Out of touch

by | May 12, 2023 | Politics | 47 comments

The special election in Wisconsin that gave Democrats a majority on their state supreme court offered Democrats in North Carolina some lessons. While access to abortion was the driving force, the overall extremism of the GOP broadened the reach of their message. The Republican majority in the North Carolina legislature is offering plenty of ammunition. 

Democrats in Wisconsin used the abortion issue to drive up turnout where they had a base receptive to the message. However, in more conservative areas, they focused on other issues, including crime. They also hammered the GOP for being out of touch with average Americans. 

In North Carolina, Democrats have plenty to talk about. Governor Roy Cooper is rallying the troops to urge members of the legislature to uphold his veto of the latest GOP bill to restrict abortion. He’s called for rallies around the state tomorrow to sound the alarm. It’s an early call to action that could set the stage for 2024. 

While abortion restrictions may motivate younger voters, especially women in urban areas, Democrats have a lot more in their arsenal. The GOP passed voucher bills that will take money from students in poor schools and give it to wealthy families. They are stealing from the poor to give to the rich. The people most harmed by the legislation live in poor, rural counties and the school systems hurt the most are the ones that are already struggling. It’s a cruel and regressive policy. 

While guns have become the leading cause of death among children, Republicans in North Carolina are arming emotionally unstable people and criminals. And they’re trying to remove additional restrictions that protect the public. Instead of trying to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, the GOP believes that more guns make us safer. In their fever dream fantasies, heavily armed vigilantes will protect us from criminals and psychopaths. When a deranged gunman enters a school or a shopping center, some working class hero will pull his unrestricted, unregistered concealed pistol and take out the psychopath. 

Of course, in reality, the deranged gunman buys his weapons without proof of anything through private sales and kills the first five people before anybody knew what was happening. Hindsight shows his rampage was predictable but any laws that may have stopped him had been stripped away by the GOP and the NRA. He may have been stopped by police who questioned his suspicious behavior as well as the gun in his back pocket and the one strapped to his leg as he was scoping out the mall, but they couldn’t do anything about it because Republicans.

Republicans are out of touch with everybody but their extremist base. They are putting young women at risk by reducing access to abortion care. They are taking money out of struggling schools and giving it to rich people in the form of vouchers, despite telling us for  years that vouchers were only designed to level the playing field for poor families. They are arming dangerous people and taking away the tools law enforcement needs to protect us. There’s something for everybody to hate about Republican rule. They should hear about it in the next election.

47 Comments

  1. Kycowboy

    Ringlet, life does not begin at conception. Two cells conjoining is not much different than two cancer cells. Both will grow. To me life begins when the embryo can survive on its own. Before that the biological processes have not developed to the point where the brain has a personality. I don’t have scientific evidence for that, it is just my thought/belief. A baby in the womb kicking may be a biochemical reaction to stimuli not a conscious move on its part. I believe abortion is a valuable medical tool that should be available to the medical profession for their and the patient’s decision .

    • ringlet86

      You of course are welcome to any view you want. People can choose to do what they like. Ultimately it going to be between them and what ever deity they look to (if any) For those who don’t its the face in the mirror!

      For an organism to be considered living, Growth and development is needed. When a sperm cell and an egg cell join They are alive before and during, and therefore whatever they make is also alive. Something alive does not make something that is dead (unless something has gone wrong) and then that thing then suddenly becomes alive again later! Its either dead or alive. Complete binary on that.

      “…To me life begins when the embryo can survive on its own…” If we followed this standard completely then any infant, child or even some adolescents ( maybe some adults) would not be alive by this because they cannot survive on their own. Their parents take care of them n the case of children.

      …”Before that the biological processes have not developed to the point where the brain has a personality… “Personality is not a tenant of determining life. If we followed this plants ( which have no personality would not be alive. We know that they are.)

      …”A baby in the womb kicking may be a biochemical reaction to stimuli not a conscious move on its part…” reaction to stimuli IS a sign of life, and consciousness of that action is not required for life. Plants are not conscious but they respond to the stimuli of the sun by leaning towards it.

      The criteria for life are as follows. If an organismic fails to meet even one, its not alive.

      They are:
      Growth and Development: An embryo absolutely grows. Cell division occurs and further development after that. So it meets the criteria of life
      Metabolism: An embryo takes food/energy and coverts it into a form it can use to grow It meets that criteria of life. It also produces waste by products.
      Homeostasis An embryo Maintains an internal stable environment so that it can continue all of its internal systems to continue to live. It meets the criteria of life.
      Response to stimuli All living things have the ability to sense and respond to stimuli. an embryo does this, and infant certainly does. Since it does It meets the criteria of life. Note it does not HAVE TO KNOW ITS DOING it, A plant is alive and will tilt towards the sun, it senses it. but has no idea of what it is doing.

