As long as you pay homage to me :w :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JMS
Printable View
As long as you pay homage to me :w :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JMS
No offense, but aren't there far more important things when deciding who gets to run the country? Like, how they actually plan to do it, or what the expectations are? Whether they can be trusted to try and get the economy to its feet, or if they are intelligent enough not to continue with the terrorist paranoia, or if they respect the constitution enough to prevent them from violating it openly?Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
I am not going to open the debate on abortion here, but consider this:
a) supposing Obama is pro-choice (I haven't checked), that doesn't mean he is killing fetuses himself.
b) supposing McCain gets elected, it won't change a thing. Abortion is legal and it will stay legal unless you allow the president to outlaw it (which is a very un-republican thing to think).
So either way, the stance of the president on abortion is moot.
And as a good christian, Bush is also against abortion. Did that make him a better president? Did that make him respect the constitution?
Don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
Is it ever worth taking a life if there is a good chance that it is that of an innocent person?
Bruno, I think a nominees position on abortion is of the utmost importance!
How a person regards the life of a fetus, or as some like to speculate, the potential life of a fetus is an indication how someone will regard you and me in their decisions that will have an impact on us, and, as a good friend of mine likes to point out which I'll paraphrase, "the question of abortion, whether legal or not, is still a philosophical question. If their is even the slightest question as to whether a fetus is alive Shouldn't we err in favor of the fetus?" Thanks Lee!!
Legal or not I would prefer that the man I vote for to be the leader of our nation not be cavalier concerning the question of life!
I can see your point, but Bush is as fundamental on this issue as you can get. Is he a better president for it? does he hold life in high regard? No, he isn't, and no, he doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
I could rephrase your argument, and ask if someone should be executed if there is even the slightest chance he was innocent. Personally I don't think so. There are enough documented cases of obvious and less obvious mistakes, and innocent people have been executed because of it.
Bush was the governor of the no.1 state in the execution list
Number of Executions by State and Region Since 1976 | Death Penalty Information Center
And he has served for 8 years. So under him, there were (rough guess) 100 executions, which means there is a good chance that under his authority, at least 1 innocent was executed.
Did you hold that against him?
someone who is very much pro death penalty is ok, but someone who is pro choice would be bad?
And regardless of their stance, does that make them a better leader? Looking at the past 8 years, I'd say no.
Bruno, if you are making this argument to show the logical failings of some people when it comes to voting I agree with much of what you say, but if you are pointing out what you believe are my inconsistencies then you have no idea who I am or what I believe in!
I have noticed the general tendencies around here (especially during election season) to paint everyone with a broad brush! We are seen as conservative,liberal,Canadian, American, straight shaver, safety razor shaver, etc, etc, etc, but we are all individuals who have different experiences, different beliefs, different points of view based on upbringing and countless other influences! When we address other posts we should keep this in mind!
That was the point of my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
That was not the point of my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
I just wanted to point out that voting for McCain solely on his pro-life stance is as illogical as voting against McCain for his pro death penalty stance.
Imo an election is a matter of fitting a job description + specific requirements with the most suitable candidate for the job, based on the whole picture, and not looking at 1 specific issue.
My own views on abortion and the death penalty are not black and white either, and more complex than what I can write down in a couple of paragraphs.
I assume yours are similarly complex because rarely are issues black and white.
So this was in no way a judgement of you or your character (or of Lee's for that matter)
Bruno, the president nominates the supreme court justices (they still have to get confirmed at legislation), and the abortion question is in their power (to move the decision to state level, or why not criminalize it on federal level). Few old people on the court right now, so it's expected that the next president will get to appoint some justices. Of course they all tell you there's no litmus test, but the fact that Lee and many others feel so strongly about who gets to nominate tells you that actualy there is an implicit litmus test.
How alive is a a fertilized egg is pretty settled, the question is at which point it gets its 'unalienable rights' under the US constitution.
Thanks Bruno! I was hoping that I was misreading your intent!