Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 255
  1. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Well this thread has taken an unfortunate turn. I think the left does a disservice to itself by ridiculing those that believe in religion. While I have my own doubts I try not to poke at those that are spiritual EVEN if they are hypocrites and acting sanctimonious (which pretty much sums up most politicians on both sides of the isle IMO.
    Because this type of legislation was driven by K Street christian-right Lobbyists (Alliance Defense Fund), which are funded by the likes of Pat Robertson's Regents (formerly Christian Broadcasting Network) University, the infusion of dogmatic religious code was first forced into this critical issue by the Religious (self)Right(eous). Just ask Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (which Pat Robertson also founded) who argues these cases before the Supreme Court. Religion ... As divisive as it ever was!

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg on this decision:

    "The Court's hostility is not concealed. Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label abortion doctor. A fetus is described as an unborn child, and a baby...and the reasoned medical judgments of highly trained doctors are dismissed as preferences motivated by mere convenience."

    And this is supposed to be the highest court in the land?
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    Do you really think that my opposition to a practice of pulling babies out of the womb feet first just far enough to stab them at the base of the skull making an incision that allows their brains to be sucked out is derived from a desire to control women?

    Rest assured, if I were able to control women, I would not subject them or their offspring to such.
    Perhaps if the feel good name "partial birth" abortion was followed with a description, it wouldn't be so widely defended.

    I Wonder how many "physicians" could do it if the baby were head first and facing them. Do they think it less wrong because because of this lack of facial contact. At that point of the birthing process, they must have to litterally force the baby to stay in. Is that why they do it in this fashion? If its so "right" to do this, why couldn't they just let the baby come completely out and then do it?
  3. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #123  
    ^ Speaking of convenient ... 'partial birth abortion' is Pat Robertson's name for intact D&E/X.

    Got a video showing these unskilled, mercenary barbarians cashing in?
  4. #124  
    As anyone here has surmised by now: I am a liberal who would normally support the womans' right to choose. However, I am sick of protecting other people's rights .. people who are not willing to stand up for their own rights!!

    I think the women of the US of A deserve a roll-back of their hard earned rights because they keep voting for politicians who will take away these rights. Or they choose not to vote at all.

    So, hey ladies .. welcome to the world you choose to create for yourselves .....

    Despite all the shortcomings, the role of $ in politics, the lobbyists .. US is a functioning democracy. People get the govt they deserve. You would think that women alone would be a huge voting block to support their rights. Bit of not .. <shrug>
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  5.    #125  
    Of all of the anti-religious people, you really are active about cramming your beliefs down everyone else's throat. Lighten up - I am sick and tired of your Jefferson crap. Add something of value instead of your emtional trivia.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    ^ Speaking of convenient ... 'partial birth abortion' is Pat Robertson's name for intact D&E/X.

    Got a video showing these unskilled, mercenary barbarians cashing in?
  6.    #126  
    I was at one time quite to the left, things happened and my beliefs have swung to the right - not the far right, but just to the right of center.

    You speak of loss of rights - not really. What is right for one is not necessarily right for another. A belief of Christianity is the protection of the innocent. Instead of abortions, why not do what you suggest - why not ask people to take responsibility for their acts. If pregnancy is a choice, then choose not to become pregnant. There are numerous ways to prevent pregnancy. In today's society with today's values, neither party has to take any responsibility for their issues. Breed like an animal and kill the resulting life. Instead of that, why not practice birth control and take responsibility for the life that may be created. I am responsible for my actions. You are responsible for your actions and that is something you display very proudly. Since we are both responsible for our actions, then why not demand others take responsibility for their actions.

    Birth control is very widely available at little or no cost. It is available from a health clinic, drug store, grocery store, the schools (I object to that...) and gosh many other places. Those of who choose to have a child, those of us who care to do the responsible thing and accept responsibility for our actions - those are to be praised.

    My children were taught from early life of their responsibilities, the need to be responsible for everything they do, not to display or even think of taking the "victim's attitude." I am proud to say "I AM NOT A VICTIM." You should be proud of it also. Do not let others get away with it, which is exactly what you are expounding.

    You speak of this country being a democracy (really a republican form of government) - if there were such a wide support for these actions that you and others are demanding, then there would be no discussion. Because the majority of people are silent on this and many other topics, it should show to all that the majority of people do not support abortion, do not support...

    Failure to support abortion does not mean that we as a country look down on the rights of women or any segment of the population. Responsibility is a goal we should all work toward. I am responsible. My wife is responsible. My three children are responsible. You are responsible. Backbeat is responsible. There is no reason the others cannot be responsible. Why support those people who do not take responsibility seriously. As a note I also support exceptions, but not just for the heck of having an exception.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad View Post
    As anyone here has surmised by now: I am a liberal who would normally support the womans' right to choose. However, I am sick of protecting other people's rights .. people who are not willing to stand up for their own rights!!

