Brain differences - Liberal vs Conservative

[Admiral_Aeka]

In my opinion conservatives suck!!

cause we pay for your welfare checks right

[[m'kay]]

See, this is why we have issues in America. At this point, the right and the left are constantly at eachother's throats, and it's only going to get worse. The parents are teaching the kids to hate those of the other side, so soon enough Glenn Beck is probably going to look [m'kay] moderate. We almost had a complete government shutdown just because neither side could get their heads out of their asses. [m'kay] hell.

[Duel of Fates]

See, this is why we have issues in America. At this point, the right and the left are constantly at eachother's throats, and it's only going to get worse. The parents are teaching the kids to hate those of the other side, so soon enough Glenn Beck is probably going to look [m'kay] moderate. We almost had a complete government shutdown just because neither side could get their heads out of their asses. [m'kay] hell.

No, we almost had a government shut down because the bills are due and the credit card is maxed out. Both parties are to blame for the current state of the union. Socialism is great until you run out of other people's money.

[Admiral_Aeka]

Socialism is great until you run out of other people's money.

[[m'kay]]

See, this is why we have issues in America. At this point, the right and the left are constantly at eachother's throats, and it's only going to get worse. The parents are teaching the kids to hate those of the other side, so soon enough Glenn Beck is probably going to look [m'kay] moderate. We almost had a complete government shutdown just because neither side could get their heads out of their asses. [m'kay] hell.

Both parties are to blame for the current state of the union.

So... are we agreeing or disagreeing? >_>

[Matt-Chicago]

If you look at the so called UN group on climate change you can see that the "scientists" that are involved in it for the most part aren't even climate scientists. Try looking at what Richard Lintzen has to say on the subject, his credentials are hard to argue with, unlike the guy that headed the UN panel (from India I believe) who has NO background at all. CO2 is a following factor of temperature increases, not a cause. As the temp rises more CO2 is emmited from natural sources, nothing to do with what little we humans add to it. It accounts for .03% of the atmosphere, to lower that a tiny fraction would require us to live like cavemen. Everytime a volcano erupts there is more carbon emmitted than is put out by a country in a year.

As for controlling our lives thru government intervention I'm sure you are totally against the government stopping abortions, or anti-homosexual laws, how about we put some stronger laws against those activiities and see how much you scream about that. When you start to control the tiniest details of our lives like what kind of damn lightbulb we're allowed to use (especially when the replacement is toxic and generally sucks) then it is going way too far. They are already trying to get people into these "smart-meters" which is going to allow them to control what temperature you keep your house at. What else are they going to try to help us control since we are too stupid to do it ourselves? I'm sure sitting in front of hte computer is bad for us so we'd better limit internet usage, too much TV as well, oh how about banning sugary drinks and fatty/salty snacks or just tax the crap out of them. I also find it funny how smoking is so evil, yet they want to legalize pot. If you like the government being in cotrol of your everyday life then try moving to north korea, I'm sure Kim Jong Il would be happy to control your daily life, from what I can see his subjects just love him for it.

LOL! From trying to control our carbon emissions and provide healthy alternatives to junk food we go from America to North Korea in one paragraph.

One recent example discrediting your above sentence: April 8, 2011, R-Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl said that abortion services comprise 90% of Planned Parenthood. Despite the actual numbers being 3% and a spokesman for Sen. Kyl says that his remark was "not intended to be factual a statement.

Just to clarify this... not gonna get into the whole discussion (I have no time to waste on this)

I wanted to point out that if you count a handing a package of condoms over the counter to be the same as administering an abortion (a 2+ hour, sometimes multi-visit ordeal which involves a number of employees) then abortions do indeed comprise 3%. If, however, you take into account the profit and time which each action takes, then abortions are over 90%. (some estimates put them at 97 or even 98%, it depends on how they count the time taken for the 'procedure')

So, whereas advising a customer on the use of contraceptives and handing them 10 packages of condoms would be considered 11 actions (the extra one is for the advice given) an abortion would only be counted as one action. This is where the discrepancy comes from.

jsyk.

Sorry Aeka - 100% wrong, everything you said. Abortions are 3% of REVENUE not of procedures.
Side note, I currently have no kids in part thanks to Planned Parenthood (check with me in a year and I will probably have one). When I was a teenager that's where my girlfriend got her birth control pills. Some of her friends did get pregnant and one got an abortion - we never had to thanks to PP. If you want to dramatically increase the number of abortions in the US, the best thing you could do would be to block any government funded insurance from covering ANYTHING at Planned Parenthood, which is what Republicans were trying to do in the recent near shutdown. PP could care less about the tiny federal funding they get as a non profit organization, but it would be catastrophic if anyone with medicaid or subsidized insurance couldn't use any PP service just because of an ideological vendetta because of one particular service they provide.

[Admiral_Aeka]

Sorry Aeka - 100% wrong, everything you said. Abortions are 3% of REVENUE not of procedures.
Side note, I currently have no kids in part thanks to Planned Parenthood (check with me in a year and I will probably have one). When I was a teenager that's where my girlfriend got her birth control pills. Some of her friends did get pregnant and one got an abortion - we never had to thanks to PP. If you want to dramatically increase the number of abortions in the US, the best thing you could do would be to block any government funded insurance from covering ANYTHING at Planned Parenthood, which is what Republicans were trying to do in the recent near shutdown. PP could care less about the tiny federal funding they get as a non profit organization, but it would be catastrophic if anyone with medicaid or subsidized insurance couldn't use any PP service just because of an ideological vendetta because of one particular service they provide.

k. Where does the rest of the revenue come from?

Even if Abortions are indeed only 3% of revenue as you say, do you still count handing a package of condoms over a counter to have the same value (a single 'action') as an abortion?

As for "tiny federal funding"... PP recieved $363 million in Government funds, and reported a profit of $63 million over one fiscal year. Their total income was $1,017 million or 1.017 billion. THUS, over 1/3 of their income came directly out of our (this includes mine) tax dollars. They would have been $300 million in debt without the $$ from taxes. Just wondering if this still fits your definition of "tiny."

also, with respect to the clause "as a non-profit organization" I'd like to point out that this isn't the reason that they receive money... for example, the Right to Life coalition in my area receives no federal funding, and they as well are a registered non-profit organization

[Duel of Fates]

That's a lot of condoms.

[Mandalore]

there is probably 0% chance anyone's mind is going to be changed in this thread.

You said it Matt, it's pointless and that's why I would never debate anything like this with American Conservatives. They simply don't like any idea, proposal or law that might in some why change their life style even in the smallest way. And solely relay on a blame culture, if it's not a liberal it's anther bogey man that's out to get them.

Quite the condescending attitude you have there. Must be rough for you when you constantly interject into the conversation with nothing much to add, other than your supposed disdain for American Conservatives.


Hey Yan, a few things that you seem to have taken the wrong way. First, pretty much all of us can agree that climate is changing. That is it's nature. It has done so far longer than humans have learned to wipe their butts. By saying that conservatives do not admit to the change is erroneous. What we dispute is the politics behind the "science".

Look, an example of what I am getting at: When I was growing up, in the 70's, the scuttlebutt was that the Earth was in for a new ice age. Many reputable scientists backed this theory and put long hours and research into it. By looking at all the data, ice core samples, fossil records, geological evidence, etc, etc, they backed away from that particular theory. They didn't throw out data that didn't fit their theory, they looked at the whole and decided, oops, maybe we were wrong. No harm, no foul.

Now we have tainted "scientists" pushing a theory of global warming? Tainted by politics, and egos. They disregard data to prove that their theory is correct. That isn't their job. And it is not the Scientific Method I was taught, oh so many years ago. And that makes for bad science. Plus you have the liberal popular media with the Al Gore out front, pushing the idea for Global Warming in order to scare the folks into spending money on ways to solve it before we become Venus.

Now I am all for clean living. I live, hunt, play and hike the woods of Northern Wisconsin, some of the prettiest forest lands in the world. I don't like seeing garbage, or junk, or chemicals being tossed into rivers or streams, lakes or ponds. It is irresponsible. I help keep it clean because I like to keep it clean for my kids and their kids to enjoy. Not because some hack politician who uses 4 times the amount of energy I do in a year, says I need to. I have to reduce my carbon footprint because Al Gore tells me to? Kiss my ass Al.

So please stop painting everyone who disagrees with popular media as dumbass hicks who don't want to admit the world aint flat.


Cheers.

While I'm no scientist the clear procession of events would be as follows(at least in my exhausted mind): CO2 Increase>Temperature Increase>Melting of Global Ice Caps>World Wide decrease in temperature>Possible "ice age"

[haasd0gg]

In my opinion conservatives suck!!

Why is that?