a vote for John McCain....

[Charles_Main]

They also tend to forget the child once born... bitching and moaning about the cost of both health and welfare...

Yeah, well I would rather bitch about the cost of Health and Welfare rather than watch babies be aborted. I tend to agree with a womans right to choose, as long as it is not abused, and used as birth control. However that does not mean I like the Idea of abortion at all, I just am willing to compromise on the issue.

 

[Ninja]

Back on topic.

Abortion preaching for those who will never have to face the decision is simply hypocrisy in my book. Walk in someone's shoes before you preach your superficial, too easy, morality. A child dies every 15 seconds, a living child, not a few cells. Late term abortion is already illegal. The same people who argue against abortion argue against education and the distribution of birth control. When the moralizers start adopting children and supporting education they can attack the why of unwanted pregnancies, till then they remain hypocrites.

children deaths
Today, over 26,500 children died around the world - Global Issues

abortion rights
Judith Jarvis Thomson: Abortion

Fuck you, fuck the kids, and fuck anyone who wants to take away my hard-earned cash and spend it on future fast food workers.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

And now a message from Michael Moore:

"Many pro-life politicians are really just catering to the special interests of corporations. It's no secret that condom manufacturers are one of, if not, the most powerful lobby groups in America. They want to make abortion illegal so they can sell more condoms."

 

[Skull Pilot]

I guess these people should just be killed now so the right to abort can be upheld

Survivors of Abortion - Gianna Jenssen.

Abortion Survivor Sarah Smith

Abortion survivors tell horror stories

here's what BHO thinks about abortion survivors

The Audacity of Death - WSJ.com

As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama twice opposed legislation to define as "persons" babies who survive late-term abortions. Babies like Gianna. Mr. Obama said in a speech on the Illinois Senate floor that he could not accept that babies wholly emerged from their mother's wombs are "persons," and thus deserving of equal protection under the Constitution's 14th Amendment.

The pro abortion people can't seem to reconcile their beliefs when a child actually survives a late term abortion. The simple fact that survivors of attempted abortions are not recognized as persons with Constitutional rights is disturbing as is this stand by BHO

Mr. Obama said in a speech on the Illinois Senate floor that he could not accept that babies wholly emerged from their mother's wombs are "persons," and thus deserving of equal protection under the Constitution's 14th Amendment

Now one can extrapolate here and say that BHO does not think any new born child can be defined as a person with guaranteed rights. Clearly there is something wrong if not immoral with this position on human rights. If this is our position then we should certainly not be prosecuting anyone for infanticide or abuse and neglect of an infant. I would like to know just when does a "baby wholly emerged from its mother's womb" become a person.

 

[midcan5]

The pro abortion people can't seem to reconcile their beliefs when a child actually survives a late term abortion. The simple fact that survivors of attempted abortions are not recognized as persons with Constitutional rights is disturbing as is this stand by BHO

Try to stay on topic, we are discussing McCain's denial of a women the right to control her own life. Republicans preach morality but do not support the context in which human actions can be moral. They oppose education, they oppose condom distribution, they oppose the day after pill, even though many conceptions end naturally. There is a curious irony in all this as it is only modern science that shows the complexity of life but republican even oppose modern science. Some even doubt evolution, the fundamental principle of modern medical science. Before modern science even most religions considered the age of seven as the beginning of personhood. So many children died young, people faced a harsh fact with a mild fantasy.

Life is a process, a gradual process, no one except the orthodox religious do not engage in birth control and have lots of children. Most people prevent multiple pregnancies in any manner they can, only the Catholic church recognizes that birth control is keeping life from forming. PS my parents lived according to the Catholic tenets.

When republicans support children, living children, they can preach their particular form of morality, till then they remain hypocrites. And as an off handed thought how many who protest abortion protest all the children killed in Iraq caused directly by our actions there for 20 years or more? Anyone!

