Announcing the formation of the ATS Curmudgeon Party (Provisional), page 8

reply to post by PurpleChiten

---

I see it's wearing it's hip waders, it'll fit right in with the Curmudgeon party's motto of wading through all the Bull

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by PurpleChiten

---

I see it's wearing it's hip waders, it'll fit right in with the Curmudgeon party's motto of wading through all the Bull

yeah, he's always shouting "Get outa mah barnyard!!!" too :/

Please Stand By......................

reply to post by IpsissimusMagus

---

Thank you I'll send you my address for the food.........what...I've eaten MREs people Spam is good food compared to those.

reply to post by SLAYER69

---

I see the shenanigans have begun

Nice vid

reply to post by nenothtu

---

Before choosing my candidate, you being the first to see my reply to the Platform, I would ask for an addendum, that if a woman makes a mistake, she should be allowed the abortion, but at the same time she should also have her tubes tied in a temporary fashion, this way in the future should she decide to have a child, she can have the process reversed.

Far too many women use abortion as a form of birth control.

In the past I have thought that anyone is entitled to one mistake or accident. That the first abortion should be granted but if it happens again she should then have her tubes tied.

So either way would be fine imo. The problem is that there will be far less cannon fodder for wars in the future, that there will be less money filtered into the system for the abortion industry...

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Before choosing my candidate, you being the first to see my reply to the Platform, I would ask for an addendum, that if a woman makes a mistake, she should be allowed the abortion, but at the same time she should also have her tubes tied in a temporary fashion, this way in the future should she decide to have a child, she can have the process reversed.

Far too many women use abortion as a form of birth control.

In the past I have thought that anyone is entitled to one mistake or accident. That the first abortion should be granted but if it happens again she should then have her tubes tied.

So either way would be fine imo. The problem is that there will be far less cannon fodder for wars in the future, that there will be less money filtered into the system for the abortion industry...

I actually have a younger sister who has been.... not as particular when it comes to activities. She used an IUD to prevent such things from occuring, had it removed when she was ready to start a family and it was very effective for her. If she had become pregnant before she was ready, I would have been supportive if she chose an abortion, in fact, in her case, I would insist on it if at all possible. Not that she would have listened to me, or anyone else.

Although abortion is a very sensitive topic, it is sometimes the most responsible decision that a given party may ever make, depending on who that particular party is. I am very much against it being used as a form of "birth control after the fact", but, due to the various types of individuals that exist in our world, I would support the continued legality of it. I do like your idea of putting a limit on the number of them and taking some type of action if it becomes a "habit".

Your concept of having tubes tied is a very good one, but the same results can be had with the IUD without the incisions and is much easier to reverse. The absoluteness of your method is much greater and there is less of a chance of making a mistake that would leave a small child as a victim of poor judgement, but the effectiveness of the IUD has increased significantly.

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Before choosing my candidate, you being the first to see my reply to the Platform, I would ask for an addendum, that if a woman makes a mistake, she should be allowed the abortion, but at the same time she should also have her tubes tied in a temporary fashion, this way in the future should she decide to have a child, she can have the process reversed.

Well, Antar, the actual platform is that it's none of my business what they do, only that it be done in a fair manner - what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So I would neither prevent nor facilitate them if it were within my purview..

I can see a "mistake" personally, although I can't consider a child to be a "mistake" - the actions resulting in it, however, can be considered a "mistake". I'll give you an example I'm acquainted with. I've known two women who had abortions over what I would call a "mistake". their first mistake was getting involved with a-holes.One was married to him, and the other wasn't, but later GOT married to him for some unfathomable reason. Just compounding the mistake, I reckon.

In both of those cases, the woman WANTED the child, the man didn't, and they allowed him to browbeat them into abortions. That's just as one-sided as a woman taking it upon herself to X out the baby without consulting the father. It takes two to make one, and it ought to be the decision of two to end one, in most cases. I make exception for that in cases of pregnancy resulting from non-consensual sex. In those cases, pappy's got no say, and properly ought not to be able to even speak anyways, through the blinding pain of castration via rusty sardine can lid. But I digress.

Also, in both of those cases, the woman never forgave herself, and carried the pain of that decision the rest of her days - one carried it all the way to the grave. I don't think a single day went by that they didn't think of it.

All because some a-hole couldn't keep it in his pants, and wanted to play without the pay, wanted the fun without the responsibility. There wasn't the slightest bit of "man" about either one of them. So yeah, getting involved with those jokers in the first place was their first mistake.

Sometimes, abortion destroys more than one life.

I could get behind the notion of abortion with the stipulation of forced sterilization if it was a consensual act resulting in the pregnancy. In non-consensual cases, I wouldn't include that requirement, nor would I include it in cases of medical emergency. It's bad enough to have to decide which is to die, knowing that it's going to have to be at least one.

Far too many women use abortion as a form of birth control.

That's a fact. There are cases where it's necessary, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

In the past I have thought that anyone is entitled to one mistake or accident. That the first abortion should be granted but if it happens again she should then have her tubes tied.

Entitled to ONE mistake, if it's going to end a baby. One. There shouldn't be a second chance. Sterilize at the first "mistake", because clearly someone isn't thinking straight enough to be able to bring a life into the world if the sorts of mistakes they make mean having to kill. A reversible option would be great, because people can learn over time.

So either way would be fine imo. The problem is that there will be far less cannon fodder for wars in the future, that there will be less money filtered into the system for the abortion industry...

Even though I'm known far and wide across ATS as a "warmonger", I just can't see the absence of cannon fodder as a problem! people might have to learn to get along if they couldn't throw their children at the "enemy", and had to get out into the trenches themselves.

No, not having enough people to throw a war ain't a bad thing. The rest of us might accidentally get left alone to live in peace then. I sometimes wonder if anyone ever reads all of what I write on the subject. Too many seem to think that I prefer war because I can see some times when it's needed, and entirely miss the parts where I say I'd rather everyone be left alone in peace, because I'm damned tired of fighting.

Simply being able to see that there is an occasional need for it isn't the same as thinking it's the best thing since sliced bread, or thinking every war that comes down the pike is a good thing.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by nenothtu

---

Before choosing my candidate, you being the first to see my reply to the Platform, I would ask for an addendum, that if a woman makes a mistake, she should be allowed the abortion, but at the same time she should also have her tubes tied in a temporary fashion, this way in the future should she decide to have a child, she can have the process reversed.

Well, Antar, the actual platform is that it's none of my business what they do, only that it be done in a fair manner - what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So I would neither prevent nor facilitate them if it were within my purview..

But dude, what if they were doing it on YOUR LAWN???

reply to post by PurpleChiten

---

yeah, there are always options, and it makes me wonder what people are thinking to fail to take advantage of them, and have to have their little "procedure" for lack of forethought.

I was married to my first wife for 8 years. We're talking MARRIED here, not fooling around in the parking lot. During that entire time, I didn't think bringing a kid into the world was a good idea, in part because it wouldn't be fair to the child if daddy got his silly ass capped in some adventure and wasn't around to raise it. So I insisted on birth control. She used a diaphragm for the most part, and it worked. She asked me one time what I'd do if she decided to stop using it, and I said "watch TV". There nothing in this world so urgent that I'd risk disadvantaging a kid just to get a little.

A man that can be led around by his 'nads without thinking ahead just a little can be made to do anything, hasn't got much character, and just ain't much of a man as far as I'm concerned. He might fancy himself to be a "stud-ape", but I don't think I can count the number of "stud-apes" I've seen laid low because their thinkers aren't in working order.

reply to post by PurpleChiten

---

Good idea, my Mom had one and got pregnant through it, we all suffered as she lost my unborn sister from the ordeal.

Responsible accidents do happen. I know it is such a delicate subject and there are always extenuating circumstances.

To do nothing is criminal, but to do something is equally harmful for certain individuals.

It usually comes down to lawsuits, so there would have to be protection put into place with my idea and unfortunately that would hurt those who are abused by this system which is as close to eugenics as it gets in the 21st century.

Eugenics without permanency.

reply to post by antar

---

I know eugenics is a bit of a hot topic that everyone avoids like the plague, but I can see some merits in it... as long as I'm the one who gets to decide

We MUST act now! ... before it's too late!!

There's a new party on the block. The Undeclared Party. I kinda wished him good luck...ahem.

2012 Election RIGGED
  Posted 8 days ago with 56 member flags

Attention Right Wing Bashers
  Posted 10 days ago with 48 member flags

Ron Paul to only get video tribute at the RNC.
  Posted 18 days ago with 32 member flags

SMH - Ron Paul supporters equated to Nazis and drug dealers (Ridiculous)
  Posted 18 days ago with 22 member flags

Busted... Republican woman in Obama ad has been a registered Democrat since 2006
  Posted 16 days ago with 19 member flags

Paul Ryan: Rape is just another ‘method of conception’
  Posted 17 days ago with 19 member flags

Bob is a RACIST (because he does not agree with Obama\'s policies)
  Posted 15 days ago with 12 member flags

Deocrats have been in charge since 2006, so why is nearly every thread/News story about GOP?
  Posted 11 days ago with 5 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: