[Joekerr]

Originally Posted by grocerylist

Unfortunately women don't have a choice in the matter when getting raped and not being allowed to abort a rape-baby is beyond ridiculous. There are also medical situations for women that might warrant an abortion. It's not just about people having unprotected sex and killing an embryo for fun.

Thankfully Governor Abbott is going to magically eliminate all rapists from Texas so rape-babies won't happen anymore.

Well there you go then - you invalidated your own argument - huzzah for Governor Abbott!

But seriously, everyone (I hope) can agree rape is wrong. What's the solution though - punish both the perp AND the innocent person as well? Why don't we just come down harder on the perp? I don't see why we need to punish the innocent as well. Can they not give up these children to someone who can't have children and really want one? I am against forcing a victim of a rape to adopt that kid as their own unless they wanted to - but there are people out there who would be happy to take that kid. But give that kid a chance to live!

And would we agree that the number of women having abortions due to rape as a percentage of all abortions is exceedingly low?

Out of curiosity - would you be perfectly ok with this new texas law if they contained an exclusion for rape victims and for medical reason (like baby has genetic mutations / chromosomes which make it unsuitable to life outside the womb, or imperils the mother's life (medically confirmed by doctor - not talking about stress)?

Would that be ok? Because I suspect you are using these factors as false flags and these aren't the real issue.

[unluky]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Well there you go then - you invalidated your own argument - huzzah for Governor Abbott!

But seriously, everyone (I hope) can agree rape is wrong. What's the solution though - punish both the perp AND the innocent person as well? Why don't we just come down harder on the perp? I don't see why we need to punish the innocent as well. Can they not give up these children to someone who can't have children and really want one? I am against forcing a victim of a rape to adopt that kid as their own unless they wanted to - but there are people out there who would be happy to take that kid. But give that kid a chance to live!

And would we agree that the number of women having abortions due to rape as a percentage of all abortions is exceedingly low?

Out of curiosity - would you be perfectly ok with this new texas law if they contained an exclusion for rape victims and for medical reason (like baby has genetic mutations / chromosomes which make it unsuitable to life outside the womb, or imperils the mother's life (medically confirmed by doctor - not talking about stress)?

Would that be ok? Because I suspect you are using these factors as false flags and these aren't the real issue.

LOL - while I am anti-abortion and also pro-choice (yes, you can be both) I do have the chuckle when they to toss out the "WHAT IF YOU WERE RAPED AND GOT PREGNANT" as their case........like that is the VAST majority of when abortions happen? Anything to point out a single example of when the law might not be tasteful.

I don't live in TX and it won't affect me, but I find that a terrible argument.

[grocerylist]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Well there you go then - you invalidated your own argument - huzzah for Governor Abbott!

But seriously, everyone (I hope) can agree rape is wrong. What's the solution though - punish both the perp AND the innocent person as well? Why don't we just come down harder on the perp? I don't see why we need to punish the innocent as well. Can they not give up these children to someone who can't have children and really want one? I am against forcing a victim of a rape to adopt that kid as their own unless they wanted to - but there are people out there who would be happy to take that kid. But give that kid a chance to live!

And would we agree that the number of women having abortions due to rape as a percentage of all abortions is exceedingly low?

Out of curiosity - would you be perfectly ok with this new texas law if they contained an exclusion for rape victims and for medical reason (like baby has genetic mutations / chromosomes which make it unsuitable to life outside the womb, or imperils the mother's life (medically confirmed by doctor - not talking about stress)?

Would that be ok? Because I suspect you are using these factors as false flags and these aren't the real issue.

I believe there are 3 valid reasons for an abortion; rape, medical reasons and a woman's choice. I don't believe women take abortion lightly or that women get abortions for fun. It's a serious decision but one that a woman should be able to make for their unique situation and for themselves.

[kscarrol]

In before thread delete!

[erickonphoenix]

It only took two pages to turn into this lol

merica

[Angelo_GraysonMiniBMW]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Well there you go then - you invalidated your own argument - huzzah for Governor Abbott!

But seriously, everyone (I hope) can agree rape is wrong. What's the solution though - punish both the perp AND the innocent person as well? Why don't we just come down harder on the perp? I don't see why we need to punish the innocent as well. Can they not give up these children to someone who can't have children and really want one? I am against forcing a victim of a rape to adopt that kid as their own unless they wanted to - but there are people out there who would be happy to take that kid. But give that kid a chance to live!

And would we agree that the number of women having abortions due to rape as a percentage of all abortions is exceedingly low?

Out of curiosity - would you be perfectly ok with this new texas law if they contained an exclusion for rape victims and for medical reason (like baby has genetic mutations / chromosomes which make it unsuitable to life outside the womb, or imperils the mother's life (medically confirmed by doctor - not talking about stress)?

Would that be ok? Because I suspect you are using these factors as false flags and these aren't the real issue.

The Gov. is smart. Maybe he’s doing it to get all damn liberals who moved there from Commifornia to go back. These idiots leave a high tax liberal state for a better lifestyle and forget why they left in first place and continue voting for the same type of Democraps. This will hopefully cause an exodus and now Florida is probably going to pass a similar law. Ugh! I fell into the political trap. I was told speaking out on social platforms changes minds

[TXSTYLE]

This wasn't meant to be a Political thread whatsoever. There is a reason the Political section got shut down.
Save that bullshit for Facebook. Thanks.

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by Angelo1

....I was told speaking out on social platforms changes minds

I don't think speaking out on social media changes minds as much as it shows the character of the person speaking.

[Nativetexan]

Gonna steer this convo back to the original post…

So a utopian society created by someone who's mega wealthy…hmm…

I mean I'm all for capitalism, but it I find it hard to believe this being made for any reason other than it'll generate income of 10x it's cost…

[x3sm]

I always wondered why this hasn't happened earlier.. build it!

[Angelo_GraysonMiniBMW]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

I don't think speaking out on social media changes minds as much as it shows the character of the person speaking.

Very difficult to judge ones character based on social media platform as well. Without talking to the person face to face, it’s simply a quick biased opinion of a person you’ve never met. . This is the problem with social media platforms. Everyone is “my way or the highway” mentality.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by grocerylist

Unfortunately women don't have a choice in the matter when getting raped and not being allowed to abort a rape-baby is beyond ridiculous. There are also medical situations for women that might warrant an abortion. It's not just about people having unprotected sex and killing an embryo for fun.

Thankfully Governor Abbott is going to magically eliminate all rapists from Texas so rape-babies won't happen anymore.

Pfft what percentage of abortions fall into that category. Weak, surely dozens a year.

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by Angelo1

Very difficult to judge ones character based on social media platform as well. Without talking to the person face to face, it’s simply a quick biased opinion of a person you’ve never met. . This is the problem with social media platforms. Everyone is “my way or the highway” mentality.

You sound like a different guy than the one who wrote the little political rant above!

Frankly its hard not to form an opinion about your character based on your name-calling rant. I'm all for free speech. Carry on. Just be careful because the moderators are pretty firm on the no politics thing.

[2000cs]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

From the original post:

“The mission of Telosa is to create a more equitable, sustainable future. That’s our North Star,” Lore said in a promotional video. “We are going to be the most open, the most fair, and the most inclusive city in the world.”

Those are all political statements. What is amusing is they come from a billionaire who made his fortune in Walmart and e-commerce, the two major retail entities that have destroyed the mom & pop , small-business retail brick and mortar economy. Being a billionaire is hardly an inclusive club. The above statement basically says the current American state of governmental/societal operation is not environmentally sustainable, not inclusive, and not fair, which by definition is a political statement.

TXSTYLE started this post as a political statement regardless of what he said later.

This is why we don’t really need a wealth tax. Billionaires get filled with hubris and do stupid things with their money, heirs do more of it than founders. Great fortunes are lost in a few generations (Vanderbilt is a good example), unless allowed to create everlasting trusts and other death tax avoidance schemes.

[DETRoadster]

Utopian societies are always doomed to fail. They seem to pitch the same thing; equity. But fail to take into account that humans are inherently greedy, selfish, and lazy. The moment one perceives their neighbor doing less but getting the same, the whole thing falls apart.

