In August 1996, Bill Clinton stated that abortion should be Safe, Legal and Rare.
Medically, it's about as safe as it can be. It's been legal for 41 years. The only way for us to be sure that it's rare is to keep full and accurate records.
"No sales tax, right?" private sellers don't charge sales tax either so there's pretty much a one to one relationship between background checks and sales tax.
What part of the constitution allows parents to compel their children not to get vaccinated (or to get vaccinated, for that matter)? If we're going to talk about this in terms of individual freedom, shouldn't we consider the individuals actually affected?
The Tenth Amendment.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
I immunized my children because it was the best way to protect them. There may be the added benefit that they will be less likely to infect your immune compromised granny with some communicable disease but that was and is not my primary motivation.
So, why isn't it your friend's sibling's fault for failing to get a booster vaccination?
I have and will most likely continue to vaccinate my children because I prefer the tradeoff of that risk over the other but it's everyone's choice. The primary responsibility of the parent is to the well being of the child, not to the society. I spend a lot of resources on my own offspring and not on the offspring of everyone else. It's in my and my offspring's best interest for me to do that even if it's not necessarily in society's.
Herd immunity is less important to me than keeping my kids from being crippled by polio.
You don't loathe government intervention, you loathe government intervention against you.
An unfortunate consequence of freedom is that some people will make stupid decisions. In order to make your Stalinist proposal work (it's one thing to pass an oppressive law, it's something entirely different to enforce it), our society would need to agree the several underlying principles of freedom no longer matter. I'll illustrate with rhetorical questions as I go along...
First world be autonomy and freedom of choice. Do you begin mandating influenza vaccines for adults because you deem the benefit of herd immunity to be more important than the agency of free adults?
What do you do if someone flat out refuses to vaccinate their children for whatever reason? Send men with guns and run the very real risk of killing the child that you seek to protect with vaccination? What if that family resists? What if they fight back?
Another issue that would be brought about by mandatory vaccination is that the financial pressure on vaccine makers would reward sloppy QA practices.
I am a father. I vaccinated all of my children because it is my belief that the miniscule chance of a complication is outweighed by the effects of measles, mumps, pertussis, chicken pox and polio but that was my decision to make, not yours.
When you hear one of the paranoids on TV railing about the threat of oppressive government, they're talking about people like you and what you'd do if you had access to the reigns of power.
The power structure in many cities takes great delight in the fact that not only were they able to poop in the punch bowl but that they have the ability to force the partygoers to drink from that bowl.
Along comes Google or some other tech company who sets up a competing transportation for their friends to travel to a smaller party with a poop free punch bowl. Sure, maybe the music isn't as good at the smaller party but you can pay to get into the big party, dance to the music, meet the girls and when you're thirsty, Google gives you a ride to another party with untainted punch.
Now, the assholes who pooped in the punch bowl at the first party are crying foul.
No, Google is providing a useful service that wouldn't have been necessary if no one had pooped in the punch bowl in the first place.
The tax revenue it needs... For what? To meet the needs of their residents?
THAT'S WHAT LOCAL INCOME TAXES ARE FOR!
The fact is that locating the business outside of the city means that the business has less impact on the city's resources.
It's funny, here where I live, the city is always complaining that suburbanites don't pay their fair share of the tax burden because many of us work in the city but live in the suburbs.
Basically, what you have are corrupt city institutions who demand more resources than are available to them so instead of being honest they have to scapegoat.
What we have here is a bully crying because his intended target won't come into the area where he has claimed dominion.
Excellent choice. You had been scheduled to be the parents of the world's next Hitler but your decision to not procreate will spare untold misery and suffering. #Deity
Basically, some things in life are enormous responsibilities that you should face with your eyes open. If you think that you shouldn't have children or own a gun or fly a plane, you're probably right.
It's more likely that if you "have" to use a weapon, you already failed at something else that would have precluded the use, or threat, of force in the first place.
Quite true. However, sometimes the thing that was failed was the attempt to convince someone else that you are sincere about being left alone.
Yes. There would have been several differences between Gore and Bush. Gore would not have restored the Mexico City policy, Bush did. Gore would have pushed to make the Clinton Gun Ban permanent, it was allowed to lapse under Bush. Gore would not have cut marginal tax rates, Bush did. Gore would have not been able to muster support to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush was.
Slashdot Mirror
I would support that wholeheartedly.
I would also support a 7 day "Cooling Off Period" between scheduling and obtaining an abortion.
LK
I have a great reason.
To fulfill Bill Clinton's vision.
In August 1996, Bill Clinton stated that abortion should be Safe, Legal and Rare.
Medically, it's about as safe as it can be. It's been legal for 41 years. The only way for us to be sure that it's rare is to keep full and accurate records.
LK
Pride, when poked becomes petty.
Another question that works just as well is
"No sales tax, right?" private sellers don't charge sales tax either so there's pretty much a one to one relationship between background checks and sales tax.
Solves your dilemma, right?
LK
That's not necessarily true.
I can pass a background check. I have passed a lot of them.
I still understand how someone could like the idea of the government not having a record that they own a gun.
BTW, that's what opposition to "Universe Background Checks" is about. It would create a backdoor registry.
LK
Well yes, Captain Obvious. Facebook would be within its rights to block firearm discussions, included in that would be sales.
Do you think they want to open that can of worms?
They have to do a little math. Will they lose more users by keeping the current policy or by imposing a new one?
This isn't just Zuckerberg's plaything anymore. There are investors to whom they must answer.
LK
If it were illicit, yes that would be stupid.
These sales are usually some guy selling his SKS to get enough money to buy a new-to-him Mauser or something like that.
LK
Liberals find every black person terrifying if they are not actively pandering to said black person at that moment.
LK (A big black guy)
What part of the constitution allows parents to compel their children not to get vaccinated (or to get vaccinated, for that matter)? If we're going to talk about this in terms of individual freedom, shouldn't we consider the individuals actually affected?
The Tenth Amendment.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Any other questions?
LK
You are missing my point.
I immunized my children because it was the best way to protect them. There may be the added benefit that they will be less likely to infect your immune compromised granny with some communicable disease but that was and is not my primary motivation.
LK
So, why isn't it your friend's sibling's fault for failing to get a booster vaccination?
I have and will most likely continue to vaccinate my children because I prefer the tradeoff of that risk over the other but it's everyone's choice. The primary responsibility of the parent is to the well being of the child, not to the society. I spend a lot of resources on my own offspring and not on the offspring of everyone else. It's in my and my offspring's best interest for me to do that even if it's not necessarily in society's.
Herd immunity is less important to me than keeping my kids from being crippled by polio.
LK
Was your friend's sibling vaccinated?
LK
You are a fucking moron and a hypocrite.
You don't loathe government intervention, you loathe government intervention against you.
An unfortunate consequence of freedom is that some people will make stupid decisions. In order to make your Stalinist proposal work (it's one thing to pass an oppressive law, it's something entirely different to enforce it), our society would need to agree the several underlying principles of freedom no longer matter. I'll illustrate with rhetorical questions as I go along...
First world be autonomy and freedom of choice.
Do you begin mandating influenza vaccines for adults because you deem the benefit of herd immunity to be more important than the agency of free adults?
What do you do if someone flat out refuses to vaccinate their children for whatever reason?
Send men with guns and run the very real risk of killing the child that you seek to protect with vaccination?
What if that family resists? What if they fight back?
Another issue that would be brought about by mandatory vaccination is that the financial pressure on vaccine makers would reward sloppy QA practices.
I am a father. I vaccinated all of my children because it is my belief that the miniscule chance of a complication is outweighed by the effects of measles, mumps, pertussis, chicken pox and polio but that was my decision to make, not yours.
When you hear one of the paranoids on TV railing about the threat of oppressive government, they're talking about people like you and what you'd do if you had access to the reigns of power.
LK
What did you eat off of your foot in this video?
LK
The power structure in many cities takes great delight in the fact that not only were they able to poop in the punch bowl but that they have the ability to force the partygoers to drink from that bowl.
Along comes Google or some other tech company who sets up a competing transportation for their friends to travel to a smaller party with a poop free punch bowl. Sure, maybe the music isn't as good at the smaller party but you can pay to get into the big party, dance to the music, meet the girls and when you're thirsty, Google gives you a ride to another party with untainted punch.
Now, the assholes who pooped in the punch bowl at the first party are crying foul.
No, Google is providing a useful service that wouldn't have been necessary if no one had pooped in the punch bowl in the first place.
LK
The tax revenue it needs. .. For what? To meet the needs of their residents?
THAT'S WHAT LOCAL INCOME TAXES ARE FOR!
The fact is that locating the business outside of the city means that the business has less impact on the city's resources.
It's funny, here where I live, the city is always complaining that suburbanites don't pay their fair share of the tax burden because many of us work in the city but live in the suburbs.
Basically, what you have are corrupt city institutions who demand more resources than are available to them so instead of being honest they have to scapegoat.
What we have here is a bully crying because his intended target won't come into the area where he has claimed dominion.
LK
So Cleveland won. They didn't give an inch and lost a mile.
Eventually, this pattern will repeat enough times and they'll learn the lesson but by then it'll be too late.
LK
Consider this alternative.
#Deity
Basically, some things in life are enormous responsibilities that you should face with your eyes open. If you think that you shouldn't have children or own a gun or fly a plane, you're probably right.
LK
It's more likely that if you "have" to use a weapon, you already failed at something else that would have precluded the use, or threat, of force in the first place.
Quite true. However, sometimes the thing that was failed was the attempt to convince someone else that you are sincere about being left alone.
LK
I'll think about mailing a check as soon as the snow around my mailbox melts.
LK
Which is precisely the fucking point. Both parties are NOT identical.
LK
He has managed to acquire degrees from Harvard and Yale.
How about you?
LK
The issue of incorrect disenfranchisement is certainly a valid concern.
The rest are nonsensical.
After all, the people of the state supported Jeb Bush, why not George? That same phenomenon is the foundation for Hillary Clinton's political career.
LK
Yes. There would have been several differences between Gore and Bush. Gore would not have restored the Mexico City policy, Bush did. Gore would have pushed to make the Clinton Gun Ban permanent, it was allowed to lapse under Bush. Gore would not have cut marginal tax rates, Bush did. Gore would have not been able to muster support to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush was.
LK
I'm unsure of what you mean by "open voting".
LK