So you made a big deal about how little time it took to find that banner and how quickly he/she accepted it as true (apparently presuming that the media that distributed was prone to deceit). Yet, the banner and Tiny Vessels are right. What happens now?
What do you mean by a "blanket point of view"? Are you implying that Tiny Vessels erroneously assumed that the claims in the banner are true (the claims are true)? Or were you implying that Tiny Vessels somehow assumed that Paul Ryan's anti-abortion ideas are wrong based on the "pro-choice" rhetoric of the banner (which is a hugely presumptuous leap).
What is your personal stance on the abortion debate?
If you believe that abortion should be legal, how do you justify supporting Paul Ryan's point of view or his candidacy as a VP? Do you believe that his fiscal policies outweigh his social policies?
I'm not an economics buff, but I'm seriously under the impression that Paul Ryan's fiscal points of view are more based on Ayn Rand's shitty philosophy than the contributions of someone like, say, Hayek.
Stance on abortions: more salt.
Wow, we agree on something, Scythe. Ayn Rand is balls. And before anyone says anything more about her, she collected social security like anyone else.
I am part of a degenerate elite
Dragging our society into the street
As a women to uses birth control why would I vote for someone is wants to ban it? Seriously.
He voted against the fair pay law! Really? He doesn't want women to get paid fair? Bullshit.
Paul Ryan hates women. The proof is right there. Why would I vote for someone who doesn't want women to have a say over their bodies, not use a perscription drug, and not get paid fair? Not for me.
Last edited by Tiny Vessels; 08-12-2012 at 01:49 PM.
If I recall correctly, Paul Ryan doesn't advocate banning all contraceptives, but just certain kinds (particularly the kinds that may serve in killing an embryo after conception). I may be wrong in the specifics though.
Personally, I think that the mode of thinking of "NO GOVERNMENT" of some people is fallacious. I believe that government intervention is not necessarily a bad thing for anything. I advocate any legislation as long as it is reasonable and rational. And up to this point, I evaluate the pro-abortion arguments as more rational than the anti-abortion arguments.
Mainly what I was talking about was being pro-choice. Do I think a crackhead smoking and breastfeeding is right? No I don't and yeah sure the government should have a say in that matter. If a crackhead wants to smoke it will smoke no matter what.
What I saying about no government was my pro-choice argument.
He did vote to cut funding to planned parenthood which supplies basic birth control to countless Americans, as well as other essential services.
I don't like that he wants to cut funding on the green energy intiative.
This seems like a decent site for reviewing the actions of politicians over their career: