Palin believes teaching abstinence only is the thing to do - nm
Posted By: Amanda on 2008-09-26
In Reply to: Birth control would have been nice. - to teach her about. nm
x
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
Apparently abstinence and no sex-ed are not working.
More failed policies?
One thing I like about Palin is that...
she is not a McCain "yes" person. They do disagree on some issues. And I myself would not classify an abortion clinic bomber as a domestic terrorist. I would classify them as criminals who should be punished according to state laws. Just like that guy who was shooting abortionists. Not a terrorist, a criminal. Just my opinion. And isn't she (Palin) entitled to hers?
Sorry, Palin ain't my thing.....neither is Obama
xx
The only thing Palin and Hillary have in common
We are not so stupid to vote for someone just because she is a woman. That is insulting. Palin is a nasty, evil, stupid person. The fact that old saggy man chose her for VP put our country at risk. He even lost the republicans on that one.
These people would not give Palin credit for a thing.
nm
Mississippi, A Hotbed of Abstinence Education, Now Boasts Highest Teen Pregnancy Rate
The Centers for Disease Control released a new report today that found that Mississippi “now has the nation’s highest teen pregnancy rate, displacing Texas and New Mexico for that lamentable title.” The report found that in 2006, the Mississippi teen pregnancy rate was over 60 percent higher than the national average and increased 13 percent since the year before. While the new report does not explain why the state’s teen pregnancy rate is increasing, one reason may be the poor quality of its sex ed programs. As the Sexuality Information and Education Center explains, Mississippi focuses heavily on abstinence education and teachers are prohibited from demonstrating how to use contraceptives:
Mississippi schools are not required to teach sexuality education or sexually transmitted disease (STD)/HIV education. If schools choose to teach either or both forms of education, they must stress abstinence-until-marriage, including “the likely negative psychological and physical effects of not abstaining.” […]
If the school board authorizes the teaching of contraception, state law dictates that the failure rates and risks of each contraceptive method must be included and “in no case shall the instruction or program include any demonstration of how condoms or other contraceptives are applied.”
A reporter for ABC News’s Jackson, MS affiliate explained, “The Mississippi Department of Human Services says abstinence is the only birth control that is 100 percent effective. And that’s the only message teens need to hear.” Unfortunately, numerous studies show that abstinence-only education is not effective. As one study found:
Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.
Further, a review by the House Oversight Committee found that “80% of the abstinence-only curricula…contain false, misleading, or distorted information about reproductive health.” Pregnant teens in Mississippi face few options. Access to facilities that provide abortions in that state is extremely limited. Indeed, because of an unusually effective anti-choice campaign in the legislature, only a single abortion clinic remains open in the state. UpdateThe report also found that the teen pregnancy rate is rising fastest in Alaska, where Gov. Sarah Palin (R) is a strong proponent of abstinence-only sex ed.
I am teaching a small ESL
course in grammar. Two examples I use
President Bush flew BACK from vacation to sign the Terri Schiavo legislation.
President Bush flew OVER the Katrina victims.
It seems to help them understand better.
I hardly think that teaching kids...(sm)
how NOT to bash LGBTs is going to "force homosexuality upon your kids." Give me a break! They aren't teaching Peter how to kiss Paul. They're teaching Peter how not to beat up Paul. I think it's really sad that this actually has to be a lessen in school in the first place, and in grammar school at that --- not because of the LGBT issues being brought to light, but because of the parents who have obviously taught their kids that its okay to bash others who are different. How many times have you called an LGBT a bad name in front of your kids? Hmmm....
They aren't teaching
Peter how to kiss Paul. They are, however, trying to reinforce to our children that if Peter kisses Paul, it's acceptable. We will continue to teach them that it's not. We do not teach our kids to bash others who are different but to bash the bad behaviors that others engage in. The homosexual community's doublespeak isn't going to work.
Teaching about contraception is the key, IMHO
We need to start teaching men and women about contraception. Im amazed when I read medical reports at how many do not use anything or the *rhythm method*. Yes, I agree with you..I would love for there to be no thing such as abortion..It is a terrible thing, breaks my heart, however, until we educate people about contraception and taking responsibility for their sexual lives, abortion will continue, whether it is legal or not..and that is the terrible part. I can remember back in NY in the 1970s..Abortion was not legal..and women ended up dead in back room alleys, dirty motel rooms, in their own homes, trying to end a pregnancy with a coat hanger, their insides ripped out. I remember seeing pictures in Ms Magazine of police files of women who died trying to terminate a pregnancy. I fear it will go back to that..
The only ones teaching hate are people
you continue to lie and say he is. He is not teaching hate. In fact, it's quite the opposite. He's showing grace and dignity and trying to bring people together, but about 20% of Americans don't want that. They want to continue the divide that Bush started. 20% people hate Obama and they represent most of the posts on this board, day after day, whining, complaining, moaning and lying about Obama.
You would deny healthcare to people who need it. You would deny Social Security benefits to those who worked all their lives. As long as you have yours, you don't care about anyone else. There's a whole thread on this page devoted to hatred of gays and gay marriage. There's also a thread devoted to a **hate crimes bill** that you all hate, as well. Don't worry. Hatred comes from the heart, so you're not in danger of losing any of the overflowing supply you seem to harbor.
So it's the **national day of prayer**. There is not one person in this country who is deprived the right to pray. Not one. Everyone can pray regardless of their religion. The day was intended for everyone of all faiths to come together and pray for our country to succeed. But you don't want that. You, Cooter and Rush and the other nut jobs out there want it to fail. There are a lot of good people who happen to be Muslim, just as there are a lot of bad people who claim to be Christian. There are good and bad in both. One religion is no better than any other. They are all equal in this country. That's what freedom of religion means.
There's probably a good reason that there isn't a **national day of government** in churches across this country.
Once again, Obama is not a Muslim and you're a sick, hateful pathetic liar. If any harm comes to President Obama it will be from someone who hallucinates and promotes hatred just like you do.
What is your problem with just teaching no bullying
There is no need to point out homosexuals as being people they should not pick on. Why pick out any single type of kid?
Did you ever hear of just teaching your child to be nice to people, to not name call, bully or pick on anyone? That would just about wrap it up wouldn't it?
There are many young children in elementary school that do not even know the term "homosexual", so I certainly don't believe it is the school's job to bring that to the attention of a child. That is the parent's responsibility to explain what homosexuality is, if they so choose.
You think for a minute if a school starts talking about tolerance of homosexuals that questions wouldn't arise about what they do, what that means, why they do that, and every other question they could possibly imagine? I sure as heck don't care for the school system to educate my child on gays or their lifestyle, thank you very much!
Teaching a child about not making fun of a child with disabilities is NOT the same as teaching a child about homosexuals. You believe homosexuality to be a "disability". Funny you brought up those two things together..........
No sell!
What kind of moral teaching she had as a child is no
reflection of whether or not she has a child out of wedlock. My 18-year-old niece was raised in church, had good Christian parents and got pregnant before marriage. You can only teach a child. You can't force him or her to live by your own convictions. 
'Fuzzy math ' - isn't that what they're teaching in all the
So that they'll be even more adept at rigging election results than last time?
Freedom of religion? Since when is teaching hate a
nm
Pastors would be held responsible from the pulpit just teaching
XX
parents signed their child up for the religion teaching
nm
If he believes what you just said, then no
The Federal Reserve IS the reason for this problem and has been the same problem each and every time this country has seen economic downfall, all because of banks and reserves. Please take the time to watch this and it will help you understand.......this is a wake up call for why government SHOULD NOT EVER be this big
Have you EVER known the government to do anything worthwhile with your money, and now this????
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553
If he believes that, then YUP.... his is
... that the U.S. is turning into an armpit. Makes me wonder which other country in the world will eventually take us over. (If anyone would even WANT TO, that is.)
So anyone that believes in God does not have
xx
Uh huh. Like anyone here believes you -
And yes, you ARE wasting your time here.
LOL! She believes she can do anything ugly she wants because she
wraps herself up in the Bible and Jesus is her *special friend* and just gives her a wink and a nod every time she does something heinous. At least that's what she herself said in a post not long ago. (Aggressive denial by her to follow, I'm sure, like she lies about everything else.)
It's obvious that none of these people have Jesus in their hearts because there's no room for love and peace and truth in those jaded, hateful, dishonest, angry people. I wonder if they even have a hint of how laughable they really are! LOL! 
Okay...if he really believes this "stuff" why does he not...
lead by example and conserve...he lives in a house the size of a small town in some countries. He uses more electricity than 4 or 5 households. I don't know what he drives, but I do know that every time he flies coast to coast he puts more emissions in the atmosphere than someone driving a HUMMER for TWO YEARS. And he does that how many times a month??? Geez. I am sure you mean well, but...if he is really so interested in saving this beautiful planet...he should be the FIRST to conserve. THis is his job now. It is all about the money.
I realize that not everyone believes the same
And sorry to offend you but in fact the poster is a fanatic, in my opinion.
Also, it's not a FACT that Palin is a fanatic; she is a Christian. You call her a fanatic, your opinion.
Well, I happen to be one who believes
God has a sense of humor. After all He created us didn't He? Yeah, I "profess" to be a Christian but I take a pretty dim view of self-righteous "Christians" who question other's opinions and thoughts that don't fit into their definition of "Christian." Christian = "one who follows Christ" or tries to in my case. I am not perfect but I'm not the one to tell you that you "profess" to be a Christian. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't, I don't know.
Don't give a fig who believes it or not.
x
He believes in abortion. NM below
x
but I'm sure the vast majority believes
that life begins at conception, however, I know I'm not going to change your mind, so I'll leave it at that.
Half of U.S. still believes Iraq had WMD
Half of U.S. still believes Iraq had WMD
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent Sun Aug 6, 7:43 PM ET
Do you believe in Iraqi WMD? Did
Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003?
Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in
Iraq.
People tend to become independent of reality in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull.
The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900-million-plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq.
Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents — up from 36 percent last year — said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story.
I'm flabbergasted, said Michael Massing, a media critic whose writings dissected the largely unquestioning U.S. news reporting on the Bush administration's shaky WMD claims in 2002-03.
This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence, Massing said.
I don't see where anyone believes Bush has done no wrong
It's the fact that several of us don't believe he is the cause of all the suffering in the world like many of you here do. Some of us are not blinded by Bush hatred nor are we Bush loyalists to the point where we think he's done everything right. I believe several of the *crashers* on this board have said that, but you refused to either read the body of their posts or believe what they say.
Oops! Don't say Amen - not everyone believes the same!
=)
She used the quote because she believes the words....
This Pegler fellow used it when Harry Truman was elected: When Truman came into the Presidency, Pegler welcomed him "We grow good people in our towns, with honesty, sincerity and dignity." But earlier, Pegler had told his readers the man from Missouri was someone to watch out for "This Truman", he wrote, when Harry was nominated for Vice President "is thin-lipped, a hater, and not above offering you his hand to yank you off balance and work you over with a chair leg, a pool cue or something out of his pocket."
Sounds like politics to me. However, the sentiments are true. We DO grow good people in our towns, with honesty, sincerity and dignity.
The poster probably believes what Hollywood says
nm
Well anyone who believes that garbage deserves
And the greatest majority of those come with NO NAME....false names, names they can't even identify the source. Wanna guess where they really are coming from?
Maybe Senator Obama believes in following the
"First Admendment" to the Constitution of the United States.
My sister believes this stuff
My sister's church tells her this stuff to scare her and get her tithe. Let me tell you in the 80s she was no saint. It makes me feel bad for her that her church makes her so afraid and discourages her from thinking for herself.
Michael Steele..Does he even know what he believes? (sm)
By Philip Klein on 3.11.09 @ 10:15PM
In 1983, Woody Allen made the mockumentary film Zelig about a man who longs for approval so badly that he changes to fit the people who are surrounding him. The movie may as well have been written about Michael Steele, who continues to tie himself in knots as part of his effort to reach out to moderates.
Steele already has been ridiculed by all sides of the political spectrum for blasting Rush Limbaugh on CNN only to apologize when he received blowback. But now, via Matt Lewis, I see he told GQ that he believes abortion is an individual choice. Here's the portion of the interview:
How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your Catholic faith but by the fact that you were adopted?
Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that—I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it… Uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.
Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
So basically, in an effort to seem more inclusive, Steele tried to appropriate the language of the left by saying life is a choice, but then he allowed himself to be backed into a corner in which he said that women have the right to choose abortion -- by definition, a pro-choice postion. Perhaps realizing what he had just said, Steele then tried to add nuance to his point:
Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!
So, after getting boxed in, he suddenly shifts from "individual choice" meaning "women have the right to choose an abortion" to it meaning that states have an "individual choice" about whether or not to permit women to exercise choice. Liz Mair, charitably, thinks that Steele was trying to express the pro-choice, anti-Roe, position but that he just was clumsy about it. Even if that were the case, however, it wouldn't be consistent with other recent statements he made on the subject.
In December, when he was under fire during the RNC race for being a member of Christine Todd Whitman's moderate Republican Leadership Council, he portrayed himself as emphatically pro-life to CBN's David Brody, barbing, "I was a monk for goodness sakes ok?" Appearing on Fox News Sunday after his election to serve as RNC chair, Steele declared, "I'm a pro-life Roman Catholic conservative, always have been."
In a debate moderated by Tim Russert during the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Maryland, Steele was all over the place on Roe. Check out the following exchange:
MR. RUSSERT: Would, would you encourage — would you hope the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think that that’s a matter that’s going to rightly belong to the courts to decide ultimately whether or not that, that issue should be addressed. The, the Court has taken a position, which I agree, stare decisis, which means that the law is as it is and, and so this is a matter that’s ultimately going to be adjudicated at the states. We’re seeing that. The states are beginning to decide for themselves on, on this and a host of other issues. And the Supreme Court would ultimately decide that.
MR. RUSSERT: But you hope that the Court keeps Roe v. Wade in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: I think the Court will evaluate the law as society progresses, as the Court is supposed to do.
MR. RUSSERT: But what’s your position? Do you want them to sustain it or overturn it?
LT. GOV. STEELE: Well, I think, I think, I think Roe vs. Wade, Roe vs. Wade is a, is a matter that
should’ve been left to the states to decide, ultimately. But it, it is where it is today, and the courts will ultimately decide whether or not this, this gets addressed by the states, goes back to the states in some form or they overturn it outright.
MR. RUSSERT: Is is your desire to keep it in place?
LT. GOV. STEELE: My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point, yes.
Huh?
The problem with Steele's defenders is that they like the idea of Steele -- i.e., the idea that Steele is going to reach out to moderates. But the reality of Steele is quite different. He is proving himself to be a shape shifter who is trying to please everybody, but in the end delivering a completely muddled message. Ultimately no pro-choice independent or Democrat is going to be more inclined to become a Republican as a result of that GQ interview, because Steele comes off like a bumbling clown who is trying to have it both ways. The mere fact that we have to have a whole debate over what he means demonstrates that he's doing a terrible job at communicating. And lest we forget, communication was supposed to be his strong suit.
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/11/michael-zelig-steele
Obama truly believes he is "the one". McCain would
nm
I am interested why any of us should know his personal reasons for EVERYTHING he believes in? sm
It does seem that President Obama is now under a microscope and every tiny minute aspect of his life, any beliefs he holds, are scrutinize for a NEFARIOUS HIDDEN MEANING? yes, perhaps it is a religious belief, I have a close girlfriend who was born Catholic and has been a Jehovah Witness for several years, but is that wrong? The focus of their lives, their spending, etc., is around Our Savior and they minimize celebrations of self, as I understand. Would that be bad or evil in some way? I have been silently reading this board since the primaries first started, and it seems that ever since Mr. Obama became a frontrunner, candidate, and finally president, people are picking apart EVERY SINGLE area of his life. Why? Would anyone want to live under this scrutiny? Why not just pray for him he has a HUGE job ahead of him that I personally would never want, judge him by his policies, his intentions for this country, the way he represents our country, for his proposals and hard work, but not his personal beliefs which should be private, as my religion is to me. What's next, analyzing his favorite color for hidden meaning? I am really praying hard for a successful and safe presidency.
What makes you think that everyone who believes in Jesus grew up in the church?
I most definitely did not, and it is an absolute MIRACLE that I even came to the Lord. My parents are as far from Christ as can be. I literally came to Christ "kicking and screaming". I did not want to believe in him. Mostly because I did not want to have to follow HIS rules. But I am here, and I am saved, and I thank God that I am! It is the best thing to ever happen to my SOUL.
And half the country believes this....good grief....nm
From point #1: "Anyone who believes otherwise is a tin-foil hat fringe conspiracist."
Ah, those pinko lefty Presbyterians!!! They hate America,are unpatriotic, traitorous, out-of-touch, terrorists....did I forget anything?
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060814&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=608140369&SectionCat=&Template=printart
Monday, August 14, 2006
9/11 book from church publishing house causes uproar
Author claims U.S. orchestrated attacks
By Peter Smith
psmith@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
By Peter Smith
psmith@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
The official publishing house of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has printed a new book about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that has outraged conservatives in the church and elsewhere.
The book, Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11, written by David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus at Claremont School of Theology in California, accuses the Bush administration of carrying out the attacks as a pretext for expanding America's demonic imperial power.
Griffin argues, among other things, that the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of secretly planted explosives -- he quotes eyewitnesses who claim that's what it looked and sounded like -- and not because airliners crashed into the buildings, causing fires.
Writers on conservative Presbyterian Web sites have been responding by saying officials of the Louisville-based denomination are out of touch with members and by calling for a boycott of Presbyterian Publishing Corp.
The corporation funds itself from book sales and has editorial independence in deciding what to publish, although its board is elected by the denomination's legislative General Assembly.
But as word of the book spreads, some Presbyterians lament that it comes as the 2.3 million-member denomination struggles with financial troubles, declining membership and a controversial General Assembly vote to open the door to ordaining gays.
It is sad that at this time in the life of our denomination, yet another silly and inflammatory step would be taken by the church's bureaucracy, said the Rev. Michael Walker, executive director of Presbyterians for Renewal, a conservative group based in Louisville.
The Rev. Parker Williamson of the North Carolina-based Presbyterian Lay Committee asked how these wild accusations make it through the editorial process.
Davis Perkins, president of the publishing company, said the book's stances are not those of the corporation or of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).
But in recent written statements, he defended the decision to publish the book, saying it is not an off-the-wall polemic but rather a considered work with 49 pages of extensive scholarly notes.
Perkins said Griffin's claims will not be universally accepted by his readers, but the arguments supporting those claims merit careful consideration by serious-minded Christians and Americans concerned with truth and the meaning of their faith.
The publisher would not say how many of the 7,500 copies of the book have been sold since its publication last month.
The book was published under the corporation's prestigious Westminster John Knox imprint, which produces works on theology and popular spirituality from a range of scholars, including liberal and evangelical Christians and also Jews. It also produces popular works such as The Gospel According to The Simpsons.
But Perkins said such works haven't stirred controversy over whether they reflect the church's official position.
Publishing a range of views is what academic/trade publishers do, he said. The corporation publishes specifically Presbyterian works under a separate imprint, Geneva Press.
Griffin is part of a wider movement whose books and Web sites challenge the official version of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001. Similar claims by University of Wisconsin-Madison instructor Kevin Barrett have brought calls for him to be fired.
In his book, Griffin claims that the U.S. military could have intercepted the four hijacked jets if it had wanted to and that the hijacker accused of slamming an airliner into the Pentagon lacked the flying skills to do so.
Griffin calls on Christians to oppose the Bush administration's foreign policy, just as ancient Christians opposed the Roman Empire. He said that although he doesn't believe in literal evil spirits, such empires have demonic power to do great harm.
Our first allegiance must be to God, he writes. … If we believe that our political and military leaders are acting on the basis of policies that are diametrically opposed to divine purposes, it is incumbent upon us to say so.
Griffin is a member of another Protestant denomination, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). The Presbyterian Publishing Corp. has published several of his books on theology.
Griffin said in an interview last week that for the first year and a half after Sept. 11, he believed the attacks simply were carried out by Arab terrorists angry about American foreign policy. I didn't think … even the Bush administration would do such a thing, he said.
But skeptics of the widely accepted accounts convinced him that the attacks were an inside job used to justify the administration's expansion of military powers and the adoption of the doctrine of pre-emptive war, the basis of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Griffin has written two previous books on this theme under different publishers. The third book seeks to rally church groups into challenging the official accounts.
Griffin said he's heard the recent criticisms from Presbyterians but not from anybody who's actually read the book.
It's remarkable how certain people can be that this idea is wrong, he said.
Reporter Peter Smith can be reached at (502) 582-4469.
McCain BELIEVES IN GLOBAL WARMING - GASP, BOY IS HE STUPID
He also terms global warming "a serious and urgent economic, environmental and national security challenge" and adds that "the problem isn't a Hollywood invention," according to excerpts of planned remarks his campaign made available Sunday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18269994/
Russian Professor of Economics Believes U.S. Will Split into Six States
Sarah Palin fans are as whack as Palin.
Even John McCain's top adviser referred to Sarah Palin as a whack job.
Vote McCain and Palin! -oh and why does Palin
nm
Palin over Biden any day. Make fun of Palin all you
nm
But valuing over the price of a dollar is a right thing wing thing, so you are on the wrong board. n
x
Sarah Palin makes Sarah Palin look stupid!
The Democrats did not make Sarah Palin look stupid. Sarah Palin does a fine job of looking stupid without help from anyone. All she has to do is open her mouth!
I never said it's a bad thing, it is a good thing....nm
nm
Palin might not have taken it anywhere
but it is not her job to seek taking books off shelves, period. And you don't know if this is "political crap" or not because the media has not been permitted to ask her any questions. Once voters get these answers, then they will have the necessary information with which to make a decision as to whether or not this is who we/they want in office. I, for one, am not going to skew her with a pitchfork or defend her as I have no information with which to do so, either way. I need answers to these questions that have been floating out there. Questions and answers are very important in our form of government called democracy which is for the people, of the people and by the people. Freedom comes with a gigantic amount of responsibility, is not to be taken lightly, and is very fragile.
|
