What are your important issues? (1 Viewer)

[wardorican]

Forget the current headlines. Forget the manufactured talking points. What are the big issues you care about? Or the small ones that don't get enough attention?

I'm just going to rattle off a few. I may dig into these more later. In no special order...

1. Infrastructure investment. The major categories being road transportation, flood protection / drainage, electrical grid resiliency, and better mass transit, especially rail. Our rail systems, outside of a few areas like Chicago, NYC, DC.. are just awful. They don't serve enough of the areas. They aren't tying the Suburbs, and towns nearby to the major city centers and major concentrations of Industry.
   1. A - I'd have much preferred no tax cut for the wealthy, and use that money towards Infrastructure. I don't mind some of the corporate tax cuts (not a fan of profitable companies finding ways to pay $0 in taxes.. that's unfair), but take a little back to go towards infrastructure and mass transit, which will boost productivity and lower congestion in major cities.
2. Wage growth. Not just min wage, all wages. Not sure what the government policy could be to drive this, but it's a huge pet issue for me.
3. Technology. Finding the balance between a company being large enough to have stability/security (think Apple, Microsoft, Samsung) to have things work well, but no so large as to stifle all competition and drive up prices. Also, who controls/owns our data. If my data is so valuable, why can't I be compensated for it?
4. Education funding. It's ridiculous how much the States cut from Colleges and how little they controlled their growth since the 1990's. That's why tuition is out of control. So, it's not just the funding issue, but also the lack of forcing public Universities to cap operating budget increases. In college, tuition increases was probably one of the biggest things I tried to fight against when in Student Government. We usually failed, but I did get one win on that topic, when I realized the committee that year was being somewhat dishonest about the increases, and called them out in public about it.

I care about a lot of other things, but I'm going to stop with these four.

 

[SystemShock]

A scientist, trained in this field, states human life exists, as far as science is concerned, at the moment the zygote is formed.

An objective fact.

As far as she's concerned. After all, she is a bioethicist.

And even if we were to agree on what is "human life", how do we get from "human life" to "human individual"?

 

[Ayo]

Facts are proclaimed here (this board) when they are only the opinion of the observer.

So, then this ^ is not a fact?

I think we found common ground

 

[Dragon]

One of the ironies of some "pro-life" is that...

A child needs healthcare, education, food on the table each day and a bed to sleep in. Children should be with their parents and not put in cages when they flee from persecution. Childrens lifes are lost due to lack of funds The same child grows up and maybe do something stupid and then suddenly a lot of otherwise pro-lifers are quite comfortable with endind said life...

 

[Archies Ghost]

So, then this ^ is not a fact?

I think we found common ground

Indeed.

 

[Lazybones]

One of the ironies of some "pro-life" is that...

A child needs healthcare, education, food on the table each day and a bed to sleep in. Children should be with their parents and not put in cages when they flee from persecution. Childrens lifes are lost due to lack of funds The same child grows up and maybe do something stupid and then suddenly a lot of otherwise pro-lifers are quite comfortable with endind said life...

This always riles me up. Liberals will justify their support of abortion with the above scenario.

1. One side wants life and then hold that life to a set of laws

2. The other side says, death is better without the choice to follow laws.

 

[Incumbent]

This always riles me up. Liberals will justify their support of abortion with the above scenario.

1. One side wants life and then hold that life to a set of laws

2. The other side says, death is better without the choice to follow laws.

I think there are important distinctions to make. The support is for a woman’s right to make decisions related to her body and well-being that she believes are in her best interests, ideally in consultation with her health care providers, and anybody else she might wish to involve.

I agree with you that a legal framework is important in a society, but we can simultaneously strive to enact reasonable laws, enforce those laws, and do so while promoting humane treatment of others.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

This always riles me up. Liberals will justify their support of abortion with the above scenario.

1. One side wants life and then hold that life to a set of laws

2. The other side says, death is better without the choice to follow laws.

So, I'm generally pro-life but the scenario listed above is one of the reasons I think Republicans are not super committed to the issue. Also, the simplest way to reduce abortions is to increase sex education and make birth control free and super easy to get. But that has very little support in Republican scenarios.

 

[Ayo]

Also, the simplest way to reduce abortions is to increase sex education and make birth control free and super easy to get. But that has very little support in Republican scenarios.

Speaking of verifiable data and thorough, rigorous research and undeniable conclusions, this is another area where we've seen tremendous improvement.

In Texas, one textbook didn't include the use of condoms as one of eight ways to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.

And a few years ago, one study found that 83% of districts in Texas taught abstinence-only or had no sex ed curriculum at all to really speak of.

Around the same time, over 60% of high schoolers in Texas reported having engaged in intercourse - which was higher than the national average by 5% - and over 60% of those sexually active didn't use a condom - 10% over the national average.

The abstinence only or no-sex-ed approaches existed in this state where teens were having more sex, period, and more unprotected sex. So what, exactly, is the abstinence-only approach or no approach trying to accomplish?

This is costing the state of Texas more than a billion dollars.

sources:
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/06/05/530922642/in-texas-abstinence-only-programs-may-contribute-to-teen-pregnancies

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/pol...ging-kids-be-taught-more-about-contraception/

If "abortion" is an "Important Issue" I would think this is something that should be pursued. Broad based sex ed curriculum teaches and emphasizes abstinence, but doesn't solely rely on it - acknowledging the reality of sexually active teens.

 

[Lazybones]

So, I'm generally pro-life but the scenario listed above is one of the reasons I think Republicans are not super committed to the issue. Also, the simplest way to reduce abortions is to increase sex education and make birth control free and super easy to get. But that has very little support in Republican scenarios.

How is birth control not easy to get? Also, I’m curious. Of the 370k or so abortions performed by planned parenthood, how many didn’t have access to birth control. Or how many of them didn’t realize the outcome of having unprotected sex.

when people want to advocate a woman’s right to chose, we get every example under the sun except one.

how many abortions are from woman who just don’t want kids. Pick your reason why, they just don’t want kids and use abortion as a solution.

 

[Farb]

One of the ironies of some "pro-life" is that...

A child needs healthcare, education, food on the table each day and a bed to sleep in. Children should be with their parents and not put in cages when they flee from persecution. Childrens lifes are lost due to lack of funds The same child grows up and maybe do something stupid and then suddenly a lot of otherwise pro-lifers are quite comfortable with endind said life...

To me, this point reads as "its ok to kill poor people before they become poor people because poor people usually make stupid life decisions (murder) and we will just have to execute them anyway.."
Now, I know from talking with Dragon, that is not what she meant to imply, but to me, that's how it comes off.

 

[TheRealTruth]

how many abortions are from woman who just don’t want kids. Pick your reason why, they just don’t want kids and use abortion as a solution.

Honestly, it really doesn't matter the reason. The paramount reason is her right to choose.

 

[Farb]

So, I'm generally pro-life but the scenario listed above is one of the reasons I think Republicans are not super committed to the issue. Also, the simplest way to reduce abortions is to increase sex education and make birth control free and super easy to get. But that has very little support in Republican scenarios.

I was not aware condoms are kept under lock and key are hard to obtain in the good ole USofA. You can order them from amazon, buy some when you get some gas, picking up some milk, condoms are on isle 4, I went drinking last night, and grabbed a couple from the bar for free when I left. Lazy does not mean lack of access.

 

[Dragon]

This always riles me up. Liberals will justify their support of abortion with the above scenario.

1. One side wants life and then hold that life to a set of laws

2. The other side says, death is better without the choice to follow laws.

This is NOT a pro- abortion argument but a pro-LIFE argument.

If you really think that all life is sacred, there should be no exceptions when it comes to deliberately ending one.

 

[CoolBrees]

Unless you are under the age of 18, female, and impoverished; how difficult contraception may be to come by for you is irrelevant.

Compound the problem by adding ignorance of contraception to it. Not talking to them about it is how kids learn that you can’t get pregnant in a hot tub, or if you have sex standing up, or if you drink Dr Pepper after.

 

[Farb]

This is NOT a pro- abortion argument but a pro-LIFE argument.

If you really think that all life is sacred, there should be no exceptions when it comes to deliberately ending one.

in your opinion.
So if you believe abortion is a good thing, then you also believe in the death penalty?

 

[Incumbent]

in your opinion.
So if you believe abortion is a good thing, then you also believe in the death penalty?

What is your view of the death penalty? Do you think it’s an issue entirely decided on the value of life?

I’m pro-choice, explanation previously given. I also oppose the death penalty because I recognize flaws and shortcomings in the judicial system.

 

[Sandman]

Balance the budget and pay down our national debt.

 

[Farb]

If someone believes all life is sacred and there is never a reason to take a life, then on the same logic if someone believes life is not sacred and can be ended just before birth due to inconvenience, then they can not have a moral argument against the death penalty.

I am just trying to make sense of the argument that is used all the time in the abortion debate. If you believe one thing, then you have to believe in this other unrelated thing and if you don't, you are being dishonest and your point is invalid.