This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
yukonjack
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19207276
Oh Noes! Hope everybody is safe.
For Wowhead's coverage look here
http://www.wowhead.com/forums&topic=205372
Post by
gamerunknown
You present a false dichotomy fallacy.
You're right, I'm sorry. I retract the argument.
Post by
MyTie
Romney picks Ryan for VP.
Post by
FatalHeaven
Romney picks Ryan for VP.
Paul Ryans Idea for Medicare...
So let me get this straight. I pay my taxes just like everyone else. Just like those who get medicare now. In fact based on tax increases over the course of time, I actually pay more than those recieving it now did in thier time. But with Mr. Ryan's reform, instead of giving me the medicare I have been paying into/for, they are going to give me some undetermined amount of money (funny how he won't say what that amount is) in which I can either pay for private insurance or use it to pay for
part of
traditional medicare. Part of. Well hell, than I want my past taxes for medicare back and I will just fend for myself!
And it seems America agrees by majority.
In February, the Kaiser Family Foundation polled Americans on competing ideas about Medicare. The poll found 70% agreed that “Medicare should continue as it is today, with the government guaranteeing seniors health insurance and making sure that everyone gets the same defined set of benefits.”
Only 25% agreed that “Medicare should be changed"
Even among Republicans, 53% said they would prefer to keep Medicare as it is currently structured, rather than move toward a defined contribution model.
Now I'm not saying that changes to Medicare don't necessarily need to be made, but not guaranteeing our generation full health insurance is whack. Honestly, I'd be more in favor of a slight tax increase and keeping my guaranteed coverage than to keep paying what I pay now and still have to pay more later.
Post by
Magician22773
Fatal,
The problem is, the current system is broke.....both
broken
, and flat
broke
. It is wrong that we will have paid our entire working lives for a "service", and it likely will not be there when we are old enough to collect it.
When the 2 largest social welfare programs were designed, they had no idea what the future would hold. Life expectancy was shorter, and medical costs were much, much lower. No one ever dreamed that people would be collecting social security for 25-30 years or more. And no one dreamed that there would be drugs and procedures that would cost tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I personally have enough faith in the United States, that I do not believe for 1 second that their intention is to "throw granny over the cliff", as many Liberals want us to believe. But the current system needs to be overhauled to meet modern lifespans, and modern medicine.
Sadly, since their inception, Social Security and Medicare have been used as political tools. Any attempt at "reform" is blasted by the other side as "gutting" or "slashing", when in fact, if something isn't changed, the programs will simply cease to exist due to no funding. Then, granny does get tossed over the cliff.
Post by
Azazel
This should be interesting...
Pregnant teen dies after abortion ban delays her chemo treatment for leukemia.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
I just found this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19319240
I'm honestly shocked that somebody with these attitudes towards rape is considered suitable as a political candidate. "legitimate rape"? "In 2011, he co-sponsored a controversial bill that would have limited the government help available to women seeking abortions in the case of rape to cases of "forcible rape". As opposed to what, exactly?
Rape is rape is rape. I can understand his position on abortion, but I don't think he understands the concept of rape. I know both men and women who have been raped. I've seen the long term results.
I live in Missouri, and this is a horrible "misspeak" by a candidate. And worse yet, this race has serious implications for our entire government.
McCaskil (his opponent), has been a horrible senator, from a conservative point of view. This year was the best chance we had of getting her out, and getting a conservative senator in. It also was a race that was all but guaranteed to give the Republicans an additional seat in the Senate. With the possibility of Obama somehow getting re-elected, gaining control of both houses of Congress is probably just as important, if not more important, than winning the Presidency.
Being Pro-Life myself, I understand his position here. Rape is a horrible crime, and I can fully understand while a woman that was raped would not want a child conceived in such a horrible manner. But I also do not think "two wrongs make a right". Murdering the innocent unborn child does not undo the horrible crime that was committed.
Akin's mistake was trying to use some goofy "pseudo-science" to bolster his Pro-Life stance, and he screwed up royally. And, unless something is done about it, his ignorance will have very far reaching consequences.
IMHO, he needs to withdraw from the race, and allow the candidate that came in a close 2nd to him in the primary, John Bruner, to take over. This wasn't a small mistake, it was a huge moment of ignorance, in a very important campaign. And no matter what he says from here, this will be used against him, over and over and over, and will most likely cost him the election.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
Edit: Sorry Magician, you are not "Pro Life". You are in favour of the death penalty, and see nothing wrong with hunting. You are, however, against abortion. A nitpick, I know, but an important one. Just say "against abortion" instead; it's simpler, and less misleading.
Do you mind applying the same reasoning to "Pro-Choice" advocates calling themselves "for child murder"?
If so, I have no problem changing my semantics, if they change theirs.
Post by
yukonjack
Edit: Sorry Magician, you are not "Pro Life". You are in favour of the death penalty, and see nothing wrong with hunting. You are, however, against abortion. A nitpick, I know, but an important one. Just say "against abortion" instead; it's simpler, and less misleading.
Do you mind applying the same reasoning to "Pro-Choice" advocates calling themselves "for child murder"?
If so, I have no problem changing my semantics, if they change theirs.
Oh so that's what that means and all this time I thought choice meant to choose.
