WWTBAM Bored

Ohio voters enshrined the right to choose into the state constitution by a wide margin.
Democrats held the Virginia State Senate. Democrats flipped the Virginia House of Delegates.
Governor Andy Beshear was re-elected in Kentucky.
The Democratic candidate comfortably won an open seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

What do these results have in common? Abortion was an important issue in each election.

Ohio is self-explanatory.

Glenn Youngkin thought he could flip the Senate by advocating for a 15-week ban. The voters of Virginia disagreed.

Governor Beshear ran on his pro-choice record against the anti-choice incumbent Attorney General. He won a deep red state.

And abortion (along with voting rights) was front and center in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court race.

In other news, it looks like anti-choice Democrat Brandon Presley will likely fail to force a runoff against Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves. --Bob

Yep, killing babies is the priority.

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:22 pm

Ohio voters enshrined the right to choose into the state constitution by a wide margin.
Democrats held the Virginia State Senate. Democrats flipped the Virginia House of Delegates.
Governor Andy Beshear was re-elected in Mississippi.
The Democratic candidate comfortably won an open seat on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

What do these results have in common? Abortion was an important issue in each election.

Ohio is self-explanatory.

Glenn Youngkin thought he could flip the Senate by advocating for a 15-week ban. The voters of Virginia disagreed.

Governor Beshear ran on his pro-choice record against the anti-choice incumbent Attorney General. He won a deep red state.

And abortion (along with voting rights) was front and center in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court race.

In other news, it looks like anti-choice Democrat Brandon Presley will likely fail to force a runoff against Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves. --Bob

Slight correction: Andy Beshear is governor of Kentucky, not Mississippi. As someone who lives a stone's throw from Kentucky, I can tell you the governor's race was much more a referendum on what Beshear has accomplished the past 4 years, although abortion rights were certainly in the mix. Beshear pulled approximately 200,000 more votes than his Democratic down-ballot counterparts in statewide races. But unlike a lot of red-state Democrats, he did not shy away from the issue of abortion rights. Ear and other Bored KY residents may have more insight.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 2:13 am

Yep, killing babies is the priority.i

Yep, killing babies maintaining the right of a woman to make medical decisions about her own body is the priority.

Fixed it for you.

Further proof that polls don't vote and people do vote.

kroxquo wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 5:52 am

Yep, maintaining the right of a woman to make medical decisions about her own body is the priority.

The issue directly affects men, too--whether they like to admit it or not. 54% of Ohio men (myself included) spoke up in this election that the government doesn't belong in a woman's uterus. This is America, not Gilead.

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2023 11:22 pm

Glenn Youngkin thought he could flip the Senate by advocating for a 15-week ban. The voters of Virginia disagreed.

There was a lot of chatter about Youngkin's political future (he can't run for re-election in two years) and his having found the "formula" on how a Republican can appeal to more moderate voters. Last night's election dispelled those myths. He was exposed as another Mike Johnson, a typical Republican, but one who looks non-threatening.

And I'm curious whether our intrepid local poll watcher, Flock, was on duty yesterday. We had local elections here in Georgia (lots of city and county races), so he might have had his chance to keep an eagle eye out for dead Democrats trying to pull a Weekend at Bernies and show up to vote for Joe Biden.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 2:13 am

Yep, killing babies is the priority.

It was interesting this morning as I was feeling a little down over the election and I opened up my bible for guidance-the "knit together in my mother's womb" passages leaped out at me. Funny how often things like that happen.

Stand strong brother-even if 95% of the people are in favor of abortion-it doesn't make it right.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Also, the states that have enacted the most severe abortion restrictions tend to be the states with the worst records for pre- and post-natal care and the highest infant mortality rates.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

George Carlin outlined all of the GOP "pro-life" hypocrisy perfectly nearly thirty years ago.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Weyoun 2500 years ago.

"Little point in not sacrificing your kids to Moloch if they are just going to starve anyway."

BTW-Have you kept your kids all up-to-date on their Covid shots?

Since we have become a nation that believes in and practices child sacrifice-I would suggest Chesterton's essay"The War of Gods and Demons" on the difference between Carthage and Rome.

Are you sure you don't want to drag Jim Jordan pedolphilia stuff into this thread?

Spock wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 11:20 am

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Weyoun 2500 years ago.

"Little point in not sacrificing your kids to Moloch if they are just going to starve anyway."

BTW-Have you kept your kids all up-to-date on their Covid shots?

Since we have become a nation that believes in and practices child sacrifice-I would suggest Chesterton's essay"The War of Gods and Demons" on the difference between Carthage and Rome.

Are you sure you don't want to drag Jim Jordan pedolphilia stuff into this thread?

Unsurprisingly, you’re not understanding the argument. I’m generally against abortion - did you know that dumbass? - but I find it important that people like you think you’re so morally superior because you’re against abortion, yet other forms of human suffering don’t bother you at all.

I think a lot of it is because you think that anything happens to anyone is entirely their fault. This would include pregnancy. This would include being born into a poor situation.

The idea that we could do anything to help someone else is abhorrent to you. Makes me think that you did not read Chesterton too closely.

And yes, my son did get a booster this fall, along with a flu shot. I regret to inform you, he’s not dead yet.

Ass.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:11 am

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Also, the states that have enacted the most severe abortion restrictions tend to be the states with the worst records for pre- and post-natal care and the highest infant mortality rates.

But that’s a problem with minorities. It doesn’t happen to white people, so people like BiT shrug, just as they shrug over gun fatalities that lead to dead teenagers in Chicago. Problems with black people don’t count because BiT has his honky ducks in a row.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 1:43 pm

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:11 am

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Also, the states that have enacted the most severe abortion restrictions tend to be the states with the worst records for pre- and post-natal care and the highest infant mortality rates.

But that’s a problem with minorities. It doesn’t happen to white people, so people like BiT shrug, just as they shrug over gun fatalities that lead to dead teenagers in Chicago. Problems with black people don’t count because BiT has his honky ducks in a row.

You are truly an idiot, and a bigot - more so with every post.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Oh I’m all for laws against killing unborn babies, born babies, and kids. Have I ever said anything to the contrary. And I don’t like kids going hungry. I donate and volunteer so that doesn’t happen.

I am against the government forcefully taking my money and providing $0.12 of marginally nutritious food the kids leave uneaten for every $1.00 they take from me.

I’m against acting like I’m “for the kids” because I want the government to take responsibility for them. Because I do care for them, mine and others, and those that will (or should) be here in the future.

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 1:42 pm

Spock wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 11:20 am

Weyoun wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:07 am

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids get gunned down in school.

Little point in being against abortion, if you hope a kid gets sick from the Covid vaccine.

Little point in being against abortion if you don’t mind it when kids go hungry.

Etc.

Weyoun 2500 years ago.

"Little point in not sacrificing your kids to Moloch if they are just going to starve anyway."

BTW-Have you kept your kids all up-to-date on their Covid shots?

Since we have become a nation that believes in and practices child sacrifice-I would suggest Chesterton's essay"The War of Gods and Demons" on the difference between Carthage and Rome.

Are you sure you don't want to drag Jim Jordan pedolphilia stuff into this thread?

Unsurprisingly, you’re not understanding the argument. I’m generally against abortion - did you know that dumbass? - but I find it important that people like you think you’re so morally superior because you’re against abortion, yet other forms of human suffering don’t bother you at all.

I think a lot of it is because you think that anything happens to anyone is entirely their fault. This would include pregnancy. This would include being born into a poor situation.

The idea that we could do anything to help someone else is abhorrent to you. Makes me think that you did not read Chesterton too closely.

And yes, my son did get a booster this fall, along with a flu shot. I regret to inform you, he’s not dead yet.

Ass.

1) Re-Your son-Good for him. I am glad you are so smart and heavily researched the long-term data on possible long-term effects on young men; especially as they mature. No harm-no foul.

2) Weyoun-"I think a lot of it is because you think that anything happens to anyone is entirely their fault. This would include pregnancy. This would include being born into a poor situation. "

Boy, you and SSS are really really good at attributing views to me. I guess since you are so smart (as you have been repeatedly told your whole life) it must be true.

3) Weyoun-"but I find it important that people like you think you’re so morally superior because you’re against abortion, yet other forms of human suffering don’t bother you at all. "

Actually, abortion isn't really my fight and I am probably in favor of a lot of the early abortion windows that a lot of the European nations have. But if you want "moral superiority" look at the pro-abortion people on the bored.

And yes, I have known several girls (back in my college days) who had abortions -none mine.

4) I have been thinking all day of my use of the term "Child Sacrifice" and I think I stand by that. We are a nation that believes in and practices child sacrifice to the gods of promiscuity and convenience.

You can't tell me that the young promiscuous singles (men and women) that vote heavily for abortion are thinking of the poor black woman, They are thinking of killing the results of their next Saturday night mistake.

5) Adoption-most of the problems cited by pro-abortion (Hungry kids et al) people could be solved by supporting adoption to waiting families. But for some reason-the pro-abortion side hates pro-life pregnancy centers that work for adoption.

Spock wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2023 8:09 pm

You can't tell me that the young promiscuous singles (men and women) that vote heavily for abortion are thinking of the poor black woman, They are thinking of killing the results of their next Saturday night mistake.

5) Adoption-most of the problems cited by pro-abortion (Hungry kids et al) people could be solved by supporting adoption to waiting families. But for some reason-the pro-abortion side hates pro-life pregnancy centers that work for adoption.

These abortion protection measures don't just pass with the votes of young promiscuous singles. A lot of older people support the measures as well. It's a matter of women having control over their own bodies rather than religious zealots who want to impose their Biblical views on everybody.

And the term is pro-choice, not pro-abortion. Many pro-choice women do not or would not get abortions themselves. They have no problem with women who choose to raise their children or put them up for adoption. They just don't feel they should make the decision for anyone else. It's amazing that many anti-abortion zealots rail on about how the government is making decisions and telling them what to do, when they have no qualms about doing so when the shoe's on the other foot.

Families are waiting for adoption of healthy white babies, but mixed race babies, black babies, malnourished babies, drug addicted babies, babies with birth defects... not so much. Instead they wind up in foster care.

Was that 12-year-old girl who was raped by her stepfather just trying to kill the results of her Saturday night mistake?

SSS>"These abortion protection measures don't just pass with the votes of young promiscuous singles. A lot of older people support the measures as well."<<<

Yep, worshippers of the God of Promiscuity are very loyal to their God, even when their promiscuous years might have passed.

SSS>"Was that 12-year-old girl who was raped by her stepfather just trying to kill the results of her Saturday night mistake?"<<<

One of the horrible results of the breakup of the family and the culture of divorce is that it puts so many young girls in intimate contact with men that are not physically related to them. The odds of a girl being molested by a stepfather or other non-related adult male are exponentially higher than the odds of being molested by their blood father.

SSS>>"Families are waiting for adoption of healthy white babies, but mixed race babies, black babies, malnourished babies, drug addicted babies, babies with birth defects... not so much. Instead they wind up in foster care."<<<

This is a classic example of an SSS post that seems plausible at a first glance, but upon reflection you realize that he is completely full of crap.

Regarding his assertion that families are waiting for the adoption of healthy white babies all you have to do is look at the waves of adoption tourism over decades as parents search the globe for babies of any race and color to realize he completely pulled that from his ass.

1) The 1970's saw a wave of babies from Korea.

2) I know at some point there was a wave of girl babies from China in the era of one-child

3) Latin American babies were the thing at one point.

4) Russian and eastern Europe were a source of babies in the late 90's.

5) After that, Ethiopia and Haiti were a source

6) etc etc

In the late 90''s, Mrs Spock and I started down the adoption path (at that time, Russia was the main source) when we thought we might not be able to have kids-We were told that domestic adoptions are so hard that it just makes more sense to go international.

Spock wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2023 12:35 pm

This is a classic example of an SSS post that seems plausible at a first glance, but upon reflection you realize that he is completely full of crap.

Regarding his assertion that families are waiting for the adoption of healthy white babies all you have to do is look at the waves of adoption tourism over decades as parents search the globe for babies of any race and color to realize he completely pulled that from his ass.

And Spock floats out a lot of anecdotes without anything to back them up. In 2019, the last pre-COVID year, US citizens adopted 2,966 babies from foreign countries as opposed to 120,869 in the US.

https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/adopted2010_19.pdf

The share of chil­dren who are Black and in fos­ter care is the low­est it has been in two decades. Even so, Black chil­dren are still over­rep­re­sent­ed among youth in fos­ter care rel­a­tive to the gen­er­al child population. In 2021, Black chil­dren rep­re­sent­ed 14% of the total child pop­u­la­tion but 22% of all kids in fos­ter care.

