# Do we have a thread for SlackerInc yet? Maybe we should **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 2, 2018, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461 "2018-12-02T20:21:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/81 "2019-03-01T16:07:21Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Shodan, > > Do you agree with SlackerInc that people of African American descent are much less likely to be intellectually capable? No, no, you have it all wrong. Blacks are perfectly capable - it’s just that Whites (Especially \*some \*Jews) and Asians are _super_-capable. \*Totally \*not the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/82 "2019-03-01T16:34:41Z")
He’s a classic [Concern Troll](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Concern_troll). ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/83 "2019-03-01T16:39:40Z")
> [@Chingon](#): > > He’s a classic [Concern Troll](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Concern_troll). Yup. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/84 "2019-03-01T16:41:11Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I guarantee you that conservatives will make a lot of noise about it, just like they have over the past several decades. That’s one reason why higher-IQ conservatives don’t want to overturn Roe v Wade, because they know the second they do they won’t have shit else to talk about on the matter. > > But as for the issue itself, abortion is now, and always has been, mostly a local issue for local voters. It doesn’t really move the needle nationally one way or the other, which isn’t to say that it can’t be a factor - it could in a close race. But if Democrats talk about economics and all of the myriad other things that people are really worried about, they will have done their job. Who are you? And what did you do to **asahi**? 😉 🙂 So I agree, and I have to point out that on issues like alleged origins about the differences of intelligence among “races”, lukewarm climate chance, and “centrist” anti-GMO stance, the evidence shows that Slacker is even unaware of how the “centrist” media he relies on grossly misleads people like him. What happens here is that most people in the SDMB came here with the basic “citation needed” ingrained and like to point out things like “that cite sucks! And we will tell you how or that we do know \*” When evidence is considered in reality the Slacker falls for the idea that popularity makes right. And even when the popularity of a position can be debated, he doubles down **into** a position that ignores the best evidence. - Because, as the Slacker seems to miss, many posters are experts or scientists in the proper or related fields pointing what it is obvious to them. ---
**Author:** ![Knowed\_Out](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/knowed_out/32/7380_2.png) [@Knowed\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knowed_Out)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/85 "2019-03-01T16:49:29Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > True! > > ETA: I am obviously an asshole as far as a lot of people are concerned. But other people really like me. When I was staying with squatters in the Netherlands, a majority of the group got so fed up with me, they demanded that I be kicked out (something they rarely did to anyone). But there was a contingent of about 20-25% who really liked me, partied with me every night; and those guys found other places for me to stay until my flight went back to the U.S. When you say “squatters,” do you mean actual homeless? Could it be you’re talking about a campground, or just hanging around with outside people? If so, I technically squat when I go to hippie parties, because there’s no indoor plumbing. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/86 "2019-03-01T17:24:38Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > 😕 It’s like people can’t read the poll numbers I post. 66 percent want to ban all abortions after 20 weeks (I believe that’s in addition to those who want to ban them earlier than that). > [@SlackerInc](#): > > I’m not misrepresenting anything, and my link works just fine. It really is like it’s invisible to you. Try looking again at post 48 in this thread, describing (and linking to a writeup of) a Marist poll conducted in…wait for it…February 2019. Maybe if you stare at it really hard this time, it will get through your thick skull. :dubious: Ah–I didn’t look in this thread, I looked in the thread that was actually about abortions. So let’s look at your claim about that poll, that 66% want to ban all abortions after 20 weeks. > [@CatholicPhilly](#): > > About 66 percent of adults said abortion should be banned after 20 weeks except to save the life of the mother (emphasis added) So right out the door you’re lying. But I was a little suspicious, given that this is a website designed to inspire others in the Catholic Faith. So I went to [the poll](http://www.kofc.org/un/en/resources/communications/kofc-marist-poll-tables-1902251324.pdf), where I found that it was sponsored by the Knights of Columbus. Second, the wording of the question is REALLY INTERESTING: > [@](#): > > Several states have recently passed laws to allow abortion during the last three months of pregnancy. Which comes closer to your view: > … > Abortion should be banned after 20 weeks except to save the life of the mother. (emphasis added) Did you catch that shitty little trick? Prime people to think about the last three months – usually from week 26-27 of the pregnancy–and then ask them about after 20 weeks. That’s an awful question, and any pollster who let it through should be ashamed. Edit: [This article raises some similar points about why you shouldn’t freak out (or smirk smugly) over this poll](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/27/new-poll-shows-spike-pro-life-sentiment-dont-panic-or-declare-victory/?utm_term=.06fdb143b1e7). ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/87 "2019-03-01T17:49:33Z")
Won’t somebody think of the johns? :rolleyes: > [@Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged in Florida prostitution sting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/patriots-owner-robert-kraft-charged-in-florida-prostitution-sting/830034/28): > > It’s definitely weird that he went to a strip mall for any reason. And I hate the Patriots like most people. > > BUUUT…the CBS Evening News led with this story, and the anchor talked about it with the somber tones and gravely serious face of someone describing a torture dungeon being discovered under Kraft’s house or something. “Stunning” and “shocking” were bandied about. Srsly? I’m not able to muster any outrage, personally. > > And to hide video comeras in this place? Jesus. Whatever you think of the morality of any of this, is this a good priority for taxpayers to fund? > [@Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged in Florida prostitution sting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/patriots-owner-robert-kraft-charged-in-florida-prostitution-sting/830034/29): > > If they were able to rescue women who were trafficked and forced into prostitution, yes. > [@Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged in Florida prostitution sting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/patriots-owner-robert-kraft-charged-in-florida-prostitution-sting/830034/32): > > I don’t have hard facts to bring to bear here, but on a recent episode of the Slate feminist podcast “The Waves” (which used to be called “DoubleX” before they changed it so as not to exclude XY transwomen) they made a convincing case that most of the talk of “human trafficking” is just cover for the same old moralistic criminalizing of sex work, and that the vast majority of female sex workers are not enslaved and would benefit more than anything from legalization and licensing. > > ETA: Furthermore, if that is what the sting is about, why arrest the johns? > [@Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged in Florida prostitution sting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/patriots-owner-robert-kraft-charged-in-florida-prostitution-sting/830034/34): > > Reportedly the women weren’t allowed to leave the premises and were forced to work and live there. > > [Orchids of Asia Day Spa: Jupiter Police describe deplorable conditions at spa in Robert Kraft sex sting - CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/orchids-of-asia-day-spa-jupiter-police-describe-deplorable-conditions-at-spa-in-robert-kraft-sex-sting/) > **“Authorities described how the women worked in deplorable conditions, were lured into the sex trade, and averaged 1,500 men a year.** > > [Robert Kraft Arrest Part of Major Sex-Trafficking Ring Bust: Police](https://www.businessinsider.com/robert-kraft-arrest-sex-trafficking-ring-bust-women-sex-against-will-2019-2) > \*\*The victims were forced to live in the spas for days, sometimes months, “for the purpose of sexual servitude,” according to the charges. Many of them came from China on temporary work visas, believing they’d get legitimate jobs in the US, Vero Beach Police Chief David Currey said in a press conference. > > “These girls are there all day long, into the evening. They can’t leave and they’re performing sex acts,” he said. “Some of them may tell us they’re OK, but they’re not.”\*\* > > These aren’t just women making a choice to go into prostitution and being treated like victims/criminals for bad choices. They’re sex slaves, or at least indentured servants according to law enforcement. > By arresting Johns they are trying to curb the demand, which will hopefully hinder the sex trafficking industry. And it’s not just the criminal charges that will dissuade johns, but the public humiliation and destruction of reputations. Especially for a powerful person like Kraft. > [@Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged in Florida prostitution sting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/patriots-owner-robert-kraft-charged-in-florida-prostitution-sting/830034/53): > > People clucking their tongues and agreeing with the johns getting arrested are no different from those who agreed with the harsh NY State drug laws, with stiff penalties even for possession of small amounts of marijuana. Buying black market weed funded bad guys who committed murders. That doesn’t make weed users morally culpable: it’s the government at fault for prohibition laws that create an illicit market and associated violence. The real answer is to legalize, license, and regulate. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/88 "2019-03-01T18:10:47Z")
What a sick human being. He’s right that keeping prostitution illegal does more harm then good, but seriously? His next leap in logic is that we should allow human trafficking to continue because women forced into sex work = weed dealers? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/89 "2019-03-01T21:02:11Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > (1) In the scenario presented, the only difference (allegedly) was that the baby is going to die quickly, or after resuscitation efforts. Right? So it’s a disturbing thing happening right before the baby dies, or a more calm but still very sad setup. This is not about the baby living or dying. (Or if it is, it’s because the scenario is not honest and we really are talking about infanticide by inaction.) A little extra unpleasantness added to a deeply tragic and rare scenario is not worth walking right into a Republican trap that could have ripple effects through races up and down the ballot if Democrats get smeared with this kind of extremist image. So when your child has a cleft palate, one eye, and a nose that’s a shriveled up proboscis situated on its forehead, you’re going to say that trying to rescusitate is just a “little extra unpleasantness”? It’s better to give birth to a child that’s going to come out gasping and choking, and die with in seconds, and it’s just “a little extra unpleasantness?” Go to hell. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/90 "2019-03-01T21:34:11Z")
