Are Republicans holding the US back?

[The Nuclear Fist]

Define child. When does a being become sapient, and therefore worth of legal rights? While I agree that abortion should be allowed in the stages of pregnancy where the child is obviously not sapient, but when dealing with people's lives I feel justified in erring heavily on the side of caution, and not letting abortions happen after the first trimester, except in cases where the mother's health is threatened directly by the existence of the child, in which case the mother really should have the right to choose.

at 2-3 months it becomes human and worth full legal rights.

It becomes fully self aware and equal mentally to a fully formed newborn?

Also, if it becomes human at 2-3 months, that means there are no legal qualms to aborting it beforehand.

Good to know you're pro-choice, welcome to the winning and moral side.

[The Free and Just Republic of Freedomol]

at 2-3 months it becomes human and worth full legal rights.

It becomes fully self aware and equal mentally to a fully formed newborn?

Also, if it becomes human at 2-3 months, that means there are no legal qualms to aborting it beforehand.

Good to know you're pro-choice, welcome to the winning and moral side.

From your post, it looks like you believe that to be sapient, a being must be at least as intelligent as a newborn. I don't disagree with this, but I do feel that it is part of a problem: we need a definition of what it means to be sapient separats from our own intelligence, so bettles like abortion aren't fought in courtrooms, but in science labs, and with minimum amounts of fuss.

[Euronion]

at 2-3 months it becomes human and worth full legal rights.

It becomes fully self aware and equal mentally to a fully formed newborn?

Also, if it becomes human at 2-3 months, that means there are no legal qualms to aborting it beforehand.

Good to know you're pro-choice, welcome to the winning and moral side.

I believe that abortion past 2 months is murder, though I am thinking about adjusting that position to become at conception. I am thinking that potential to be human is as good as human.

[Neutraligon]

It becomes fully self aware and equal mentally to a fully formed newborn?

Also, if it becomes human at 2-3 months, that means there are no legal qualms to aborting it beforehand.

Good to know you're pro-choice, welcome to the winning and moral side.

I believe that abortion past 2 months is murder, though I am thinking about adjusting that position to become at conception. I am thinking that potential to be human is as good as human.

So how would you deal with miscarriages?

[Nationalist Eminral Republic]

I agree that there should be spending cuts, but the problem with some Republicans (and sometimes even the republican base) is instead of cutting the ridiculously high amount of military spending they want to cut social security, medicare and medicaid and other programs that help less fortunate people. They also do not want to raise taxes on the rich even though they did not work. Yes, there needs to be done to decrease the deficit, but cutting social services isn't one of them.

I do not think that cutting military spending is a good idea. The Iranian situation is escalating, the North Koreans recently performed a Nuclear Test and there are Anti-Chinese and Anti-Japanese protests all over Japan and China respectively. The Chinese are increasingly modernizing their military, the Japanese have called for the modernization and increase of their Self Defense Units and the Chinese are conducting military exercises in the South China Sea near and inside Japanese waters. The region has entered "a simultaneous buildup of advanced weaponry on a scale and at a speed not seen since the Cold War arms race between America and the Soviet Union."¹ Now is not the time to be cutting back on our military, but we have to cut somewhere.

Like programs to help less fortunate people? pensions of the elderly? food stamps for Americans who are starving? cutting more taxes for the rich,

How about cutting this in half? US have allies now, is it really more dangerous now than it is in Cold War? US have been spending much in the military since 9/11, so much that US do not have any more money to help its own people, and the solution to its fiscal problem, more spending cuts on pensions for the elderly, tax cuts to "job creators", social security, medicare and medicaid etc.

[Euronion]

I believe that abortion past 2 months is murder, though I am thinking about adjusting that position to become at conception. I am thinking that potential to be human is as good as human.

So how would you deal with miscarriages?

a genetic malformation appeared in the process of conception and development. The body therefore aborted the process as it could tell there was something wrong going on. It is a natural safeguard.

EDIT: which is why I support abortion in case where there is such a serious genetic malformation, that it would not be worth living, that it would be so painful and demanding that it would not be worth it. So a child born with no lungs, should've been aborted.

[Neutraligon]

So how would you deal with miscarriages?

a genetic malformation appeared in the process of conception and development. The body therefore aborted the process as it could tell there was something wrong going on. It is a natural safeguard.

