Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Tracing back a sickness within American society

Tracing back a sickness within American society
Thread Tools
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 01:13 PM
 
If we want to get a handle on what's driving the lack of empathy within our culture, I believe one must look at three of the root causes; abortion, prison, and capital punishment. All are inhumane ways of dealing with deeper societal problems, and all are a treatment of symptoms and not the disease... That being, we overvalue convenience and the ability to abandon our problems, rather than encourage personal responsibility and recovery.

Abortion.

While I certainly do believe in a woman's right to choose, the abortion rate is still shockingly high, at epidemic levels; year after year, decade after decade. Yet, I've found very few successful campaigns to reinforce birth control and, perhaps more importantly, to promote family structures (mostly PP is pushed, and more often than not, they push abortion as the best solution). Why? Because It's so easy to just suck out the thing that's causing the problem.

Here's the problem with that: It's not just a "thing". You may reason that it's just a clump of cells, and at a certain point that's literally all that it is, BUT if simply left to its devices, it WILL become a baby. Subconsciously everyone knows that, every woman who I've spoken with who's had an abortion has admitted that at some point after their abortion that they were haunted with the idea that they had destroyed a life, a life intrinsically connected to them. How does that not affect someone, even if it's only in subtle ways, for the rest of their life? IMO, abortions should be very safe option, but also a very rare one. Nearly 3,600 abortions /day in the USA, a shockingly disproportionate 900 /day being black, isn't "very rare".

If we're able to devalue the wellbeing of the most vulnerable of living things, a fetus, how much easier is it to devalue anyone and anything else? I've seen the campaigns that are intended to create distance between the unborn and babies, making a fetus appear to be "other", thus easier to dispose of. I've also seen the opposite, where people embrace their abortions and even celebrate them (those are particularly twisted, IMO). There's even a rather notorious instance where a woman kept a picture of the ultrasound of her later-aborted fetus with her, even showing it off to others the same way we'd show pictures of our kids. *cringe*

Ultimately, it's not that those "methods" of coping don't work, but that they work too well and have unintended side-effects, leading to a degradation of our social moral character over time. Why? Due to that ingrained (fostered by millions of years of evolution) belief within all humans that a new human life is one of the most precious of things, something that our most basic motivations as humans are centered around producing and protecting, and we're attempting to deal with it in a similar manner as we would get a cavity filled at the dentist. My view is that this (along with imprisonment and capital punishment) creates a type of cognitive dissonance, helping enable us to see the lives of others as also being disposable, as less valuable than the things we personally desire for ourselves.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 02:24 PM
 
You gave 3 reasons, but only addressed the Abortion one, which I'm least interested in.

On the incarceration, we're vastly overusing jail time. Over-criminalizing everything, long sentences, very little treatment (in case of drugs) or rehab. And it's costing a fortune, in addition to making a lot of people difficult to employ.

I'm not sure of the objection to capital punishment. Murder earns death. The alternative is granting a long (but unpleasant) life to someone who took away the same from others. Some states only apply it to egregious circumstances, with multiple deaths or where it's deliberate and/or cruel & unusual.

I'd add active policing to the list. Law officers used to be peace officers. Today, it's "law enforcement" which means officers are looking for violations. Not waiting for a complaint, or responding to citizens in distress. Instead, they're looking for the opportunity to write tickets, discover violations, etc. Instead of just being in the "responder or helper" category like fire officers, it also adds the "inspector or occupier" position where people have to look out. Where the cop is someone to be feared, who may jump on any visible violation. Civil asset forfeiture makes this worse, incentivizing theft by officers against citizens.

I'd also add income disparity, which has dramatically grown since the 50s/60s. Today most people have to work hard just to keep the rent paid. To keep from slipping. Can't take time off for protests, or to volunteer for a political campaign you agree with. Instead, a couple weeks off work can mean loss of home, loss of children because you can't keep a roof over their head, etc. Workers who can't quit aren't far from slavery. Enforced by economics rather than property laws. So you work two jobs, and have no time for empathy with the neighbors. You may not even know their names.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 02:54 PM
 
Personal responsibility? Seems to be a common thread of all 3.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 03:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I'd also add income disparity, which has dramatically grown since the 50s/60s. Today most people have to work hard just to keep the rent paid. To keep from slipping. Can't take time off for protests, or to volunteer for a political campaign you agree with. Instead, a couple weeks off work can mean loss of home, loss of children because you can't keep a roof over their head, etc. Workers who can't quit aren't far from slavery. Enforced by economics rather than property laws. So you work two jobs, and have no time for empathy with the neighbors. You may not even know their names.
This.

Also the cult of individuality. A state of mind fostered on us by the right in the 1980s, in the UK by Thatchers belief that there was "no such thing as society" and the Reagan era push to convince people that everything was self self self.

35 years later it's hardly surprising that people now lack empathy. To place blame for societies ills at the feet of women needing or wanting to choose control over their lives is monsterous.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 03:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
You gave 3 reasons, but only addressed the Abortion one, which I'm least interested in.
I'm addressing them one at a time.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
On the incarceration, we're vastly overusing jail time. Over-criminalizing everything, long sentences, very little treatment (in case of drugs) or rehab. And it's costing a fortune, in addition to making a lot of people difficult to employ.
One solution that I thought was creative was to reintroduce hard labor for felony convictions, but with shorter sentences, while making the prisoner attend a trade school (give them several options to choose from). 1/3rd of their time spent working hard, 1/3rd spent studying, and 1/3rd spent sleeping. They'll learn a trade, pay their debt, and be much less likely to want to return.

I'm not sure of the objection to capital punishment. Murder earns death.
I don't think that's right. Perhaps in some rare instances, where we have proof beyond a shadow of a doubt (IMO, just beyond reasonable doubt isn't enough to execute someone) and it's a particularly heinous murder, or a serial murderer. Given the way our justice system is structured, and the appeals process is handled, it costs nearly 3x more to execute someone than to jail them for life.

I'd add active policing to the list.
Perhaps, but I see it as a lesser influence, and we had a thread for that.

I'd also add income disparity,
Jealousy fueled by opportunists (who in turn cultivate vast wealth and political power from the jealousy) IS a major problem in the USA, but I don't see it as related to the subject (the lack of a respect for life in our society).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 04:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
This.

Also the cult of individuality. A state of mind fostered on us by the right in the 1980s
After being stripped from us by the Left decades before. There's no evidence that collectivism leads to anything but misery.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
shifuimam
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Somewhere in the Pacific Northwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 04:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
On the incarceration, we're vastly overusing jail time. Over-criminalizing everything, long sentences, very little treatment (in case of drugs) or rehab. And it's costing a fortune, in addition to making a lot of people difficult to employ.
Our felony criminal justice system is a mess. A felony conviction permanently ruins your life. You can't get a job, you can't get approved for loans, you can't really do anything with your life except continue using criminal activity to support yourself, which is a mighty big reason why few felons are ever really rehabilitated.

Along with that, of course, is the massive list of laws - both federal and state/local - that are used to stiffen penalties. These aren't used objectively with all cases but are instead used to exert additional power and judgement over targeted individuals. And yes, that frequently means more charges and a longer sentence for black males than any other demographic.

I'm not sure of the objection to capital punishment. Murder earns death. The alternative is granting a long (but unpleasant) life to someone who took away the same from others. Some states only apply it to egregious circumstances, with multiple deaths or where it's deliberate and/or cruel & unusual.
I generally lean this way, but after reading up on the Scott and Laci Peterson case, I'm less inclined to believe that the death penalty is a good solution aside from those who are so criminally sociopathic that they're incapable of existing in the general population.

The cost of execution is easily remedied, but if we go that direction, we also need to severely limit eligibility for the death penalty.

I'd add active policing to the list. Law officers used to be peace officers. Today, it's "law enforcement" which means officers are looking for violations. Not waiting for a complaint, or responding to citizens in distress. Instead, they're looking for the opportunity to write tickets, discover violations, etc. Instead of just being in the "responder or helper" category like fire officers, it also adds the "inspector or occupier" position where people have to look out. Where the cop is someone to be feared, who may jump on any visible violation. Civil asset forfeiture makes this worse, incentivizing theft by officers against citizens.
Civil asset forfeiture shouldn't even be legal.

I'd also add income disparity, which has dramatically grown since the 50s/60s. Today most people have to work hard just to keep the rent paid. To keep from slipping. Can't take time off for protests, or to volunteer for a political campaign you agree with. Instead, a couple weeks off work can mean loss of home, loss of children because you can't keep a roof over their head, etc. Workers who can't quit aren't far from slavery. Enforced by economics rather than property laws. So you work two jobs, and have no time for empathy with the neighbors. You may not even know their names.
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition. When everyone has about the same in terms of income and quality of life, people start to lose motivation to do more and achieve greater goals. That said, the income disparity in urban areas is certainly a problem, because property values are always absurdly high, which makes it next to impossible for average individuals to live in an area.

Urbanization and the deliberate erosion of the American middle class are to blame for the widening income gap. Bring back middle class jobs, and you'll bring back the middle class, and fewer people will have to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet. Right now, people pretty much have two options - low wage, hourly, unskilled labor, or white collar corporate work. There's no more middle, which is where the vast majority of Americans lived comfortably in the 50s. This has also contributed greatly to how antisocial people are today. Everyone's addicted to their smartphone and nobody interacts socially with real, flesh-and-blood human beings anymore.

To the OP - I entirely agree that the devaluing of individual human lives is one of the leading factors in the social decay of the Western world. "Progressive" politics teach a doctrine of self-loathing. The entire concept of "privilege" is designed to make you feel like a bad person due to factors you have absolutely no control over (like how big your house was growing up, your ethnicity, your gender, your age, etc.). The "oppressor versus oppressed" dichotomy that is being forced on us - since the communistic plebe vs aristocrat comparison failed to mobilize Americans into a violent revolution - equally contributes to telling people that they're *objectively bad* if they're successful or pursue lofty goals.

I've been spending a lot of time on Reddit lately, engaging in conversation with people whose political ideologies drastically differ from my own. I've come to notice that many people on the far left are very, very, very miserable. They're depressed, they suffer crippling mental disorders, they hate everyone around them, and they hate themselves. It's a terrible way to live your life. Because such individuals have generally rejected all dogmatic religious belief, and because they embrace an ideology that teaches them their life has no meaning if they're not fighting against "oppression" every waking hour, they simply have nothing to live for.

It's pretty scary, when you stop and think about it, that the echo chamber of academia has turned into a tool to indoctrinate young adult minds to believe that violence is the only answer and that civil discussion (and therefore free speech) no longer matter. When you don't value individual humans and see the intrinsic worth in every life, it's really easy to just scream "you're a Nazi" at someone and punch them in the face, because in your own confused mind, that person truly has no right to exist due to what you perceive their character to be.

Progressivism teaches, above all else, arbitrary progress for the sake of progress. You shouldn't ever be content with how things currently are, because then you're resisting progress, and progress is universally and objectively good (to progressives, at least). Since you can never waver in your futile march toward "more progress", you get more and more cynical and more and more beat down by your life, because all your progressive friends and coworkers and mentors shame you if you aren't progressive enough.

I'm not saying that the religious right figured things out, either - religion suffers many of the same social diseases brought on by secular humanism and progressivism. Even so, there's something to be said for holding onto tradition and an existing social and cultural fabric in society.
     
shifuimam
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Somewhere in the Pacific Northwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 04:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
This.

Also the cult of individuality. A state of mind fostered on us by the right in the 1980s, in the UK by Thatchers belief that there was "no such thing as society" and the Reagan era push to convince people that everything was self self self.

35 years later it's hardly surprising that people now lack empathy. To place blame for societies ills at the feet of women needing or wanting to choose control over their lives is monsterous.
One might argue that the harsh biological facts of what abortion entails are far more monstrous.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 04:57 PM
 
Good thread, Tightpants! I'm not sure why you led with abortion, that's a really weak leadoff IMO, but here are my thoughts...

- income disparity: a number of people feel that with their skillsets (some of them obsolete or less relevant), stagnant middle class incomes, and fewer methods to climb the opportunity leader that they are stuck in a rut. Others call these people lazy, snowflakes, entitled, etc. In some cases they are right, in other cases they are tone deaf, but instead of actually listening to these stories we prefer to just label.

- struggles with embracing diversity. Racial tensions, lack of interest in listening, recognizing advantages and challenges, manipulation of efforts, neurodiversity not fully understood (there is a decent chance Trump is not completely neurotypical), etc.

- general economic, political, and cultural struggles. A thousand things going on, but at the end of the day we feel like other Americans are our competition, and in order for us to win they have to lose
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 05:25 PM
 
Abortion rates are dropping in the US, but are likely to go back up as those who oppose abortion are in power and also oppose the most effective tools for limiting them, sex education and access to birth control.

Originally Posted by shifuimam
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition.
This is very arguable, although I'm not sure this is the right thread for it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 07:12 PM
 
I'm going to do about as much research as I suspect you have here and assume your theory that birth control programs don't work is just unsubstantiated opinion with little basis in fact.
As far as I understand it, pretty much every campaign that promotes birth control and sex education in the US is successful when compared to the common default which is abstinence that is proven time and again to be very very bad at preventing unplanned teen pregnancies. I seem to recall that Colorado is a good recent example where Republicans pulled a highly successful sex ed and birth control campaign and replaced it with abstinence only which of course saw the predictable spike in unplanned teen pregnancies.
Abortion is typically highest amongst the most religious anti-abortionist populations. Especially the poorest ones.

If Freakonomics is even partially right, it seems likely that abortion saved urban America from devolving into an ultraviolent nightmare. Pretty much everyone agreed back in the 80s that your cities were doomed to end up like the nastier parts of Soweto and Karachi where people were gunned down in disputes over laundry and other petty nonsense that makes having abortions look highly civilised.
Its a theory that makes a lot of sense.

Education is almost always the answer to social problems but nearly half your nation still thinks its a bad idea. Want less abortions? Don't be anti-abortion and anti the best measures to prevent them. You couldn't make up anything so imbecilic.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2017, 09:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition. When everyone has about the same in terms of income and quality of life, people start to lose motivation to do more and achieve greater goals. That said, the income disparity in urban areas is certainly a problem, because property values are always absurdly high, which makes it next to impossible for average individuals to live in an area.
Welcome back Shif! Long time no see...

I disagree with this, but I think it might mostly be a semantic thing, but this is worth clearing up because this seems to be a stumbling place in a lot of conversations, generally speaking. I'm wondering if we can close this gap, because I remember you to be reasonable and stuff...

I think your interpretation of this is more like the concepts of socialism, where people are uninspired to work harder because their earnings are capped and redistributed to others.

I don't think everybody who talks about income disparity means this, or at least I don't.

