Okie dokie. We agree to disagree. Someone should speak for the babies...
Posted By: sam on 2008-10-31
In Reply to: No, I'm responsible for my own "O" - meme
and I would be one of those. Because I think they deserve a shot at life just like you do. You don't. Your prerogative.
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
Okie dokie. sm
Must be doing your research on the star planet nebula or something, because Hillary's health fiasco was well written about on both sides. As far as conservativism dying out, I don't recall I said I was a conservative. As usual, you make assumptions because I would just really like you to stop posting untruths/bad information. You talk along the "One World Order" line. You had best be careful what you wish for.
Okie dokie. I am just reminded of the old phrase...
be careful what you ask for. But I do have a question...Obama has said forcefully that if he ends Iraq the war will go on in Afghanistan...so you are still going to have a war. Where the war is makes the difference? We are still going to be spending billions. The fact that it will be in Afghanistan and not Iraq makes the difference?
We are getting ready to spend billions bailing out the mess that Democrats created. No, Republicans have actually been bringing this mess up, screaming warnings about it, and the only thing this Democratic congress has done was pass a housing bill this time that further encouraged giving out those bad loans. Republicans were against it, but the Dems have the majority. Soooo...here we are. I do blame one Republican, George Bush, for signing it. He should have vetoed it.
How you can ignore something that huge and trust the fox to run the chicken house...I will be the first to say...I certainly do not understand it. But your vote is YOURS, and you should use it however you wish to.
Okie dokie. Then I apologize to gourdpainter. Was...
just asking.
okie dokie....I will be the lone ranger optimist once again...
I can only hope you are wrong and I am right. As you say...only time will tell.
And I still disagree. We shall agree to disagree. But....
welome to the board! A new voice is welcome, whichever side the voice decides to fall. :)
I agree with the scenario you speak of.
but there is also talk of growing fetuses for harvesting. I do not agree with that.
We will have 2 agree 2 disagree on this one.
I think he knew exactly what he was doing just like Sheehan knew when she wore that shirt 2 to the White House. I say, have the power of your convinctions and be a stand up person. I don't have a problem with making a statement, just obey the rules.
Again we agree to disagree...
I do not believe there is any valid motive to show the footage, blacked out or not. I think it is tasteless. I believe I know how snipers operate without having CNN air a wonderful propaganda film for jihadists...see, this is how we kill Americans, thank you so much CNN. I am sure there were high 5's in Al Qaeda camps all over the world. They get most of their information from CNN. CNN is their friend. If you don't believe that, look at some of the early footage and how CNN could get in places where no one else could and the big exec knew Uday Hussein on a first-name basis. The same CNN who knew for years exactly what Hussein was doing to his own people, but I didn't see THAT running on the 6:00 news. They stood idly by, on the pretense of keeping their reporters safe, and let the mass murder, rape rooms and various other human rights violations just keep right on keepin on. Instead of pulling their people out and telling us the truth, like you are saying they want to do now. Pardon me if I think, no matter what the faults of Fox, do not even come close to that. That alone shows while Fox may not be perfect, they certainly have higher values than CNN. As to sponsors of the programming about OJ, find out, and write to them. If you believe strongly what Fox is doing is wrong (I have already voiced my displeasure and have encouraged friends to do so), I encourage you to find out who the sponsors are, or at the very least, bombard Fox with emails. It is your right and you should exercise it. I certainly did with what CNN did, and I did bombard them with emails, not that they give a hoot what a conservative thinks, but I did it anyway. If enough people complain, it could have an effect.
Again we agree to disagree...
I do not think the Democrats are that much different today than they were during Civil War days, during the 60s, or today. In my opinion, Democrats still seek, as I said, to keep people enslaved by tying them to the government for survival instead of instead developing programs to make people productive citizens. So we will agree to disagree on that.
Johnson may have signed the bill, but go to the Congressional Archives and look at the votes. Democrats fought it tooth and nail. Had Republicans not voted it in, it would not have been there for him to sign. I would not say he carried anything into fruition, other than signing the bill.
