Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Ohio, Ohio, Ohio – Measuring Trump’s Chances – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 8 in General
imageOhio, Ohio, Ohio – Measuring Trump’s Chances – politicalbetting.com

There is an election today, and it might be rather a consequential one. Yep: it’s the Republican Senate Primary in Ohio, and it’s going to give us an early glimpse into Trump’s ongoing popularity with ‘the base’. Because the three leading candidate represent the three different strands within the GOP:

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • CatManCatMan Posts: 1,498
    Premier
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 47,939
    CatMan said:

    Premier

    Get Inn?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 97,799
    Ohio is Trump country, voting for him in 2020 as well as 2016. I expect therefore that Vance will win the GOP primary
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,507
    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    Premier

    Get Inn?
    More Travelodge, 2BH.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 3,999
    The venture capitalist Vance had a brief career as liberal America's scold during the Brexit-Trump aftermath era, but like many other writers and academics who settled into that position, turns out he was just covering for extreme-right positions in politics, like the US election conspiracies. Sad.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 49,748
    The view from Ohio:

    " “We’ve been listening to political ads since last September — it’s awful,” said Mike Heister, 62, who owns an insurance brokerage and lives in Green Township."

    NY Time live blog
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    Liverpool score!

    2-3 Liverpool lead in aggregate.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,517

    The view from Ohio:

    " “We’ve been listening to political ads since last September — it’s awful,” said Mike Heister, 62, who owns an insurance brokerage and lives in Green Township."

    NY Time live blog

    That's not awful, it's hell.

    Thank christ we don't have to put up with that shit.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,517
    I know endorsements from people we like are significant, but even so it'd be nice if people thought things through for themselves just a little bit more rather than so clearly just doing what we're told. That's not a knock on Trumpers, it's common enough behaviour.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    Interesting thread Robert. Hopefully Dolan wins from what you've said, but I wouldn't hold my breath expecting that result.

    Interestingly Trump didn't win the Ohio primary in 2016, but considering it was the home state of Kasich who did win it, I'm not sure how much can be read into that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 47,939
    mwadams said:

    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    Premier

    Get Inn?
    More Travelodge, 2BH.
    Well, hotel puns were never my Forte.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049

    IshmaelZ said:

    Aslan said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    It is demonstrably true that no-one treats early embryos as babies outside of the abortion debate. Lots of early embryos fail to implant in the uterine wall and “die”, without the mother even noticing. If we thought these were babies, we would care about them, we’d want to know about them, we’d mourn them. We don’t. We pay them no attention. You probably had a “sibling” that failed to implant in your mother’s uterine wall. Have you ever mourned this sibling?

    You hear people saying that heart disease is the biggest cause of death. Or maybe it’s meant to be cancer. If that ball of cells is a baby, then neither heart disease or cancer are the leading cause of death. It’s failure to implant in the uterine wall, that’s the leading cause of death, your logic says. Why do we spend £billions on treating and researching heart disease but basically nothing on the failure to implant in the uterine wall? Because no-one really believes these early embryos are actually people.
    However, people feel a deep loss following a miscarriage in the early months of pregnancy. Why is that, unless they have lost a baby?
    Show me someone who has felt deep loss for a failure to implant/miscarriage in the first *fortnight*, a deep loss like that felt when, say, a 6 month a baby dies. No-one does.

    As time passes, that ball of cells becomes more and more of a person, so of course we can understand the deep loss people feel at later miscarriages. But the anti-abortionists say life begins at conception. I’m saying that, in reality, people do not act as if life begins at conception outside of abortion debates.

    If you want to argue life “begins” at 1 month post-conception, or 2, or 3, those are more nuanced debates. Perhaps they are more nuanced than a political betting comments section can handle. I respect people may differ when quite they want to draw a cut-off date.

    But the idea that “life” begins at conception is untenable with our natural biology where the majority of zygotes never make it.
    From failure to implant through to stillbirth, there are plenty of conceptions that don't result in the birth of a child. The resulting level of sorrow increases from zero to devastation as the pregnancy progresses.

    However, these are all natural processes, very different to active intervention to end the life of an unborn child.

