The End of the Christian Right

[Intense]

the world trends long term in the liberal direction.

It always has

It always has been heading towards Armageddon.

 

[Intense]

Give it another 20 years, and they'll be as ineffectual in American politics as they are at controlling morality in the U.S.

Michael Kazin: The End Of The Christian Right | The New Republic

Key points...

the Christian Right is fighting a losing battle with the rest of the country—above all, when it comes to abortion and same-sex marriage, the issues they care most about. A strong majority of Americans backs abortion in the early months of a pregnancy.

Meanwhile, support for gay rights is rising, quite swiftly. Same-sex marriage tops fifty percent in some recent polls, and the remarkably placid response to New York’s recent legalization of the practice will make it easier for other states to follow suit. With over two-thirds of Americans now endorsing the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the debate on that once controversial issue is now a matter for historians to analyze.

Put simply, the Christian Right is getting old. According to the largest and most recent study we have of American religion and politics, by Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, almost twice as many people 18 to 29 confess to no faith at all as adhere to evangelical Protestantism. Young people who have attended college, a growing percentage of the population, are more secular still.

Last gasps of a dying subculture...

It may rise and fall like the tide, but it will remain until the end.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

So you would support law that requires judicial review to protect the rights of the victim prior to abortion?

I'm against Roe v Wade, should be a state's issue. Just as a side point.

When Does Life Begin? Medical Experts Debate Abortion Issue

This is a great site that shows the debate side of science for both pro-choicers and pro-lifers.

"Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present."

That snippet best illustrates my view.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It could be! Some women can become so desperate that the alternative isn't a live baby, but a dead mother and dead baby.

I agree.

Abortion is killing a human. However, not all killing is prohibited. There are reasons to kill. This is why I support judicial review, not the outlawing of abortion.

Life and health of the mother are obvious, as is rape and incest. But there may be other factors that justify killing the child. Where I draw the line is that there MUST be justification in a court of law, prior to taking human life.

I have come across pro lifers (I use the term with some respect, descriptive only) who find that keeping women who want an abortion confined, in shackles and handcuffs to be force fed as appropriate treatment if necessary to prevent an abortion, self induced miscarriage or suicide.

There are radicals on both sides.

I am a moderate.

There is no easy answer. The tragedy is in imposing a one size fits all solution that is as bad, if not worse than refusing abortions completely.

This is why I support judicial review.

I also believe that it is an issue that belongs in the states, that the federal government has no business nor authority to be involved with.

Obviously abortion has become the monster that ate Kansas. How did we get from a society sympathetic to desperate women in life threatening situations to the concept of post birth abortion where babies born healthy and alive are killed? We have a health care czar who believes that post birth abortion is appropriate up to the age of two.

Because the radical pro-abortion movement has always been about infanticide. The abortion movement sprang from Margaret Sanger, an Eugenicist who lobbied congress to impose forced sterilization on "the feeble, the degenerate, and the mud people."

How did this kind of insanity happen? Is it better or worse than disallowing abortion under any circumstances?

Both are bad policy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Uncensored is not a moderate, he is a progressive right wing pro-lifer. Judicial Review before an abortion. Hint: the judicial review, Roe v Wade, has been done.

 

[Katzndogz]

the world trends long term in the liberal direction.

It always has

It always has been heading towards Armageddon.

it never get there. The degenerate culture has always fallen before Armageddon. It will this time too. You can't escape history. That's why Caligula and Nero aren't liberal heroes.

 

[Intense]

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

So you would support law that requires judicial review to protect the rights of the victim prior to abortion?

I'm against Roe v Wade, should be a state's issue. Just as a side point.

When Does Life Begin? Medical Experts Debate Abortion Issue

This is a great site that shows the debate side of science for both pro-choicers and pro-lifers.

"Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present."

That snippet best illustrates my view.

I'm against Roe v Wade, should be a state's issue. Just as a side point.