[Joekerr]

Originally Posted by DETRoadster

Utopian societies are always doomed to fail. They seem to pitch the same thing; equity. But fail to take into account that humans are inherently greedy, selfish, and lazy. The moment one perceives their neighbor doing less but getting the same, the whole thing falls apart.

Agreed. Otherwise, communism would have worked. Its a nice idea. Until you realize you are dealing with humans, not robots, and you factor free will, selfishness, and all the other human factors into the mix.

Utopia for me is heaven. That's where sin is gone. Which is what leads us to fail at any of these sorts of utopian endeavors.

[UncleWede]

If I agree to mow the lawns (with EGo, or even a push) do I get a penthouse?

[Ximian]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Agreed. Otherwise, communism would have worked. Its a nice idea. Until you realize you are dealing with humans, not robots, and you factor free will, selfishness, and all the other human factors into the mix.

Utopia for me is heaven. That's where sin is gone. Which is what leads us to fail at any of these sorts of utopian endeavors.

How would communism ever work when combined with a dictatorship or autocracy? Hypothetically, communism/socialism would work best when combined with a representative democracy. I can't think of a communism example, but there are examples socialist democracies that are still working out pretty well.

I also like how religion always has to be the only way people are good. No other reason to be good except for the fear of some higher power and not getting into heaven. People who hold this opinion are the ones that actually scare me because what they're telling us is as soon as they stop believing, they'll resort to murder, rape, and all sorts of other heinous crimes. Apparently there are no other reasons people choose to be good.

[Ximian]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Agreed, but Humans become greedy and selfish when they think or feel there is no higher power beyond them that directs the universe. When humans believe they are the end of all is when problems start. Humility has a purpose. More people need to discover it in this modern age. Metaphysics should be required study.

Just my opinion.

[DETRoadster]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Agreed, but Humans become greedy and selfish when they think or feel there is no higher power beyond them that directs the universe. When humans believe they are the end of all is when problems start. Humility has a purpose. More people need to discover it in this modern age. Metaphysics should be required study.

Just my opinion.

Ah yes, but what happens when humans believe whole/heartedly in that higher power but can't agree on which higher power belief system is the "right" one?

We will always find a way to screw shit up.

[DETRoadster]

Originally Posted by UncleWede

If I agree to mow the lawns (with EGo, or even a push) do I get a penthouse?

No comrade. You will receive a modest 1 bedroom home, exactly the same as mine. We will all enjoy our homes that are afforded by the fruits of our combined labors. We will be happy; our utopian project mandates it.

[Ximian]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I have a term for your predicament... Maleducated. Communism and Socialism are both economic systems AND political systems that have to be practiced together. Capitalism however, can operate independent of a political system. It is most effective under a democratic political system based on private property rights. There is no political system known as "Capitalism".

You have been taught incorrectly. Unfortunate it is.

You sound like a bitch-ass Yoda.

Sure, let's spend time tying down the argument in semantics. Communism, socialism, democracy, and autocracy are a few political and economic systems. Nobody really talks about democracy as an economic model, but it certainly can be. Some of these are more complete as one system the other. "Political capitalism" is also a political system where instead of the welfare of the people being prioritized, it's the welfare of the businesses that are the priority.

This brings up another point. How about we now refer to it as a "philosophy" instead of "system" as in this case the words are used interchangeably and to also avoid the word "system" implying there is something more involved other than just labelling of ideas. There are no prescribed sets of rules and actions that must be adhered.

Capitalism describes a specific case in an economic philosophy. Big whoop. Capitalism can't survive without a compatible supporting political philosophy just like communism can't either. Congratulations on making my point.

So now we're left with pretending that the differences in these economic and political philosophies are always distinct, have no overlap, and are never mixed when political ideologies favor it. The US has been a capitalist, socialist, representative democracy, with the occasional communist and autocratic flare ups. Because none of those philosophies ever mix.

Private ownership is the main idea supporting capitalism. That means a company owned by a private individual that is taxed at 100% to support social welfare programs is still considered capitalist. Semantics are wonderful.