Teddy said the same thing, that the parties are not what they once were. But the basic fiber is the same...one conservative...Lincoln...slaveowners and pro-slave...Democrats. In the 60s...Republicans for...Democrats against. Same way with the womens' vote. Most of the women who took to the streets to get women the vote ....were NOT Democrats. They were Republicans. It is there for anyone to look up. It is just that you could not convince half the country today that any of those milestones were brought about by Republicans...and they were. Are you saying that since the 60s the Democrats have suddenly transformed into the warm and fuzzy party of the people? Yep, that is their message...but in my view a lie. They used to be open about what they were about...now it is hidden. But to me, the agenda is the same. Again we agree to disagree.
Okay, agree to disagree and all that...
how about the question...is war ever justified? You never have weighed in on that one though I have asked numerous times.
As I stated, you did the graphic description of maimed and mangled war dead. I simply added that babies sliced and diced amount to the same thing. And it is way past the embryonic sac stage when it is aborted and I believe anyone who has looked at the stages of a baby's growth in utero knows that.
You don't have to keep justifying what you believe to me. It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. Just like I won't change your mind, you won't change mine.
Again...agree to disagree. I am sure, if the child were able to choose, it would not choose to be sliced and diced and left alone to mature and be born and live like it was supposed to had someone not "chosen" to end its chance to do that. But, you want to give that choice to someone else. I don't think that is right. Any more than it would be my right to kill someone who was inconvenient, annoyed me, or was too much trouble.
Why do you not support a woman's right to choose to kill the baby if the baby is too much to handle when it is a day old? Two days old? A week? A month? It certainly cannot live on its own without a lot of care for a whole lot longer than that. Somehow taking one breath makes all the difference. Yep. Uh huh. Whatever.
Human embryo, plants, animals?? Now I've heard it all.
Then we will agree to disagree....
if you have to kill it to keep it from being born....my friend, it is viable. You started as an "embryonic sac." Without intervention...here you are. Tim Tebow who just won the Heisman trophy...had his mother decided to dispose of him when he was an "embyronic sac" (she chose not to) that young man would exist today. There are consequences of every action. Every abortion prevents a life from continuing to maturity and being born. There is really no other way to look at that, that I can see. And to me, that is the most precious, most innocent of all human life. And I feel that someone should speak for them. You do not have to, you do not consider them "alive" until...well, I don't know when you consider them "alive." There are plenty in the world to speak against war, and rightly they should if that is what they believe. I just don't understand why someone would be so strenuously against someone speaking for the child. Because to me, from the time of conception it grows. If it grows, it is alive. That is simple biology.
So we will agree to disagree. Or just disagree.
No harm, no foul. Each of us entitled to their opinion on the matter. That is what makes America great.
Agree or disagree
If somehow the American people can put aside bias and have an open-minded discussion, then and only then will real change happen. I respect your opinion and I read what you and others say with an open mind. My problem is that neither the Democrats or Republicans have come up with anything I can support.
As for Palin, yeah, I relate to her "soccer mom" status. I was a football and cheerleader mom. My kids being only 2 years apart, there were times when my husband would go to one event and I would go to another so they all had a parent present. As a mom, I balanced family and a full-time job. There is NO WAY I could have balanced my family and the second most important job in the country. Maybe she is a superperson but I was not, although my kids will tell you I was "supermom." As for me, my job suffered before my family. Which would she chose to come in 2nd place? Think about it.
So we can agree to disagree
I fail to see her accomplisments but then that's just me and I doubt I'm alone.
