All Activity

Read the thread before you make assertions on what someone has or has not gone through. Be better.

No, no string...but a big huge hope.

low on artillery? this is just 1 of our plants

Farrell still writing and hosting radio shows? I always kind of liked him.

Completely misses the factor in play in which Biden continues to supply Israel with tons of military/killing resources with absolutely zero strings or expectations attached.

Here's the thing. Neither one of us ever want abortions to happen minutes before birth or post birth. (one of us recognizes they actually don't ever happen). But, if we don't ever want them to happen, the answer is not in legislation, but in improving sex education, contraception availability, healthcare, social services for single mothers, increasing responsibility of baby daddies, improving support for kids in low income households. But, your party is against all of that because of....OMG....socialism. None of those things are going to totally take away the need for abortions. But, like what we have seen since the 70s, it will continue to reduce the need for them. My hope is that we could reduce them all the way to the ones who NEED them for health reasons. And, all the statistics point towards the fact we have been moving to that. But, reducing the NEED includes things other than...oh crap, I'm pregnant, I"m going to go get an abortion. There are truly serious situations where these procedures are needed and politics should stay out of those instances. The thing is, your party is using all of this to build more support against all of those other issues. We need to get off this idiotic discussion about things that never happen and move on to more important issues.

See this is where I was headed with it...do these super dorky pro-hammers end up not voting for joe?

I meant elective abortion, not rape. I guess elective rape would be… ok I’m not going to post that.

That's true, functionally it works the same. But, ultimately, athletes are going to negotiate CBAs which will allow their share of the revenue to go from $15-$20 million to $60-70 million. I understand that schools want to hold into as much money as possible, but that's where all this is heading anyway. I think I just want the endgame to arrive so college football can stabilize. Instead we're going to wait until the 2030s for everything to play out.

Here is the Cliff's Notes from the OCR There is a component that says men's and women's coaches have to "receive equivalent compensation". But you can have extenuating circumstances like number of athletes. So maybe they can get away with huge salaries for football coaches under the auspice of "they have a lot more athletes to supervise". But they are definitely employees and it says they have to be paid similarly unless it can be justified. I don't know why having athletes as employees would be any different. Right now, it only says that "scholarships and financial assistance" has to be commensurate with total population. I don't think this would probably be strictly "financial assistance" but it seems very likely that paying athletes would get lumped into the same bucket.

I’ll try to explain this simply. Those people you are so sure are sick are choosing between 2 scenarios. 1- where the woman’s and doctors options are severely limited by draconian laws outlawing abortions in almost all situations. The same laws that are giving us story after horror story of how women are being denied proper healthcare for pregnancies gone wrong. And 2- the opposite of that, which leaves any and all healthcare decisions to the woman and their providers. As much as you want to make it about elective abortions being allowed up to the very end, it just isn’t. Those people are answering “in all cases” to remove the government and inflexible laws from the equation to prevent Betty Lou, who desperately needs (not willy nilly wants) an abortion for health and safety reasons. These fictitious late third trimester abortions of your conjuring really aren’t and won’t ever be a problem. For sure not a big enough problem that the alternative of not being able to get one when it’s really really needed is worth sacrificing.

I agree! And would also encourage....eh, nevermind. No minds will be changed and your banal and useless contributions are entertaining enough.

You should take your own advice.

Well it’s obvious someone hasn’t read this thread. Good Lord. Sometimes it’s ok not to type the words you are thinking

Deion is a snake oil salesman, and I think people are starting to see that about him. He's all about himself and his family. He brought a lot of attention (and revenue) to CU, a program that was really struggling. I thought all along that he'd only last 2, maybe 3, seasons, and I think he bolts after this year. I could absolutely see Jerry Jones bringing him in, because they'd be a match in ego maniac history. CU is going to be left with a mess of a program; will he leave it better than it was when he started? Remains to be seen.

You are the only one here who is using a strawman when you incorporate “eager to abort babies”. It ain’t me my dude. Probably almost all of them would not personally choose that option, and as you well know by reading the thread, INt point is that 29% believe that it should be shoukd be an option for anyone. THAT IS WHAT THERE VOTE IN THE SURVEY OK’s. That’s what I have a problem with.

If they are truly employees, companies aren’t required to have the same number of women vs men employees….or spend the same on them as a whole. Where it might come into play is discrimination if you’re paying a men’s basketball player more than a women’s. That not title 9 though.

29% of Americans to be exact. According to the survey

Yes, full stop. It’s my view that people are sick when they believe abortion should be legal in all cases. I believe there has to be some line in the sand. You can bring in Trump, sheep, the tooth fairy, Santa, Ms. Strawman all you want as it means nothing to me.

I would think Title IX would still apply to employees because I think you are supposed to (more or less) spend the same amount. So if you're spending more on men's employees, I would think you still have to spend that amount on women. But as I say that, the salaries of coaches are significantly different right now. So I'm not sure how that all plays out.

I suggest you check back to page 57. And, if you could, please point out where I said 93% of elective rapes (what the hell even is that) in reference to anything.

Your logic hurts a lot more people than it protects. Congrats to you on being worse than the actual problem.

Or, if they are all considered employees....do the title 9 issues go away? It's going to be a travesty if this allows all the revenue from revenue generating sports (with employees) to stay with the men.....which would drastically cut funding for women's sports. Or, if we can declare our volleyball players employees and pay them, but the vast majority of other programs can't, so they die off....along with the sport.

This is my biggest question on this. If they do it as "revenue sharing" can they get away with directing most of the payments to the revenue-generating sports? If not there are going to be a whole lot of happy golfers and tennis players and a bunch of pissed-off football players.