JCauto

No. We're already there. IVF has just been ruled to be exactly that in Alabama I think? I expect human cloning to already have occurred somewhere. There's a need to draw a reasonable line and then leave it exclusively between the woman and her physician. The government should have no interest in the matter and no access to any of the information unless there is a criminal investigation. Doctors are trained and licensed and can handle the matter as well as recognize when something is not right and report it to the authorities if necessary. The vitriol is because this debate isn't and never was about reasonable abortion laws. Let's not pretend if we're being all clear and honest here. Not saying this about you particularly, saying this about the reason this has become such an important topic in the USA.

Viability. Which apparently is 24 weeks. If it's past 24 weeks and threatens the mother's life and she and her physician agree that the abortion is necessary, then allowed. If it is before 24 weeks, then no restrictions, completely up to the mother. Clear?

And once again, as usual, you'd be completely wrong. https://www.cfr.org/article/abortion-law-global-comparisons "The past fifty years have been characterized by an unmistakable trend toward the liberalization of abortion laws, particularly in the industrialized world. Each year, around seventy-three million abortions take place worldwide, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This translates to about thirty-nine abortions per one thousand women globally, a rate that has stayed roughly the same since 1990. Notably, rates have diverged between countries with fewer restrictions and those with more: Between 1990–94 and 2015–19, the average abortion rate in countries with generally legal abortion (excluding China and India) declined by 43 percent. By contrast, in countries with severe restrictions on abortion, the average abortion rate increased by around 12 percent." So if you are actually interested in reducing the rates of abortion, the answer is clear and always has been - provide open access because by having choice and easy access to birth control and reproductive health services, the number of abortions goes DOWN! But you don't actually care about that anyway, so moot point, right? "As nations around the globe have expanded the grounds on which people can access reproductive health services, the quality and safety of abortion care has improved, as has maternal survival. However, the safety of abortion procedures diverges widely between countries where abortion is generally legal and countries with high restrictions on abortion. Almost 90 percent of abortions in countries with liberal abortion laws are considered safe, compared with just 25 percent of abortions [PDF] in countries where abortion is banned. According to the WHO, approximately 5–13 percent of maternal deaths worldwide are due to complications from unsafe abortions, the vast majority of which occur in developing countries." And of course you're cool with 5-13% of maternal deaths being because of unsafe abortions, right? Sanctity of life blah blah blah. I do hope you're going full nutter on us and value the life of the unborn more than the mother, after all, why value what already exists more than an abstract possibility for which you need not provide any support or tax dollars to? At least until it's born, at which point "not my problem", amirite?

Oh, I've been listening. And to pretend that this is about when life begins and when life deserves protection is just disingenuous. Almost as disingenuous as pretending that you think this is a "State's rights" issue, similar to the pretend way the Right likes to push any issue they don't like as being somehow having to be decided at lower levels due to "the Constitution". Of course, once they stack the courts and succeed in getting their way with "State's Rights" arguments, it's immediately onto the ultimate objective, federal statutes that enshrine it as the law throughout the USA. At that point, you won't hear a peep about "State's Rights". So you'd be totally cool with the male in the relationship having to support their partner from the moment of conception? And if they engage in domestic assault, that puts the life of the foetus in danger, so that's attempted murder, correct? And they have to support that baby once born throughout their childhood, no? Of course, that means supporting the mother too if she doesn't have sufficient income, so you're down with that, right? And if they don't, then because they've already demonstrated that they won't take responsibility for what's theirs, then you're cool with State-sponsored mandatory vasectomies or SSRIs to suppress the man's uncontrollable desires? I don't know why I bother, it's obvious to me that none of our Far Right interlocutors have any religious conviction or moral ground for their arguments, they simply enjoy trolling and want to get their people in power so they can enjoy the cruelty they inflict on women and minorities.

So you think that state-level, county-level and city-level decisions about abortion are not political? How did they end up getting elected and making profoundly important decisions about other people's bodily autonomy? I take it you're male, since it clearly annoys you so much that you must consider it to be something that's got nothing to do with you so why do you keep hearing about it all the time? And you know what? You're right! It is something that absolutely should NOT be anything to do with politics, just like nobody should be telling me I can't take viagra or have a vasectomy. Leave individual people alone to make their own decisions with their own bodies. Pretty simple. Yet the party that supposedly advocates for "freedom" continuously tries to subjugate women to their own personal beliefs and whims. The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.

Seems everyone missed the interesting part - what's all this about plus-sized women sex parties? Quite a throw-in there at the end. Perhaps like this story, the writer was just chewing the fat.

You mean the residents? The ones who were here LOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG before Chiang Mai had even seen the first longnose? The ones whose land it is? The ones who rely on their traditional agriculture as they have for centuries and for which there is no viable alternative? Or perhaps you mean the CP Group and other large local agro-business concerns who are actually funding the production of cash crops such as corn and cassava? These are the reason why you now have such problems with air quality, as this wasn't an issue until people went from subsistence agriculture to the market, something heavily promoted by the governor, the ministries, the Prime Minister, the village headman, in fact by everyone as the best way forward for the economy and people. So what's your proposed solution? It seems "locals fulfill market needs then go to jail" is the one you're advocating for. I'd say the ones who ought to be at the forefront of this discussion are those from whom we've heard precisely nothing, nada, zip, zilch, silence. That would be the large local agro-industry who are funding this burning and benefiting directly from it. Why don't they say anything? Probably because they don't have to, they've got the lazy foreign retirees whining about their poor air quality and denigrating the villagers without identifying the real problem so they're best to keep mum.

So where in the article was it mentioned that this guy had been smoking cannabis? Nowhere to be precise, entirely made up from your own keyboard and bias. Then you for some reason believe that people attracted by cannabis are junkies? Weird, junkies refer to heroin addicts, they're not pot smokers. As you're aware, Thailand was the land of the well-behaved Westerner prior to the legalization of cannabis and opening of the shops. At least in your mind it seems. Those of us who are in the real world however recall things differently.

Yeah, because everyone after all these years still picks on Lefties. Despite the education and advancement of human knowledge, Lefties are stigmatized, beaten up in the bathrooms, banned from expressing their preferences, have legislation written specifically against them... It's pretty sad that this passes for rhetoric on the Right. The sorts of arguments I thought had been left behind once we reached Junior High School seem to still have persuasive value to some.

Holy crap - they know the air pollution levels in two days time! Quick, give us the lottery numbers!

So Jonny, care to enlighten us about how he set all this up in 2009 just so he could desecrate your holy day? Keep thinking about it, perhaps one day you'll understand.

So he went back in time to 2009 to declare the International Transgender Day of Visibility as 31 March every year? How did he do that when he wasn't the President? Is he actually a Trans woman named Rachel Crandall Crocker from Michigan? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Transgender_Day_of_Visibility The Stoopid from the Right just finds a new level with every manufactured outrage...why wasn't this an issue last year (HINT: Easter Sunday changes from year to year, don't believe me just go look at a calendar, maybe take a day off from work so you can contemplate how EASTER SUNDAY is NOT THE SAME DAY EVERY YEAR)?

Right, so before cannabis was legalized here, what you described simply didn't occur? Or since legalization, things have gone on a downhill slide? Or the only major real change was that they made sure for the nth consecutive election that those receiving the most votes and clear mandate from the population were disqualified on spurious reasons? Would that be a bigger impact that legalization of a plant?

Joe Bloggs is a multi-millionaire now? Inflation really is getting out of control.

Just a reminder...ACAB! In case there were any doubt.

Sorry, didn't catch that was the Government's idea. It doesn't have any easy solutions, since the conglomerates are responding to the market by producing a lot of cattle and commodities to feed them and other cash crops. They don't have to deal with the issues caused by the burning because they're one step or more removed and the government won't hold them accountable in Thailand while the government doesn't have much control over what happens in the rural areas in Laos. Not that there's a huge amount they can do about it if they require those commodities to serve their large markets which are mostly in Thailand. The EU and other developed countries are implementing new rules that govern the origin of the major commodity crops that are imported into EU countries. These are aimed at preventing conversion of forests to cash cropping or plantations. However, the vast majority of these areas that are currently burning aren't good quality forest, they're swidden agriculture fields that are in various stages of fallow, so that regulation won't apply. Eventually one would expect that with the large number of sensors that are available and AI to handle a lot of the analysis load they're going to eventually drill down to source on everything and assign carbon and biodiversity costs to it all. But that's going to take quite some time. I don't see how you can get widespread permaculture in the sloped lands unless they're just really crowded and everyone is only into farming. But that's not really the issue in Thailand, there's lots of migration for employment in the cities and other economic alternatives. As to the "mushrooms" and swidden agriculture, that has been going on for hundreds of years including the entire time when things were tolerable in the dry season. The rate of swidden hasn't really increased significantly since it's subsistence agriculture and there's low population growth in the poor rural areas and there's a lot of out-migration and availability of food from elsewhere. This is just business.

You think the current jets don't have GPS? Wow. And you think that the number of land owners is so small you could chase after them with choppers and coppers and haul them all off to the land office? LOL. And what's the plan once you "make contact with neighboring countries"? Hold onto the phone while they try to stop laughing and answer your ridiculous questions? Here's a hint about why this ain't changing. Those people you wish to conduct air raids upon and throw into jail are also known as the majority of the voting population in the North of Thailand. Capisce?

