I think you should question everything including yourself.89Hen wrote:DSUrocks07 wrote: Isnt is a form of liberalism to ALWAYS question the world as we know it. It intriguing that the left is going the traditional, "the world is flat, don't question it"That's not surprising to you really, is it? The mantra of the Left is question everything... except us.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ882QYzr-M[/youtube]
andy7171 wrote:Why not just PM klamy and D1B?
Yes, the classic "uncertainy" tactic. But they can't tell us exactly when the Earth will be 11 degrees hotter!JohnStOnge wrote:Yes, in a way they do. And the reason is that if you are familiar with the scientific method you know there are limits to the conclusions of climate science. And you know that it's one of those areas where nothing can be inferred with the highest level of confidence. And you know that there is reason to be skeptical about the perception with respect to the precision with which the future climate can be predicted.Brock Landers wrote: Denialism and critical thinking obviously go hand-in-hand
Oh wait I'm on CS.com. /ducks
Again: Taking the position that "I believe it because the climate scientists say so" is not critical thinking. I guess I can understand it if you're somebody who is not involved in science. It's kind of like if you know nothing about cars you believe the mechanic. But if you have some understanding of the scientific method you know there's a limit to the certainty associated with climate science. It's inherent to the nature of the field.
You're confusing skepticism with denialismDSUrocks07 wrote:Isnt is a form of liberalism to ALWAYS question the world as we know it. It intriguing that the left is going the traditional, "the world is flat, don't question it" thinking sans Catholicism prior to 1300, when it comes to global warming...i mean climate change.Brock Landers wrote: Denialism and critical thinking obviously go hand-in-hand
Oh wait I'm on CS.com. /ducks
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
Well then you missed the part where she said she decided to have an abortion because "it was the wrong time". A time when she had all the "tools, the trust, and the chance to chart her own path" in order to "succeed in life".catbooster wrote:Haven't watched the video - just scanned the article, butCAA Flagship wrote:Hey 89, you're gonna love this speech from today at the DNC:
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/ne ... rtion-dnc/
You can skip to the 0:35 mark.
Hogue stressed that her story is not unique. About 1 in 3 American have abortions by the age of 45, according to Hogue, who said the "majority are mothers just trying to take care of the families they already have."
I suppose that's a misprint? Since 1 in 2 Americans are male....
Global Warming followers are similar to you believing Trump is not fit for the Presidential office.JohnStOnge wrote:Yes, in a way they do. And the reason is that if you are familiar with the scientific method you know there are limits to the conclusions of climate science. And you know that it's one of those areas where nothing can be inferred with the highest level of confidence. And you know that there is reason to be skeptical about the perception with respect to the precision with which the future climate can be predicted.Brock Landers wrote: Denialism and critical thinking obviously go hand-in-hand
Oh wait I'm on CS.com. /ducks
Again: Taking the position that "I believe it because the climate scientists say so" is not critical thinking. I guess I can understand it if you're somebody who is not involved in science. It's kind of like if you know nothing about cars you believe the mechanic. But if you have some understanding of the scientific method you know there's a limit to the certainty associated with climate science. It's inherent to the nature of the field.
In the video, she said 1 in 3 American women. But even so, the claim is fiction. There are no accurate stats on this figure, which is somewhat amazing to me. You could probably find the exact number of knee or hip replacements but not abortions?catbooster wrote:Haven't watched the video - just scanned the article, butCAA Flagship wrote:Hey 89, you're gonna love this speech from today at the DNC:
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/ne ... rtion-dnc/
You can skip to the 0:35 mark.
Hogue stressed that her story is not unique. About 1 in 3 American have abortions by the age of 45, according to Hogue, who said the "majority are mothers just trying to take care of the families they already have."
I suppose that's a misprint? Since 1 in 2 Americans are male....
Which is why the whole #ShoutYourAbortion movement blows my mind. Like its something to be proud of.89Hen wrote:In the video, she said 1 in 3 American women. But even so, the claim is fiction. There are no accurate stats on this figure, which is somewhat amazing to me. You could probably find the exact number of knee or hip replacements but not abortions?catbooster wrote: Haven't watched the video - just scanned the article, but
Hogue stressed that her story is not unique. About 1 in 3 American have abortions by the age of 45, according to Hogue, who said the "majority are mothers just trying to take care of the families they already have."
I suppose that's a misprint? Since 1 in 2 Americans are male....
In any case, the number of abortions is thankfully on the decline and the sentiment towards abortion is still moving towards the pro-life side.
To me it sounds like they are trying to say they were somehow 'brave' to admit it, not necessarily proud. I guess it does take some bravery to admit you did such a cowardly act.DSUrocks07 wrote:Which is why the whole #ShoutYourAbortion movement blows my mind. Like its something to be proud of.89Hen wrote: In the video, she said 1 in 3 American women. But even so, the claim is fiction. There are no accurate stats on this figure, which is somewhat amazing to me. You could probably find the exact number of knee or hip replacements but not abortions?
In any case, the number of abortions is thankfully on the decline and the sentiment towards abortion is still moving towards the pro-life side.
You made a serious mental error through a lapse of judgment that required a medical procedure to fix. Is that really something to be proud of?
— Letha (@lethacolleen)89Hen wrote:To me it sounds like they are trying to say they were somehow 'brave' to admit it, not necessarily proud. I guess it does take some bravery to admit you did such a cowardly act.DSUrocks07 wrote: Which is why the whole #ShoutYourAbortion movement blows my mind. Like its something to be proud of.
You made a serious mental error through a lapse of judgment that required a medical procedure to fix. Is that really something to be proud of?
Do what you want. Just don't ask for taxpayers to pay for it.Brock Landers wrote:— Letha (@lethacolleen)89Hen wrote: To me it sounds like they are trying to say they were somehow 'brave' to admit it, not necessarily proud. I guess it does take some bravery to admit you did such a cowardly act.
September 21, 2015
if ever pregnant, i will have an abortion. i lay claim to my own life. that life will not include giving birth. #ShoutYourAbortion
CAA Flagship wrote:Do what you want. Just don't ask for taxpayers to pay for it.Brock Landers wrote: — Letha (@lethacolleen)
September 21, 2015
if ever pregnant, i will have an abortion. i lay claim to my own life. that life will not include giving birth. #ShoutYourAbortion
That's where I'm at. $$$$$kalm wrote:CAA Flagship wrote: Do what you want. Just don't ask for taxpayers to pay for it.
Are taxpayers funding abortions?CAA Flagship wrote:That's where I'm at. $$$$$kalm wrote:
Of course not, PP really really promises that none of their federal or state funding goes towards abortion procedures, equipment, payment to doctors for services. Cross their heart and hope to die!kalm wrote:Are taxpayers funding abortions?CAA Flagship wrote: That's where I'm at. $$$$$
Is there an agency under greater scrutiny?DSUrocks07 wrote:Of course not, PP really really promises that none of their federal or state funding goes towards abortion procedures, equipment, payment to doctors for services. Cross their heart and hope to die!kalm wrote:
Are taxpayers funding abortions?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
Do you really not believe that taxpayer money is being used for abortions?kalm wrote:Is there an agency under greater scrutiny?DSUrocks07 wrote: Of course not, PP really really promises that none of their federal or state funding goes towards abortion procedures, equipment, payment to doctors for services. Cross their heart and hope to die!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
I don't believe that any abortion other than life or death situationsCAA Flagship wrote:Do you really not believe that taxpayer money is being used for abortions?kalm wrote:
Is there an agency under greater scrutiny?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... 78fa777096
That is where I'm willing to compromise. But I still hope they would choose life.Chizzang wrote: I don't believe that any abortion other than life or death situations
should be covered by tax dollars (period)
Careful here. What you are saying, I believe, is that healthcare for bad choices should not be covered by tax dollars. Well that would also include injuries sustained from a drunk driving accident, illnesses from smoking tobacco or pot, etc. If you are saying "elective" healthcare should not be covered, that's a tough line to draw in some cases. There are many elective healthcare procedures that can lead to improved health in the future, thereby reducing future costs. I think something could be done to draw a line, but it won't be easy.Chizzang wrote: I also don't think that lap band surgery should be covered by tax dollars (see: Chris Christie)
CAA Flagship wrote:That is where I'm willing to compromise. But I still hope they would choose life.Chizzang wrote: I don't believe that any abortion other than life or death situations
should be covered by tax dollars (period)
Careful here. What you are saying, I believe, is that healthcare for bad choices should not be covered by tax dollars. Well that would also include injuries sustained from a drunk driving accident, illnesses from smoking tobacco or pot, etc. If you are saying "elective" healthcare should not be covered, that's a tough line to draw in some cases. There are many elective healthcare procedures that can lead to improved health in the future, thereby reducing future costs. I think something could be done to draw a line, but it won't be easy.Chizzang wrote: I also don't think that lap band surgery should be covered by tax dollars (see: Chris Christie)
I hear you. That's why I hate the idea of legalizing marijuana with an Affordable Care Act that requires all to participate in the cost of it.Chizzang wrote:CAA Flagship wrote:
That is where I'm willing to compromise. But I still hope they would choose life.
Careful here. What you are saying, I believe, is that healthcare for bad choices should not be covered by tax dollars. Well that would also include injuries sustained from a drunk driving accident, illnesses from smoking tobacco or pot, etc. If you are saying "elective" healthcare should not be covered, that's a tough line to draw in some cases. There are many elective healthcare procedures that can lead to improved health in the future, thereby reducing future costs. I think something could be done to draw a line, but it won't be easy.
It's just my opinion...
I'm wrong a lot (just ask 89Hen)
a lifetime of eating 3500 calories a day is YOUR problem
Just like deciding you want an abortion
Life is expensive when you make bad choices
There's already research that proves the states with legalized Marijuana have lower healthcare costsCAA Flagship wrote:I hear you. That's why I hate the idea of legalizing marijuana with an Affordable Care Act that requires all to participate in the cost of it.Chizzang wrote:
It's just my opinion...
I'm wrong a lot (just ask 89Hen)
a lifetime of eating 3500 calories a day is YOUR problem
Just like deciding you want an abortion
Life is expensive when you make bad choices
Just stop. Geesh.Chizzang wrote:There's already research that proves the states with legalized Marijuana have lower healthcare costsCAA Flagship wrote: I hear you. That's why I hate the idea of legalizing marijuana with an Affordable Care Act that requires all to participate in the cost of it.
Google that one... and post back your results
I'll kick start you right here
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/75393cb0-1 ... a-has.html
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 172022.htm