(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

Or, taken another way, minimal impact in eliminating a truly barbaric and uncivilized practice. I'd have them available for life/death and major quality of life issues even late in term, but that would be subject to very stringent controls. And the big thing I would do is make adoption a much more common alternative. I remember one politician was railing about gay couples adopting. I asked him, "Would you rather the baby be aborted?" He had no answer. And I am well aware that there are many situations where that is in fact the choice.

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

But you are perfectly fine with gun control due to 1%?

(02-16-2020 06:54 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

But you are perfectly fine with gun control due to 1%?

But the murder of 7,000 babies a year is irrelevant.

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

Hmmm. I’m sure there was similar rationalizing going on around Berlin early on in the process back in the day.

We murder viable infants. If you think that’s cool just call it what it is.

(02-16-2020 06:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 03:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would argue that giving government control of wealth, health care, guns, or women is evil. My opposition to abortion is limited to late-term abortion on demand, which strikes me as at least the first cousin of murder, and I would argue that instead of trying to pass draconian laws, the right should focus on making adoption a more attractive option.

Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

Or, taken another way, minimal impact in eliminating a truly barbaric and uncivilized practice. I'd have them available for life/death and major quality of life issues even late in term, but that would be subject to very stringent controls. And the big thing I would do is make adoption a much more common alternative. I remember one politician was railing about gay couples adopting. I asked him, "Would you rather the baby be aborted?" He had no answer. And I am well aware that there are many situations where that is in fact the choice.

I really must be missing this extremely public push to make late term abortions completely legal for anyone under any circumstances. I think there should be a push on both ends of this, to make adoption an easier and more attractive option and educating and providing more access to birth control to help prevent the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies.

This is a little unrelated but not completely. My girlfriend was born in Nigeria and we've discussed having children and one of her big fears is the insanely higher mortality rate for minorities vs white women during childbirth in America. It's scary when you start reading about it. I assumed it was mostly just due to income inequality but according to the CDC

"The PRMR (pregnancy-related mortality rate) for black women with at least a college degree was 5.2 times that of their white counterparts."

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/...eaths.html

My point would be especially as a woman of color there would need to be a pretty amazing incentive for me to want to take the risk of having a child I just was not going to keep.

(02-17-2020 10:02 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  This is a little unrelated but not completely. My girlfriend was born in Nigeria and we've discussed having children and one of her big fears is the insanely higher mortality rate for minorities vs white women during childbirth in America. It's scary when you start reading about it. I assumed it was mostly just due to income inequality but according to the CDC
"The PRMR (pregnancy-related mortality rate) for black women with at least a college degree was 5.2 times that of their white counterparts."
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/...eaths.html
My point would be especially as a woman of color there would need to be a pretty amazing incentive for me to want to take the risk of having a child I just was not going to keep.

I don't think it's "insanely high" in either case. The reported US rates of infant mortality appear to be relatively high compared to other countries, but there is a methodology disconnect in those numbers. The US counts all deaths, starting as soon as the baby comes out of the birth canal. Other countries do not start counting until the first 24, 48, or 72 hours after birth. So a baby who is born and then dies within those time frames counts as an infant death here, but not there.

And I would guess that a big part of the differential is that because of economic resources, probably fewer black women give birth in hospitals where the health care is better and more readily available. As long as you take proper precautions, I wouldn't expect any differential.

(02-16-2020 08:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:54 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

But you are perfectly fine with gun control due to 1%?

But the murder of 7,000 babies a year is irrelevant.

Getting hit in the head by a baseball bat 1% of the year is not so bad, right mensa.

Sound logic.

(02-16-2020 03:05 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 12:25 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Owl#’s simplistic rationale through the years...
Jimmy Carter was evil, Walter Mondale was evil, Michael Dukakis was evil, Bill Clinton was evil, Al Gore was evil, Barack Obama was evil, Hillary Clinton was evil; whoever gets the Democratic nomination will be evil
In the meantime, the Republicans were, and continue to be, graciously stupid.

Obviously, based upon your overly simplistic mischaracterization, you haven't paid attention. Let me clarify.

Jimmy Carter pursued evil policies and was incompetent, Walter Mondale pursued evil policies, Michael Dukakis pursued evil policies, Bill Clinton was a good president (I would put him #2 to Reagan over that time frame), Al Gore pursued evil policies, Barack Obama pursued evil policies, Hillary Clinton pursued evil policies but not to the extent of some of the others (perhaps moderated by Bill); whoever supports massive redistribution of income and wealth, single-payer health care, draconian gun controls, and abortion on demand (including late-term) is evil, which pretty much includes the current democrat field.

Republicans were, and continue to be, both stupid and milquetoast wusses. I disagree with Donald Trump on many things, including the wall and tariffs, but at least he has some backbone.

I think someone who supports concentration of wealth, healthcare for only those who can afford it, gun access for all, and government control of a women’s right to choose to be evil; but then we’ll just have to disagree.

Please explain why the following are evil:

• Concentration of wealth
• Healthcare for only those who can afford it
• Gun access for all
• Government's control of a woman's right to choose
  

And by "explain" I don't mean jabs at somebody else's character. I mean actual reasoned explanations.

To answer the OP, no Bernie cannot save the Dems, but he can blow up the party which would be good for most people. I just hope the Bernie Bros stay home when the Dems steal the primary from him again.

(02-16-2020 12:25 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Jimmy Carter was naive, Walter Mondale was unelectable, Michael Dukakis was clueless , Bill Clinton was entertaining, Al Gore invented the Internet, Barack Obama was smart, Hillary Clinton is a b itch; whoever gets the Democratic nomination will be someone other than Bernie.

In the meantime, the Republicans will hold the Senate, take back The House and Keep The Presidency.

Fixed the statement for you...

Why? The Democrats in four years have done nothing but kick and scream like toddlers throwing tantrums. Instead of dealing with the Bernie problem immediately following the 2016 election, they let his movement continue to gain strength. Instead of offering a strong electable, moderate to unite their party they parade out 25 candidates with one unifying message, We Hate Trump. Beyond that none offer anything of substance.

(02-17-2020 02:16 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 12:25 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Jimmy Carter was naive, Walter Mondale was unelectable, Michael Dukakis was clueless , Bill Clinton was entertaining, Al Gore invented the Internet, Barack Obama was smart, Hillary Clinton is a b itch; whoever gets the Democratic nomination will be someone other than Bernie.

In the meantime, the Republicans will hold the Senate, take back The House and Keep The Presidency.

Fixed the statement for you...

Why? The Democrats in four years have done nothing but kick and scream like toddlers throwing tantrums. Instead of dealing with the Bernie problem immediately following the 2016 election, they let his movement continue to gain strength. Instead of offering a strong electable, moderate to unite their party they parade out 25 candidates with one unifying message, We Hate Trump. Beyond that none offer anything of substance.

If you think selling Bernie voters a better moderate is how you solve "the Bernie problem" then you really don't get it.

(02-17-2020 02:50 PM)Mav Wrote:  

(02-17-2020 02:16 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 12:25 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Jimmy Carter was naive, Walter Mondale was unelectable, Michael Dukakis was clueless , Bill Clinton was entertaining, Al Gore invented the Internet, Barack Obama was smart, Hillary Clinton is a b itch; whoever gets the Democratic nomination will be someone other than Bernie.

In the meantime, the Republicans will hold the Senate, take back The House and Keep The Presidency.

Fixed the statement for you...

Why? The Democrats in four years have done nothing but kick and scream like toddlers throwing tantrums. Instead of dealing with the Bernie problem immediately following the 2016 election, they let his movement continue to gain strength. Instead of offering a strong electable, moderate to unite their party they parade out 25 candidates with one unifying message, We Hate Trump. Beyond that none offer anything of substance.

If you think selling Bernie voters a better moderate is how you solve "the Bernie problem" then you really don't get it.

while I understand that gist, you're not seeing his point...

what he's really saying is those stupid fks went all-in on hill-lair-liar, #henceDJT squashed any version to social center with a macro pragramatic/domestic economic platform, and Perez and the dandy corp. doesn't have a fk'n clue how to combat it...

#layTheFrank

(02-17-2020 10:02 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  This is a little unrelated but not completely. My girlfriend was born in Nigeria and we've discussed having children and one of her big fears is the insanely higher mortality rate for minorities vs white women during childbirth in America. It's scary when you start reading about it. I assumed it was mostly just due to income inequality but according to the CDC

"The PRMR (pregnancy-related mortality rate) for black women with at least a college degree was 5.2 times that of their white counterparts."

