Seegson-Synthetics

Seegson-Synthetics t1_iy87qo6 wrote

This comes from a study done in 1987, where 1900 women were surveyed. It’s hardly representative of today’s statistics. But even if it were, 1% (using 1987 numbers…nearly 40 years out of date) represents something like 16,000 women per year. So you’d be okay with 16,000 women each year being forced to give birth to their rapists’ child?

6

Seegson-Synthetics t1_iy870ws wrote

You’re presenting a false equivalence, though. Just because the behavior appears similar (Democrats voting and acting as a single bloc, like the Republicans do) doesn’t mean they’re the same. If you have ten people who always agree the sky is blue and ten people who agree that it’s red, the side that insists the sky is red cannot point to their opposite group and say “See? They always vote together, just like us!” Well, of course they do, because it’s a fact (that the sky is blue). They’re definitely not behaving in the same way as the group that insists the sky is red, even though it might appear that way (all voting as a single bloc).

4

Seegson-Synthetics t1_iy7utaw wrote

It’s a shame that so many like you share this belief. Politics is absolutely anything but fake—just ask the millions of women who can’t get abortions any longer and are being forced to carry to term their rapists’ child, or brain dead fetuses, or their father’s/brother’s/other relative’s child.

13

Seegson-Synthetics t1_iy6x1yp wrote

I get what you're saying, but the problem is that local Republicans won't go against the party. They won't stand up to the insanity. Instead, they act and function as one, and thereby enable the crazies in their own party. So some CT Republican may well be an outstanding individual who would work hard for his constituents, he won't do anything but enable the nutters in his own party. Therefore, how can you vote for them, knowing that your vote will get translated to a tacit approval of the extremes in the party?

17