All I've heard from people who oppose bombing ISIS at all is criticism, and as my favorite quote goes...

I hear the same from politicians. Only criticism, and sometimes I hear "We need to build a coalition!" That's the most solution I hear from people who oppose US military action. Yet no action is being done. I'd honestly love to hear other solutions, but all I see is criticism, with no alternative solution that could work.

ISIS has attacked France, Belgium, and more. I realize no one wants innocents to die, but what happens when their next attack is as big as 9/11, and we have hundreds-thousands of innocents die on our own soil, or on our allies' soil? A solution needs to be made and put in place. If it came down to my family's lives, or another family's lives, I would pick my family. And sadly, because the politicians have let ISIS grow for so long, it's getting closer and closer to that decision that has to be made. They should have dealt with ISIS beforeit grew to be the problem it is today.

I didn't read it all because I will forget what I want to say, I'll go back and edit this as I read more, just so you know incase you see the post prematurely.

I'm not trying to undermine the issues of the female-male pay gap, but it also doesn't appear to be quite as substantial as the media portrays it to be. I'd also like to point out other factors such as asking for raises, setting work hours, getting more paid leave (if you have children or something) and many other factors that play into the salary of each individual employee. I understand that there definitely is a problem, and in some situations it's much bigger than others. Here's a good CNN article about the pay gap for men and women.


Well ****. I just typed a whole paragraph and my iPad froze on me, and removed everything I said. I'm sorry but I'm going to shorten it quite a bit then... I understand she's a woman and faces challenges that males don't. However, most people face their own special challenges, but it doesn't mean they should be treated differently because of it. She should focus on her overcoming them, rather than focusing on her facing them because she's a woman. It's fine to focus on the issue, but not when she uses that issue to try to get people to vote for her simply because there's a gender issue, and she's a woman. I'm short for my age, and I face different difficulties that tall people don't face, but I shouldn't be treated differently because of that. I respect how someone overcomes the challenges, but not the fact that they simply had them.

As for abortion, it's a big issue for me too. I believe, however, that abortion should be illegal unless the health of the mother is at risk, or if it was from rape or incest. The thing is, if a male and female choose to have sex, they know what could come out of that. All actions have consequences. Even if theh wear protection and something happens and the girl still has a baby, that was one of the known consequences of their actions. Even if you believe that the baby isn't alive until it's born (or whatever stage of pregnancy you believe), you can't deny that an abortion is murdering the potential of an innocent human being. Yes, the potential is still being murdered. That baby (or its potential) has no say in whether you end its life. People only find it OK because they don't see the human being actually formed and conscious of its surroundings yet. If you stab a pregnant woman, you will be charged with the murder of her baby, but apparently having an abortion isn't killing a baby? I don't believe a child should die because 2 people went through with sex, but disliked the consequence that came from it. I also seriously believe that while the female is the one who carries the baby, it's not just her child. The father has as much rights and responsibility to the child as the mother does. I don't view this topic through my religion, but I still can't understand why people are OK with murdering a child (or its potential) because they want to have sex, but don't want to deal with the consequence of their actions.

Just to emphasize, since now I have read all of your post, I believe the father is obligated to the child just as much as the mother, and laws should be passed to require that. Not just financially (unless the mother and father agree to that).

As for Obama and race relations. I won't get too involved with that, so I'll keep it fairly short. I think Obama has only hurt race relations because when there have been incidents when a white cop kills a black person, he comes right out immediately and condemns the cop, without knowing the entire situation. For example: Ferguson. I think someone with his power and presence should be more cautious before he ruins the life and image of a cop, and the entire police force. (I couldn't help myself from getting into it more... sorry) The police are in the wrong sometimes, but it's sad because some communities have "cried wolf" so many times in situations that race has nothing to do with, that they actually undermined themselves the racial issues we have in America today. It's hard to take anyone seriously now when every time it's a white cop and a black person, they call it racism. Hell, I've even see them call racism when a black cop shot a black guy. Who knows, it may very well be racism, even then, but they undermined the whole issue that we can't take it seriously anymore. It's really sad to be honest, because it's an issue that should be worked on to get it fixed.

As for politicians or people in general changing their stances... I'm going to tell you right now that my opinion has nothing to do with the video posted about Hillary Clintom allegedly lying, or Hillary Clinton in general. I haven't even seen the video posted on this thread. My opinion on changing stances is that I don't understamd why when someone changes their stance, everyone attacks them. I actually respect people listening to other sides and forming a different opinon from that. However, politcians often change their stance to simply side with the majority of the people. When they do it for that reason, that's when it becomes an issue. We elect them to represent us, so while I understand them changing to side with the majority of the people they represent, we also elect them for who they are individually. I would respect them if they changed their stance and said it was because the majority of the people agreed with that stance, and noted that their opinion may not have changed. But they seem to generally change their stance simply to side with the people to keep their votes and popularity, which creates problems.

I think I covered everything you said Plat That was a lot...