Thread: NRA defends itself after corporations pull away

Originally Posted by Boomslang

After reconstruction, many poor people couldn't vote simply because they couldn't afford the poll tax. How is a free democracy to function with only
the voice of the rich?

Is that the environment today? Let's deal with things as they are rather than use examples of what is no longer.

Originally Posted by Boomslang

I use my state DL to vote because I choose to drive. Driver's license in my state is $25 dollars.

Most states, at least California, give "ID only" if you choose not to get a driver's license. So that is a moot point!

Originally Posted by Boomslang

Now, what if I use public transportation because it's cheaper and my job is close?

And what is your complaint here? That it costs too much for bus fare? So now bus fare must be free or that is a violation of the Constitution because you can't get to the voting booth?

Originally Posted by Boomslang

Do my right to vote suffer due to my choice to stop driving?

If that choice was because you were convicted of felony drunk driving, chances are your voting rights were suspended, so, again, that is a moot point!

Originally Posted by artist

There are many alternatives to abortion thru PP today.
The morning after pill for 1, and 2 a 10 day after missed menses extraction procedure and of course 3, the good old condom that additionally prevents the spread of STDs.
Also available, hormonal birth control pills for women with health disadvantages and still waiting for a sperm control pill for men as they are the other half of the equation.

Then there is no need for abortions if people just avail themselves of the many preventative options.

And don't forget sterilization! That can provide unlimited freedom.

Originally Posted by jtdc

The state is using our money to pay for it. And the evidence is that Federal money is paying for them despite the claims that it is not. Throwing the money in a pool is laundering it so you can't say what money went directly to abortion. If the government pays for an insurance policy to cover abortions, they will claim that the money did not go for abortions.

Here we go again! According to the article, 49% of the abortions through them are performed by them! And as for this argument that because they are not doing over 50% of the nations abortions, they are a minority, I hear the same argument about whites. In California "whites" makeup about 46%. So they are the largest minority. There is no "majority". Can you name the second largest abortion provider? I can't find one. In California there is listed 121 providers. But PP is apparently the only "abortion mill"!

It is legal because a court decided to make law, Congress would not. That is not to say I disagree with Roe-v-Wade. But Roe-v-Wade was a ruling that said it could not be prohibited. At this point I still agree with that. But the ruling did not say it was a right to be paid for by the public.

As for "moral", that is a real controversy. As I have pointed out, I prefer avoiding pregnancy over abortion. However, as I have also said, I feel it is better for a fetus to be aborted than to be born to be abused!

As for "vital", pregnancy is an easily avoidable affliction. Again, as I have said, abstinence is the most effective and, I believe, the most healthy all around. This too is controversial. Before Roe-v-Wade women aborted by many bad ways, with unqualified doctors, self abortion and other methods that sometimes killed them. Roe-v-Wade, by making it legal, allowed them to get proper medical care. But it also became a license to get pregnant all you want. And that is bad!

Those "rich" sinners have always paid for their own abortions!

Yes! I was aware of one in my church who disappeared soon after it was know she was pregnant. I knew of only two girls in my high school (one of them the one from my church) who got pregnant. It wasn't epidemic then. And I don't know that either of them got an abortion. They had to leave school because of school rules, so I never saw them again.

It's already here! Much of the molest and abuse I have seen is religion based. And those children, not imprisoned by their parents like with that Paris California couple with all those children, those children will rebel once they are of age, and have grown up uneducated in how to deal with their urges.

I do! Expanding what I wrote earlier, if homosexuals were monogamous, they would not have had diseases like AIDS wipe half of them out. These days, heterosexuals seem to be competing with them in that category.

But it is not very "personal" these days.

I'd like to see that evidence! Yes, it goes against our natural instincts, but so does our self restraint against murder.

And I don't want them to. But I would like it tone back a ways. We have killings in schools. They will be next to arm. But we already lost a lot of freedom when we fly and do a lot of other things. It is not because they have become less safe, it is because this free society values others less. That is a learned behavior!

Yet we have many laws that do just the opposite! We are a "democracy", yet when we go to war, our military is a dictatorship. That is because a democracy cannot effectively fight a dictatorship. So freedom does have responsibilities!

