ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,257 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
3 minutes ago, daz28 said:
World politics can have an effect on everyone. Try again. If anything, the argument should be that someone(depending on the person) birthing a child could have MUCH more effect on their lives, than if it were aborted. You'd think the group that hates poor people from stealing their taxes would understand that.
Don’t forget that conservatives seem incapable or unwilling of considering second and third order effects.
Imagine if abortion was banned completely in the US. You would see a black market of unregulated and likely very unsafe abortion options available to the desperate.
Now imagine you or someone you love is pregnant. Everything is going well but then suddenly, it’s a miscarriage. How does the doctor know that it wasn’t the result of a back alley abortion? How does law enforcement know? The only way is to investigate.
Better yet, they can follow in the steps of Missouri and use data from things like period tracking apps to keep tabs on women of child bearing age. A surveillance state for women.
What about someone who is pregnant but is diagnosed with cancer? Well, if their life isn’t immediately in danger, they’ll be given no choice but to let the cancer grow until it’s life threatening instead having the option to choose their future.The world in which they get their way is a totalitarian nightmare but they don’t believe or understand it because they still can’t grasp simple second order effects like fetal personhood requiring banning IVF.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
Everyone wants these things. The difference in philosophy is how to accomplish it.
The Border deal? The GOP passed their border bill in the house. HB2 is sitting on Schumer's desk collecting dust. Dems haven't passed a border bill yet because Schumer couldn't get the support he needed in the Dem controlled senate.
The senate passed a border bill. It was basically written by a conservative and it’s sitting on Mike Johnson’s desk.
If Johnson puts the bill on the floor, it will pass and it will help the border. Which is why he won’t put it on the floor.
There are always a million reasons to say “no.” Part of being a responsible legislator is finding a way to “yes” through compromise. But compromise is anathema to the MAGA wing of the GOP, ensuring that they get basically nothing done.
And that’s even if they do actually support addressing the root causes of abortion. Which they don’t, so it’s all moot anyway. The idea that “everyone wants these” is, frankly, naive.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Pokebball said:
they'd also be probably all on board
I wish you were correct, but the GOP tends to oppose expanding healthcare, increasing access to contraceptives, and affordable childcare. There are signs however, that they are rethinking their opposition to parental leave.
It would be smart for them to revisit these policies. Dobbs is incredibly unpopular with the average American. If the GOP were open to these things, Speaker Johnson could put them on the House floor and force Dems to choose to support their stated policies or keep the issue alive for the election (not unlike how the GOP went back on their proposed border deal.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
If the people who claim to oppose harming women over abortion really wanted to, they would address the root causes of harming women!
did I do that right
Well, if you ask Dems if they want to make having kids more affordable and provide better opportunities and support to people with financial difficulties while ensuring that people can get prenatal care, good parental leave, and affordable childcare, they’d probable all be on board.
Do you think the GOP would?
-
1
-
-
If the people who claim to oppose abortion really wanted to reduce abortions without harming women, they’d address the root causes of abortions.
But they never do (and often oppose proven effective methods) so it’s hard to believe them when they say that’s their goal.
-
15 minutes ago, Pokebball said:
Bail is a legal process. Again, what would you do with someone that broke the law?
If you’re implying that the natural consequence of outlawing abortion is punishing women and doctors, I agree.
In fact, the natural consequence of fetal personhood (which is gaining popularity on the right) is banning IVF and prosecuting women who have abortions and their doctors for first degree murder.
I just happen to agree with the majority of Americans that those laws are stupid and warrant fighting against.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Doc said:
What was that about Dunning-Kruger Effect again?
If a pregnant woman has signs of a miscarriage (bleeding, abdominal pain) and a good-faith effort is made to search for a fetal heart beat and none is found, one can confidently declare it's a miscarriage. The ultrasound is the evidence. Everything else is political machinations.
Hey buddy, you can be having a miscarriage while there is still a “heartbeat.”
That’s the problem with these stupid laws. If the pregnancy is nonviable or the mother is experiencing miscarriage symptoms but there is still a fetal “heartbeat,” by law they need to wait until the life of the mother is in danger.
It’s really dumb and illogical, but that’s why it’s a GOP policy.
Read like, literally any story about this coming out of Texas.
-
1
-
-
The changes the right is so upset about:
“The Mifepristone REMS Program was modified on January 3, 2023. Under the Mifepristone REMS Program:
Mifepristone must be prescribed by a health care provider that meets certain qualifications and is certified under the Mifepristone REMS Program.
