Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Maybe a reson to vote Dem.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
PCL_128 said:
I understand what you're saying, but unfortunately, politics is usually a "behind the scenes" business. Real business doesn't get conducted on the House and Senate floors. It gets conducted in back rooms and over drinks. It gets conducted in the Capital hallways and over the phone. It gets conducted in restaurants and in the homes of representatives.

That being said, it has little affect on us as pilots. The RLA is the law of the land for us as pilots, and Taft-Hartley, the NLRA, and many other labor laws generally don't apply to our operations.
Click to expand...

I'll concede that far too much business in D.C. goes on behind closed doors. Surely you'll concede that "secret agendas" and lack of transparency are not a good things for a union consisting of numerous pilot groups with conflicting interests.

No matter. If ALPA truly is a professional union composed of highly specialized, highly trained, difficult to replace labor that is in an extreme shortage worldwide, the RLA should be absolutely meaningless. "How?", you ask?

ALPA demands revocation of the RLA, then follows with a full page NYT add calling for a "STRIKE FOR A DAY".

Whoops. ALPA gets fined. Reply with "STRIKE FOR THREE DAYS"

Whoops. ALPA leaders thrown in jail. Reply with "STRIKE FOR A WEEK"

The country would literally grind to a halt.

While I'm loath to provide ALPA with this kind of power (historically very corrupting), it nevertheless would make it an actual union, instead of dues collecting racket. The fact that ALPA is unable to command this respect shows beyond a doubt that whatever else it is, it's not much of a union.

ALPA has taken the position for decades that it's job is to beg for favors from Congress. This is silly. It's job is to negotiate with strong-arm tactics with business, not kiss Congressmen's butts.

There is a reason union membership continues to drop .. . and that reason is that unions talk big, but provide little. When a labor group like pilots should have business and the country by the balls, they mostly just whine about how no one is giving them permission to do what they want.
 
Soverytired said:
I'll concede that far too much business in D.C. goes on behind closed doors. Surely you'll concede that "secret agendas" and lack of transparency are not a good things for a union consisting of numerous pilot groups with conflicting interests.

No matter. If ALPA truly is a professional union composed of highly specialized, highly trained, difficult to replace labor that is in an extreme shortage worldwide, the RLA should be absolutely meaningless. "How?", you ask?

ALPA demands revocation of the RLA, then follows with a full page NYT add calling for a "STRIKE FOR A DAY".

Whoops. ALPA gets fined. Reply with "STRIKE FOR THREE DAYS"

Whoops. ALPA leaders thrown in jail. Reply with "STRIKE FOR A WEEK"

The country would literally grind to a halt.

While I'm loath to provide ALPA with this kind of power (historically very corrupting), it nevertheless would make it an actual union, instead of dues collecting racket. The fact that ALPA is unable to command this respect shows beyond a doubt that whatever else it is, it's not much of a union.

ALPA has taken the position for decades that it's job is to beg for favors from Congress. This is silly. It's job is to negotiate with strong-arm tactics with business, not kiss Congressmen's butts.

There is a reason union membership continues to drop .. . and that reason is that unions talk big, but provide little. When a labor group like pilots should have business and the country by the balls, they mostly just whine about how no one is giving them permission to do what they want.
Click to expand...

Your idea has been tried before by a union called PATCO. Remember them? Didn't turn out so well. It wouldn't for us either.
 
Rez O. Lewshun said:
Whose morality? Yours? Mine? Thiers?

There is no room for morality in survival.
Click to expand...


First, if you have the stomach to face the truth, look at this link and tell me how it can be right for some and wrong for others. WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTOS of aborted babies. Don't cry to the moderator, you guys never complain about porn in here...

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.html

Second, don't tell me there is no room for morality in survival. Our very survival, our existence and our civility is based upon some form of morality. Whether you choose your basis of morality on God, the moon or whatever, it is an absolute must in any civilized society. So if we can make it OK to kill our own children, why do you think anyone would care if your family survives at all? We kill the most defenseless of all, the unborn, but then somehow expect fairness to anyone else?
 
Last edited:
acaTerry, in all fairness, I think it's only right for you to specifically warn people what they're about to see if they click on that link. I'm on your side on the abortion debate, but some people can't stomach that kind of stuff.
 
PCL_128 said:
acaTerry, in all fairness, I think it's only right for you to specifically warn people what they're about to see if they click on that link. I'm on your side on the abortion debate, but some people can't stomach that kind of stuff.
Click to expand...
I did. I even put WARNING in all caps
 
acaTerry said:
I did. I even put WARNING in all caps
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you just said "graphic." You didn't say "graphic pictures of aborted fetuses," or my preferred way of saying it, "graphic pictures of murdered babies."
 
FishandFly said:
Abortion doctor agreed to have a ladies abortion documented via ultrasound.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek&feature=related

It will take you 27 minutes to watch, but if you think aborting a "fetus" is acceptable, you need to take the time to consider the alternative.
Click to expand...

Well, I still think it's acceptable. 1st and 2nd Trimester.

Third trimester, you had enough time to decide.

Now go look up one of the several academic articles discussing the number of people who have been vindicated from death row after DNA evidence was introduced years later. Also, consider the number of innocent people who have been accidentally executed in the past with these flaws.

Then tell me if you think our capital punishment system is acceptable.
 
Last edited:
Abernathy said:
Well, I still think it's acceptable. 1st and 2nd Trimester.

Third trimester, you had enough time to decide.

Now go look up one of the several academic articles discussing the number of people who have been vindicated from death row after DNA evidence was introduced years later. Also, consider the number of innocent people who have been accidentally executed in the past with these flaws.

Then tell me if you think our capital punishment system is acceptable.
Click to expand...
You are a heartless person. And I think you may find it interesting that most prolifers prefer life prison sentences to the death penalty, if life was fully served.
 
Abernathy,
You posted minutes after me, so you did not even watch the video.

Please explain why it is not acceptable in the third trimester?
 
Abernathy said:
Well, I still think it's acceptable. 1st and 2nd Trimester.
Click to expand...

Then I question your humanity.

Now go look up one of the several academic articles discussing the number of people who have been vindicated from death row after DNA evidence was introduced years later. Also, consider the number of innocent people who have been accidentally executed in the past with these flaws.

Then tell me if you think our capital punishment system is acceptable.
Click to expand...

Separate issues. Obvious red herring. You don't want to face the realities of what you see in the video, so you try to deflect to another issue.
 
FishandFly said:
Abortion doctor agreed to have a ladies abortion documented via ultrasound.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek&feature=related

It will take you 27 minutes to watch, but if you think aborting a "fetus" is acceptable, you need to take the time to consider the alternative.
Click to expand...

This video should be required viewing for all high school students as part of any "sex ed" curriculum. That's the video that changed my mind about abortion. A horribly violent and despicable procedure.
 
FishandFly said:
Abernathy,
You posted minutes after me, so you did not even watch the video.

Please explain why it is not acceptable in the third trimester?
Click to expand...

I said I don't think it's acceptable. I never said it should be outlawed.

I don't think an embryo is a person. And if you think a fertilized egg is a person, you need a reality check.

A fetuses brain, CNS, and control centers in the brain are not fully developed in the first trimester. Even after birth, connections are still being made in brain. Though no one knows exactly what it's like to be a 2nd trimester baby, I'm convinced that they're not conscious of the environment around them. A third trimester baby is pretty close to the viable stage. I know, because I know someone who was born 2 months premature and is 100% fine.

I think it's unacceptable because by the third trimester, you should be able to know whether or not you want the baby. By the third trimester, you should know whether or not the fetus is the product of a rape, incest, mistake, etc. And by around that time, the fetus is a viable baby.

There's my reason.
 
Incredible that the abortion doctor refused to ever perform another abortion (after 10,000) and yet people are able to watch the same thing and blow it off as insignificant.

This mentality must be very similar to the acceptance jihadists have taken of cutting off a person's head. You must have to numb the mind and heart a great deal to reach that point.
 
FishandFly said:
Incredible that the abortion doctor refused to ever perform another abortion (after 10,000) and yet people are able to watch the same thing and blow it off as insignificant.

This mentality must be very similar to the acceptance jihadists have taken of cutting off a person's head. You must have to numb the mind and heart a great deal to reach that point.
Click to expand...

Yes anyone who agrees with abortion (a significant plurality of the population) thinks like a jihadist.

Again, leave the emotions at home.

It could be worse. I could have said I agree with "partial birth" abortion, or whatever they call it now. But I don't. I think it's pretty horrific.

Either way, that was a video of a partial birth abortion. I should have been more clear in my initial post. I meant I find abortion acceptable as in 1st and 2nd trimester.
 
Last edited:
acaTerry said:
That's a decision that should be made before conception.
Click to expand...

Ever been raped? Ever broke a condom? Mistakes happen.

This is a mistake that can easily be taken care of EARLY. Wait 7 months and you've had your chance.

I'm against partial birth abortion, and it didn't sting for me when Bush signed that legislation into law.
 
Abernathy said:
Yes anyone who agrees with abortion (a significant plurality of the population) thinks like a jihadist.

Again, leave the emotions at home.

It could be worse. I could have said I agree with "partial birth" abortion, or whatever they call it now. But I don't. I think it's pretty horrific.

Either way, that was a video of a partial birth abortion. I should have clarified. I meant I find abortion acceptable as in 1st and 2nd trimester.
Click to expand...


Hell abernathy. You haven't even seen the video. It is an abortion at 12 weeks, not partial birth.
 
FishandFly said:
Hell abernathy. You haven't even seen the video. It is an abortion at 12 weeks, not partial birth.
Click to expand...

Should have paid closer attention. I thought it was partial birth. I've never been good with ultrasounds.

I did watch the video. I just happened to have seen it a lot longer ago.
 
Abernathy said:
Either way, that was a video of a partial birth abortion.
Click to expand...

Actually, NO, it wasn't. Partial birth abortion is an even more brutal and despicable procedure that involved partially birthing the child and inserting scissors in its skull to the kill the baby before it's head has cleared the birth canal. What you saw was a regular old, run of the mill abortion. It was conducted just 11 weeks after conception.
 
Abernathy,
After about 10 minutes, please respond back to the following:

1. How is it that the abortion doctor refused to every perform an abortion again after watching this, but you and many others are unaffected?

2. Considering your concept of it being acceptable at this stage (12 weeks) what discernible point is reached in the third trimester which you suddenly consider this unacceptable?
 
FishandFly said:
Abernathy, since it's not worth 27 minutes of your life to see this, TAKE 10 minutes

Here is the portion of the video showing the procedure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJzSiAPXTiQ&feature=related
Click to expand...

For the umpteenth time, I've seen the video. I just saw before you posted it.

And PCL_128, I know now it was 12 months. I thought this thread was about partial birth abortion, another video I've seen. Like I said, I've seen this video just a long time ago. I've seen a lot of stuff on abortion, videos, read the literature, covered it in classes, etc.

I should have watched it again when I saw this thread so I knew exactly what this one was about. My mistake.

Carry on.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom