Mike Huckabee gives a speech on womens libido

[WhipperSnapper]

Pro-Lifers should be applauding providing BC, it could prevent millions of Abortions.

Making the assumption that Pro-Lifers have the mental capacity to understand something like that is a bad assumption.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Now what?

...well, uh, we'd have 55 million not dead people walking the earth.

Or a lot of women dead or maimed by botched back alley abortions.

 

[row]

You amuse me...

sorry, feeling is not mutual

...All complaints and judgments but never a solution.

other than under extreme situations there is no good reason for unwanted pregnancies today, abortion is the 21st century condom. biology much? so, don't. get. pregnant. professor.

...But for the sake of argument, let's suppose all 55 million of these unwanted babies were born. Now what?

well, let's see what the pp founder, your hero would say, or rather said?

We should apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring

Give dysgenic groups [people with "bad genes"] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.

Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members

and then there is this famous one:

Such parents swell the pathetic ranks of the unemployed. Feeble-mindedness perpetuates itself from the ranks of those who are blandly indifferent to their racial responsibilities. And it is largely this type of humanity we are now drawing upon to populate our world for the generations to come. In this orgy of multiplying and replenishing the earth, this type is pari passu multiplying and perpetuating those direst evils in which we must, if civilization is to survive, extirpate by the very roots

racism, eugenics. deeply rooted in progressive ideology. you sure know how to pick em vic!

Lol...another disrespecting women nutjob standing behind a message board. Sorry buddy, rational consevative/right leaning people will never let you views become mainstream. You think uncle sugar Huckabee represents the views of most conservatives?..hahaha!. The guy is what they/we most fear most running for president..Why does his ilk think all women are nymphos? Is it because they can't control their own peckers? Next he will want to institute mandatory burkha-wearing in the U.S. and stone adulterous women and rape victims..lol

What can I say...when you only have the liberal part of the gene pool to work with, you're gonna have basic errors.

 

[Vic]

I love the supposed guilt by association, as though the real world works that way.
I never met Margaret Sanger, and I have zero association with Planned Parenthood. Try reading articles past the byline.

 

[Vic]

Now what?

...well, uh, we'd have 55 million not dead people walking the earth.

Well.. actually more than that. Roe v Wade was 40 years ago, so most would have had children of their own and some even grandchildren. I won't bother with the math though.
Needless to say, there would be tens of millions more Americans (far more than the 11 million illegal immigrants in the US). All unwanted children, most of them born to poverty. All of them would need schooling. Large numbers of them would need government services, welfare, food stamps, CPS for their drug addict parents, and foster homes.
America used to have orphanages.
Then, these 55 million unwanted babies grow up and enter our already over crowded labor force.
And the "pro lifers" never have a solution for any of this besides calling women "skanks" (like the guy had no part in it), and pretending there are 55 million more adoptive parents out there.
When the pro lifers are ready and willing to pay for everyone of those 55 million, then IMO they can talk and they can judge.

 

[row]

Well.. actually more than that. Roe v Wade was 40 years ago, so most would have had children of their own and some even grandchildren. I won't bother with the math though.
Needless to say, there would be tens of millions more Americans (far more than the 11 million illegal immigrants in the US). All unwanted children, most of them born to poverty. All of them would need schooling. Large numbers of them would need government services, welfare, food stamps, CPS for their drug addict parents, and foster homes.
America used to have orphanages.
Then, these 55 million unwanted babies grow up and enter our already over crowded labor force.

you may not have met ms sanger, but some of what you wrote there still sounds very much like her. anyway certainly a percentage of them would fall into the categories you describe, but i'm personally not into fortune telling nor do i possess a crystal ball.

