I really wasn't expecting a debate on abortion. I should have seen in coming though.
It is an important issue, but my problem is, the Republicans claim to be pro-life, but they don't do anything.
Which is worse? A candidate who says he is pro-choice? Or one that says he is pro-life but does nothing once in office?
Bush had the golden opportunity. He had the presidency, control of the house and senate, and control of the supreme court. Soooooo can anyone explain to me why abortion is still legal? Or at least why there was not even any kind of effort?
Far as I know it wasn't even brought up before the house or the senate, and certainly not before the supreme court. At the very least he could have brought it up for debate. Eight years, ... nothing.
It's like sending someone to Wichita to buy something that cost's $100. They come back without your item (they lost your money at the casino) and want another $100 to go get it the next time they go. Sorry, Not buying it.
The "vote pro-life" mantra has a hollow ring to it.
Are we going to be taken again?
Don't take that to mean I support the Dems. Neither party is "christian" as far as i can tell. Both use religion when it is convenient to get elected. Im really tired of the republicans though.
Some people argue that the republicans are "more" biblically oriented. Maybe, but ... isn't that like saying rape isn't as bad as murder so lets support the rapist instead of the killer? Where's the sense in that?
Remember the Who song?
"won't get fooled again."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
35 comments:
"Some people argue that the republicans are "more" biblically oriented."
Really not true. What the republicans do is claim to be a better (fill in the blank) than everyone else. Ie.: better christians, better americans, etc.
It is just a matter of rallying the poorly educated judgmental people to think that the republicans are better people than those "other bad people over there".
I'm always surprised that it ever works. Apparently there is never a shortage of stupid people to follow them.
Republicanism is philistinism. The outwardly demonstration of great religious values while cheating people out of money. The accusations that others are not christians while torturing prisoners. The dramatic outward opposition of abortion because it kills a human being while vigorously supporting the death penalty.
They are pharisees, hypocrites, cleaning the outside of the cup and dish but leaving the inside full of greed and self-indulgence. (Mat. 23:25-26) Republicans more christian? Ask Larry Craig. He would tell you yes, it is true.
Democrats offer the people easy money.
Welfare, food stamps, and no work required. All you have to do is sign away your life and let the government chose for you.
Give up your freedom for being lazy, a sweet deal....
BOOM CHICA BOOM CHICA BOOM
"Democrats offer the people easy money.
Welfare, food stamps, and no work required. All you have to do is sign away your life and let the government chose for you."
exactly. B.O.'s mantra. poor people don't know & don't care. Just gimme something.
Which is worse? A candidate who says he is pro-choice? Or one that says he is pro-life but does nothing once in office?
Wouldn't that just amout to the same? And neither are worse, I'm pro-choice and don't see a problem here...
Ahhh blam game, blame game. Always the democrats! Always Obama!! You all need to get something new... Can you say obsession!!
Hey I got a idea! Lets just get rid of it all. No more foodstamps, no more social security or welfare. NO more nothing, no tax refund or anything. Hell, lets not even give commodities to the lil ol lady that is on disability.
Lets just tell that to the people that just got layed off their job, you know the one that can't find nothing but a $6 an hour fast food job and still can't feed th0se kids. Oh, what about health wave insurance to the kids...get rid of it!
Not everyone on the programs sits on their butt all day. Nothing wrong with at least temporarily getting some help. Thats where the line should be drawn unless circumstances are beyond ones control to make ends meet at all.
Let's require a urine test for drugs, and manditory birth control for people on welfare.
I can't see how you can say the president had the golden chance just because of his office. The president does not control the house or senate, especially when they are controlled by the opposing party. He does have some control over the Supreme Court, but only if he gets to select a new justice - and he has no control, just gets to pick one that believes as he does.
People give the president a lot of credit for things he has little control over. The war in Iraq is a good example. Bush did push for it there is no doubt, but he could do nothing at all without Congress' approval. Whether he mislead them or if they just didn't bother to check the facts, Congress took us to war.
The president makes a lot of speeches and suggests policy, but if you want someone to blame, put it where it lies. The president can only approve or veto acts from the congress. At that, congress can still override a veto!
You don't like the bail out? The President's staff may have suggested it, or the basics of it, but congress organized it and approved it.
Keep all this in mind when you elect your next president. You've seen where the democrat controlled Congress has led us. Just wait until you elect a democrat president to push them further along the same path.