    I think the women of the US of A deserve a roll-back of their hard earned rights because they keep voting for politicians who will take away these rights. Or they choose not to vote at all.

    So, hey ladies .. welcome to the world you choose to create for yourselves .....

    Despite all the shortcomings, the role of $ in politics, the lobbyists .. US is a functioning democracy. People get the govt they deserve. You would think that women alone would be a huge voting block to support their rights. Bit of not .. <shrug>
  7. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #127  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Of all of the anti-religious people, you really are active about cramming your beliefs down everyone else's throat. Lighten up - I am sick and tired of your Jefferson crap. Add something of value instead of your emtional trivia.

    Ben
    Once again, you jump to wild conclusions. I'm (clearly) not anti-religion. However, I do hold very tightly to the Separation of Church & State. No religion, especially (Americanized) Christianity, wants governmental intrusion or regulation. Yet, at the same time, many christian churches in the US freely preach politics (both sides of the aisle) from the pulpit which crosses that clearly marked line, all the while enjoying their tax-exempt status.

    Get religion out of government and you can freely continue to enjoy having government out of religion. No deal? Then deal with the consequences.
  8.    #128  
    And which presidential candidate is in the church the most? Hillary. Do you support that? What would you say if Bush did it as often as Hillary is doing it? How many times has Bush done it versus Hillary. How about Bill when he was president? He spoke at churches bunches and bunches of time.

    The left as represented by Hillary and the rest are pushing their agenda in many ways and you cannot tell me by their actions that they push a separation between church and state. If they did, Hillary would not be doing what she does so often.

    Ben
  9. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #129  
    Should've known better than to think the point would be addressed directly and with integrity.
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    I love watching these things when Shop gets involved
    Me too!

    and Surur also. They are so articulate, it makes me feel like a caveman.
  11.    #131  
    From what you are saying, one side can do it, the other cannot. How is one support to address such a statement? I see you did not respond to my example of what you presented.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Should've known better than to think the point would be addressed directly and with integrity.
  12.    #132  
    Nah, you are more hostile than I am. Also, if one keeps stating the other side is hostile enough time, it becomes a "fact." Just look at Sorus - that is an example of hostility with no bounds.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Because this type of legislation was driven by K Street christian-right Lobbyists (Alliance Defense Fund), which are funded by the likes of Pat Robertson's Regents (formerly Christian Broadcasting Network) University, the infusion of dogmatic religious code was first forced into this critical issue by the Religious (self)Right(eous). Just ask Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (which Pat Robertson also founded) who argues these cases before the Supreme Court. Religion ... As divisive as it ever was!

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg on this decision:

    "The Court's hostility is not concealed. Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label abortion doctor. A fetus is described as an unborn child, and a baby...and the reasoned medical judgments of highly trained doctors are dismissed as preferences motivated by mere convenience."

    And this is supposed to be the highest court in the land?
  13. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #133  
    ^ Reread my statement that's you're so inflamed about enough times and you may just get a glimpse that I was being very fair-handed. Can't say the same for you and yours, however.
  14. #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    Do you really think that my opposition to a practice of pulling babies out of the womb feet first just far enough to stab them at the base of the skull making an incision that allows their brains to be sucked out is derived from a desire to control women?
    You certainly appear to place the wellbeing of this undeveloped child ahead of the fully developed adult who made the choice in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    Rest assured, if I were able to control women, I would not subject them or their offspring to such.
    What would you do instead? Have the woman suffer a futile labour and die trying to pass a head the size of a melon? Would that be more godly?

    The "Responsibility and Consequence" brigade's agenda is pretty clear - No sex unless you are prepared to have a baby. This is quite funny, considering Mary was an unwed mother. I can imagine Shopharim standing there with the first stone, saying "There are actions and consequences, this is the consequence!"

    Unwanted pregnancies are as old as time, methods of ending these pregnancies are also, and trying to turn back the clock to more primitive times is dangerous and an exercise in futility.

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 04/21/2007 at 02:02 AM.
  15. #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post

    The left as represented by Hillary and the rest are pushing their agenda in many ways and you cannot tell me by their actions that they push a separation between church and state. If they did, Hillary would not be doing what she does so often.

    Ben
    Barry Goldwater himself would be laughing (or puking) at this statement. Sure, there are Dems (as Backbeat said....both sides of the isle) that try to pretend they go to church and pander to the faithful but there has been a concerted effort by the GOP to become the party of the christian right for two decades and their deeds along the way to do so dwarf any paltry effort by Dems to win the christian right's vote. Barry was known to have been deeply troubled by this strategy and was shunned by many of the bible belt chasers in the GOP because of it.

