I don't believe it is a lifestyle CHOICE, but, sm
Posted By: oldtimer on 2008-11-12
In Reply to: what? - shelly
even if it were, it is none of your business. EVERYONE is entitled to equal rights under the law.
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
I don't feel the need to make the choice. It's a child, not a choice. n/t
.
Lifestyle choices
Just wondering where the line should be drawn.
For some people this is a lifestyle
and raising the minimum wage is not going to change anything. Believe me, I understand your point, and I commend you for using the system for the purpose it was intended for, but I know people who have made a career out of collecting welfare and are doing a lot better than I am.
I was a single, struggling mom once (okay, I'm STILL struggling!), and I was grateful there was help available when I needed it most. But what I learned along the way was that making a "decent" living is not incentive enough to work when it's easier and more lucrative to accept free handouts. My husband and I can't afford to help our kids with college, but my girlfriend's kids both got a free ride from the state. We have to decide between paying the electricity bill and buying groceries some months, but she gets foostamps and eats steak five times a week, and her housing and utilites are 95% subsidized. We can't afford medical insurance but she and her kids have always had health coverage. Her kids' daycare was paid for while she went to school (for free) and got a degree that she never put to use in the work world because she was smart enough to realize it wouldn't benefit her in the long run. I think what I resented most through the years was that she got to stay home and spend quality time with her family while I was out working like a fool to make ends meet.
Her story unfortunately isn't the exception to the rule. The welfare system is broken and has been for YEARS. It's not going to change as long as it's comfortable to sit back and have all your needs met by a system that encourages you to do so, no matter what the minimum wage.
Sometimes I think nature has it right when the fledgling is tossed out of the nest and has to learn to fly on his own.
The "gay" lifestyle
is a perversion that most parents do not want for their children and it is dangerous for your health. Parents have no desire to control their children but they want better things for them than that type of "lifestyle." Homosexuality deprives parents of grandchildren and healthy children. You might as well inform your children of the "prostitution lifestyle, drug-induced lifestyle and criminal lifestyle" as well. Those are all just as dangerous as a "homosexual lifestyle." I would much rather have a "bigotted" child than a dead one.
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
Ever consider you and your lifestyle is just 1 or 2 layoffs away from poverty?
What if you're laid off, maybe your jobs are sent out of the country and you can't find another job. Would you be too proud to take a handout from the government in the form of unemployment benefits? Maybe food stamps so you could eat. Judge not...............
Not everyone is looking to have you and your cohorts fork over part of your paycheck so they don't have to work. Think overpaid CEOs. Think companies (also MT companies) who send jobs out of the country so they can bloat their bottom line and put more in THEIR paycheck while taking it out of YOUR paycheck. Isn't that what's being done already? Is your MT pay getting better......or worse?
YOUR almighty lifestyle is what's deviant.
?
You can't compare race vs. a deviant lifestyle.
x
How is listening to his music exposing her to his lifestyle? nm
x
Listening to his music won't expose her to his lifestyle; however,
purchasing his CDs directly or indirectly supports his lifestyle.
I like Melissa Etheridge's music, but I have never purchased a CD.
So now with my taxed insuring kids -- I can supervise their lifestyle, eating habits, etc.
Insurance premiums for kids only are not that expensive, adults can go without if they want their children to have insurance. Why should I pay for that. So now, if my tax dollars are going for that, can I go up to an overweight kid and start monitoring their diet, can I watch what they eat, make sure that they get enough exercise, not be exposed to second hand smoke, etc. Because if the government starts to provide everything for these kids, pretty soon they will be telling everyone what to feed, how to exercise, and everything else. Why don't we just hand over our paychecks to the government and they can just take care of us.
Just teach "no bullying" PERIOD and leave the lifestyle crap out of it.
I'm sorry, but you're very naive about what these children are actually being taught - i.e., that one family is "just like another" (there's a cute little song they sing about this), etc.
You want to teach kids not to be physically violent toward any other kids - fine. You go beyond that and start preaching the gospel of lifestyle equivalency and you're wandering off into the parents' domain.
Oh, yeah - I almost forgot. Get back to T E A C H I N G!!
Choice
The three posters chose not to post anymore. No one ran them off.
Pro-Choice
I am pro-choice and here is why. My dad was a big city cop before Roe v. Wade. He told me true stories of woman dying from botched illegal abortions. Many times, they found women who had bled to death because they tried to abort the babies themselves with coat hangers. Other times, they found women dead from sepsis. This was in the days before ambulances when the cops answered all the medical calls.
He was anti-abortion but seeing all these dead young woman haunted him. He saw a lot of awful, gruesome stuff where he worked and eventually became somewhat hardened to it, but these cases he could never forget.
I am not pro-abortion but it is going to happen. It can either be legal and somewhat safe, or illegal and dangerous.
my choice
would be change with demonstrated ability to appreciate the complexity of situations and the willingness to listen to all views on the subject. precisely why I am an ardent Obama supporter.
Again, for those of you who are pro-choice...
and against hunting, fishing, etc, could you please explain the difference between killing something for food or because it is a menace to livestock as opposed to killing a child because it's not the right time for a baby, oops I got pregnant by "accident", oops I don't want children, etc. Again, it is rather ironic that one can be selective in their definition of killing.
whose choice?
seriously, where do you draw the line? i mean a 2-year-old is not old enough to make a "choice" of life or death, so you think it's okay to rid of them too?
choice
I do not think there is a person on here who is in favor of 3rd trimester abortion, etc. The thing is folks, that if abortion is abolished, it not only effects those who haven't learned of birth control use (and I don't feel sorry for them) but those in real need such as rape victims, maternal distress, etc. That is the trouble here, you can't do away with abortions entirely, though a lot of people have abused it. We don't need women resorting to butchers as they did in the past. Look, if someone is wanting one, they are going to have it, legal or not. We have to make it the same as any other medical procedure in this country.. you see your doctor, you make arrangements for the procedure to be done in the hospital through a referral.
what choice
When Obama wins, the repubs will no choice but to accept that fact. I cant wait to get out of the Bush admin and have a change. The last eight years has sunk our country.
There is another choice.....sm
for president. Check out Chuck Baldwin and the Constitutional Party. Warning: He is VERY conservative, so all you liberals need not look. ;o)
http://www.baldwin08.com/
Actually under O you will have no choice
The dems are talking about a draft. O has already starting talking about it being a requirment for college students. Yes REQUIRE, not option.
http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-new-youth-corp-requirement.html
Going to war is your choice...not ours.
Those who choose to elect war-mongers should be the ones sent to battle. Those who choose to elect peace-loving Presidents should not be forced to serve. That is why there are conscientious objectors.
I think you summed it up when you described the lack of intelligence involved in being the first to enlist.
I don't think we will have any choice. (sm)
As you said, people will do whatever they have to feed thier families. I also think before it's over with, we'll have to get a board for gardening on this site...LOL.
Bad choice, but he had to do it (sm)
IMHO, Obama made a deal with the Clintons in order to get elected and now it's pay up time. Look at all the Clintonites he's got surrounding him - the positions have changed, but all the faces are the same. All we need is Madeline Albright in there somewhere.
It is my choice, and I don't believe it.
Scare tactics are a dime a dozen in religion.
No, I think the choice was hers...(sm)
but that's the point. She had the choice of either having the baby or not, as opposed to being forced into having the baby, which is exactly what outlawing abortion would do.
What exactly do you think Pro Choice is?
Pro Choice means you believe a woman has the right to decide what to do with her body - exactly how do you figure Obama is not Pro Choice?
And he is not saying that women are going to be required to abort their unborn - he is saying they are going to have the right!
That's your choice
and God gives you that right.
Christianity is very much based on fact just as it is on faith. The faith comes from having faith that Jesus' death was sufficient for all. The facts have been shown through archeology and even science.
If the Bible was scrutinized the way other ancient literature has been, it would be found to be true and consistent within itself, but because there is preconceived notions held by those who scrutinize, such as the "fact" that miracles cannot happen, it is believed to be incorrect, myth if you will.