    A fertilized ovum is not a child.
    So when does it become one? And does that matter in this debate?
    At birth.
    What is special about birth? Topologically speaking, it's just moving from inside a cylinder to outside it. Biologically, it is going from 100% dependency on the mother to 100% dependency on the mother.

    As I have already asked, would your answer differ if humans were marsupial? Why?
    Anyone who describes birth merely in topological terms has never been at a birth.
    A creepy virgin writes.

    I have.

    Wanna bet about it?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,536
    Liverpool party central
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,536
    Liverpool party central
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    NYT Live blog

    Ohio and Indiana are shaded red on a different type of map: Parts of both states are under a tornado watch until 9 p.m. Eastern time. The watch area includes Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton and southeastern Indiana.

    SSI - Potentially this could hurt Vance a bit, as he's only major GOP US Senate hopeful from SW Ohio, others are from NE, and his turf is in the watch zone.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    ydoethur said:

    mwadams said:

    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    Premier

    Get Inn?
    More Travelodge, 2BH.
    Well, hotel puns were never my Forte.
    It's fate at work:

    The moving finger writes; and, having Ritz,
    Moves on...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 40,136
    ydoethur said:

    mwadams said:

    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    Premier

    Get Inn?
    More Travelodge, 2BH.
    Well, hotel puns were never my Forte.
    You normally share a ton of them.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,699

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I certainly believe that anyone who disagrees with me is my inferior.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 47,939
    Incidentally, I'm wondering if this is a false flag thread. I know it says it's rcs, but it doesn't seem to mention Radiohead.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    Democratic nominee for US Senate from Ohio, likely Tim Ryan, will likely do best IF Vance is GOP nominee. As he can appeal to Republicans turned off by 45's toxic twit.

    My guess is that IF any of the other Republicans gets nominated, then GOP vote will be LESS inclined to flake off, as the flakes will NOT vote for Dem, and are likely to hold their noses, show up and vote the GOP ticket in November.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 47,939
    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I certainly believe that anyone who disagrees with me is my inferior.
    There are two sides to every argument. My side and a wrong side.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 21,195
    rcs1000 said:

    I certainly believe that anyone who disagrees with me is my inferior.

    [taps mic]

    WRONG
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,191
    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I certainly believe that anyone who disagrees with me is my inferior.
    I misread the sentence, I thought you said "is my mother"
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 49,748
    kle4 said:

    The view from Ohio:

    " “We’ve been listening to political ads since last September — it’s awful,” said Mike Heister, 62, who owns an insurance brokerage and lives in Green Township."

    NY Time live blog

    That's not awful, it's hell.

    Thank christ we don't have to put up with that shit.
    Don't give the Tories ideas for another dead cat.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,286

    Congratulations to @Roger for his 15/1 tip on Liverpool at Half Time. Joins the Oscars as something Rogerdamus can tip about ;)

    Thank you! This could be the start of a beautiful friendship............
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Supporting Liverpool takes years off my life but my God, this season is something else.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Roger said:

    I hope no one missed my 15/1 tip on Liverpool!

    Well done sir!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    kle4 said:

    The view from Ohio:

    " “We’ve been listening to political ads since last September — it’s awful,” said Mike Heister, 62, who owns an insurance brokerage and lives in Green Township."

    NY Time live blog

    That's not awful, it's hell.

    Thank christ we don't have to put up with that shit.
    Don't give the Tories ideas for another dead cat.
    Be difficult to improve on this now quite topical one:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfFVt6VD5cM
  • TazTaz Posts: 4,787
    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,699
    edited May 3
    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    Adding another one:

    11. If you are working out of a windowless office in St Peterberg, then at least try an be subtle about it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Peter Brimelow, a former National Review editor who now runs the racist website VDARE, celebrated the Roe news by posting on the alt social media site Gab: "Next stop Brown vs. Board!



    https://twitter.com/nickmartin/status/1521555176515014656/photo/1
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    RCS, note that RCP average says 30% of GOP vote is for someone who is NOT Vance, Dolan or Mandel. Specficially:
    Mike Gibbons 15%
    Jane Timken 7%
    Other 8%