    Which brings up an interesting topic for a new thread for our friends of the christian right - are you doing god's will by letting evil men use you just as you use them to advance your mutually exclusive agenda's? And rest assured....they are mutually exclusive no matter what Karl Rove tells you. George Bush is about as religious as my cat and Karl used religion as a way to patch up GW's drug/alchohol/DWI days to appeal to the voters he knew he could sway. How else could he clean up GW's mess of a spolied-brat's life? "Praise the lord....George is born again".....well at least he is for two more years.

    So as a matter of discussion, would Christ accept that you all have been duped by a mass murderer all to impose your faith-based views on the rest of our society?
  16.    #136  
    We are still ignoring the question asked that I responded with about Hillary. Backbeat has yet to answer anything. Ask a question, point something out and he goes around it.

    Enough is enough. If you really look hard, you will find Bill carrying around a huge Bible. And bad as George may be, at least he is a step above Bill.

    And from another statement above, the exercise of self control in our society is no longer practical and probably not even desirable.

    Ladies and gentlemen, being a liberal means taking no responsibility for your actions (see post number 134). What a shame.

    Take care all. I have no further interest here with anyone who cannot take the time to be responsible for themselves.

    Ben
  17. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #137  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I have no further interest here with anyone who cannot take the time to be responsible for themselves.
    So we heard on Page-2.

    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    To close my participation in this thread ...
    You irresponsibly took political potshots after I leveled the playing field with the reality that seeking the bible-thumper vote is (currently) a bipartisan effort, however the bible-thumper vote's historically factual home is with the former Bluedog Democrats / formerly known as Dixiecrats, the home of such cretin hypocrites as Strom Thurmond.

    Republicans haven't gotten any closer to being any more Christ-like in the past 50+ years. Your party, and its members, simply do not remotely resemble your religion's Founder, though your party chest-thumps the values it pretends to have profusely. Good marketing campaigns do not a christian (party/nation/world) make.
  18. #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    We are still ignoring the question asked that I responded with about Hillary. Backbeat has yet to answer anything. Ask a question, point something out and he goes around it.

    Enough is enough. If you really look hard, you will find Bill carrying around a huge Bible. And bad as George may be, at least he is a step above Bill.

    Well therein is the crux of it - as usual when things go awry for the right-wing lets blame the Clinton's. That said, I could not disagree more with your assertion that George is a step above Bill. I didn't vote for Bill but his offenses pale in comparison to King George who has trampled our freedoms in the name of freedom; started an unecessary war with "hand picked" and in some cases phoney intelligence all cleverly time to win both houses in a mid-term election; failed to make any attempt to try to reverse their mistakes in Iraq to the demise of thousands of lives purely for their ego; etc. etc. etc. and we're to compare all of that with lying about a extra-marital affair? Really?


    Ladies and gentlemen, being a liberal means taking no responsibility for your actions (see post number 134). What a shame.

    Take care all. I have no further interest here with anyone who cannot take the time to be responsible for themselves.

    Ben
    Yes, the right-wing are a full of fine folks that do nothing but "take responsibility" - especially the Bush administration, who as we all know, are never wrong about anything. Then we have the big fat liar himself, Rush Limbaugh, who did all he can to not take responsibility for his drug habit or if that doesn't work, how about Papa Bill O'Reilly and his ability to "take responsibility" for his perverted actions?
  19. #139  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Well therein is the crux of it - as usual when things go awry for the right-wing lets blame the Clinton's. That said, I could not disagree more with your assertion that George is a step above Bill. I didn't vote for Bill but his offenses pale in comparison to King George who has trampled our freedoms in the name of freedom; started an unecessary war with "hand picked" and in some cases phoney intelligence all cleverly time to win both houses in a mid-term election; failed to make any attempt to try to reverse their mistakes in Iraq to the demise of thousands of lives purely for their ego; etc. etc. etc. and we're to compare all of that with lying about a extra-marital affair? Really?




    Yes, the right-wing are a full of fine folks that do nothing but "take responsibility" - especially the Bush administration, who as we all know, are never wrong about anything. Then we have the big fat liar himself, Rush Limbaugh, who did all he can to not take responsibility for his drug habit or if that doesn't work, how about Papa Bill O'Reilly and his ability to "take responsibility" for his perverted actions?
    Look at the AG if you want another example. "take responsibility for one's actions" what a joke.
  20. #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christinac130 View Post
    [...] I'm sorry, I know this post is long. But, you guys were pissin' me off...
    As the parent of a 26-weeker, I've been trying to refrain from getting involved in this one, but thanks for sharing your perspective.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions