Dinner With Dad 4
The thot plickens!
It seems that some of the people in the comments read a pro-gun comment and assume that I’m One Of Them: An anti-abortion, pro-death penalty, pro-war, anti-drugs Republican.
*cracks knuckles*
Let’s set that shit straight right here and now.
I no longer have a political party. Nobody in Washington represents me. I’m a mostly fiscal conservative (who still sees the need for social welfare and taxes), and moderate liberal socially. The system is fucking broken. It panders to the extreme right and left. We are caught in a machine, and the Fourth Estate is dead. Shit has gotten terribly Huxleyan, here in the US of A, and I find myself drifting in some moderate ocean politically.
But we can get some shit straight:
– I am pro-abortion. Always, if someone wants to argue abortion, my three main linchpins are this:
1. A blastocyst is not a person.
2. If you don’t like abortion, don’t get one.
3. It’s none of your fucking business if a woman gets an abortion.
– I am heavily pro-2nd Amendment. If you want to argue in favor of gun control, my three linchpins are:
1. If you don’t like guns, don’t buy one.
2. Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. (I’ve often noted that if guns turn people into homicidal maniacs, all of ours are defective, in our small arsenal.)
3. It is none of your goddamn business how many guns I own.
– I am an environmentalist. I believe that if we do not start being smarter as a species, and stop poisoning our planet, shit’s gonna get really fucked up. We will outgrow this ball of rock that we’re on, and that situation will take care of itself, in a maelstrom of hellish pain and suffering. I do not wish to see that.
– I am an avid outdoorsman. I grew up in the San Bernardinos of Cali, before the state went insane on things like permits for walking in the woods and the most ridiculous gun control laws in the nation. I love camping. I love nature. I really wish more people got out of suburbia and went out to camp for a weekend, get off the grid and just experience life OUTSIDE of civilization.
– I am a hunter and fisherman. I don’t believe that wild animals have “rights.” I’m okay with safari hunting as a thing that exists, although I’ll likely never be rich enough to waste my money on flying to Africa to kill a lion. I have killed deer, squirrel, rabbit, and hog for food, as well as a plethora of fish. I have killed snakes and coyotes because they were a nuisance. This doesn’t make me a serial killer in the making. I know where my food comes from, because more than a handful of times (rather more), I’ve killed my own food.
– Politically, as noted, I’m adrift. I thought Obama was going to be a good President. He’s turned that into a pile of shit. I didn’t vote for him because I’m a democrat – I haven’t identified as such since 2000. I did vote for him because both times, the alternative was something awful. McCain? Seriously? Or Romney? Reading the above stances, do you see me getting behind an old, nearly-dead, pro-war fuck, or a hardcore Mormon? At least Obama gave me a nice plate full of lies to believe. And yeah, if you want to be one of those readers who says “O HE VOTED FOR OBAMA, FUCK HIM, I’M OUT”, then, well… there’s the door. You won’t be missed. Sorry you assumed to know what my political habits have been.
– I am a stringent atheist, and at times bordering on “anti-theist.” I grew up in the LDS church, lost my faith in my teens, started studying world religions and the history thereof. I originally identified, during those years, as an agnostic, but my studies have led me to being an atheist. I will not show respect to your religion. I think all religions are fucking silly, and we can do better than to worship imaginary bullshit. If we work together, we can make this world better for all of us, as well as succeeding on getting off this ball of fucking rock and colonizing other planets.
– I am middling when it comes to war. Pacifists like to point at Gandhi, but I honestly believe that there are times when violence is the only solution. Sometimes, you just have to fight the people doing evil shit, with bullets and bombs. I think the USA should have gotten involved in WWII long before they did, as well as Vietnam. I also think that there hasn’t been a military action by the USA, during my lifetime, that was necessary, or even a good idea. I was vocally against the Iraq wars, both times, and against our current occupation of Afghanistan.
– As a person of mixed ancestry, I really, really don’t give a shit about the howling and whining from the hardcore White People as they watch their racial stratus fall from the majority. Yes, I pass for white. No, I am not pure white. My father’s people suffered some serious bullshit during WWII, and I have experienced racial prejudice firsthand in a town of lily-white motherfuckers who found out about my Japanese heritage. I not only understand White Privilege, I’ve identified that I’ve prospered from it.
– The drug war is a horrible failure. I surrendered long ago. If you tell me that weed is bad, but alcohol and cigarettes (both of which I partake of on a daily basis) are great, then guess what? You’re a fucking idiot. Meth doesn’t kill people. Coke doesn’t kill people. Acid, X, shrooms, DMT, GHB, all of these do not kill people. People being stupid on these drugs kills people.
– I feel that government that governs least governs the best. I believe that the Libertarian Party is a sham. I believe that Ron Paul is nothing more than a hardcore right-wing shill in Libertarian’s clothing. I suspect that Jesus, as a person, may not have actually existed. I believe that the best bet we have is solar energy, and converting off of the oil grid onto the electrical grid. I believe that public expression of organized religion should be outlawed, or at least taxed hard. I think a Jesse Ventura/Colin Powell presidential ticket would not only win, it would be amazing. I have many controversial beliefs. I don’t expect ANYONE to agree with them, but I’m willing to debate.
If any of these stated beliefs make you disgusted with me, and furthermore lead you to not read my comic?
Then fuck ya. G’bye. You don’t have to agree with me. You can argue with me. We can discuss.
But if you decide that I am a horrible monster for believing these things, and shun me outright due to dogma?
Fuck ya.
I have no problem with any of your positions. Not that it makes a fuck’s worth of difference, and not saying I agree 100%, but at least you came to those positions based on reason, not simply because %TALKING_HEAD% told you to.
Except the Ventura/Powell thing. Tyson/Nye, now, that would be the most epic brains-trust of all time.
I actually know a former girlfriend of Bill Nye who said she ended it because he was a “TROO BELIEVER” in anthropic global warming, and that Obama was gonna be just the ticket to getting that stuff fixed. I wasn’t sure I believed her, until she sent me a picture of herself sitting at a formal dinner, bracketed by Bill and Neil.
Showing your (our) age … I haven’t heard it called “X” in a long, long time. “E” and “thizz” (yeahyeah, I’m in the East Bay, whatever) are fading away. They’re calling it “Molly” now, although that’s supposed to denote pure MDMA (street drugs? pure? hahahahahahah).
You’re a vile, horrible, barely socially acceptable person.
There’s a reason I keep reading the shit below your comics, the current social order sucks ass and the people who don’t fit in it are at least interesting if not honestly worth knowing.
Although I’m not sure I can see Ventura in the White House. And in the Ventura/Powell combo, you see “The Body” as President?
I’m more of a fan of the Ventura/Weathers combo ticket. That would make Predator the most unlikely movie to feature multiple politicians in the history of humanity.
I don’t think there’s a lockout on the VP slot like there is for the President slot so it could go Ventura/Terminator….
There IS a lockout on the VP. The Veep is literally a heartbeat from becoming President; no one not legally able to hold the office of President can been Veep, either.
Not shocking really, but usually they only cover it as applied to the President. I guess that technically means that all in line are subject to that… Speaker of the House, etc, etc.
It’s my understanding that people ineligible for the office of President can still serve in the other offices, but in the event of a succession crisis, they would not be eligible to ascend to the Presidency. ICBW, YMMV, NUSPI (No User Serviceable Parts Inside).
LIES! There are ALWAYS User Serviceable Parts Inside. Just depends on your caliber of user. 😉
But surely at a certain level of knowledge a person stops being a “user” and becomes an “operator” or a “technician”.
Ha ha, Jesse Ventura. Very droll! 😀
You know what? I don’t agree with some of your points.
You know what else? I don’t give a fuck what you believe, if you continue to make funny shit on the internet, I will continue to read said funny shit.
Just like I don’t care what the sexual orientation of the owner of IBM is or the feelings of the lead singer for Cage The Elephant in regards to Armenian foreign policy pertaining to the import/export of sex toys, if I like the shit you make, I will partake of it.
So I will sit here, with my stack of Post-It Notes and Thank You Happy Birthday CDs, and laugh at anyone who would take something they like and not do it just to spite the creator.