And the "pro lifers" never have a solution for any of this besides calling women "skanks" (like the guy had no part in it), and pretending there are 55 million more adoptive parents out there.

oh bullshit. it is not brain surgery my friend, but because of the i don't give a fuck/carelessness/lying/manipulating of one, or both of the parties of the sexual union involved, an innocent has to die. if women are as concerned about their bodies as they would have you believe, they wouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place (obviously not talking about the miniscule #'s of pregnancy by rape, failed birth control, etc.). the solution is easy, it is simple and as often as not it is free.

skanks? for me, margaret sanger was a skank, abortion barbie is a skank, cecile richards who promotes the killing of the unborn is a skank. the girls who get pregnant aren't, an overwhelming majority of them simply made a mistake, one that was easily correctable. before. having. sex. it would seem to me based on the reality of the situation that because in every case the women suffers the greatest repercussion of a pregnancy, they might have a slightly higher interest in determining the consequences of sex. no?

When the pro lifers are ready and willing to pay for everyone of those 55 million, then IMO they can talk and they can judge.

by this logic vic, you and yours should be paying for all abortions and me and mine shouldn't have to contribute a penny.

 

[Vic]

Who is this "me and mine," row? You keep trying to pin some kind of guilt by association on me. I refute any association with any group relevant to this discussion.
Speaking frankly, I am opposed to abortion. But I'm also opposed to forcing my personal beliefs, no matter how noble, onto others, especially when those beliefs may cause harm.

Now, I asked you a simple question, and it seems you were so busy name calling that you forgot to address it.
I asked that if these 55 million aborted children had been born, would you (and this time I mean you personally, row) have assisted financially in their care and upbringing if their parents proved unwilling or unable?
It seems to me that your answer to this is a definite no. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[VRAMdemon]

What can I say...when you only have the liberal part of the gene pool to work with, you're gonna have basic errors.

LOL...just as I expected, you got nothin except "its all the liberals fault" bullshit...

I guess in you world:

No conservatives support legal abortion
conservatives have never had an abortion
conservatives don't use planned parenthood
conservatives don't use contraception
conservatives don't use fertility clinics
conservatives don't have unexpected pregnancies
conservatives don't cheat on their wives
conservatives never knock up there mistress and want an abortion
conservatives never look at pornograpy

LOL...

 

[row]

not trying to "pin" anything on you. what i post is never anything more than an observation with regards to what you say. if the shoe fits, wear it, if it doesn't then consider putting more thought into what you say.

from following some of what you post vic, you're a leftist whether willing to admit it or not. i am a conservative and happy to let anyone who is interested know. although you knew exactly what i meant by "me and mine' and "you and yours", it appears you feel there must be some pay off in playing semantics, well whatever. if it simplifies things, strike the words "and yours", strike the words "and mine", replace "me" with "i". the statement would look something like:

by this logic vic, you should be paying for all abortions and i shouldn't have to contribute a penny.

doesn't alter the lack of thought you put into it. unless you actually believe what you wrote, but again, i give you the benefit of doubt:

When the pro lifers are ready and willing to pay for everyone of those 55 million, then IMO they can talk and they can judge.

Now, I asked you a simple question, and it seems you were so busy name calling that you forgot to address it.
I asked that if these 55 million aborted children had been born, would you (and this time I mean you personally, row) have assisted financially in their care and upbringing if their parents proved unwilling or unable?
It seems to me that your answer to this is a definite no. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

since you seem interested as to whether or not i lived a life that coincides with my beliefs. i'm happy to oblige.

veteran of two wars (similar to social work albiet on a global scale), ended up for the last 15 years providing direct social service to a diverse population of individuals, some deserving, some not. have handled hundreds of cases over the years, helping some in an attempt to put their lives back together, others whose lives would never "be together" making sure they got connected to appropriate resources. i've worked with homeless, gang bangers, ptsd, dual diagnoses, drugs and alcohol, mental health disorders of every stripe, developmentally disabled, physically disabled. so to answer your question, would i help?

in a fuckin heartbeat.

what would you do?

ps since moving to santa cruz from the east bay i have for the last 4 years cleaned Twin Lakes Beach every friday, and i do volunteer work for Meals On Wheels delivering food.

 

[Vic]

Row, that's great and all, and its certainly more than most people do, but your individual volunteer work won't feed, house, and educate 55 million unwanted children.

And I know how much you love painting the world in a broad brush strokes of black and white, but I'm not a leftist by the way. I'm actually a moderate libertarian (note small l ). My views tend to be pretty middle of the road of economic issues (although I am a staunch capitalist) while I am pretty liberal on social issues (I don't believe government can or should legislate morality).

