I could agree with your logic if
Posted By: all4me on 2008-10-31
In Reply to: For the record - - Amanda
Obama would let it alone Unfortunately, he is not going to do that. He has already said that his first order of business will be to sign into law the FOCA. He will be allowing many ill-aborted babies to die without treatment after having been mutilated, burned, etc. This isn't an issue of whether or not you are pro-life or pro-choice. This is about whether or not a born child should be left to suffer and die. The key word here is born. That child was born.
I work on a peds hospital account. I type reports everyday about babies born at 25 weeks and everything being done to save them. I don't see how someone can say "that baby gets to live today and I'm going to help it because the mother wants it to live, and that baby will die today because the mother does not want it."
This FOCA directly undoes the Safe Haven act. It makes no sense. How is the FOCA any different than a mother leaving their unwanted infant to die in a trash can?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
With this logic....
...am I to assume that if you personally were imprisoned on faulty and/or trumped up charges that later proved false that you should therefore remain in prison?....simply because at one point the charges against you were believed to be true by the court?
You are saying that our government can never admit to a mistake or to being misled and then CHANGE the course of action?
As Ted Koppel said, our reason for Iraq went from being for our own national security and then as the facts were revealed about the reasoning for this, it changed to being for the good of the Iraqi people. It has now proven to be neither for the good of the Iraqi people or for the lives of the Americans.
Logic
only a look (sans rose colored glasses) at the current state of affair and perfectly logical question of where the same trajectory might lead 4 years from now.
Ah, what logic
Just shows the overall mentality of the "pro-life" side. People like you and this murderer do great things for your cause everyday. Makes us all want to switch over to your side....
Scary logic
So you would base qualification solely on his horrific experience in the POW camp? Seriously?
McCain is truly to be admired - no doubt - and ANYone who actually said "lying in a POW camp for 5 years does not make you qualified to run a counry" is despicable.
But enduring torture (at the hands of people whose country we invaded by the way, sound familiar?)
does not and SHOULD NOT automatically grant *any*one a pass to the most powerful position on the planet. If that's as far as your thinking goes, it's just scary...
PATRIOTISM, my friend, means standing up against your government on behalf of your COUNTRY! not JUST being willing to participate in any war, any where.
And being commander in chief means to ME that the person in that position would NEVER send men/women into another Vietnam OR IRAQ - and John McCain CLEARLY would like to continue the battle in many more places - but NOT in the one place where the attackers from 9/11 originated: Saudi Arabia. THAT my friend is shameful.
very lame logic; and she never said only.
x
Lame logic??????
If it's lame logic that I have listened to ALL candidates and decided for myself based on what they have said without regard for the media take, the political party affiliation, gender or color, then so be it. By whatever means you have made YOUR decision, I assume you don't consider your logic lame and I certainly will not put you down for coming to a conclusion that differs from mine.
...of twisted logic.
Strange logic!
x
Where's the logic in this way of thinking?
x
Be careful where you go with that logic
Does that mean that we can safely assume that anyone who believed in Swaggart, Baker, Haggart, or any one of the legion of other evangelical ministers are guilty of not having a true Christian belief or guilty of the same 'crimes' that their ministry leaders were? Guilt by association, while easy, doesn't seem like a very Christian assumption.
the logic is in the legality, though
Killing the adult with cancer would be illegal. Abortion is legal. Does that spell it out for you?
Let's use logic for a change....(sm)
I would assume the only thing Obama might not have paid for would have been travel to NY. So, you tell me, exactly how else was he supposed to get there when the Secret Service is in charge of how he gets from point A to point B.
You need to pay attention to what has actually been going on in this country instead of getting wrapped up in the pettiness that is now the republican party. Where was your outrage when Bush spent billions on a war over BS? Amazingly, you guys have been on a spending spree for the last 8 years (most of which wasn't even on the books, BTW), and now all the sudden you want to worry about the cost of a date.
Poor little you, you can't afford a date. Well, next time think ahead and try not to vote in a president like Bush, and maybe, just maybe, the whole economy won't be in the shi++er and you can have your date, along with a job!
by your logic you think we can spend sm
our way out of debt???????
There is no logic at all to that line of thinking.
There is no arguing with that kind of logic.
Alex Jones is not a physicist or a structuralist, I presume. The people who built the WTC explained how the extreme heat from the jet fuel caused the buildings to topple. There is no use arguing this with you. You have chosen to believe it and there you have it.
"Twisted logic" is just another way of describing
Doesn't fool everybody, just the naiive, the narrow-minded, the SHEEP.
Baaaaa.
Your logic makes no sense at all
!!
By that same logic, Obama is also a puppet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There seems to be a piece of logic that has escaped you.
Hawaii DOES hold the authentic after all? Wouldn't that simply confirm that he was born in Hawaii?
After reading the piece of trash lurking behind your link, my head was spinning as I attempted to count how many times Andy the anti-Obama lunatic Martin referred to "I", "mine", and "my" in his statement. Do you not recognize a megalomaniac in the midst of trying to justify his frivolous lawsuit and vindicate his own delusions of grandeur in his claims being the smartest attorney on the face of the earth?
This is the same guy who is trying to assert that Frank Marshall Davis is the REAL biological father of Obama. You expecting to see that on on the "real, typewritten, long version" of the secret Hawaiian BC? If that were the case, then what was Obama Sr's visit with Obama all about? How about the Kenyan grandmother and brother who fringe pubs falsely claim witnessed his birth in Kenya? So Aunti Zeituni isn't REALLY his Aunti Zeituni after all? She's yesterday's news, now that you have conjured up another, more desperate smear?
Your hate machine is imploding all over itself under the weight of its own lies. If you don't get a grip on yourself, the next legal action down the pipe just may be your own state commitment papers.
Looks like that logic thingy is way above your head.
That's a pretty hard thing for O to accomplish BEFORE he takes the oath, and his senatorial offices did not afford him to accomplish such feats single-handedly, so maybe you could try clarifying what you are babbling about now.
Logic + Big Bad - Never the twain shall meet.
There you go trying to be all logical and realistic and everything.
Those who are in the 'ignorance is bliss' camp will never believe that radical Islam is anything to worry about. They will continue to blame 9/11 on America. They will continue to blame Bush for everything else. They will continue to praise their annoited one every time he jogs shirtless or plays with a puppy or eats a piece of pie.
They don't want to see his radical agenda, his blatant mistakes, or his real (and really dangerous) lack of leadership skills.
My folks used to raise hunting dogs. Once in awhile, you'd come up with a dog that simply couldn't learn. No matter how much time you put into training and coaching the poor little thing, its head could never seem to get in the game. They were lovable, attractive, but totally useless for the job they were meant to do.
I can't wait until we get another chance to find the pick of the litter, because when it comes to Obama, as my dad might say, "That dog can't hunt."
Try to follow this logic. I support Obama. Therefore,
his platform and every single speech he ever gave, was and never will be MY issue. It is yours. MY issue is with the hypocrisy of Joe the unlicensed, the way he misrepresented his intentions to buy the business (seems to have completely forgotten that by now), misrepresented his income, the income of the business in question and the innocent bystander routine that you so strongly defend. Contrary to popular belief, it seems, ignorance IS NOT BLISS here. His cover was blown and you can't stop crying foul because the underlying agenda is out in the open.
Beyond that, McCain has lifted up JTP and is using him to further misrepresent his alleged concern for the middle class (a phrase which he has yet to utter in any speech) which is clearly the case, given his 24-year record of voting and his 90% undying devotion to the "commonly shared philosophy" with the shrub.
gee -- that's the same kind of logic applied to pro-life
nm
Logic and common sense tell me the content of this message
Our government agencies tend to err on the side of caution in these circumstances. I do agree that votes will not and should not be swayed one way or the other. I just found this to be a fascinating piece of news.
I agree, that goes for both sides. I don't agree with those starting trouble over...sm
on your board either, but then some of you come and take it out on the people who only post here and we have nothing to do with the fights over there.
