# Roe vs. Wade....again



## Don M. (May 14, 2019)

It seems that recently there is a movement in several states to put severe restrictions on Abortion and effectively close down organizations like Planned Parenthood.  What are your thoughts on this issue?

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/alabama-s...rtion-ban-014400714--abc-news-topstories.html

Personally, I think there are already far too many children being born to parents who either cannot afford, or have no desire, to raise them properly.  I will agree with these anti-abortion activists when I see them lining up to adopt these unwanted children.


----------



## C'est Moi (May 14, 2019)

I am pro-choice, but only for early-term abortion.   Personally I could never have had an abortion, but I don't pass judgement on others.


----------



## SeaBreeze (May 14, 2019)

I'm pro-choice, and would want birth control to be easily available to all who need it via organizations like Planned Parenthood.  Birth control to avoid the pregnancy in the first place is ideal, in my opinon.


----------



## terry123 (May 14, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> I am pro-choice, but only for early-term abortion.   Personally I could never have had an abortion, but I don't pass judgement on others.


Same here.


----------



## Aunt Bea (May 15, 2019)

I'm for sex education, easy access to birth control, the morning after pill and pro-choice.

IMO the need for an abortion in today's world would be extremely rare if we were all open and honest about sex education in the home and at school.

It's sad that we spend more time teaching a kid to drive a car than we do about something as important as sex.


----------



## Ronni (May 15, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> It's sad that we spend more time teaching a kid to drive a car than we do about something as important as sex.



SO THIS!!!

I was always extremely open with my kids about every aspect of sex and it covered everything from STD's to how to avoid pregnancy to the moral and ethical and emotional choices involved in all aspects. 

4 of my kids are boys, and more than once I was saddened to discover that my boy knew _WAY _more about the female reproductive system than the girl he was dating!  What is up with THAT???


----------



## Sassycakes (May 15, 2019)

I have very mixed views on abortion . Thankfully I was never in a position to have to make a decision on whether or not to have one. When a friend of mine had a child the girl was born with a lot of birth defects. She would never,walk or talk or see and many other things. They had a company called the Institute of Human Potential that helped her do a lot of things,but she never was able to function. 7yrs later her Dad was a fireman and killed in a fire. They took his wife to be examined before they could pronounce him dead. That's when my friend found out she was pregnant with her second child.They had to do amniocentesis on her to check if that baby would have the same health issue. Thankfully the child didn't have the same condition. If she hid have it and my friend decided to have an abortion I don't believe she would have been wrong. From that day I have always felt that my opinion on abortion should not judge someone that has one. I believe the only one that should make the choice is the woman that is pregnant.This is just my opinion.


_________________​


----------



## rgp (May 15, 2019)

Don M. said:


> It seems that recently there is a movement in several states to put severe restrictions on Abortion and effectively close down organizations like Planned Parenthood.  What are your thoughts on this issue?
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/gma/alabama-s...rtion-ban-014400714--abc-news-topstories.html
> 
> Personally, I think there are already far too many children being born to parents who either cannot afford, or have no desire, to raise them properly.  I will agree with these anti-abortion activists when I see them lining up to adopt these unwanted children.




   Agree here!


----------



## rgp (May 15, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> I'm for sex education, easy access to birth control, the morning after pill and pro-choice.
> 
> IMO the need for an abortion in today's world would be extremely rare if we were all open and honest about sex education in the home and at school.
> 
> It's sad that we spend more time teaching a kid to drive a car than we do about something as important as sex.




 Agree here as well.


----------



## StarSong (May 15, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> I'm for sex education, easy access to birth control, the morning after pill and pro-choice.
> 
> IMO the need for an abortion in today's world would be extremely rare if we were all open and honest about sex education in the home and at school.
> 
> It's sad that we spend more time teaching a kid to drive a car than we do about something as important as sex.



I agree with every word you wrote and will go one step further.  I think birth control should be widely available and very inexpensive, if not free.


----------



## Trade (May 15, 2019)

If you don't like abortion, don't get one. It's that simple. It's not the government's business to legislate morality.


----------



## White Rabbit (May 15, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> I'm for sex education, easy access to birth control, the morning after pill and pro-choice.
> 
> IMO the need for an abortion in today's world would be extremely rare if we were all open and honest about sex education in the home and at school.
> 
> It's sad that we spend more time teaching a kid to drive a car than we do about something as important as sex.


I couldn't say it any better than this.


----------



## chic (May 15, 2019)

I think that since it will be a woman's responsibility to care for an unplanned child, she should have complete freedom in her reproductive rights. No brainer.


----------



## Olivia (May 15, 2019)

There's the morning after pill now that a woman can get without a prescription, so in a way no excuse. However, there should be no legislation about what a woman does with her own body. That's slavery.


----------



## Sunny (May 15, 2019)

I agree with all of the above.

Sassycakes, one sentence in your story was puzzling to me:



> They took his wife to be examined before they could pronounce him dead.



They examined his wife before they could pronounce him dead? Why? I don't understand.


----------



## Sassycakes (May 15, 2019)

Sunny said:


> I agree with all of the above.
> 
> Sassycakes, one sentence in your story was puzzling to me:
> 
> ...




It was to see if she was expecting because if she was the new baby would be covered from the Fire Dept.with Medical coverage and benefits due to the death of her Dad.
And she was covered as was her older sister until they turned 18yrs old.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (May 15, 2019)

Trade has it right. If you don't like abortion, don't get one. It's that simple. It's not the government's business to legislate morality.


----------



## Aneeda72 (May 15, 2019)

I am pro-choice and I have adopted two disabled children.  But I hate that Down syndrome babies are aborted practically to the point of extinction in the United States.  People with DS are wonderful.  It’s such a shame.  These babies are highly adoptable, as are all the rest.

Still, I remain pro choice.  It is not my place to judge.


----------



## chic (May 15, 2019)

It isn't an issue of morality. It's subjugating women by limiting their choices in life by denying them reproductive rights. It's a huge step backward IMHO.


----------



## Manatee (May 15, 2019)

This should be a state issue, not a federal one.


----------



## C'est Moi (May 15, 2019)

Manatee said:


> This should be a state issue, not a federal one.



It should be between a woman, her conscience, and her doctor.   Period.


----------



## Ruthanne (May 15, 2019)

Recently in my state of Ohio they made it illegal to have an abortion after 6 wks. of pregnancy.  The ACLU is all over it and everyone is going nuts over it.

I would have never had an abortion if I had gotten pregnant but am pro-choice for others.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 15, 2019)

I think the thing that bothers me the most about this is the very people who want to deny women the right to an abortion are the ones who bitch the loudest about welfare costs for unwanted children.


----------



## fmdog44 (May 15, 2019)

Great timing when record numbers of young people are strung out on more types of dope than I ever heard of when I was 18. Sometimes it appears this country has no idea where it is headed. Sex is pushed on our youth at every turn through every medium and we think they won't get pregnant???!!!


----------



## Butterfly (May 15, 2019)

Sassycakes said:


> It was to see if she was expecting because if she was the new baby would be covered from the Fire Dept.with Medical coverage and benefits due to the death of her Dad.
> And she was covered as was her older sister until they turned 18yrs old.



That seems very intrusive, oppressive and insulting to me.  A child born within 9 months from his death would have been assumed to be legally his here in NM.  If there was any question, DNA would have solved the matter.


----------



## Butterfly (May 15, 2019)

Manatee said:


> This should be a state issue, not a federal one.



It shouldn't be ANY government's issue.  It should be an issue between a woman and her physician.  Period.


----------



## Butterfly (May 15, 2019)

az jim said:


> i think the thing that bothers me the most about this is the very people who want to deny women the right to an abortion are the ones who bitch the loudest about welfare costs for unwanted children.



me, too, jim!!


----------



## chic (May 16, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> It should be between a woman, her conscience, and her doctor.   Period.



So true.


----------



## terry123 (May 16, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> It should be between a woman, her conscience, and her doctor.   Period.


Exactly!!!


----------



## StarSong (May 16, 2019)

AZ Jim said:


> I think the thing that bothers me the most about this is the very people who want to deny women the right to an abortion are the ones who bitch the loudest about welfare costs for unwanted children.



Isn't that the truth!


----------



## Trade (May 16, 2019)

chic said:


> It isn't an issue of morality. It's subjugating women by limiting their choices in life by denying them reproductive rights. It's a huge step backward IMHO.



I said morality because it seems a lot of these anti-abortion cranks are also Religious fanatics. But that's what I get for living down here in the Bible Belt. But I agree with you. It's a huge step backward. And I am vehemently against it.


----------



## Don M. (May 16, 2019)

This morning, the local news said that our State Senate passed an anti-abortion bill that puts our State among those who are trying to dictate this issue to women.  I suspect that this issue will soon be headed to the Supreme Court, and I hope the court leaves this responsibility to the people and the doctors.  An increase in funding for things like Planned Parenthood, and better education for our young, regarding childbirth, would be a far better approach than what these States are proposing.


----------



## oldman (May 16, 2019)

Roe vs. Wade will never be overturned, or at least not in our lifetime. States that are passing their own laws that circumvent the RW ruling will have their laws overturned by the high court. 

Until the SCOTUS changes their position, the law will stand as they have ruled.


----------



## Olivia (May 16, 2019)

Trade said:


> I said morality because it seems a lot of these anti-abortion cranks are also Religious fanatics. But that's what I get for living down here in the Bible Belt. But I agree with you. It's a huge step backward. And I am vehemently against it.



It was the Son of God. A Daughter of God was never considered. And when the angel Gabriel told Mary she was pregnant, she didn't have a choice about it. Nothing's changed. All religions across the planet subjugate women one way or another. Except today it's women who are just as vicious and would prefer to see women die in back alleys, especially since doctors who perform abortions would be subject to criminal liability.

The Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost are all males.


----------



## Trade (May 16, 2019)




----------



## retiredtraveler (May 16, 2019)

Don M. said:


> It seems that recently there is a movement in several states to put severe restrictions on Abortion and effectively close down organizations like Planned Parenthood.  What are your thoughts on this issue? Personally, I think there are already far too many children being born to parents who either cannot afford, or have no desire, to raise them properly.  I will agree with these anti-abortion activists when I see them lining up to adopt these unwanted children.



I agree with the unwanted, unable to care for issue with parents. Once again, Americans behaving badly. DW and I are pro-choice, but the 'other side' has a point.

I listened to a couple of discussions on this. I found some striking talking points:

  -- there are almost 20 states that have movements to support legislation similar to Alabama --- Missouri being next in line. 
  --- even though it's essentially 50 years with roe/wade, almost half the country still has a problem with it (depends on the poll you read, but it would appear a solid 40% have an issue)
  --- the primary issue with those that support Alabama is that it's murder. If you're pro choice, you don't believe the fetus is a human. Roe/Wade condones killing and those that abort put their own wants         over the killing of a human. That's why rapists would get a smaller sentence than the woman having the abortion.

Anyway, you decide. There was also a discussion about the conservative court and a very good possibility that Row/Wade will be overturned.


----------



## Olivia (May 16, 2019)

> That's why rapists would get a smaller sentence than the woman having the abortion.



So these people want punishment for the women? And rapists would get a lighter sentence? 

I would love to see a reference for that. I've actually heard only one person saying women who have an abortion should be punished, and that was in an interview on TV.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 16, 2019)

I wouldn't be so sure about overturning Roe vs Wade.  It was a  precedent and they don't get overturned often.


----------



## retiredtraveler (May 16, 2019)

Olivia said:
			
		

> So these people want punishment for the women? And rapists would get a lighter sentence?
> 
> I would love to see a reference for that. I've actually heard only one person saying women who have an abortion should be punished, and that was in an interview on TV.