Not necessarily just a genetic malformation. I see abortion as just another safeguard.

[Dariandan]

My very short (and possibly bad) counter argument

1.While yes the Republicans are slowing down the nation socially, economically, they have the right idea. Spending cuts save money, not higher taxes.

2.Sexuality IS A choice, one that I don't like, but am willing to accept and let them have the option to marry or not.

3.Obama may not have that much control over the budget, but he needs to grow some balls and push the budget through, edited or not.

End of short, bad, counter argument.

sexuality is not a goddamn choice

I agree sexuality is not a choice, but its also not predetermined either. In fact many psychologists argue that sexuality is not black and white it is an area that is shaded grey by things like upbringing, experience, and interaction.an example of this would be your favorite food, genetically are you programmed to like that food? no there is something about that food that doesnt interest you, same with sexuality. I believe that there is a window of experimentation in a persons life to figure whether or not they like that "food".

[Euronion]

I do not think that cutting military spending is a good idea. The Iranian situation is escalating, the North Koreans recently performed a Nuclear Test and there are Anti-Chinese and Anti-Japanese protests all over Japan and China respectively. The Chinese are increasingly modernizing their military, the Japanese have called for the modernization and increase of their Self Defense Units and the Chinese are conducting military exercises in the South China Sea near and inside Japanese waters. The region has entered "a simultaneous buildup of advanced weaponry on a scale and at a speed not seen since the Cold War arms race between America and the Soviet Union."¹ Now is not the time to be cutting back on our military, but we have to cut somewhere.

Like programs to help less fortunate people? pensions of the elderly? food stamps for Americans who are starving? cutting more taxes for the rich,

How about cutting this in half? US have allies now, is it really more dangerous now than it is in Cold War? US have been spending much in the military since 9/11, so much that US do not have any more money to help its own people, and the solution to its fiscal problem, more spending cuts on pensions for the elderly, tax cuts to job creators, social security, medicare and medicaid etc.

If that's what it takes, then yes. We cannot maintain things at our current state. Though with the conflicts in the world and the possibility of war on the horizon, the United States cannot be hallowing out its military. Cutting the military in half would be devastating. Military spending doesn't just go towards paying troops and buying bigger guns, it goes towards research and development, supplying, logistics, etc. What does more funding towards the poor do when millions of people are dying overseas and those wars threaten to take place on U.S. soil. Not only does China cover-up its military numbers and the money allocated towards it, it also attacks the U.S. via cyber attack. We cannot afford to cut the military at such a time as this.

[Esternial]

Not all of them, though quite a few, yes.

But to be frank, it's US politics in general.

[Euronion]

a genetic malformation appeared in the process of conception and development. The body therefore aborted the process as it could tell there was something wrong going on. It is a natural safeguard.

Not necessarily just a genetic malformation. I see abortion as just another safeguard.

I don't, because in the case of miscarriage, it is a natural safeguard that would've taken place either way. An abortion is the killing of a perfectly healthy human. The fact that 55 million Abortions, 1/6th of the US population has been eliminated is appalling. Imagine 1/6th of the people you know suddenly disappeared and you get the idea of how astounding and horrible that is. Think of all the Great Minds that we have lost.

[Terraius]

Yeah we should just become a one party state like China or North Korea. I heard they're doing pretty well.

[The Occident]

Where Mothers can choose to be Mothers...

Hooray for murdering babies! Or, as the liberals call it, 'the right to a woman's body' [is to be able to murder a baby].

No politician's authority should be allowed to extend directly to the human uterus.

[Frisivisia]

Like programs to help less fortunate people? pensions of the elderly? food stamps for Americans who are starving? cutting more taxes for the rich,

How about cutting this in half? US have allies now, is it really more dangerous now than it is in Cold War? US have been spending much in the military since 9/11, so much that US do not have any more money to help its own people, and the solution to its fiscal problem, more spending cuts on pensions for the elderly, tax cuts to job creators, social security, medicare and medicaid etc.

If that's what it takes, then yes. We cannot maintain things at our current state. Though with the conflicts in the world and the possibility of war on the horizon, the United States cannot be hallowing out its military. Cutting the military in half would be devastating. Military spending doesn't just go towards paying troops and buying bigger guns, it goes towards research and development, supplying, logistics, etc. What does more funding towards the poor do when millions of people are dying overseas and those wars threaten to take place on U.S. soil. Not only does China cover-up its military numbers and the money allocated towards it, it also attacks the U.S. via cyber attack. We cannot afford to cut the military at such a time as this.