I enjoy communicating with liberals and occasionally do learn something from conservative posters, so I refuse to let the driveby, no moniker, one-sided finger pointers, self-indulging posters drive me off.
Rush is right. I agree. Somebody's gotta agree.
....in many of his policies in his attempt to completely socialize America.
I hope he fails.
I hope he succeeds, however, in the office of president, and doing the right thing, and moves to the center.
However, it's not looking good. He's left of left so far, isn't he. Showing who he truly is, in his first acts as president.
I sure don't agree with
the Supreme Court's decision on eminent domain, either, and I also hope that guy buys Souter's property and turns it into a hotel. I love the name of the restaurant he wants to build in the hotel: Just Desserts. (I can't remember which TV show I saw that on because, contrary to those on these boards who already have me figured out, I DON'T only watch MSNBC. I actually flip back and forth between MSNBC and Fox. I'm sure it was one one of those stations, though.)
And I totally agree with a woman's right to choose.
I do have a problem with partial birth abortions, based on my limited understanding of it, which is what I've heard the conservatives say about a full or nearly full-term baby being basically born and then "beaten to death" by the doctor. (From what I've discovered from some conservatives on these boards in the past few days, I take everything they say with a grain of salt and accept the possibility up front that it's an exaggerated statement devoid of critical facts.)
But if this is indeed true, then I don't know how it could be considered anything BUT murder. And I don't understand the issue regarding the health of the mother because if the mother can survive the delivery of a baby that can survive outside the womb, then the issue would seem nonexistent. (Again, I don't know that much about it.)
I also have mixed feelings about children and abortion. One the one hand, it is a surgical procedure, and if my child can't even have her ears pierced without my consent, then certainly she shouldn't be allowed to have a surgical procedure without my consent.
But what about if she's been impregnated as the result of a rape by her father or other family member? That sick stuff DOES happen in this country. What if she knows she wants an abortion? Should she be forced to have the baby? I can think of situations where she might be safer if the parents didn't know, but yet I still feel the parents have a right to know. I'm very conflicted about this particular issue and can't say I have a definite opinion. That's why I'd like to hear more on the subject from some intelligent, thoughtful, nonjudgmental people.
As far as gay marriages, I admit I get a little "twinge" at the use of the word "marriage." It might be that something deep in my gut is telling me that marriage SHOULD be between a man and a woman. After all, WE invented it and WE wrecked it. I think they should invent a new name for their unions because from what I've personally seen, gay couples seem to last for a very long time, much longer than some marriages I know. As far as whether or not they should have rights, why SHOULDN'T they? I don't recall a day during puberty when I woke up and made the decision that I was going to be straight. Likewise, I'm willing to bet that no gay person woke up and decided to be gay. I just don't understand why people are so threatened by the thought that a group might actually have RIGHTS in this country. As with abortion or stem cell research, etc., if they don't believe in it, they shouldn't PARTICIPATE IN IT. I'm neither pro-gay or anti-gay. (A quick look in the mirror, though, reminds me that I'm definitely pro-gray. )
With all of these social issues, as you said, we will "stand in judgment with our maker." That's between us and our own personal God, and those with different religious/spiritual beliefs have no right to shove their beliefs down our throat.
I saw a post on the other board referring to when the U.S. was founded, saying that the vast majority was Christian but that others were given "the freedom to others not to believe..."
NOBODY can "give" anyone "freedom" to either believe or not to believe, and the fact that this poster thinks they can is either very stupid or very scary, and I'm not exactly sure which it is. I think this is relevant because I believe there are some conservatives out there who don't only want the law to reflect their specific narrow brand of religion, but they would LOVE to be able to control what people think and believe.
Knowing that Bush is going to appoint one (maybe two before the end of the year) new Supreme Court Justice(s) scares me because, as you said, our rights are being slowly taken away, and this man has proven by his own actions that the personal freedoms of others aren't things that he cares for much, especially freedom of speech and ideas. That's why he banned anyone who didn't agree 100% with his views from all of his "open town hall" meetings.
We also have an evangelical Senator who holds a public meeting in a search and says that liberals aren't people of faith.
First, it's freedom of speech. Next, it will be freedom of religion. What about freedom of "thought."
I wonder what their views on stem cell research would be if it was discovered that stem cell research held the key to developing a new technique to control thought processes of those who disagree with them. 
I AGREE
I agree with a few of your points..maybe this govt will push us liberals and conservatives together..how great that would be. I agree with eminent domain, I dont know about the abortion issue for a young person, however, I feel empathy for them. Regarding gay marriage. I feel there is not enough love in this word and if two people find love and want to be married, let them. I personally do not believe in marriage..dont want the govt or anyone else keeping tabs on my personal life. I have lived with my male friend for 11 years and dont want anyone telling me what choices to make in my adult life.
agree
I agree with you..why, a lot of my friends are conservative (smile), they really are. We agree on a lot and disagree on a bit but do it in a friendly manner. My dream..that both ideologies can live together peacefully..
I agree!!!
These people on here are pretty nasty to conservatives. They are definitely not living up to their standards of tolerance and peace. They seem very angry even enraged. I don't think we should rip each other apart. It serves not useful purpose whatsoever.
I agree with most of what you said.
However, I don't think it's because of President Bush AND his DADDY. I think George W. came into office hell bent on finishing what his daddy DIDN'T finish and only needed a reason, real or invented, to "finish" it. And I totally agree with you when you say that this was his personal agenda. I think the disconnect is that many people want him to focus on terror, but his personal agenda has always caused his focus instead to be on Iraq, and I personally am very fearful for the future of this country as a result of that.
Agree with everything you said
I believe they will definitely find a way to twist it if some are found guilty. Under no circumstances will they admit that this administration could possibly do anything wrong.
I so agree with you. Even one is way too
many.
I agree. I think they're ill.
It should be criminal to expose children to such hostility and insanity. It sounds like real violence could have ensued if these whackos would have been crossed in any way.
I almost feel for some of these people. A brief visit to the Conservative board left me thinking I should have worn a helmet and worn body armor. Although it's a scary place over there, it must be terrible to exist inside a body that harbors such rage and hatred every day, 24/7. I don't understand what has happened to their religion, but my Christian religion still promotes love, tolerance, respect and the principles of the Golden Rule, all attributes that seem completely foreign to them. All they do is trash others and haven't contributed one positive thing to that board.
Sometimes I think there isn't much difference between these people and the terrorists who attacked us and other countries. They both exhibit signs of mental illness, a maniacal obsession with controlling what everyone believes, and they both promote hatred, violence and intolerance in the name of their respective gods. About the only main difference I can see is that the terrorists, unfortunately, seem to be much more intelligent in their pursuit of their goals.
I agree.
The only way to do it is to DO IT, increase our troops, speed up training their troops, and GET OUT. We've created such an unnecessary mess over there, I think it would be very immoral to just invade, turn their country upside and leave without fixing what we broke.
I agree with you
I had the same feeling about Roberts and I was glad to hear he had done this pro bono work.
Let's hope he really is a "good guy" with a heart and a brain.
I agree.
With every day that passes, I feel less and less hope. I've never been this frightened of a politician in my entire life.
I agree with you.
And I wonder if we had stepped it up a while back, how much of this would be going on today. The more we delay, the better they get at their "craft."
I wish we had never gone in there to begin with and think it's one of the biggest mistakes a president could have ever made. But we're there, and we can't just go in there, turn their country upside down and leave without leaving them with some semblance of normalcy. Those who said this is a quagmire were right on the money.
I agree
Anyone who has anything less than a hate Bush agenda should burn in hell as far as GT is concerned. I too don't agree with Bush 100% on everything, but that does not matter to GT. If you agree with Bush on anything you should not pass GO and go straight to hell along with Bush's Stepford wife and alcoholic daughters. Am I painting that picture correctly GT?