All you have to do is 'google': "should women be punished for abortion" and you can find all sorts of citations. There is some percentage of the population, as I mentioned, that believe abortion is homicide. Therefore, women should be subject to the laws for homicide. You don't have to agree. Also, as stated, around 20 states have movements to enact legislation similar to Alabama. 

[h=3]Poll: Women should be punished for abortions, say 39 percent of ...[/h]


----------



## retiredtraveler (May 16, 2019)

Trade said:


> If you don't like abortion, don't get one. It's that simple. It's not the government's business to legislate morality.



Not that simple. A goodly percentage of people don't look at it as a moral issue. They look at it as homicide. You choose to believe that a fetus is not a person. A great many people would disagree.


----------



## Trade (May 16, 2019)

retiredtraveler said:


> A goodly percentage of people don't look at it as a moral issue. They look at it as homicide. You choose to believe that a fetus is not a person. A great many people would disagree.



Then a goodly percentage of people are FUBAR in the head. 

The idea that I should be able to sit down and calmly and rationally discuss issues with people who have a different opinion than mine has limits. And this goes way beyond those limits.


----------



## Olivia (May 16, 2019)

retiredtraveler said:


> All you have to do is 'google': "should women be punished for abortion" and you can find all sorts of citations. There is some percentage of the population, as I mentioned, that believe abortion is homicide. Therefore, women should be subject to the laws for homicide. You don't have to agree. Also, as stated, around 20 states have movements to enact legislation similar to Alabama.
> 
> *Poll: Women should be punished for abortions, say 39 percent of ...*



I was asking what legislation passed anywhere provides punishment for women who have abortions. So far, I have only found "opinions" about that. I've no doubt that fanatical idiots would love to pass the death penalty for this "crime".


----------



## Pepper (May 16, 2019)

retiredtraveler said:


> Not that simple. A goodly percentage of people don't look at it as a moral issue. They look at it as homicide. You choose to believe that a fetus is not a person. A great many people would disagree.



Wrong.  Those who see it as homicide always have moral reasoning.  They may mention heartbeat, other science, but their "logic" is based on their personal reality, which always tracks back to religion.  Also to their control freak personalities.  A woman is not a brood mare to be bred against her will.  A fetus is dependent on it's host.  A viable person is not.


----------



## C'est Moi (May 16, 2019)

Trade said:


> View attachment 65587



Ugh.   That reminds me of back in the '80s when I went into the hospital to have my tubes tied having had all the kids we wanted.   They would not operate until my husband signed the PERMISSION page.   I was madder than eff and spewed plenty of expletives in that hospital.    Of course, my husband signed, but still... what the actual hell??   I am no one's property, and that wasn't so long ago.    It still steams my oats to think of that.


----------



## fmdog44 (May 16, 2019)

Look at how many voters on the new Alabama law are men.


----------



## rgp (May 16, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> Ugh.   That reminds me of back in the '80s when I went into the hospital to have my tubes tied having had all the kids we wanted.   They would not operate until my husband signed the PERMISSION page.   I was madder than eff and spewed plenty of expletives in that hospital.    Of course, my husband signed, but still... what the actual hell??   I am no one's property, and that wasn't so long ago.    It still steams my oats to think of that.




 Sorta related?...if I'm hijacking?...I apologize..........

  In 1968 , while working at a Pontiac dealer, a young woman inquired about a car to one of the salesmen.....I happened to be standing there. The salesman replied.....well, why don't you stop by this evening with your husband, and we'll all sit down & discuss it.........Try that today....nthego:


----------



## retiredtraveler (May 16, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> Look at how many voters on the new Alabama law are men.



And look at who signed it. Alabama is #33 of all the states in voter turnout. 2/3rds of white woman voted for a child molester in the last election. The people of Alabama don't care to vote, so they don't much care about the issues. That's fine --- states rights. They want this legislation, voted for men who support this legislation (in relatively small numbers), they got it.  
   I have a real pet peeve about people not showing up to vote, so I always figure you get the government you want. If you don't care to vote, you're happy with things. If you're not, you forfeit the right to complain.


