Abortion is murder

[Divine Wind]

You seem to be trying to somehow "win" points here. But you're not. Again, there is not just "left" and "right", Hillary is hardly what I would call left wing. She's more left wing than some in the US, but she's not really left wing either. Sanders is left wing. But then left wing and right wing is merely a statement of relativity within a political system.

Points? What kind of fucking low IQ moron believes there is anything to be "won" here? Truth is its best own argument. Sometimes versions of truth come into conflict, so we can discuss this to see which version best fits the facts. I presented the fact that both Hillary Clinton and John Kerry voted for the Iraq Resolution resulting in us going to war in Iraq. Not just them, but a majority of Democrats voted for that resolution as was factually proved.

Now everyone sees you seemingly getting bent out of shape and making frivolous and false accusations. Why the conniption?

 

[Divine Wind]

...One person killing a separate, discrete, and unique individual is murder.

Agreed. What makes a zygote a "separate, discrete, and unique individual"? It's just a cell. Sure, it has the potential to become a person, but most self-abort. Some are stillborn. Who is responsible for the self-abortions and stillbirths? God? The woman? If a woman has a stillborn baby should she be charged with murder?

 

[PoliticalChic]

...One person killing a separate, discrete, and unique individual is murder.

Agreed. What makes a zygote a "separate, discrete, and unique individual"? It's just a cell. Sure, it has the potential to become a person, but most self-abort. Some are stillborn. Who is responsible for the self-abortions and stillbirths? God? The woman? If a woman has a stillborn baby should she be charged with murder?

1. The unique and identifying DNA configuration identifies each human being.
It is formed at the moment of conception.

Clearly you don't understand the topic of discussion: zygotes are not subject to abortion.


2. " For many years, fingerprints were the gold standard for linking suspects to a crime scene. Today, the gold standard is DNAevidence because DNA can be collected from virtually anywhere. Even a criminal wearing gloves may unwittingly leave behind trace amounts of biological material. It could be a hair, saliva,blood, semen, skin, sweat, mucus or earwax. All it takes is a few cells to obtain enough DNA information to identify a suspect with near certainty." Collecting DNA Evidence

DNA identifies a person.



3. When does it become a person?

" A child inherits half their DNA from each parent, while each parent passes half their DNA to each child. This is achieved through sexual fertilization, requiring themeeting of the sperm with the egg, and the combining of the DNA from both (since the sperm and egg contain only half the genetic information in the parent). " DNA is passed on from parent to child


QED, at conception we are discussing a human being with unique and identifying DNA

 

[PoliticalChic]

Now....watch how easily I utterly destroy you....you will be left speechless:

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?

'cause....if there isn't, and one is murder, so, then, is the other.

That's called logic.

A lesson in biology for you:
The unborn is in her body....but not a part of her body.

The baby is a person with rights and the fetus isn't. That's called the law.

And an unborn baby is part of a woman's body until it is born. Now you know.

Massive epic fail on your part.

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).

You can run, but you can't hide.

Morality is subjective, so nobody has to agree with you. You lose again.

"Morality is subjective"

The required doctrine of the religion known as Liberalism.



Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."
the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck

What are you rambling on about?
Or is that your way of conceding the point?

Let's be clear.
The purpose you serve around here is as a semi-human piñata.

 

[Mudda]

The baby is a person with rights and the fetus isn't. That's called the law.

And an unborn baby is part of a woman's body until it is born. Now you know.

Massive epic fail on your part.

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).

You can run, but you can't hide.

Morality is subjective, so nobody has to agree with you. You lose again.

"Morality is subjective"

The required doctrine of the religion known as Liberalism.



Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."
the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck

What are you rambling on about?
Or is that your way of conceding the point?

Let's be clear.
The purpose you serve around here is as a semi-human piñata.

Your concession has been duly noted.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).

You can run, but you can't hide.

Morality is subjective, so nobody has to agree with you. You lose again.

"Morality is subjective"

The required doctrine of the religion known as Liberalism.



Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."
the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck

What are you rambling on about?
Or is that your way of conceding the point?

Let's be clear.
The purpose you serve around here is as a semi-human piñata.

Your concession has been duly noted.

See what I mean.

 

[Mudda]

Morality is subjective, so nobody has to agree with you. You lose again.

"Morality is subjective"

The required doctrine of the religion known as Liberalism.



Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."
the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck

What are you rambling on about?
Or is that your way of conceding the point?

Let's be clear.
The purpose you serve around here is as a semi-human piñata.

Your concession has been duly noted.

See what I mean.

Cmon, you can do better than that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Morality is subjective"

The required doctrine of the religion known as Liberalism.



Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion. In Godless, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).
From the Amazon review of Godless, by Coulter…

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "...the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."
the Catechism: you didn't build that.....any success is just dumb luck

What are you rambling on about?
Or is that your way of conceding the point?

Let's be clear.
The purpose you serve around here is as a semi-human piñata.

Your concession has been duly noted.

See what I mean.

Cmon, you can do better than that.

And that is the very point: you can't.

 

[Divine Wind]

...One person killing a separate, discrete, and unique individual is murder.

Agreed. What makes a zygote a "separate, discrete, and unique individual"? It's just a cell. Sure, it has the potential to become a person, but most self-abort. Some are stillborn. Who is responsible for the self-abortions and stillbirths? God? The woman? If a woman has a stillborn baby should she be charged with murder?

1. The unique and identifying DNA configuration identifies each human being.
It is formed at the moment of conception.

Clearly you don't understand the topic of discussion: zygotes are not subject to abortion.


2. " For many years, fingerprints were the gold standard for linking suspects to a crime scene. Today, the gold standard is DNAevidence because DNA can be collected from virtually anywhere. Even a criminal wearing gloves may unwittingly leave behind trace amounts of biological material. It could be a hair, saliva,blood, semen, skin, sweat, mucus or earwax. All it takes is a few cells to obtain enough DNA information to identify a suspect with near certainty." Collecting DNA Evidence

DNA identifies a person.



3. When does it become a person?

" A child inherits half their DNA from each parent, while each parent passes half their DNA to each child. This is achieved through sexual fertilization, requiring themeeting of the sperm with the egg, and the combining of the DNA from both (since the sperm and egg contain only half the genetic information in the parent). " DNA is passed on from parent to child


QED, at conception we are discussing a human being with unique and identifying DNA

1) Correct. Every time you brush your teeth, given you do so, you are washing human DNA down the drain. Every time you take a dump, you are flushing human DNA down the drain. Everyday you are shedding DNA around the house.

Incorrect. What do you think Plan B is all about?

2) See above.

3) Misleading. We each have unique DNA, including the dump you took this morning but is your pile of shit a person? A human being even though it has "unique human DNA"? No, it does not.


Let's add to this that every time we execute a human being or cops shoot a suspect, we are killing a unique person. Everytime we drop bombs on a country and there is "collateral damage" we are killing innocent human beings; full sized persons each with both unique DNA and a unique personality. Yet you don't give a shit about them so why do you care about a blastocyst which is neither a person nor a distinct personality?

 

[Papageorgio]

The doctrine you have attempted to apply is starkly similar to the one used in Nazi Germany vis-a-vis Jewish folks.

'Perhaps you are a Nazi?

Are you unamerican? Because you seem to be against the laws of this country. I don't know anything about Nazi's. You seem to know a lot about them maybe you are one.

And you know who agrees with you? ISIS.

1. "Because you seem to be against the laws of this country."

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).


2. "I don't know anything...."
Truer words were never said.
Let's leave it at that.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us AGAIN. Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you guys tried pushing your morality on us it was a long hard 8 years. I hope people haven't forgotten.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

When was gay marriage banned?

 

[sealybobo]

Are you unamerican? Because you seem to be against the laws of this country. I don't know anything about Nazi's. You seem to know a lot about them maybe you are one.

And you know who agrees with you? ISIS.

1. "Because you seem to be against the laws of this country."

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).


2. "I don't know anything...."
Truer words were never said.
Let's leave it at that.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us AGAIN. Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you guys tried pushing your morality on us it was a long hard 8 years. I hope people haven't forgotten.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

When was gay marriage banned?

I can remember a time when gays couldn't marry.

Anyways, I just can't believe every girl age 18-50 who's pro choice isn't going to show up to make sure hillary appoints a pro choice justice

 

[BreezeWood]

.

Now for any who believe in God.

Genesis 9:6 prescribed ...


what was said is everyone on planet Earth is a murderer of one sort or another and you equivocate without the justifiable sustenance for its occurrence sanctioned by the Almighty with an example of blatant disregard for human existence shared by both parties.

I notice you did not question whether the unborn is a separate human being.

is your unborn equivalent to to the Lamb being led to slaughter ...

.

 

[sealybobo]

In America abortion is not murder apparently the person you're talking to is not an American. Perhaps they are Taliban?

The doctrine you have attempted to apply is starkly similar to the one used in Nazi Germany vis-a-vis Jewish folks.

'Perhaps you are a Nazi?

Are you unamerican? Because you seem to be against the laws of this country. I don't know anything about Nazi's. You seem to know a lot about them maybe you are one.