No one's going to invade the US, ever. No major military power will.

[Esternial]

Yeah we should just become a one party state like China or North Korea. I heard they're doing pretty well.

Better than the US in terms of maturity in politics, as far as I've seen.

[Frisivisia]

Not necessarily just a genetic malformation. I see abortion as just another safeguard.

I don't, because in the case of miscarriage, it is a natural safeguard that would've taken place either way. An abortion is the killing of a perfectly healthy human. The fact that 55 million Abortions, 1/6th of the US population has been eliminated is appalling. Imagine 1/6th of the people you know suddenly disappeared and you get the idea of how astounding and horrible that is. Think of all the Great Minds that we have lost.

Source that. Source it now.

And think of all the criminals we've lost.

[Gauntleted Fist]

Yeah we should just become a one party state like China or North Korea. I heard they're doing pretty well.

When your country is almost single-handedly the reason poverty in the world has been reducing at amazing levels then yeah I guess pretty damn well. (China.)

That's not to give them a free pass by any means, but at least they don't have politicians out to actively fucking kill large portions of their population via starvation.

[Euronion]

If that's what it takes, then yes. We cannot maintain things at our current state. Though with the conflicts in the world and the possibility of war on the horizon, the United States cannot be hallowing out its military. Cutting the military in half would be devastating. Military spending doesn't just go towards paying troops and buying bigger guns, it goes towards research and development, supplying, logistics, etc. What does more funding towards the poor do when millions of people are dying overseas and those wars threaten to take place on U.S. soil. Not only does China cover-up its military numbers and the money allocated towards it, it also attacks the U.S. via cyber attack. We cannot afford to cut the military at such a time as this.

No one's going to invade the US, ever. No major military power will.

No sane power, though to call Iran and North Korea sane would be a great stretch. I also doubt any of our "allies" will support us. It seems like most Europeans secretly despise the US. When faced with the prospect of returning the favor we paid them in WWI and WWII, I doubt they'd be willing to send their soldiers to save us.

[Wamitoria]

Yeah we should just become a one party state like China or North Korea. I heard they're doing pretty well.

When your country is almost single-handedly the reason poverty in the world has been reducing at amazing levels then yeah I guess pretty damn well. (China.)

That's not to give them a free pass by any means, but at least they don't have politicians out to actively fucking kill large portions of their population via starvation.

Well, North Korea might do the latter.

[Gallopfrey and the Pony Republic Therof]

In a (slowly) modernising world,
Where Homosexuals can join in Marriage,
Where Mothers can choose to be Mothers,
Where Socialism is slowly becoming more popular, and people are slowly becoming tolerant of one another,
a country far away on distant shores is being held back by a group of child like adults where they refuse to just accept the future for what it is, for what it means...
Instead, they continue to argue against change, against the future.
Oh, they aren't alone in this conflict, but that will wait until another day.

The country?
The United States of America.
The group?
The Republicans (What a broad term. Let's stick with it for now)

WARNING: Moderately Long Read for some people ahead

The Republican Party of the United States of America is one of the most intolerant, ignorant and rather laughable political parties on the face of this planet, only because they are so well recognised by the international community for being so very thick.

It is an argument that the Republican Party is the cause for the United States' Debt Crisis, where overspending has led to a large debt crisis on the United States which people (Guess who?) blame the current President, Barrack Hussein Obama, for.
This is far, far from the truth.
The crises can be attributed to a large number of factors, primarily the bad Economic situation across the planet, US Congress and previous Presidents.
Let's start with US Congress.
For those of you that have at least a tiny bit of knowledge in US Politics, you'll know it isn't the President who assigns the budget directly.
It's the US Congress.^{A simple way to explain it.}
Lately, US Congress has been getting a little bit cocky with their budget allocation, and have started to WAY overspend the money they actually have to spend.
To those of you who are lost, I'm basically going over how Congress is OVERSPENDING US Income.
When the US Government Overspends, then basically it has to borrow money to get straight and not run out of money.
This creates Debt.
The Debt the US is infamous for.
The Debt that is ruining the US Economy.
And although the President can suggest budgets, they can be edited or scrapped entirely so that the congress can write a new one.
This creates an interesting problem in US politics, because the debt crisis can be blamed on the US President.

