Why the Right Wing Rejects Science

Obamanomics was a joke. It produced the worst economic recovery since the GD and resulted in the only Presidency which never achieved real annual economic growth above 3%. That's your idea of a success ?? No one praises the success of Obamanomics because there are no successes. Those are the facts.

You clearly do not know the history of ObamaCare. You've been Grubered (Verb - To mislead the public into believing lies to achieve personal ideological laws pass.
The President really grubered us on that healthcare bill.) ObamaCare has no basis in anything that Stuart Butler proposed in the mid 90's.

 

The irony in the above is palpable. The truth cannot have many sides. There is only one truth. The fact that you feel uncomfortable with the truth is irrelevant.

 

The complete untruthfulness of your posts.

 

Exactly. It's just breathtaking to watch the left define authoritarianism as the undesired outcomes from the political process. It's almost as breathtaking as the illiberal definition of racism if you voted for Ted Cruz (who is demonstrably Hispanic) instead of Beto (an assumed name) O'Rourke. The only thing the left stands for these days is identity politics in which they pit groups of US citizens against each other and placing the welfare of non US citizens above the welfare of US citizens. As a Demcrat about their party's economic growth plan and all you get is blank stares.

 

You are incorrect.

https://theindependentwhig.com/haid...etter-than-liberals-understand-conservatives/

I was telling you why we support those things, not that we don't support those things. You're interpretation that they are related to personal security and not freedom is your misunderstanding. Now you are persisting in that misunderstanding. Most conservatives, having to make a decision between security and freedom, will choose freedom. Note that it was establishment Republicans who pushed for and defended the Patriot Act, not conservatives. Conservatives did and do oppose that horrendous piece of legislation.

Again, you are ignoring the fact that being "pro-choice" is also imposing your sense of morality on the rest of us, in particular 50 million dead babies since 1971. 50 million infants in the womb have had your sense of morality and "freedom" imposed on them with death. Certainly no one should be regarded as "less" because of his/her religious views, but at the same time, no one should be regarded as less for being an infant in the womb, either. And as so often on the left, you are confusing freedom of religion with freedom from religion. The first is guaranteed in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. The second isn't guaranteed anywhere. You aren't entitled to be free from other people's religious viewpoints simply because they are religious. Freedom of religion simply means the state won't impose one on you.

 

There is no freedom without security however. The mob mentality of the left is reaching new lows with regard to the personal security of people they decide they don't agree with. Tucker Carlson's home was vandalized and his family terrified by a group of a dozen or so antifa cowards the other night. They mindlessly chanted that Carlson was a racist for some illogical reason ?? This behavior is encouraged and actually demanded by some of the leaders on the left.

The left will not acknowledge that abortion is the termination of a human life. They claim that they want to reduce the number of abortions but refuse to require counciling for women who contemplate abortion on their responsibility for this life and the options available for adoption. There are ~ 1 million abortions per year performed in the US and ~ 20% of all pregnancies end in abortion thus terminating a human life. This is a tragedy which was once argued to be racist because a disparate number of those terminated human lives by abortion are minorities.

Many contend that the difference between the left and right is that the right thinks the left is wrong but the left thinks the right is evil. This justifies the attacks on the personal freedoms of persons on the right by the left.

 

Many of us feel that Obama succeeded in preventing the Great Recession from becoming a real depression. That's success.

 

The same applies to you.

 

I am not a dishonest person. Nor will I post a lie in order to win an argument. If my information is wrong, it's because I posted it believing it correct. I will openly amend my information if someone shows it to be wrong.

 

1. Because I disagree with you doesn't necessarily imply I'm incorrect. I found your link interesting, and I accept the results of the study, but like any study, it's focus is limited in scope. Their title & conclusion was stretching it a bit much for me.

2. It's interesting that I, a liberal, agree with you in your opposition to the Patriot Act. I also find it interesting that you differentiate between "establishment" Republicans & "conservative" Republicans. From my point of view that fits nicely within the general context of conservatives enjoying dividing us all in as many ways as possible.

3. Since Pro-Choice allows the freedom of each individual to decide for themselves regarding abortion, they can't be imposing anything on anyone. Pro-Choicer's support your right to decline abortions just as strongly as they support your neighbor's choice to have one. That's real freedom. The Pro-Life efforts to dictate their will and their religious views over us all is a form of absolutism, and in direct contradiction to the idea of personal freedom. You imply the Constitution protects us from the imposition of unwanted religion onto us, but doesn't protect us from the imposition of unwanted religious belief onto us. If that's true, then what's the value of the amendment in the first place? I disagree with you completely.

 

The recession was over before any of his programs were implemented. His programs produced the worst recovery since the GD.

 

The left lashes out. Too funny.

 

It has and you haven’t.

 

The human life terminated has not say ??? Fifty million lives lost. That’s an epic tragedy.

 

If those fetuses had no chance of ever coming again later in another pregnancy, I'd agree with you. But the truth is, they can and often do. But the loss of a mother's personal freedom truly IS a tragedy--particularly when it's based on someone's beliefs that you don't share.

 

Once an abortion is completed the human life is terminated. That is a tragedy. Ask Jack Nicholson.

BTW do you really believe that an aborted human life can have a “do over” ?? That’s truly bizarre.

 

I already pointed out that "pro-choice" is imposing morality on the fetus without benefit of representation. Your "freedom" means the deaths of millions of babies. That price is way too high. You call having the state protect the sanctity of life "absolutism", but I would say there's nothing quite as absolute as death.

As for the 1st Amendment, at the time of ratification of the Constitution, all the founding members of the republic were Christians or Deists, so they could have imposed a state religion if they had chosen to do so, but across the 13 different colonies, different denominations of Christianity held sway. In Massachusetts, the Puritans pretty much still controlled things. In Pennsylvania, it was the Quakers. In Maryland, it was the Catholics. Most colonists were Episcopalians. Rather than establish a state church at the federal level, it was agreed that everyone should be allowed to worship God in his own way. There was absolutely no consideration given in the ratification of the 1st Amendment for atheists. Dissenters, yes, atheists, no.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

To suggest based on this history that the 1st Amendment was intended to protect people from religious viewpoints is absurd in the extreme. The expression of religious viewpoints by elected officials was common up to and including Harry Truman, and revisited by Reagan and now by Trump. You might like to escape religious viewpoints, but you can't.

 

No it has no say and more importantly there has been shown to be a direct correlation between abortion restriction and a rise in infant and maternal mortality

 

No it is Buddhism

And again it is not as simple as you would suggest because to apply foetal "rights" you have to remove women's rights

 

Kinda like how to remove slavery you had to remove State's rights? Funny how democrats use "rights" to justify atrocities.

 

No, they haven't. Computer simulations are not experiments.

 

Funny how the republicans seem to care for a clump of cells more than the born children or women

Where abortion restrictions have been increased infant and maternal mortality has increased

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521693416300682

 

Small scale experiments have been done

Crap! Even mythbusters were able to demonstrate the CO2 effect

 

It’s very simple. Abortion terminates a human life. No one has the right to terminate a human life.

 

Small scale experiments have nothing to do with climate science.