You're normally a sensible poster so it's disconcerting to observe you carrying water for the CP group while simultaneously casting all the blame upon the poor villagers who are simply trying to make a living. To suggest it's mushroom picking that is causing the fires to this extent is absurd. You want to change the climate via rain-seeding airplanes? Might as well invest in Aboriginal raindancers to come and have a jump about for all the good that will do. Drones, police and rangers to observe the fires that any idiot could simply go to a website showing the latest satellite imagery to observe? Why? What's the point? They know where they are, I could list the ones for yesterday if you like. There is only one reason for such large-scale burning and that is cropping for commodities including corn, cassava, sugar cane, watermelon and other crops for the agro-industries in Thailand, China and Vietnam. These commodities are mostly grown via contract farming with small-scale middlemen who contract farmers to clear and plant the land then buy the crop. The crop is eventually sold to larger agro-industrial conglomerates such as the CP Group. CP Group doesn't contract farmers directly, since they're too huge, and it provides them with a degree of separation. Chinese industry and agriculture companies are not easily identified, controlled and boycotted. Everyone along this chain is making money including the authorities from village and district level upwards. So you tell me how you're going to stop that. Except put away the fantasy solutions that haven't the slightest chance of occurring or doing anything about the actual problem. And stop blaming the villagers. You should understand by now who has the power and who makes the real money from this, and it ain't them.

Ah yes, the Right Wing solution to most everything, get the cops to start busting heads! What could go wrong?

Oh sure, blame the poor boy. That horse was asking for it! He was nuzzling him provocatively first. And the boy gave him a carrot, nothing wrong with something consensual between two fully mature adults. Or maybe he was a veterinarian-in-training and wanted to see how the pregnancy was going?

Are there really that many travelers like this? Would they really choose their airports based on whether they're likely to be able to toss down a quick guzzle of Dom Perignon on their way to the gate? Classic Thai response to the unpleasant truth, let's put some lipstick on it and tell 'em it's a beauty queen!

Sure, take away the agency responsible for security at airports and that will fix everything! The Guv'ment shouldn't be involved at all! They shouldn't build the airports, hire and regulate the Air Traffic Controllers, set safety standards for airplanes and airplane components, make sure the pilots are well-trained and up on their certifications, enable the international transfer of passengers and luggage, undertake immigration and customs duties... Because it's the marvelous private sector that can do all these things much more effectively and efficiently, amirite? Such as has been done successfully numerous times, including in....oh, problem. It's never been done successfully. But we can point to some things where for example we can compare the Public Sector approach to the Private, such as Health Care. There's one country that seems fixated on private sector health care, that is the USA. As it is also the world's main proponent of a capitalism-beats-all approach, then they would surely be able to show the rest of the "commie" world how good ol' fashioned American know-how and get-it-doneness can overcome the sluggish creep of socialism. And the results prove it conclusively! The costs for health care per capita are ranked: https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm Guess who's number one? But of course, you'll point out, this is because they get the best health outcomes with their far more high-tech and efficient approach: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/05/us-healthcare-system-ranks-last-11-wealthiest-countries Hmmmmm. So the private sector approach is the MOST expensive of the different ones taken by the most developed countries in the world and also doesn't even appear within the lists of the best health outcome countries in the world. In my opinion, the private sector approach works well for much of the economy but absolutely and utterly fails when it comes to provision of necessary services. These include health care, environmental and safety regulation, law enforcement, education and the military. Those are clearly best left to government to manage as demonstrated by numerous studies and the US' valiant efforts to prove the social democracies pre-eminence in the modern age.

Oh you think that's being subtle, do you? You'll need to get a bit more vague to get to the point of it being a dog whistle which appears to be your objective. A noble one to be sure.

Or could it be you're a pontificating anti-semitic liar like Ozimoron? You're the one who asserted that you're the noble fighter against injustice (except against the Jews obviously) who never shirks a battle. So I went to observe you jousting with your enemies but found you not even on the battlefield. Unless of course it had to do with Israel, there's always an exception to every rule. And that exception, remarkably, always seems to be Israel for some folks. I don't think you're likely to be a pleasant person in real life, it's why I'm quite Left Wing but don't hang out much with those people. Wet, boring and generally unhygienic in my experience.

Well, I see you've taken the time since this thread started to gain a PhD in Political Science. With wisdom like that, what's the point of debate? The Jewish Communists who founded the "Labor Zionism" or "Social Zionism" movement sure would have been surprised to discover they're Far Right...