Oh well, you're apparently just way off the right wing side. You want a big government that'll stop and/or punish people for making poor decisions, but you won't be paying for it.

 

[row]

I asked that if these 55 million aborted children had been born, would you (and this time I mean you personally, row) have assisted financially in their care and upbringing if their parents proved unwilling or unable?

my answer was: "in a fuckin heartbeat"

i don't know, maybe you didn't like the answer, or you didn't feel it was descriptive enough-lacking specifics, could be you were offended by my use of words because what i didn't see in your reply was anything that closely resembled a response to your question - my answer. instead you come up with something totally unrelated:

Row, that's great and all, and its certainly more than most people do, but your individual volunteer work won't feed, house, and educate 55 million unwanted children.

never suggested it was an answer to anything and has nothing to do with the original question. forgive me, but i find it almost impossible to follow your train of thought and the helter-skelter way in which you jump from one thing to another, not bothering to address or answer anything in between. my thinking is if you refuse to acknowledge answers, don't ask questions.

It seems to me that your answer to this is a definite no.

as the above shows - hope that shoe you wear is relatively small, it's gotta be painful to continually have to extract the thing from your mouth.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

you were wrong and corrected. missed the part where you admitted it though :whiste:

lastly vic, i was courteous enough to answer your question in what i considered to be civil manner. i asked you a question in that same post. would you mind answering? thanks!

ps as to the rest of your post, well some of it. it's nice to know where you stand on things, thanks for letting me know.

 

[nehalem256]

Speaking frankly, I am opposed to abortion. But I'm also opposed to forcing my personal beliefs, no matter how noble, onto others, especially when those beliefs may cause harm.

This is really the stupidest double think ever invented. The reason for be opposed to abortion is that you think its murder. So you have basically just said you are personally opposed to murder, but no have an issue with other people committing it

And lest you think I exaggerate:

But I'm also opposed to forcing my personal beliefs, no matter how noble, onto others,

Seems to me like you just rationalized away every law in existence. So say for instance if some teenage boys think it is fine to finger a passed out drunk girl and take naked photos of her, such an act should not be illegal, because that would be forcing your personal beliefs on others

 

[Victorian Gray]

This is really the stupidest double think ever invented. The reason for be opposed to abortion is that you think its murder. So you have basically just said you are personally opposed to murder, but no have an issue with other people committing it

And lest you think I exaggerate:


Seems to me like you just rationalized away every law in existence. So say for instance if some teenage boys think it is fine to finger a passed out drunk girl and take naked photos of her, such an act should not be illegal, because that would be forcing your personal beliefs on others

 

[Vic]

I'm gonna have to agree that the reductio ad absurdum from those two makes any attempt at rational discussion more or less pointless.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I'm gonna have to agree that the reductio ad absurdum from those two makes any attempt at rational discussion more or less pointless.

You will pretty much never get an actual attempt by nehalem to have a rational, honest debate/discussion. He's here to get a reaction, to be noticed.

I simply notice him in the manner that his posts deserve.

 

[Spungo]

Seems pretty clear Democrats think women are unable to take care of themselves. Talk about thinking women are inferior.

Basically. Society still treats women like retards, and feminists are not helping. Hard right wingers think women need a man while hard left wingers think women need the government. I think we're stuck in a position similar to that of African Americans. Right wingers think blacks are incapable of working due to laziness and left wingers think blacks are incapable of working due to racism. Nobody stands up to say we're all people, we're all the same, we're all capable of working, we're all capable of taking care of our own bodies, and we're all capable of being responsible.

Our society will continue to decline as expected standards continue to decline. Men don't seem overly embarrassed to live with their parents at age 30. Women don't seem embarrassed to have a kid and not know who the father is.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Another thing I love about this is Santorum had to come out and try to explain what Huckabee meant when he gave this talk. Its almost like someone was pulling thestrings behind the scene and was afraid Huckabee would spout out more stupid crap trying to clarify what he previously said.