Because you know what? At the end of the day, whatever you or I think, we think it is the right thing to do, and we want to work off of that because we want our little section of the entity known as “Existence” to be as rad as it fucking can be.
So I may not agree with you, but let’s at least agree to try to make shit cooler, and may the better man see his results sooner.
Good rant. I agree with the vast majority of what you said, minor differences on a few points, but so what? That’s the beauty of it. Your views are closer to mine than any member of Congress I can think of, not that they’d be electable anyway. Which is a damn shame, because if someone was campaigning based on what you just said, I’d actually be excited about a candidate for the first time in my life. Instead of the giant douche vs. turd sandwich contest that appears most times I see a ballot. I hate the fact that I generally pick the candidate whose party at least pays lip service to fiscal conservatism before raping the economy, instead of those who don’t try to hide it at all. I could likely go on and on about how black and white things are, with the only shade of grey being that everyone pretty much gets screwed equally. Such is life in this grand country.
If it wasn’t 3:30am on the east coast and I didn’t have a test in 7 hours I’d try to post a more detailed comment. But here goes:
I disagree with you on nearly as many things as I agree with you on. But we both agree on the bit about shunning people due to dogma. Our country cannot function with this collective thought process of, “Oh my god that person doesn’t agree with my views I can’t associate with them.” I was homeschooled in a very Christian family through till college; this exact idea of dissociating with people who disagree with you was engrained into every fabric of my being. Once I shook a lot of that yoke off and learned that, in fact, it was okay to have thoughts of my own I started to realize how stupid this idea is.
Society can’t function if everyone thinks the same way; as a matter of fact it thrives on people with varied opinions. If we could look past petty (and party) differences to really try to work on problems, who knows what we could accomplish. Maybe Obamacare COULD be affordable. I’m only 21 and I know that I’ll never see that in my lifetime; because any fix that could concievably work would be shot down because “the other guys” proposed it.
Sorry if that’s not coherent but that’s what I wanted to spit out.
“I think a Jesse Ventura/Colin Powell presidential ticket would not only win, it would be amazing.”
Know much about Powell’s stance on the Second Amendment?
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/01/colin-powell-backs-gun-control-measures-including-assault-weapons-ban-2535588.html
Shudder.
Not to mention that Jesse Ventura is a sack of shit for not only trying to sue Chris Kyle (Navy SEAL sniper/American badass/author of two books) for defaming him, but then continuing to sue his estate after his death.
Whether or not the story about Chris Kyle punching him is true, Kyle didn’t actually name him in the book, and the whole thing just looks like a blatant money grab by a washed up has been.
How isn’t the ORIGINAL claim a money-grab under that assumption?
I’m not religious, never have been and never will be. However in the UK we do get a mix or religious zealots and passive religious people. I’ve read up on a few religions and some of them have a good solid core that then gets mislabled and abused by men addicted to power… which is terrible.
To me the basic idea of religion is great, a handy set of rules to make you a better person and make you act towards other kindly and nicely… how ever when it ends up with people blaming Tsunami’s on “God’s displeasure” or stopping young girls from leaving a BURNING BUILDING so they die… well that shit is messed up…
So I’m not pro or against religion as a whole. I’m pro belief and anti-zealotry.
I’d love to hear back from you dude!
You should add your rant to your FAQ area.
i’m not disgusted… well actually i am, because i thought i was unique but apparently everyone else thinks almost the exact same way i do. except i’m probably a little more militant, religion should be heavily taxed and abortion should be mandatory for the next 20 years or so. i’m anti war but i feel like if we’re gonna do it then just carpet bomb the ever loving shit out of where our enemies are and then go home, don’t let our guys drive over bombs and have to come home mutilated to a system that treats them like shit. also not much of an environmentalist but i’m also not a retard, i’ll drive a damn 4bbl 350 at full throttle whenever possible but i won’t litter or burn styrofoam.
I still can’t get over this white privilege bull, it just sounds like a bunch of airy fairy excuses to hate on whitey. But I’m from New Zealand, I must have a vastly different experience of race relations.
It is bull shit, a giant joke that tumblr “social justice” morons and butthurt lefty academia types try to propagate to soothe their white guilt. unfortunately it seems like it is spreading to more and more people, I hope I am very wrong about that.
Please define “White Privilege” as you understand it.
Me? My definition of it is “Bullshit, white guilt, and lies” we all have our own “privileges” and stereotypes.
I read parts of the wikipedia page on white privilege without coming away with any understanding of a definition or even any clear examples. Pretty hard to stomach. For example this applies to everyone everywhere since the history of forever, and probably extending foreward until the end of time: “The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one’s own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.”. Pretty hard to see how that’s a white only thing.
Also hard to see how the concept of white privilege excuses racism leveled at whites, as you yourself have done. “Two wrongs don’t make a right”, not to mention perpetuating the animosity and racial divisions. I maintain that equality is the only thing that can bring about equality, that the only way to end racism is to ignore race as a factor. You want to help impoverished people from poor backgrounds that’s awesome, but don’t make skin colour part of the criteria. “An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind”.
I’m curious, what is your definition of white privilege is? Perhaps you could drop some links to further reading, something more sensible than wikipedia.
White privilege is a flesh toned Band Aid.
When you can tell me there’s no truth in your society to George Orwell’s classic line, All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, THEN you can lecture on the non-existance of racial privelege.
Due to my incredibly fucked up ancestory, I can be considered as several flavours of southern european or arab. Or english white. Depends on the amount of sun I’ve had and how much hair im packing at any given time. As a result i too have experienced first hand the sort of rug pulling of privelege mr grant has.
Your ignorant posturing linking a modern social phenomina to an age old issue suggests you dont have a clue what you’re on about. Til y ou do might I heartly recomend a heavy dose of shut the fuck up. Your ignorance betrays your privelege, and your defensiveness suggests you cherish it.
Yes, exactly. In NZ, you do have a VASTLY DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE. White priveledge is alive and well in the west. And it is fucking awful.
It isn’t an excuse. You don’t have to be aware of it or even prejudiced, let alone racist to benefit from White Privilege in the U.S., because a lot of it is based on how others treat you because you’re white.
Try growing up “white” in Hawaii. Haoles get treated different, but not better. “Kill Haole Day” goes way back.
It might better be called “Majority Privilege”. ( Eg I understand that white doesn’t get you much privilege in Japan, either. )
Got that right! Until recently, ethnic Japanese were the biggest single group and ran the democratic party machine.
New Zealand generally considers itself part of the western culture, if not geographically ‘in the west’. To be honest the concept that New Zealand isn’t in the west is a new one to me.
What, pray-tell, do you define as ‘the west’? Is there a definition?
Woohoo, I say. And on that note, might I put forth my 2 BitCoins worth? (I’m just amused at the thought that today, my two BitCoins might equal $1200 and tomorrow, $.0012, which kind of illustrates some of the issues.) Ah, in the absence of real-time feedback, I’ll just assume you were vociferous in your desire to read my opinion…
Yes, the system is broken. Part of the reason the system is broken is that it rewards seniority over pretty much anything else. Our term limits are ridiculous, and our unwillingness to vote people OUT of office borders on the suicidal. At this point, I’m pretty much straight up with Clean Sweep 2014. Except I feel like it might take a Clean Sweep 2014-2021 for them to get the idea that we will vote every one of them out as long as they reward themselves for who can dupe us the longest. The Senate has just engaged in one of the lowest and most short-sighted examples of politicking I ever seen by removing the filibuster-against-nominees and supermajority vote (barring SCOTUS…for now). It’s not that they overturned a law that is pretty much as old as our nation (hey, not all those laws are great, I know) but that they are so blind that they don’t seem to realize that come the day their party is no longer in power, they are going to regret losing this check on the power of the majority party. I say, get rid of them all, and elect a completely new crew on the understanding that if they don’t vote away their benefits and a huge chunk of their perks, then come the next election cycle, no amount of campaigning will keep them in office.
The House of Reps, more than any other section of the Federal Govt. is designed to function as the barometer of people, to basically be disposable. The Senate is designed to be less so, making a statement like voting as many out as possible until they are all unseated an even more scathing condemnation. At this point, if I voted for an incumbent, I’d feel as though I were part of the problem. (And I have done and been so before.)