      DNA and reproduction All living things have DNA. an embryo being a multicellur being absolutely has the DNA of its parents.

      Anyway food for thought.

    • ringlet86

      I wanted to add, that there is a difference between the scientific rules that determine life and the legal ones. The former is objective, the latter no so much.
      Life begins at conception. Two humans are not going to produce anything but a human life. Even if it dies etc its still human. That thing meets all the rules for life. So it is a HUMAN LIFE. A=B B=C A=C. simple logic.

      Murder is the taking of a innocent life in cold blood. There is no doubt that a fetus etc is innocent and committed no crime or offense other than living.

      Therefore Abortion is Murder and outside of a few areas it should be banned. That’s my personal view.

      But I’m not going to force my choices onto anyone else. They can speak to God about it when they meet him, or be congratulated by Satan when they meet him. Its their choice to commit murder or not.

      But I’m not going to play word games or partake in any legalistic sophistry. Call it what it is

  2. TC

    Wayne, Ring, and Coco. I’ve posted a similar response three times now. I’m guessing the server doesn’t like the fact I’m trying to post to my own comment; since that is the only place I could find a respond button.

    Wayne, I read your response on Sunday evening I believe and it began with “gentlemen.” We don’t see eye to eye on a lot, but, I intend to honor that and be civil in response. Since then, you’ve posted several more times and posed a question to Coco. Without being able to directly as for his acquiesce to respond in his stead and since I haven’t had anything put up in the last three days, I’ll say I found an answer to your question. How acceptable will you find it? I’m guessing that you won’t. I likewise know it won’t change your mind about your stance on this issue. But it does serve to answer the question you posed.

    I found it in Title 1, Section 8 of the US Code. It states:

    “§8. “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant

    (a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

    (b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

    (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.

    (Added Pub. L. 107–207, §2(a), Aug. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 926.)”

    Ring, what has been lost is time. A buffer to make a potential life altering decision. If nothing had been lost, then there would be no cause for the protest and gnashing of teeth we currently have. This will be the second adjustment in three years if it should happen to override the veto. I didn’t see anything wrong with the previous iteration. The only compromise was between the more restrictive and ban. To me, that’s like having a speed cap on a chase policy. You might as well ban it. So while 12 weeks is not a de facto ban, I don’t think we’re done with this either. If Republicans keep control, the constraints will continue to tighten on abortion. As we have seen, twice in three years already.

    • ringlet86

      Agreed.

    • Wayne

      TC–I get what you are writing here, but (predictably) I disagree with the foundational premise of it. It seems to implicitly legitimize abortion, with no discussion for the fundamental immorality of the act, let along what I (and so many others) consider the sheer horror of the procedure. Therein lies my disagreement. I posit that no civilized society can–in any way shape or form that it chooses–justify the killing of an unborn innocent child. That ‘thing’ that is developing in the womb is not a blob, nor a glob of tissue, or some undefined parasite. It is–consistent with its DNA–a developing human child….right from the very moment of conception. No scientific question about that whatsoever. So–I will reiterate what I pointed out somewhere else in here: with the single exceptions of danger to the mother, or some other medically justifiable reason to terminate the gestation of the fetus, I do NOT believe there is ANY justification for abortion. Most certainly, I do not agree with the ‘Pro-Choice’ blather. And as I also pointed out, the current recommendation of the 12-week point in development is a mere sop to the Leftists, in an effort by the GOP to do away with the entire concept of ‘Pro-Choice’ altogether. Thus, at this point, we will have to agree to disagree!

  3. ringlet86

    ….”While guns have become the leading cause of death among children….”

    Outright lie.

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Joseph Goebbels

    “Gun violence is the NUMBER ONE cause of death for children and teens in our country,” shrieked the fundraiser from “Giffords PAC,” a prominent gun control organization. From CNN: “Children and teens are more likely to die by guns than anything else.” We now hear this horrific statistic from academics, leftist lawmakers, TV news anchors, newspapers, and magazines.

    It is indeed horrific, but it is also a lie. It is, in fact, the sort of “big lie” that would make Joseph Goebbels proud. And like all good propaganda, the “children killed by guns” lie is designed to hide an ambitious agenda. Let’s examine how they lie, and what the truth really is. All data cited in this article come from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s “WISQARS” (Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System) for 2020, the year most recently available, and are expressed in fatalities per 100,000 people.

    https://rulesforantiradicals.com/blog/f/when-%E2%80%98children-killed-by-guns%E2%80%99-are-not-children-at-all

    Not that you guys around here are the LEAST BIT open minded. But hey Maybe…

  4. Laura Reich

    Great piece. The abortion bill will hurt women, especially poor and rural women. As for guns and school vouchers, you’re right the GOP is extremely out of touch. They do not represent their constituents, rather they represent their big donors.

