What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Planned Parenthood leaked video (1 Viewer)

There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
found it interesting. thanks
I gave up after the subtitled indicated she thinks Trump is funnier than Jon Stewart

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe so, it sounds like it was going to be under oath.
Texas has some crazy abortion laws.
And it was probably going to be a setup, show trial, probably including some previously unseen evidence, which isn't fair. And under oath? No way. I don't blame them. Hard to see how rational minds on either side take over here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_thats_simply_not_true/
found it interesting. thanks
I gave up after the subtitled indicated she thinks Trump is funnier than Jon Stewart
Trump is waaaayyy "funnier" than Stewart. In his entire career, Stewart never came close to Trump's Rosie O'Donnell rant.

 
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_thats_simply_not_true/
found it interesting. thanks
I gave up after the subtitled indicated she thinks Trump is funnier than Jon Stewart
Trump is waaaayyy "funnier" than Stewart. In his entire career, Stewart never came close to Trump's Rosie O'Donnell rant.
...and he writes his own material...

 
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
I enjoyed reading this article because here is someone who is on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me who is able to see the good and the bad of both sides of the political spectrum. She is not just saying something is good or bad because it fits or doesn't fit with her ideology, she tries to look at it objectively and say whether it is good or bad. It is far different from this website where you generally have the liberals defending the liberal viewpoint and conservatives defending the conservative viewpoint, whether either side is legitimately defensible. The politicians on both sides have sucked for so long that we should all be rebelling against them. They aren't generally working for the good of the country, they are generally working for what is good for them.

Part of the reason Trump is doing so well with some of the ridiculous stuff he is saying is because he is saying things that a politician would never say. And people like him for no other reason than he isn't a normal politician.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
I enjoyed reading this article because here is someone who is on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me who is able to see the good and the bad of both sides of the political spectrum. She is not just saying something is good or bad because it fits or doesn't fit with her ideology, she tries to look at it objectively and say whether it is good or bad. It is far different from this website where you generally have the liberals defending the liberal viewpoint and conservatives defending the conservative viewpoint, whether either side is legitimately defensible. The politicians on both sides have sucked for so long that we should all be rebelling against them. They aren't generally working for the good of the country, they are generally working for what is good for them.

Part of the reason Trump is doing so well with some of the ridiculous stuff he is saying is because he saying things that a politician would never say. And people like him for no other reason than he isn't a normal politician.
Agree 100%...there are just too many ideologues on both sides who simply don't have the ability to see anything other than how they want to see it...in some cases they are almost like the Gestapo or KGB and want to destroy anyone who doesn't toe their line which really is disgusting...or they will allow a law to be broken if it aids their agenda...we are really in a dangerous time in our country because ideology at all costs trumps (no pun intended) the general welfare of the country...

 
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
Sneering at religion is juvenile, symptomatic of a stunted imagination.” It exposes a state of perpetual adolescence that has something to do with their parents– they’re still sneering at dad in some way.
:lmao:

 
Boston said:
dhockster said:
There's a lot more in this than just her views on this topic...one of the more dead-on critiques I have seen in quite some time...due to that I am sure it will be bashed by the usual suspects...

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/29/camille_paglia_takes_on_jon_stewart_trump_sanders_liberals_think_of_themselves_as_very_open_minded_but_that’s_simply_not_true/
I enjoyed reading this article because here is someone who is on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me who is able to see the good and the bad of both sides of the political spectrum. She is not just saying something is good or bad because it fits or doesn't fit with her ideology, she tries to look at it objectively and say whether it is good or bad. It is far different from this website where you generally have the liberals defending the liberal viewpoint and conservatives defending the conservative viewpoint, whether either side is legitimately defensible. The politicians on both sides have sucked for so long that we should all be rebelling against them. They aren't generally working for the good of the country, they are generally working for what is good for them.

Part of the reason Trump is doing so well with some of the ridiculous stuff he is saying is because he saying things that a politician would never say. And people like him for no other reason than he isn't a normal politician.
Agree 100%...there are just too many ideologues on both sides who simply don't have the ability to see anything other than how they want to see it...in some cases they are almost like the Gestapo or KGB and want to destroy anyone who doesn't toe their line which really is disgusting...or they will allow a law to be broken if it aids their agenda...we are really in a dangerous time in our country because ideology at all costs trumps (no pun intended) the general welfare of the country...
Really good posting. Someone a few weeks ago described much of our current political climate as the Yankees vs Red Sox fans. My players used PEDs to win...that's ok because we beat them.

That is where we seem to be and if you look at history..this is where societies can change quickly and in horrific ways...ie Nazi Germany, etc. When the focus is completely on if your side wins with no thought or analysis of methods and outcomes that come from the "win" allows tyranny and despotism to systematically take over a democratic/republic process.

Scary times indeed.

 
They have been flat out awesome to several people I care about.

When they stop helping women that need it, I'll stop supporting them.
What does that have to do with anything?

If an organization did amazing things with the right hand and horrific things with the left hand, would that organization still be one to be defended?

 
They have been flat out awesome to several people I care about.

When they stop helping women that need it, I'll stop supporting them.
:thumbup:
I'm not going to use the first analogy that comes to mind. But doing some good things isn't a reason to support an organization.

