ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[SomeGuy]

Quote:Well, my perspective can easily be disproven.  All you have to do is generate an agreement on the facts with respect to several issues like gun policy, climate change and borrow and spend trickle down economics.  Lotsa luck.  Seriously.  Go for it.

I accept!  So, facts, facts, facts...

Guns

The text of the Second Amendment is "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Rifling refers to the practice of manufacturing a helical spiral into the barrel in order to generate spin (and thus gyroscopic stability) in the projectile when the device is fired. 

In Port Arthur, AU in April of 1996, 35 people were killed and another 23 people were wounded in a mass shooting.  Martin Bryant was found to be guilty of this act, and sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole.  John Howard was Prime Minister of Australia during this period, and the National Firearms Agreement was passed 12 days later.

Climate Change

CO2 is a compound composed of one carbon atom and 2 oxygen atoms.  It is gaseous at room temperature.

The Earth's atmosphere contains CO2.

CO2 is one of the products of the combustion of hydrocarbons.  It is also a product of respiration.

Economics

The US Dollar is the official currency of the United States.

The US Government accepts US Dollars as payment for taxes assessed by the same.

The present value of the US Dollar is not fixed to a particular mass of gold, silver, or both, but it has been in the past (not continuously, and not at a fixed rate for all of its history).


Does anyone disagree with these?  Would anyone like to argue that the Port Arthur shooting occurred in October, that the Peso is the official currency of the United States, that the atmosphere does NOT contain CO2?  

These things are facts, what you are quibbling about are interpretations and conclusions that you feel should be drawn from the same.

Quote:I'd say most people here are advocating for their own world view and values.  If  you can't distinguish between promoting one's values and bludgeoning and needling people, I quite understand.  The two are rather hard to differentiate.  

Given the amount of posturing, social signaling, and general what-have you involved, I'd say that most of the time on this board they amount to the same thing.