By com­par­i­son: White kids rep­re­sent 49% of the nation’s child pop­u­la­tion and only 43% of its fos­ter care pop­u­la­tion. Lati­no or His­pan­ic chil­dren rep­re­sent 26% of kids nation­wide, yet 22% of all kids in fos­ter care. And Asian Amer­i­can and Native Hawaiian/​Pacific Islander kids make up near­ly 5.5% of the U.S. child pop­u­la­tion but only 1% of its fos­ter care pop­u­la­tion. In oth­er words, these three groups are under-rep­re­sent­ed in fos­ter care when com­pared to their pres­ence in the total child population.

https://www.aecf.org/blog/us-foster-car ... -ethnicity

It turns out, one of the biggest predicators of adoption costs is the race and gender of the child. Put bluntly, non-white children are a cheaper domestic adoption choice. NYU Stern School economist Allan Collard-Wexler, when writing about adoption and adoption costs, found that the most requested preference from adoptive parents was a white, assigned female at birth infant, concluding that, “the cost of adopting a black baby needs to be $38,000 lower than the cost of a white baby, in order to make parents indifferent to race.” In a 2013 NPR series, The Race Card Project: Six-Word Essays, correspondent Michele Norris writes, “Non-white children, and black children, in particular, are harder to place in adoptive homes. So the cost is adjusted to provide an incentive for families that might otherwise be locked out of adoption due to cost, as well as 'for families who really have to, maybe have a little bit of prodding to think about adopting across racial lines.'"

https://onyourfeetfoundation.org/educat ... n%20choice.

So it's cheaper to adopt black babies to incentivize parents to do so, but more black children still end up in foster care instead of being adopted.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2023 1:42 pm

Spock wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2023 12:35 pm

This is a classic example of an SSS post that seems plausible at a first glance, but upon reflection you realize that he is completely full of crap.

Regarding his assertion that families are waiting for the adoption of healthy white babies all you have to do is look at the waves of adoption tourism over decades as parents search the globe for babies of any race and color to realize he completely pulled that from his ass.

And Spock floats out a lot of anecdotes without anything to back them up. In 2019, the last pre-COVID year, US citizens adopted 2,966 babies from foreign countries as opposed to 120,869 in the US.

https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/adopted2010_19.pdf

The share of chil­dren who are Black and in fos­ter care is the low­est it has been in two decades. Even so, Black chil­dren are still over­rep­re­sent­ed among youth in fos­ter care rel­a­tive to the gen­er­al child population. In 2021, Black chil­dren rep­re­sent­ed 14% of the total child pop­u­la­tion but 22% of all kids in fos­ter care.

By com­par­i­son: White kids rep­re­sent 49% of the nation’s child pop­u­la­tion and only 43% of its fos­ter care pop­u­la­tion. Lati­no or His­pan­ic chil­dren rep­re­sent 26% of kids nation­wide, yet 22% of all kids in fos­ter care. And Asian Amer­i­can and Native Hawaiian/​Pacific Islander kids make up near­ly 5.5% of the U.S. child pop­u­la­tion but only 1% of its fos­ter care pop­u­la­tion. In oth­er words, these three groups are under-rep­re­sent­ed in fos­ter care when com­pared to their pres­ence in the total child population.

https://www.aecf.org/blog/us-foster-car ... -ethnicity

It turns out, one of the biggest predicators of adoption costs is the race and gender of the child. Put bluntly, non-white children are a cheaper domestic adoption choice. NYU Stern School economist Allan Collard-Wexler, when writing about adoption and adoption costs, found that the most requested preference from adoptive parents was a white, assigned female at birth infant, concluding that, “the cost of adopting a black baby needs to be $38,000 lower than the cost of a white baby, in order to make parents indifferent to race.” In a 2013 NPR series, The Race Card Project: Six-Word Essays, correspondent Michele Norris writes, “Non-white children, and black children, in particular, are harder to place in adoptive homes. So the cost is adjusted to provide an incentive for families that might otherwise be locked out of adoption due to cost, as well as 'for families who really have to, maybe have a little bit of prodding to think about adopting across racial lines.'"

https://onyourfeetfoundation.org/educat ... n%20choice.

So it's cheaper to adopt black babies to incentivize parents to do so, but more black children still end up in foster care instead of being adopted.

One also has to understand that the vast majority of children in foster care are there due to choices/behaviors of their parents, and are not adoptable (no matter their color, since that apparently matters)

SSS>>"And Spock floats out a lot of anecdotes without anything to back them up. In 2019, the last pre-COVID year, US citizens adopted 2,966 babies from foreign countries as opposed to 120,869 in the US."<<<

And suddenly you are an expert on international adoption. Funny you didn't mention that earlier as a contra-argument to your assertion that people only want to adopt white babies.

I would also have to say that given the large number of international (and domestic) children of color adopted by people that I know of-I would have to say that my circle certainly overperforms the general population in the adoption of children of color. Interesting that.

Over and above the more recent adoption (parents of my age and so forth) Given that I have a 1970's adopted Korean cousin and there were at least 3 in my small rural school I have to wonder how many Korean kids were adopted in the late 1970's.

Spock wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2023 7:48 pm

Over and above the more recent adoption (parents of my age and so forth) Given that I have a 1970's adopted Korean cousin and there were at least 3 in my small rural school I have to wonder how many Korean kids were adopted in the late 1970's.

None of these anecdotal adoptions changes the fact that children of color in the United States are substantially less likely to be adopted and substantially more likely to remain in foster care.There's also less red tape involved in most international adoptions

From the Korean Herald (overseas would be numerous other countries in addition to the United States):

The number of children adopted overseas jumped sevenfold from 6,166 in the decade spanning the '60s to 46,035 in the '70s, according to data from Seoul’s Ministry of Health and Welfare. It peaked at 66,511 in the '80s, before falling to 22,925 in the '90s. A total of 169,483 South Koreans were put to adoption to overseas parents from the beginning of 1953 to end-2021, latest data compiled by Statistics Korea showed.

https://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud ... the%20'90s.

More recent international adoptions have slowed down. The ten most popular countries for adoptions in 2015, when this article was written. Again, that's not just adoptions to US parents:

China – 2354 adoptions completed in 2015
Ethiopia – 335 adoptions completed in 2015 (now closed to international adoption)
South Korea – 318 adoptions completed in 2015
Ukraine – 303 adoptions completed in 2015
Bulgaria – 185 adoptions completed in 2015
Latvia – 170 adoptions completed in 2015
Nigeria – 154 adoptions completed in 2015
Colombia – 153 adoptions completed in 2015
Philippines – 150 adoptions completed in 2015
Haiti – 137 adoptions completed in 2015

https://adoption.org/11-things-need-kno ... l-adoption

SSS>>>"And the term is pro-choice, not pro-abortion. Many pro-choice women do not or would not get abortions themselves. They have no problem with women who choose to raise their children or put them up for adoption. They just don't feel they should make the decision for anyone else. It's amazing that many anti-abortion zealots rail on about how the government is making decisions and telling them what to do, when they have no qualms about doing so when the shoe's on the other foot."<<<

Bull crap-if this is true why are the pro-abortion TPTP STRONGLY OPPOSED (in their own words) to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers.

Planned Parenthood>>>"We therefore strongly oppose so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs) because of the biased and often inaccurate and misleading information they provide to women seeking honest information about birth control and abortion. CPCs disrespect liberty of conscience and a woman's right to follow her faith's teachings."<<<

While you are certainly strongly opposed to pro-life pregnancy centers-just because Planned Parenthood says bad things about them-doesn't mean they are bad.

Just let that sink in. Planned Parenthood is STRONGLY OPPOSED to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers that work for adoption.

I guess you can't have anyone helping people in a crisis pregnancy unless they are priests of the worship of the God of Promiscuity.

Spock wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 10, 2023 12:00 pm

SSS>>>"And the term is pro-choice, not pro-abortion. Many pro-choice women do not or would not get abortions themselves. They have no problem with women who choose to raise their children or put them up for adoption. They just don't feel they should make the decision for anyone else. It's amazing that many anti-abortion zealots rail on about how the government is making decisions and telling them what to do, when they have no qualms about doing so when the shoe's on the other foot."<<<

Bull crap-if this is true why are the pro-abortion TPTP STRONGLY OPPOSED (in their own words) to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers.

Planned Parenthood>>>"We therefore strongly oppose so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs) because of the biased and often inaccurate and misleading information they provide to women seeking honest information about birth control and abortion. CPCs disrespect liberty of conscience and a woman's right to follow her faith's teachings."<<<

The reason is in the quote. It isn't that they are opposed to the clinics per se, but rather because they use misinformation when counseling the women.