The president does not control the house or senate, especially when they are controlled by the opposing party.
>>>
Thats just it.
He DID have control of the house and senate
and still did nothing.
Thats what republicans need to explain.
Let's require a urine test for drugs, and manditory birth control for people on welfare.
October 28, 2008 10:06 AM
----------------------------------
Good idea!
OK, HERE ARE SOME STATISTICS I DUG UP THIS MORNING:
Here is the web address if you want to read the whole thing.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
I will summarize
in cases of rape or incest: 0.3%
in cases of risk to maternal health or life: 1%
in cases of fetal abnormality, 0.5%
About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons.
To:October 28, 2008 11:52 AM
Thanks. I had no idea. I thought so, but...
Heaven help us. How many innocents have we slain?? God have mercy on America.
I am afraid we live in an age that anything can be purchased for enough money!
Let's require a urine test for drugs, and manditory birth control for people on welfare.
Hey, I think if you want the tax payers to support you, you SHOULD have to follow some rules. Have you ever borrowed money from someone and not had to listen to their two cents? I say no money to drug addicts and no more babies for those who can not afford them. Not a bad idea.
I'm not against assistance for those who are truly disabled. For the rest of us, I think we should suck it up and "get 'er done". All of those who cheat and milk the system can take a walk!
I don't think there will ever be a candidate running for the White House that will take a hard stance on abortion because it will cost them too many votes. The majority of voters firmly believe that this issue belongs to women to decide what they need to do with their own body.
I personally have mixed feelings about the abortion issue and here are some of the reasons why:
Andrea Yates proudly displayed her "christian" beliefs but as a Christian, wife and mother she gave and took life. Should she have taken birth control or talked abortion? Who knows...
I think there may be as many boyfriends/husbands offing girlfriends/wives because they have concieved as there are women having abortions. Oddly enough, I just don't hear as much this as I do about abortion. Not sure why..
And does pro life include people like Terry Shrivo?
What about people on death row?
What about assisted sucide?
@6:14 PM
Andrea Yates is a mentally disturbed individual. Used to be we would say she was crazy. Though crazy may not be very p.c. So, we can't refer to her for our base.
I think the males in the pregnancy are left out of the debate too. Anyone ever ask the male? not very often I fear. I'd be willing to bet the abortionist isn't trying to hear that line. She may change her mind and let him raise it.
Yup, Mrs. Shiavo is included. She deserved better. Especially since her family was left begging to care for her at her bedside. Their cries were ignored. Too bad for Terry.
Death row. A different argument. I don't believe you can compare a murderer being put to death for a crime commited with an unborn defenseless infant.
Assisted suicide. It's the next step up the ladder from abortion. Then there's the elderly. They'll start in on them.
OK. I know this sounds far fetched. But, think, step by step, Hitler was able to brainwash a nation to believe that the Jews were not human and needed extermination. Healthy, men, women and children. Gassed, shot, starved, used as slave labor, etc.
Does a woman have control over her body? you betcha. Is it right to kill a child? I don't think so.
I realize you have mixed feelings. That's your heart talking to you. Trying to tell you to stand up for those who cannot speak for themselves.
I speak for them. They deserve at least the same chance to live that you and I have been given. Someone on here gave some stats that said that 98% of abortions are elective. Meaning someone decided that child didn't fit in their life for whatever reason. My God, where's the justice or mercy in that. It's been proven over & over that they feel pain when they're being cut to peices.
forget the religious aspects of the delima before us, i think we have enough problems with the two religious wars we are fighting.
Lets get down to the basics of what is best for this country, not muslim nations or who wants to kill a baby
We need to think about prolonging the freedoms we have, and the things that have made this nation stand alone,, Obama is not going to be interested in either of these two concepts
the Pro Life game is just to far out there to really do anything constructive to change, there will always be those who do not want what they have created,
the burdon of life is not one that can be forced upon another man to support if not ask for.
What does bother me is that a woman can have sex with anyone, get pregnant and abort the baby which is legal,,,
But it is illegal for her rent that very same body for pleasure in which no life is taken
I am confused by this, who made this rule
If we are going to let women make a choice what they do with thier bodies, its all or nothing in my book
A man should be makeing these more difficult choices for her anyway,, women just cant handel that kind of responsibility
Republican
@8:39 PM
i will pass on this one
What kind of world do we live in where an old and/or sick person, who has already lived their life, and is begging for someone to help them stop their pain by killing them is ILLEGAL, and killing a baby, with it's whole life ahead of it, who just happened to be conceived by the wrong, poor, or simply immoral person, can be killed, most times for no other reason than simply being inconvenient, and that is perfectly LEGAL?