I agree with you.
What you said is so profoundly true and so profoundly sad. I think over time Bush will be viewed as a pawn or a stooge. Who or what do you think may be the controlling force behind Bush? I have read articles on the "Vulcans" but have read little about this recently.
I agree.
It keeps promising to leave (yet another lie). Maybe if we ignore it, it will go away.
I agree.....
I am a moderate conservative, and a Republican, although I'd consider a moderate Democrat like Joe Lieberman or somebody reasonable, however, the Democrats won't nomiate anybody like that, so my vote stays Republican.
As for hand outs and hand ups... There's a big difference between somebody who is unable to work and somebody who is unwilling to work. The individual who is physically or mentally unable to work, or the hard working family who falls on hard times for whatever reason that is out of their control, those people deserve some help. Hands outs/hands up, whatever you want to call it should be viewed as a stepping stone to self sufficiency.
I feel for the innocent victims (children) of those who embrace a lifestyle of just taking free money from those of us in society who work hard, but I havn't much compassion for able bodied young people who refuse to work. If an uneducated person is working hard but not making enough to sustain themselves they can avail themselves of food stamps, WIC, free school lunches, and I don't a problem with that. But, drive through a poor neighborhood and watch the young healthy people sitting on stoops and standing on corners doing nothing all day instead of working. Whether it be pursuing their GED, or taking vocational classes, they should be at least thinking of bettering themselves instead of just resigning to a life of free hand outs.
agree!
I hear ya and yes I agree we should stay away..There are a lof of other political boards through the net, where we can discourse/debate with conservatives over ideas and America without being attacked like mad dogs (I hate to use the analogy as mad dogs as my dogs are much kinder than the conservatives who post here..smile)..
I agree with you.
I think O'Reilly got a taste of his own medicine and was about to lose it. I roared when Phil called him Billy, and Phil in no way denigrated Bill's nephew, but Phil had asked if any of O'Reilly's kids are serving in Iraq. O'Reilly tried to use his nephew's service to detract from the fact that NONE of his own children are there. I think that's what made O'Reilly the angriest: The fact that Phil zapped him on that point.
I agree with you both.
And now that Libby (yuck! I should change my moniker) and Rove are both implicated in the Plame scandal, it will be interesting to see what Fitzgerald's findings are, and they should be coming soon.
I also agree about Cheney. He's very scary. There is definitely a very shrewd, conniving network at work in this administration, and Bush simply isn't bright enough to do this on his own. And there are no standards of decency left on any level in this administration, which is incredible for the CONs, considering all they ever babble about is their superior *decency*. For example, they blatantly lie without blinking an eye, as do some of their more dedicated followers. If anyone dares to disagree with this president, the response it to DESTROY the opponent (not unlike what happens on these boards, only to a more dangerous degree, such as exposing Valerie Plame, for example). Nothing is out of bounds any more.
I'm eagerly awaiting the results of Fitzgerald's investigation. 
I agree with you as far as
the definition. But to read some posts on these boards, you'd think it WAS communism. It's a part of their mantra that you're worse than a traitor if you have anything GOOD to say about it, so it looks like McCarthyism is still alive in well in today's CONservative party!
I agree
I agree with you..I have always believed there was a **supreme being** who was creating evolution.
Agree 100%
with your post Freethinker..its a scary world out there, like the Twilight Zone or something.
I agree with that, too.
Schools are for teaching science, and churches are for teaching religion, except in the cases where there are private religious schools, which are certainly there for the purpose to teach both, which is great!
I have to agree. nm
x
Actually I agree with you.
I agree!
Bush and his military brass treated this family horribly. They did nothing but lie about everything. (Big surprise, huh?)
They tried to use Pat Tillman as their poster child for recruiting purposes, but Tillman wouldn't agree to be used that way.
When I think if the incredible courage and integrity Pat Tillman had and I look at what a coward Bush was when it came to fighting in a war and what a lying sack of crap he is today, it's easy to see who the REAL man is, and it just makes me want to spit on Bush.
|
