Results 61 to 70 of 147
-
10-16-2008, 02:53 PM #61
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,292
Thanked: 150I just mean to show that the taking of life is a complicated matter, one that should be in the hands of the individuals who understand and are dealing with it, not the government in it's infinite wisdom.
-
10-16-2008, 03:00 PM #62
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Salt Lake City
- Posts
- 263
Thanked: 31How is any other candidiot any different? They let Quayle in as V.P. They let Mondale in as V.P. Lincoln, Nixon, Carter, King George II, Van Buren (and the list goes on and on) all made it to the very presidency. They're no different than Palin, they just picked different things to lie about.
-
10-16-2008, 03:08 PM #63
The problem is that either the unborn children have rights or they do not, and yet all individuals do not agree on that point. If the government doesn't have enough sense to know what it is dealing with, it should leave it to individuals as you say. But I support the government getting it right and protecting the lives of the unborn. Leaving it to individuals has resulted in tens of millions of abortions in the US in just 30 years. That the government not only stands back and allows it, but makes a decision supporting people's right to do so is unacceptable for me
Find me on SRP's official chat in ##srp on Freenode. Link is at top of SRP's homepage
-
10-16-2008, 03:11 PM #64
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586Hey, not only is this sort of statement hateful nonsense, this thread is strictly designated to bash Sarah Palin. If you can't say anything negative about her, than please keep your snotty comments to yourself, or start your own thread. So there (again)!
Lee, regarding your off topic rants against abortion, I understand your concern about killing "innocent babies". However, as a man I don't understand why it should matter to you. I also don't think our government should get involved in the morality business. It is far too hypocritical an organization to entrust with choices regarding the bodies of individual adults. Your argument is that human life begins at conception. Others believe human life begins at birth. This is the essential argument.
I raised two girls for eleven years. The older one came home from school one day when she was thirteen years old and asked me what my stance was on abortion. I explained that I don't agree with either of the two standard choices. I explained that I don't believe human life begins until a child reaches eighteen years of age and parents should be allowed to drop their kids off at a clinic to be aborted any timee up to the kid's eighteenth birthday. My stepdaughter was not very happy with my answer.
Alot of people would like my mother to have aborted me. There are times I agree with them.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to icedog For This Useful Post:
WireBeard (10-16-2008)
-
10-16-2008, 03:12 PM #65
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Posts
- 377
Thanked: 21
-
10-16-2008, 03:16 PM #66
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586
What is different about Palin is that it appears likely that if McCain/Palin win, she is statistically likely to become President. The fact that politicians are liars is not news. However, this woman is dangerously stupid and her blatant lies indicate a serious disrespect/disregard for the people of this country. Now please say something hateful about her.
-
10-16-2008, 03:18 PM #67
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Posts
- 3,763
Thanked: 735For Icedog
To keep this on-topic:
Sarah Palin is the sorriest, saddest excuse for a political candidate ever. So much so, it even eclipses the ineptitudes of G.W. Bush and Dan Quayle combined!
It has, however, made for some excellent and enjoyable fodder for SNL and David Letterman! All of the debate skits on SNL (including the non-Palin ones) were really quite funny. I gave up on SNL ages ago,but the debate skits were well done indeed.
-
10-16-2008, 03:22 PM #68
I didn't realize that has been questioned too
Icedog, you don't know why it matters to me since I am a man? Don't be silly, that's akin to saying men should not be concerned with women's right to vote since they are not women. It's a question of rights. Do the unborn have rights to life that the government should protect? And I agree, the government shouldn't be making such moral determinations, but somebody needs to make it and the government is charged with protecting the lives of the people even from each other
And yes, it has been an off-topic rant, although at least you'll know why I won't be helping keep Palin out of Washington. Any further posts I make in the thread should be in the spirit of bashing Palin, that feather-ruffler!Find me on SRP's official chat in ##srp on Freenode. Link is at top of SRP's homepage
-
10-16-2008, 03:24 PM #69
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586
10-16-2008, 03:36 PM
#70
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586
That is convoluted logic. WHen the constitution guarantees a right to vote for all adult American citizens, it is a right for men and women regardless of race, color, creed or sexual orientation. The argument there was that women and negroes were not considered people by all the folks in control. That is obviously a remarkably ignorant point of view, Sadly, today, that level of ignorance still exists in some circles. Regarding abortion? Well, that is an issue that affects primarily women and will be primarily a woman's concern until men get pregnant. I say "primarily" because the father of the fetus may in some circumstances have a valid input regarding the termination of the pregnancy for which he is (at least)50% responsible. However Lee, in most instances, it is no one's business but the woman who is pregnant.
Now just bash that whacky idiot Palin.