In order to become certified to prescribe mifepristone, health care providers must complete a Prescriber Agreement Form.
The Patient Agreement Form must be reviewed with and signed by the patient and the health care provider, and the risks of the mifepristone treatment regimen must be fully explained to the patient before mifepristone is prescribed.
The patient must be provided with a copy of the Patient Agreement Form and mifepristone Medication Guide (FDA-approved information for patients).
Mifepristone may only be dispensed by or under the supervision of a certified prescriber, or by a certified pharmacy on a prescription issued by a certified prescriber.
To become certified to dispense mifepristone, pharmacies must complete a Pharmacy Agreement Form.
Certified pharmacies must be able to ship mifepristone using a shipping service that provides tracking information.
Certified pharmacies must ensure mifepristone is dispensed to the patient in a timely manner.”
(FDA)
-
30 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:
Silly false dichotomy. Tylenol doesn't need a script for very real medical reasons. You guys always reference science. But here your going with feeling and pr over science.
One more time. What kinda of side affects can happen if used after a certain date?
Severe hemorrhaging, death? Stroke? Tylenol has those warnings.
Eff safety and science. It's about beating the other team, eh
If you have an opinion, state it. If you want to say “mifepristone should be banned because reasons x, y, and z,” then say so.Don’t play stupid guessing games that waste everyone’s time. It’s childish.
My opinion: mifepristone should not be banned because it has been proven to be safe and effective.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:
bIg BiRd BiG mAd At FaCtS
You are what you attempt to call others.
Or answer the question. Are there side affects of taking those drugs after a certain date.
What a dumb question. Every drug has side effects.
Mifepristone is safer than Tylenol. Should we ban Tylenol?
-
1
-
-
Nah man, just laughing at you. So simple, so naive. Like a precious little cinnamon bun.
-
1
-
-
Asks a bunch of questions, spits a bunch of nonsense, misses the point, is completely unable to address the actual issues.
“Do My FaCtS tRiGgEr YoU?”
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
ItS a StAte IsSuE. wE wIlL vOtE tO hArM wOmEn BeCaUsE dEmOcRaCy. I aM a SeRiOuS pErSoN.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
“Oh hey, these laws are poorly written and are having disastrous consequences.”
ItS a StAtE iSsUe. I aM sMaRt
-
1
-
1
-
-
I see Tommy Eyerolls has gotten his marching orders.
-
2
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, BillStime said:
But they didn’t treat her because of the law - own it “Doc”
Discharge paperwork when my wife had to be treated for miscarriages: “Spontaneous Abortion”Discharge paperwork when my wife thought she was having a miscarriage (but thankfully wasn’t): “Threatened Abortion”
Basically every hospital looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means we are potentially liable if we terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk.
Basically every lawyer looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means you are potentially liable if you terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk.
MAGA: “nuh uh. Everyone is wrong except me, facts and logic be damned.”
-
1
-
1
-
-
I see that the usual crowd has gotten their talking points ready
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
It was revised UP.
Has there ever been a more "glass half empty" pessimist?
Jobs report bad? Biden's economy sucks. Not adding enough jobs.
Jobs report good? Biden's economy suck, more inflation.
They cannot, under any circumstances, say that anything is ever good if a Dem is president.-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Which bring me back to my point. If one were to consider reasonable and fair treatment as the goal, and laws that were broken were really only pretend/maybe laws that no one really follows (though Comey did suggest that others in the same situation might face adverse actions), why would it be unreasonable to think a few boxes in the steam room were anything to worry about as it relates to an armed raid, or life in prison?
Remember that for almost a year, there wasn’t a big concern from the government. They found out Trump had the docs and they asked for them back.
Trump wrongfully claimed that they were all his, but the government simply continued to negotiate with him to return the documents.
Eventually, Trump told the government he’d return the documents. He gave them several boxes of documents and his lawyer signed a letter stating that these were all of the documents.
Had that been it, Trump would have been fine. For all of the problems of walking away with the documents and refusing to return them, the government just wanted to get them back. As far as I can remember, the whole thing was still being handled by NARA at this point, not federal law enforcement.
However, the government then learned that Trump had lied. He had removed documents prior to his lawyer examining all of the boxes, causing his lawyer to falsely claim they had returned everything. He had also told his staff to tamper with the security cameras for the room that housed the documents.