    • ringlet86

      Abortion kills an average 850,000 children a year in the USA. Guns are not even close. ( its like 1600 or so) I’ve no idea why Democrats love and protect one kind of death (Abortion) and revile the other kind of death. (Guns) But Democrats are full of contradictions. ( Like Cops can’t be trusted, but they are they only ones who should have guns…) Weird. The rural women (who you democrats mock) and the poor women (who you Democrats use) all live near hospitals so believe me they will be just fine, just as they are now.

      School vouchers the horror! Parents actually controlling schooling and using with their own money!
      Guns? That pesky 2nd amendment. I am starting to think Democrats really ARE racists because you are STILL upset about losing your Jim crow law. Get over it already. Guns are never leaving this country ever. Not in your lifetime, not in your great grandchildren life times. Hopefully NEVER EVER EVER You don’t like them, don’t use them, but leave the other guy alone. You do you and Mind your own business.

      The GOP INCREASED their seats in the state this last election. They are hardly out of touch. People voted them MORE CONTROL not less.

      I think Democrats are out of touch. Look at what you stand for…. LOL. Who wants it?

      Apparently not North Carolinian’s. Too bad so sad!

      I hear California is (well, used to be nice) But I know for they can use your money! After all they just voted to give reparations to Black in the state Blacks that were never slaves themselves in a state that never had slaves. You just can’t make this up!

      Maybe go live “your truth” and “your values” there?

      Its clear NC wants NONE of it.

  5. Wayne

    Since Mills tends to preach to a drooling base of utter morons, let’s pull apart and question some of his more obnoxious narratives for them. For example—

    Mills constantly hammers on the abortion issue—which, admittedly, is golden fodder for the radical Left. Democrats have leveraged the abortion issue into what seems like their ‘issue du jour’—no matter that the southern U.S. border has now become factually and provably non-existent, and that our entire nation is under siege and attack from tens of thousands of foreign nationals.

    Nossir—abortion—a gruesome, hideous medical procedure that literally rips apart the infant’s body, dismembers it alive, sucks out its brains, or chemically scalds the infant to a horrible death—is resoundingly trumpeted by Democrats as ‘A Woman’s Right To Choose!’ Yessir!!! Absolutely!! Let’s make no mistake—KILLING an infant—which, by any other name is known as infanticide, let alone murder—THAT’S how wimmin are s’posed to ASSERT their womanhood—ASSERT their ‘Control Over Their OWN bodies’—never mind that an innocent baby is mutilated and destroyed, and a human life ended. SSSssshhhh….don’t talk about that. SSSsshhh….shut up, you crazy MAGA radical extremists… don’t you know that killing an infant, even one about to be born, is perfectly OK, as long as the mother asserts her womanhood and decides (along with her complicit doctor, of course) that motherhood is really white male oppression??? Yeahhh…sure it is. Do you even KNOW what an abortion procedure really involves…???

    There is MUCH more ‘golden fodder’ inside Mills article—MUCH too much to continue here, so—I’ll save it for later. But MEANWHILE—by ALL MEANS—let’s get those staunch and dedicated sycophants of yours in here!!! Let’s see some ‘fact-finding’ answers to my diatribe!! By all means—PROVE to me how wonderful and glorious and life-affirming an abortion really is!! Talk about an extremist base that is out of touch, and has NO concept of fundamental morality…! Go ahead, I’ll wait….

    • TC

      Well I see you made it back from the CNN Town Hall in New Hampshire. Now, let me see…definitions…ah yes!

      https://www.verywellfamily.com/difference-between-baby-newborn-infant-toddler-293848

      Definitions
      “Newborn usually refers to a baby from birth to about 2 months of age.
      Infants can be considered children anywhere from birth to 1 year old.
      Baby can be used to refer to any child from birth to age 4 years old, thus encompassing newborns, infants, and toddlers.”

      If you want to be blissfully ignorant, that’s on you. But when you’re trying to infuriate and piss off people, it works better if it sounds like you sorta know what you’re ranting about.

      • Wayne

        Not unsurprisingly, when Democrats are presented with facts or narratives which conflicts with their cherished ideological beliefs, not only do they stoutly deny those facts, but they typically push back with emotional rants and silly outbursts, because Democrats live in an ‘alternate universe’, where they can pick and choose whatever “facts” that fits and supports their party’s narrative. The lame responses I see here from ‘cocodog’ and ‘TC’ seem to fit that description quite well. Predictably, and as usual, democrats act like spoiled toddlers, resort to adolescent name-calling, and refuse to address the actual question.

        In the example I cited regarding abortion, the Democrat narrative asserts that ‘abortion is healthcare’….’abortion is a woman’s right to choose’….’abortion is safe’…’abortion is essential healthcare’…abortion is reproductive care’… ‘abortion is good for the economy’…

        Other than the pabulum you’ve been spoon-fed by the extremists in your party, you don’t really know ANYthing about the procedure, or the process, of an abortion, do you? You don’t know ANYthing about what the abortion of a child actually involves, do you? Nor, in fact, do you care, because—as always—democrats don’t want anything like actual facts to get in the way of their cherished narratives!

        You clowns need to re-read my paragraph describing the brutal and barbaric methods that abortionists use to kill a baby. I don’t care if the child is referred to as ‘developing infant’, ‘baby’, ‘pre-born child’, ‘fetus’…. They all refer to a child in utero. There is no ‘life-affirming’ aspect to the process of an abortion. An abortion kills a child. It ends the life of a completely innocent child—regardless of HOW that child was conceived—simply to satisfy the misguided beliefs of a woman who, in a desperate moment of emotional upheaval, has been taught that the developing life inside of her is a ‘parasite’…’a malignancy’….’a horrible example of male domination’….!

        You people are sick, and your party platform which supports this sort of atrocity is perverted to the core. However you want to DEFINE the subject matter, the subject itself is beyond appalling, and merely speaks to human sacrifice, simply to appease a thoroughly rotten belief system. Over the last three years I have received phone calls from persons affirming that they were re-registering as Unaffiliated or as Republican—asserting each time that it wasn’t them leaving the Democrat Party—the Democrat Party had already left THEM!

        • TC

          “Nossir—abortion—a gruesome, hideous medical procedure that literally rips apart the infant’s body, dismembers it alive, sucks out its brains, or chemically scalds the infant to a horrible death—is resoundingly trumpeted by Democrats as ‘A Woman’s Right To Choose!’ Yessir!!! Absolutely!! Let’s make no mistake—KILLING an infant—which, by any other name is known as infanticide, let alone murder—THAT’S how wimmin are s’posed to ASSERT their womanhood—ASSERT their ‘Control Over Their OWN bodies’—never mind that an innocent baby is mutilated and destroyed, and a human life ended. SSSssshhhh….don’t talk about that. SSSsshhh….shut up, you crazy MAGA radical extremists… don’t you know that killing an infant, even one about to be born, is perfectly OK, as long as the mother asserts her womanhood and decides (along with her complicit doctor, of course) that motherhood is really white male oppression??? Yeahhh…sure it is. Do you even KNOW what an abortion procedure really involves…???”

          Nowhere, and I mean nowhere in that entire driveling rant did you mention anything about what you said you mentioned.

          “In the example I cited regarding abortion, the Democrat narrative asserts that ‘abortion is healthcare’….’abortion is a woman’s right to choose’….’abortion is safe’…’abortion is essential healthcare’…abortion is reproductive care’… ‘abortion is good for the economy’…”

          You can’t even read what you wrote.

          That’s right imbecile, it is a woman’s right to choose. Whether you or I agree with it or not is immaterial; not my choice to make. Nor is it yours or that of government. If you want to argue that BS about life begins at conception, let me lend you some words. “Then the Lord God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”

          When does life begin? It’s right there in Genesis. Chapter 2, verse 7. “…the breath of life…”

          But you got your way for right now, didn’t you? And it’s going to cost the Republicans at the polls. I hope Thomas talks about abortion and stripping away womens’ rights every day. He won’t; there’s too many other right wing dictatorial atrocities to write about.

          But you keep trying there, sunshine. Who knows, you might actually make a modicum of sense one day.

          • ringlet86

            …”But you got your way for right now, didn’t you?…” I can’t see where Wayne got anything. Its pretty apparent he is completely anti-abortion ( I’m guessing elective abortions.) So I’d guess he would be down for a total ban on those. ( Maybe he can clarify)

            In NC women still have the same right to choose as they ever have. Its only the timing that has changed. The still have every right to choose.

            I don’t get the outrage. No “rights” have been stripped from anyone.

          • TC

            Ring: The ‘thing’ that Wayne got was the thing that agrees with his beliefs. Is that a tangible thing? No. But it is what he wanted as an outcome for the abortion issue.

            And no, women don’t have the same right to choose. If they did, this wouldn’t be an issue, would it? If they have the same ‘right’ as before, what was the point of changing it, twice, in the last two years?

            It’s woefully apparent what Wayne is against. Ronnie Milsap can see what Wayne is against and doesn’t like. And if you don’t believe the same way as Wayne, you’re about as wrong as lipstick on a dog.

