The hypocrisy of pro-life/pro gun

Jump to Last Post 1-6 of 6 discussions (125 posts)
  1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
    Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months ago

    Senator Murphy from Connecticut sums it up pretty well.

    https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/statu … 25280?s=20

    1. Readmikenow profile image94
      Readmikenowposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      The man is an idiot.

      There is a huge difference between illegal guns being obtained and used to in a criminal act that kills people and ripping a living human being from a woman's body.

      What do you say is the solution?  More gun laws?  The parts of the country with the most gun laws like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles have some of the worst gun violence.  Why is that?

      People on the other side of the isle don't seem to realize that gun laws don't stop people from getting guns illegally.  To think it does is just plain stupid.

      The Bozo talks about getting rid of "military" style weapons.  Whatever that means...as he's talking about what happened in Michigan.  Did this idiot ever stop to look at the fact that the weapon used in the case in Michigan was a handgun?  (A very expensive one) The kid's parents were irresponsible gun owners.

      The second amendment gets dragged into the political grand standing in the most bizarre ways.

      What a shame he's using a tragedy to forward his political agenda.  I guess we can expect nothing less from a career political hack.

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Gun violence is a pervasive, endemic issue in the U.S. not solely confined to urban areas.

        Several states in the South had among the highest gun homicide rates in the country, with Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi recording rates above 10 per 100,000, according to the CDC. It's pervasive throughout the country. It's not just an urban problem.
        For example, Mississippi County, Arkansas, which has a population of more than 42,000, according to U.S. Census data, had a gun homicide rate of over 23 per 100,000, the CDC showed. That's more than double of Brooklyn/Queens in New York combined.
        We have a gun violence problem in this country. No other developed country has such a high rate of gun violence. A March 2016 study in the American Journal of Medicine found that Americans are 25 times more likely to die from gun homicide than people in other wealthy countries.
        Yes, the question is, what do we do about it? Why are we struggling with gun violence much more than similarly developed nations?

        1. Readmikenow profile image94
          Readmikenowposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          If you or anybody else can figure out a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals I'm all for it.

          "The Justice Department recently released a report that once again confirms a long-running statistic regarding firearms and crime. The DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports that in 2016, some 287,400 individuals were imprisoned for committing crimes while in possession of a firearm and 90% of those firearms were obtained illegally. The report further notes, “More than half (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at the scene of the crime (7%), or obtained it off the street or from the underground market (43%). Most of the remainder (25%) had obtained it from a family member or friend, or as a gift.”

          https://patriotpost.us/articles/60599-9 … 2019-01-17

          You do know that approximately 63 percent of all gun fatalities in the United States are suicides.  Around 2 percent are accidental gun deaths.

          The vast majority of homicides occur in urban areas.

          1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
            Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Yes, absolutely I acknowledge that  nearly two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. The US gun suicide rate is 10 times that of other high-income countries.
            Access to a gun triples the risk of death by suicide. Gun suicides are concentrated in states with high rates of gun ownership. This is from everytownrseach.org  Your reply led me to look further and all I can say I've learned something new and it's left me with the question: Why has our gun suicide rate 10 times higher than similar countries?! Shocking.
            I also read here that The US gun homicide rate is 25 times that of other high-income countries. it's disturbing and begs the question why?
            Maybe the answer is in the gun laws of other countries? Maybe it is in the cultural differences?
            Either way, it needs to be addressed in an aggressive manner. As a nation we can do much better.
            Opinion polling by Gallup suggests that a majority of Americans would like to see the laws covering the sale of firearms made more strict.

            BUT the National Rifle Association (NRA) campaigns against all forms of gun control in the US and argues that more guns make the country safer.

            It is among the most powerful special interest lobby groups in the US, with a substantial budget to influence members of Congress on gun policy.

            Again, the minority repressing  the majority.

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              "Why has our gun suicide rate 10 times higher than similar countries?!"

              There are two answers to that question.  One is that there are more guns than people in this country.  The other is that suicide is more common here than other countries.  Between the two it seems obvious that there will be more suicides by gun than other countries.