The following below is a bit crackpotty, you are free to ignore it:
It is possible that, since Congress is only slightly majority Republican, that they can purposely put out 'bad' budgets just so they can pin the blame on the president later, adding to their glorious bubble world that "LOL demicratz cant run an economy".


Socially, Republicans hate anyone that isn't a Republican for any reason.
Though I am a firm believer in state rights, RELIGION shouldn't be the leading cause of Homophobia in politics.
Really now, who are you to mix Religion and Politics!? Two things that SHOULDN'T BE MIXED. EVER.

Outright banning Gay Marriage because "it goes against my slightly dodgy, holy text that ONLY ON VERY RARE OCCASIONS Contradicts itself because of mistranslation and added information" is simply put, rather... ... what's a better word for stupid?
In a world that is emerging as tolerant 'peaceful' (LOL, why is that in there?) nationstates (I'm bad at puns) and gay people can join in state approved marriage, why must you deny them these rights?
How does this affect you in any way at all?
They're not FORCING heterosexual men to marry them...

Another argument against Gay Marriage is "letting two men (why is it always men... *sigh*) marry is like a man marrying a *Inset object, animal or child*".
First of all, the two men in question are consenting, loving adults.
Secondly, you're replacing the second consenting adult with something that cannot give consent; ie: A toaster.
Something that cannot possibly give consent, despite being a living thing, ie: A dog.
And finally, something that can give consent, but cannot fully think out the consequences because they are not mature, a child.

where 2 start dat:
2 Consenting Men (or Woman) =/= 1 Consenting Man (or Woman), and something that cannot give consent.
I'd like to finish this badly constructed point by saying something I've said before, "How does this affect you in any way".

The same goes to Abortion.
Reading a thread five minutes before that had a "unreliable republican source" (Cough cough, guess...) that said that woman was 'nearly killed' after not given anesthetic for an abortion in a Planned Parenthood Clinic in some other US State, I saw right through this for what it really was:
An article of a small, over exaggerated event made exaggerated to make people angry.

Really now, there is little evidence to support the foetus as a 'living, thinking creature' the GOP and other like minded people make it out to be.
Really, it is half the mother's DNA, and half of the father's. A collection of Cells building and arranging themselves, preparing for Birth.
People asking "What if you were/going to be aborted! How would you feel!?"
This is how I always, forever will respond:

"I wouldn't be alive to complain."

It just doesn't make sense to me.
Why (and HOW) Republicans are against Abortion.
If a women can't have a baby, as in can't afford it or cannot have it without medical problems, then shouldn't be allowed to 'opt' out?
I mean, if a women is threatened by her pregnancy, is she not ENTITLED to have an abortion to save her life?
I can think of one recent case in Ireland where this has happened.
It could possibly happen in the United States.

What if she's a rape victim?
How would the child grow up psychologically, knowing it was a rape child?
How would the child feel if they found this out on their own after a coverup since birth!?
How would the mother afford this child is she's POOR!?

There. Not only are the Republicans holding the US back socially, they have no care in the world for people who cannot live up to their standards.

Another thing - Republicans act like this is COMPULSORY, not a choice.
Let's finish this once and for all, shall we?

Gay Marriage - Not Compulsory, a Choice.
Abortion - Not Compulsory, a Choice.
Euthanasia - Not Compulsory, a Choice.

Let's clear up some Right Wing clutter while we're here...

Sexuality - Not a choice.
Gender - Not a choice.
Pregnancy (from Rape or any other occasion you don't intentionally conceive) - Not a choice.
Other peoples actions upon you - Not a choice...

Republicans need to understand this. Sometimes, I think they don't.
Once we put these pesky social problems behind us, we can move forward as a society and actually focus on what is important right now:
- The Economy,
- Medical Technologies,
- Agriculture Technologies,
- The Debt Problem...
- DPRK

Inside the spoiler, you'll find:
A poorly constructed argument that states that the Republicans are holding the US back Socially, Economically.
If I could word things properly, I would be a much more effective speaker.


So, NS, I'm presuming you already have a political bias against the GOP, my question to you is this...
Is the Republican Party holding the United States back from progression into a better world?

Poll included for your enjoyment.

It's not Republicans. It's the bipartisan system altogether. We can't get anything done or have progressive policies enacted because both parties have politicians more concerned with being reelected than actually going out and getting crap done.

[Euronion]

Yeah we should just become a one party state like China or North Korea. I heard they're doing pretty well.

When your country is almost single-handedly the reason poverty in the world has been reducing at amazing levels then yeah I guess pretty damn well. (China.)

That's not to give them a free pass by any means, but at least they don't have politicians out to actively fucking kill large portions of their population via starvation.

What? You don't think that North Korea and China starve their population? over 300 Million people in China are effected by contaminated drinking water, 190 Million so severely so that it effects their health. 17 out of the 20 most polluted cities in the World are in China. That doesn't even include the massive censorship and let us not forget Tienanmen Square.

[Gauntleted Fist]

No sane power, though to call Iran and North Korea sane would be a great stretch. I also doubt any of our "allies" will support us. It seems like most Europeans secretly despise the US. When faced with the prospect of returning the favor we paid them in WWI and WWII, I doubt they'd be willing to send their soldiers to save us.

Yes, jumping in after a great majority of the war has been fought on the soil of other countries and those countries have fields literally running red with the blood of their own soldiers is certainly doing them a 'favor'.

I don't know about you, but the incessant crowing we do about how we 'won' WWI/WWII for the Allies is probably incredibly fucking annoying to the people that fought the war for four (And three respectively) fucking years before we jumped in.

[Nationalist Eminral Republic]

Like programs to help less fortunate people? pensions of the elderly? food stamps for Americans who are starving? cutting more taxes for the rich,

How about cutting this in half? US have allies now, is it really more dangerous now than it is in Cold War? US have been spending much in the military since 9/11, so much that US do not have any more money to help its own people, and the solution to its fiscal problem, more spending cuts on pensions for the elderly, tax cuts to job creators, social security, medicare and medicaid etc.

If that's what it takes, then yes. We cannot maintain things at our current state. Though with the conflicts in the world and the possibility of war on the horizon, the United States cannot be hallowing out its military. Cutting the military in half would be devastating. Military spending doesn't just go towards paying troops and buying bigger guns, it goes towards research and development, supplying, logistics, etc. What does more funding towards the poor do when millions of people are dying overseas and those wars threaten to take place on U.S. soil. Not only does China cover-up its military numbers and the money allocated towards it, it also attacks the U.S. via cyber attack. We cannot afford to cut the military at such a time as this.

What does more funding towards the poor do when millions of people are dying overseas and those wars threaten to take place on U.S. soil.

I'm pretty sure Jesus would disagree with you. If China is hacking US computers then why not place embargo on China rather than Iran who doesn't even have a navy or an air force that can confront the American military. China on the other hand do not also have the capabilities to confront American military, if they do, it will be tragic. If the US wants to retain its former power, they need to give up their empire and focus on domestic issues instead of spending money on military.

[Twilliamson]

No one's going to invade the US, ever. No major military power will.

No sane power, though to call Iran and North Korea sane would be a great stretch. I also doubt any of our "allies" will support us. It seems like most Europeans secretly despise the US. When faced with the prospect of returning the favor we paid them in WWI and WWII, I doubt they'd be willing to send their soldiers to save us.

they would have to. If they don't and some how we are defeated by iran and north korea(which i doubt because even if we cut milatry spending in half we would probably stil be in the top 3 in milatary spending in the world) the world ecomeny world collapse

[Priory Academy USSR]

No one's going to invade the US, ever. No major military power will.

No sane power, though to call Iran and North Korea sane would be a great stretch. I also doubt any of our "allies" will support us. It seems like most Europeans secretly despise the US. When faced with the prospect of returning the favor we paid them in WWI and WWII, I doubt they'd be willing to send their soldiers to save us.

So are you saying we should wait a few years for the US to be softened up, sell them the weapons they need for a quick buck and eventually join in if they piss us off?

Seriously though, neither Iran nor North Korea could feasibly reach the US, even if spending was at a tenth of what it is now. Few nations possess the military capability to even invade the US, and the majority of those are allied or at the very least on neutral tems.