Jump to content

A questior for Enlightened since you claim to be social liberal


stevenash

Recommended Posts

Do you find anything hypocritical about the left, when it comes to abortion, insisting that a woman has the right to do with her body as she wishes and simultaenously being vociferously insistent on requiring vaccinations? ( for the record, I support vaccinations)

Two different categories. Abortion affects three people (mother, father, and potential child). Vaccinations, more specifically the lack of vaccinations, affect the entire country.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel comfortable comparing abortion to vaccines. Here's my stances on both - interpret it how you want

Abortion - Not a big fan of it.. But sometimes it's probably the best option (rape, birth defects, extremely low IQ parents)

Vaccines - I support vaccinations. I'm not sure how I feel about forced vaccinations. I do believe they should be required if you let your kid go to public schools, daycare, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel comfortable comparing abortion to vaccines. Here's my stances on both - interpret it how you want

Abortion - Not a big fan of it.. But sometimes it's probably the best option (rape, birth defects, extremely low IQ parents)

Vaccines - I support vaccinations. I'm not sure how I feel about forced vaccinations. I do believe they should be required if you let your kid go to public schools, daycare, etc.

 

You just wiped out 80% of the population :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skins- if its the governments job to protect the people, I would ask you a couple of more questions:  Should all people be forced to get the flu vaccine?   I think we all know that salt and sugar are both bad for you-should the government have a say in whether you can consume these items or a say on how much one can have? Should the government protect people ( save their lives) by making laws/rules/regulations against obesity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skins- if its the governments job to protect the people, I would ask you a couple of more questions: Should all people be forced to get the flu vaccine? I think we all know that salt and sugar are both bad for you-should the government have a say in whether you can consume these items or a say on how much one can have? Should the government protect people ( save their lives) by making laws/rules/regulations against obesity?

The people is different than the person.

The flu shot I'm for, especially in public schools and the like. If you don't get the flu shot you could very well get me and anybody else sick.

None of the other stuff have anything to do with the people, you being obese does not affect me in any way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skins- if its the governments job to protect the people, I would ask you a couple of more questions:  Should all people be forced to get the flu vaccine?   I think we all know that salt and sugar are both bad for you-should the government have a say in whether you can consume these items or a say on how much one can have? Should the government protect people ( save their lives) by making laws/rules/regulations against obesity?

Flu and obesity not comparable IMO. Being around an obese person cant kill me but being around someone with the flu can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think men should have an "opt out" clause where they don't have to pay child support, but they have 30 days after birth to declare it. Obviously this situation would be for one night stand type pregnancies where the two mates are obviously not going to work out. No child support = no visitation either, if one day ole Johnny decides to re enter the kids life.

Or if one of these crazy women lie about being on the pill. Men get the shaft in family courts hard.. Someone make a topic on this lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think men should have an "opt out" clause where they don't have to pay child support, but they have 30 days after birth to declare it. Obviously this situation would be for one night stand type pregnancies where the two mates are obviously not going to work out. No child support = no visitation either, if one day ole Johnny decides to re enter the kids life.

Or if one of these crazy women lie about being on the pill. Men get the shaft in family courts hard.. Someone make a topic on this lol

 

We need a pill........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
    • This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up   GCCISD paid a firm called PASA to compile this report ahead of them closing/consolidating some schools and redrawing attendance zones.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...