Roe v Wade Overturned

Canugghead

https://twitter.com/JoJoFromJerz/status/1548400959130202115?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/RexChapman/status/1548457429616103424?s=20&t=vSez8NEKpeE0Jnlem3FZ7A

The Master.

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/jasonselvig/status/1548743299531476996?s=20&t=36sQhikXO-td5zg3T2cASw

fishlessman

JohnInCarolina said:

dmchicago said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

dmchicago said:

No Ozzie_Isaac said:

Thanks. I’m on it. 

DMChicago: "do not threaten me with a good time" 

I wonder how much traction a "what are you smoking now" thread would generate?

You might have to choose a different word if you want the kind of smoke that I think you want, at least on a bbq forum.  Of course with the OP I guess you could make that clear.                                 I got a girl high when I was 13. Became my first serious girlfriend

fishlessman

fishlessman said:

JohnInCarolina said:

dmchicago said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

dmchicago said:

No Ozzie_Isaac said:

Thanks. I’m on it. 

DMChicago: "do not threaten me with a good time" 

I wonder how much traction a "what are you smoking now" thread would generate?

You might have to choose a different word if you want the kind of smoke that I think you want, at least on a bbq forum.  Of course with the OP I guess you could make that clear.                                 I got a girl high when I was 13. Became my first serious girlfriend

On oregano

JohnInCarolina

fishlessman said:

fishlessman said:

JohnInCarolina said:

dmchicago said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

dmchicago said:

No Ozzie_Isaac said:

Thanks. I’m on it. 

DMChicago: "do not threaten me with a good time" 

I wonder how much traction a "what are you smoking now" thread would generate?

You might have to choose a different word if you want the kind of smoke that I think you want, at least on a bbq forum.  Of course with the OP I guess you could make that clear.                                 I got a girl high when I was 13. Became my first serious girlfriend

On oregano

Why does none of that surprise me?

HeavyG

https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1549047742940340225

fishlessman

JohnInCarolina said:

fishlessman said:

fishlessman said:

JohnInCarolina said:

dmchicago said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

dmchicago said:

No Ozzie_Isaac said:

Thanks. I’m on it. 

DMChicago: "do not threaten me with a good time" 

I wonder how much traction a "what are you smoking now" thread would generate?

You might have to choose a different word if you want the kind of smoke that I think you want, at least on a bbq forum.  Of course with the OP I guess you could make that clear.                                 I got a girl high when I was 13. Became my first serious girlfriend

On oregano

Why does none of that surprise me?

you might want to give youre daughter the speech about the evils of oregano and 13 year old boys......my girlfriend had her learners permit at the time

HeavyG

https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1549167714283003907

JohnInCarolina

HeavyG said:

https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1549167714283003907

Thankfully that won’t go anywhere in NC.  Cooper is the governor and the Republicans do not have a veto-proof majority.

HeavyG

True. For now.

JohnEggGio

@FarmingPhD Thank you for your courage.  It was quite heartening to read your posts.  I, too, believe life begins at conception, unborn children are worthy of protection, and as abhorrent as rape and incest are, the circumstances of his/her conception is not the fault of the unborn child. It all boils down to opinions over when life begins and the value placed on that life.  The worth of that life should not be a function of the relative convenience of its arrival, nor of the circumstances of its conception. 

JohnInCarolina

Ozzie_Isaac

I keep expecting this to just go away.  In my mind it us such a clear issue.

However, I have begun to run into actual real breathing people who applaud all this contraction of rights.  Removing contraceptives?  I am absolutely dumbfounded.  Basically, they only approve of abstinence.  I keep checking my calendar to confirm it is 2022.  I wonder what 2023 will bring?  Everyone keeps saying, "it can't possibly get worse" .... and then humans keep humaning.

nolaegghead

Sad.  The current population trajectory is unsustainable.  We need every tool in the box to reduce the human population.  Or we will eventually all perish.  Dumb f*cks.

paqman

paqman

Canugghead

paqman said:

Careful what you wish for, back in the day I'd seen yolks no longer round 🐣

Ozzie_Isaac

Reading a book now, kind of a YA SciFi novel, but it is by Neal Schustermen who seems to focus on death, society, and taking thoughts to extremes.  The book is "Unwind".

The premise is:. From conception to the birth no abortions are allowed.  From 0 - 13 kids have an opportunity to learn, grow, and develop their skills.  From the age of 13 - 18 parents or the state may retroactively abort a child.  They are "unwound".  Their bodies are harvested and all the organs, limbs, etc are used to help others.  Society sees this as them living on in a separated state so they are not really dead.  The story follows a group of kids who were selected for unwinding due to different circumstances.

1. Typical bad kid who appears to be a drag on society.
2. Kid who is a ward of the state, but at 13 didn't display any astounding skill or talent and must be "unwound" because legally the state is required to make room for all the 0-13 year olds who didn't get adopted, and funding is tight.
3. An incredibly talented 13 year old from a wealthy, but religious family.  He is "tithed" to the Church.  As the 10th child his parents knew from conception they would have him unwound at 13.

Interesting book that seems outlandish, but really ties in with a lot going on today.

Gulfcoastguy

Ozzie_Isaac said:

Reading a book now, kind of a YA SciFi novel, but it is by Neal Schustermen who seems to focus on death, society, and taking thoughts to extremes.  The book is "Unwind".

The premise is:. From conception to the birth no abortions are allowed.  From 0 - 13 kids have an opportunity to learn, grow, and develop their skills.  From the age of 13 - 18 parents or the state may retroactively abort a child.  They are "unwound".  Their bodies are harvested and all the organs, limbs, etc are used to help others.  Society sees this as them living on in a separated state so they are not really dead.  The story follows a group of kids who were selected for unwinding due to different circumstances.

1. Typical bad kid who appears to be a drag on society.
2. Kid who is a ward of the state, but at 13 didn't display any astounding skill or talent and must be "unwound" because legally the state is required to make room for all the 0-13 year olds who didn't get adopted, and funding is tight.
3. An incredibly talented 13 year old from a wealthy, but religious family.  He is "tithed" to the Church.  As the 10th child his parents knew from conception they would have him unwound at 13.

Interesting book that seems outlandish, but really ties in with a lot going on today.

Seems similar to that SciFi movie from the late 70’s where the main character is a Sandman, Logan’s Run . As a Sandman he kills everyone who ages out, at 31 in the book and at 30 in the movie. 

In a slightly related subject I was at Booksamillion recently. They have a display of banned books that would disturb most people, 1984, Katzen Mausen, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Clockwork Orange, Catch 22. It seems to be a mix of books banned by the right and books banned by the left.

Legume

I never realized Logan’s Run had a plot, just Farrah.

JohnInCarolina

I don't think we should be banning any books.   Let people read them and draw their own conclusions, or educate them about what's in the books and why.

Gulfcoastguy

JohnInCarolina said:

I don't think we should be banning any books.   Let people read them and draw their own conclusions, or educate them about what's in the books and why.

That extends to other media also.

JohnInCarolina

Gulfcoastguy said:

JohnInCarolina said:

I don't think we should be banning any books.   Let people read them and draw their own conclusions, or educate them about what's in the books and why.

That extends to other media also.

Not in my opinion.  I think there need to be limits in certain instances.  I assume you are referring to social media.   Sites that have been no holds barred in this regard really don't have the best track records.  

I mean just consider child pornography, as one extreme.  I would guess that you're not a fan of allowing any site that wants to post that sort of thing to be permitted to do so, right?

Gulfcoastguy

JohnInCarolina said:

Gulfcoastguy said:

JohnInCarolina said:

I don't think we should be banning any books.   Let people read them and draw their own conclusions, or educate them about what's in the books and why.

That extends to other media also.

Not in my opinion.  I think there need to be limits in certain instances.  I assume you are referring to social media.   Sites that have been no holds barred in this regard really don't have the best track records.  

I mean just consider child pornography, as one extreme.  I would guess that you're not a fan of allowing any site that wants to post that sort of thing to be permitted to do so, right?

Considering that children cannot consent, no. I would also be opposed to snuff films. Other than those two items I could think of few others that I would penalize. Which doesn’t mean that I would watch them.

Legume

Books are categorized as fiction, non fiction, etc.  I’d certainly be in favor of that type of clarity in other media.

Botch

Legume said:

Books are categorized as fiction, non fiction, etc.  I’d certainly be in favor of that type of clarity in other media.

I hit the "Like" button on your post, but it got me to thinking.
Books are categorized by quiet, old, little librarians (who are now quitting in droves, nationwide, fearful of red-capped raving idiots at school-board meetings).
Movies are categorized on age/parental accompaniment levels; by whom, I'm not really sure.
Scientific articles are categorized by Peer Review.
 
Beyond that, all the various "info spigots" have a completely random and scattered, often absent, system of "gatekeepers" who categorize that info (Rotten Tomatoes, "Likes", talking heads on "Opinion" feeds, political parties, media commercials funded by The Wealthy, internetz forums, your crazy Uncle, your sane Uncle, snopes.com, etc).  Achieving that kind of clarity, for everything, is wishful but a bridge too far.  
 
Finally, I must point out, "The Information Spigots" WBAGNFARB!  

HeavyG

https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1551663686326124546

caliking

HeavyG said:

https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1551663686326124546

Holoprosencephaly is one such condition. It is not, by any measure,  an easy conversation to have. Of course, the fools in our state's govt (and elsewhere) don't have a clue as to what that means. 

I've been wondering how many anti-abortion/"pro-life" champions would be willing to contribute to a fund (national, state, county, etc.) for the care/healthcare/welfare of unplanned, or medically/financially/socially devastating, births. Not just a buck, or three. I mean substantially.

 I bet we'll hear nothing but crickets.

Botch

Unfortunate acronym for Mothers Against Greg Abbott.