 

[Jeepers]

Try to stay on topic, we are discussing McCain's denial of a women the right to control her own life. Republicans preach morality but do not support the context in which human actions can be moral. They oppose education, they oppose condom distribution, they oppose the day after pill, even though many conceptions end naturally. There is a curious irony in all this as it is only modern science that shows the complexity of life but republican even oppose modern science. Some even doubt evolution, the fundamental principle of modern medical science. Before modern science even most religions considered the age of seven as the beginning of personhood. So many children died young, people faced a harsh fact with a mild fantasy.

Life is a process, a gradual process, no one except the orthodox religious do not engage in birth control and have lots of children. Most people prevent multiple pregnancies in any manner they can, only the Catholic church recognizes that birth control is keeping life from forming. PS my parents lived according to the Catholic tenets.

When republicans support children, living children, they can preach their particular form of morality, till then they remain hypocrites. And as an off handed thought how many who protest abortion protest all the children killed in Iraq caused directly by our actions there for 20 years or more? Anyone!

Well said....

BTW... why in the hell is this story in the Wall Street Journal...

here's what BHO thinks about abortion survivors

The Audacity of Death - WSJ.com

 

[sealybobo]

I didn't answer your questions because they are retarded questions, and It is funny you would point out that to me, I ask you all kinds of questions and you just spout more of your senseless BS.

Please Name an Arab Nation we are occupying other than Iraq, and Saudi does not count. Because we have a small force and a few bases there does not qualify as an occupation.

Didn't you learn there are no dumb questions? Clearly you are living proof that no child left behind was a failure. LOL.

 

[Charles_Main]

Didn't you learn there are no dumb questions? Clearly you are living proof that no child left behind was a failure. LOL.

LOL, I am 35 numb Nuts, when was no child left behind started? Or were you just making more pointless jokes, and insults like you do all the time.

Still waiting for you to tell me what Arab nation besides Iraq that we are occupying.

 

[sealybobo]

LOL, I am 35 numb Nuts, when was no child left behind started? Or were you just making more pointless jokes, and insults like you do all the time.

Still waiting for you to tell me what Arab nation besides Iraq that we are occupying.

Wow, did we really pull out of Saudi Arabia?

US pulls out of Saudi Arabia

The US was not allowed to carry out air strikes from Saudi Arabia
The United States has said that virtually all its troops, except some training personnel, are to be pulled out of Saudi Arabia.

Ever since the 1991 Gulf war, the US has had about 5,000 troops stationed in Saudi Arabia - a figure that rose to 10,000 during the recent conflict in Iraq.



Honestly, I didn't know we pulled out. Like your dad should have. LOL. Yes, another joke.

 

[Charles_Main]

Wow, did we really pull out of Saudi Arabia?

US pulls out of Saudi Arabia

The US was not allowed to carry out air strikes from Saudi Arabia
The United States has said that virtually all its troops, except some training personnel, are to be pulled out of Saudi Arabia.

Ever since the 1991 Gulf war, the US has had about 5,000 troops stationed in Saudi Arabia - a figure that rose to 10,000 during the recent conflict in Iraq.



Honestly, I didn't know we pulled out. Like your dad should have. LOL. Yes, another joke.

ROFLMAO now our troop presence in Saudi is an occupation eh. Yet they didn't "allow" us to make air strikes from their soil.

you need to go back to school and learn what occupation means.

From Wiki. Military occupation, control of a territory by a military force. So do we control the government of Saudi?
Man you are a fool indeed.

 

[sealybobo]

ROFLMAO now our troop presence in Saudi is an occupation eh. Yet they didn't "allow" us to make air strikes from their soil.

you need to go back to school and learn what occupation means.

From Wiki. Military occupation, control of a territory by a military force. So do we control the government of Saudi?
Man you are a fool indeed.

Hey freak! I agreed with you on that post. Now I'm starting to see that 1/5th jewish heritage in your arguments. LOL. Just kidding!! But you argue even when someone admits you are right. WHat a jerkoff. LOL.

I still like you, sorta. You are the best NEOCON here, but that's only because you pretend not to be one. LOL.