            Outrage? I’m not outraged. Since Roe passed, Republicans have been indignant and repulsed. It’s taken them this long to repeal it. It became an entire movement. Doctors have been killed. Clinics firebombed. For providing a service that was a private choice between the provider and patient. God has not been happy with them since.

          • TC

            I wrote two responses and neither posted. So I’ll combine them and see if that works.

            However, Ring, yes Wayne got his policy stance supported and converted into law. In this win/lose political paradigm, that’s what it’s all about, isn’t it? Yes, it is obvious. Ronnie Milsaps could see it. Wayne is not a pro-choice supporter.

            And no, women do not have the same choice to choose as they had. The time frame has been changed…twice in three years. That is not the same. Now, you had better find out and find out fast if the woman is pregnant and you have any other notion other than carrying a full-term pregnancy. Time is the relevant factor. If nothing had changed, it really wouldn’t be an issue, now would it?

            Wayne, the response yesterday was concise and clear. It does bring another factor into the limelight though; one that I know you won’t agree with. Our debate swirls on the definition of terms and words. I understand that you know what “human being” means. Generally speaking, so do I. But law and things legal don’t work that way. We both know that. So I searched for a definition for “Human Being. ” This is what I found and where I found it. I’m not writing this to be adversarial. You wrote a civilly toned piece and I’ll reciprocate.

            Title 1, Section 8 of the Unites States Code defines “human being” as:

            (a)In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

            (b)As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

            (c)Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.

            I know you don’t care and that it doesn’t change your mind. But if we as a nation are following the rule of law, that would be it. No doubt there are many laws on the book that a great number of people disagree with. It doesn’t change the law though. Does that mean it is wrong and shouldn’t be changed? No. If it is in fact a bad law, then it shouldn’t be allowed to stand. There have certainly been some. But I can’t see how this is going to be something a plurality can get behind or will ever support.

            Is it murder? Not by definition and the way the law is written. The elements of the offense simply don’t fit the act or the state of mind. I know; there I go with definitions again.

            We have to know and understand the language we all use and share. Common sense falls into that category of things we all know and accept as common knowledge. But when we get into something this emotionally charged, we have to be more precise particularly when the legal component is added.

            I know, you don’t care since abortion is murder. I understand your position, I can’t agree with it.

            As for your response to Coco, I’ll point at the definition above and the question you posed.

        • cocodog

          Judging from what I read from your narrative, I seriously doubt you are a licensed physician or for that matter have any creditable training in the medical arts, beyond basic first aid.
          To be honest neither have I. But of course, I am not attempting to describe a late term abortion procedure in excruciating and vivid detail. A procedure which may come into play where the child is clinically deceased and presents a clear and present danger to the life of the mother. I am not trying to convince folks this procedure is common when it is not.
          I understand that white Christian Nationalist desire everybody to believe as they do, but some of us find it difficult to accept. We accept the notion that separation of church and state was placed in the constitution by folks who lived in a time when tyrannical leaders used religion to further their despicable ends.
          The Row case was not decided on the isolated notion that government should not become involved in abortion. The fundamental principle announced by the court addressed the right of privacy. To put it in simple terms, the government had no rational purpose sticking their nose into matters that is none of their business.
          I might suggest the white Christian Nationalist do the same. In other words, stick to teaching your followers to clean and maintain their AR15 and stay the hell out of the private affairs of other taxpaying citizens of this country.

          • Wayne

            Gentlemen, there is a fundamental question that must be answered regarding abortion, and that is: are the unborn actually human beings…?

            Because, if the unborn are NOT human, then everything Pro-Choice advocates say would be correct! This is what they say—

            “No one should be able to tell a woman what to do with her body!” Or, “Abortion is a personal choice that shouldn’t be restricted, or be illegal in any way!” Or how about this one: “People shouldn’t impose THEIR views onto someone else’s!”

            The reasoning behind those platitudes is legitimate if…and ONLY IF… the unborn are not human beings. But now we have a problem, don’t we? We all agree that a woman—EV’ry woman—should be able to freely make choices about every single aspect of her life, be it friends, the religion they follow, their career, their hobbies—you name it.

            However, the choice is kill an innocent human being—simply because they are not wanted—is morally wrong. I’m not arguing the medical statistics in this discussion related to those instances where aborting an unborn child becomes tragically necessary due to health complications. I’m arguing about the moral implications of an abortion decided upon by choice.

            If it is wrong to kill innocent human beings (and it is), and abortion kills an innocent human being (which it does), then abortion MUST be wrong. Period.

            Simply said, I believe in a Woman’s Right to Choose IF—the unborn are not human. I ALSO believe that abortion is intentionally designed to kill an innocent human being, and thus—it is morally wrong. That argument is predicated on no particular religion, nor any particular cultural ethic. I am simply pointing out a fundamental and unavoidable fact. No political party should embrace this noxious notion. While the concept and the practice of abortion has existed for centuries, if not millennia, it is an abhorrent practice, and it should be stopped, unless drastically and dreadfully necessary.

          • TC

            First of all Wayne, that was a very measured and congenial response. But it does bring up a point that ran through your first post in this thread. That’s terminology. Using the term “human being” raises the question of defining that term. I know, the average person knows what a ‘human being’ is. I once thought the term “person” didn’t include corporate entities; I was determined to be wrong in that regard in 2016.

            The most expansive definition I could find is in Title 1, Section 8 of the US Code. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/8

            “(a)In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

            (b)As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

            (c)Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.”

            I understand that you don’t need a definition to know what a “human being” is. But if we are to live by the rule of law, there it is, stated. When you apply that definition to the question of abortion, well, it doesn’t really fit. I know that doesn’t change your mind and abortion will always be wrong to you. I get that. I don’t see any way to reach consensus though that is amicable to both sides.

          • cocodog

            Reading your rants can be challenging. I am still trying to get an answer to my question. Do you (Wayne) have an opinion as to the latest legislation introduced by NC Republicans rolling back the elective abortion from twenty weeks to six weeks? It is a simple question, no need for accusations, double talk or three-dollar words. Just a simple answer. If you find it difficult to answer this simple question, I can only conclude you are just another internet troll, not worthy of engaging.

          • Wayne

            Currently, the way it reads is that the bill prohibits abortion past 12 weeks, with some exceptions for rape, incest or to preserve the life and health of the mother. I consider that to be reasonable.

            The 12-week ban is not as restrictive as bans enacted in other states across the country since the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Many states have banned most abortions at ANY stage of pregnancy or after six weeks, before most women even know they ARE pregnant.

            As we know from statistics, most abortions take place within the first trimester, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Republicans in North Carolina have pitched the 12-week ban as a legitimate compromise. Although I don’t personally support abortion at all, I consider that to be a reasonable compromise, and a sop to the Leftists in your organization who see abortion as the ‘hill to die on’ when it comes to challenging the Republican majority in the House. So be it.

            Now, how about answering MY questions. At what point does the unborn infant become human??

            If you decide the unborn child IS, in fact, a human being, then at what point is it acceptable to you to kill it? THAT definition is obviously very important, because it defines what lies at the very heart of your position.

            MY position—and that of the entire conservative branch of the Republican Party—is unequivocal: the choice is kill an innocent human being—simply because they are not wanted—is morally wrong. Period.

            Answer my questions.

          • cocodog

            The old saying Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love comes to mind as I read your response. You are against abortion, yet if a Republican legislature writes laws that permit a physician to abort a fetus up to six weeks you are all in, but it bothers you.
            This is what I call hypocrisy. If you were genuine in your beliefs, you would be against abortion.

            OK, you asked the question “when does life begin”? I will try to keep this as simple as possible. There is at least a dozen or more definitions out there. The one I was taught by my criminal law professor was based on the common law concept of homicide. To have a homicide, there must be a killing by a person of another person. This means you need a live person.
            In the case of a fetus, life begins when it quickens. I am told by friends of mine in the medical profession, the moment in pregnancy when the pregnant woman starts to feel the fetus’s movement in the uterus. Again, I am going on what I am told that usually occurs in the second trimester.
            I m not a woman, so I have relied on what trained professionals tell me.
            I suspect women do not take abortion lightly. It can have long range effects in terms of physical and mental issues. It is unnatural for a woman to terminate a pregnancy by abortion. But that is not a decision the state should have any part. The Row case made that point. Women going through such a process have an absolute right of privacy. It is not something Government has any business becoming involved, other than to assure the patient the physician is qualified.

            Up until about twenty or so years ago, evangelists took no interest in abortion. This was a Catholic thing. It was only when a TV preacher realized he could stir up division that it became important.
            I might add, TC has done an excellent job covering many of the medical aspects. Medicine is not my field. I recommend you reread some of his stuff. Also, abortion is losing issue for Republicans. If they have any chance of winning anything, they had best move away from it. Concentrate on rebuilding the reputations of some of those wing nuts seeking to be your parties standard barer. If such is possible.

        • cocodog

          The problem with white Christian nationalists is they believe life begins at the time two folks have sex. This notion was taught to them by an uneducated TV evangelist 10 or 15 years ago. Of course, scientifically this assumption is not correct. For a white Christian nationalist to accept science as valid is about as likely as dragons inhabiting the earth. They are good with Jewish Lizards from outer space, but no dragons!

          • Wayne

            Very interesting response. While I alluded to NO religion whatsoever, you automatically reverted to the standard Democrat canard that I must be a ‘white Christian nationalist’, thus (in YOUR mind) reflexively discrediting ANY legitimacy to my questions whatsoever. That’s pretty standard stuff for your party extremists, and I see you have learned their tactics well: Never answer a question; automatically divert, deflect, and go on the offense by leveraging accusations and invectives against your opponent. That’s pretty good stuff, straight from Saul Alinsky’s playbook, and you have learned well.

            I never—not once in my dialogue—ever suggested that life begins at the time two folks have sex. YOU said that, not me, and then you drifted off onto some other drivel. Thus, you never answered, nor offered any response to my fundamental question: when does the unborn become a human being?

            I posited that killing an innocent human being—simply because they are not wanted–is wrong. I pointed out that If it is wrong to kill innocent human beings (and it is), and abortion kills an innocent human being (which it does), then abortion MUST be wrong.

            Thus it begs the question: when does the unborn become a human being? Please define for me where that specific point in time is (in the framework of the Democrat Party platform which embraces all of this) when the unborn entity is not human, and then when it suddenly DOES becomes human? I’m assuming, of course, that you can comprehend the moral turpitude of killing an innocent human life, and that you can grasp, and fully understand, the moral wrong with terminating the existence of an innocent human life.

          • cocodog

            One of the problems I have with reading your stuff is clarity. You are all over the place. You regard abortion as taking a human life, but you fail to define when life begins. You rant that abortion tears a human life from the female body, yet never address at what point in the gestation period that is wrong. How about the latest legislation, Republicans are proposing? Do you agree with six weeks?

          • Wayne

            Reading comprehension must not be your strong point, or else your reading skills never got very far from the newspaper comic page. I even break my narrative up into paragraphs for you, so that even a Democrat with limited academic abilities can comprehend what I’m writing.

            Look—the very question you are asking ME is the very question I have been asking YOU! I just asked YOU in my previous post, and I quote: ‘Thus it begs the question: when does the unborn become a human being?’

            YOU are the one who seems to be representing the settled wisdom of the Democrat Party. YOU are the one who seems to be claiming ‘the high ground’, asserting that YOUR moral position supersedes that of all conservative-minded people who find the procedure of abortion morally repulsive.

            I’ll say it again: the choice to kill an innocent human being—simply because they are not wanted– is morally wrong. And I will repeat this as well: ‘I’m not arguing the medical statistics in this discussion related to those instances where aborting an unborn child becomes tragically necessary due to health complications. I’m arguing about the moral implications of an abortion decided upon by choice.

            If it is wrong to kill innocent human beings (and it is), and abortion kills an innocent human being (which it does), then abortion MUST be wrong. Period.’

            The ball is in your court, scooter. You tell all of US when life begins. You tell US when it is permissible–per YOUR definition, or per the definition of the Democrat Party–to abort and to end an innocent human life. MY position is clear: abortion for ANY reason other than for medical complications is wrong. Spare us the usual pabulum and boring talking points.

          • ringlet86

            That is an extremely racist and bigoted.

    • cocodog

      Wayne represents what has been called “those who can walk up right” among the “White Christian Nationalist movement.” Unlike his knuckle dragging colleagues he has a greater vocabulary, but the same level of comprehension. But he is improving, this post only contained five misspelled words, and four grammatical errors. Moreover, he refrained from using his signature rebel yell.

      • ringlet86

        I think you’d do better to try and counter his position rather than mere insult him.

        ad hominem just means you’ve nothing yourself

        • cocodog

          Read between the lines Ring. We are not insulting by speaking out against misinformation and lies. There are two ways of dealing with folks who profess misleading and false information. One, ignore them or two call them out for what they are and make them famous. Folks have a promising idea of what you and your associate represent. Folks like you show up at this site before election cycles spewing hate and misinformation with regularity. You are not something new. We are Democrats, Unaffiliated and Republicans who cannot tolerate what is occurring within their party. One thing unites us, we do not support politicians who lie and promote hate nor the folks who are their unwitting stooges.

          • TC

            Well said.

          • ringlet86

            what is misinformation?

          • cocodog

            Ring tail, seriously! You are not familiar with this word. You use so much of it, yet you have no idea what it means! Well, here is a homework assignment for you, Look it up.
            Example: Trump said at that phony CNN town hall meeting, the police officer involved in the shooting at the capital, later appeared on television, to brag about it. This is an outright lie, and a perfect example.