----------



## Aneeda72 (May 16, 2019)

Does anyone think this new legislation is connected with the “browning of America?”  As the white population decreases in the US this would be a way a sneaky backdoor way to increase it.  Just curious.


----------



## Pepper (May 16, 2019)

Aneeda72 said:


> Does anyone think this new legislation is connected with the “browning of America?”  As the white population decreases in the US this would be a way a sneaky backdoor way to increase it.  Just curious.



You are definitely on to something.  However, it would certainly increase the "browning" as well, but we are not dealing with rational thinkers here.


----------



## Aneeda72 (May 17, 2019)

Pepper,

There would have to be a breakdown of which of the different races obtain the most terminations.  It might be illegal to collect such data.  Then you’d have to take into account what faith different people are and how that affected their decision, again that might be illegal.

But it’s the southern states, the Bible Belt, so I think there is some connection.  In some places in the south, women are still considered second class citizens.  Plus, we can’t afford the children that are in foster care now.  What will we do with all those unwanted babies?

There was a case in Utah where large amounts of abused children were removed from a certain segment of the population.  They were returned because the state could not afford to care for them.  It always comes down to the money.  It’s going to be an interesting case to watch.


----------



## DaveA (May 17, 2019)

Aneeda72 said:


> Does anyone think this new legislation is connected with the “browning of America?”  As the white population decreases in the US this would be a way a sneaky backdoor way to increase it.  Just curious.



Anything is possible but I think it has more to do with religious nutcases trying to force their religious beliefs on the country in general.  A simpler solution would be to encourage education regarding birth control along with easy access and affordable birth control methods. but the anti-abortion folks don't want this either??


----------



## chic (May 17, 2019)

No. It isn't about religion. It's about control hiding behind the guise of morality.


----------



## C'est Moi (May 17, 2019)

And then there's the irony of the "right to lifers" murdering clinic staff and doctors.      They should be busy adopting and raising those unwanted children.


----------



## Trade (May 17, 2019)

DaveA said:


> Anything is possible but I think it has more to do with religious nutcases trying to force their religious beliefs on the country in general.  A simpler solution would be to encourage education regarding birth control along with easy access and affordable birth control methods. but the anti-abortion folks don't want this either??



[h=1]“Life in Lubbock, Texas taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth, and you should save it for someone you love.”[/h]
― *Butch Hancock*​


----------



## fmdog44 (May 17, 2019)

Pepper said:


> You are definitely on to something.  However, it would certainly increase the "browning" as well, but we are not dealing with rational thinkers here.


The ever changing racial makeup of America if all stays the same the white race will be a minority soon.


----------



## Trade (May 17, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> The ever changing racial makeup of America if all stays the same the white race will be a minority soon.



Well, like I said before it's long overdue for us palefaces to take our turn in the barrel.


----------



## chic (May 19, 2019)

And now Missouri is about to pass an eight week bill, ie no abortions after eight weeks of pregnancy.


----------



## Butterfly (May 19, 2019)

chic said:


> And now Missouri is about to pass an eight week bill, ie no abortions after eight weeks of pregnancy.



The Alabama law just passed says SIX weeks.


----------



## StarSong (May 19, 2019)

Butterfly said:


> The Alabama law just passed says SIX weeks.



There's nothing I like more than a group of old white men telling young women of every color what they can and cannot do with their bodies.


----------



## Sassycakes (May 19, 2019)

Butterfly said:


> That seems very intrusive, oppressive and insulting to me.  A child born within 9 months from his death would have been assumed to be legally his here in NM.  If there was any question, DNA would have solved the matter.




I guess 43yrs ago that was the rule where we lived. I don't know if that has changed now,but that's the way it was in 1976.


----------



## Butterfly (May 19, 2019)

Well, I think that if states are going to  pass such drastic laws, then they should be required by law to DNA test all males the mother identifies as the possible father and then garnish the father's wages for 18 years for child support; if he doesn't have a job, make him get one, or make him work picking up litter or something to earn the money for the support of the child.