It was only at this point that the government decided to take real action, referring the case to the DoJ which then executed a search warrant and later indicted Trump.
If you want to argue that the controls and laws around the handling of sensitive documents by electeds are broken and need fixing, I’m 100% with you.
But it is simply false to paint Trump’s situation as him being treated differently. They gave him every opportunity to avoid trouble (opportunities that everyone else in his shoes gladly took) and he decided to obstruct instead.
Also, I’m no “true believer.” I don’t like Hillary, I didn’t vote for her in 2016 (voted for Gary Johnson). I didn’t want Biden to be the Dem nominee in 2020 and I certainly didn’t want him to be the nominee in 2024. I’m just trying to explain what’s going on with these cases.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:
How many times do you think you've spelled this out here? At least 10.
I don’t expect people to understand all of the legal ins and outs so I’m happy to explain it.
But after some point the ignorance goes from understandable to willful.
-
1 hour ago, Doc said:
Initially you said/believed that he never knew he had classified information and it was "spillage" thanks to his underlings. Now it appears you're saying that knowingly possessing classified material and not giving it back is OK because he wasn't asked for it back (which is what is truly nonsense). Is that what you're saying? Because I don't want to put words in your mouth...
I’m saying that if a former elected has government docs in their possession, they do not get charged if they cooperate and turn them over when asked. Like it or not, that’s just how it works.
If you actually read Hur’s report, the evidence they could use to charge Biden for willful possession was a single comment he made. In all of the tapes with his ghostwriter, he never again mentioned them, none of the information ended up in the book. The documents were not even found in the house he was in when he made the comment (and they were in a “badly damaged box surrounded by household detritus”), and he had been out of office for barely a month (while in office, he was permitted to keep such files at his home).
No jury would convict on that fact pattern.
If the Trump case had the same facts, Trump wouldn’t have been charged because there would be no likelihood of a conviction.
He got charged because, unlike Biden or Pence, Trump obstructed the investigation and lied to the Feds. That’s certainly enough to be able to prove intent to a jury.
The thing that has the right so made is that they mistakenly believe the cases are the same and Trump is being treated differently. They are not because Trump ensured his indictment by his own actions after the documents were discovered by the Feds.
-
2 hours ago, Doc said:
And you keep ignoring that Hur found evidence that Biden willfully retained classified information. And shared some with his ghostwriter. And he had that information for many more years than Trump did and stored some in his garage.
I’m not ignoring it. Like I said, electeds get away with a lot around this stuff, likely because the laws were written with the millions of public and private sector employees in mind, not former elected officials.
Had Trump taken the documents and forgotten about them and they were discovered years later, he still wouldn’t get charged *unless* he refused to return them when asked.
That’s the difference. It remains the difference. All of this other nonsense is just to deflect from the fact that it was Trump’s actions *after* he was asked to return them that got him charged.
-
9 minutes ago, Doc said:
Yes on the bolded parts but no on the rest. I've been saying all along that either they both should be charged or neither should be. It's the Dems who are trying to have it both ways.
You keep ignoring that Trump obstructed the investigation. That’s the crucial difference between the two.
Had he just done what Biden did, he wouldn’t have been charged.
-
3 minutes ago, Doc said:
No I just realize when I'm dealing with people who aren't as smart as they think they are and/or are merely partisan hacks. I deal with far more intelligent people on a daily basis and many have egos the size of Texas.
If you truly believe Biden didn't know he had classified material for years, you're a moron. But I realize that you have to believe it because Biden just has to be different from Trump in your eyes to help you sleep at night.
So go hiding behind your legal standards. I live in the real world, not a courtroom.
I appreciate you proving my point that you are incapable of reading comprehension and instead just pretend you know what people said regardless of the actual text, so long as it meets your preconceived notions.
You don’t live in the real world. You live in a pretend world that brings you comfort and tells you that you were always right all along despite the evidence to the contrary.
I would laugh, but it’s actually quite sad.
-
1
-
Trump wants to ban ABORTION, IVF, MIFEPRISTONE nationwide and JAIL doctors who provide care.
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted · Edited by ChiGoose
It’s just projection on their part.
Most everything is emotionally tinged on the right because if they came right out and said “we want to take your money and what you work for and give it to millionaires and billionaires,” people wouldn’t vote for it. So they stoke a culture war to scare hard-working Americans into supporting their corporate masters.