As a side note, I tend towards the ideals of Libertarianism (as I like to describe it, keep the Govt. out of my pocketbook, bedroom, and body.) One of the few areas I’ll budge on this is public health. You want to ingest toxic substances, fine by me. If the smoke crawls into my lungs OTOH, I’m a lot less sanguine. As for religion, same deal: I don’t care if you hop widdershins around a fire extolling the virtues of Squod the Refreshingly Mediocre or worship at the Altar of Empirical Evidence, as long as you keep from cramming it down someone else’s throat, no problem. Ech. I grow tired of my rant and must rest now.
Maybe you can help me out:
Exactly how to bitcoins work?
“It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence.” – Mahatma Gandhi
Dude wasn’t pure pacifist, he knew when to fight too…
I’m with ya on *almost* 100%. The only major exceptions are that I didn’t vote for Obama (was GOING to vote Libertarian, as I think it’s the *direction* we need to go in, but didn’t get to vote at ALL due to a last-minute business trip extension), and “that public expression of organized religion should be outlawed, or at least taxed hard.” I believe in free expression of beliefs, no matter how idiotic. Censor it, and what’s next to censor? Slippery slope etc. IMNSHO the right response is use your own right of free expression of belief: ridicule them, write books and give public speeches and so on about how silly, wasteful, and often downright damaging religion can be. If you want to do something about it politically, how about getting the tax-exempt status of religious institutions revoked? It not only makes the rest of us support them, but also puts the government in the position of deciding what is a “legitimate” religion or not, in gross violation of the wall of separation.
Good stuff. Especially about the wars.
Btw, I’ve been reading this comic for a while now and it seems you have a tendency to get fairly defensive for no apparent reason. That and sometimes getting a bit patronizing/teachy about stuff. Not that it matters, except when it bleeds to the comic. “If any of these stated beliefs make you disgusted with me, and furthermore lead you to not read my comic?” – one has to be a certain kind of dickhead to “protest” by not reading a comic because the author is an asshole in their opinion 😀
Anyhow, hope you’ll continue to enjoy producing this stuff and get a better self-esteem as a result 🙂
> it seems you have a tendency to get fairly defensive for no apparent reason.
No *apparent* reason, yes. You don’t see the emails or chat messages I get.
Then please do post some of them, without names and/or addresses on them.
Dammit, meant “please do post some of them, because I at least would like to see them”. I need more sleep.
Please post them WITH names and addresses so we know who the biggest assholes are.
Yanno, you don’t *have* to twitch when they poke you with sharp pointy things. I might even argue that visibly reacting is encouraging them.
Who gives a damn what they write? They ain’t in charge here, and you needn’t entertain them – this website is not a Democracy. Nor even a Federated Republic. You’re the boss here, and you can cast them to the outer darkness, or make ’em dance your tune, or grandly ignore them – as you choose.
“one has to be a certain kind of dickhead to “protest” by not reading a comic because the author is an asshole in their opinion” — I’m exactly that kind of dickhead, about a lot of things not just comics. But I agree with most of what Grant’s said, and even if I didn’t he seems knowledgeable and reasonable in arguing his points. Which is more than I can say for myself.
the cartoonist ain’t a real Texan, just a westie transplant who has yet to kill a jackalope. 🙂 Nice rant.
I bet that’s not even real cowshit on his boots, too. 😀
I bet that’s not even real cowshit on his boots
No, it’s human blood.
Excellent!
Fake cowshit is a disturbing concept.
Not the most disturbing one, I’m sure. I think up three or four seriously fsked-up things before breakfast, every day.
BTW: There already exists fake dog poo – I’m sure fake cowcrap isn’t too far from reality, if it isn’t real already.
“the cartoonist ain’t a real Texan, just a westie transplant”
Actually, no. He was born in Oklahoma.
As for bringing home the jackalope meat: where’s yours? 🙂
I am in Alabama, no lopes here. And hunting circle snakes with a 12 ga does not leave much meat. :0
I hope you had welding gloves on for that rant, since the mic is now a melted piece of slag and wire… *Tips Hat*
I still remain officially associated with the GOP.
Not because they actually represent who I am – I’m all over the map, generally speaking – but because in the current political setup, if I disassociate, I lose much of my influence. And the GOP needs my help more than any other party. They’re also closer to who I am than any other party, though the fit is an uncomfortable one.
Unfortunately, in this world, centrist socially-liberal fiscally-conservative pro-Constitutional folks don’t have much of a voice. Which is a damned shame.
I’m a Democrat, but I feel a kinship for the ideals of the Republican party. I think a lot of their overall ideas are great on paper. I wish people could have as many guns as they wanted, but that would only work in a situation where everyone wanted guns for the purposes of sport uses and sheer love of quality engineering. I love the idea of not taxing people. Unfortunately if that were the case, everyone would have a luxury car sitting in their driveway that they never used, because the roads are too poorly maintained. I wish we could remove all the various government regulations on businesses to allow people to get things done without the need for endless permits and approvals, but a laissez-faire system usually leads to the rich exploiting the poor.
Disagree with some of your points there, but yanno? That’s OK.
You seem reasonably inteligent and reasonably tolerant. So you can go right ahead with being wrong on some points ’cause you’d still probably make a fine neighbor. 😉 I bet you probably work a mean grill, and probably even mow your grass.
> I wish we could remove all the various government regulations on businesses to allow people to get things done without the need for endless permits and approvals, but a laissez-faire system usually leads to the rich exploiting the poor.
Much like our current rampant corporate crony-capitalism. Or most implementations of systems along the communism / socialism axis, despite their intentions… or feudalism, mercantilism, colonialism, or just about any other historical politico-economic system in practice (on scales larger than that of a village). Given freedom, people will tend to emergently exploit one another to the maximum extent they can get away with. Given unfreedom, whoever is in control (the enforcers of unfreedom) will tend to exploit everyone else to the maximum extent they can get away with.
Sing it, brother! Registered as a Republican, but rarely vote for ’em. I identify myself as a Nixon-ian Republican. In fact, I frequently find myself voting against the raving loonies running as Republican and wonder if politicians ever read details about the ideals they are allegedly representing. I haven’t been able to vote for a major party candidate since Clinton.
Yup. Just so. Though I cite Rockefeller.
I was even forced to work for Chris Coons – Because Castle fucked away the primary, and that raving loon O’Donnell is a threat to all Americans. No one THAT gullible and easily manipulated should ever hold high office.
As I’ve previously noted, the state of the GOP in Delaware is a sad, bad jest done in poor taste.
I’ll disagree on your view of public display of organized religion, only because I think you should be able to have a public display of organized non-religion, or non-organized religion, or non-organized non-religion, etc. I grew up Christian and still believe as such. Sure, I’ll display it publicly but I’m not gonna shove it down someone else’s throat. Funny story behind that…
Some friends and I were in a nearby major city exercising our first amendment rights to, let’s say, speak up about cause x. We finished up and walked through town, holding our signs in whatever way was comfortable, walking to the nearest pizza joint. Suddenly some “Christian street preacher” starts screaming in our faces that we’re all going to hell for a million different reasons.
At the time I had long hair and a lip piercing, though at this particular time I didn’t have my lip ring in. I looked like some guy with long hair and a beard. The dude is screaming in my face that I have “tons of piercings and tattoos” (and I still don’t have any tattoos at all anywhere on me) and that I’m gonna suffer in hell. GREAT OBSERVATION, PROFESSOR JESUS! LET’S JUST TELL EVERYONE THEY HAVE TATTOOS AND PIERCINGS EVEN IF IT’S OBVIOUSLY NOT TRUE!!!
So I decide to ignore the aforementioned twat nacho and bust out one of our signs that we used for a completely unrelated cause. It was a sign with an arrow that simply read “FAIL”
I held the sign so that it pointed at this so-called street preacher, claiming to be “Christian” while reflecting absolutely NOTHING of Christianity.
I got lots of applause and pictures from passers by.