I used to be just like you. I used to think that Christians were rude Bible-thumping bigots who tried to take the corner on Heaven. But when I finally dropped my bias and read the Bible as I would any other book and once I let people actually speak their peace to me, I came to the logical conclusion that Jesus was real, He was the Godman, and He was the Lord. Reading the Bible through you cannot help but notice the consistency and fluidness that runs through it. The OT is the story of the promise God made, and the NT is God fulfilling that promise.
I was not raised in a church, I was not taught about Jesus by my parents. I was not forced to go to Sunday School and I was not forced to be baptized. I made a decision. A decision has to be made with your mind, your emotion and your spirit. It's a three part deal. Many people make emotional decisions and once the emotion is gone, so is the decision. Many people make logical decisions, but the decision is never personal for them, so neither is the relationship with God. Many times the spirit tries to guide someone to the decision, but the person feels logically or emotionally that they cannot.
I may come off as brash because I don't take the "we are all on the same path route" as some do. I would be wrong in doing so, and I would be denying what my Lord explicitly said. To do so would have serious repercussions for me. Therefore, I choose to do what He says and have people not like me, rather than do what people would have me do and deny the One who died for me.
And that is your choice
You choose that belief; I don't. If you want to lead a life ruled entirely by Biblical law, maybe you could all band together and buy an island or something and call it Christganistan. This is a secular country, founded to get away from the idea that there is one true way to live one's life.
The more the so-called tolerant Christians write here, the less difference I see between Radical Islam and Fundamental Christian. It's two sides of the same coin, and it saddens me that this country, founded on principles of individual choice, has seemingly regressed in that regard.
It is NOT a choice.
You keep on with this ridiculous choice bit, but homosexuality is not a choice anymore than being blond or tall or having blue eyes is a choice. It is what the individual is born as.
Sure it's a choice.
God says it is. I believe Him not you. Sorry...
thank you and I like #2 choice. nm..
x
I don't know where they want to go with it, but abortion is a choice..sm
and last time I checked it was not limited to one race. Can that same one prove that more blacks abort than whites? There goes that theory.
A word about choice
I think we have probably said all that we can say on that matter, and we won't agree, but I enjoyed speaking with you.
I just want to add a word about women who support choice. It seems that many people are quick to judge a woman that supports choice, stating that she must have had an abortion or would be willing to have one. I can only speak for myself, a few friends, and family members, but I can tell you that in our case, this it entirely not true. My sister always states that she is, Personally conservative, but politically liberal. I do have a few friends who had had abortions, but I do not believe that I could ever have one myself, and though I would stand by my daughter if that was a choice she made, I would be devastated inside. So, while this is not a choice I would make, I will still support the right to choose for other women. In an ideal world, there would be no unwanted pregnancies, but until there is, I will always stand for choice.
Peace.
A word about choice...
And I enjoy talking with you. It is good to discuss opposing viewpoints without anger and condescencion. We will have to agree to disagree. There is so much more to this than just abortion. As I have said, and as I will continue to say, when we as a nation begin to devalue life at any stage, we are on a slippery slope headed downward. And to start that devaluation with the most innocent and helpless among us...is horrifying to me. The idea of murdering captive child in utero is absolutely horrifying to me. As I said, I will follow the law of the land, and just because some wingnuts have blown up clinics and shot doctors does not mean that all people of faith believe that. I believe it is wrong to do that and I would have no part of that. However, I will continue to call it what I believe it is, and that is murder. And in the end, the women who choose abortion and the doctors who perform them will have to answer for that one day, not to you or me, but to God.
God bless!
It is not our choice who becomes president
Whether we like or dislike someone, vote or not vote for them, they are not elected by the people. I totally understand when people say "so'n'so is not my President. I felt that way when Bill Clinton was in. He campaigned as one person and once he got in the office all the promises he made, all the "changes" he said he'd bring never happened. He was a totally different person than what he campaigned as and therefore he was "not my president". The same was with Hillary. All I kept thinking was great, here we go again...this country is going to be without another president for 4 years. I was hoping for the best and luckily it worked out for the country's best to not have her in there. In actuality the people who have the money control who is put in there. We saw that with the Bush/Gore campaign (even though I'm thankful Gore didn't get in). I highly doubt all of Obama's donations are from people who send in $5 and $10. Although I leaning more towards him over McCain. To call someone names (retarded, hillbilly, etc) is childish and an insult to the people who are actually "special" and hillbillies. Also calling them the antichrist is also another stupid remark put out by people who don't understand. Sure Bush is not among the brightest who have held the office. He should have been impeached a long time ago (but we have the dems Pelosi and others) who stopped that (why I don't know). So, no Bush is not the brightest, he has committed war crimes (IMO). But Clinton was no better. If there was a contest in the worst President I would not be able to decide between the two. Neither of them know or care what the regular person (me and my family and friends) are going through. They don't know we're struggling with paying bills, grocery shopping, paying for gas, etc. Hillary Clinton fortunately is out of the race. I sweated that one. We won't even begin to go into all the lies and crooked campaigning she did. Why people don't remember what it was like when she and Billy were in there I can't understand. Clinton's presidency was the worst ever. Each time a President gets in their the economy gets worse. We end up more in debt as time goes on. So to say its worse with Bush than Clinton, you also have to say it was worse with Clinton than Bush Sr, worse with Bush Sr than Regan, etc, etc. We just go further and further into debt and each campaign are promised that they have a solution to get the debt down. I'm no Bush fan, but one thing that is a fact is that people have been paying lower taxes with Bush than Clinton. I found a fact sheet that showed what people paid for taxes under Bush and what they paid under Clinton. Clinton was awful. It was a dark time for our country. He misrepresented our country and made us look like fools. I counted every day until he left office and then in those last few hours was rewarded with learning how much more crooked he was by giving out pardons like it was candy at a halloween party. I also think Bush is awful, but the country would have been worse off with Gore (the Bore), and Kerry (Mr. Lerch). John McCain would be the worse thing that happened to this country, but I always have to remember...my vote doesn't count. Whoever "big brothers" want in there they will put in there.
I approve of his choice. I also was...sm
impressed by Obama's statement that he did not want to choose a yes man.
I think that was a good choice also.
Biden has over 30+ years experience and isn't afraid to voice his opinion if he disagrees with an issue. Great choice and can't wait for them to WIN!! Be real people - can you see Cindy McCain (druggie) as a first lady? She's afraid of her own shadow and it's like watching paint dry when she talks! Okay, Michele needs to spruce up that wardrobe but she's got more brains then McCain and Cindy put together.
it was an insane choice
I certainly do not want to wake up every morning in a country where such mind-boggling choices are foisted on us by the president out of the blue.
not even john's first choice
ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: It wasn't until Sunday night that John McCain, after meeting with his four top advisers, finally decided he could not tap independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to be his running mate. One adviser, tasked with taking the temperature of the conservative base, had strongly made the case to McCain that it would be a disaster for the party and that the base would revolt. McCain concluded he could not go that route.
So the man McSame thought would make the best vice president was vetoed by his fundie base. And he caved.
But he's very Mavericky!
That's her business and choice if she does, not yours.
Just because YOU wouldn't be able to handle children plus a job doesn't mean another woman wouldn't. Perhaps your energy or patience level isn't up to it, but I know plenty of women that have high-profile careers and young children and handle both beautifully. It's all about balance. Again, just because you might not be able to find that balance doesn't mean others can't.
Nothing wrong with his choice....and so far...
no Marxists have given her a rousing endorsement either. Another point in her favor.
Definition of choice
Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action. Some simple examples include deciding whether to get up in the morning or go back to sleep, or selecting a given route for a journey. More complex examples (often decisions that affect what a person thinks or their core beliefs) include choosing a lifestyle, religious affiliation, or political position.
You choose your path, I'll choose mine.
In the United States, the Bill of Rights is the name by which the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known.[1] They were introduced by James Madison to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of constitutional amendments, and came into effect on December 15, 1791, when they had been ratified by three-fourths of the States. The Bill of Rights limits the powers of the federal government of the United States, protecting the rights of all citizens, residents and visitors on United States territory.
The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom to petition. It also prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, cruel and unusual punishment, and compelled self-incrimination. The Bill of Rights also prohibits Congress from making any law respecting establishment of religion and prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. In federal criminal cases, it requires indictment by grand jury for any capital or "infamous crime", guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury composed of members of the state or judicial district in which the crime occurred, and prohibits double jeopardy. In addition, the Bill of Rights states that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,"[2] and reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the citizenry or States. Most of these restrictions were later applied to the states by a series of decisions applying the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, after the American Civil War.
Are you pro-choice? Just askin', cause...
I always find it ironic that people against hunting, etc, don't mind abortion at all....killing is killing.
Sam, was he your choice from the very beginning
or did you prefer one of the other candidates during the primary? I am just curious, no sinister motive behind this question.
I'm in favor of choice
So, yes, I want the deck stacked on my side, lol! If you aren't in favor of an abortion, then please don't have one. You can make that choice all by yourself.
Pro choice is one thing
pro infanticide is another. The point is that he was opposed to a bill to protect these newborns. Why on earth would you oppose that? Furthermore, he kept calling the newborns "embryos" or "fetuses." Now, I'm pretty sure there is a difference between an embryo, fetus, and a baby that has come out of the mother's womb and is breathing right??
Now lets look at this from the argument of "well he was concerned that this we would end up in court about this over and over again"
The definition of embryo is:
Main Entry: emˇbryo
Pronunciation: primarystressem-bremacron-secondarystressomacr
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural emˇbryˇos
1 archaic : a vertebrate at any stage of development prior to birth or hatching
2 : an animal in the early stages of growth and differentiation that are characterized by cleavage, the laying down of fundamental tissues, and the formation of primitive organs and organ systems; especially : the developing human individual from the time of implantation to the end of the eighth week after conception -- compare FETUS
And the definition of FETUS is:
Main Entry: feˇtus
Variant(s): or chiefly British foeˇtus /primarystressfemacront-schwas/
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural feˇtusˇes or chiefly British foeˇtusˇes or foeˇti /primarystressfemacront-secondarystressimacr/
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth -- compare EMBRYO
Ok so that being said, we can all agree that fetus and embryo means "before birth" and once the fetus or embryo is born, it is no longer considered such. It is now considered a human. If it is born breathing, it is a living human, correct?
So first off, either Obama didn't do well in biology class, or he is purposely underplaying the fact that this is a living, breathing child. He keeps saying "fetus, or child as some describe it" ---it is a child, right? that's what we figured out above. Next he says that this would bar abortions because we are considering this DELIVERED LIVING BREATHING HUMAN a CHILD. WHAT?? He than says we are trying to give the same rights of a 9 month old child has to a preterm baby. So all the preemies out there shouldn't have the same rights as a child that was born full term??
He keeps saying its unconstitutional to try to keep alive a "previable fetus or child" These are two completely different things. These woman aren't pushing out a cell sack of a would-be child, these are developed, breathing, crying children. Why on earth does he say that is unconstitutional?
To me it speaks a lot about him as a person to even say anything against this. And I don't think he was trying to better the bill, because he doesn't make any suggestions to do so, he is just saying "it's unconstitutional to say that we have to offer these unwanted babies the same rights as other citizens"
Look, I understand being pro choice, in fact, that is your choice! (no pun intended) I am not pro choice, but that isn't the issue here. The issue here is that this man opposed a bill to save the lives of these children. That is just cruel. If he can do that about newborn babies, who else can he do it about?
BTW the bill was passed, and it hasn't been struck down in court yet.
Still a better choice than Obama, who will put the
nm
happy with the choice of
Gregory for Meet the Press. I think the team at NBC and MSNBC have put together in the last year is exceptional. Its a good feeling to have faith in our new president, his cabinet appointees and even the media covering him. I think maybe we had to hit Bush-rock bottom to be able to get our act together. Did anyone hear that Rev Wright called Eliz Hasselback a dumb blonde or such other phrase.
He would have been a GREAT choice but
you guys would have been over him like white on rice (no pun intended) because he is African-American. sheesh.
|