              Yes, the suicide, and even more important the homicide rate, needs addressed in this country.  Why are Americans so prone to violence?  But the answer will not be found in guns; there is no correlation between gun ownership rates and homicide rates anywhere in the "first world" countries.  Without even a correlation, guns cannot be the cause of high homicide rates we see.

              You seem to make the mistake of assuming that without guns we will not see the murder (and suicide) rates we do see, but there is nothing at all to support that viewpoint.  The fact is that murderers will kill...and if they cannot find their preferred weapon they will use a different one.  A car, perhaps, or a baseball bat (did you know more people are killed with blunt objects like a bat than all long guns {like the dreaded "assault rifle"} combined?).

              1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
                Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                The most similar to the u.s. in terms of gun ownership but with very different results

                https://www.businessinsider.com/switzer … ths-2018-2

                1. wilderness profile image94
                  wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                  Exactly.  The Swiss are a good example of just how little gun ownership contributes to a countries homicide rate.  If guns were the problem, if owning a gun makes one a killer, then Switzerland should have a much higher homicide rate that the US.

                  But it doesn't.  The Swiss don't need to get rid of their guns to have a very low murder rate.  Why not, when the US does?  Because guns aren't the problem - something in the US culture, in our psyche, in our attitude towards violence is the problem.  Not guns.  And we won't even try to address it - all our efforts are designed to rid American of guns instead.  Just a quick glance at the massive effort to demonize the so-called "assault rifle" (a common hunting rifle) shows that; those guns are used in a tiny minority of murders but the effort to get them out of the hands of the public is absolutely enormous.  Including the lie that they are military grade weapons.

                  1. Credence2 profile image77
                    Credence2posted 11 months agoin reply to this

                    Europeans are generally more evolved than their American counterparts.

                  2. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
                    Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                    I tend to agree that we have a culture of violence. But I still believe better gun laws are needed. Also this nation needs a new approach to mental health and more resources and expansion of care. And, yes, we need to address the csuses of despair and rage that would lead someone to take another life.
                    Again I feel media has a role also. With every shooting I noticed that there is an inordinate amount of coverage given to the shooter and we rarely hear about the victims. It's almost a glorification in the eyes of some.

                  3. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

                    "Why not, when the US does?  Because guns aren't the problem - something in the US culture, in our psyche, in our attitude towards violence is the problem."

                    100% agree... Sad as it is, this is true IMO.

            2. Readmikenow profile image94
              Readmikenowposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              "BUT the National Rifle Association (NRA) campaigns against all forms of gun control in the US and argues that more guns make the country safer."

              If it was THAT important to the American people, they would vote in representatives who could make it happen.  The NRA does campaign against all forms of gun control.  That is why I'm a lifelong member.

              The combined efforts of anti gun groups equals millions spent lobbying Congress.

              "Stricter gun laws are becoming less popular in the United States. 

              STORY HIGHLIGHTS
              52% of Americans want stricter gun laws, lowest since 2014
              Independents' support for stricter gun laws down 15 points since 2020
              Record-low 19% favor handgun ban in U.S., down from 25% last year
              WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' support for stricter gun control has fallen five percentage points to 52%, the lowest reading since 2014. At the same time, 35% of U.S. adults think laws covering the sale of firearms should be kept as they are now and 11% favor less strict laws."

              https://news.gallup.com/poll/357317/str … pular.aspx

    2. GA Anderson profile image90
      GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Is the title your thought, or the video's? Either way, I think one real hypocrisy is in how disingenuous comparison of three, (at least), different issues is as if they were linkable and portray a telling truth. They are not and do not.

      I think that trying to use "sanctity of life" to link the abortion issue to the gun control issue is baloney. The effort is political pandering to emotions in a crisis.

      Do you think that one cannot hold both a pro-life and pro-gun position without being a hypocrite? I think one could.

      GA

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        GA, As I sort out my own thought process,  I think the Senator raised this issue in my mind: Are some "lives" more sacred than others?  There's a lot of furor over extending rights to non-viable cellular masses while others lives are seemingly not  granted the same consideration.
        If life  is as sacred as pro lifers declare, the value would not end immediately after exiting the birth canal.

        We would provide for those who are food- and clean-water deprived. Do we think some human lives are more sacred than others?
        if life was sacred, would health care be a human right for all? Not just only to those who can afford it along with Insurance companies who decide your access to procedures?
        If all lives were sacred wouldn't we work harder and smarter to curb gun violence to end the deaths of blameless victims?
        Would we have a death penalty if all lives were sacred?
        The cherry on top of the hypocrisy  sundae:
        A Texas lawmaker has filed a bill that would abolish and criminalize abortions, leaving women and physicians who perform the procedure to face criminal charges that could carry the death penalty. ( Texas tribune 2021)

        That's the gist of my thought. Most times it's a distillation process . Your response helped me narrow in though. Much appreciated.
        And yes I do believe that you can be pro-life, pro gun. I also believe  Pro-life politicians aren’t much for sustaining a safe healthy  life after birth.

        1. GA Anderson profile image90
          GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          That was quite a mix of issues. Too many for one conversation, but . . .

          Initially, I didn't expect you to disagree with the question, but as I read your response I became doubtful. Then I came to your close . . . it's a start.

          And then there was: "If life  is as sacred as pro lifers declare, the value would not end immediately after exiting the birth canal."

          Where the hell, (strictly for emphasis ;-O), do you get that from? Who is saying that?

          I have the perception that those are your words and that they would be difficult to support with more than just opinions.  Without that support things boil down to a simple `I'm right and you're wrong'  situation. This sort of leads to an assumption that you, (generic?), think the quoted statement is true merely because you believe it to be true.

          GA

          1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
            Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            I feel that some  Republicans claim that they care deeply about human life right up until the moment a child is actually born, and then they’re on their own. The party has spent decades fighting to abolish abortion and preaching the sancticty of life, all while supporting the death penalty and opposing social spending programs aimed at helping struggling parents and their kids.
            Republicans are busy fighting against Joe Biden’s Build Back Better Act, much of which is aimed at supporting parents with childcare services and tax credits for reducing family poverty—the sorts of priorities that a party that actually cared about children, as opposed to fetuses, might embrace.

            1. GA Anderson profile image90
              GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              What you feel is yours to decide, of course, but that doesn't make what you feel to be the truth of reality. For instance, look where you started; "If life  is as sacred as pro lifers declare, the value would not end immediately after exiting the birth canal.". to "And yes I do believe that you can be pro-life, pro gun. " we have gone from an affirmative statement to a statement of feelings.

              Look at the direction you took to validate your feeling: the criminal justice system, (the death penalty thing), opposing social spending programs, and struggling parents. Then, to top things off,  you introduce opposition to the BBB as proof that Republicans don't care about the sanctity of life. *sheesh . . . "

              GA

      2. tsmog profile image76
        tsmogposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        In support of your premise I am pro-life, but against abortion. I support the 2nd Amendment, yet am greatly concerned with the rising gun violence with its rising death rate. But, I am against further gun control believing it offers no benefits and won't solve anything. Most certainly an ambivalent right wink

        1. GA Anderson profile image90
          GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Sounds reasonable to me.

          GA

          1. tsmog profile image76
            tsmogposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            You may change your mind as I just reread what I wrote. I meant "I am pro-choice, but against abortion". My stance on guns is the what I meant.

            1. GA Anderson profile image90
              GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              No worries, I caught that. I even thought about poking at your redundancy—if it wasn'ty a misspeak. :-0

              GA

    3. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Not sure how this congressman could question the morals of a responsible gun owner, and perhaps their moral value of being pro-life.

      Industry data and firearms background checks show nearly 23 million guns were purchased in 2020. One can only imagine how many guns have been legally purchased over the many years.

      It would well appear the vast majority of gun owners do not use their guns to kill or commit crimes. It would appear they respect life and our laws.   Are all gun owners pro-life? This seems to be a true stretch to even make that assumption. Just the number of gun owners alone should tell one that the majority of gun owners are responsible gun owners.   And perhaps some hold the value of life in regard to abortion and are pro-life.  I don't like to compartmentalize people into groups. Not sure why anyone would even buy into the analogy this congressman was trying to push. He was politicking. 

      In regards to your " non-viable cellular masses" statement.
      I can tell you from my own experience went a person is killed by a weapon or if a 20-week baby is aborted  --- I can tell you the sex of both, both have fingers with nails and toes, both have eyelashes. It takes two hands to pick the baby at 20 weeks... It can take two or more to put a grown human into a body bag.  Both are dead --  if killed by a weapon or aborted.   