          • ringlet86

            For me its just a word used by the left to ignore inconvenient truths, simply something they don’t like. The word came into use during the COVID stupidity. To fight truths coming out about the mRNA shots. Now its just use as general club to dismiss people. Basically you are telling the person they are a liar.

            But I don’t lie ever. So I think that people who use that word just don’t agree, and since I’ve found liberals/ democrats HATE having their beliefs challenged they just say “misinformation” and dismiss it.

            I NEVER misinform. I state only the truth. I’ve no agenda, no reason to lie. no reason to distort.

            I’m never going to change anyone minds here. You guys are 2000% in the bag for the democrats. They could kill puppies live on TV and all you guys will state with absolute certainty that no one could kill puppies better than them!

            Therefore I have nothing gain by lying to anyone.

            And really guys you just aren’t that important.

          • cocodog

            Ring, you are your own worst enemy. Your postings are based on the notion that leftists use the misinformation label to deny the truth is childish. Here is a suggestion: drop the immature, high school to cute by a one thousand, techniques. COVID killed over seven million worldwide and over a million in this country. Republicans lied about the seriousness of the disease, saying, it can be cured by zinc, Clorox injections, inserting lights into the human body and medication designed to treat malaria. This is misinformation! Democrats called it out. Respected members of the medical profession said it was wrong. You are calling it stupid. These types of statements only demonstrate the immaturity of your thought process. Moreover, reaffirm my and others belief you are a high school kid trying to play mind games on the internet.

          • ringlet86

            A lot of stupidity occurred during covid. and that is where I first saw the “misinformation” label come out and it was used against real scientific facts that were inconvenient. That is all I am saying. I know it existed long before that but I never saw it in broad use prior to that. and it was used to silence a lot of people who turned out to be correct the whole time.

            .”…One thing unites us, we do not support politicians who lie and promote hate nor the folks who are their unwitting stooges….” That is some real irony right there!

            Anyway. My point still stands. Misinformation is used to silence unpopular view points. You do it yourself all the time. You don’t even realize it.

            This place isn’t the best to converse beyond a quick take. But I’ll gladly defend anything I’ve typed here as not misinformation. I’ve told you why. There is no point to it. So I’m not going to bother. You aren’t interested, Neither am I.

            You have your incorrect opinion of me, make invalid assumptions as to my views and disparage me and that is that. BTW I’ve been here for at least I don’t know, A long time, and I just decided to post recently.

          • cocodog

            OK Ring, when was the misinformation label used to attack “real scientific facts” and which party used?

          • ringlet86

            Really. Its done, and over. So I’m not going to get into it.

          • cocodog

            I thought so, nothing new here, just accusations followed by the internet two step. Where have we seen this before?

        • ringlet86

          You can think what you want. It matter not a whit to me.

          • cocodog

            Frankly Ring makes minor difference what I think about you, it is what others think of you! And right now, I would say your credibility has serious issues.

          • ringlet86

            I couldn’t care less what anyone thinks of me outside those I love

    • Melinda Lewis Baran

      Wayne, with your opinion about abortions–here’s mine about state laws that make abortion illegal. All women who do not want to be mothers–in spite of being forced to go through nine months of pregnancy against their will– will have the right to sign the baby over to its sperm father and walk away–forever.

      • ringlet86

        …”state laws that make abortion illegal. ( fortunately NC is no one of those) All women who do not want to be mothers–in spite of being forced to go through nine months of pregnancy against their will ( then don’t have sex) will have the right to sign the baby over to its sperm father and walk away–forever. ( I believe they already have this.)

        Here is an alternative. Instead of using abortion as a birth control method.

        They could avoid all the drama and simply choose not have sex with people they don’t want to spend the rest of their life with and they can assure that person reciprocates those feelings. Or at the very least they could be EXTREMELY discriminating as to whom they do have sex with. Since they will bear the brunt of the burden. They could be sure to choose quality individuals who will own up to their responsibility. That alone will remove a ton of issues.

        Then they can get married (which gives legal protections) That way if they get pregnant a whole bunch of drama is avoided.
        Its part of the deal in having sex. It is possible, despite precautions ( of which there are legion) to get pregnant. That is absolutely well known, and should surprise exactly no one. If you can’t handle the responsibility of your actions…. Don’t do it.

        Its kind of simple really.

        We are not a bunch of animals driven by our base desires. We have intellect and can easily weigh the consequences of our actions.
        all that is needed to avoid a ton of drams and angst, heartache, and interpersonal stress etc… is to just think carefully.

  6. Mike

    I think I read here not long ago that the Republicans in the NC General Assembly are 98% white and 88% male. Apparently the goal is to hit 100% on both counts.

    • ringlet86

      LOL As is race and sex have anything to do with anything in our system of government.

  7. Robert Frntress

    Excellent analysis.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!