I think the reasons males are so eager to pass laws like this are (1) they want to control women, and (2) it's easy for a father of a child to just shrug his shoulders and walk away from the responsibility for a child he fathers, whereas the woman can be stuck supporting the child on her own and/or with taxpayer money until the child grows up.  "No skin off my nose" says the father as he rides off into the sunset.


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

StarSong said:


> There's nothing I like more than a group of old white men telling young women of every color what they can and cannot do with their bodies.



Don't blame this old white man. I didn't vote for any of these fascist gasbags.


----------



## StarSong (May 19, 2019)

Trade said:


> Don't blame this old white man. I didn't vote for any of these sonsabitches. And I never will.



Good to know, though I'd already suspected as much from many of your earlier posts.


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

StarSong said:


> Good to know, though I'd already suspected as much from many of your earlier posts.



I edited my post to read Fascist Gasbags. I think that fits them better.


----------



## MannyGT (May 19, 2019)

chic said:


> No. It isn't about religion. It's about control hiding behind the guise of morality.




I agree, but one must understand that morality is an important bases for the support of religion. This does not mean that one must be religious, in order to be moral.


----------



## Olivia (May 19, 2019)

MannyGT said:


> I agree, but one must understand that morality is an important bases for the support of religion.



I don't agree. The basis of religion is control of "the masses". Always has been. "Morality" in that case is only what helps them do that. Atheist societies know that and is why they need to outlaw them. Example was the Soviet Union. There can only be one God, which is the State. And, guess what?  THE STATE and much of the little states work on that premise. And it does happen to be males, because they resent women. Underneath it all, that's what it's all about.


----------



## Don M. (May 19, 2019)

Butterfly said:


> Well, I think that if states are going to  pass such drastic laws, then they should be required by law to DNA test all males the mother identifies as the possible father and then garnish the father's wages for 18 years for child support; if he doesn't have a job, make him get one, or make him work picking up litter or something to earn the money for the support of the child..



AMEN!!  I'm with you 110% on this.  Everyone talks about the women involved, but no one mentions the so-called "father".  An increasingly number of children are being born to unwed mothers....in some ethnic groups, that percentage is approaching 70%.  Many of those kids will grow up never knowing who their father really is, and quite often, they grow up on the "streets", and become the next generations criminals, and welfare recipients.  Unwed mothers should be Required to say who the father is, and that male should be required to support the child.  If the "sperm donor" refuses to accept responsibility, he should be given a free Vasectomy....If these fools want to behave like rabbits, society should Not have to contend with the results of their animal behavior.


----------



## norman (May 19, 2019)

Trade said:


> *“Life in Lubbock, Texas taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth, and you should save it for someone you love.”*
> 
> 
> ― *Butch Hancock*​




LOL..that is a funny quote...I noticed that Butch's last name is HANCOCK.   :lofl:


----------



## MannyGT (May 19, 2019)

Olivia said:


> I don't agree. The basis of religion is control of "the masses".


There are many reasons why one takes up religion, control is simply one of them.




> Example was the Soviet Union. There can only be one God, which is the State. And, guess what? THE STATE and much of the little states work on that premise. And
> it does happen to be males, because they resent women. Underneath it all, that's what it's all about.


Soviet policy toward religion was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, which made atheism the official doctrine of the Communist Party. However; the Soviet law 
and administrative practices extended some tolerance to religion and forbade the arbitrary closing or destruction of some functioning churches. As the founder of the 
Soviet state, Lenin, put it: Religion is the opium of the people: this saying of Marx is the cornerstone of the entire ideology of Marxism about religion. All modern 
religions and churches, all and of every kind of religious organizations are always considered by Marxism as the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class.


----------



## Pepper (May 19, 2019)

fmdog44 said:


> The ever changing racial makeup of America if all stays the same the white race will be a minority soon.


Payback for the importation of slave labor throughout the Americas.  The meek shall inherit the earth.