    Extent that this "none of the above" vote gets squeezed, and which way(s) will likely determine the primary winner.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 25,876
    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    Does the Radiohead denial crime apply only on PB or will you take revenge if you see us making such comments elsewhere in the universe as well? Before you answer, do bear in mind I do have a record of you making derogatory comments about Radiohead in another place not too long ago :)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    The Tory Unionists on PB are always complaining about the National. But, I don't know why, they seem to like the DT. Didn't the DT try to get out of trouble over a story by explaining nobody could be expected to take what they print serious newspaper, it was like a comic or something?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,699
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfySK7CLEEg
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 25,876
    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    The Tory Unionists on PB are always complaining about the National. But, I don't know why, they seem to like the DT. Didn't the DT try to get out of trouble over a story by explaining nobody could be expected to take what they print serious newspaper, it was like a comic or something?
    Erm, just in case you were being serious... different National.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 1,498
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    Adding another one:

    11. If you are working out of a windowless office in St Peterberg, then at least try an be subtle about it.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg,_Florida ?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 7,466
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    Weirdo.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    The Tory Unionists on PB are always complaining about the National. But, I don't know why, they seem to like the DT. Didn't the DT try to get out of trouble over a story by explaining nobody could be expected to take what they print serious newspaper, it was like a comic or something?
    Erm, just in case you were being serious... different National.
    Yep, or rather no, yes I was extracting the urine ...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Jurgen Klopp has now led his team to as many Champions League finals as Alex Ferguson. Not bad.

    https://twitter.com/Tactical_Times/status/1521592029028958212
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 21,195
    edited May 3
    Carnyx said:

    The Tory Unionists on PB are always complaining about the National.

    That's The Nat onal
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 25,876

    Peter Brimelow, a former National Review editor who now runs the racist website VDARE, celebrated the Roe news by posting on the alt social media site Gab: "Next stop Brown vs. Board!



    https://twitter.com/nickmartin/status/1521555176515014656/photo/1

    Jesus. They are genuinely insane.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 16,443
    Japan is the greatest band of all time but since they disbanded in 1982 the 30 year rule doesn't apply.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 18,903
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    Who is this Radiohead of whom you speak?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 10,391
    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    No problem with any of that, Robert, but for the avoidance of doubt can you please state once and for all where the Site stands on pineapple toppings on pizza.

    Thanks
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    edited May 3
    Scott_xP said:

    Carnyx said:

    The Tory Unionists on PB are always complaining about the National.

    That's The Nat onal
    That's because they can't read proper, but then they do like to complain about it without having a sub in my recent experience.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 44,699
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfySK7CLEEg
    As an aside, the song is particularly appropriate given the thread header.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 7,466

    Jurgen Klopp has now led his team to as many Champions League finals as Alex Ferguson. Not bad.

    https://twitter.com/Tactical_Times/status/1521592029028958212

    I seem to recall some discussion in the early stages of his time at Liverpool that players get tired of his high press style, so he had 2-3 seasons at most.
    Doesn’t look that way!
    As much as I disliked Liverpool in the 80’s and 90’s, I really do like Klopp, so I end up wanting Liverpool to do well. Man City, not so much.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 25,876
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    At the risk of inciting the ban hammer... I prefer the Post Modern Jukebox cover.
  • TazTaz Posts: 4,787

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    Weirdo.
    It’s currently 5th on my most played on Spotify.

    Behind Owner of a lonely heart, Layla, run by snow patrol and Groovin with Mr Bloe.

    Ahead, rock factor 9.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147

    Peter Brimelow, a former National Review editor who now runs the racist website VDARE, celebrated the Roe news by posting on the alt social media site Gab: "Next stop Brown vs. Board!



    https://twitter.com/nickmartin/status/1521555176515014656/photo/1

    Jesus. They are genuinely insane.
    I was speaking to an American friend/lawyer who pointed out about 20 years ago it used to be a joke that the Originalists would seek to say the Dred Scott decision was right because the constitution valued African Americans as three fifths of a white man.

    Now he can see it happening.
  • TazTaz Posts: 4,787
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfySK7CLEEg
    Interesting signing style. Thanks.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    Adding another one:

    11. If you are working out of a windowless office in St Peterberg, then at least try an be subtle about it.
    Think all these rules are pretty clear and understandable.

