SCOTUS to overturn Roe v Wade

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Jul 5, 2020
2,161
406
213
59
Broken Arrow
Someone pointed out that Adoption was the answer to help with the influx of unwanted kids in the system.

I simply pointed out facts about the current system as it is now, AND the need for funding that will be imminent to address those issues.

How you got to your conclusion from that....baffles me.

You seem to think when I point out Actual Numbers and Money that I'm doing so in Opposition of the RvW outcome.

It is actually NOT AT ALL IN OPPOSTION of the changes to RvW..... it is done in Preparation to tackle real funding issues that are about to hit states who severely limit abortion. I expect Oklahoma will be one of those states.

We need to get our butt in gear on the funding side because or abortion restrictions were auto triggered. ..and the funding doesn't exist right now.
Okay, now follow me closely here. A question was previously posted on here regarding the "alternative" solution to abortion, to which is simply responded with "Adoption". Your response, which I copied above, pretty clearly indicates that adoption isn't a solution, since the language in your response was negative regarding problems like too many children now in the system, and the funding issues, blah, blah, blah. So again, back to my response to that, which was given the choice you'd rather accept that adoption isn't the preferred option since the system has issues.
 
May 4, 2011
3,736
1,671
1,743
Charleston, SC
Okay, now follow me closely here. A question was previously posted on here regarding the "alternative" solution to abortion, to which is simply responded with "Adoption". Your response, which I copied above, pretty clearly indicates that adoption isn't a solution, since the language in your response was negative regarding problems like too many children now in the system, and the funding issues, blah, blah, blah. So again, back to my response to that, which was given the choice you'd rather accept that adoption isn't the preferred option since the system has issues.
Or, now follow me closely here, you could read the entirety of what he's saying about how we need to get our butts in gear to fix the adoption and foster care system if that's the direction you're wanting to head. The current systems don't really work now and we're going to put them under more strain. So--and this is the part to follow closely--you need to fix those systems. He's posted several ideas over the last couple of days for doing just that.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
38,315
10,926
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
Or, now follow me closely here, you could read the entirety of what he's saying about how we need to get our butts in gear to fix the adoption and foster care system if that's the direction you're wanting to head. The current systems don't really work now and we're going to put them under more strain. So--and this is the part to follow closely--you need to fix those systems. He's posted several ideas over the last couple of days for doing just that.
adoption is a system already in place, already has a proven track record that it can work AND has a proven track record that when under funded it will fail.

I'm WAY PAST SCOTUS decision at this point. Its already done. So many states had auto triggers to enact abortion restrictions immediately should the SCOTUS do what they did.

Now these states are going to be in a HUGE budget crunch trying to strengthen and build the Adoption services in their state as it CURRENTLY the most viable solution and where the most strain will be placed due to the RvW decision.

Thanks for understanding What I'm saying. The laws already went into effect to heavily restrict abortion in many states WITHOUT any funding mechanisms to support the already taxed infrastructure of Adoption that will bear the brunt of the cost increase over these newly triggered laws.

We have 9 months (maybe less with Preemies) to get the funding and resources in place to begin caring for these children.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
38,315
10,926
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
advocates for recreational Marijuana laws in Oklahoma to be voted in, they have a great opportunity at this point to get a petition and get it on the ballot.

If Recreational MJ supporters would concede to a tax structure on recreational MJ that is directly linked to funding adoption services in the state....I bet they could get the R's and D's all behind it and have it voted in fairly easily.
 
May 4, 2011
3,736
1,671
1,743
Charleston, SC
advocates for recreational Marijuana laws in Oklahoma to be voted in, they have a great opportunity at this point to get a petition and get it on the ballot.

If Recreational MJ supporters would concede to a tax structure on recreational MJ that is directly linked to funding adoption services in the state....I bet they could get the R's and D's all behind it and have it voted in fairly easily.
I really like these kinds of ideas. I've grown too cynical though that legislators will just use it as an opportunity to cut the money going to those programs so that it winds up a net neutral or even net negative.
 

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,836
475
713
the supreme court was never meant to be political...when formed there were no political parties...pretty sure founding fathers would not have had the president pick them if so...founding fathers assumed presidents would try to do what's best for the whole country, not just their party...my 2 cents...
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
8,731
8,031
1,743
advocates for recreational Marijuana laws in Oklahoma to be voted in, they have a great opportunity at this point to get a petition and get it on the ballot.

If Recreational MJ supporters would concede to a tax structure on recreational MJ that is directly linked to funding adoption services in the state....I bet they could get the R's and D's all behind it and have it voted in fairly easily.
Like! Count me in for taxing rec MJ at 4x, heck 10x more, than current tobacco tax. Use the proceeds for all kinds of stuff like this and education.
 

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
9,624
5,401
1,743
Somewhere
Like! Count me in for taxing rec MJ at 4x, heck 10x more, than current tobacco tax. Use the proceeds for all kinds of stuff like this and education.
Eff that. It is already taxed heavily. Sin taxes are a waste and the money is always used on something else. Remember casino money for education? I sure do.
 
Jul 5, 2020
2,161
406
213
59
Broken Arrow
Or, now follow me closely here, you could read the entirety of what he's saying about how we need to get our butts in gear to fix the adoption and foster care system if that's the direction you're wanting to head. The current systems don't really work now and we're going to put them under more strain. So--and this is the part to follow closely--you need to fix those systems. He's posted several ideas over the last couple of days for doing just that.
And I did read that and I did agree the current system needs improvement, you won't get any dispute from me there. Where you will get a dispute from me is trying to tell me the system needs improvement, therefore abortion is a better option.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
38,315
10,926
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
And I did read that and I did agree the current system needs improvement, you won't get any dispute from me there. Where you will get a dispute from me is trying to tell me the system needs improvement, therefore abortion is a better option.
I think u confused me, misunderstood me or I made a horrible typing error somewhere cause I'm 1000% never think abortion is a better option than adoption

Jesus I won't even support a kill animal shelter..how the heck would I ever think that about kids
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
8,731
8,031
1,743
Eff that. It is already taxed heavily. Sin taxes are a waste and the money is always used on something else. Remember casino money for education? I sure do.
Rec MJ is already taxed out the wazoo? Or tobacco?

Alcohol, tobacco, rec MJ, lotto… should all be taxed at the highest rate possible that the market will bear. None of these are necessities. Don't like a "sin" tax, quit. Or at least cut back. All what's a priority in your life.
 
Dec 9, 2013
1,959
658
743
52
@Rack caught a lot of crap in some of those discussions, but he clearly engaged earnestly and with some willingness to actually listen. We still disagreed at the end of the day, and on some very important points, but after seeing this garbage play out today, I'd take that all day.
You already know this but this is a result of too much consumption of conservative opinion oriented media. There is no honest willingness to engage to learn or see someone else’s perspective. They ask gotcha questions that in their limited perspective should result in a binary answer knowing that your answer is more nuanced and not just yes or no. If you answer sincerely but nuanced the response is that you didn’t answer the question. If you answer w a binary response it’s “aha you are a baby killer” or “you are a damned socialist.”

Real life is complex and nuanced. Some posters are not.

Proverbs 14:15 in real life.
 

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
9,624
5,401
1,743
Somewhere
Rec MJ is already taxed out the wazoo? Or tobacco?

Alcohol, tobacco, rec MJ, lotto… should all be taxed at the highest rate possible that the market will bear. None of these are necessities. Don't like a "sin" tax, quit. Or at least cut back. All what's a priority in your life.
Strongly disagree. All sin taxes do is increase black market activity, ensure less pure, more dangerous product and give incentives for organized crime to get involved. Plus the moralizing of these behaviors actually increase the power of addition for those stuck in that cycle.

Look at regulators and tobacco free nicotine: they are actually blocking or removing approval to products that are not carcinogenic and help people get off more addictive or carcinogenic products.

Big government at work yet again.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,656
18,200
1,743
the supreme court was never meant to be political...when formed there were no political parties...pretty sure founding fathers would not have had the president pick them if so...founding fathers assumed presidents would try to do what's best for the whole country, not just their party...my 2 cents...
Then why should the supreme court have ever ruled on abortion in the first place. It's not addressed in the constitution.
 
May 4, 2011
3,736
1,671
1,743
Charleston, SC
Strongly disagree. All sin taxes do is increase black market activity, ensure less pure, more dangerous product and give incentives for organized crime to get involved. Plus the moralizing of these behaviors actually increase the power of addition for those stuck in that cycle.

Look at regulators and tobacco free nicotine: they are actually blocking or removing approval to products that are not carcinogenic and help people get off more addictive or carcinogenic products.

Big government at work yet again.
Not sure about the less addictive part, but less carcinogenic for sure. It's a huge issue from a harm reduction standpoint, but is tough to balance against the insanely high rates of vaping among younger people. The risks aren't as obvious or gross as what tobacco can do to lungs. It's much harder to convince someone that it will impair long term planning, emotion regulation, attention, etc. I don't think the current approach is right and there are too many anti tobacco purists that can't let go of abstinence with influence on both parties, but vaping presents a real challenge that our prior methods aren't equipped to handle.

There's also obviously a balance on sin taxes. I'd rather start lower with something approximating normal sales tax and go from there, which is what I'm guessing you're getting at. Several states overtaxed marijuana and underground markets largely stayed in place, plus the federal law often makes it harder to prevent that from happening because you basically have to be unbanked.
 

okstate987

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 17, 2009
9,624
5,401
1,743
Somewhere
Not sure about the less addictive part, but less carcinogenic for sure. It's a huge issue from a harm reduction standpoint, but is tough to balance against the insanely high rates of vaping among younger people. The risks aren't as obvious or gross as what tobacco can do to lungs. It's much harder to convince someone that it will impair long term planning, emotion regulation, attention, etc. I don't think the current approach is right and there are too many anti tobacco purists that can't let go of abstinence with influence on both parties, but vaping presents a real challenge that our prior methods aren't equipped to handle.

There's also obviously a balance on sin taxes. I'd rather start lower with something approximating normal sales tax and go from there, which is what I'm guessing you're getting at. Several states overtaxed marijuana and underground markets largely stayed in place, plus the federal law often makes it harder to prevent that from happening because you basically have to be unbanked.
The harmala alkaloids in cigarettes strengthen the addition to nicotine. In fact, pharmaceutical MAOI's have even been investigated to replace their effect when coming off of nicotine to reduce withdrawals:
http://www.tobaccoinduceddiseases.o...diction-phenelzine-a-monoamine,83981,0,2.html