There was a certain satisfaction I felt from it. Calling out some douche that claimed to be Christian, yet demonstrated oppositely, it felt great!
Anyway, when it comes to public displays, don’t mess with it, unless it’s actually hurting other people. Obviously if some sort of cult came out and said they had to murder the first 100 people they saw, that would NOT be allowed as a public expression of religion. But when it comes to the self serving douchebags that try to call everyone else out on random things that aren’t even true (i.e. twat nacho street preacher), hell, why not let em have center stage for a few minutes? They just make themselves look bad, plus, they give the rest of us a huge opportunity to troll the shit out of them and make them look bad!
The problem with letting douchebags have center stage is that, no matter how asinine their message, somebody is going to believe their bullshit if they say it enough.
Voted for Johnson last year, since there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference betweeen Mittens and Zer0Bama on the issues that matter to me. I did vote for McCain in ’08 (only time I’ve ever voted for a Republican for prez), because guns.
Over the course of 25 years since dumping booze, I’ve gone from atheist to AgnostiPagan. Which basically expresses itself, most of the time, in fighting MOOP where I see it.
Some day I want to go to a rally with a Gadsden flag styled sign with “Don’t tread on” at the top, and then alternating red and blue, depending on which side wants to fuck with it: “My wallet; My bedroom; My guns; My body; My medicine cabinet; My library; My car;…”
Wow. Nice to see someone else who’s a pro gun, pro choice (I wouldn’t say pro-abortion myself) and not a religious nut. Agree totally on the dissapointment that is Obama, despite voting for him twice.
Pro-gun, pro-choice, and religiously faithful here…
But you know what? My choices are mine, and yours are yours, and anything you believe is between you and your vision of God. Mine is between me and mine. Not my job to live your – or ANYONE else’s – life for them. I’ve got enough on my plate dealing with my stuff. 😉
I’m pro-choice because any other stance would mean living their life for them – which is not my job!
Not in the least surprised by Obama, sadly. He was green as grass, still wet behind the ears, and is a pie-in-the-sky idealist. That’s a combination doomed to disappoint.
Like that asshole Bill Maher, I am “pro death”: guns, abortion, death penalty. So maybe I should be pro Obama as well, what with his “death panels”. 😉
But I ain’t. I did NOT vote for him, and now I would not piss on him if he was on fire. Whatever the faults of the Republicans we’ve had—and they are many—they at least are not obviously out to drag us farther down Hayek’s road to serfdom. Any step away from the welfare state is a good step.
I’ve always found abortion easiest to argue out of all of my stances. Abortion is the modern slavery. It’s proponents demand the “right” to refuse to recognise the humanity of a group of people based on physical appearence. So:
1. A blastocyst is not a person.
2. If you don’t like abortion, don’t get one.
3. It’s none of your fucking business if a woman gets an abortion.
Since number three is clearly false if number one is false (because murder of a person is everyone’s fucking business), and two is fucking silly if one is false (because if you don’t like murder, don’t murder someone), let’s just focus on that first (and only) linchpin.
It’s interesting that you chose a stage of development rather than a timeline to attack in Abortion. The argument, however, remains the same: you’re only a human being if you look like what I think a human should look like, or have reached the development level that I think human beings should have. A blastocyst has DNA independant of his or her parents, and is a living organism by the defintion of “living” which will, if not killed, grow to be an adult human being after passing through years and stages.
You know, I was going to give a full-length rant on this, but that’s really all there is. Abortion very simply denies the humanity of another human being based on age, location or development, making that human being nothing more than property to be used or disposed of at it’s master’s whim.
Based on your arguments, do you also oppose sterilization?
I do in fact, unless they’re medically necessary, but I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion by my arguments.
The problem with this stance is that it presupposes that DNA is all it takes for something to be considered a human. If you sliced off one of my thumbs and hooked it up to the proper equipment, you might be able to keep it alive for a while. I’ll agree that abortion isn’t great. I wish that nobody ever had an abortion, ever again. But you know what? I don’t think a woman should be forced to raise a child because she was drugged and raped at a party. I hate the idea of women too irresponsible to use proper birth control getting an abortion just because they think having a baby would be a hassle, but that’s the other side of the coin that comes along with every right and freedom. Everyone has freedom of speech, which means you’re going to have to listen to some ignorant, prejudice bullshit from idiots who have that same right. Everyone has the right to bear arms (albeit with restrictions in certain areas) but there’s an unspoken social responsibility to be judicious and careful in the application of the power this gives you.
Abortion is a necessary evil, along with prisons and the military. Note: I am not saying the military are evil. I have great respect for the men and women of our armed forces. I’m simply stating that the fact humans have to live in semi-constant fear of aggression from other nations is an evil.
“I’ll agree that abortion isn’t great. I wish that nobody ever had an abortion, ever again. But you know what? I don’t think a woman should be forced to raise a child because she was drugged and raped at a party. I hate the idea of women too irresponsible to use proper birth control getting an abortion just because they think having a baby would be a hassle, but that’s the other side of the coin that comes along with every right and freedom.”
THIS. Thank you for saying this!
The difference is that your thumb will never become a complete human being. It won’t grow, it won’t mature, it won’t become anything but a thumb and then a rotten former thumb. That’s kind of the point of the argument.
And you and are are encountering a fundamental disagreement. Abortion ends a human life. It ends a human life without a trial by jury, without the representation of an attorney, without the chance to speak for his or herself. We as Americans are endowed with certain unalienable rights, among those are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Without the first the other two may not be enjoyed, making life the primary right to all Americans.
And while a woman getting pregnant by rape is a crime and a tragedy, it is not the child’s fault. Just as the woman should not be punished for the act of another, it is not just to punish the child. The child did not ask to be conceived. The child has done nothing wrong. As such, the child is entitled to legal protection.
As for abortion somehow being freedom, it’s pretty simple. You have the right to fire a gun so long as it doesn’t damage another person or another person’s property. You have the right to swing a fist, but that right ends at the tip of my nose. Abortion is not a right because it inherently interferes with another person’s right to live, and by doing so denies them all the rights associated with life.
Lives are ended legally with out a trial all the damned time.
Your argument seems to hinge on the potential life to be, thing is you can’t/don’t know that is what’s going to happen. Sometimes babies come out as a brainless lump of organic material. If medical science can detect that, should the parents be allowed to abort?
Please provide an example for your first objection.
And for the second. I’d like to know what your specific objections are in order to properly address them.
*Nods* It don’t matter, it’s only a Niggah.. They’re just Jews.. Genocide always starts with dehumanization. Now, the thing is, I don’t ~know~ where along the line of development that tiny batch of cells becomes a ‘person’, but if we’re talking about taking a life I will always err on the side of caution. I do know that there are times when the only difference between a premature baby, who has all the protections of law, and a fetus is location. If that is true then there must be a time, some point in the developmental cycle, where we have to say “ok, this is a person now. Get the knife away from it.” This seems self evident to me, and yet the abortions at any time crowd pitched a total fit when Texas said “Look, this kid is 21 weeks into development. He’s got all his fingers and toes and brains and everything. If we take him out of the womb right now he could actually live. Maybe we shouldn’t cut him up into little pieces and suck him out of his mother’s hoochie.” That’s the sort of thing that makes me look at abortion rights activists and just shake my head.
The problem with always erring on the side of caution, in this case, is that you necessarily draw a line somewhere. Somewhere between “egg in an ovary”/”germ cell in a testicle” and “adult human” you are making a choice of “this is now a separate human”. There’s a perception that “pro-choice” means “the instant the thing is born”, while that’s not necessarily the case, just as it’s not necessarily the case that “pro-life” means “forget ‘medical necessity’, the kid lives and the mom dies.” What is necessarily the case is that “pro-life” means “the moment you have a cell go from 23 to 46 chromosomes, it’s a human,” while “pro-choice” only means “draw the line some time further down the ‘shares [x] qualities with an adult human’ path.” There’s a huge difference between “abortions at any time” and a typical pro-choice supporter (at least, in my experience), and asserting otherwise is a false dichotomy.
As for your starting statement, c’mon, really? Make your argument with reason, don’t trot out unsupported and inflammatory terms (straying perilously close to Godwin’s Law in the process).
