Dr. Oz Wants Local Politicians To Decide If It's Ok For A Woman To Have An Abortion

Hang on, Ethel. Not in the least, as I'm quite comfy with myself and my beliefs, and that fact appalls you simply because we have differing issue opinions. You base  any evaluation of your opposition here totally and completely on political stances, and you erroneously presume that approach to be 'smart'. It's far from it.  I'm now fully convinced that your primary participatory function here in the Sink is as an elitist agitator fueled by his own internal discontent; you disperse that discontent to your opposition here as a means to ease those inherent negative feelings and to subsequently provide you with some sense of superiority over the other participants. It's a means for you to feel powerful. Many times, you proceed further with assigning rank names and labels to those who don't agree with your political axioms or because they might misspell something / use improper grammar in their posts. You only find some vestiges of contentment  here when there's an argument / conflict ( and you're not alone there). You have plenty to say, but you fail miserably much of the time with your presentation/s (eg how you say it, again).

Just know that your negative approaches elicit zero influence on me personally. As I've offered previously, you've made useful and reasonable contributions in other LVA forum segments concerning travel and gambling. Yet, by engaging you with the above observations, I've greatly erred by being drawn into and practicing your kind of pathology. I've engaged in the very actions that I'm ridiculing you for. I'm not happy about that, and rest assured I hope to avoid that in the future. Yet, I refuse to shoulder any of your oft- employed erroneous, manipulative, and/or accusatory crap. At the same time, I'm  all for rational - toned debate during the limited time I spend here. Such debate is elusive here.  Have fun.

Look, you can't be a good person (genuinely good) and a Republican,  and that impossibility produces cognitive dissonance. I get it!

I don't think you really understand that my opposition to the RepubliQ is NOT political. In fact, I agree with many conservative positions and disagree with many liberal ones. I loathe the RepubliQ because they're stone-cold evil. As should you. As should anyone, regardless of what party's label they paste on their foreheads.

You're at a turning point. Formerly, you had an ideology, which was fine. But now, you're like a charter-member Nazi in 1938, when they moved from torchlight parades and pageantry to mass murder. You should drop the RepubliQ like the proverbial hot potato.

I wasn't referring to your "beliefs," Charles, or your principles, since you don't seem to have any.

I was referring to how you would VOTE. And you would vote to allow a local Mayor Quimby to make abortion denial decisions for ectopic pregnancies and young rape victims - as long as you got the economic and tax policies you wanted. That's what shouldn't keep you up at night.

And our bet is still on. I'm betting that the total votes for Congressional Democratic candidates exceed those of the Republican candidates. If I lose it's sayonara. If I win I lose, and if I lose I win.

And Charles, I bet you laugh at people like David Miller, but he is clearly your moral superior. He actually believes in his stances on abortion, immigration, and so on. For you, it's only a means to an end. 

I think there's actually only about a 50% chance that he believes his own shit. For instance, only a total moron fuckhead would believe the Big Lie--and David, while unequivocally a fuckhead, isn't a moron. I think there's a good chance that he's just a bored, lonely old man sitting in his mommy's basement and amusing himself by starting fights on the internet.

Which of my principles / beliefs are you unclear on, or are you assuming way too much again?  And you excluded another component in your original wager offer..that went beyond more total congressional Democratic votes. It also included that the Democrats would retain control of the Senate. Why'd you omit that second component ? Was it due to the more current circumstances? Your omission of that component lets me know whom / what you are, unless it was just a slip.

Yes, I did leave that out because I plum forgot. Sorry. The Democrats must also control the Senate. (That's your best shot at winning by the way.)

And for all of your exceptions to banning all abortions, you'd still vote for someone banning them 100% if it means your side wins. Seems kind of whorish to me, but I'm sure you can justify it to yourself.

Well, Charles, you've already testified to your, um, moral flexibility. If we elect people who will enact the RepubliQ social and economic agenda, then I guess the accompanying horrors visited on women who try to exercise their right to have abortions are what...collateral damage? End justifying the means? Because, y'know, hundreds of women will die and thousands will have children they don't want and can't care for. But that's just swell as long as big corporations get those yummy tax breaks and no one "teaches" CRT, right?

It looks like 50/50 on the Senate, so only a fool would try to predict the outcome, but MP's prediction of more Democrat than Republican votes is a certainty.

  The Senate will not be 50/50. I predict 53/47, in Republican control.  A week from now this "question" will be answered and we will be then subjected to more excuses and lies from Lewis about the result.

Which is why I brought it up, actually ( on my possible wager win, etc.) Who knows, but lord knows I'm sick of polls from all sources...don't trust them. I might have a small surprise for you regarding this wager, too. You'll have to wait until the outcome occurrs. Exciting, isn't it?

I'd vote for banning abortions with the standard well known exceptions, absolutely. I'd have a difficult time voting for someone who banned them 100%. With your charge here, you're insinuating that the abortion issue is the single most important  decision voters have to make. Many Democrats do, and that's just fine. You do realize that, despite either of our stances on this issue, that the legislative process involved in forcing a ban is extremely unlikely to occur ( even if the R's sweep Congress next week)? The thing is, you can't and won't make my personal decisions for me, no matter how many labels you assign to me or how many intentionally degrading / manipulative statements you offer in my direction. It's not your business. If I make a voting decision that keeps me up at night, it'll be no skin off your hide. There's an entire cadre of issues that I personally believe are more critical. Clear enough?

Further, again you have no clue what my position might be on immigration. It's basically founded on old conservative ideas that you and others like to lambast here. Securing the border is the primary issue for me ( ohh, look..you'd already guessed that) , with a set of laws and procedures with some semblance of basic processing order. There's no way or means for you or anyone else to convince me that the current situation is anywhere close to that. I could list many other items on my personal immigration bucket list, which might include massive housing facilities for asylum seekers who would be required to get in line and follow a structured protocol. Expedient court decisions on those asylum cases would have to naturally follow that. This issue is so maximally complex that I'm not  aware of even a portion of all the inputs. If you are, feel free to digress and educate us (try to minimize the ideological slant, please). Securing the border as described is the number one issue with me, and that event would have desirous and far reaching effects in many other areas.  Clear? As mud? My supposed morality just took another dive, right?

So did I elevate my level of so-called morality ( as outlined by you, anyway)..or, alternatively am I simply now burning in the lake of fire? Any sneakily worded responses won't change things, btw.

Facts about abortions, U.S. abortion statistics ---https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/