As for this guy:
I just found this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19319240
I'm honestly shocked that somebody with these attitudes towards rape is considered suitable as a political candidate. "legitimate rape"? "In 2011, he co-sponsored a controversial bill that would have limited the government help available to women seeking abortions in the case of rape to cases of "forcible rape". As opposed to what, exactly?
all I can say is while his comments in this particular interview are astonishingly idiotic and I certainly don't agree with his views maybe he really did misspeak.
At least I hope that's what happened, it scares me to think a man in such a position would really think that way.
Post by
Adamsm
Yeah it's off topic, but so what: I do find it 'amusing' in a sick sad way that while they go on and on about abortion being murder,
the whole anti-abortion violence
thing is just swept under the rug for the most part. But I guess the doctors, nurses and workers at the offices rate lower on the scale then the poor little babies.
Edit: Also, I find it very amusing that a lot of people say they don't want the government intruding on their lives, putting in 'unfair' laws and the like....well, I feel the same way, only about the religious groups out there that try to push their 'well meaning and joyous' religion into my face.
Post by
Magician22773
Edit: Also, I find it very amusing that a lot of people say they don't want the government intruding on their lives, putting in 'unfair' laws and the like....well, I feel the same way, only about the religious groups out there that try to push their 'well meaning and joyous' religion into my face.
I find it amusing that someone who's
'religion'
is based on a creed to do no harm, has no problem with just tossing a random insult to religious groups out there.
Really Adamsm.....where did that edit come from? Please quote where someone,
anyone
, tossed
anything
in your face, during the recent discussion. Or do you just harbor that much angst against Christians that you have to bring it up whenever possible because they reject you and your pagan Goddess?
Post by
Adamsm
The edit itself is due to the anti-abortion violence and other things that have popped up as the more extreme members of Pro-Lifers do their best to remove any choice from anyone else, whether they believe in the same ideals as them or not; such as these
things
.
And honesty Magician, yeah I did have problems with Christians and Catholics in high school because of my religious choice; those people sure had no problem with tossing insults and heavy objects at me just because I happened to believe in something different.
And please don't butcher my creed: It's do what you will but harm none. That doesn't mean we are suppose to just suck up and take whatever insults are aimed at us.
Post by
Magician22773
The edit itself is due to the anti-abortion violence and other things that have popped up as the more extreme members of Pro-Lifers do their best to remove any choice from anyone else, whether they believe in the same ideals as them or not; such as these things.
OMG! Those HORRIBLE people, trying to trick innocent unwed teenage mothers into not killing their unborn child. Oh the HUMANITY!.
So, I guess your
creed
Rede, doesn't mind harming unborn children?
Post by
Adamsm
OMG! Those HORRIBLE people, trying to trick innocent unwed teenage mothers into not killing their unborn child. Oh the HUMANITY!. Yes actually; the %^&* they do to those poor kids is horrible, disturbing and that's leaving out the fact that they are pretending to be something they aren't. Also: those horrible people attack the clinics, harass the doctors nurses and workers doing their jobs, and the truly extremist ones bomb and kill the doctors.
As for the fake abortion clinics: What with the whole lie to scared children and the way they treat victims is god awful and those @#$%ing things should be outlawed and anyone find doing some of that crap imprisoned for a long ass time.
So, I guess your creed Rede, doesn't mind harming unborn children?My life is my own, and I don't have a right to intrude on others. I'm also pro-choice, so what those mothers do is completely up to them.
Post by
Magician22773
Yes actually; the %^&* they do to those poor kids is horrible, disturbing and that's leaving out the fact that they are pretending to be something they aren't
The *!@# they do to those poor unborn kids is pretty horrible and disturbing too. I would list what the common methods of abortion are here, but I would be banned in a matter of minutes if I did. And they do it because they can pretend they are not human beings, while they vaccuum them out of the womb.
What with the whole lie to scared children and the way they treat victims is god awful and those @#$%ing things should be outlawed and anyone find doing some of that crap imprisoned for a long ass time.
Lock up the people trying to stop a mother from murdering her child because they don't have ANTI-ABORTION CLINIC on a neon sign out front, but its OK for the "doctors and nurses doing their job"...even though that job includes severing the spinal cord of an unborn child with a pair of scissors? Nice priorites there, Mr. Harm None.
I'm also pro-choice
Sorry Adamsm, you are not "Pro-Choice", you are in favor of the death penalty....for innocent, unborn children. The victim here doesn't exactly have any "Choice" after they are killed by drugs, and then delivered dead.
My life is my own, and I don't have a right to intrude on others
And if that is what the essence of your so called "faith" is, than it is not the practice of peace that you want others to believe it is. It is a practice of self-centered, uncaring, pagan bull$%^&. It is nothing but a method of providing you with a way to distance yourself from any wrongdoing of others. At least my 'fairytale' religion compells me to do what is right, and to witness to others so that they might choose to do the same. Yours just says "meh...do what ye will".
Post by
Adamsm
Edit: No, you know what, someone like you doesn't deserve an answer.
Edit 2: Yes Mods I know you can see what I originally put, and yes it had a statement in it shouldn't have. I apologize for that, but don't regret it.
Post by
Magician22773
Hey, I asked the mods to shut this down 3 hours ago when you fired off an unprovoked, off-topic, unnecessary attack on Christianity, but they had no issue with you bashing my beliefs, so I see no reason why I don't have the same right.
You said it yourself....
That doesn't mean we are suppose to just suck up and take whatever insults are aimed at us.
....and I didn't. All I have done is insult your 'religion' in the same manner you decided to insult mine. So if you want to fire back, feel free. Im a big boy, I can handle it.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.