 

[Charles_Main]

Hey freak! I agreed with you on that post. Now I'm starting to see that 1/5th jewish heritage in your arguments. LOL. Just kidding!! But you argue even when someone admits you are right. WHat a jerkoff. LOL.

I still like you, sorta. You are the best NEOCON here, but that's only because you pretend not to be one. LOL.

LOL you agreed with me my ass, you brought up our pull out of SA as if to say when we were still there, we were occupying it. Which is of course not true.

Try again pal.

Or you could just call me names again like the weak arrogant debater that you are.

 

[sealybobo]

LOL you agreed with me my ass, you brought up our pull out of SA as if to say when we were still there, we were occupying it. Which is of course not true.

Try again pal.

Or you could just call me names again like the weak arrogant debater that you are.

No, I thought you were trying to make me look dumb because my answer would have been Saudi Arabia, and then I looked it up and it turns out we pulled out. Seriously, I was conceeding.

But you are too condeeded to be conceeded too. I really hope you vote for a 3rd party, but I doubt it. When you get behind that curtain, I know who you are voting for. McCain/Liebermann!!!!

 

[Charles_Main]

No, I thought you were trying to make me look dumb because my answer would have been Saudi Arabia, and then I looked it up and it turns out we pulled out. Seriously, I was conceeding.

But you are too condeeded to be conceeded too. I really hope you vote for a 3rd party, but I doubt it. When you get behind that curtain, I know who you are voting for. McCain/Liebermann!!!!

what ever you say pal. Like I said how am I even suppose to respond to a guy who claims to know who I am going to vote for, despite how many times I make the case not to vote for McCain or Obama.

Oh and if you were going to claim we were occupying Saudi then I would make fun of you. Our military presence in Saudi was not an occupation. No more than our military presence in Korea or Japan are occupations. We did not control the government of Saudi by military force, any more than we control the governments of Japan and S Korea. The fact that the Saudi government asked us to be there in the first place, and then asked us to leave, and we left. Is all the proof you need that it was never and occupation.

 

[sealybobo]

what ever you say pal. Like I said how am I even suppose to respond to a guy who claims to know who I am going to vote for, despite how many times I make the case not to vote for McCain or Obama.

Oh and if you were going to claim we were occupying Saudi then I would make fun of you. Our military presence in Saudi was not an occupation. No more than our military presence in Korea or Japan are occupations. We did not control the government of Saudi by military force, any more than we control the governments of Japan and S Korea. The fact that the Saudi government asked us to be there in the first place, and then asked us to leave, and we left. Is all the proof you need that it was never and occupation.

Bin Ladin would disagree with you.

He would also object to us protecting the Saudi government while they oppress their citizens.

PS. Glad to hear you aren't voting and/or your vote won't really matter.

If you don't like Obama, the Democratic party will never win you over. So best case scenerio is you voting 3rd party, or not at all.

 

[Charles_Main]

Bin Ladin would disagree with you.

He would also object to us protecting the Saudi government while they oppress their citizens.

PS. Glad to hear you aren't voting and/or your vote won't really matter.

If you don't like Obama, the Democratic party will never win you over. So best case scenerio is you voting 3rd party, or not at all.

I would never not vote at all bud. I have not missed a vote since I turned 18. I would agree the Dems are not likely to win me over anytime soon. However I have voted for them in the past. Most notedly I voted for Clinton both times, and was just as disappointed I did as I was when I voted for Bush. Both parties have failed the American people, and the only answer I see is for Americans to defect on mass from them and start supporting 3rd parties.

Plain and simple. I will stand with my principles and vote for Bob Barr this time around.

 

[sealybobo]

I would never not vote at all bud. I have not missed a vote since I turned 18. I would agree the Dems are not likely to win me over anytime soon. However I have voted for them in the past. Most notedly I voted for Clinton both times, and was just as disappointed I did as I was when I voted for Bush. Both parties have failed the American people, and the only answer I see is for Americans to defect on mass from them and start supporting 3rd parties.