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/...eaths.html

My point would be especially as a woman of color there would need to be a pretty amazing incentive for me to want to take the risk of having a child I just was not going to keep.

What is the PMR in Nigeria apples:apples?

This is not a 'go home' comment at all, not remotely, merely a 'how do we compare to what she would have faced before coming here'? Said more simply... is she better or worse off for being 'here'? I can't prove it for certain because of issues like what numbers said (because high percentages of people in Nigeria are born at home)

Did I read the CDC numbers correctly? It implies that the rate for black women WITHOUT a degree is somewhat lower than with?

'For women over the age of 30, PRMR for black and AI/AN women was four to five times higher than it was for white women.'

(4 to 5 vs 5.2)

You're right that it doesn't seem to be related to income or education or many other common things, so what else is going on? Said differently, is she/are you worrying about something that IS an issue, but has nothing to do with being here?

(02-17-2020 10:02 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-16-2020 06:11 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Late term abortions account for 1.3% of all and are most often limited to cases involving the health of the mother or the child.

And your point is?

Hyperbolic outrage over 1% of procedures which typically involve difficult questions of life and death/quality of life issues for the mother/child.

Or, taken another way, minimal impact in eliminating a truly barbaric and uncivilized practice. I'd have them available for life/death and major quality of life issues even late in term, but that would be subject to very stringent controls. And the big thing I would do is make adoption a much more common alternative. I remember one politician was railing about gay couples adopting. I asked him, "Would you rather the baby be aborted?" He had no answer. And I am well aware that there are many situations where that is in fact the choice.

I really must be missing this extremely public push to make late term abortions completely legal for anyone under any circumstances. I think there should be a push on both ends of this, to make adoption an easier and more attractive option and educating and providing more access to birth control to help prevent the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies.

This is a little unrelated but not completely. My girlfriend was born in Nigeria and we've discussed having children and one of her big fears is the insanely higher mortality rate for minorities vs white women during childbirth in America. It's scary when you start reading about it. I assumed it was mostly just due to income inequality but according to the CDC

"The PRMR (pregnancy-related mortality rate) for black women with at least a college degree was 5.2 times that of their white counterparts."

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/...eaths.html

My point would be especially as a woman of color there would need to be a pretty amazing incentive for me to want to take the risk of having a child I just was not going to keep.

My wife is an OBGYN who focuses on Medicaid deliveries. Don’t focus on the mortality rate of the US versus other countries. As Owl Numbers said, different metrics are used. Your gf’s chances of a successful delivery are very high.

(02-17-2020 05:31 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-17-2020 10:02 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  This is a little unrelated but not completely. My girlfriend was born in Nigeria and we've discussed having children and one of her big fears is the insanely higher mortality rate for minorities vs white women during childbirth in America. It's scary when you start reading about it. I assumed it was mostly just due to income inequality but according to the CDC

"The PRMR (pregnancy-related mortality rate) for black women with at least a college degree was 5.2 times that of their white counterparts."

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/...eaths.html

My point would be especially as a woman of color there would need to be a pretty amazing incentive for me to want to take the risk of having a child I just was not going to keep.

What is the PMR in Nigeria apples:apples?

This is not a 'go home' comment at all, not remotely, merely a 'how do we compare to what she would have faced before coming here'? Said more simply... is she better or worse off for being 'here'? I can't prove it for certain because of issues like what numbers said (because high percentages of people in Nigeria are born at home)

Did I read the CDC numbers correctly? It implies that the rate for black women WITHOUT a degree is somewhat lower than with?

'For women over the age of 30, PRMR for black and AI/AN women was four to five times higher than it was for white women.'

(4 to 5 vs 5.2)

You're right that it doesn't seem to be related to income or education or many other common things, so what else is going on? Said differently, is she/are you worrying about something that IS an issue, but has nothing to do with being here?

Oh by no means did I take the beginning of your comment as a go-home type thing.

I kinda derailed the thread a little bit, and I could derail it even more with my disgust over the new travel ban with Nigeria.