'm scared of flying nonsense, and it was shown she took annual trips abroad to Europe and the like. More lies.

I can't find anything saying she changed the dates. Can you point me to these changes in her story?

I've no idea if she was telling the truth or not. Its not like teenage boys don't do these things though, especially when drink is involved. There was also the story of him shaking his **** in the face of another girl in their freshman year at Yale. The Committee refused to here that testimony.

 

[C Kent]

I can't find anything saying she changed the dates. Can you point me to these changes in her story?

I've no idea if she was telling the truth or not. Its not like teenage boys don't do these things though, especially when drink is involved. There was also the story of him shaking his **** in the face of another girl in their freshman year at Yale. The Committee refused to here that testimony.

Christine Blasey Ford's changing Kavanaugh assault story leaves her short on credibility

Put aside Christine Blasey Ford's emotional performance. Her testimony revealed her as a witness whose memories change at her convenience.

eu.usatoday.com

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Evidently that’s not what I said. Assuming people belong to one is what I take issue with. Assuming people belong to one because of their race, sex, etc is abhorrent, yet incredibly widespread.

You said

Fed up of hearing ‘the black community’, ‘lgbt community’ etc. do they all live in one neighbourhood together?

you'll admit that there are such things as the black community and LGBT community though? And people from those "communities", which could be spread across the country do rally together in their group, for want of a better word, as they share similar political aims and are lobbying at local, state or national level for things that matter to them? Politics at all levels is full of such communities. The Christian Evangelical community is an incredibly powerful lobbying group in US politics. They've managed to load the US SC and get Roe overturned after all.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Christine Blasey Ford's changing Kavanaugh assault story leaves her short on credibility

Put aside Christine Blasey Ford's emotional performance. Her testimony revealed her as a witness whose memories change at her convenience.

eu.usatoday.com

Did you actually read it? For one its an opinion piece by an openly conservative catholic who writes for the Federalist. She isn't exactly a neutral is she. Just look at some of the articles she writes

Margot Cleveland - Catholic Womens Forum

Margot Cleveland is a freelance writer and a contributor at The Federalist, and has published pieces for Townhall as well. Since...

catholicwomensforum.org

Her issues with the story is that Ford doesn't give a year to her therapist or the Washington Post but does in the hearing and on the exact number of people at the party. I've no idea if any of that is normal in attacks like this and an attack that was so long ago. She told her therapist of the attack in 2012 though so its not like she just made it up in 2018. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss her claim. She's not Amber Heard you know.

 

[C Kent]

Yes I read it, she makes the same point. Blassy Fords story constantly changed only after she was called out on her lies. She was never credible, the whole hearing was a shame by the democrats to try and stop Kavanaughs confirmation.

 

[dowie]

Oh another expert on sexual assault/rape accusations. This is the same expert who told us Derek Chauvin would be acquitted of murder as there was no evidence he was guilty

^^^ this guy just lies and makes things up as he goes along, I said I reckoned there was a 10% chance of him being found not guilty, I put more weight on him being found guilty of manslaughter and or 3rd degree murder or indeed a mistrial.

Of course, you'll just pretend to ignore that and make stuff up as usual.

 

[Dis86]

So you don't believe that there should be any groups based on collective interest? Clearly people are placing themselves in those "blobs" as you put it because they tend to vote together and campaign together. Maybe why they feel like they need to do that is the question you should be asking.

Weird, because when you or I put people in those groups we're racist, or sexist, or a phobe.