开云体育

If someone says that it's a fact that a fetus in the womb has no rights, that'd be their opinion, not a fact. The same can be said for the rest of the opinions you say are facts. They're opinions, not facts.

But facts are facts.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@...>
To: ibmpensionissues <ibmpensionissues@...>
Sent: Sat, Jul 27, 2013 4:21 pm
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From Obamacare






Well Sue then help us all since it seems the entire country cannot agree on a fact and neither can the law of the land.

Many people seem to say it is a fact the thing in the womb after conception is a fetus with no rights. Others say the child in the womb after conception is a human with all the rights of any human.

Fortunately for the country neither side claiming the facts has won total control of the argument.

I am sure we can all list other "facts" that are facts for only a single group of people and supported vehemently by selective association of information.

You cannot even define a color factually unless you get very strict in the definition, or ensure everyone associated with the definition has the same visual capabilities.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

No, Kevin, facts are facts. No one owns "facts". They're available for everyone.

And while someone's feelings might be hurt when another exposes their dishonesty, it's not an insult to call a liar a liar when the discussion revolves around whether or not that person is being honest.. That's not what an insult is.

Opinions are related to a personal belief set. Facts are not.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@>
To: ibmpensionissues <ibmpensionissues@...>
Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 8:25 am
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From Obamacare






Untruths can be refuted without denigration and insult. Facts can be presented without being insulting. As many of the posts have shown, facts don't equate to truth. What is fact for you because it suits your personal belief set, living situation, context may not apply to someone else in different situation.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Rick b Cool" <rickb_cool@> wrote:

Really, Spreading lies and distoertions is OK, but revealing sinmple facts is denigrating.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Kevin W" <nowwicked@> wrote:

Rick I have to agree with zimowski you b definitely not cool. Your typical mode of operation here is to denigrate or insult those who don't agree with your point of view.
I've watched you call people ignorant, uneducated, biased, prejudice all because they believe something different than you.
If I was a practicing conservative I'd call it "typical liberal methodology" where they all believe they are superior to everyone else and have "THE" right answer. If you don't believe me, simply ask one, they will tell you.
As far as the ACA, it is a good idea but a bad piece of legislation. It was not thought out and the consequences ignored.
For the past several years companies have been accelerating the removal of full time job positions and replacing them with part time, under 29-32 hours to avoid the medical mandate. Go to any retail establishment, since you seem to favor all things NY, drop by Macy's, talk to any sales person over the age of 40 who has a history long enough to know what is going on. Their hours are cut, not due to economy but due to planning for benefits cuts and avoidance of the ACA.
Our current administration does nothing but blame the previous one for its woes, no responsibility just finger pointing, but try to play that game with the prior one for the one before it and you get screams of foul play. Obviously what is good for the goose isn't good for the gander.
If congress and the administration wanted the people to follow them,they would have ensured they took up such coverage as their only means of medical care before imposing it on the people. Using the excuse that it has always been done, doesn't hold water. Wasn't this administration supposed to be different? Supposed to work "for the people". Yeah, I know, those damned evil republicans in congress won't let our poor president and the democrats get anything done. Again nothing more than lack of taking responsibility. Like the outcome or not, at least the prior president took responsibility.


--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Rick b Cool" <rickb_cool@> wrote:

An interesting conclusion. Solely based on complete circular reasoning, obviously starting with the conclusion.

Hint: most legislation is complex. Mostly because of industry input to create confusion and loopholes and give big corporations competitive advantages and exclusions from regulations.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

"The real issue on this forum is getting back on topic." Really? Unlike the ibmpension group, the moderators of this group do not censor participant appends. It seems that your style for participation is to criticize others that you don't agree with politically and then to suggest that anybody who responds to one of your inflammatory appends is off topic.

Regardless of one's political persuasion, I think it's now becoming quite clear that ACA is complicated, poorly understood, difficult to implement, and that it will be more expensive for most Americans, providing affordable care only to those who could not previously obtain/afford health care coverage on their own. Everyone else will pay for it out of pocket while receiving lower quality services due to the added stain that will be placed on the entire health care system.

Well, it a fact that until the fetus leaves the womb, it's a fetus.

But that isn't what you wrote. See, I can read, and I do it well, and you didn't simply say that it's a fetus until it leaves the womb before.

And that IS a fact. An indisputable fact. It's not an opinion that it's a fetus until it leaves the womb, it's a fact.

Whether or not it has rights is an opinion. Whether or not it's a human life that can force a woman to be an unwilling incubator while it's not viable outside the womb is an opinion.

But it's a fact that it's a fetus while in the womb.

See, I'm not, and never have been, confused about what's a fact and what's an opinion. Apparently you are, as you describe below both facts and opinions as facts.

I have NOT described opinions as facts in this ongoing discussion. Others have, it's true, but I haven't.



-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@...>
To: ibmpensionissues <ibmpensionissues@...>
Sent: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 8:47 am
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From Obamacare




Wow, interesting and you see I'd agree with you for the most part. However the entire "womans right to her own body above everything else crowd" has stated it is a medical fact that the thing in the womb is a fetus, not a child, not a human and it has no rights. Of course the other camp states it as a fact that the child in the womb is an innocent human and as the most defenseless among us has the right equal or greater protections than the mother.
Both state fact, you will never get them to move from their stand.

This is but one simple example of "facts" which are not facts. Most everything in this string that started the whole discussion is opinion based upon an individuals particular preference and the selective facts they choose to use to form that stand.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

If someone says that it's a fact that a fetus in the womb has no rights, that'd be their opinion, not a fact. The same can be said for the rest of the opinions you say are facts. They're opinions, not facts.

But facts are facts.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@>
To: ibmpensionissues <ibmpensionissues@...>
Sent: Sat, Jul 27, 2013 4:21 pm
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From Obamacare






Well Sue then help us all since it seems the entire country cannot agree on a fact and neither can the law of the land.

Many people seem to say it is a fact the thing in the womb after conception is a fetus with no rights. Others say the child in the womb after conception is a human with all the rights of any human.

Fortunately for the country neither side claiming the facts has won total control of the argument.

I am sure we can all list other "facts" that are facts for only a single group of people and supported vehemently by selective association of information.

You cannot even define a color factually unless you get very strict in the definition, or ensure everyone associated with the definition has the same visual capabilities.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

No, Kevin, facts are facts. No one owns "facts". They're available for everyone.

And while someone's feelings might be hurt when another exposes their dishonesty, it's not an insult to call a liar a liar when the discussion revolves around whether or not that person is being honest.. That's not what an insult is.

Opinions are related to a personal belief set. Facts are not.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@>
To: ibmpensionissues <ibmpensionissues@...>
Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 8:25 am
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From Obamacare






Untruths can be refuted without denigration and insult. Facts can be presented without being insulting. As many of the posts have shown, facts don't equate to truth. What is fact for you because it suits your personal belief set, living situation, context may not apply to someone else in different situation.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Rick b Cool" <rickb_cool@> wrote:

Really, Spreading lies and distoertions is OK, but revealing sinmple facts is denigrating.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Kevin W" <nowwicked@> wrote:

Rick I have to agree with zimowski you b definitely not cool. Your typical mode of operation here is to denigrate or insult those who don't agree with your point of view.
I've watched you call people ignorant, uneducated, biased, prejudice all because they believe something different than you.
If I was a practicing conservative I'd call it "typical liberal methodology" where they all believe they are superior to everyone else and have "THE" right answer. If you don't believe me, simply ask one, they will tell you.
As far as the ACA, it is a good idea but a bad piece of legislation. It was not thought out and the consequences ignored.
For the past several years companies have been accelerating the removal of full time job positions and replacing them with part time, under 29-32 hours to avoid the medical mandate. Go to any retail establishment, since you seem to favor all things NY, drop by Macy's, talk to any sales person over the age of 40 who has a history long enough to know what is going on. Their hours are cut, not due to economy but due to planning for benefits cuts and avoidance of the ACA.
Our current administration does nothing but blame the previous one for its woes, no responsibility just finger pointing, but try to play that game with the prior one for the one before it and you get screams of foul play. Obviously what is good for the goose isn't good for the gander.
If congress and the administration wanted the people to follow them,they would have ensured they took up such coverage as their only means of medical care before imposing it on the people. Using the excuse that it has always been done, doesn't hold water. Wasn't this administration supposed to be different? Supposed to work "for the people". Yeah, I know, those damned evil republicans in congress won't let our poor president and the democrats get anything done. Again nothing more than lack of taking responsibility. Like the outcome or not, at least the prior president took responsibility.


--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "Rick b Cool" <rickb_cool@> wrote:

An interesting conclusion. Solely based on complete circular reasoning, obviously starting with the conclusion.

Hint: most legislation is complex. Mostly because of industry input to create confusion and loopholes and give big corporations competitive advantages and exclusions from regulations.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

"The real issue on this forum is getting back on topic." Really? Unlike the ibmpension group, the moderators of this group do not censor participant appends. It seems that your style for participation is to criticize others that you don't agree with politically and then to suggest that anybody who responds to one of your inflammatory appends is off topic.

Regardless of one's political persuasion, I think it's now becoming quite clear that ACA is complicated, poorly understood, difficult to implement, and that it will be more expensive for most Americans, providing affordable care only to those who could not previously obtain/afford health care coverage on their own. Everyone else will pay for it out of pocket while receiving lower quality services due to the added stain that will be placed on the entire health care system.