And as we have an artificial uterus and the ability to feed a child in the womb with artificial means, viability is no longer a factor in determining humanity. And Vyk, there have been more than fifty million reported abortions since Roe V. Wade. Sounds like genocide to me. A sperm in a testicle is not a human being. It will never be a human being. It is not until a sperm combines with an egg to create a new organism with it’s own DNA that will, if given what it needs, grow to a human being that it is a human. And a human is created at that moment. Everything else is semantics.
A blastocyst has DNA independent [sic] of his or her parents, and is a living organism by the defintion of “living” which will, if not killed, grow to be an adult human being after passing through years and stages.
So will sperm.
If you are male — does that make you a murderer when you masturbate? By your logic, it should.
If you eat nuts, brazil nuts inparticular, or chocolate for that matter, are you personally destroying the rain forest? By your logic, you are.
IF you are female, then by your definition of human life, you should be arrested every time you ovulate and don’t get pregnant, or if you miscarry —wait a minute, that’s getting a little too close to actual legislation in some states these days.
*stops before giving in to rage on that issue*
*again*
Respectfully, ma’am, a sperm does not have DNA independent of it’s creator, nor will it grow to be an adult human being on it’s own. So no, I am killing nothing but time and sperm cells. In effect it’s very little different than scratching a layer of skin off when I scratch my back. Those skin cells will never be a complete human being either.
The rain forest is not a human being. As for ovulation, it’s the same thing. An egg on it’s own will never be a human being. It’s just an egg.
Ma’am, I’m a pretty reasonable man. I attack this issue, like most issues, on the basis of logic. If it’s not legal to kill a person without trial, it’s not legal to kill a person without trial. If you are a person at ten months from conception, then you are a person at twenty years after conception and you are a person at the moment of conception. Everything else is just a number.
Stop calling me ma’am. It’s rude. Makes you sound like a cop.
I’m pro choice. Very pro choice. Banning abortion will NOT get rid of it. It will just drive it back underground and kill women. That death can be from botched self done abortions or back street butchers or the husband/boyfriend who decides HE doesn’t want the kid and beats the mother until she miscarries. It’s happened in the past. In my own family. Now, what is needed is not a banning of abortions, but increased access to other forms of birth control and more assistance to women in bad situations.
Ma’am, the fact that murder will happen whether or not it is outlawed does not mean we should not outlaw murder. That’s just silly.
Which is precisely the rhetoric used by anti-gun types when we remind them that banning guns won’t prevent people being shot to death.
Odd, as that’s the argument I’ve consistently heard the pro-gun crowd use. Bad people exist, so private citizens need their guns. You follow “Ranger Up”?
@LadyE: Chile banned abortion in 1989. It had essentially no effect upon maternal mortality rates.
@Coinneach: Remind the anti-gun types that the rate at which people are murdered tends to be highest where access to firearms is lowest.
I had an abortion after 5 months. Didn’t know that tetracycline stopped birth control pills from working. Didn’t know that a terrible case of food poisoning when I was apparently 2 months into the pregnancy had killed the parasite within me. Didn’t know I was pregnant. Didn’t know why I was having stomach pains until I went in, wondering if it was an ulcer and was told I had a 5 1/2-months dead *thing* inside me that was still getting larger, even though parts of it were decaying inside me. Had the damned thing removed the next day with an emergency D&C and am thankful to the medical profession that was able to restore me to health.
Thing is *that* counted as an abortion. It should have miscarried, but didn’t. I was on the Pill – was having monthly periods – and showed no sign of being pregnant. There was never a heartbeat there. I’m sure I’m not unique. So as long as biology does weird tricks to the female gender, I am very pro-abortion. I never want someone else to have to go through something like what I went through.
Then you miscarried. You had a dead person in you, which is a tragedy and must have been a horrifying experience. I’m sorry that you had to go through with it. You had a medically necessary procedure that harmed noone. And that’s not the same thing.
It sorta is the same thing. For any chemical abortion, you’re describing an identical situation with the only difference being foreknowledge. You take a pill, or series of pills, which your body reacts to by rejecting the parasite. Usually the body ejects the remains naturally, but the above procedure can be required, on occasion.
But in the end the problem with abortion isn’t so much that it’s a harm, in and of itself, but that outlawing it would work about as well as Prohibition… Which is to say that it would put everyone who desires one, and their families, and their neighborhoods, in more danger, and would make large fortunes for some of the worst people you’ve ever known… And still wouldn’t stop them from being conducted.
It’s interesting the use of terms here. As I’ve pointed out previously, dehumanization is required for this kind of action or any other form of making a human being into a piece of property. Blacks weren’t considered human beings by slave-holders, and now children aren’t considered human by the pro-abort crowd.
It’s really not the same thing. Burying a live person is a monsterous act of murder. Burying a dead person is not. Taking a live person, killing them, *then* burying them is also wrong, but it’s not the burying that’s the problem.
Prohibition was an attempt to keep consenting adults from indulging in an intoxicant. In and of itself, this behaviour harms noone but the person imbibing. The entire point of abortion is that it harms an innocent living human being. This isn’t even a side effect, it’s the desired result. And clearly legal abortion isn’t helping keep the monsters in the closet, as any form of regulation is fought tooth and claw. Again, the fact that murder will happen whether or not it’s outlawed does not mean we should not outlaw murder.
On a side note, thank you for a polite and well-reasoned statement. I think the fact that I can’t get a polite discussion on a church forum, a science forum or a political forum but instead have to go to a gun comic proves the old saying “An armed society is a polite society.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. Unfortunately I still like Obama, I feel that he’s genuinely trying to make some progress and the rabid, dogmatic opposition he’s getting from the far right is making it extremely difficult. The right-biased segment of the media is throwing up complaints about everything, including his plans to not attend the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address. Ignoring the fact that it’s not something a president has attended since Taft, I have a strange suspicion that if he did attend, the Right Wing media would rip him apart for wasting time on PR appearances when he should be governing. I didn’t like a lot of what Bush did, but I only complained when I had a legitimate grievance with his stance or actions.
Ultimately the problem with our government is that it was a system designed for a much smaller country. I’m sure the Founding Fathers expected our nation to grow and change, but we’ve swelled far beyond what I think they imagined and as a result the ability of the ‘Will of the People’ to truly be reflected by how our nation is governed has been hamstrung. There are too many states with too many voices and too many disparate opinions for anything other than partisan gridlock. Just look at the fact that Democrats have the executive branch and half of the legislative branch, but with enough opposition from Republicans in the congress, it’s nearly impossible to get anything accomplished.
In a way I feel bad for every president whose approval numbers plummet. The stance that everything is the fault of the President isn’t one a rational person should take. Yes, there is a degree of accountability and once the shit has hit the fan it’s the President’s job to either fix it or appoint the correct people to fix it.
Obama has been every bit as intransigent as his opponents. He’s an equal partner in the gridlock two-step.
Simply beause he holds a position, it does not make that position correct, viable, useful, or moral. He does not understand this; a symptom of his idealism and, fankly, arrogance.
The above statement in no way absolves the others; they’re dancing the same dance as Obama.
Can’t believe it took you till 2000 to figure out that none of the major political parties represent you. I figured that out back in the late 1980’s and walked away from all of them.
Sounds like you could easily point to Gandhi yourself, man. And that’s not a slam in any way. Gandhi advocated passive civil disobedience because what he wanted to do was shift public opinion in Great Britain, and it was an effective tool: resisting violently, he felt, would simply harden the resolve of the British populace to support the Empire’s need to ‘keep the savages in line’.
Remember, t’was Gandhi who said ‘if the choice were between cowardice, and violence, I would advocate violence.’
Via Wiki: “The blastocyst is a structure formed in the early development of mammals. In humans, its formation begins 5 days after fertilization. It is preceded by the morula. It possesses an inner cell mass (ICM), or embryoblast, which subsequently forms the embryo, and an outer layer of cells, or trophoblast, surrounding the inner cell mass and a fluid-filled cavity known as the blastocoele. The human blastocyst comprises 70-100 cells. This group of cells embeds itself into the endometrium of the uterine wall where it will undergo later developmental processes, including gastrulation.”