    Only one that I have question about is 10th PB Commandment - Thou shalt NOT dox.

    Which is, is is doxing if a PBer notes that other PBer have doxed themselves? Not trying to be a smart-aleck (this time!) but just asking? Assuming that, when in doubt, best not!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 31,467
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    For light relief - rather taken with this picture of a major naval base, Punic style:

    https://twitter.com/cvdldb/status/1521593872018812933
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 16,575
    Andy_JS said:

    Japan is the greatest band of all time but since they disbanded in 1982 the 30 year rule doesn't apply.

    I remember when a lad at school suddenly started saying how great Japan were. All became clear when he dropped into the conversation how a certain girl in our year was also a fan...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    Max, you're assigning views to me that I neither hold nor have expressed. You wouldn't like me doing that with you, now, would you? No.

    I have no problem with thinking of an unborn child as a baby. My problem is a ban on abortion. And I don't see that the first leads to the second. Nor, I see, do you.
  • TazTaz Posts: 4,787

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    At the risk of inciting the ban hammer... I prefer the Post Modern Jukebox cover.

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    At the risk of inciting the ban hammer... I prefer the Post Modern Jukebox cover.
    This ? Touch of the bossa nova about it. Of course many covers are better than the originals.

    Always on my mind by the pet shop boys being an obvious one.

    https://youtu.be/m3lF2qEA2cw
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 31,467

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    Who is this Radiohead of whom you speak?
    A modern pop beat combo, your honour.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 3,999
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    Adding another one:

    11. If you are working out of a windowless office in St Peterberg, then at least try an be subtle about it.
    And don't accidentally walk out the window of your windowless offices with your mistress and dog.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,282
    Where as I have loads of friends who vote Tory I could never be friends with a Trump supporter , I simply couldn’t stomach anyone who would enable Trump.

  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967

    Peter Brimelow, a former National Review editor who now runs the racist website VDARE, celebrated the Roe news by posting on the alt social media site Gab: "Next stop Brown vs. Board!



    https://twitter.com/nickmartin/status/1521555176515014656/photo/1

    DNC ought to send this storm-trooper a big thank-you basket!

    Re: National Review, still remember watching Wm F Buckley's tv show "Firing Line" on PBS, as a kid. Thought the young preppies he literally had sitting at his feet looked like total twits.

    And got to see him Richard Crossman, obviously in less than robust health (he died a few years later) debating - and wiping the floor - with WFB.

    Didn't happen all the time - but it did THAT time.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 3,999
    Remember 24 hours ago when we thought the midterms might be about cost of living, woke and Ukraine? Innocent face
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    Remarkable statistic but before tonight's game, Liverpool had only been behind for 69 minutes across all matches in all competitions to date in 2022.

    So despite winning 2-3 tonight, they were behind tonight for almost as long as every other match in 2022 so far across the competitions combined.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,650
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    Max, you're assigning views to me that I neither hold nor have expressed. You wouldn't like me doing that with you, now, would you? No.

    I have no problem with thinking of an unborn child as a baby. My problem is a ban on abortion. And I don't see that the first leads to the second. Nor, I see, do you.
    Quoting specifically - "No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not." - is incorrect. Plenty of couples (including us) lost pregnancies early on and it feels (and still does) as though the baby was snatched away.

    You are simply wrong that people don't see early pregnancies as babies outside of the abortion debate. I dare you to go into one of the miscarriage support meetings and suggest as such, I think you'd walk out after being kicked in the balls a few times by irate women.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    Polls close in most of Indiana in under 1 hour (6pm Eastern), and in under 2 in NW & SW sections (6pm Central).

    Polls close in all of Ohio in just under 2 1/2 hours (7.30pm Eastern)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 13,166

    Jurgen Klopp has now led his team to as many Champions League finals as Alex Ferguson. Not bad.

    https://twitter.com/Tactical_Times/status/1521592029028958212

    Klopp is the Ronnie O'Sullivan of soccerball.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, the new updated 2022 PB rulebook is:

    1. Don't deny the holocaust. And if you do deny the holocaust and are asked politely by the moderators to stop, then stop. Don't keep posting about how it didn't happen.

    2. Don't be rude about OGH. He doesn't like it, and will ban you.

    3. Avoid overtly racist or antisemitic posts.

    4. Don't libel public figures. OGH has had correspondence from Carter Ruck in the past, and he didn't enjoy the experience. If you're putting OGH in danger of getting sued, you will be banned.

    5. Be nice about Radiohead. rcs1000 (me) runs the technical side of the site, and I will ban you if you are caught denying they are the greatest band of the last 30 years. (If you say say that they might be second only to The National, then I might forgive you.)

    6. Don't claim to have tipped certain outcomes when you didn't.

    7. If you enter into a bet with another site member, then - if you lose - you need to pay up or you will be banned.

    8. Don't have multiple different IDs.

    9. Use a genuine email address when registering. If I email you multiple times and you don't respond (@Gary_Burton & aliases), then I reserve the right to... oh yes... wave the ban hammer.

    10. Don't dox other posters. Respect the fact that some people like to be pseudonymous.

    I’ve never heard of The National but I quite like Creep by Radiohead.
    Who is this Radiohead of whom you speak?
    A modern pop beat combo, your honour.
    Some losers who can't even spell Tom.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 7,967
    Can you go back home again? Mixed views re: JD Vance by voters today in Middletown, Ohio
    via NYT live blog:

    In the battered steel city of Middletown, Ohio, where the Trump-endorsed G.O.P. candidate J.D. Vance grew up, some of the voters heading to the polls on Tuesday seemed more concerned with a local fire-station issue on the ballot than with voting for one of their own.

    “I play volleyball at the senior center and not one of them said they were voting for Vance,” said Sheila Belcher, 68, a retired postal worker. Ms. Belcher said the Republican Senate candidate’s best-selling book, “Hillbilly Elegy,” which used Middletown as a backdrop, made her angry. She also cited Mr. Vance’s years-old comments criticizing former President Donald J. Trump, and his full embrace of Mr. Trump later, as a turnoff.

    “He flip-flopped, and that was upsetting,” Ms. Belcher said, adding that the nation’s borders and inflation were her top concerns going into the voting booth. She cast her ballot in the primary for the businessman Mike Gibbons.

    Demarius LeForce, 93, said she was turned off by Mr. Vance’s portrayal of her hometown and that she voted instead for Jane Timken, a former state Republican Party chair.

    “When I read the book, I got mad. I was born on Main Street in Middletown and I didn’t recognize the town he described,” Ms. LeForce said.

    Maureen Hattrup, 39, an instructor at a local community college, said she has her students read “Hillbilly Elegy” and that it always inspires “lively discussion.” She cast her vote in the Democratic primary.

    One voter interviewed in Middletown said he was sticking by his hometown Senate candidate. “He has that private sector knowledge and experience,” said John Langhorne, 70, who voted for Mr. Vance. “He’s not a career politician, and I like that.”
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,282
    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,650
    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 49,748

    Can you go back home again? Mixed views re: JD Vance by voters today in Middletown, Ohio
    via NYT live blog:

    In the battered steel city of Middletown, Ohio, where the Trump-endorsed G.O.P. candidate J.D. Vance grew up, some of the voters heading to the polls on Tuesday seemed more concerned with a local fire-station issue on the ballot than with voting for one of their own.

    “I play volleyball at the senior center and not one of them said they were voting for Vance,” said Sheila Belcher, 68, a retired postal worker. Ms. Belcher said the Republican Senate candidate’s best-selling book, “Hillbilly Elegy,” which used Middletown as a backdrop, made her angry. She also cited Mr. Vance’s years-old comments criticizing former President Donald J. Trump, and his full embrace of Mr. Trump later, as a turnoff.

    “He flip-flopped, and that was upsetting,” Ms. Belcher said, adding that the nation’s borders and inflation were her top concerns going into the voting booth. She cast her ballot in the primary for the businessman Mike Gibbons.

    Demarius LeForce, 93, said she was turned off by Mr. Vance’s portrayal of her hometown and that she voted instead for Jane Timken, a former state Republican Party chair.

    “When I read the book, I got mad. I was born on Main Street in Middletown and I didn’t recognize the town he described,” Ms. LeForce said.

    Maureen Hattrup, 39, an instructor at a local community college, said she has her students read “Hillbilly Elegy” and that it always inspires “lively discussion.” She cast her vote in the Democratic primary.

    One voter interviewed in Middletown said he was sticking by his hometown Senate candidate. “He has that private sector knowledge and experience,” said John Langhorne, 70, who voted for Mr. Vance. “He’s not a career politician, and I like that.”

    "“He’s not a career politician"

    He is now.

    If he wins the senate race I expect a tilt at POTUS in a few years.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    Max, you're assigning views to me that I neither hold nor have expressed. You wouldn't like me doing that with you, now, would you? No.

    I have no problem with thinking of an unborn child as a baby. My problem is a ban on abortion. And I don't see that the first leads to the second. Nor, I see, do you.
    Quoting specifically - "No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not." - is incorrect. Plenty of couples (including us) lost pregnancies early on and it feels (and still does) as though the baby was snatched away.

    You are simply wrong that people don't see early pregnancies as babies outside of the abortion debate. I dare you to go into one of the miscarriage support meetings and suggest as such, I think you'd walk out after being kicked in the balls a few times by irate women.
    It wasn't Kin who wrote that Max.

    Miscarriages certainly are a tragedy that bring a sense of loss, its even possible to have that sense of loss without a pregnancy or a miscarriage. A friend thought she was pregnant and was happy only to find out at the 12 week scan that it was a false positive, she'd never been pregnant. She mourned the loss, even though philosophically some might say there was 'nothing' to mourn, its not true and was still deeply distressing for her.

    Finding out that you can't have children can also be deeply distressing too.

    Sensitivity is certainly required on this subject, because sometimes you can never know what someone has been through.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,282
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
    Good luck to you and your family . You must be so excited.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    Max, you're assigning views to me that I neither hold nor have expressed. You wouldn't like me doing that with you, now, would you? No.

    I have no problem with thinking of an unborn child as a baby. My problem is a ban on abortion. And I don't see that the first leads to the second. Nor, I see, do you.
    Quoting specifically - "No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not." - is incorrect. Plenty of couples (including us) lost pregnancies early on and it feels (and still does) as though the baby was snatched away.

    You are simply wrong that people don't see early pregnancies as babies outside of the abortion debate. I dare you to go into one of the miscarriage support meetings and suggest as such, I think you'd walk out after being kicked in the balls a few times by irate women.
    You're quoting a different poster. He made some good points imo but that specific sentiment isn't one I share.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,173
    On the plus side, Boris is absorbing a lot of that hatred and resentment, and it will pass with him, like a bad bank, or a decommissioned nuclear site, or in a strange way, Jesus.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,650
    nico679 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
    Good luck to you and your family . You must be so excited.
    Thanks! Extremely nervous is closer to the truth but also excited. We've already got a niece and nephew but everyone says it's always different when it's your own baby and I have no doubt about it.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,282

    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
    There’s a few there admittedly but any UK politician that tried to interfere with a women’s right to choose would be shown the door.

    Thankfully the UK remains a truly secular society and Amen to that !!!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
    It was quite striking to see the justification put forward on PB that we needed an Established Church to stop the RC Church becoming dominant in public discourse and influencing HMG. No, I don't understand it either.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530

    On the plus side, Boris is absorbing a lot of that hatred and resentment, and it will pass with him, like a bad bank, or a decommissioned nuclear site, or in a strange way, Jesus.
    Boris is like Jesus for taking on our sins is the oddest hot take I've ever seen on this site. 😲

    Politics doesn't just pass like that. If the Tories lose the next election, they'll probably be out of power for at least a decade.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    On the plus side, Boris is absorbing a lot of that hatred and resentment, and it will pass with him, like a bad bank, or a decommissioned nuclear site, or in a strange way, Jesus.
    Boris is like Jesus for taking on our sins is the oddest hot take I've ever seen on this site. 😲

    Politics doesn't just pass like that. If the Tories lose the next election, they'll probably be out of power for at least a decade.
    Nuclear waste is perhaps an unintentionally apt comparison.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    Re header, so COME ON DOLAN then! There's much to fret about these days, to put it mildly, but I still find time for this one - the possible return of Donald Trump to the White House. It's right up there.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,649

    Peter Brimelow, a former National Review editor who now runs the racist website VDARE, celebrated the Roe news by posting on the alt social media site Gab: "Next stop Brown vs. Board!



    https://twitter.com/nickmartin/status/1521555176515014656/photo/1

    DNC ought to send this storm-trooper a big thank-you basket!