I agree with you there.
Should Either Side get 66% support in Congress, bring it to the floor for discussion, 75% support, Pass a Constitutional Amendment. That is a Federalist Principle, long ignored. Until that is done, the States Power is being Usurped.

 

[koshergrl]

You really sound like a bleeding heart lib when you make this posts purely based on emotion.

I am a liberal.

But I make my argument based on scientific fact. You seek to kill, with the blessing of the state, other humans. You demand that you have a "right" to kill with no judicial oversight nor process of appeal for the victim.

As a libertarian, I support the right of people NOT to be summarily killed.

Just the other week you said you thought abortions should be legal up to a certain point in the pregnancy which is exactly what every pro-choice person says, now you're anti-abortion, I'll leave that for you to figure out as it's not important to me.

I've always been anti-abortion.

I said that prior to life, you are not killing. Life is medically defined as heart and brain activity. This occurs about 6 weeks gestation.

For this reason, I support RU486 and Plan B.

My position has not, and does not change.

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

What you WANT and what you SUPPORT are at odds with each other.

You want the world to be perfect and everybody to live forever. That's commendable.

Unfortunately, you support the killing of children. That makes you pro-abortion.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Okay. I'll pare it down to its core. Would you support a 'personhood' amendment?

I'll be as direct as possible. Abortion is none of the business of the federal government. They have no constitutional authority over abortion.

Now, had you read my replies you would have noted that I base my positions on biological fact. Does life begin at conception? Nope. From the perspective of medical science, life begins when the heart and brain start functioning - about 6 weeks gestation. So would I support an amendment that defies medical science? Nope.

Roe v. Wade is bad law. First off, the judiciary dictating law makes a mockery of the farce of constitutional governance. Secondly, the federal government has no authority over how states handle criminal torts.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm against Roe v Wade, should be a state's issue. Just as a side point.

When Does Life Begin? Medical Experts Debate Abortion Issue

This is a great site that shows the debate side of science for both pro-choicers and pro-lifers.

"Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present."

That snippet best illustrates my view.

We have similar views, the only discrepancy is that EEG patterns are detectable at 6 weeks, not 24.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I am a liberal.

But I make my argument based on scientific fact. You seek to kill, with the blessing of the state, other humans. You demand that you have a "right" to kill with no judicial oversight nor process of appeal for the victim.

As a libertarian, I support the right of people NOT to be summarily killed.



I've always been anti-abortion.

I said that prior to life, you are not killing. Life is medically defined as heart and brain activity. This occurs about 6 weeks gestation.

For this reason, I support RU486 and Plan B.

My position has not, and does not change.

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

What you WANT and what you SUPPORT are at odds with each other.

You want the world to be perfect and everybody to live forever. That's commendable.

Unfortunately, you support the killing of children. That makes you pro-abortion.

Here's the difference between you and I, I want a perfect world and everybody to live forever, you think that's actually possible if you get your way with abortion legislation.



Abortions will happen whether we want them to or not. I would think you would be patting me on the back for wanting Roe v Wade over-turned, but you wouldn't dare agree with a hellbound heathen like myself.

 

[koshergrl]

And off we go to lala land, where you profess you have the ability to read minds.

HERE'S the difference between you and I...in a nutshell..I hold you accountable for what you say. You pretend what you say has no meaning, and the only thing that matters is what you THINK...and you support that with your personal opinions about what others THINK, and think that is valid in a conversation between adults about real issues.


It's not. You fail, as you undoubtedly failed high school.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And off we go to lala land, where you profess you have the ability to read minds.

HERE'S the difference between you and I...in a nutshell..I hold you accountable for what you say. You pretend what you say has no meaning, and the only thing that matters is what you THINK...and you support that with your personal opinions about what others THINK, and think that is valid in a conversation between adults about real issues.


It's not. You fail, as you undoubtedly failed high school.

No you don't hold me accountable for what I say. You hear what I say, disregard, listen to what the voice in your head says I said, then you judge and insult that particular voice in your head.

I support my opinion based on all the lies and exaggerations you post on here all day long. Your posts never have anything to do with facts or logic.

Glad we can agree that we want Roe v Wade over turned and we both want zero abortions, have a great weekend. Maybe get drunk tonight, you always seem like you need a night of letting loose and being care-free.

 

[koshergrl]

Even that statement is laughable.

You are incapable of honesty, as you are incapable of holding an adult conversation/debate. You can't grasp the basic tenets of debate, and you seem to not understand what words mean.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Even that statement is laughable.

You are incapable of honesty, as you are incapable of holding an adult conversation/debate. You can't grasp the basic tenets of debate, and you seem to not understand what words mean.

Ok babe

 

[Dragon]

it never get there. The degenerate culture has always fallen before Armageddon. It will this time too. You can't escape history. That's why Caligula and Nero aren't liberal heroes.

That Rome fell because of its "moral degeneracy" is a myth without any basis in fact. Rome fell because of 1) plague and 2) barbarians. And it did not fall until centuries after Caligula and Nero. In fact, it did not fall until centuries after Constantine, and when it fell, it was Christian. In fact, the Roman Empire as a political institution didn't fall until the 15th century AD.

Also, Caligula and Nero are not "liberal heroes" for reasons having nothing to do with the fall of Rome. Caligula was a madman and a mass-murderer. Nero was a corrupt toad and another mass-murderer. You will find no madmen and no mass-murderers among "liberal heroes."

No civilization and no nation has EVER fallen because of "moral degeneracy." If you think to the contrary, name one. Rome does not qualify.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Caligula was a madman and a mass murderer, just like heroes of the left, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho, Pol Pot, Ortega and Castro...

 

[Nosmo King]

Okay. I'll pare it down to its core. Would you support a 'personhood' amendment?

I'll be as direct as possible. Abortion is none of the business of the federal government. They have no constitutional authority over abortion.

Now, had you read my replies you would have noted that I base my positions on biological fact. Does life begin at conception? Nope. From the perspective of medical science, life begins when the heart and brain start functioning - about 6 weeks gestation. So would I support an amendment that defies medical science? Nope.

Roe v. Wade is bad law. First off, the judiciary dictating law makes a mockery of the farce of constitutional governance. Secondly, the federal government has no authority over how states handle criminal torts.

gee was what they taught me in Civics Class wrong? Aren't there three co-equal branches of the federal government?

Maybe what they taught me in English Class was wrong! What does co-equal mean anyway?

 

[koshergrl]

Rome fell centuries after constantine?

LOL!

Rome.info > Fall of the Roman Empire, decline of ancient Rome

"There were several reasons for the decline of Roman Empire. They are all interweaved with each other. Decline in morals and values, public health problems, political corruption, unemployment, inflation, urban decay, inferior technology, military spending. All these facts had contributed to the fall of one of the greatest ancient civilisations - Ancient Rome. "

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am a liberal.

But I make my argument based on scientific fact. You seek to kill, with the blessing of the state, other humans. You demand that you have a "right" to kill with no judicial oversight nor process of appeal for the victim.

As a libertarian, I support the right of people NOT to be summarily killed.



I've always been anti-abortion.

I said that prior to life, you are not killing. Life is medically defined as heart and brain activity. This occurs about 6 weeks gestation.

For this reason, I support RU486 and Plan B.

My position has not, and does not change.

Well then i guess we just disagree with label, if you told me and probably 99% of the rest of the population that you think abortions should be legal up to 6 weeks into the pregnancy than they'd probably all label you pro-choice.

And, like always when you try to point what others views, you're wrong. I want zero abortions, I hope another one never happens ever again.

What you WANT and what you SUPPORT are at odds with each other. You want the world to be perfect and everybody to live forever. That's commendable. Unfortunately, you support the killing of children. That makes you pro-abortion.

You are out of step with Christian tradition and doctrine. Moral exclusions justify some abortions. That you don't like that does not count.