I see now the reason we're having difficulty here. You think we're a democracy. We are not. We are a Republic for as long as we can demonstrate enough intelligence, common sense and loyalty to hold on to it.

Originally Posted by artist

There are many alternatives to abortion thru PP today.
The morning after pill for 1, and 2 a 10 day after missed menses extraction procedure and of course 3, the good old condom that additionally prevents the spread of STDs.
Also available, hormonal birth control pills for women with health disadvantages and still waiting for a sperm control pill for men as they are the other half of the equation.

The Pro Life Movement counts the morning after pill as an abortion. Go figure.

Planned Parenthood is a family planning organization helping women plan their families, to reproduce when they are capable of doing a good job at being mothers, healthy, mature, ready and with the means to support their families. There are numerous ways to achieve this for our society which benefits everyone, but there is no way to achieve this without safe abortion procedures for those are facing an unwanted pregnancy who choose to terminate the pregnancy. The Pro-Life movement considers the morning after pill ... murder. They have pharmacists who refuse to fill the prescriptions. It's just a weird and creepy element of our society if you ask me. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Judy

I see now the reason we're having difficulty here. You think we're a democracy. We are not.

No, I don't think that's the reason.

Republic or democracy, we just disagree!

Yes, that, too!!



How about I don't force you to terminate a pregnancy and you don't force me to finish one. How about that?!

Originally Posted by Judy

The Pro Life Movement counts the morning after pill as an abortion. Go figure.

Irrelevant as to who pays for it.

Originally Posted by Judy

Planned Parenthood is a family planning organization helping women plan their families

That's what their name implies. But you don't see them counseling pregnant girls to keep their babies. We instead find them selling parts of aborted fetuses for profit, this "non profit organization"!

Originally Posted by Judy

The Pro-Life movement considers the morning after pill ... murder.

Isn't that what you opened this post with?

Originally Posted by Judy

They have pharmacists who refuse to fill the prescriptions.

So you don't support free choice? In most cases there are multiple sources for such drugs. The competition should welcome those customers.

As I said in an earlier post, it's taxpayer money paying for it that I and many others object to. You said "It's a legal, moral and vital service for pregnant girls and women, regardless of who pays for it or who provides them." My argument is it is optional activity that results in the pregnancy. What I thought of after I posted is homosexuals get diseases from the same optional activity. So I presume that you feel society owes them all of their medical treatment at taxpayer cost as well. Now of course there are many other optional things that should be indemnified by the public as well, such as sex change operations, plastic surgery, the list is endless. So we may as well accept Obamacare for all and get to the socialized medicine that we are heading to. Personal responsibility be damned!

As I said in an earlier post, it's taxpayer money paying for it that I and many others object to.

Then put your mind at ease, because ZERO federal tax money pays for abortions in the US. If you have an issue with the state of California paying for abortions, that's a state issue and none of my business one way or the other.

Do you object to federal money being used to fund Medicaid maternity benefits? I do.

Originally Posted by jtdc

Is that the environment today? Let's deal with things as they are rather than use examples of what is no longer.

Todays "environment" is shaped by yesterday's laws. The 24th Amendment is still stands. I was stating the reason behind the law. No money shall be charged. Period.

Originally Posted by jtdc

Most states, at least California, give "ID only" if you choose not to get a driver's license. So that is a moot point!

A municipal library card or college ID can be used as "ID", too, by any number of organizations but there are rules stating which IDs can be used for voting.

https://dds.georgia.gov/voter-id
Let's stay on topic: Voter IDs, no money and 24th Amendment.

Originally Posted by jtdc

And what is your complaint here? That it costs too much for bus fare? So now bus fare must be free or that is a violation of the Constitution because you can't get to the voting booth?

Say what, nah, what, nah?

Originally Posted by jtdc

If that choice was because you were convicted of felony drunk driving, chances are your voting rights were suspended, so, again, that is a moot point!

Don't add anything that doesn't need to be added. It's my choice to hold a DL or not and my voting rights are still intact.

Originally Posted by Judy

Then put your mind at ease, because ZERO federal tax money pays for abortions in the US. If you have an issue with the state of California paying for abortions, that's a state issue and none of my business one way or the other.

Do you object to federal money being used to fund Medicaid maternity benefits? I do.

Not true. On paper yes, in actuality, no.