I certainly think a redistribution of wealth would not be a bad thing, unless, of course, you're among the richest families in America and I certainly am not. . In the last 8 years the rich have gotten richer while the poor got poorer. Do your research. The Bush tax cuts are what made the rich richer, along with sending good jobs out of the country and allowing illegal aliens to come in and further depress wages. One of the causes of economic depression is when too much money is in the hands of too few people and that's just about where we are now. Palin aside, if McCain is elected I would bet my last dollar that we'll have a repeat of the Great Depression of the 30s. I wouldn't put any money on what will happen if Obama is elected but I expect the economic situation won't be any better. With Bush's popularity being so low, I can't imagine why anyone would want to elect his cronie to follow him but then people have different opinions and that's what makes horse races (or political races) I guess.
agree to disagree
sam, you have to just let it go. We will never change the minds of people so hard hearted. Anyone who votes for someone who will allow or encourage such laws will have the blood of innocent lives on their hands.
Yes, we agree to disagree..nm
nm
I agree and disagree.....
You're right, most of the people on this board have no problem with abortion BUT abortions can be stopped; we do it all the time in my town. We have an organization that DOES NOT promote abortions but helps pregnant women with their pregnancy so they don't feel the need to abort their child in the first place. We give counseling, free medical care, free delivery by doctors here in this town, clothing for the mother, clothing for the newborn with supplies and necessities to keep her knowing she is loved and cared for; which is why so many end up with abortions; they feel no one cares and they feel scared and worried. We try to help take those worries from them and let them know they are not alone and there will be people to help them through their pregnancy and AFTER the baby is born as well.
So, yes, you can stop abortions. Very few of the girls/women who come in want an abortion; they just feel it's the only answer because of their present situations. We NEVER help with abortions in any way. If they decide they will have an abortion, they are on their own there but we do offer ongoing counseling for them.
I agree - and disagree. (sm)
This government has gone stark raving mad. The spending is insane. The villagers-with-torches mentality regarding the AIG bonuses is insane. The agenda Obama is pushing is insane.
Where I disaagree is that the country is a "laughing stock" (except, of course, the horse laughs that Obama got from Putin with his offer to dismantle the missile shield, and from Iran with his "speech to the people").
No, the world isn't laughing at the U.S. at all. In fact, the world is becoming concerned about the chaos in Washington, the insane spending (the Fed just created $1 trillion "out of thin air", as one writer put it, but it won't come from thin air - it will come from you, me, our children, and our grandchildren), and the likelihood that Washington will be the spark for worldwide superinflation.
Here's a very thoughtful piece that comes from Canada, for instance - and I could list other sources as well. Read it and weep: http://tinyurl.com/cs5qro
Then see my post above, "Find a Tax-Day Tea Party Near You", and DO IT. I've never participated in any sort of public demonstration of any kind (except on the police lines, of course) - but the time has come. We can speak now or forever hold our peace. As you say, God help us all!
We can agree to disagree
If you watch the old B/W movies, most all of the actors were smoking. Tobacco has been around a long time. My great-great-grandmother I'm told smoked a pipe. Danged if it didn't kill her at the age of 80 something. My grandmother dipped snuff, lived to be 86. My dad smoked like a freight train and died at 69 unrelated to tobacco. It's the personal freedom that concerns me. Tax won't make me quit and neither will government regulation. Used to be smokers and nonsmokers got along just fine and dandy in the same room, that only changed when the special interest goups decided they didn't want anyone smoking.
As for the junk that's stuck in our food, you're on to something but I don't expect the government to do anything about that until enough of the special interest groups (i.e. the antismoker group) raises enough ruckus. Not to mention the air we breathe. I'm allergic to car exhaust fumes as well as jet fumes. You don't hear anything about that. Okay, I'd be happy to go back to horse and buggies myself but I have the time, realize not everyone has that luxury, so I take my Benadryl and suffer. IMHO there are lots of things to worry about other than whether people smoke or wear seat belts. I don't wear those things either and they can ticket me all they want, I still won't do it.
disagree or agree, americans right
AG can post here anytime. Who are you to say she cant? Are you afraid of a debate? Maybe you will be proved wrong or will it put a seed in your brain to investigate? That is all I ask. Let conservatives post here, please do..and put a seed out there so we can investigate and maybe we can all come to a consensus that we are Americans first and foremost..How can we stop distrust around the world if we as Americans cannot stop it between us? Sure many conservative posts get my blood boiling but so what. I read them, get boiled and then laugh and either post a disagreement or an agreement.
Sorry, but I'll just have to agree to disagree with you...sm
I'm entitled to my own opinion and feelings and I'm NOT looking to make an issue out of a nonissue. I'm not the only one in America who thinks this is *glaringly* wrong, or else we wouldn't be having this conversation, so you can lay off of chastising me.
I'm smart enough to know that people will think and believe differently and while you can praise these remarks because you *know* everyone is just taking this out of context I don't think so. I think people slip the lip, and especially with his tone, and say what they mean every once and a while. I think Bennett was caught with his pants down.
Yeah, Alan Coombs is intelligent, but also a softy. He debates to politely with people who would just as soon bite his head off. That's what I don't like about him, and this is not just limited to his debate with Bennett.
With people throwing ideas like abortion of a race to reduce crime, I want to hear the the Bill Mahers type to tell them as plain as they can speak, take that trash and shove it.
This is the last post I will respond to about this because there is no sense in us going back and forth about this. I respect your opinion that this man has a right to say what he wants because he was just throwing ideas around and hypothetically speaking, but I don't agree and nothing you can say will make me be OK with it. Sorry.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree
because I've seen many a lies from the Obama campaign including Joe Biden who I believe was found to say 13 or more things during the VP debate that were not true.
As for the way Sarah talks during her speeches.....why should she hide who she is when she gives a speech. For some of us....it is nice to hear someone up there who talks like we do in every day life, who is successful, and has started from the bottom up and has no problem standing up to her political party....which is something I wish more politicians on both sides would do. I'm tired of this political party crap and politicians following what that party wants.
That is another thing that appeals to me about McCain/Palin. I feel they will stand up to their party if needs be. Obama and Biden, however, have not shown me that.
Okay, I'll agree to disagree n/m
Whether you agree or disagree with this pick...
Maybe we should all check the facts before judging this guy. Actions speak much louder than words. Below are 2 sites, The first is a list of bills he sponsored. The other is his voting record.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400120&tab=bills
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=33530
Then we will agree to disagree. And a controlled interview...
is not like meeting with a hostile head of state. And I don't think an "understanding" of Islamic principles is going to help talk to the prime minister of Israel OR Ahmadinejad. That is just my opinion.
I beg to differ about Joe Biden's comfort zone...he is extremely comfortable in DC. He is an established member of DC politics. Unless you have not been paying attention in past years, you know this. He is a toe-the-line Democrat. When he actually said in public what he said about McCain, I thought well, maybe he isn't as partisan as I thought. Buzz, wrong thought. I was right. He is. He came from a blue collar background...so did Obama, so did his wife. But they are far, far removed from that now. And they trot it out when they feel they need to "connect" to the blue collar out here among us. Maybe some buy into that, and that is fine. But some do not, and that is also fine.
Personally, I feel Joe Biden wants to be Vice President and whoever he has to mow down in the process, fine, casualities of the political war. No blue collar people I know throw friends under the bus to promote themselves. But maybe the blue collar people I know are not like the blue collar people he comes from. Can't say.
Yes, he used to talk about partisan bickering, and he and McCain worked on a lot of issues, and if McCain felt he was right then he bucked his own party to support him. Which is why Biden said he viewed McCain as a friend and "I would be proud to be on a ticket with John McCain." Notice how quickly that changed. Either you have integrity or you do not. Either you feel loyalty to a friend is more important than partisan politics or it is not. He showed me what was important to him. I was not impressed. That is my opinion of course, entitled to it, just like you are to yours. We just disagree.
All that being said, I do feel that he is much more qualified for the job than the man who is running for it. I would still be concerned, but I would not be as concerned if Biden were in the #1 seat instead of the #2 seat.
But that would not change my opinion of Joe Biden as a person. I think he lacks integrity, I know he lies, because he was either lying when he said Obama wasn't ready or he is lying now when he says he is. Either way...he lied. Same old Washington politics...sorry, I don't see much change or any hope thereof where Biden is concerned.
We will agree to disagree...I think she would wipe the floor with him.
Because he would underestimate her. Like I think many will. Time will tell.
Agree to disagree. I don't think we deserve Barack Obama...
and with his same stances on things, I wouldn't vote for him, I don't care what party he represented. It is not about party for me. It is about the stand of the man. And for me it is nobama, no way, no how...no matter what ticket he is running on.
Well, mine is definitely Okie. Never lost it.
Guess I haven't been gone long enough to lose it. I think NE Oklahoma/NW Arkansas accents pretty similar. So we probably do. I say "coke," (the Okie all purpose word for Coke, Pepsi, DP, lol) these folks up here say "soda." Drives me nuts. Soda is made by Arm & Hammer. LOL. The very FIRST thing I do when I get back to my old home town is get a chicken-fried steak, mashed potatoes and white gravy. These people up here don't even know what white gravy is. lol. Traveling for a few years has been real educational though. Still...ready to go home. :)
Okie doke - point taken on that one.
I still say that no matter what channel you watch, the opinion shows (and none of them are really news shows, only opinion) make you think about what's going on, regardless of whether you agree or disagree.
And I guess since Beck was kissing Bush's but all those years, it's a good think Olberman was around to kick it! =) All depends on whose ox is being gored.
Okie doke - point taken on that one.
I still say that no matter what channel you watch, the opinion shows (and none of them are really news shows, only opinion) make you think about what's going on, regardless of whether you agree or disagree.
And I guess since Beck was kissing Bush's but all those years, it's a good think Olberman was around to kick it! =) All depends on whose ox is being gored.
Cry babies
Your post is so true. Cry babies, run to the moderator and get the posts they disagree with deleted, even though they are posted on the LIBERAL board.
Cry babies
The posts that get removed are removed because they violate the rules for the boards posted by the administrator. Typical liberal response, follow only the rules you like, and to use your term, become a cry baby when the you don't like the rules. With all due respect, spend less time whining about who posts on what board and what posts are removed, and more time trying to figure out why you think it is more important to investigate Bush than it is to concentrate on terrorism. Still having a real difficult time trying to wrap my mind around that one. But..it does underscore why conservatives are so concerned and rightly so.
Cry babies
The two posts of last week were removed because a conservative who came on this board (you?) did not agree with them. Both were articles from journalists and printed in major newspapers, so obviously cleared and approved by the editors of the newspapers and read throughout America. However, the conservative did not agree with the articles, so whined and cried and ran to the moderator (flash back of junior high actions) and had them removed. My opinion is, if a conservative cannot handle an article that was posted in a newspaper and obviously cleared by its editor, dont read it, go back to the conservative board and leave the liberal board alone. I have never posted on the conservative board but have read some of the posts and some are definitely inflammatory and attacks on liberal/democratic politicians. Liberals have not asked to have those posts removed. Conservatives: Do as I say, not as I do.
How many babies do you think die in
the wars that Bush and McCain support? Or does it only matter when American babies die?
You say you think McCain is the lesser of two evils because he is against abortion, right? Well if you are against the concept of killing innocent life, you should be APPALLED at the number of innocent children the US has killed in IRAQ, and will kill in Iran if Mr. 'Prolife" McCain gets in power.
Let your "conscience" be your guide.
So were the babies
murdered. I don't see you making a case for them.
Anchor babies. sm
You mean to tell me, gourdpainter, that you don't celebrate this country's great cultural differences and rights for every American born citizen? I'm shocked!!!! 
Seriously, yes, I do see this as a problem, but doing away with the 14th Amendment is not the way to keep this from happeniing. I'm not sure what the correct procedure for handling this would be or even if it could be done as anchor babies are automatically citizens, but I would think writing your congressmen would be the place to start. This is one of the tragedies this country might face because of weak borders and law enforcement's seeming inabiilty to send illegals back where they came from. It goes deeper than that, though.
You know, you mentioned in another post that no Native American has ever run for POTUS. Actually, they probably have more right than Caucasian American citizens to hold this office as they were here first. 
anchor babies are ---
Anchor babies are babies born to foreigners on American soil. They by virtue of being born here are automatically American citizens even if their parents are not and even if their parents are here illegally. Thus, one day, we could very well have a president whose parents are here illegally, whose parents do not speak English, and he will be legal to be the president! Think that's right?
The law concerning anchor babies....sm
In 1898, the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark declared that the Fourteenth Amendment adopted the common-law definition of birthright citizenship. Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller’s dissenting opinion, however, argued that birthright citizenship had been repealed by the principles of the American Revolution and rejected by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nonetheless, the decision conferred birthright citizenship on a child of legal residents of the United States. Although the language of the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark is certainly broad enough to include the children born in the United States of illegal as well as legal immigrants, there is no case in which the Supreme Court has explicitly held that this is the unambiguous command of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Based on the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, some believe that Congress could exercise its Section 5 powers to prevent the children of illegal aliens from automatically becoming citizens of the United States. An effort in 1997 failed in the face of intense political opposition from immigrant rights groups. Apparently, the question remains open to the determination of the political and legal processes.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/GovernmentReform/wm925.cfm
Where do babies come from? 1 man and 1 woman
I understand these relationships, but I don't think traditional marriage between a man and a woman should cover gays/lesbians. They have civil unions in my state and now they want marriage. Leave the tradition of marriage alone.
I am not willing to assume that 1.2 million babies...
would have horrible lives. I can't see killing them all just in case some might suffer. But how is our choice to decide whether or not someone lives based on what kind of life they might have? I think it should be the choice of the creator, myself. I am curious as to what you think your creator thinks about choosing to kill an unborn child? I think mine's heart breaks every time one happens...over 2000 times a day. Yes, that's what I think.
It's quick? It's horrible but its quick? Good grief!!
You keep discounting the right of the child to live. Who are you, the mother, or anyone else, to say that child has no right to live? Do you think your creator endowed you with that right? Just curious.
How many unwanted babies have you adopted, sam? (nm)
???
but there was already a law in place to protect the babies -
nx
wow -- that's as sad as 1/2 aborted babies being left
nm
No, most of those murder enough babies legally as well.....
@@
They cant stop having babies if they have no forms
Remember the babies in dumpsters?
We had a 17-year-old come in our hospital, full-term and in complete denial she was pregnant. She got mad and left when told she was pregnant. She came back a few weeks later and they could not save her - she never went into labor, the baby was stillborn in her for god knows how long and it subsequently killed her. This kid was living here and there - her parents did not care. The ills in society will remain regardless of the laws.
Obama is not saying he wants babies murdered -
Obama is prochoice - that means each person has the right to decide for themselves. You all amaze me when you say you want the government out of your life and to quit telling you what you have to do, but then it is okay for the government to tell the other person that they can't do something they want to because it does not go along with your belief system.
I would never ever have an abortion. I think it is wrong. However, I think that each person should have the right to decide for themselves if they do it or not. In this case I agree, government stay out of my business!
Nope. She can have all the babies SHE wansts to have.
It's a free country. Believers in pro-choice want to KEEP it free.
Sorry, but according to the law, anchor babies are US citizens - nm
x
Better 1.2 million dead babies a year?
I think we get where you are coming from.
babies are piling up in hospitals and all you're
Have you written or called your local representative? Have you written Congress? What about getting a group together to picket the issue on Capitol Hill?
So many people claim to care, but what they really want is a "clear conscience". Not voting for Obama does not clear anyone of this travesty. It only makes people like you think it does. Sam, you claim to be an independent, but you need to change your card to republican. That's how a republican operates. They only worry about if their hands are clean at the end of the day.
GP..Exactly. And those "anchor babies" can sponsor their whole family and who know what else.
nm
|
