I suspect you are wrong. Most of us in fact give a fuck about those items. Specifically, we are the reason the US hasn't gone socialist like the EU and your country.
Printable View
Out of those issues, abortion is the one I care the least about either way. The only reason I do care at all is because of the militant feminist movement about where they are claiming that they can do whatever they want with their body and no one at all has any say about it, even the potential father. I would be more in favor of a man's bill of rights that would parallel the Roe v Wade law in this country. It's not right that a man should have no say in it. Especially if it the scenario where the man decides he doesn't want the baby but the woman decides that she wants to keep it and there's nothing he can do about it. I look at it this way, if the father wants the baby but the woman gets an abortion anyway, without regard to what the man wants, then if it's reversed and the man doesn't want the baby but the woman keeps it anyway, then the man should NOT have to pay child support. On abortion, women want it both ways and that's not right.
Aye so actual abortion itself isn't particular the issue for many people.
That I can understand.
Folks here get militant on the matter too.
Personally my view is that if a child is unwanted, why bother populating the world with it.
I'm very much pro-voterID, I think it is insane you can vote anywhere on the planet without having ID.
I'm in favour of guns being allowed, but additionally think there should be serious screening and certification of the process, including med checking.
As for immigration, I think countries as a whole have to sit up and decide if they want to suspend the asylum system worldwide for a period of years.
Asylum and illegal immigration i see as 2 completely separate things, the latter I've absolutely no time for.
Most think about it insofar as their voters think about it. There are some that are die-hard constitutionalists, and others that are drinking the far leftist kool aid, but the majority of them are just doing what they know the people that voted them in office want them to do, and that's why it's so important for the voters in their state and district to reach out to them and talk to them... like I do, constantly. My 2 US Senators and Representative know exactly who I am and what I expect from them. My state legislator knows who I am, what I'm about, and what I expect from them too.
I hate to see fetuses aborted. It is killing a potential life. Personally I wish people would take more responsibility and not get knocked up in the first place. With the population problem we have on the Earth though, I do respect peoples right to terminate. I hate it, but the herd needs to be manged more.
I'm dead set against abortion unless absolutely necessary. If a child is unwanted, it can be adopted. There are tons of couples that for one reason or another would prefer to adopt children. I believe we have a forum member here that has done so. In fact, I know we do. To me, abortion 'just because' is selfish, and in some cases downright evil.
I'm totally for voter ID. You're right, doing otherwise is insane.
Outside of background checks during purchasing, all forms of government should be hands off with weapons. US citizens should be able to purchase and own everything a police officer or military soldier is permitted to use. If you're an avid student of US and world history, then you should understand why.
Immigration - enforce the laws. A civil society cannot exist without laws and a sovereign country cannot exist without borders. Suspend constitutional citizenship for the children illegals have in the US, that birthplace amendment was intended to prevent disenfranchising freed slaves and their children to begin with. It doesn't apply anymore.
I like what Trump's doing with Asylum seekers currently.
You think I'm off my rocker, but consider this: several things that history teachers never teach but are absolutely true: The founding fathers of this country didn't trust a large and powerful central government. Nor did they trust a constantly standing military. History teaches us that constantly standing militaries under their own power or under the power of a powerful central government can take the freedoms away from the citizens of their nation when the citizens are disarmed. The founding fathers wanted us to retain our spirit of rebellion and be able to meet fire with fire if we found ourselves in that situation. The tree of liberty is refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Recent history is also littered with examples where such a travesty has happened: Germany in the 30s. Adolf Hitler convinced the people to give up their guns before taking full control as Der Fuhrer. Millions upon millions died because of it. The Venezuelan socialist government convinced their people, by force, to give up their weapons, and now Maduro's regime kills Venezuelan protesters indiscriminately. China kills unarmed protesters indiscriminately. Putin's Russia kills dissidents within the opposition. Time after time throughout history, the same thing happens over and over again: A regime convinces the people to willingly disarm for whatever reason, then those people cease to be human in the eyes of the regime and citizens die.
Yes people die because of terrible and sick people with guns, but every life taken is the price of freedom. The Freedom of this nation is bigger and far more important than any individual citizen, young/old, male/female, regardless of race, religion, whatever. If we lose the right to keep and bear arms, it will be the end of freedom as this world knows it. The beacon of liberty that this country was to the rest of the world will be extinguished.
If you don't get that, then I'm sorry, you're too far gone, and there's nothing I can do to help you.
Well said, Homey..^
Fair enough. I read it and perhaps in the case of the US, you indeed can't trust your government. Perhaps it's the size of the country, or its history that acts as a factor. Countries like Canada and Australia & Britain seem to do ok plus most of Europe and there don't appear to be government take-overs or coupe's on the horizon, nor is there repression of its citizens.
I also wonder if countries like Venezuala, China and Russia had the same degree of weapons whether there would have been a civil war or something. Hard to predict outcomes there.
I agree with this. Tightening the rules on owning weapons is not removing the right to own guns. If a society demonstrates they can't manage the right and innocent people are dying, changes to the process are needed. From what I understand the rules of ownership vary and some states don't demand registration of weapons. Law abiding gun owners should never fear a longer, more complete background check or categorization of who owns a firearm.
I disagree. There has to be a firm, concise delineation between civilians and police/military. Giving untrained people access to the same weaponry blurs the line of authority and what their roles should be.
You're too far gone and there's nothing I can do to help you. You imply people that who don't agree with this viewpoint need help and you say they're beyond your help. Lofty :lol:
I often think the first four words above apply to some Americans like you and feel sympathy, but out of respect have never stated that. Always remember your view is not always the correct view. Only something you feel.
A group of English civilians left England in the late 1700's and ensured they would be independent from their governing faction as they populated the new world. Ideas like taxation without representation were at the forefront and a war was fought to cement that independence of the new nation.
Today, some people feel they need to be armed to the same degree as the police and the military and often reference the events above. Those two entities, police and military, are part of the evolution of the democratic process and have been put in place and armed differently for specific reasons.
There is one overriding fear that is often spoken by certain groups. We don't want our guns taken away. Events like Ruby Ridge illustrate the extreme edge of this idea, conversely incidents from the 1930's in Germany illustrate the other, very real danger that exists when the government is allowed that degree of control over civilians.
I won't level a comment like - you're already too far gone or the freedom of the world is at jeopardy if laws are changed, because I agree with Lost. He has identified a handful of countries under different rule, and government takeovers or coupes are not on the horizon. To be clear, that can be a real danger in other countries and my belief sits somewhere right in the middle of the two ideas below:
Gun laws need to change and the US has written their constitution to ensure guns are not taken away from civilians.
I know I won't change minds here because reading DGX's posts you can see the passion and conviction behind them. Without insult I believe the statements are a sad commentary on the issue, but that doesn't mean that I think DGX or his views are sad. I live in a country that has stricter gun laws and far more restricted selling practices. And per million people we enjoy much lower incidents of gun related deaths. It works up here. And saying that I realize there are different factors in each country that contribute to gun related deaths. Yes, mentally sick people are responsible. So is accessibility. So are economic struggles. Lack of education. Fear.
What I've always tried to impart is - There's a system that obviously doesn't work and needs to be improved. Everyone is affected reading stories about 20 school kids dying or random people at a mall. It generates such a climate of civilian fear that when you're on the outside of it looking in, the idea of ramping up the weaponry for civilians and removing the demarcation that separates the police from civilians seems asinine. Like throwing gas on a fire.
I don't think most Americans are too far gone. I do however know something needs to change and most rational people are amenable to that idea. Question remains, what's the correct answer?