      Perhaps we should be concerned over the innocent being killed not by guns but moms?

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        I'll post this  quote from Benedictine Sr. Joan Chittister. It speaks to the importance of being more broadly pro-life, not just "pro-birth." I feel that Senator Murphy was sort of striking at this vein of thought. 

        "I do not believe that just because you are opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, a child educated, a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."

        I think he was taking the tragedy of continued gun violence as one current example to say that attention to remedying this and other issues  is also a pro-life stance.  Shouldn't pro life possibly mean more than simply going through the birth canal?
        Seems to me being pro-life requires more of us than being pro-birth. After all, we don’t become human through biology alone, but through acts of will and love on the part of other people. Something seems to go terribly wrong with our concern for life once a child leaves a mother’s womb. Those trapped in poverty, by addiction and mental illness, or trapped by a broken criminal justice system, are not free and certainly don’t have dignity. But by golly, they were born!
        As a foster parent, I might have more passion for the unborn if I weren’t so preoccupied by the plight of those already here. Our world is full of children no one wants, who often become adults no one wants. We can be a cruel species.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          I will be blunt to save a bit of ink --- Frist, I never shared whether I am pro-life or pro-choice.  The fact is as some could attribute I am pro-abortion. Not for all the reasons liberals offer why abortion should be considered a right.

          I came to my view of abortion through what I have learned and experienced throughout my life as a nurse.  I have witnessed spontaneous abortions, as well as botched abortions. I have been a first-hand witness to women experiencing both. The sometimes heartbreaking emotions of losing a baby to the lack of emotion after aborting a baby.

          I think Wilderness said a mouthful when he said this in one of his comments here --  "Why not when the US does?  Because guns aren't the problem - something in the US culture, in our psyche, in our attitude towards violence is the problem." However, I have equated it to abortion.  our US cultural attitude toward abortion has become a problem in my view.

          It has become well excepted to abort than use common sense, and use birth control. Of course, there are incidences that a woman may lose control of protecting herself from becoming pregnant, such as rape, incest. Bt the better majority of our female society should be intelligent enough to plan pregnancies via birth control.

          To address your quote ---   I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, a child educated, a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth.

          This statement to me rings shallow, it ignores most sentiments of why someone may be pro-life. It offers a narrow opinion. The author sets aside the "other sides" views completely.  She assumes, her words are, just assuming pro-lifers don't consider or care what becomes of an unwanted child.  And the bite about cash,
          that is just a ridiculous insult meant to bait.  These kinds of statements IMO that are given from a soapbox, are very much an embarrassment to me, as a clear-thinking woman. 

          " Shouldn't pro life possibly mean more than simply going through the birth canal?"

          I could say --- Shouldn't pro-choice mean more than having unprotected sex, having used one vagina carelessly, when we have so many options to stop an unwanted pregnancy? A pregnancy could result in the decision to need to go through a procedure that removes a human being from one's birth canal.

          This is an age-old argument. One that both sides have relevant points of view.

          "Those trapped in poverty, by addiction and mental illness, or trapped by a broken criminal justice system, are not free and certainly don’t have dignity. But by golly, they were born!"

          You have hit on one of the main reasons I am at this point pro- abortion.
          Many children born in these situations pay for the sins of their parents. Parents that are in no way equipped to be parents in any circumstances. Parents that were not, unfortunately, intelligent to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.  We have a society that has produced some that lack basic empathy and are not suitable to raise children. And yes, this promotes a cycle of the same...

          My daughter is a psychologist, so yes I hear a lot about child abuse of the worse form. Being a nurse, I have seen plenty first hand. It is more than obvious we can be a cruel species. 

          But, do we want to add blanketed abortions to the list of cruelties. We need to have some very sensible laws on abortions. And not sure why the subject has become so muddled in our society. Both sides
          have relitive points on the subject.

    4. Kathleen Cochran profile image78
      Kathleen Cochranposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Thank you for asking this question. I've often wondered about this conflict in thought processes too. I think the answer is that these are two issues you can feel strongly about - but never be required to do anything about.

    5. peterstreep profile image80
      peterstreepposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, this is something I don't get either.

      People protesting against abortion, calling it murder of a life. Not thinking about the life of a teenage mother raped by her father. (Texas does not give an exception for incest and rape!)
      And at the same time shouting about the right to wear a gun to kill people.

      There is no, absolutely no reason to sell guns (except for hunting) to people.
      It's simple. In countries where you can't easily own guns, there are far fewer gun crimes.
      If somebody is shot in the streets of Amsterdam, Londen, Madrid, Berlin, Rome, it's a rare occasion.
      In the US there is a mass murder every day!!!

      mass shooting US

      Guns are made to kill a living being. That's their sole purpose.

      And besides comparing selling guns and abortion I even want to compare abortion and killing an animal for food.
      A pig is more developed and more intelligent than a fetus.
      Anybody who is shouting that an abortion is killing a life and eating meat at the same time is a hypocrite in my opinion.

    6. tsmog profile image76
      tsmogposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      I don't want to post to somebody because I agree with all on some points. I would like to address the issue of gun death overall, suicide, and homicide and where it occurs.

      Looking at the report I discovered it varies between the later two and overall it is NonCore (NonMetro) that is highest. Homicide is highest in Large Central Metro while Suicide is highest NonCore (NonMetro). That to me is a story in and of itself. That gives support to the crime related issue of cities, yet to me the suicide one gives great concern as to why?

      The report (Feb 2021) is very thorough  by The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence using 2019 CDC data that I understand it the latest. It is a PDF File and I don't think a link will work here. I'll try. The next link goes to the Google search page where it is at the top of it. The data I discovered is on page 20. Might be worth a skim.

      The PDF File

      https://efsgv.org/wp-content/uploads/2019CDCdata.pdf

      The Google search page title is A Public Health Crisis Decades in the Making

      https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … e+vs+metro[/url]

      Edit: Seems the PDF link works

  2. Nathanville profile image92
    Nathanvilleposted 11 months ago

    I’ll not get involved in the gun debate because that is something peculiar to America, but I do find the discussion on Abortion of interest.

    Abortion was originally made illegal in the UK in 1861 under the ‘Offences Against the Person Act 1861’, but that law was repealed in England, Scotland and Wales, making abortion legal in England, Scotland and Wales in the ‘Abortion Act of 1967’.

    However, in Ireland (the only part of the UK that is highly religious) the Catholics have long been anti-abortion; so Abortion didn’t finally become legal in the Republic of Ireland (southern Ireland) until 2018, following a Referendum in favour of abortion; and abortion didn’t finally become legal in Northern Ireland until October 2019, when the UK took matters into their own hands and passed the laws from Westminster (London) because the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party)(Northern Ireland Catholic Party) refused to convene the Northern Ireland Parliament to deal with the matter because of a spat that they had with the Sinn Fein (Protestant Party) over political sleaze e.g. Sinn Fein accused the DUP of corruption in Government funding of a ‘Renewable Energy’ project in Northern Ireland. 

    As part of the Northern Ireland 1998 Peace Agreement a ‘Power sharing’ Parliament was set up in Northern Ireland whereby both Catholics and Protestants have to work together in order for the Parliament to sit and pass laws.  The Northern Ireland Parliament collapsed, and was suspended in January 2017 after Sinn Fein made accusations against the DUP Party for making personal financial gain in a ‘Green’ Government funded project; and it didn’t finally sit again until January 2020 when both sides made up.

    However, in the Autumn of 2019 the UK Government, putting pressure on the Northern Ireland Government to reconvene, threatened the DUP Party that if they didn’t agree to reconvening the Northern Ireland Parliament before the end of 2019 that the UK Government would exercise it’s legal right to run Northern Ireland from the Westminster UK Parliament in London, and that one of the provisions it was putting on the statue books, unless stopped by DUP was a pro-abortion law, to bring Northern Ireland in line with the rest of the UK.

    So, in Northern Ireland abortion does not constitute a criminal offence after sections of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 were repealed in October 2019.

    The DUP Party, being a devote Catholic and hard right-wing political party is very anti-abortion, so it was a real threat to them, but they called the UK Government’s bluff and lost e.g. the UK Parliament carried out its threat and passed the pro-abortion laws in Northern Ireland, as well as legalising gay marriages in Northern Ireland to bring it in line with the rest of the UK.  Again being a hard-right political party with very strict Catholic beliefs Gay Marriages is something the DUP party would never had allowed if they’d made up their difference with Sinn Fein and reconvened the Northern Irish Parliament before the end of 2019.  So DUP have only got themselves to blame.

    Abortion in the Republic of Ireland (southern Ireland) is regulated by the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018. Abortion is permitted in the Republic of Ireland during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy, and later in cases where the pregnant woman's life or health is at risk, or in the cases of a fatal foetal abnormality.

    But like Northern Ireland, the people in the Republic of Ireland are very religious, and mostly Catholic, so the road to legalising abortion hasn’t been an easy one.

    In the Republic of Ireland the 1st Referendum in 1983, was in support of ‘pro-life’ (giving the unborn child equal right to life) e.g. strengthening the anti-abortion law.  That referendum was 66.9% in favour, and 33.1% against.

    Then the Referendum in the Republic of Ireland in 2018 was for permitting the legislation of abortion, and that referendum was 66.4% in favour, and 33.6% against – A complete reversal to public opinion 35 years earlier?

    I gather from recent news that the road to abortion in the USA hasn’t been an easy one either; although I’m not totally clear on what the current status is in America, nor on what public opinion is?

    1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
      Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      59% majority of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.(Pew Research)
      We have a growing issue in this country of a fringe minority continually trying to subvert the will and interests of the majority.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        I wouldn't call 40% of the population a "fringe minority".  While it is true that the fringe minorities often try to control the majority, a bigger problem is that the majority often simply runs roughshod over the minority without regard to their wishes or thoughts.

        Lest there be misunderstanding, I am firmly in the "pro-choice" camp on abortion although I do make an effort to understand the complaints and reasoning of the other side.

        1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
          Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          You're, correct. My bad. When I stated "fringe" I'm referring to the break out in the Pew stats that I should have stated: "White evangelical Protestants continue to be opposed to abortion in all or most cases. Around three-quarters of White evangelicals (77%) say it should be illegal in all or most cases, while 21% say it should be legal in at least most cases."  With Evangelicals representing a minority in numbers but iny opinion often the loudest voice on this issue.
          This is where we need compromise. I agree no one should run rough shot over anyone else but nowadays it feels like if one group isn't getting exactly everything they want they feel they are being persecuted.
          Also, I cannot reconcile the mantra of "My body my choice" When some speak of vaccines but can't apply it to legal, safe abortion.

        2. Credence2 profile image77
          Credence2posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          How do we "accommodate" the minority with forfeiting the rights of the majority?

          1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
            Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Exactly! It's called COMPROMISE and many don't want to seem to have anything to do with it these days.

            1. Credence2 profile image77
              Credence2posted 11 months agoin reply to this

              Example: Biden won, how do you "compromise" with the minority whose candidate lost?

              So much like cutting an infant in two to compromise with either of two mothers who both claim that the child belongs to them

              1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
                Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                In your example, You put your feelings aside and do what's in The best interest of the child.
                In terms of our election, You work for what's in the best interest of our country. Now there's where a lot of disagreement comes in. It's supposed to be country over party not the other way around.
                But don't people believe there is still much more that unites us than divides us? And that those who seek to divide do so for their own selfish purpose?  Mostly power and money?

                1. Credence2 profile image77
                  Credence2posted 11 months agoin reply to this

                  The problem with that, Faye is that we have vehemently different views on what is "best for the child".

                  We all think that we work for what is best for our country. Trump and the Right have one vision, while I and much of the Left have another. What is different now, is that the differences are so great that it is questionable that the two can ever meet.

                  In today's political climate the idea that there is more that unites us than divides us may well be just a comforting homily from a past America.

                  And I won't deny that there are forces involved in the division and are associated with and stand to gain from the division. But how do you hold wealth and associated power accountable in a society that virtually worships it?

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

                    All you have said rings sadly true.  It would seem things could become worse before better.

          2. GA Anderson profile image90
            GA Andersonposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Assuming you meant "without," the solution is simple and at hand. Follow our Constitution and the laws passed under its authority. We have minority and majority protections in place. And I think they are working.