Good point.
The more abortion is accepted, the more it will become accepted to "mercifully put to sleep" those too old to take care of themselves and contribute to society.
The choice a woman has is when she has sex. THAT is the choice. After she gets pregnant, she loses the choice because there is another person involved.
great point @ 7:42 AM
Sex is NOT always a woman's choice. You lose your whole argument if a woman has been raped and become's pregnant.
The rape argument was already covered, for the late comers. It helps to read all the above posts before commenting.
The statistics show less than HALF OF 1% of abortions are because of rape or incest. Most are for convenience.
Now who lost their whole argument?
there is no arguement to win or lose, why is it your right to judge what others do
the majority want free choice so live with it
there is no arguement to win or lose, why is it your right to judge what others do
the majority want free choice so live with it
>>>
Exactly the argument used in the south to defend slavery and then to defend the lack of civil rights for blacks.
If there was not another human life involved, then choice would be an issue.
You do have to come to grips with the fact that it is the right to choose to murder.
and i do not belive that its life if it has not taken a breath
"Exactly the argument used in the south to defend slavery and then to defend the lack of civil rights for blacks."
jj, ever notice when you use this point everything goes silent. Why? They can't counter it.
So called "Judges" accepted black people as "non-persons". Well they were people. They are people. The law was wrong, so it was changed. The law is wrong concerning the unborn and should be changed.
A baby is alive. If it wasn't alive, it would not grow.
---for the unborn
I wonder if it will take another civil war?
The abortion v slavery argument is failed logic at best.
Slavery is subjection of one person to the will of another. The pro-life movement attempts to negate a woman's right to choose or her will.
Secondly, There are people who do not support life beginning at conception. If a fetus is unable to survive outside the womb - is it a living being? How can a dependent entity have a will of it's own?
Slavery is subjection of one person to the will of another. The pro-life movement attempts to negate a woman's right to choose or her will.
>>>>
The obvious connection is that both do harm to a person and its legal.... a right...
Slaves were owned and you could do what you wanted ... beat, rape kill, didnt matter it was your property.
the baby is a person, and people call it choice to kill it..
the connection is that both were legal and both are evil.
Secondly, There are people who do not support life beginning at conception. If a fetus is unable to survive outside the womb - is it a living being? How can a dependent entity have a will of it's own?
>>>>
Ive no argument with abortion in the first few weeks or month or so..
6 months into a pregnancy, the baby could live ..
after that its just murder...
choice or not.
I just dont buy the choice argument at all.
its a nice word to hide a gruesome fact.
"its a nice word to hide a gruesome fact."
GRUESOME. People really don't know the procedure. I think. Bloody from beginning to end. 1st trimester, injection of salt-water to kill it. then insert forceps to grasp, grasp, grasp. pull as many pieces out as possible. put them together in jig-saw puzzle fashion hoping to "get it all". what's left is passed from the lady naturally in the next few days. there have even been ultrasound of the baby trying to get away as it's being dismembered. nowhere to go. trapped. she has the gruesome task of identifying the leftover pieces. this is the "sanitized" version. any wonder why no one wants to talk about it?
BTW, she should receive grief counseling.
bytedaily (in all their wisdom)said...
"The abortion v slavery argument is failed logic at best.
Slavery is subjection of one person to the will of another. The pro-life movement attempts to negate a woman's right to choose or her will.
Secondly, There are people who do not support life beginning at conception."
Whether you like it or not, it IS one person (the mother) subjecting her will on another (the baby). A baby in the womb is no less a human than a man who has to have a scuba tank to stay under water.
And just because "There are people who do not support life beginning at conception" does not make them right. There are people who believe we never walked on the moon, and that Elvis and Jim Morrison are alive somewhere playing shuffleboard together. Some idiots will believe anything, that doesn't make them (or you) right.
@ 3:57
Most proponents of pro-choice believe abortions should occur within the first trimester and statistically the majority of them do.
In what scenario does a woman wait until the sixth month to get an abortion? In my opinion, carrying a pregnancy into a third trimester shows intent to fulfill the pregnancy. I suspect an abortion at this stage is usually medically advised.
@ 8:17
What constitutes being an individual?
Post a Comment