I always understood a person/human being as someone with their own mind, voice, and able to sort things out for themselves. It’s a clump of cells that is technically a parasite that if the body and its various chemicals, hormones, and immune system don’t deem it a threat, combined with the choice of the host to properly provide the rest of the components needed to keep it going until it arrives into this world. It doesn’t have a thinking brain, it doesn’t have an opinion, it’s a lump of cells programmed with the potential to become something. It. Isn’t. Murder. It. Isn’t. A. Life. It’s. None. Of. Your. Business. What. A. Woman. Does. To. Her. Body. Do the same anti abortion people get uppity when a woman they know uses birth control? She is preventing the chance to even have her half of the recipe from being popped out, is she still a “murderer”? Is every man who squirts a load a murderer because he “wasted” millions of cells?
To quote the late and great George Carlin: “But even after the egg is fertilized, it’s still six or seven days before it reaches the uterus and pregnancy begins, and not every egg makes it that far. Eighty percent of a woman’s fertilized eggs are rinsed and flushed out of her body once a month during those delightful few days she has. They wind up on sanitary napkins, and yet they are fertilized eggs. So basically what these anti-abortion people are telling us is that any woman who’s had more than more than one period is a serial killer! Consistency. Consistency. Hey, hey, if they really want to get serious, what about all the sperm that are wasted when the state executes a condemned man, one of these pro-life guys who’s watching cums in his pants, huh? Here’s a guy standing over there with his jockey shorts full of little Vinnies and Debbies, and nobody’s saying a word to the guy. Not every ejaculation deserves a name.”
I always wonder if anti abortion people also think about common sense things like, what if the person is destitute or too poor to take care of said fetus if they choose to carry it to term and birth it? These same people are usually anti-welfare and want people “to stop being lazy and get jobs and stop abusing a system they pay taxes into”? This same woman who can’t get a good job because of lack of experience or decent education is stuck trying to support herself, the baby, and maybe even try to go to school to hope to improve her situation and HAS to get on welfare to barely get by. The woman could also die from the many complications that arrive during childbirth or even gestation itself! If it was their daughter/mother/cousin/wife/what the fuck ever, who was told their fetus wasn’t developing right or becoming detached from the uterine wall and there was a serious or near definite risk of death to the mother if the fetus was not remove, would they still be staunch in their stance? I also find it interesting they never seem to understand they themselves aren’t realizing they don’t have to consider the fact they don’t have to carry it or care for it. Their care seems to stop the minute that fetus is born into the world and the fetus was “given a chance at life” and then expect it to go work and stop being a mooch and contribute.
It’s none of your business. Shut. Up.
There are plenty of people willing to adopt ~begging~ to adopt even. No one’s saying poor women need to be forced to raise an unwanted child. All they’re saying is that there are other options besides killing it.
Yep, that’s right. For all of us whose bodies are NOT CAPBLE of bearing babies without dying–it doesn’t MATTER if the mother dies, as long as that baby survives long enough to be ‘dopted!
You have shifted the argument from: “Abortion on demand, at any time for any reason” to “The mother will die if she tries to cary the baby to term.” That’s a pretty big shift. A choice between one life and another is a BIG difference between a choice between taking a life and being inconvenienced for the time it takes to bring the baby to term before putting it up for adoption.
Well, considering that there are politicians (if by politician, you mean shitstain who should not be allowed near sharp objects or Lego, much less laws) in the U.S. who have tried to pass legislation completely outlawing abortion, even in the case where the mother’s health is at risk, it’s a valid point.
You have morons like Todd Akin, who insisted that women can’t get pregnant from rape (excuse me, “legitimate rape”), which leads to the “logical” conclusion that there doesn’t need to be a rape exception in abortion-banning legislation….
And I forget the name of the blithering idiot politician (although perhaps I repeat myself) who was fairly insistent that modern medicine was so good that no woman in the U.S. ever needed to worry about not surviving childbirth, so there doesn’t need to be a “health of the mother” exception…
Not forced to raise it, but forced to carry it, eh?
Because there are no children needing to be adopted?
Murder is everyone’s business, ma’am.
And in your statement defining humanity, you very clearly mention that it is YOUR understanding. That’s a problem, because it means that a human being is subject to whim. And that’s not true. A human being is a human being whether they are crippled, whole, disabled, sound, black, white, asian, brown, red, pink, tattooed, pierced, gay, straight, bi, tri, try, poly, hell, I’m even sure Tom Cruise is a human being. You don’t just get to pick and choose what makes a human a human. You don’t have that right. Humanity is determined by evidence and should be protected by law. It *is* protected by law in every other case. I don’t even know why this is an issue. And the moment you strip away the emotions from abortion, it stops being an issue. It is wrong. It is the willful termination of a human life, generally without cause, always without trial and in direct violation of that child’s rights.
And before I hear “Women have a right to do what they want with their bodies!” No. No you don’t. I don’t have the right to take a leak on the White House lawn. I don’t have the right to go streaking down Battalion Ave at Ft. Hood. I don’t have the right to take my body to the top of the empire state building and jump off. Why?
Because those actions impact other people.
The way you use ma’am reminds me of the condescending way southerners use the word boy. In other words it makes you sound like a dick.
> You don’t just get to pick and choose what makes a human a human. You don’t have that right
Yes, you do. It’s called having a functioning brain and being able to discern reality around you. My brain has led me to believe that a clump of cells the size of a garden pea, that looks like this:
Has no rights. That is not a human being any more than a kernel of corn is a field of corn.
Man, I would totally get behind a Jesse Ventura / Colin Powell ticket. That would be awesome.
cheers,
Phil
So when is the new political party’s convention? We REALLY need to kick both the Democrats and Republicans out.
Having said that, there are people in Congress who are reasonable and want to do a good job. Thoughtful, civil discussions don’t make headlines so you never hear about them. I guess that means, if they make the news channels get rid of them. Or possibly get replace the news channels.
As noted, the 4th estate is DEAD. It’s owned by companies, and those corporations own the politicians. We need a massive change.
The 4th Estate has been dead for a VERY long time. Remember ‘Yellow Journalism..?” The 4th Estate ws dead *before* that.
There was a brief period when it looked like Journalism was going to rise up to become the stalwart bastion of honest information that it has long claimed itself to be, but that was just a nervous twitch in the slowly-cooling corpse.
Wow, man, I’m with you on about 97% (I’m still agnostic, but agree religion should be kept far away from politics anyway) If more people could just open their eyes to reality, we’d have a much nicer country to live in. You go, man. Tell it like it is!
“Having a religion is like having a penis. It’s fine to have one, it’s perfectly okay to be proud of it. But please, do not wave it around in public or attempt to shove it down my children’s throats.”
Now just wait a fucking minute here. Why not Grant/Hynes for the ticket?!!? There’s awesome and fucking amazing.
I Want DHS if they get in.
Yeah, don’t really give a rats ass about your political views. Just came here to read the comics.
I am a Republican, and believe in the rights of people to make their own choices. While I agree that there SHOULD be a point when abortion is NOT allowed except in the case of saving the mother, but for the most part, my reasons for being Pro Choice are simple. I’ve been a daddy to a little girl. If some knuckle dragger decided to attack her and ended up getting her pregnant, I don’t want to force her to be saddled with a child she never had any intention of having. I don’t want to require a police report, because many women who are put in a bad situation would have to report rape just to get out of the pregnancy. Then there are those abusive jackwads who actually use pregnancy as a weapon against their wife/girlfriend. Yes they are out there. My ex wife was essentially held prisoner by one who would keep her pregnant.
I don’t vote Democrat anymore, because EVERY TIME they get the majority they go after the Second Amendment. I cannot allow that. I know I shouldn’t be a one issue voter, but I think its a pretty big one. If the Democrats had the majority in the house, we would probably have another AWB and more.
I don’t believe the other side is evil. I hate Obamacare. I think it was the worst thing to come out of Washington during this Presidency. But I think the Democrats TRULY were thinking of helping people. They just got the method completely wrong. If you ask me I DO have an idea on how to REALLY provide health care without blowing up the insurance industry and causing millions to get cancellation letters.
