Punk rockers/anarchists and Libertarians, what is the difference?

[bladeXcrasher]

Not all distilleries make Tennessee Whiskey. If those clinics don't want to use the Austin County Recipe, they can still provide other medical services.

The widened hallways are every bit the "consumer protections" that new oak barrels and maple charcoal are.

The fact you are choosing to die on this hill is pretty telling.

Most of the libertarians I know are the same way, so I'm not all that surprised.

[Machismo]

The fact you are choosing to die on this hill is pretty telling.

Most of the libertarians I know are the same way, so I'm not all that surprised.

I literally picked this; because it is such a small regulation... to show that compromise should be possible.
Wider hallways are a "consumer protection" aren't they? After all, if there's a complication, a patient should be able to be wheeled out on a stretcher... right? If there are complications, then the doctor should have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital...

[bladeXcrasher]

I literally picked this; because it is such a small regulation... to show that compromise should be possible.
Wider hallways are a "consumer protection" aren't they? After all, if there's a complication, a patient should be able to be wheeled out on a stretcher... right? If there are complications, then the doctor should have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital...

I'm sorry, can you explain how those increase consumer confidence in medical abortions? I mean, if you are going to compare a specific distillation process you better compare it to a specific abortion process.

- - - Updated - - -

Care to point to the issues that prompted these regulations?

Because nothing says confidence like requiring pamphlets with misinformation to be handed out to all women seeking an abortion.

[Shadowferal]

Because nothing says confidence like requiring pamphlets with misinformation to be handed out to all women seeking an abortion.

But that's just freedom of speech. /s

[Machismo]

Care to point to the issues that prompted these regulations?

Care to point out the issues that prompted those whiskey regulations?

Clearly, those altruistic and concerned folks just wanted to make sure women received the very best health care. I don't see why anyone wouldn't want patients to be as informed and safe as possible.

/s

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, can you explain how those increase consumer confidence in medical abortions? I mean, if you are going to compare a specific distillation process you better compare it to a specific abortion process.

- - - Updated - - -



Because nothing says confidence like requiring pamphlets with misinformation to be handed out to all women seeking an abortion.

Well, women will now be confident that their doctor had admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, in case there's any issues with her care. The wider hallways will make sure that a stretcher can be used if she has any complications. The ultrasound is to make sure she is as informed as possible.

Did I do it right?

- - - Updated - - -

But that's just freedom of speech. /s

Why do you want a medical clinic that cannot allow for stretchers to properly maneuver to a patient that may need one?

[bladeXcrasher]

Care to point out the issues that prompted those whiskey regulations?

Clearly, those altruistic and concerned folks just wanted to make sure women received the very best health care. I don't see why anyone wouldn't want patients to be as informed and safe as possible.

/s

- - - Updated - - -



Well, women will now be confident that their doctor had admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, in case there's any issues with her care. The wider hallways will make sure that a stretcher can be used if she has any complications. The ultrasound is to make sure she is as informed as possible.

Did I do it right?

I'm sorry, can you answer the question? You do know that medical abortions are a pill pack you take home right?

[Machismo]

I'm sorry, can you answer the question? You do know that medical abortions are a pill pack you take home right?

You do know that things involve a risk, and those concerned citizens just want to make sure that those clinics are following the proper procedures, right?

[bladeXcrasher]

You do know that things involve a risk, and those concerned citizens just want to make sure that those clinics are following the proper procedures, right?

Again, how does a clinic being an ambulatory surgery center have anything to do with a pill you take home? Why can't you answer a simple question?

[Shadowferal]

Why do you want a medical clinic that cannot allow for stretchers to properly maneuver to a patient that may need one?

Why do you support Big business and political disinformation? Why do you believe vaccines cause autism?

[Ivanstone]

Nice to see Machismo is still shilling for his corporate masters at Diageo. Can't stop or the big guy won't be able to continue their market dominance.

[Mayhem]

I'm more than willing to talk a out the GMO thing, let's do it.

The dude who is saying it's just marketing saying I'm wrong doesn't make it so. A bunch of hypocritical progressives disagreeing with me doesn't make me wrong.

Do I need to remind you that you called this all marketing?

Oh, and abortion is a service,you really need to learn what words mean.

"let's do it"

proceeds with doing nothing but bitching about words he doesn't understand

Did you really type that post and thought "yeah, that'll do, I've shown him! HA!"?

Let us all see how you're again defending the larger corporations against the smaller ones while telling everyone you want to protect small corporations and are in favor of diversity.

Go on, that'll be fun.

[Shadowferal]

Nice to see Machismo is still shilling for his corporate masters at Diageo. Can't stop or the big guy won't be able to continue their market dominance.

He knows he can't convince anyone of his silly nonsense anymore, so he goes off in laughable tangents.

[bladeXcrasher]

He knows he can't convince anyone of his silly nonsense anymore, so he goes off in laughable tangents.

But what are his corporate overlords to do if they can't call there potatoe based spirits Tequila?

- - - Updated - - -

You do know that things involve a risk, and those concerned citizens just want to make sure that those clinics are following the proper procedures, right?

Only thing I know is you refuse to answer the question. I wonder why?

[Muzjhath]

So, getting rid of that single regulation will lead to a world dominated by the mega wealthy? That regulation was pushed by a multi-billion-dollar corporation.

So, because of things like that, you won't have my sympathy when the GOP-controlled SCOTUS shreds abortion rights. Now, as much as I detest the attacks on liberty, I'm used to them by now. So, I'll at least be able to enjoy the misery of hypocrites.

Except you're against so many regulations that would. And favour situations where the effect would be what I described. Less government = people with more resources get more personal power. The fact that you seem blind too it (Or think it's their right) is neither here nor there. You keep being blind to the fact that the people who owned the private roads would abuse that fact and cause harm. As a common example. A reason for why broadband ought to be a public utility. Just put down all the cable on the public dole and then let the ISPs supply the end connecting service and network management outside of the house.

You picked a regulation that you thought no one would object to its removal because on one side was a known brand that is a subsidary of Brown-Forman. Clearly aiming for a "look at this regulation that was clearly pushed with an agenda!" Thinking it'd be an easy sell. Missing what the regulation was doing. It was giving status to the sub-header of "Tennesee whisky" to put it on the same sort of level as Champagne or Parmigiano-Reggiano.
A thing that generally helps consumers as they'll better know what they buy. Same as I know what general character of whisky I get if I get an Islay. A fact that you keep missing in all your circles around this. And with the GMO stamp. The consumer having more information on the label is good for everyone but a very few people.
Then some people did use some hyperbolic arguments, but without this kind of protection they aren't far off. Without consumer protecting regulations someone could make vodka, colour it reddish-brown, and sell it as whisky for a premium.

I also brought up the removal of a regulation that corporations pushed for heavily. That then led to a huge recession. And you were silent.

[Ivanstone]

You picked a regulation that you thought no one would object to its removal because on one side was a known brand that is a subsidary of Brown-Forman. Clearly aiming for a "look at this regulation that was clearly pushed with an agenda!" Thinking it'd be an easy sell. Missing what the regulation was doing. It was giving status to the sub-header of "Tennesee whisky" to put it on the same sort of level as Champagne or Parmigiano-Reggiano.

Another interesting element about this. DiageoMan raised a stink about new charred oak barrels. He claimed this requirement caused harm (without proof). Here's the kicker: This requirement is superseded by a 1964 US Congress law which requires that American Whiskey (ie Bourbon) be a 51% Corn Mash and be aged in..... new charred oak barrels. There's also a variety of additional regulations that surround this particular act of congress including NAFTA and others.

In the end, consumers just get a more accurate label.

[Machismo]

Why do you support Big business and political disinformation? Why do you believe vaccines cause autism?

Where did I say vaccines cause autism?

This is one of the consumer protections being pushed by conservatives in red states.

- - - Updated - - -

Already did. It’s industry standard to have such regulations defining the product and we know what was being done to devalue it. So, your evidence?

Great, then 5-foot-wide hallways, mandatory ultrasounds, and admitting privileges are going to be industry standards for abortions.

- - - Updated - - -

Except you're against so many regulations that would. And favour situations where the effect would be what I described. Less government = people with more resources get more personal power. The fact that you seem blind too it (Or think it's their right) is neither here nor there. You keep being blind to the fact that the people who owned the private roads would abuse that fact and cause harm. As a common example. A reason for why broadband ought to be a public utility. Just put down all the cable on the public dole and then let the ISPs supply the end connecting service and network management outside of the house.

You picked a regulation that you thought no one would object to its removal because on one side was a known brand that is a subsidary of Brown-Forman. Clearly aiming for a "look at this regulation that was clearly pushed with an agenda!" Thinking it'd be an easy sell. Missing what the regulation was doing. It was giving status to the sub-header of "Tennesee whisky" to put it on the same sort of level as Champagne or Parmigiano-Reggiano.
A thing that generally helps consumers as they'll better know what they buy. Same as I know what general character of whisky I get if I get an Islay. A fact that you keep missing in all your circles around this. And with the GMO stamp. The consumer having more information on the label is good for everyone but a very few people.
Then some people did use some hyperbolic arguments, but without this kind of protection they aren't far off. Without consumer protecting regulations someone could make vodka, colour it reddish-brown, and sell it as whisky for a premium.

I also brought up the removal of a regulation that corporations pushed for heavily. That then led to a huge recession. And you were silent.

I brought up regulation that would be easy to compromise on... but some people don't want to compromise. Just don't expect any compromise when conservatives start pushing more and more abortion regulations.

- - - Updated - - -

But what are his corporate overlords to do if they can't call there potatoe based spirits Tequila?

- - - Updated - - -



Only thing I know is you refuse to answer the question. I wonder why?

I know there's multiple ways to perform abortions, depending largely on the gestation.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, can you answer the question? You do know that medical abortions are a pill pack you take home right?

Not necessarily. You did know there's more than one type, right?

[Ivanstone]

I brought up regulation that would be easy to compromise on... but some people don't want to compromise.

You (or Diageo) chose poorly. Next time chose better. Everything else since then has been you doubling down on your initial error.

[Machismo]

"let's do it"

proceeds with doing nothing but bitching about words he doesn't understand

Did you really type that post and thought "yeah, that'll do, I've shown him! HA!"?

Let us all see how you're again defending the larger corporations against the smaller ones while telling everyone you want to protect small corporations and are in favor of diversity.

Go on, that'll be fun.

I'm defending liberty, try and keep up. And, you'll notice that I was siding with Benjamin Prichards, the smaller distillery.

- - - Updated - - -

He knows he can't convince anyone of his silly nonsense anymore, so he goes off in laughable tangents.

Why would I try and convince you?

- - - Updated - - -

You (or Diageo) chose poorly. Next time chose better. Everything else since then has been you doubling down on your initial error.

I sided with Benjamin Prichards, try and keep up. You brought up Diageo, not me.

Why are you siding with Planned Parenthood over people who just want consumer protections for women?

[Muzjhath]

I brought up regulation that would be easy to compromise on... but some people don't want to compromise. Just don't expect any compromise when conservatives start pushing more and more abortion regulations.

Except you didn't. You brought up a regulation that you felt looked harmless. And mostly it is. But it benefits consumers as much as producers. And is a very common type of law.
Your issue is that unless the regulation is maliciously put forth. Like your abortion regulations. Most regulations are either forced into being (see fire extingishers and exits). Or good for multiple sides of a situation. The Glass-Steagall Act was a regulation that was pushed in by force. And a regulation I'm sure you hated. Since it stopped the free market.

[Machismo]

Except you didn't. You brought up a regulation that you felt looked harmless. And mostly it is. But it benefits consumers as much as producers. And is a very common type of law.
Your issue is that unless the regulation is maliciously put forth. Like your abortion regulations. Most regulations are either forced into being (see fire extingishers and exits). Or good for multiple sides of a situation. The Glass-Steagall Act was a regulation that was pushed in by force. And a regulation I'm sure you hated. Since it stopped the free market.

Nope, that's you arguing for me. I pointed to it, because it is an easy one to compromise on, as I pointed out. This was pushed in... by a major corporation.

And that's the problem, people pushing abortion regulations will claim their motives are altruistic, and the courts may very well allow for those regulations to stick.