Azalin

Do you ever discuss things like this with your doctor?

The first paragraph alone was enough to make me sick: "One of my friends has a bumper sticker on her car that reads, “Thank you for not breeding.” Every time I read it, I feel a pang of guilt that I have two children. I know that children in developed countries, especially Americans, use up for more resources than children around the world. The statistics are staggering when comparing children’s footprints across the globe, which causes many environmentalists to suggest that not having children may be the single most important thing you do for the environment. As a mother of two, this is a hard pill to swallow, and I try to convince myself that my children will be part of the solution since they are raised with green family values."

I'm looking forward to seeing the answer to this.

You frame it as 'the question of manmade climate change', then go on to act as if there's no question whatsoever that it exists.

What's so independent about following a movement with no basis in science? Isn't that like believing in AGW?

Well, considering the size of any SUV that can comfortably fit a family of Brachiosaurus, it's no wonder CO2 levels got so high.

+2 Just yesterday, Austin Regional Clinic (which serves thousands in the Austin area) adopted a new policy where they're refusing to treat children who aren't up to date on their vaccinations, due to an outbreak of measles. http://kxan.com/2015/06/30/austin-regional-clinic-wont-accept-unvaccinated-children/

CO2 levels used to be much higher in prehistoric times, so there is no precedent with today's levels. Also, it apparently bears repeating that scientific fact is not determined by votes.

A footnote in the Necronomicon states that its author, Abdul Al'Hazred, resented being called the mad arab, preferring instead to be called 'Abdul the I just get these headaches'....

Apparently we are, or else we'd all be fine with the judicial activism apparent in the court's decision.

"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results." - Milton Friedman

At the federal level, socialism does suck. What too many people don't notice is that socialism is prominent in our local governments, where we pay our public school teachers, police, fire & rescue, etc. It works pretty well locally, but not at the national level. How many different socialist economies have to fail before people start to figure that out? Do you honestly think that the only reason socialism has always failed is because it's always been tried by people that don't know how to get it right?

What is free market gross inequality?

Would you care elaborate on this point?

Not only that, but the rich aren't paying anyone else's fair share either.

I may be oversimplifying it, but the only real benefit with the ACA I see is the ability for people to get coverage for pre-existing conditions, but only at a ridiculously high premium. Anything else covered has already been available. You don't 'charge forward' with something so onerous as the ACA just because doing something is better than doing nothing. You don't need to be a strategist/philosopher to understand that.

That depends, Does one of them own a gun, and if so, did they acquire it legally?

From what I can tell, that seems to be a reasonable assessment of the concept in general. Can any AGW proponents clarify further?

That's the only thing that makes any sense. They could have easily addressed the issue of preexisting conditions by enhancing medicare/medicaid or by just offering a separate plan to cover that. There's always been access for low income people by simply going to the emergency room.

Generally speaking, I've found that people who believe that gun shows are hotbeds of illegal gun purchases have never actually been to a gun show. The politicians that rail against gun shows are propagating an untrue characterization of them.

The reason I've never supported carbon credits as a method of addressing AGW is because I don't see how buying carbon credits actually helps anything. I'd like to hear a reasoned explanation of how they work, if you could offer one.

So then what's your solution?

I think they understood perfectly. I believe they were asking you how you could square obtaining a gun from your friend in the manner you did while simultaneously calling for a ban on the 'gun show loophole', since they are essentially the exact same thing. With regard to the ATF study you reference, does it say anywhere in there that the focus of their investigation was either legitimate gun dealers and gun shows? It's fair to make a comparison between legal & illegal gun dealers and pharmacies & drug dealers. In each case, one is a legitimate business, the other a criminal enterprise.