The War on Drugs… AKA Prohibition II (Because it worked SO well last time). So what if people are stupid and do drugs that kill them… Not my deal. I feel the same way about suicide… Why is that even a crime? So someone kills themselves. JOB OPENING! Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for trying to help people with problems, but they want to kill themselves it’s not up to me to FORCE them not to.
Taxes: NOBODY should EVER get more back than they put in. I even said it was stupid when I got more back than I put in. NOBODY should be IMMUNE to taxes either. It’s actually possible to break that old adage of Death and Taxes. Some people don’t pay taxes at all. We also have too many tax breaks that make people think that they aren’t paying that high of tax, because they took every tax break under the sun and found out that they had a total tax of $200 for the year… If everyone was taxed at either a flat rate, or even replace it with a national sales tax on everything but food, we’d actually end up with a greater amount of revenue for the government and more coin in our pocket.
Military action… Sticky point. We have to be involved in Afghanistan, DIDN’T have to be involved in Iraq. BUT We wouldn’t have had to be involved in Afghanistan if we hadn’t been involved in Afghanistan in the 80’s and TRAINED the Taliban and Al Q… I understand WHY we have our military all over the world(Force Projection to respond quickly to emergencies), but it seems that we are responding to emergencies of our own making with military force, and we could easily cut that out by not being involved in Other People’s Problems. Though it’s great to be able to come to people’s rescue as we do when there is a natural disaster.
Environment: Clean air, Sure I’m behind that. I’ve lived through acid rain, and outside air being so ban your eyes sting. Clean water, Absolutely. Global Warming? It’s a money grab. I fish, kayak(and every time I do, I make it my mission to pick up after other less conscious kayakers), hike, camp, and even sail(I can spend a whole day and not use a drop of gas). Don’t tell me I hate the environment because I don’t buy into Global Warming. Keep our environment clean, but don’t tell me that paying carbon credits to less developed countries is going to fix the planet. That’s where the Green Movement loses me. I run a biodiesel truck, produce my own fuel from algae, and make every effort NOT to use oil that I can. But I have had people driving a Prius preach to me about my truck being bad for the environment.
Anyway, that’s my stance.
So long as you don’t go full retard and switch sides on the gun debate, I’ll continue reading. Your religious stance and other political stances don’t bug me at all. It just shows you have a heart(though I may disagree with where your heart lies). But the gun ownership stance means more than the others to me.
I surprisingly agree with you on at least 90% of this.
Howsomever – I have to correct this one thing, hoping that this time, it’s once and for all:
I grew up in the San Bernardinos of Cali, before the state went insane on things like permits for walking in the woods…
Um..no.
The only thing I can think of that you might be referring to, there, would be the Wilderness Adventure Pass, an admittedly wrongful and self-serving bit of fuckery (golly, I am using a lot of your own terms here, ain’t I? Well if it works, take it, I say)
which is now crumbling in its death throes. For nearly all intents & purposes, revoked: you can imagine my booyah-esque rejoicing when I saw the signs disappear.
In any damned case, that was FOR PARKING ONLY.
Walking in the the National Forest remained and remains free of charge.
If you are referring to the Wilderness Permit required to hike, say, San Gorgonio, then
1 – that’s been in place since you were small, maybe even before your lifetime; I’ll have to check. It sure wasn’t anything that came along later and spoiled your woods-traipsing experience.
2 – Wilderness permits are part of a nationwide program, not a Californian thing.
If it seems otherwise, perhaps that’s because Cali has a disproportionate amount of declared wildernesses. (Damned nature-lovin hippies!)
Which IMO is a good thing, since USFS land can still be developed into ski slopes or harvested for timber — or, apparently, in recent years, sold off as private property without public forenotice — whereas Wilderness cannot.
FWIW I agree almost 100% with everything you said. I also feel totally abandoned by both parties- GOP wants to take away the rights of women/gays and give the country to corporations, Democrats want to take away the rights of gun owners and are happy to regulate anything they can. I voted for Obama twice, mainly because the GOP was too stupid to run a real contender and Obama said all the right things.
To pigeonhole political positions into only two possible options (‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’) is absurd, and this false dichotomy is IMHO a big part of why our country is in such big trouble.
Wooo, opinions! Yay, well researched positions!
…
…
…
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand that’s the extent of my feedback. Honestly, I’ve always been a “I won’t shove my shit down your throat if you do the same for me.” kind of person. As long as you believe what you believe for an honest reason with real thought put into it that doesn’t boil down to “I think it and so does my imaginary friend so you should too.” I’m typically okay with it. I appreciate your honesty (and admittedly have many similar beliefs, but I have G+ if I want to talk about them in a public forum). You write an entertaining comic, so shy of you using it to try to bludgeon your readership into following your beliefs there’s very little you could do or say to make me decide you’re not worth reading anymore.
Far be it for me to try to change your opinions, but I fully understand why you don’t have a political party. I didn’t either, for many of the same reasons you list, until I ran into the Modern Whig party. I suggest you at least check them out – I think you’ll find they make a whole lot of sense. Their slogan is “The Party for the Rest of Us.” (www.modernwhig.org)
I love what you have to say here. One thing I would point out is that it’s dangerous to outlaw religion because then that creates martyrs, drives it underground, and ultimately makes it stronger. What a pain!
I disagree on a couple thing here and there, but its a free country.
My only big issue is with “Perfect Ticket” as I will not vote for a 9/11 “Truther” under any circumstances.
You said “if x” and followed it with “but x,” something that was in line with the first comment.
Had me thinking that you were going to say “but y” and give me an alternative course of action.
As you have given me no choice other than to think badly of you AND I am incapable of thinking for myself, I must shun you to the highest of my ability.
Holy shit! You sound like my twin brother from another mother. I made the mistake of expressing OUR views on Sigforum.com and was summarily booted as a troll before I was even given a chance to clarify my comments, albeit briefer than yours were. Why is it so hard for most people who own guns to slam other gun owners just because they call Rush Limbaugh a loudmouth gasbag? Anyway, money coming from me to you to keep this strip going as soon as my proverbial ship comes in–and it isn’t that far away…
Great description of your beliefs, well thought out. I agree and identify with most, some I don’t but for the most part we share the same Ideas. Maybe someday we can sit down with a bottle and discuss…
JL, I’m not too far from you. And my dogma pretty much insists that nobody should be given up on. /|;^)
Fiscally conservative? You bet. “That which governs least, governs best.” Most of the time, we do not need intervention from The Capitol (federal OR state) to handle our problems. Civil society can and will handle most welfare issues if the government will first, not cost us and our businesses each about half of our annual income, and second, permit it.
But “governs least governs best” also applies to social behavior. There are all kinds of social behavior that I regard as harmful and socially corrosive, but which do NOT require government intervention, because they don’t violate my rights. What should be done, is that the faithful should make their case in the marketplace of ideas that these things are harmful so that people choose to stop. I am convinced a polyamorous lifestyle is bad for you and especially for any kids you may have, but I have no business setting the government on you for it. But the same goes for religious practices. You have no business setting the government on me for them, whether they are Eucharistic Processions, caring for orphans, performing marriages, or anything else (including buying insurance for my employees). I do NOT violate your rights by refusing to do business with you, either as a customer a vendor, or as an employer or employee. If I’m unjustly prejudiced against anyone in those decisions, I am going to shoot myself in the foot. No government vengeance is needed.
I also generally oppose war. It’s to be avoided whenever possible. Just War theory is used to determine when it absolutely is not possible to avoid war. Viet Nam does not look just, based on what I know. I very much doubt that any of our wars since then have been.
I am with you entirely on the drug war. Back when weed, cocaine, and heroin were legal, they were not the enormous social issues they are today. If we got rid of the “I was intoxicated, so I am less culpable (or not culpable) for my criminal behavior” defense, I’d be delighted to see us relegalize them all.
I am put more or less in the libertarian camp as a result. The LP may be a sham. If so, I blame the Republicrats and Demicans for rigging elections to guarantee that they alone can win (barring a change in majority of a state legislature, followed by redistricting, incumbents are nearly always re-elected if they seek it). The LP is unlikely to win, but I think they have the best ideas. I’ll spread their ideas, but I don’t give them my money.