    Re: National Review, still remember watching Wm F Buckley's tv show "Firing Line" on PBS, as a kid. Thought the young preppies he literally had sitting at his feet looked like total twits.

    And got to see him Richard Crossman, obviously in less than robust health (he died a few years later) debating - and wiping the floor - with WFB.

    Didn't happen all the time - but it did THAT time.
    Buckley did do that great against the Man from U.N.C.L.E either:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNKkcAOYCVY
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 31,467
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
    Well, Fox jr2 got good A levels, so seemingly undamaged! I think there were real concerns 21 years ago, but I think those have largely evaporated.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    edited May 3

    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
    image

    Thankfully though those people generally aren't nutjobs at least, and thankfully they don't generally interfere with politics much either. Not that it justifies the situation.

    The Americans don't have either but the nutters still interfere much more.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,173
    edited May 3

    On the plus side, Boris is absorbing a lot of that hatred and resentment, and it will pass with him, like a bad bank, or a decommissioned nuclear site, or in a strange way, Jesus.
    Boris is like Jesus for taking on our sins is the oddest hot take I've ever seen on this site. 😲

    Politics doesn't just pass like that. If the Tories lose the next election, they'll probably be out of power for at least a decade.
    Thanks! :blush:
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,282
    MaxPB said:

    nico679 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
    Good luck to you and your family . You must be so excited.
    Thanks! Extremely nervous is closer to the truth but also excited. We've already got a niece and nephew but everyone says it's always different when it's your own baby and I have no doubt about it.
    I can understand the nervousness . Keep us posted and we look forward to you moaning in here about sleepless nights and changing nappies! Lol
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,517

    On the plus side, Boris is absorbing a lot of that hatred and resentment, and it will pass with him, like a bad bank, or a decommissioned nuclear site, or in a strange way, Jesus.
    Boris is like Jesus for taking on our sins is the oddest hot take I've ever seen on this site. 😲
    It's a common enough argument from many MPs too scared to act against a leader, or at least so they may leak. The Leader as lightning rod approach, we saw it used under May (admittedly it actually worked on that occasion).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Carnyx said:

    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
    It was quite striking to see the justification put forward on PB that we needed an Established Church to stop the RC Church becoming dominant in public discourse and influencing HMG. No, I don't understand it either.
    I'd expect to hear that kind of talk from the Orange Order.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 31,467
    MaxPB said:

    nico679 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I’m pro abortion (pro choice is a euphemism).

    But I’m struggling to get worked up over Roe v Wade.

    It’s not covered by the constitution, nor by common law, and as far as I can tell the original SC justification was weak.

    So let States decide, as ghastly as that must be for the poor women who have to live in said States.

    I agree. I’m also highly pro-choice but if you actually look at the leaked, draft decision, it has merit. There is nothing in the US constitution which says women have a basic right to terminate a fetus. Finessing this as a right to privacy is bogus

    The voters must decide in individual states, that’s democracy. Equally, democracy allows the president and senate to pass a law explicitly allowing abortion everywhere if they have enough votes in DC

    This decision arguably allows such a vote to ban abortion nationwide, too.
    https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1521311115392737280
    If the Alito opinion savaging Roe and Casey ends up being the Opinion of the Court, it will unravel many basic rights beyond abortion and will go further than returning the issue to the states: It will enable a GOP Congress to enact a nationwide ban on abortion and contraception.