 
I don't support killing living babies out of the womb. I would like to think no one does, but I know that's not the case.

How horrific.

 
They have been flat out awesome to several people I care about.

When they stop helping women that need it, I'll stop supporting them.
What does that have to do with anything?

If an organization did amazing things with the right hand and horrific things with the left hand, would that organization still be one to be defended?
You mean....like the United States of America? Helped end WWII and the holocaust; butchered and killed Native Americans and held black people in slavery.

 
Call me an awful person but I just don't care what they do with the remains here.

I'm not some pro PP person here or anything, but this isn't even really hitting my outrage radar even if they are making straight cash off this.

You donate organs and you don't get any of the proceeds when you die, not sure how this is different.

About the only time you can get money for something in your body is when you are alive (blood, semen, eggs, ???) It's just one of the weird lines we've drawn as a society.

If I could make some money selling a relative's organs after they died I'd be all in. Put that #### on ebay and throw a party.

 
I don't support killing living babies out of the womb.
Look, you think they're babies. Most of us who are pro-choice don't think they are babies. That's the crux of our disagreement, and we're never going to see eye to eye on this. Never. So why are we wasting time discussing the details of what Planned Parenthood does? You didn't need these so-called "revelations" to despise them. Of course you're going to despise them because you think they're abetting the murder of innocents. We don't. You find everything they do as horrific. We don't. What's to gain from further argument or discussion?

 
They have been flat out awesome to several people I care about.

When they stop helping women that need it, I'll stop supporting them.
What does that have to do with anything?

If an organization did amazing things with the right hand and horrific things with the left hand, would that organization still be one to be defended?
You mean....like the United States of America? Helped end WWII and the holocaust; butchered and killed Native Americans and held black people in slavery.
Yes, thats a good analogy.

 
Not humans, just boys and girls.
Of course it's human, it's not an elephant. The question is whether it's a human being or not. A person. Being male or female doesn't change the outcome of that discussion for either side of the debate.
There's really no question of that
Of whether a fetus is a person? Yes, there is.
:lmao:
:goodposting:

It has been clearly determined that it is not a person.

 
Here's something odd I've noticed in reading these discussions. The pro abortion folks are pretty determined to make clear *they* personally do not think these fetuses are more than tissue, these are not persons or children's or boys or girls. - Question: what if the doctors doing the aborting or doing the chopping up do actually view them as persons? Is that possible?

 
Henry that's some Jesuitical reasoning, I would love to hear you convince a jury that a "boy" is not a "child".
Okay.

When a fetus is at about 16 weeks, we can tell whether it's a male or female fetus. At that time, the doctor generally says "it's a boy" or "it's a girl." Abortion is legal generally until viability - until the fetus is a child as defined under the law (viability outside the womb) at approximately 24 weeks. So when we agree legally that "it's a boy" and "it's not yet a child" that's what we're talking about.

 
Here's something odd I've noticed in reading these discussions. The pro abortion folks are pretty determined to make clear *they* personally do not think these fetuses are more than tissue, these are not persons or children's or boys or girls. - Question: what if the doctors doing the aborting or doing the chopping up do actually view them as persons? Is that possible?
I don't see what difference it makes. If they regard what they're doing as unethical or harmful, they won't do it. Isn't there still a hippocratic oath?

 
Here's something odd I've noticed in reading these discussions. The pro abortion folks are pretty determined to make clear *they* personally do not think these fetuses are more than tissue, these are not persons or children's or boys or girls. - Question: what if the doctors doing the aborting or doing the chopping up do actually view them as persons? Is that possible?
when you type "pro abortion", are you actually trying to piss people off?
 
Here's something odd I've noticed in reading these discussions. The pro abortion folks are pretty determined to make clear *they* personally do not think these fetuses are more than tissue, these are not persons or children's or boys or girls. - Question: what if the doctors doing the aborting or doing the chopping up do actually view them as persons? Is that possible?
So?

 
Not humans, just boys and girls.
Of course it's human, it's not an elephant. The question is whether it's a human being or not. A person. Being male or female doesn't change the outcome of that discussion for either side of the debate.
There's really no question of that
Of whether a fetus is a person? Yes, there is.
:lmao:
:goodposting:

It has been clearly determined that it is not a person.
That is a lie. It has been clearly determined in YOUR eyes. But you can't speak for everyone. I fully disagree, as do millions of others. And don't bring the US or the supreme court in here, unless you are willing to admit that you'd be staunchly against abortion if the supreme court overturned themselves and ruled that it was illegal.

 
Ha well Tim the opposite would be pretty horrible, right? Do you think there any persons in this world who believe in eugenics and Malthusian population control? Do you think that's impossible, or is it possible?

 
Henry that's some Jesuitical reasoning, I would love to hear you convince a jury that a "boy" is not a "child".
Okay.

When a fetus is at about 16 weeks, we can tell whether it's a male or female fetus. At that time, the doctor generally says "it's a boy" or "it's a girl." Abortion is legal generally until viability - until the fetus is a child as defined under the law (viability outside the womb) at approximately 24 weeks. So when we agree legally that "it's a boy" and "it's not yet a child" that's what we're talking about.
We can tell far earlier than 16 weeks using blood tests.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top