            GA

            1. Credence2 profile image77
              Credence2posted 11 months agoin reply to this

              I am for that, but obviously that has not been enough....

      2. Nathanville profile image92
        Nathanvilleposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Thanks for your feedback.  I find it interesting in your comments to wilderness that in the USA it’s the Protestants who are anti-abortion; whereas in Northern Ireland it’s predominantly the Protestants who are pro-abortion and it’s the Catholics who are generally anti-abortion!

        1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
          Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Ah yes, I associate Evangelicals as mainly Protestant in my area but I think they are pretty evenly divided between Catholic and Protestants.

          1. Nathanville profile image92
            Nathanvilleposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks, it's been an enlightening read.

  3. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 11 months ago

    I understand Faye's point.  In one case, there are laws being passed to protect a life, even an unborn life.  On the other hand, we are seeing school shootings in most years and no legislative action taken to save those lives.

    And this scenario is not about illegal guns being obtained.  It's about legally bought firearms continuing to find their way into the hands of children and then into schools.  I'm all for Second Amendment rights, but to say that the political answer to these unnecessary deaths is to issue more thoughts and prayers, while an unborn fetus is legislated does seem to belie the hypocrisy of pro-life arguments.

    Especially as many of those same people make the body autonomy argument for vaccines and masks, while then ignoring that same principle in regards to a woman's body during pregnancy.  As well as the total omission of the physical and emotional damage, and sometimes fatal cases, caused to the women who chose to get abortions despite laws banning them.

  4. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
    Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months ago

    https://worldpopulationreview.com/count … by-country

    I've seen several rankings and reports of these stats. They don't always peg each country in the same position but generally close. It's interesting to look at and consider the factors involved for each country.

  5. Credence2 profile image77
    Credence2posted 11 months ago

    Mike and Wilderness, you consider your diversionary tactics as clever? On the contrary, they are quite transparent and found not to "hold water" under any serious evaluation.

    Take a look at this chart of intentional homicides in the different countries, the US has a rate 5 times that of Britain and while I am pleasantly surprised that our stars don't compare with those horrendous ones of South America, for example, we are still far more homicidal than Great Britain as a whole.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/is-il … ess-crime/

    https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/is-il … ess-crime/

    Mike, you want to pick on urban areas? London is a pretty good sized place, the last time I checked. I am sure that the city has rough patches and gangs, yet still its homicide rates are below that of 30 American cities of comparable or smaller population. It does not matter whether its AK-47s or pea shooters.

    Let's see the slight of hand you employ this time to explain that little contradiction?

  6. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
    Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months ago

    State level responses to the rise in smash and grab crime is varied.
    https://www.wesh.com/article/florida-cr … s/38415697

    I've read additional information on several states creating tasks force to apply laws that are currently available and look at changes in law that's needed to address this new/growing phenomena.
    These crimes also appear to be related to organized rings who pay low level criminals to commit these smash and grabs. Obviously attention needs to be given to rooting out these rings and breaking them up. But..

    "San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos Bolanos said the five busted were part of a network "responsible for an international distribution center” that funneled merchandise stolen in retail thefts, robberies, commercial and residential burglaries to other countries, with the money returned to the United States.

    Bonta said the pleas “should serve as a warning shot to anyone thinking about participating in organized retail theft and committing brazen crimes.”

    The lead defendant in the case will be sentenced to six years in state prison. "

    This is something each state is going to grapple with and we are going to see varying responses. It's a good reason for people to be involved in their state government.

    1. tsmog profile image76
      tsmogposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      This may be off on a different tangent. The smash and grabs kinda' is a recent national phenomena and seems to be growing. Yet, pondering I wonder why? What does it say about our society now? Yes, there is the debate they let them off or they allow them to get away with it vs. not so. But, I come back to why are people doing it? Are people that broke or maybe see a thrill adventure. Why are they doing it and what does that say about society today?

      1. Fayetteville Faye profile image60
        Fayetteville Fayeposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        I suppose criminals are ever evolving. Sizing up opportunities and weaknesses in the system. I would venture to say that organized crime acts in this manner  even more so. I'd also guess that there is a readily available pool of low level criminals to recruit to do the job.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)