[Kazan]

http://go.fark.com/cgi/fark/go.pl?IDLink=1236892&location=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news%3ftmpl=story%26cid=558%26ncid=718%26e=2%26u=/ap/20041129/ap_on_go_su_co/supreme_court_ap_poll

 The poll found that 59 percent say Bush should choose a nominee who would uphold the 1973 Roe v. Wade (news - web sites) decision that legalized abortion. About three in 10, 31 percent, said they want a nominee who would overturn the decision, according to the poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos-Public Affairs.

[aldo_14]

I'm somewhat surprised it's as few as 59%, myself.

[Moonsword]

Kazan, I would not trust *any* poll like that... they're very, very easy to distort/mislead people.

[Kazan]

yeah, look at organized religion - it's been misleading people for thousands of years and morons still think their one is the "ONE TRUE RELIGION" and are willing to become fascistic and impose it on other people

[Unknown Target]

Wow, Kazan. He said something, and now you just opened a big ass can of worms.
I suggest you edit your post so it has to do A) With what he said, B) this thread, and C) so it doesn't start a big flame war (again)

[Kazan]

it has everything to do with this thread

the only reason we have to worry about Roe v Wade is because of right wing fundamentalist christian fascists

[Moonsword]

Kaz, I voted Kerry, don't jump me on politics, please.  Have you had a statistics course?  I, having not seen the stuff for 18 months, could easily engineer a misleading poll... or distort the interpretation of it very easily.

[BlackDove]

I'm gonna love watching another pointless debate of name calling.

[Moonsword]

I'm not, BD.  And I'm not getting involved with this one any further unless he calms down somewhat.

[Kazan]

i wasn't jumping on you moonsword - just the issue in general, and yes i have a stat class, and yes i know how a poll can be manpilated

this one is probably right

[aldo_14]

To be honest, the polls accuracy or not shouldn't matter a jot.

I don't think majority rule should apply to anything as fundamental as abortion, anyway; even if the majority was against it, it wouldn't mean the principles behind the decision that legalised it was wrong.

[Moonsword]

Kaz, got it, but it looked that way for a while there.  You really need to calm down some.  Rational arguments are a better choice than insults, my friend.

[Kazan]

and why exactly should i calm down when the christian version of the taliban is trying to take over my country?


aldo_14: yeah, the entire point of the constitution is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Kazan
and why exactly should i calm down when the christian version of the taliban is trying to take over my country?
 

Because you tend to sound a bit...er...rabid at times.  Which means people are sometimes a wee bit less inclined to listen to you & thus consider any sources you present.

No offense or owt.

[Moonsword]

Kazan, there are a lot of people ignoring you or just laughing at you because of how you say things, even when they (like I do much of the time) agree with what you say.

You're perceived as a nut by many (not me, but many), and politics is far more often based on the shadows of perception and belief than concrete facts.  This is the same basic problem that screwed over Kerry in the last election... and several Democrats in my state-level elections that I voted for or would have voted for if they'd been on my ticket.

Your facts are usually at least of fair validity/accuracy.  The way they're presented is what colors it so badly much of the time.  I am not your enemy here, Kazan.  And to be honest, the fact that you feel passionately, and you're well informed, puts you ahead of a lot of people in this country on *both* sides of the aisle.

EDIT:
*looks at Aldo's post*  What he said, expanded, basically.

[Bobboau]

you have always had this problem, you react, violently, in such a way that even if your right no body is willing to beleive or even listen to you.

it's why you have that title.

you debate style, while might technicaly work in an organised sort of situation, is not very good at reaching anyone who doesn't already agree with you in a real world environment.

[Corsair]

I should damn well hope it would be something like that. Let a woman choose whether she wants an abortion or not...don't thrust your own morals on the entire country.

[NGTM-1R]

What effect would overturning Roe v. Wade have?

Little or none, actually. It's the aftermath and the possiblity of state or federal laws against abortion that are what you should fear, not the court decision. A court decision is meaningless without attendant legislation.

[Moonsword]

Unless it finds certain laws unconstitutional... then it's a very big deal.  And Roe v. Wade is the foundation for a number of laws.. a finding that overturns it could (conceivably) ban those laws as well.

[Mongoose]

Originally posted by aldo_14
To be honest, the polls accuracy or not shouldn't matter a jot.

I don't think majority rule should apply to anything as fundamental as abortion, anyway; even if the majority was against it, it wouldn't mean the principles behind the decision that legalised it was wrong.

By the same token, even if the majority was for abortion in every circumstance, it wouldn't mean that the principles that legalized abortion were right.