Should men have a say in abortion ?

Jeeves said:
Bet their office decor sucks, too! I know they themselves are stultifying to look at.
Click to expand...
They managed to fool a few hicks by installing a black man to sit in the corner and bark like a white man on command.
that made the old little wimmin feel like they might have a chance at being respected as a retiree.
lol

"people want something new god damn-it!"
"ask that black guy i hired to do something with this office"
"god damn-it man ! hes black not gay!"
"god-damn-it he is a minority isnt he!"

"what is this world coming to" ...
 
Last edited:
Jeeves said:
It don have to look good, just expensive. Giddis wife to go shoppin'; wimmin like shoppin!"
Click to expand...
worship'n money is the christian thing ta do
thats whut validates us take'n ya health care away to pay fur our gold plated golf club toilet seats
ya'lls ma bitches ya workin class scum
 
wegs said:
What can be challenging with any forum, group, club, etc is trying to find that perfect balance between tolerating varying view points and becoming an echo chamber. If we become an echo chamber, then we lose diversity, but we need to draw the line at allowing people to use the forum as a pulpit for their prejudices.
Click to expand...
I agree entirely.

In some ways, there's no point having a discussion forum in which we all agree about everything. It would leave us with little to do apart from to pat each other on the back and congratulate ourselves on how enlightened we all are, with a bit of friendly chit-chat on the side, maybe.

Personally, I like challenging my own views and assumptions about things, testing them to see if they can stand up to counter-arguments. I also find it interesting to have the opportunity to get a first-hand insight into the thinking of people whose views are diametrically opposed to certain views I have.

What frustrates me is that some people who come here seem unable to carry on an honest conversation in good faith. There are the blatant preachers, of course, who aren't interested having a real discussion at all, but only come to try to spread their propaganda. Then there are those who cherry pick the points of contention they will address, ignoring or misrepresenting the points that they find too difficult or inconvenient to honestly respond to. We see the same kind of behaviour regularly, often from the same posters - the same pattern of attempting to change the topic to a side-issue or irrelevancy, the same studied ignoring of objections put to them, the same refusal to answer straightforward questions. That kind of behaviour is particularly noteworthy when the person in question is superficially attempting to claim a kind of moral high ground, since one would ordinarily assume that such people would hold themselves, in the first instance, to a high standard of honesty and integrity, before trying to preach at others. Some of these people are clever enough. You sometimes have to read through their responses to questions and counter-arguments to see what they deliberately didn't address and what they deliberately attempted to distort. But over time, a consistent pattern of posting in bad faith becomes apparent. Typically, the pattern is more pronounced when those people post about certain pet topics of theirs. It is even more pronounced when the same people start a new thread weeks or months later on essentially the same topic, and to all appearances it is as if the previous conversation(s) never happened, as far as they are concerned.
 
James R said:
I agree entirely.

In some ways, there's no point having a discussion forum in which we all agree about everything. It would leave us with little to do apart from to pat each other on the back and congratulate ourselves on how enlightened we all are, with a bit of friendly chit-chat on the side, maybe.

Personally, I like challenging my own views and assumptions about things, testing them to see if they can stand up to counter-arguments. I also find it interesting to have the opportunity to get a first-hand insight into the thinking of people whose views are diametrically opposed to certain views I have.

What frustrates me is that some people who come here seem unable to carry on an honest conversation in good faith. There are the blatant preachers, of course, who aren't interested having a real discussion at all, but only come to try to spread their propaganda. Then there are those who cherry pick the points of contention they will address, ignoring or misrepresenting the points that they find too difficult or inconvenient to honestly respond to. We see the same kind of behaviour regularly, often from the same posters - the same pattern of attempting to change the topic to a side-issue or irrelevancy, the same studied ignoring of objections put to them, the same refusal to answer straightforward questions. That kind of behaviour is particularly noteworthy when the person in question is superficially attempting to claim a kind of moral high ground, since one would ordinarily assume that such people would hold themselves, in the first instance, to a high standard of honesty and integrity, before trying to preach at others. Some of these people are clever enough. You sometimes have to read through their responses to questions and counter-arguments to see what they deliberately didn't address and what they deliberately attempted to distort. But over time, a consistent pattern of posting in bad faith becomes apparent. Typically, the pattern is more pronounced when those people post about certain pet topics of theirs. It is even more pronounced when the same people start a new thread weeks or months later on essentially the same topic, and to all appearances it is as if the previous conversation(s) never happened, as far as they are concerned.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. It's interesting, but when you are busy with life, and take a break from a forum, upon returning you notice things that maybe you didn't notice when you were more active. For me, I've noticed a few members who really don't have any genuine desire to understand another person, so their motive in nearly every thread, seems to be to cut someone down, insult, provoke, goad or appear superior. I notice this in the philosophy section, where there are no ''right or wrong'' answers, per se. It's a section to discuss topics, not to duel with one another, but there are some who feel the need to consistently do just that. Their need to prove their intelligence, is boring to me. They clearly look for a discussion forum to validate them, so there will never be a genuine discussion with such types.

So, the ignore feature will be utilized now, so I can just avoid those who seek to humiliate others, in hopes of building themselves up.
 
James R said:
I agree entirely.

In some ways, there's no point having a discussion forum in which we all agree about everything. It would leave us with little to do apart from to pat each other on the back and congratulate ourselves on how enlightened we all are, with a bit of friendly chit-chat on the side, maybe.

Personally, I like challenging my own views and assumptions about things, testing them to see if they can stand up to counter-arguments. I also find it interesting to have the opportunity to get a first-hand insight into the thinking of people whose views are diametrically opposed to certain views I have.

What frustrates me is that some people who come here seem unable to carry on an honest conversation in good faith. There are the blatant preachers, of course, who aren't interested having a real discussion at all, but only come to try to spread their propaganda. Then there are those who cherry pick the points of contention they will address, ignoring or misrepresenting the points that they find too difficult or inconvenient to honestly respond to. We see the same kind of behaviour regularly, often from the same posters - the same pattern of attempting to change the topic to a side-issue or irrelevancy, the same studied ignoring of objections put to them, the same refusal to answer straightforward questions. That kind of behaviour is particularly noteworthy when the person in question is superficially attempting to claim a kind of moral high ground, since one would ordinarily assume that such people would hold themselves, in the first instance, to a high standard of honesty and integrity, before trying to preach at others. Some of these people are clever enough. You sometimes have to read through their responses to questions and counter-arguments to see what they deliberately didn't address and what they deliberately attempted to distort. But over time, a consistent pattern of posting in bad faith becomes apparent. Typically, the pattern is more pronounced when those people post about certain pet topics of theirs. It is even more pronounced when the same people start a new thread weeks or months later on essentially the same topic, and to all appearances it is as if the previous conversation(s) never happened, as far as they are concerned.
Click to expand...
Isn't this down to modding of the site? Are your hands tied jimmy boy?
You should treat them like tv re-runs. Someone may see a programme for the first time when it is later repeated. It pulls in the punters.
Quality discussions may come about with quality modding. But, it may get a bit lonely round here???
 
Last edited:
James R said:
and to all appearances it is as if the previous conversation(s) never happened, as far as they are concerned.
Click to expand...

they are attempting to re-write history in their mind while playing out the brain washing mania to re establish a pattern of compliant behaviour.
like a drug addict going through the same little superstitious social behaviours prior to going out to find a fix.
 
iceaura said:
The Reps have lots of gay men in their Party and political administrations.
Click to expand...

pretending to be women as a subservient male dominated ideology ?
living out the battered wife syndrome ...
pretending to be in control of that which hurts them...
coveting the weapon for its ability to create suffering ?
 
men should have absolutely no say what so ever in abortion laws or regulation.
those who think democracy works when 50% make up all the laws for the other 50% when it doesn't concern their bodys are a bunch of A-holes
 
RainbowSingularity said:
men should have absolutely no say what so ever in abortion laws or regulation.
those who think democracy works when 50% make up all the laws for the other 50% when it doesn't concern their bodys are a bunch of A-holes
Click to expand...
Well, that isn't how democracy works. You don't only have a say in the laws that concern you directly.

Laws should not be made that allow society to dictate what a member does with his/her own body, but democratically, there's no way to prevent it.
 
RainbowSingularity said:
RE
it is a minority of men who are a minority of men making the decision that controls what all women can or cant do with their own body and does not apply to men.
that is not democracy
that is a cult
Click to expand...
That's a comment on democracy in general. You can't expect democracy to work differently for one issue - e.g. abortion.
 
sideshowbob said:
That's a comment on democracy in general. You can't expect democracy to work differently for one issue - e.g. abortion.
Click to expand...
just like american democracy delivers all actions of the state ?

working Vs non working ?

where is the "putting it to the people" part of that said democracy ?

the reality is that it is an autocratic dictatorship.
pulling loony fringe church group ideologies out of your ass and making them a new law is not a process of democracy.

politicians are owned by big business who pay them via lobbyists to vote a certain way.
that is not democracy.

you cant have church groups buying laws and call it democracy
pretending the broken half assed model of pretend democracy IS democracy and decrying the potential loss of that system as being the very center of the democratic process seems a little ...
less honest

"by god man ! are you not a democrat?!.. here take another bribe and make that law i want"

that seems to be usa morality NOT Greek democracy.

why is there no massive pro democracy movement to get rid of lobbyists ?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top