Yes, I am well aware of your inability to confront the truth.

You still here, douche nozzle?

Thought you were gonna do us all a favor and split?

Fuck.

Oh....GoCart is correct, BTW. If you look at the entire political spectrum from right to left, Democrats and Republicans ARE in the middle, to the immediate left and right, respectively, of the center point.

See.......Nationalism or a Totalitarian Fascist regimeceould be extreme Right, along with an Iran style Theocracy, while communism and Socialism would sit on the far left. And in truth, Obama never really got close to Socialism in its purest sense.

Some will tell you that Anarchism is at the far left of the spectrum, but since that term denotes a total eradication of ANY form of government, this in not accurate.

Hope this helps. Maybe you should take a Poli Sci class?

SS

You're very right- I agree with you on many of these points. As a full disclaimer, I personally do not mind the idea of perfect ideal Socialism. For me, it does not matter how much money I make so long as I can feed my own family and provide for them a solid quality of life. I would easily forego a large salary if it meant that we could improve the quality of life of all americans. To me, in that scenario, the idea of ensuring food for all, healthcare for all, and education (not necessarily college but at the very least access to information and enough education to be able to effectively use that information) is very appealing to me.

That said, I do not think that idea of perfect socialism is remotely feasible. Obviously it depends upon public/government control and regulation which I think is the first place where this ideology breaks down. In fact, I think it's where a variety of related issues breaks down. I think common core is a pretty fantastic example- the intent, the direction, and the idea of a common core that all children across the united states should know is pretty incredible to me. Forgive the cliche but America's children are obviously in a very real sense the future of America- the nation suffers from a lack of education and flourishes from a well-established education. To clarify, by education I don't mean every child in America should have extensive knowledge of math/science/ect. However, at a bare minimum, I think every child in America should be taught literacy and should be exposed to a variety of ideas and concepts from various disciplines. Without these, children would have no way to find credible information to base their own opinions or to permanently record their own experiences. Common core is based on these very simple largely self-evident principles, but the execution of the design was positively horrific.

That's why I completely agree that the recent expansion of the umbrella topic of human rights is made less feasible by adding in these topics. In doing so, we discredit the importance of the more basic human rights.

To be fair I do believe in many of these topics, but not in the way that they are being attempted to be executed. I do believe that everyone should be guaranteed access to basic healthcare, no matter what. However even as a medical provider myself, I think much of the way that we go about medicine is completely and utterly flawed, which makes any attempt at truly universal healthcare destined to fail fantastically. That goes into a series of topics I think we need to address with our medical system before the idea of universal healthcare can even begin to be brought to the table.

Free college tuition is a bit silly to me, though the intent is solid. Like I mentioned previously, I believe in access to information and education to that end, but not necessarily access to college. Again, college opens up into another variety of issues that I have with the education which is another debate. Largely, I think we should focus on opening up and encouraging free platforms so that people have access to information.

But of course, you're right. There's a powerful drop-off where as government power starts to escalate to encompass every possible topic under the sun. Freedom is obviously one of the founding non-negotiable principles of America, and we do have to avoid over-compression of those freedoms in that respect. It's an interesting thought progression as to where the negatives outweigh the positives.

See, this is exactly where I'm saying this argument breaks down. Saying that I'm conditioned to democratic rhetoric, that my views are nonsense and disgusting, this is not an attempt at discussion. That's simply useless to anybody.

Regarding the remainder of the points that you raised:

Additionally, if you think something I say is a lie or simply rhetoric, please do point it out and I can attempt to clarify. However, if you truly find nothing I say remotely valuable, then absolutely feel free to stop reading my 'lies and rhetoric'. I'm simply discussing my own personal opinions. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm here to discuss a difference of opinion, not convert anyone or attack anyone's beliefs.

On the issue of abortions, yes. I think late-term abortions should occur only in absolute life or death situations. If the mother will certainly die carrying the child to term yet can survive through late abortion, then yes. Wouldn't it be even more immoral to allow both mother and child to die if we had the option to save one?

Further, yes I think early term abortions are acceptable for women who have been raped. Carrying a child for 40 weeks is not a trivial task. It requires lifestyle changes, and opens the mother up to a slew of horrific medical complications that can kill the mother, along with higher rates of mental illness. Further, I don't think forcing a woman to carry a reminder of rape for 40 weeks without solace seems particularly humane.

Obviously, it's not as if anyone views abortion as a good thing, or a happy thing. The argument that is to be made is one of humanity. Is the potential for a human life more valuable than an already living human, with thoughts, feelings, family, ect? The issue of late abortions in America is not one of mothers who just decided one morning that they didn't actually want to be a mother. Late abortions are performed exclusively in the united states if carrying the child would endanger the mother's life or health. Totally acceptable to disagree with my stance, but I'm obviously not pledging for convenience abortions.

As for women's health rights, there's been a large push to close down planned parenthood clinics because they perform abortion operations. However, the clinics also provide contraception and contraceptive advice (not just for sexually active women- many need contraceptives to treat other non-reproductive conditions) and cancer screenings. They're giving women information about their own health. Information many women don't receive otherwise.

On the topic of the bathroom laws, it really isn't quite as simple as boys simply walking into girls bathrooms. I understand that the situation is uncomfortable, but there's not a particularly solid solution. If a birth-female switches to male gender, should that student be forced to stay in the girls bathroom as well? Even if that student is undergoing testosterone therapy and has had a sex change operation? Where is the line drawn? It's a slippery slope that makes it difficult to clearly define the exact boundaries. I myself don't know of a proper method of handling the situation in a way that makes nobody uncomfortable, short of building transgender-specific bathrooms which is obviously not feasible for many places. Have you considered any other alternatives? I honestly do not know what the absolute best solution is here.

Regardless, thank you for your opinion. I honestly enjoy civil disputes. I'm sure you have perspectives on these issues I haven't considered.