President Obama is slick, and he fooled a lot of people, a lot of whom are smarter than I am. He did not surprise me at all. I ignored the speeches and telly, and instead I read up on what he’d actually done in the past, and his behavior as President has been largely consistent with that. Romney would probably have been less bad, if only because the press and the Democrats in both houses would have been all over him at all times, but after holding my nose and voting for McCain, I decided that I was not ever going to vote for a candidate just because he was “less bad” than the other major party candidate. I’m going to vote for the guy whom I agree with most. I don’t care if my candidate has no chance of winning.
I think religion is largely beneficial to society, but only if there’s no coercion involved. Christian convictions lead people to do a lot of good. The government has no business advocating or punishing belief, or anything else that doesn’t violate the rights of others. I expect the current administration to do its best to circumvent the free exercise and free association clauses in order to punish people for their religious convictions.
Grant, IMHO you’re an idiot about some stuff, but that’s ok. I’m friends with bigger idiots than you who aren’t nearly as humorous, and I still consider you more intelligent than 90% of the population that I’m forced to share oxygen with.
Besides, it would be boring if we all had the same opinions anyway.
That’s what I like to hear!
I just …. Wow…
I’m sorry…but I have to ask this question Jay…
Does any of the above comments mean you are going to act any differently or change the way you drink and party and draw comics or support the 2nd Amendment?
I don’t know if I could handle it if the answer was yes.
Not a fucking chance. 😀
For that, we thank you.
Seriously, which IS hotter, Brosnan or Statham?
And was that an example of white privilege rearing its ugly head when Samuel L. Jackson and Byung-Hun Lee were excluded from the list?
just now read this. holla. glad you spoke your mind. i really like your comic.
i’m racist against racists myself. i don’t care that i can’t help it. it’s just fucking
stupid to me. fuck what other people think. i got my own problem.
We line up about 85% on these issues. The remaining 15% aren’t deal breakers. I think I’ll stick around.
I routinely avoid the abortion issue by telling people, “I don’t have a uterus, so I’m not qualified to comment on that.”
As for the rest, I agree, except the bit about religion. I really don’t care what other people believe or worship, as long as they keep it out of my home and face. I get really irritated when someone tries to waste my time by talking to me about how great their flavor of god might be. I get downright RUDE when they spout bad facts at me, too.
Ms. Idjit: “The bible is the oldest known work of text.”
Me: “Really? I guess you’ve never heard of the Vedas. DAMN THOSE HINDUS! There’s a temple down the road. Maybe you should go talk to them, you moron. You’re trespassing, too. Get off my property.”
I tend to throw out the Code of Hammurabi at people when they make that stupid comment…something like 1770 BC off the top of my head. First Bible was around what… 200 BC for the Hebrew variant and 325 A.D. for the Constantine authorized version.
Pisses the hard core Bible thumpers off when they come at me thinking I’m on their side just because I did 12 years in Catholic Schools as well as Sunday School and being an Alter Boy and a Boy Scout (please…no priest jokes…still a tight end here.).
I’m just glad my parents know better after 20 years.
So you are a libertarian.
Lets see some of the more ridiculous emails, or fisk them like Larry Correia or Tom Kratman.
I probably disagree with more of your principles than not, but agree with more of your policies for different reasons. Even still, I think we’ve got enough in common to enjoy company and beer. I’m still reading your comic.
I pretty much skimmed this on Friday, went back and read it today. Other than the atheist part (I’m a Witch and a Pantheist, but then, that just means I think EVERYTHING is part of some big thing, not that we talk to cloud people!), we’re very similar in political stance across the board. I feel lucky to know that there are people out here whom I respect AND who entertain me. I’d have a drink with you any time!!!
I agree with most of what you said. For what it’s worth.
–Then fuck ya. G’bye. You don’t have to agree with me. You can argue with me. We can discuss.–
Actually, you’ll slander us as racist and then delete comments. I can get that on Facebook.
*hands you a kleenex*
Well, i can agree on most of your political points, as well as your stance on gun control. Two things, however, i have a slight disagreement with:
Your stance on religion. While it’s perfectly okay to be an atheist, your comment that “You will not respect our religion” comes off as slightly offensive. If someone believes n a religion, but is quiet about it and does not force his beliefs on others, the blatantly telling them they are bullshit and trying to”cure them” passes off as alittle too much like extremism.
2. Your stance on abortion. While i agree it is a fundamental right, i do no like the concept, nor do i feel it should be the first option/taken lightly.
Two questions: are you fundamentally anti-government?
What is your stance on the death penalty?
> If someone believes n a religion, but is quiet about it and does not force his beliefs on others, the blatantly telling them they are bullshit and trying to”cure them” passes off as alittle too much like extremism.
I will not deny that my views are extremist. I hesitate to call them “beliefs.” A lack of faith does not constitute a faith any more than bald is a hair color, or not riding motorcycles is a preference on what kind of motorcycle to ride. If pointing out that religion is made-up horseshit with a sucking lack of evidence to back it up is “extremist,” so be it. Call me an atheist Jihadist.
> i do no like the concept, nor do i feel it should be the first option/taken lightly.
Many people feel I take the concept lightly. I do, because under no circumstance will I ever have to make the decision to get an abortion. I also take the decision of which tampons to buy lightly. It doesn’t directly impact my life.
However, I do feel that many in the anti-abortion crowd feel that women get abortions “lightly,” and that’s just fucked up. Last I checked, abortions don’t tickle. It’s not like a day at the Korean Spa. It’s painful, and a hard decision to make. As long as ANY woman makes that decision, whether flippantly or with dread and horror, I support her right to choose to abort an unwanted pregnancy.
Forgive me, but I feel your first question is a bit stark in the asking. Fundamentally anti-government? No. I live in a society. And I enjoy all the bonuses of living in a social sphere of humanity. Anarchy doesn’t work – unless you like watching a society melt down in thunder, blood and ashes. At the same time, Fascism and Totalitarianism don’t work either, because that’s when a ruling class takes it out on the plebes. I don’t believe unregulated Capitalism works as an economic model (some try to say that economic models are not applicable to the argument of governmental styles, to which I say bullshit, governments and nations run on money) because that allows a hell of a lot of corpocracy and snake oil salesmanship. On the other hand, pure Socialism doesn’t work either, because to make it happen, a government has to rule with an iron fist.
I guess you could say I’m a borderline Libertarian/Liberal, and I think we all have to meet somewhere in the middle. Small government, compassionate social services, and conservative fiscal budgets. It can be done – MANY countries in Europe do this well. Hell, even a few states here in the USA have such practices in place already, unbeknownst to many of the pundits. Places like Alaska and Virginia.
I used to be in favor of the death penalty. If the system was flawless, I would still support it. The problem is that our current death penalty systems are fundamentally flawed from the ground up, and the result is that dozens of convicts have been exonerated of their crimes after they’d been executed. For a while, I fell behind the mealy-mouthed argument of “breaking a few eggs to make an omelet,” but that stopped working. I can’t get behind it when we’ve put people to death who turned out to be innocent. That’s just not okay with me. If you have someone on death row who confessed their crime, still confesses it, and there’s a shit-ton of evidence showing that they’re guilty as shit, hell, go ahead and kill them. I’ll hand out cupcakes at their candlelight vigil in front of the prison, and cheer when they die. But if there is any doubt, any whatsoever, no, I am not in favor of the death penalty. Those executions of innocents were paid for by our tax dollars. That means we are morally culpable. And most, overwhelmingly MOST, of the death row convicts were cases where there is still a shred of doubt. Fuck it, let them rot in lockup for 100 years. Prison isn’t a vacation. People who talk about “three hots and a cot”, without exception in my experience, have never spent ANY amount of time in a prison. Prison is hell, according to family members and friends who’ve been. If there’s doubt about innocence of a death row convict, let them live – albeit in hell, but at least they’re alive until exonerated or proven 100%, no appeal, no possible missed evidence, guilty.
Regarding showing respect for people’s religion, I’ve always subscribed to H.L. Mencken’s attitude: “We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.”