And you know who agrees with you? ISIS.

1. "Because you seem to be against the laws of this country."

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).


2. "I don't know anything...."
Truer words were never said.
Let's leave it at that.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

I notice a pattern with you. You don't argue the points people make you attack their grammar or that they used vulgarity. Well I took the vulgarity out and replied to you and then you still didn't respond.

It's just insane to think that if little Bobby and Suzie had an accident that they would be forced to carry out the pregnancy when the little fetus is still just a forming seed. No way

 

[Papageorgio]

1. "Because you seem to be against the laws of this country."

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).


2. "I don't know anything...."
Truer words were never said.
Let's leave it at that.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us AGAIN. Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you guys tried pushing your morality on us it was a long hard 8 years. I hope people haven't forgotten.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

When was gay marriage banned?

I can remember a time when gays couldn't marry.

Anyways, I just can't believe every girl age 18-50 who's pro choice isn't going to show up to make sure hillary appoints a pro choice justice

Wasn't that Hillary and Obama's position in 2007?

 

[Papageorgio]

The doctrine you have attempted to apply is starkly similar to the one used in Nazi Germany vis-a-vis Jewish folks.

'Perhaps you are a Nazi?

Are you unamerican? Because you seem to be against the laws of this country. I don't know anything about Nazi's. You seem to know a lot about them maybe you are one.

And you know who agrees with you? ISIS.

1. "Because you seem to be against the laws of this country."

Morality is the Litmus Test...not the law.
Unless you believe (I almost said 'think') that the Taney Supreme Court was correct in the Dred Scott Deciison (better look that up,huh?).


2. "I don't know anything...."
Truer words were never said.
Let's leave it at that.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

I notice a pattern with you. You don't argue the points people make you attack their grammar or that they used vulgarity. Well I took the vulgarity out and replied to you and then you still didn't respond.

It's just insane to think that if little Bobby and Suzie had an accident that they would be forced to carry out the pregnancy when the little fetus is still just a forming seed. No way

True, Obama thinks children are a punishment. I bet his kids are happy about that.

 

[sealybobo]

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us you sick mother fuckers.

Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you right wing wack jobs tried pushing your morality on us.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research (don't even argue you didn't because you did)
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us AGAIN. Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you guys tried pushing your morality on us it was a long hard 8 years. I hope people haven't forgotten.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

When was gay marriage banned?

I can remember a time when gays couldn't marry.

Anyways, I just can't believe every girl age 18-50 who's pro choice isn't going to show up to make sure hillary appoints a pro choice justice

Wasn't that Hillary and Obama's position in 2007?

Yes but they changed with the times. Progressives progress and cons conserve

 

[Divine Wind]

One of my favorite speeches from "Mr. Conservative" and one of my heroes, Senator Barry Goldwater:

It's a wonderful feeling to be a conservative these days. When I ran for President 17 years ago I was told I was behind the times. Now everybody tells me I was ahead of my time. All I can say is that time certainly is an elusive companion.

But those reactions illustrate how far the ideological pendulum has swung in recent years. The American people have expressed their desire for a new course in our public policy in this country, a conservative course.

Being a conservative in America traditionally has meant that one holds a deep, abiding respect for the Constitution. We conservatives believe sincerely in the integrity of the Constitution. We treasure the freedoms that document protects.

We believe, as the founding fathers did, that we ''are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the prsuit of happiness.''

And for 205 years this nation, based on those principles, has endured. Through foreign wars and civil wars, through political scandals and economic disasters, through civil disorders and Presidential assassinations, our flag has flown high. Through it all we've survived every possible attack on our freedom.

But another force could succeed in dividing our country. The specter of single-issue religious groups is growing over our land. Issues Kept in Background

One of the great strengths of our political system always has been our tendency to keep religious issues in the background. By maintaining the separation of church and state, the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars.

Throughout our 200-plus years, public policy debate has focused on political and economic issues, on which there can be compromise. Madison saw this as the great paradox of our system: How do you control the factions without violating the people's basic freedoms? And in a well-constructed representative Government like ours, Madison said, one of our greatest strengths is our ability to ''break and control the violence of faction.'' Can any of us refute the wisdom of Madison and the other framers? Can anyone lo ok at the carnage in Iran, the bloodshed in Northern Ireland or th e bombs bursting in Lebanon and yet question the dangers of in jecting religious issues into the affairs of state?

There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah or whatever one calls his Supreme Being.

But, like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing in our land are not using their religioius clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their positions 100 percent.

In the past couple years, I have seen many news items that referred to the Moral Majority, prolife and other religious groups as ''the new right,'' and the ''new conservatism.'' Well, I have spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the ''old conservatism.'' And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics.

The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength.

As it is, they are diverting us away from the vital issues that our Government needs to address. Far too much of the time of members of Congress and officials in the Executive Branch is used up dealing with special-interest groups on issues like abortion, school busing, ERA, prayer in the schools and pornography. While these are important moral issues, they are secondary right now to our national security and economic survival.

I must make it clear that I don't condemn these groups for what they believe. I happen to share many of the values emphasized by these organizations.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in ''A,'' ''B,'' ''C'' and ''D.'' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate.

I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of ''conservatism.'' Says It Destroys Perspective

This unrelenting obsession with a particular goal destroys the perspective of many decent people. They have become easy prey to manipulation and misjudgment.

A prime example was the recent nomination of Sandra O'Connor as a Supreme Court Justice and the ensuing uproar over her stand on abortion.

No single issue ever should decide the fitness of a Supreme Court Justice. To think otherwise is to go against the integrity of the Constitution. There are many broad issues addressed each day by a jurist that are much more revealing of how that person might perform on the high court.

Of course, the saddest part of the whole dispute was that Judge O'Connor was attacked by these religious factions for a position she doesn't hold. She opposes abortion and said so. I firmly believe that she recognizes the authority of legislatures to regulate it.

She will make an excellent Justice of the Supreme Court. She will make President Reagan proud that he chose her as the best of all candidates, men or women.

And the religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy.

They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. The great decisions of Government cannot be dictated by the concerns of religious factions. This was true in the days of Madison, and it is just as true today.

We have succeeded for 205 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn't stop now.

To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic.

Barry Goldwater, Senator, 15SEP81

 

[Papageorgio]

So often, when my responses to a dunce like you are undeniable.....you default to vulgarity.

Time and again, when folks realize that their political infatuations have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at the truth that you are unable to deny leaks out as vulgarity.


That is why I never have to do the same.

Well please don't try to push your morality onto us AGAIN. Great reason not to vote for a Republican. I remember the last time we put a Republican in the white house and you guys tried pushing your morality on us it was a long hard 8 years. I hope people haven't forgotten.

a. You didn't allow stem cell research
b. You banned gays from marriage
c. Threw Jack Kavorkian in jail
d. and lets not forget

When was gay marriage banned?

I can remember a time when gays couldn't marry.

Anyways, I just can't believe every girl age 18-50 who's pro choice isn't going to show up to make sure hillary appoints a pro choice justice

Wasn't that Hillary and Obama's position in 2007?

Yes but they changed with the times. Progressives progress and cons conserve

So gay marriage was banned during the last GOP administration, not because of Republicans but because of the times. So your statement that Republicans banned gay marriage is false.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You seem to be trying to somehow "win" points here. But you're not. Again, there is not just "left" and "right", Hillary is hardly what I would call left wing. She's more left wing than some in the US, but she's not really left wing either. Sanders is left wing. But then left wing and right wing is merely a statement of relativity within a political system.

Points? What kind of fucking low IQ moron believes there is anything to be "won" here? Truth is its best own argument. Sometimes versions of truth come into conflict, so we can discuss this to see which version best fits the facts. I presented the fact that both Hillary Clinton and John Kerry voted for the Iraq Resolution resulting in us going to war in Iraq. Not just them, but a majority of Democrats voted for that resolution as was factually proved.

Now everyone sees you seemingly getting bent out of shape and making frivolous and false accusations. Why the conniption?

I don't know if you've noticed but a lot of people see there's things to be won on here.

The truth might be the best argument for some, but when people put deflecting the truth and putting everything down to ideology or even worse, partisan gaming, then you get very wary about who is saying what.

Yes, you presented facts. I could also present the fact that WW2 started in 1939, but it doesn't really have much to do with the discussion we were having.

You pointed out that not just Republicans voted for the war in Iraq. Then I said not everyone who is Democrat is left wing. So then you jumped on this and said stuff about Kerry and Hillary. This didn't add anything to the discussion, what little discussion it was in the first place. It was merely playing games.

 

[Divine Wind]

I don't know if you've noticed but a lot of people see there's things to be won on here.
.....

Not my fault "a lot of people" are idiots or pathetic souls in need of virtual "wins" to bolster their sad lives. OTOH, it's more likely you are simply projecting.

Bullshit on your "facts" analogy. My fact was relevant to your post by pointing out a majority of Democrats were in on the persuading by voting for it:

How hard was it for the right to convince you to go to war in Iraq?