----------



## hollydolly (May 19, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> Ugh.   That reminds me of back in the '80s when I went into the hospital to have my tubes tied having had all the kids we wanted.   They would not operate until my husband signed the PERMISSION page.   I was madder than eff and spewed plenty of expletives in that hospital.    Of course, my husband signed, but still... what the actual hell??   I am no one's property, and that wasn't so long ago.    It still steams my oats to think of that.



HUh?.... what would have happened if you didn't _have_ a husband?..


----------



## Olivia (May 19, 2019)

Pepper said:


> Payback for the importation of slave labor throughout the Americas.  The meek shall inherit the earth.



Agree. big time!


----------



## C'est Moi (May 19, 2019)

hollydolly said:


> HUh?.... what would have happened if you didn't _have_ a husband?..



Beats me.


----------



## norman (May 19, 2019)

deleted


----------



## C'est Moi (May 19, 2019)

Pepper said:


> Payback for the importation of slave labor throughout the Americas.  The meek shall inherit the earth.



Oh what a crock.   I don't understand why anyone believes that the descendants of those who did things that were later deemed to be morally reprehensible should in any way be held accountable for wrongs that happened centuries ago.    If you travel far enough back in history, I'm sure that ALL our ancestors were slaves, serfs, indentured, blah, blah.


----------



## Olivia (May 19, 2019)

norman said:


> Many think that Earth polution has already reached the point of no return and we (humans) will have  to move  to another planet in the future... sorry off the subject, but can you think of anything that last forever..



You have stuck my "I agree" to what I posted in another post making me think I agree with the one you posted. I could or not agree, but the  point is -Don't Do That!


----------



## norman (May 19, 2019)

Recorded history indicated that the first slaves were white people held by dark skin people, the Moors. That was about 711AD so who cares. 





C'est Moi said:


> Oh what a crock.   I don't understand why anyone believes that the descendants of those who did things that were later deemed to be morally reprehensible should in any way be held accountable for wrongs that happened centuries ago.    If you travel far enough back in history, I'm sure that ALL our ancestors were slaves, serfs, indentured, blah, blah.


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> Oh what a crock.   I don't understand why anyone believes that the descendants of those who did things that were later deemed to be morally reprehensible should in any way be held accountable for wrongs that happened centuries ago.



Centuries ago? 

I didn't realize I was that old. 

But I must be, because I can remember when this was happening.


----------



## norman (May 19, 2019)

Olivia said:


> You have stuck my "I agree" to what I posted in another post making me think I agree with the one you posted. I could or not agree, but the  point is -Don't Do That!


 :crying:*Sorry, my bad...*


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

norman said:


> Recorded history indicated that the first slaves were white people held by dark skin people, the Moors. That was some 1000 or so years ago so who cares.



Funny, I had always thought that the ancient Romans had slaves and that that was quite a bit farther back than 1,000 years. Or has that history been since rewritten? And then there's all that mention of slaves in the Bible. But since I'm an Atheist I'll give you a pass on that.


----------



## Pepper (May 19, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> Oh what a crock.   I don't understand why anyone believes that the descendants of those who did things that were later deemed to be morally reprehensible should in any way be held accountable for wrongs that happened centuries ago.    If you travel far enough back in history, I'm sure that ALL our ancestors were slaves, serfs, indentured, blah, blah.



Irrelevant.  No moral judgment is being passed, or any opinion either.  It is what it is.


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

C'est Moi said:


> Oh what a crock.   I don't understand why anyone believes that the descendants of those who did things that were later deemed to be morally reprehensible should in any way be held accountable for wrongs that happened centuries ago.    If you travel far enough back in history, I'm sure that ALL our ancestors were slaves, serfs, indentured, blah, blah.



Our day in the barrel is coming. There is nothing you can do about. It's Karma. And Karma doesn't care what you think.


----------



## Aunt Bea (May 19, 2019)

Trade said:


> Centuries ago?
> 
> I didn't realize I was that old.
> 
> ...



Trade, 

I don't understand why you are so intent on keeping the hate alive.

Why can't we move forward without anyone spending time in the barrel?

I'm not saying that we should forget but I am suggesting that we let it go and move forward together.


----------



## chic (May 19, 2019)

Olivia said:


> I don't agree. The basis of religion is control of "the masses". Always has been. "Morality" in that case is only what helps them do that. Atheist societies know that and is why they need to outlaw them. Example was the Soviet Union. There can only be one God, which is the State. And, guess what?  THE STATE and much of the little states work on that premise. And it does happen to be males, because they resent women. Underneath it all, that's what it's all about.



Bingo!This is being done to limit a woman's choices because it seems, we are increasingly becoming a threat to men. How fortuitous for these men in control, that a woman's high school, college, and early career years coincide with her most fertile years. How can a woman become a doctor, physicist, lawyer, poet, author, etc. which require years of education, if she's stuck having children she does not want? This is going to hurt economically because most families are two income families. And who will care for these children of unplanned pregnancies? She can't even get a menial job to make ends meet because technology is doing away with them. So her choice is to marry. A woman of the 21th century may find her position in society determined by her relationship to a man like it was in the 19th century. This is intolerable.


----------



## norman (May 19, 2019)

You are correct, I should have said, about 711AD,  history actually should be rewritten because alot was omitted and then incorrectly written to eliminate certain contributions to mankind and the delevopment of the human race.  Nothing wrong with a Atheist belief, an acquaintance attended college studing theology and later embraced the lack of the existence of God.  I don't know...





Trade said:


> Funny, I had always thought that the ancient Romans had slaves and that that was quite a bit farther back than 1,000 years. Or has that history been since rewritten? And then there's all that mention of slaves in the Bible. But since I'm an Atheist I'll give you a pass on that.


----------



## Trade (May 19, 2019)

Aunt Bea said:


> Trade,
> 
> I don't understand why you are so intent on keeping the hate alive.
> 
> ...



What you call hate, I think of as a sense of fairness. White people stole this country from the Native Americans and killed a whole bunch of them in the process. Then white people built a great amount of wealth from the stolen land on the backs of black slave labor. Now that they hold most of the land and most of the wealth they want to say, "Let's forget about the past and move on." As a white guy I can certainly understand the appeal of that. But when I put myself in the shoes of a Native American or a Black person I don't see it the same way. I want some payback. And let's be honest. Isn't that what's fueling the fear that many white people have of black and brown people? The fear that they might get what's coming to them?


----------



## Gary O' (May 19, 2019)

Don M. said:


> What are your thoughts on this issue?



I get torn on this
But, down deep, right or wrong, more or immoral, I think it should be the decision of the one carrying
…like every other freaking thing (in regard to the one saddled with the burden)

We humans have this power of choice thing
And no matter what yer station in life, decisions/choices get made

Horrible ones have been made by some leaders, affecting millions
But, as Trade notes, karma, be it soon or later, has its way

It is my eternal hope that we get some things right


----------



## Don M. (May 19, 2019)

norman said:


> Recorded history indicated that the first slaves were white people held by dark skin people, the Moors. That was about 711AD so who cares.



Actually, evidence of slavery goes back WAAAY before 711 AD.  There is ample evidence to indicate that the Egyptian pyramids...built between 2500 and 1500 BC...were largely built with slave labor.  Going back even further, many archeologists have uncovered evidence that Homo Sapien societies were usurping Neanderthals well over 500,000 years ago.  Humans share One big similarity with nearly every other life form....that is "survival of the fittest"...and even today, the Strong continue to prey upon the Weak.  Much of today's discussion on slavery centers around slave labor which was brought to the Americas in the 1600's.  However, those slaves were "sold" to the British and Dutch slave traders by residents of Africa who preyed upon their weaker neighbors.  The British and Dutch traders didn't go into the African bush to capture these slaves....rather, they just appeared at the ports and bought these slaves from other Africans.  

Humans are probably the most Vile life form on the planet.  No other species kills for pleasure, and no other species attacks their own.  No matter how "civilized" we think we are, there is still a substantial number in our midst who would be better placed back in the days of the dinosaurs.


----------