What I mean is that the game is rigged to literally deter others from climbing the so-called ladders of opportunity by way of lobbyists buying elections, stagnant wages, predatory financial practices (e.g. the housing crisis), etc. You might say that anybody can find ladders by working hard, and I'll agree with that for a number of professions (other professions have ceilings that are virtually impossible to break through because not every skill can be monetized equally), but I think a number of people will say that it often feels hopeless and extremely frustrating when those with power can mess around with their taxes, hide behind lawyers, etc.

TL;DR: I think when a number of people talk about income inequality it's more of a David vs. Goliath argument. I honestly think that if we could find ways to approach this subject using the right words we can all agree upon this sort of thing, because I don't think anybody likes powerful bullies. Nobody, for example, was cheering on the investment bankers that brought on the housing market collapse and saying "rah rah, capitalism".

It is true that some people also use these challenges as excuses and create false obstacles for themselves. You aren't going to clear the path for everybody. But I also think we could probably agree that things are rather out-of-whack right now in the power hierarchy when, for example, powerful interests can funnel in unlimited amounts of money to political campaigns that last 23094823094 years.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 03:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition.
As Bess has jumped on this as well, I'll elaborate on my thoughts
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I disagree with this, but I think it might mostly be a semantic thing..
It's not a matter of semantics, it's demonstrably false. If there were any truth to this, we would see the bulk of innovation and economic growth coming out of the third world, and of course it doesn't.

The digital world has provided greater democratisation of innovation, but historically, innovation has sprung from the upper echelons of society. Innovation not only requires ambition, but tools (education, access to resources, etc) that are not typically available to the lower classes.

The USA is arguably leading the way of innovation by almost any metric, yet according to this it's number 167 on the list of "List of countries by income equality". Now you can quibble about Wikipedia as a source, but it's probably mostly correct that there are 166 countries in the world with worse, and in some cases much, much worse, income inequality.

There are always exceptions to the rules, but if you were to make a list of the top 100 'innovators' or 'creators of wealth' over the last 100 years, that list would be dominated by western, white men from middle-class or higher backgrounds with quality educations.

If shif's premise had any basis in reality, this would not be the case at all.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 04:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition. When everyone has about the same in terms of income and quality of life, people start to lose motivation to do more and achieve greater goals.
It is not income inequality that drives economic strength, it is social mobility, i. e. how likely it is that your dream of “starting as a dishwasher and end up a millionaire” turns into reality. This isn't some wishy-washy notion, but can be measured quantitatively through statistics — and social mobility has decreased as income inequality has increased (“Inequality Rising and Permanent over Past Two Decades”). With lower social mobility, it is much more likely that seeing a nice car or a nice house will trigger envy, frustration and depression rather than inspire you to work hard.

Historically, periods of large economic inequality were typically also periods of political instability and upheaval, and that includes historical cases such as the fall of the Roman Empire or the outgrowth of the global recession of the late 1920s. America is heading there now, as are quite a few other countries around the globe.
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
I've been spending a lot of time on Reddit lately, engaging in conversation with people whose political ideologies drastically differ from my own. I've come to notice that many people on the far left are very, very, very miserable. They're depressed, they suffer crippling mental disorders, they hate everyone around them, and they hate themselves. It's a terrible way to live your life. Because such individuals have generally rejected all dogmatic religious belief, and because they embrace an ideology that teaches them their life has no meaning if they're not fighting against "oppression" every waking hour, they simply have nothing to live for.
I don't think this is true just for one extreme end of the ideological spectrum, but for both. The coal miner from Kentucky who voted for Trump didn't do so because of his positive outlook on life, it's a manifestation of the same type of frustration: they have not received the share of growth they think they are entitled to (whether they are is a separate discussion, but no matter what you think, this is a product of the growing income inequality). A lot of grievances are shared, buzz words such as crony capitalism are part of the vernacular of Tea Party-ers and Trump fans as it is for Occupy Wallstreet types. That is why Trump is appealing to some voters who were traditionally blue collar, left-leaning Democrats: a lot of grievances (not all) are shared. And that is why rural America is struggling with an opioid epidemic.

Maybe you find yourself more ideologically at home with one of these extreme ends of the spectrum, but it is quite natural that these spring up in the current economic climate. It is just different reactions to the same perceived facts on the ground.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 09:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
Abortion rates are dropping in the US, but are likely to go back up as those who oppose abortion are in power and also oppose the most effective tools for limiting them, sex education and access to birth control.

This is very arguable, although I'm not sure this is the right thread for it.
When birth control fails, you need a back up plan. Abortion is the backup plan.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:21 AM
 
When you don't have access to birth control, abortion is still the backup plan.

In areas where birth control is more freely available, the rates of abortion are lower.

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealt...tion-rates/en/
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
Here's the thing - income inequality unarguably drives economic strength, innovation, development, and ambition. When everyone has about the same in terms of income and quality of life, people start to lose motivation to do more and achieve greater goals. .
Income inequality unarguably works for some. The tiny minority. Other than that it wrecks societies, blights lives, encourages selfishness and increases instability (see every revolution in history ever once the bulk of the population reach tipping point). By this argument the most effective and efficient society of the last couple of centuries must have been feudal Russia, where the general population were indentured slaves and the nobility owned everything. Oh wait...

It's funny how earning the big bucks only seems to motivate the CEO's and mega earners. Oh yes, got to pay THEM the "market rate". The average Joe? No, he can stay on wages that are relatively unchanged for thirty years. Perhaps giving everyone a bit more money would help motivate, well, everyone?
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
After being stripped from us by the Left decades before. There's no evidence that collectivism leads to anything but misery.
And so far little evidence that individualism and neo libralism works any better. Your comment seems to feed directly into your proposed issue. Why the yawning divide between people these days? Because everything gets framed AS a divide.

The evidence (from Europe at least) seems conclusive. States that work hard to maintain societal bonds and create communal experiences of the society (as opposed to communist economic policies) have better outcomes, with happier populations, lower crime, less violence and healthier lives. No one is advocating soviet style government, but Germany, Scandenavia etc have far better, more stable and supportive societies than either the US (by far) and the UK.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
When you don't have access to birth control, abortion is still the backup plan.

In areas where birth control is more freely available, the rates of abortion are lower.

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealt...tion-rates/en/
More freely available? Availability is not an issue in the US. BC pills have been generic for some time, and are $5 month from Walmart.
BTW, did you know the WHO has classified hormonal birth control as a class one carcinogen?
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
BTW, did you know the WHO has classified hormonal birth control as a class one carcinogen?
No one is saying you should consume them like sweeties.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 12:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
BTW, did you know the WHO has classified hormonal birth control as a class one carcinogen?
BTW, did you know that while use hormonal contraceptives do appear to marginally increase the risk of breast cancer, it marginally lowers the risk of ovarian cancer?

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer...rcinogens.html
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 01:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
BTW, did you know the WHO has classified hormonal birth control as a class one carcinogen?
Same with processed meat.

You'll pry my sausage from my cold, dead hands.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 03:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
BTW, did you know that while use hormonal contraceptives do appear to marginally increase the risk of breast cancer, it marginally lowers the risk of ovarian cancer?

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer...rcinogens.html
There is also fertility issues achieving pregnancy after long term usage.

In addition to post usage fertility issues, according to Nautre, they are making their way into environment.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09303
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
There is also fertility issues achieving pregnancy after long term usage.

In addition to post usage fertility issues, according to Nautre, they are making their way into environment.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09303
And the risk of death in pregnancy is on the rise, so pick your poison.

We can trade pointless statistics all day, but it's not going to change anyone's mind.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 04:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Same with processed meat.

You'll pry my sausage from my cold, dead hands.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 04:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
More freely available? Availability is not an issue in the US. BC pills have been generic for some time, and are $5 month from Walmart.
I think acceptability is a factor of availability for many.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 05:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
And so far little evidence that individualism and neo libralism works any better.
Except for producing the most successful republic in the history of mankind (the USA), you mean?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 06:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I'm going to do about as much research as I suspect you have here and assume your theory that birth control programs don't work is just unsubstantiated opinion with little basis in fact.
When did I say birth control programs don't work? Show me. They certainly CAN work, when properly managed and implemented.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 06:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I think acceptability is a factor of availability for many.
It's not just affordability, or the fact that options exist.

I know that my options, as a married older woman who has her own insurance, are different than a teen who needs mom and dad to drive her to the drugstore, whose minister says you go to hell if you use contraception, whose allowance won't pay for options even if she did catch the bus.

And hey, enough about her, what about his options?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 07:19 PM
 
To get this back to the devaluation of life in general, and life in the womb specifically, Ben Shapiro knocks down some of the typical rationale for abortion.


When you do not value life in the womb, you begin to not value it after.
( Last edited by Chongo; Sep 25, 2017 at 07:31 PM. )
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 07:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
When did I say birth control programs don't work? Show me. They certainly CAN work, when properly managed and implemented.
Thats my bad, I could have sworn thats what I read. I must have been half asleep. Sorry about that.

Colorado still makes for a good example though I think. Conservative politicians and religious groups axing successful programs they should be expanding is just criminally unhelpful. Or ought to be.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2017, 11:21 PM
 
I think our society is sick due to being too spoiled. The effect of solving pretty much every serious problem that existed for most of human history and life becoming too easy. Due to this people have trouble appreciating what they DO have and spend a great deal of time deeply angry at what should otherwise be petty issues. Or theyre deeply angry that others disagree with them on their stance that government should engage in theft of successful people's money to make sure the less successful can use that money to live the easy life they want.

We used to be a species who admired and respected the successful, the competent, the strong, the smart. Through some twist of sociological fate we've evolved into admiring the weak, the losers, the incompetent, the whiners, calling them the underdogs. Perhaps it's because the masses relate to these people, maybe they view themselves as the losers, but not wanting to admit they're losers, they claim their circumstance is due to them being too nice & civil to the point they were taken advantage of by "the oppressors". If only everyone would see this theyd see all these underdogs are equal to CEOs in competence, their potential good life was just stolen from them.

If you had taken anyone from 100 yrs ago & shown them American society they would say utopia had been achieved, yet recent generations are the angriest peeps in history. A "right" used to refer to your rights to be left alone. You have right to free speech & government wont bother you. You have the right to buy or make a gun and government wont bother you about it. All the rights cost society & the government nothing and revolve around the gov basically leaving you alone. But now days people want the right to pay for their healthcare with money stolen from others. They want rights to more government... rights that involve an active and expensive government roll in their lives

I dont think abortion or incarceration subjects are making our society sick. These things arent a regular part of the average person's daily lives. I tend to side with freakanomics on abortion. The media makes these things bigger than they should be. Abortion is only the business of the people getting it done & is only a small part of their life; it should also be noted how people are often shamed into regret afterwords... and this itself is a cultural construct.

Lack of empathy....
Conservative culture admires a time when we were good friends with our nieghbors, coworkers, family and people we ran into frequently in our LOCAL communities. We would have empathy for these people when they needed it. You might give the incompetent person a job simply 'cause you knew him from the community. You might get together with neighbors to pay another neighbor's medical bills, because you knew them, and they were a good person, and you cared about them.

Liberals have done everything they can to destroy this culture, successfully I might add. Liberalism has us not caring about anyone on a personal level so the desire to help what are now just random people we dont know in our communities is nonexistent. The liberal solution to this is to 1st redefine "empathy= government social programs & government defined political correctness & if you disgree youre unempathetic" , then replace what was human nature's solutions for thousands of yrs with government mandated "empathy" so to speak... in the form of wealth redistribution programs to solve problems for heinous ungrateful people you never met, living on the other side of the country. Of course these people don't need to be good people anymore, they dont need to be social, create meaningful relationships with neighbors because whatever "help" they need, government will be their for them, with muny stolen from others who had no say in who to donate too.
the largest problem for Americans today is they eat too much food and dont have enough work to do to keep their heart healthy
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 02:51 AM
 
Standards of living certainly have improved, along with average lifespan and public health. That doesn't mean we should ignore today's problems, just because most of yesterday's are solved.

As to friendly communities, modern communications have enabled watering holes on the internet like here. Followers on Twitter, subscribers on YouTube, and everyday family interactions on FaceBook. It's possible we regularly communicate with more people than our ancestors did, they're just not as geographically clustered. Our parents were a (toll) call away from most of the planet. We have instant contact, for a fixed monthly fee to the ISP.

The problems with income inequality aren't so much on the top end, as the bottom end. If ordinary people cannot save up for their dreams, then their dreams are gone. We once made education free through high school. It wasn't "socialist wealth redistribution", it was a collective investment in the next generation. So every kid could start with an equal chance, and those better-educated kids would support all of us in our old age. Whether via Social Security, or through extended families.

But today, high school is not enough. The world has become more complex, and we need to learn more to earn above minimum wage. A great inventor or author could make it with only high school. For the less remarkable, you need college. But the free education investment was not extended. So today, we make kids gamble on what skills will sell in the future. If they guess right, we win. If they guess wrong, we saddle them with crushing debt that will follow them to the grave. And cannot even be discharged in bankruptcy.

Banks and lending institutions make more money financing bigger homes, so in past decades, they lobbied local cities to raise home standards. Minimum lot sizes, and minimum house sizes. This is why there are no starter homes today - they were made illegal to build. Just monsters with prices that start at years of one's earnings, assuming no other expenses. Decades realistically, and one lost job results in repossession and total loss of capital. The banks are too big to fail, and no one goes to jail. But your dreams are gone, and you're now a sniveling loser looking for a handout. For something you had no power to prevent.

Or health care. Disabled or injured people can't work, so they lose any job they had. Care is expensive, but society benefits from having as few sick people as possible. More people to pay into social security, to buy goods and services (company can pay into pensions), or to buy goods and services so business prospers and your dividends arrive.

Almost no one can cover the possibility of a million-dollar hospital bill. Certainly not the people on minimum wage, because they couldn't afford college. Or picked the wrong major. Who can't save much because they have to pay the rent each month. Who rent because small homes aren't available. So medical coverage takes insurance, and the larger the pool, the more affordable it gets. Economies of scale help a bit with the base cost too.

Just like car insurance, where nearly everyone will need it eventually. Actually, scratch that. Everyone will end up in the hospital at least twice, at the beginning and end. Most likely in between too, especially in the latter half. So make everyone who drives breathes buy insurance. Or not, they can pay a penalty and skip it. Or they can buy minimal coverage and take some chances. And we all benefit from fewer uncollected medical bills, or monthly phone calls from collectors looking for someone who lived there years ago. Or who just randomly put your phone number down on the ER form.

But even that's too much. The poorer people, who failed to get rich totally because of their own fault, should just get sick and croak. Never mind there will be fewer supporting us in retirement. Instead, widely available health insurance should be shot down because base medical costs too much. If poor people would only invent cheaper surgery, then ... then they could afford their own care, and we can veto universal coverage again!

--------
Sorry for the tirade, I got on a roll. Medical costs could certainly go down with greater automation, currently held up by FDA policies passed after the thalidomide scare. But the current prices are what we have. We either use an imperfect system, or load the country down with fewer working people, which cuts everything from taxes to business to dividends.

If those on the low end of the scale are losers, it must be contagious. They're threatening to become a majority of the country. Totally all their fault of course. Besides not adjusting the minimum wage for inflation, we should punish them further. Like taking away their toilets or removing benches for stools, so they can't sleep.

Making everyone pay for everything out of pocket, and face all consequences if they can't, is not good for society. Certainly not us in our old age. And it's pretty damned cruel. If you don't like the current healthcare, improve it. Don't cancel it, or make it only work for those who need it least.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 02:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Except for producing the most successful republic in the history of mankind (the USA), you mean?
Did it? I seem to remember the US being pretty successful BEFORE the invention of neoliberalism. Seems to me its only gotten worse since then.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 06:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by el chupacabra View Post
We used to be a species who admired and respected the successful, the competent, the strong, the smart.
This whole love letter post to capitalist neo-feudalism is just awful, but if as you say your worldview is truly predicated on respect for the strong and successful, you should be in favour of a 100% death tax yes? The successful peoples kids don't need help if they have inherited strength and successfulness from their parents, and if they haven't then we certainly don't want losers having money and influence.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 06:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post

Sorry for the tirade, I got on a roll. Medical costs could certainly go down with greater automation, currently held up by FDA policies passed after the thalidomide scare.
I'm not sure its (just) the FDA when a bag of saline is billed at ~$500 and a room with a panic button is billed at several grand a night over motel prices.

My guess is its the insurance model. Everyone jacks prices when insurance companies are paying. Apparently they don't haggle or query, just pay the bill and put up the premiums to cover it. Its still socialised healthcare, just not accessible to everyone and a bunch of guys who are already rich are skimming off the top at every single level of the scam.

The American distrust of government is nothing but a trick to keep money in the hands of private businesses instead.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 07:10 AM
 
The FDA regs demand detailed studies to prove efficacy and safety. This was ramped up after the thalidomide scare. Today though, it's been problematic for self-help tools. The examples I'm thinking of are smartphone apps that use the camera to identify pills (by color+shape), read warning labels out loud, etc. For patients with poor sight.

I've read at least one story on this - even when the app is free, the FDA sends a letter asking about your scientific study proving accuracy. They aren't comfortable with allowing "use at your own risk" labels. While they're happy with new automated tools, they prefer them to be in the hands of doctors rather than the public. Since doctors don't make house calls, that means in the hospital.

But doctors and hospitals are two of the biggest parts of medical expenses. Plus drug and supply costs of course, as you say. So while computers were quickly added for the underpaid typists and nurse stations (minor parts of medical costs), it's been endless foot-dragging for self-help. And home diagnostic / treatment tools for self use - expect immediate calls from the FDA.

Anyone found an app that lets you put in symptoms, or follow your way through multiple-choice, then offers a diagnostic? The only ones I've seen end up diagnosing you as "you should make an appointment with X-type of doctor for a diagnosis".
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 08:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Did it?
Yep. We have this Bill Rights to back that up.



We've been really big on empowering individuals for a long time.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yep. We have this Bill Rights to back that up.



We've been really big on empowering individuals for a long time.
I know. That's exactly what I said.

Neoliberalism doesn't empower individuals. It empowers corporations and wealthy elites.

Your success as a nation is entirely due to a philosophy of government that has been usurped and corrupted for the past 35 years.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 10:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post

Anyone found an app that lets you put in symptoms, or follow your way through multiple-choice, then offers a diagnostic? The only ones I've seen end up diagnosing you as "you should make an appointment with X-type of doctor for a diagnosis".
It’s called Teledoc, and you have access to a live Dr 24/7/365. We signed up two years ago, but have not used it yet.
There is also a website.
https://www.teladoc.com
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
I've been spending a lot of time on Reddit lately, engaging in conversation with people whose political ideologies drastically differ from my own. I've come to notice that many people on the far left are very, very, very miserable. They're depressed, they suffer crippling mental disorders, they hate everyone around them, and they hate themselves. It's a terrible way to live your life. Because such individuals have generally rejected all dogmatic religious belief, and because they embrace an ideology that teaches them their life has no meaning if they're not fighting against "oppression" every waking hour, they simply have nothing to live for.
Welcome back! We've been aching for a decent conservative voice around here lately, I'm hoping you'll stick around.

Regarding this quote - I've noticed CPT doing the same thing.

I've also seen the opposite, where people embrace their abortions and even celebrate them (those are particularly twisted, IMO). There's even a rather notorious instance where a woman kept a picture of the ultrasound of her later-aborted fetus with her, even showing it off to others the same way we'd show pictures of our kids. *cringe*
Taking a fringe case or a group of anecdotes and using them to support the thing you already believe, assigning negative traits to a group that you oppose. Do you think that's intellectually honest?

One could very easily visit TheRedPill and reinforce a preconceived notion that most men are sad, lonely, angry people looking only to use women or t_d and determine that most conservatives are racist, misogynist assholes. But we know that neither of those are true.

Urbanization and the deliberate erosion of the American middle class are to blame for the widening income gap. Bring back middle class jobs, and you'll bring back the middle class, and fewer people will have to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet. Right now, people pretty much have two options - low wage, hourly, unskilled labor, or white collar corporate work. There's no more middle, which is where the vast majority of Americans lived comfortably in the 50s.
Out of curiosity, who deliberately eroded the middle class? Corporations sending skilled jobs overseas? The government increasing taxes and taking wages away from middle class earners?

Manufacturing jobs aren't coming back to the US en masse, where do you think the middle class will come from? Governmental increases in minimum wages? Stronger unions to support collective bargaining for higher pay/better job security for the remaining skilled trades? Less regulation in order to promote entrepreneurialism?

This has also contributed greatly to how antisocial people are today. Everyone's addicted to their smartphone and nobody interacts socially with real, flesh-and-blood human beings anymore.
Do you have a measure for how antisocial people are? To claim that people are significantly more antisocial today than they were in the past requires some quantitative measure, right? Otherwise it would seem that you could once again be projecting some belief or position you hold.



To the OP - I entirely agree that the devaluing of individual human lives is one of the leading factors in the social decay of the Western world. "Progressive" politics teach a doctrine of self-loathing. The entire concept of "privilege" is designed to make you feel like a bad person due to factors you have absolutely no control over (like how big your house was growing up, your ethnicity, your gender, your age, etc.).
I think you're focusing on a minority of loud, obnoxious voices instead of the bigger picture. From Wikipedia:

Progressivism is the support for or advocacy of social reform.[1] As a philosophy, it is based on the Idea of Progress, which asserts that advancements in science, technology, economic development, and social organization are vital to the improvement of the human condition.
Don't confuse the people who want, for example, single-payer health care, more funding for NASA, and government subsidies to support small businesses with people fighting for a law requiring you use their made up pronouns.

It's taking the easy way out to try and equate the groups, to discount the people trying to better society (the specific methods you may disagree with, but the goals you surely do not) by characterizing them as a bunch of sad, self-loathing shamers on tumblr.

The "oppressor versus oppressed" dichotomy that is being forced on us - since the communistic plebe vs aristocrat comparison failed to mobilize Americans into a violent revolution - equally contributes to telling people that they're *objectively bad* if they're successful or pursue lofty goals.
I'd be interested to see an example of this. Initially, it sounds like more mischaracterization of the side you oppose. "Democrats are just poor people who are mad at the rich and successful Republicans." I think the worst thing you can say about modern progressives is that they think everyone should have an equal shot at achieving their individual lofty goals.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I think your interpretation of this is more like the concepts of socialism, where people are uninspired to work harder because their earnings are capped and redistributed to others.
That's not socialism, that's communism. A modern "socialist" state like Norway has many opportunities for success, incentives for people to work hard and earn more money, but also low income inequality and social safety nets such that those out of work aren't going to die because they don't have health insurance.

Communism is where everyone has the same everything and no one has an incentive to work harder.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:13 AM
 
Equal opportunity or equal outcome?

The use of gender neutral pronouns has introduced a new abbreviation, Mx.
A letter from FL teacher to her students.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Equal opportunity or equal outcome?

The use of gender neutral pronouns has introduced a new abbreviation, Mx.
This is perfect! Thank you for the example of someone getting terrified of something their echo chamber on facebook told them was an imminent threat to society as we know it!
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:18 AM
 
That’s an assumpmtion on your part.
http://www.tallahassee.com/story/new...ers/685061001/

Gannett is hardly a rightwing echo chamber.

My echo chamber.
http://www.newadvent.org
http://www.catholicculture.org
www.catholic.com
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 11:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
How come the Pope isn't in your echo chamber?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 12:06 PM
 
@pontifex is in my Twitter feed.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 12:19 PM
 
An interesting article regarding those in a persistent vegetative state. How will it be used? Will it be used? This is one of the conditions Ben Shapiro addresses in the video posted earlier.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/...getative-state
Niels Birbaumer, of the University of Tübingen and a pioneer of brain-computer interfaces to help patients with neurological disorders communicate, said the findings, published in the journal Current Biology, raised pressing ethical issues. “Many of these patients may and will have been neglected, and passive euthanasia may happen often in a vegetative state,” he said. “This paper is a warning to all those believing that this state is hopeless after a year.”
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2017, 03:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
That’s an assumpmtion on your part.
http://www.tallahassee.com/story/new...ers/685061001/

Gannett is hardly a rightwing echo chamber.
Just catching up on your local Tennessee news when you randomly stumbled upon that article?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:09 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,