The Political Discussion Thread

[Galileo_Galilee]

That is flat wrong. Weren't you the one advocating ADOPTION? Isn't an adoptive parent able to provide nurturing love for a child? For that matter, isn't the FATHER able to provide nurturing love? Why must it be the biological mother?

Serious answer: because according to these people women must be made to be a slave to their biology.

[Ben 'Teal'c would WIN!!' Noble]

I am just wondering LoS do you support no limit to when an abotion is carried out? I am not being funny it's a real question.

[Galileo_Galilee]

The anti-gun people are winning in California:

Gov. Brown signs ban on open handgun carrying


SACRAMENTO -- California became the fifth state to prohibit openly carrying handguns in public after Gov. Jerry Brown announced Monday that he had signed the ban into law amid heavy opposition from gun enthusiasts.

AB144 by state Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-Pasadena, makes it a misdemeanor to carry an exposed and unloaded gun in public or in vehicles, with violators facing up to a year in prison or a potential fine of $1,000 when the law takes effect on Jan 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_19080574

I'm tired of this crap.

I fervently hope it'll be challenged all the way to the Supreme court, but that'll take years.

[SoulReaver]

California...ain't that also the state where Rodney King got the crap beaten outa him & where you can get lifetime jail for stealing pizzas? ("3 strikes law" or something)

interesting

[Goose]

The anti-gun people are winning in California:


http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_19080574

I'm tired of this crap.

I fervently hope it'll be challenged all the way to the Supreme court, but that'll take years.

Why do you need to openly carry a loaded hand gun in public anyway? Just out of curiosity...

[SoulReaver]

did some checking on the governor - apparently this Jerry Brown chap is alsoa "staunch proponent" of the 3-strikes law

ain't that a surprise! (but at least he's being consistent)

[Galileo_Galilee]

Why do you need to openly carry a loaded hand gun in public anyway?

I personally don't like firearms, but I do like being able to CHOOSE to do so, such is my INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to do.

And I wouldn't INFRINGE on somebody's RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

As an adult, shouldn't I have the right to make these kinds of choices for myself?

[Goose]

I personally don't like firearms, but I do like being able to CHOOSE to do so, such is my INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to do.

And I wouldn't INFRINGE on somebody's RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

As an adult, shouldn't I have the right to make these kinds of choices for myself?

Quite frankly, no, I don't believe you should. Firearms, in my opinion, should be heavily regulated and only permitted when there is a genuine need to have one. To be able to carry a hand gun in public is not a genuine need for a firearm.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Quite frankly, no, I don't believe you should.

So what happens when you are attacked by gang bangers when you take a wrong turn and have nowhere to run to and you have nothing to protect yourself with? Isn't that a need?

And how do you define need? What needs would allow a person to own a firearm, and why do YOU get to take away my rights to choose for myself?

Maybe I don't like you having a computer. You shouldn't have a computer unless you NEED it.

Maybe I should take your right to free speech away since you obviously don't NEED it.

You see, that's the thing about the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. It means that we all have the right to self governance. Why should we have to rely on the government to determine who NEEDS what? Why can't I determine that NEED for myself?

[Goose]

So what happens when you are attacked by gang bangers when you take a wrong turn and have nowhere to run to and you have nothing to protect yourself with? Isn't that a need?

And how do you define need? What needs would allow a person to own a firearm, and why do YOU get to take away my rights to choose for myself?

Maybe I don't like you having a computer. You shouldn't have a computer unless you NEED it.

Maybe I should take your right to free speech away since you obviously don't NEED it.

You see, that's the thing about the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. It means that we all have the right to self governance. Why should we have to rely on the government to determine who NEEDS what? Why can't I determine that NEED for myself?

You don't have the right to self governance, though, do you? You all those pesky things called laws? They all restrict your right to self governance.

[Galileo_Galilee]

That doesn't answer my questions directly or at all.

[Ukko]

You don't have the right to self governance, though, do you? You all those pesky things called laws? They all restrict your right to self governance.

And you wont mow down a crowd of people with your computer or free speech. Although, if your going to try, please inform me first because i think it would be quite amusing.

[Gatefan1976]

Normally I keep out of politics, but........

except it's not her body...it's the baby's body that's growing and developing

the unborn child is a living human being who until he is born essentially gets his basic nutrition from a feeding tube.....so in a way he is no different from those who can only use a feeding tube to get basic nutrition....and yes after the child is born anyone can feed him....but only the child's mother can provide the unique nurturing love that only a mother can for her children

Complete, utter BS. I am a stay at home father for all 3 of my kids, I love them all and play with them all equally. All 3 are *apparently* advanced for thier ages and are happy and healthy kids. That kind of narrow viewpoint that only a "mother" can can care for children is a throwback to the outdated concept of gender based role definition, I wonder where you get the inspiration for that idea MG??

sad indeed when man takes for himself a power that can only belong to natural law....to define when human life begins

An interesting observation from someone who is annoyed that they have to pay to get a concealed handgun permit, but I suppose the "right to bear arms" is another one of those "natural laws" as well?? (and don't bother arguing constitutionality, I know many Americans are insanely fond of thier right to bear arms, I just find it.........wrong)

a society that can rationalize the killing of its own young at any stage of development is a society doomed to fail because it is only a short trip from that to rationalizing the euthanasia of the disabled and elderly and pretty soon you'll be able to rationalizse genocide...short indeed is the trip between infanticide and genocide

More BS dude. Euthanasia happens all the time under the auspices of "pain management", it's hardly a "new concept", nor has it run rampant either. This however is more a topic for a "morality" discussion is it not?

[SoulReaver]

would Direct Democracy count as "self-governance" ?

[Galileo_Galilee]

No, that would be mob rule and one of the reasons why the concept of civil rights and liberties were developed. With mob rule you have the right to do what the mob tells you or be trampled to death.