    I’m not sure even the GOP are that stupid . To ban abortion nationwide would cause such a furore that they would be pulverized in future elections . And banning contraception would be unbelievable given most Americans aren’t Catholic.
    The democracy angle is a red herring imo. An outright ban on abortion is removing a fundamental right of women that I think should be protected regardless of which party happens to be in power, state or federal level, at any one time. States' Rights - ie "democracy" - was offered in the 1960s as for why racial segregation should continue in parts of the South. It didn't wash then, as a reason for allowing something appalling, and for me it doesn't scrub up any better now.
    Funnily enough, I bet you’d argue exactly the opposite way with regard to gun laws and the 2nd Amendment
    I would, yes, and I'd be right to do so. Literal minded consistency, regardless of nuance and context, is the enemy of good judgement.
    You are so brilliantly boring
    Just brilliant, I think you mean. Fat fingers?

    But let's not bicker about this abortion banning monstrosity - we clearly agree about it and that's rather precious. :smile:
    We agree in practice, but I maybe see nuance where you apparently don’t. The unborn child also has rights as @Sean_F eloquently puts it downthread (better than me). Otherwise we’d have no moral problems with third trimester abortion of perfectly viable babies

    When do those rights commence? It’s the devil of a question and I respect the beliefs of those who might put it at conception, even if I disagree
    No, we don't have a "nuance" issue. I support the right to abortion but with controls around reasons and term limits. I don't support an outright ban or anything close to it.

    Sean was making the obvious sound deep. He has a talent for that. So do lots of you grinders on here.

    Ooo bitchy! :smile:

    (but I love you all)
    Your brain is so weirdly narrow.

    There can be no “fundamental right’ in this debate, not when it comes down to a clash between the fundamental right of a baby to live, versus the fundamental rights of a woman to govern her own body


    It’s like saying there is a “fundamental right of a home owner to shoot a burglar dead” or a “fundamental right of a woman to stab her abusive husband”

    This is fiercely debatable stuff. It IS nuanced - because two basic rights are clashing
    A ball of cells is not a baby. A ball of cells does not have fundamental rights. Calling it a “baby” doesn’t make it a baby. No-one actually treats the early embryo as if it is a baby outside of the abortion debate, because it’s not.
    That's just your opinion, bro.
    But an informed and intelligent one. Which therefore outranks those that are neither. Where would we be if all opinions are deemed equally worthy of respect? In big big trouble.
    And a rather pompous and arrogant one too.

    You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is your inferior.
    I've been in a lot of miscarriage meetings with other couples who have had failed pregnancies (my wife and I have lost three in total) and each one was absolutely devastating. @kinabalu doesn't speak for me or my wife who have been through the absolute worst of times with miscarriages, each time it felt like a huge and personal loss for both of us and the third almost broke our marriage.

    I simply don't recognise anything that he's saying and all of the couples in those support groups would surely agree.

    I still support the right to choose and in general abortion, yet the characterisation that people who think of an unborn child as a baby as incorrect or outranked by a third rate sixth form debater is laughable. His pompous self importance is part of his character but it's also a bit sad.
    I don't think people who have not struggled with fertility can really appreciate how stressful it is. Foxjr2 was our final roll of the dice with IVF and was frozen for six months. It is a massive emotional rollercoaster and very stressful on a marriage.

    There were a number of other embryos frozen with Fox jr2, and 3 were implanted, of which only he survived to term. Under British fertility law embryos cannot be stored indefinitely, so were allowed to thaw and disintegrate some years ago. After years of stress, that wasn't an entirely comfortable thing to do.
    Very sorry to hear about your ordeal Foxy, we're finally on the way at the fourth attempt, baby due in just a few weeks now!

    Is there degradation of embryos in cold storage that could cause birth defects? It seems a bit mad to let them just thaw otherwise.
    Good luck to you and your family . You must be so excited.
    Thanks! Extremely nervous is closer to the truth but also excited. We've already got a niece and nephew but everyone says it's always different when it's your own baby and I have no doubt about it.
    Your own babies are gorgeous, other peoples look like mis-shapen potatoes or Winston Churchill. It is how biology works!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,517

    nico679 said:

    The USA is a basket case . We may have political disagreements here but thankfully don’t have the religious nutjobs interfering with politics .

    But we have unelected clergy in our parliament, our unelected head of state is head of the established church.....
    I know, it's hilarious.
This discussion has been closed.