Here’s what the [American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has to say](https://www.acog.org/-/media/Departments/Government-Relations-and-Outreach/Facts-Are-Important_Abortion-Care-Later-In-Pregnancy-February-2019-College.pdf?dmc=1&ts=20190205T2205418389) about third-trimester abortions: > [@](#): > > The need for an abortion later in pregnancy could arise for a number of reasons, including fetal anomalies or complications that threaten a woman’s health. Women, in consultation with their physicians, must be able to evaluate all appropriate treatments and make informed choices about what’s best for their health and their pregnancies. Depending on the circumstance, this might include abortion care, induction of labor, or cesarean delivery. Women’s access to accurate, full information and care must never be constrained by politicians. > > Many abortions that occur later in pregnancy involve fetal anomalies incompatible with life, such as anencephaly, the absence of the brain and cranium above the base of the skull, or limb-body wall complex, when the organs develop outside of the body cavity.ii In these cases, where death is likely before or shortly after birth, patients may decide whether to continue the pregnancy and deliver a nonviable fetus or have an abortion. In any case, the focus of medically-appropriate, compassionate care must be on the patient and what she feels is best for her health and her family. > > Abortion later in pregnancy may also be necessary when complications severely compromise a woman’s health or life, conditions which may also reduce the possibility of fetal survival. These might include premature rupture of membranes and infection, preeclampsia, placental abruption, and placenta accreta. Women in these circumstances may risk extensive blood loss, stroke, and septic shock that could lead to maternal death. Politicians must never require a doctor to wait for a medical condition to worsen and become life-threatening before being able to provide evidence-based care to their patients, including an abortion. So **SlackerInc** and his ilk can fuck off out of here with their cavalier selfish disregard for the unnecessary suffering of patients and fetuses because they’re scared that standing up against such suffering might facilitate Republican smear campaigns against Democrats (which it [likely won’t](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/27/new-poll-shows-spike-pro-life-sentiment-dont-panic-or-declare-victory/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6628d1a855db), by the way—ETA: as **LHoD** already pointed out). **SlackerInc** ’s ill-informed panic attack is an excellent example of why abortion decisions should be made by pregnant women and their doctors, not pre-empted by callous politicians whose only real concern is trying to make their political opponents look bad. I am writing to my reps today to thank them for not caving in to that kind of Chicken Little attitude. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/91 "2019-03-02T00:39:16Z")
You guys are so full of shit. You try to attack me for not knowing every detail of this bill, but your takes on it are fundamentally ignorant, dishonest, or both. Here, let’s hear from someone who worked in the Obama White House: > **[The Abortion Debate Needs Moral Lament](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/abortion-will-play-big-role-2020/583873/)** > > “Born alive” bills show where abortion politics are going. > [@](#): > > By focusing on abortion rights, Democrats ended up arguing a lot about what was not explicitly in the bill, while neglecting to make clear to the American people that they do, in fact, oppose infanticide and believe babies born alive after a botched abortion deserve medical care consistent with similarly situated babies who are born under any other circumstance. Not one Democrat uttered the phrase born alive during the floor debate. Not one Democrat referred to the 2002 act or expressed support for it during the floor debate. If Democrats truly believe the bill is a disingenuous attempt in a long game to end access to abortion, they could at least have been clear while voting against it that they endorse its sponsors’ stated intent. They could have also proposed, or tried to propose, amendments to the legislation, as the writer Charles Camosy has suggested.[…] > > Our politicians spend so much time with people who agree with them, using talking points cleared by or provided by entrenched advocacy groups and pursuing electoral strategies more reliant on base turnout than persuasion, that it has become difficult to tell if they have simply forgotten how to speak with people who hold a different viewpoint or if they simply do not care.[…] > > Former Governor Mike Huckabee accused Democrats of wanting to “murder freshly born babies.” Senator Chuck Schumer said during floor debate that “the bill is solely meant to intimidate doctors and restrict patients’ access to care and has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with protecting children.” There is no sense that anti-abortion Republicans are influenced by the stories of women like Dr. Jen Gunter or Erika Christensen. There is no sense that pro-choice Democrats are aware of sincere pro-life Americans, or take seriously the claim that abortion is an attack on the very human dignity Democrats rightly invoke (and, yes, many anti-abortion Republicans ignore) when discussing immigration, poverty, or human rights. Now our politics are only for the absolutists, those who deny any place for doubt or humility.[…] > > Regardless of concerns about the political motives driving the conversation, if Democrats can’t support a bill that penalizes denying proper care to a baby who survives an abortion because it might undermine other commitments, or offer a serious alternative proposal that protects those commitments, perhaps those commitments require further examination. If the penalties in Sasse’s bill for situations that Democrats say are either rare or non-existent are capable of impeding the entire medical field’s capacity to conduct abortions, what does that say about how thin the line is between proper care and negligence?[…] > > Trump’s anti-abortion stance appears to be one of political convenience, not deeply-rooted conviction, and I am uninterested in the transparently self-interested appeals to morality of a man whose life and presidency have been so thoroughly immoral. He has no standing to lecture Democrats or anyone else on how to uphold human dignity and advance justice in our politics. **Democrats do have an obligation, though, to provide a clear answer to Americans who are not so cynical, who are concerned that our approach to abortion is one sign, along with policies espoused by Trump and Republicans, that we have lost our moral bearings as a country in pursuit of political power.** Bolding mine. Let’s also note the absurdity of claiming this has nothing to do with late term abortion. How could it possibly apply to anything else? It’s about aborted fetuses who survive the procedure. That only applies to late term abortions, duh. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/92 "2019-03-02T01:11:34Z")
> [@Knowed\_Out](#): > > When you say “squatters,” do you mean actual homeless? Could it be you’re talking about a campground, or just hanging around with outside people? No, this was in the 1990s when squatting was legal in the Netherlands (I only just learned from Wikipedia that it was, sadly, banned in 2010): [Dutch squatting ban - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_squatting_ban) At the time I lived with them, squatters could legally take over control of an unoccupied space by sneaking in and putting a bed, table, and chair of their own in the space (based on court rulings that established this litmus test). I went along on one of their “occupations”, although this was not where I lived. They went in in the early morning, quickly but their lightweight “furniture” inside, and called a special division ol the police to come certify their legal status. Meanwhile the owner of the building and his two very preppy sons stood outside fuming, in stark contrast to the bearded, dreadlocked anarchists who were doing the squatting. > [@Skywatcher](#): > > Won’t somebody think of the johns? :rolleyes: Thank you for fairly representing my views. I have no problem standing behind all of that, which was quoted appropriately. > [@Babale](#): > > What a sick human being. He’s right that keeping prostitution illegal does more harm then good, but seriously? His next leap in logic is that we should allow human trafficking to continue because women forced into sex work = weed dealers? :smack: You really are tremendously stupid. I can understand why Manda was loath to be taken for you! It is, obviously, the _human traffickers_, not the sex workers themselves, who are the analogue to the weed dealers here (perhaps not to the street level dealers, but to those above them). Both the weed dealers and human traffickers are providing an illicit product/service that many people want and which in and of itself infringes on no one’s rights. But when these trades are made illegal and driven underground, they are managed by organized crime syndicates. And those syndicates engage in all kinds of nasty violence in the pursuit of their black market profits. So if johns are morally culpable for funding a sex worker industry that engages in some degree of human trafficking (again, the experts cited by the Waves podcasters say the extent this is true has been exaggerated), then weed smokers in states where it is illegal are culpable for funding organized crime syndicates that smuggle and sell marijuana. There’s really no way around it. And I settle on “neither” rather than “both”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/93 "2019-03-02T01:12:29Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > You guys are so full of shit. You try to attack me for not knowing every detail of this bill, but your takes on it are fundamentally ignorant, dishonest, or both. To recap: -You cite multiple polls, at least one of which contradicts your thesis. -When called on that, you point toward a poll contracted by a highly partisan organization, with a leading question that should shame any pollster. You cite it using a highly partisan analysis. **And you lie about that analysis**. -When called on that, rather than address any of the multiple idiocies you conducted and I pointed out, you freak out and call me ignorant, dishonest, or both. -In the process, you misrepresent what you’re being attacked for. Yeah, you call me whatever names you want, dumbass. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/94 "2019-03-02T01:39:56Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > [snip] > Here, let’s hear from someone who worked in the Obama White House: > > [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...e-2020/583873/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...e-2020/583873/) > > Bolding mine. > > Let’s also note the absurdity of claiming this has nothing to do with late term abortion. How could it possibly apply to anything else? It’s about aborted fetuses who survive the procedure. That only applies to late term abortions, duh. Well, that bolded part in that opinion was bullshit too. Specifically the part about the Democrats in congress not being clear. > **[Do Democrats not mind 'executing' babies, as Trump said?](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/feb/28/donald-trump/fact-checking-donald-trumps-tweet-saying-democrats/)** > > On Feb. 25, the Senate took up a bill backed by anti-abortion advocates called the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protec > [@](#): > > Broadly, critics of the bill said that it would take decisions out of the hands of parents and medical professionals and hand it to politicians. Democrats also argued that the number of relevant cases is vanishingly small, and usually involve heartbreaking situations that often have specific, unusual factors at play that are hard to accommodate in advance. Because of this, they saw the bill as a chance for Republicans to embarrass Democrats rather than as a genuine piece of legislation aiming to solve a significant problem. > > Perhaps the Democrats’ most basic argument in the context of Trump’s charge, however, is that laws already exist to cover the scenario the bill would seek to prevent, making the new bill redundant. > > In a floor speech before the vote, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said, “It has always been illegal to harm a newborn infant. This vote has nothing—nothing—to do with that. Read the language.” > > Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, echoed that argument. “This bill is not about protecting infants, as Republicans have claimed, because that is not up for debate and it is already the law,” she said. > What is the law currently? > > Most legal experts we contacted agreed with this much of the Democrats’ argument: Killing a baby after birth is already against the law. > > … > Our ruling > > Trump said, “The Democrat(ic) position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth.” > > There’s little question that the vote on the Senate bill was uncomfortable for Democrats: They effectively voted against a bill whose principles they said they support, arguing that the bill would be redundant because those principles are already enshrined in law. > > However, Trump overreached when he described Democrats as tolerating “executing” newborns. No one supports actively killing newborns, much less “executing” them; the contested terrain concerns what efforts should be made to extend the lives of babies who are not expected to survive long with severe disabilities. > > We rate the statement False. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/95 "2019-03-02T01:52:03Z")
GIGO, you are playing your usual strawman game. No one here that I have seen has endorsed Trump’s rhetoric. The excerpts from the Atlantic piece in my post that you responded to included the following: > [@](#): > > Trump’s anti-abortion stance appears to be one of political convenience, not deeply-rooted conviction, and I am uninterested in the transparently self-interested appeals to morality of a man whose life and presidency have been so thoroughly immoral. He has no standing to lecture Democrats or anyone else on how to uphold human dignity and advance justice in our politics. :dubious: You strawman more than anyone here that I can think of. Which is a truly low, dishonorable way to debate–worse in some ways than Trump’s crass insults. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/96 "2019-03-02T01:57:31Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > GIGO, you are playing your usual strawman game. No one here that I have seen has endorsed Trump’s rhetoric. The excerpts from the Atlantic piece in my post that you responded to included the following: > > :dubious: > > You strawman more than anyone here that I can think of. Which is a truly low, dishonorable way to debate–worse in some ways than Trump’s crass insults. Piffle, your chicken little act on that issue depends on thinking that most will listen to Trump’s rhetoric. BTW nowhere I have said that you are saying that, that was directed to the opinion’s bolded part, so in reality this is about the third time that you show all that you do not even know what a straw man is. As **Left Hand of Dorkness** says, you are a dumbass. And at logic too. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/97 "2019-03-02T02:14:59Z")
Now you’re back to the word salad, your other defining trait. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/98 "2019-03-02T02:25:00Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Now you’re back to the word salad, your other defining trait. :rolleyes: Too late, I already noticed in this thread about your ‘going grammar Nazi’ act so as to not reply to what was posted. Unless you are so inept and incapable of reading what Politifact posted about this, it is actually a general reply to your chicken little act and I did reply directly to the bolded part of the opinion that you linked too. So, not a straw man. Again: **you are not only a dumbass at logic but a coward too.** \* - Something that I noticed a long time ago too. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/99 "2019-03-02T03:03:25Z")
La la la! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2019, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461/100 "2019-03-02T03:25:48Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > La la la! Of course, last time you tried that same toddler reply it did not work with everyone else in the threads, you just show gross inmaturity; so, meh. I prefer to have grammar trouble rather than what you do, that falls for lukewarm climate change denial, paternalistic racism, “middle of the road” anti-GMO talking points, [and even gross illogical replies about what experts are actually saying.](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20829552&postcount=925) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-we-have-a-thread-for-slackerinc-yet-maybe-we-should/825461.md?page=6)