bullets13

Sorry, just getting back on here... I'll just refer you to westend's response. I don't think I can word my opinion any better than that.

:)

Sorry I lumped you in. Much of my evidence was lost in the crash anyway. I'm just saying, the political forum is full of threads from biased "news sites" and then everyone gets all in an uproar about them. When I didn't, you seemed taken aback.

the point being, you guys post dozens of posts like this a week.  the only difference is that they say what you guys want to hear.  but that doesn't make them any more verifiable or legitimate than this one. 

    absolutely, as it totally negates the content.

[Hidden Content]

it reads like a bogus propaganda article, it's definitely on a bogus propaganda site, and it's on a topic that many people really aren't that worried about these days anyway. at some point you guys are going to realize that no matter how many of these articles you guys post and high five each other about, nobody else takes them seriously.

    How concerned would you be if i started posting issues brought up on liberal websites? and i'm not talking about cnn and the like, i mean liberal blog-type websites ran by random lefties on the internet. if you want me to be concerned, at least post a fox article. they're clearly biased conservative, but they're a legitimate news source.

how much money did you donate to this "news site" at the bottom of the article, NOTB?

    sinner. ;)

I didn't say it was wrong. I wasn't asked if it was wrong. I was asked why they wouldn't vote republican. I just stated why.

    you're getting your poor people mixed up. Mexicans are not coming to the US for free stuff. The reason that unvalidated or undocumented people support the left is because the left supports the unvalidated and undocumented. The right screams for them all to be shipped back south (at least until they need a good price on that new deck they're building). I'm with you on the free stuff and why some sectors vote democrats, but that's not why THIS particular sector does.

No, i personally don't think so. A lot of people, especially those from older generations, want to say that things are worse now. i don't think they're worse, they're just different. there are major issues affecting us now, but there always have been issues. there are major issues that divide the country based on social beliefs, but there always have been. and social media brings those issues into a much sharper focus now. but no, i don't believe things are worse now than before. as for America being a laughing stock around the world, not hardly. there's a reason people from all over the world move here, and there's a reason that countries all over the world hate us. we have it really, really good over here.

    absolutely not. but do i believe that the right would be far more accomodating to the practice if unvalidated citizens were voting republican? absolutely.

I'm not sure what's more unsettling... that someone would destroy a million dollar vase in a museum, or that a vase made by someone who's still living, that looks like a vase a novice could make, and with a paint job that I myself could do, is worth a million dollars.

[Hidden Content]

    No different than politicians in texas gerrymandering districts a couple of years back to decrease the amounts of democrats in power. both sides abuse their power in order to increase their power, and affilliates of both sides "play politics on one side of the aisle while giving a pass to the other." If illegal aliens voting helped republicans, not only would democrats be acting the same way that republicans are now, but republicans would be acting the same way that dems are now. it would be total role-reversal.

    Well, a lot of the population is pro-choice, including myself. that being said, the LAW is also pro-choice. so if what they're doing is legal, you might as well look at the work that they do that benefits you as well. i personally would rather my tax dollars go to abortion and birth control than to unwanted children that i'll have to support for 18-years with my tax dollars (at least).

    I suppose it's in how you want to divide the numbers, but i'd agree that 10% is a valid number. that being said, 90% of their clients do not get abortions. So i get it, you hate abortions, and many people do. I respect that. but this does not take away from the fact that 90% of their clients, AND 97% of the services they provide have nothing to do with abortions, and are very valuable to the poor of our country. I'd also challenge anybody to say that any entity providing free birth control to the poor in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies that you and i will pay for (both during pregnancy and as long as the child receives welfare, medicaid, chips, WIC, etc.) or that might end up as an abortion is not doing a great service for our country by doing so. So while you and i may disagree about abortion, i can respect your view on it. But PP is not strictly an abortion clinic, or even mostly an abortion clinic, or even a good bit a an abortion clinic. it's a free women's health clinic that also happens to provide abortions. And no matter how much you may dislike the abortion aspect of it, there are many aspects of PP that are extremely valuable.

   I based on their "news topics": Abortion, Bioethics, Contraception, Culture of Life, Editorial, Euthanasia, Faith, Family, Freedom, Homosexuality, Newsbytes, Politics, Population Control, Stem Cell. This is clearly a far-right propoganda site. It would be like me posting an article from a far-left one. I don't know of any, but i'm sure there are just as many as on the left as on the right.

just FYI, about 3% of PP's health services involve abortion. Their main focus is on prevention of unintended pregnancies, rather than termination of those already conceived. Whether or not you agree with abortion, that is a miniscule part of what they do, and they provide a TON of other valuable services.

   Fair enough. my comment had nothing to do with your comment. ;)

That could be completely fabricated. maybe it's just the fact that it's poorly written and on a fake news site, but it sure reads like a piece of fiction. I'm just saying. It is all based on an interview posted by a church on their website. a church that is obviously against abortion. it wouldn't much serve their purpose if she said "it was very humane and by the book".

    It's the new #2 behind homosexuality ;)

I don't care which side of the argument you fall on, this legislation is a joke.