Plain and simple. I will stand with my principles and vote for Bob Barr this time around.

You voted for Bush. That's all the proof I need to know you are not an educated voter. Clinton/Gore did a great job. So, you should have given Gore a chance, the same way you did when you voted for Bush 1 in his first term. Were you old enough? Anyways, I voted for Bush 1. He sucked, so I voted for Clinton twice too. Nothing wrong with that administration, except for one thing...


BARR, NEWT, and KEN STARR wouldn't leave Clinton the fuck alone. So Barr was exposed for having a mistress himself, remember? Larry Flynt busted him? And now you have forgotten because it has been 9 years and you want to vote for Barr again? What a jerk off voter you are. YOu vote for hypocrites. He's an opportunist. He's sticking to the conservative values bullshit of the 90's and he gets a pass on the Tom Delay corruption because he went into hiding, hoping you would forget that he was a key player in Monicagate. And he had a mistress of his own?

I don't trust a word that comes out of that creeps mouth.

And I don't believe you voted for Clinton twice. Based on your hard on for Barr, I think you voted for Dole. Liar.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Try to stay on topic, we are discussing McCain's denial of a women the right to control her own life. Republicans preach morality but do not support the context in which human actions can be moral. They oppose education, they oppose condom distribution, they oppose the day after pill, even though many conceptions end naturally. There is a curious irony in all this as it is only modern science that shows the complexity of life but republican even oppose modern science. Some even doubt evolution, the fundamental principle of modern medical science. Before modern science even most religions considered the age of seven as the beginning of personhood. So many children died young, people faced a harsh fact with a mild fantasy.

Life is a process, a gradual process, no one except the orthodox religious do not engage in birth control and have lots of children. Most people prevent multiple pregnancies in any manner they can, only the Catholic church recognizes that birth control is keeping life from forming. PS my parents lived according to the Catholic tenets.

When republicans support children, living children, they can preach their particular form of morality, till then they remain hypocrites. And as an off handed thought how many who protest abortion protest all the children killed in Iraq caused directly by our actions there for 20 years or more? Anyone!

if abortion is a human right as defined by the constitution,then surely the rights of an abortion survivor are inextricably tied to abortion rights . And the fact that an infants rights are not recognized if it was meant to be aborted should be a concern to anyone who worries about the needless deaths of children around the world who may or may not be considered persons in the eyes of the law. You can't have it both ways. If a late term abortion survivor is not afforded the same rights as a child born via vaginal or cesarean birth then no new born child has any rights at all and all those parents who abused and neglected their new born children should be exonerated of all charges.

I am not anti abortion. I am anti late term abortion with the one exception being to save the life of the mother. There should be limits on abortion after the second trimester with the one exception noted above.

 

[Charles_Main]

You voted for Bush. That's all the proof I need to know you are not an educated voter. Clinton/Gore did a great job. So, you should have given Gore a chance, the same way you did when you voted for Bush 1 in his first term. Were you old enough? Anyways, I voted for Bush 1. He sucked, so I voted for Clinton twice too. Nothing wrong with that administration, except for one thing...

LOL, Gore is a smuck and Kerry was even worse. I voted for Bush both times only because at the time, I saw him as the lesser of 2 evils. Now I have come to realize that if we keep just picking the lesser of 2 evils then we we always only have the lesser of 2 evils as our choices. I see the only way to real change to be to actually vote for real change, and not just keep supporting either of these corrupted parties who could care less about the American people or what they want.

Clinton/Gore did not do a great job in my opinion. They failed on many issues. Just One being the fact that the completely ignored the threat of International Terrorism. An Issue I think is rather important.

BARR, NEWT, and KEN STARR wouldn't leave Clinton the fuck alone.

Give me a break, Clinton committed a crime when he lied on the stand. I personally at the time never thought he should have been asked questions about his sex life, but he was, and he chose to lie on the stand.

He's sticking to the conservative values bullshit of the 90's and he gets a pass on the Tom Delay corruption because he went into hiding, hoping you would forget that he was a key player in Monicagate. And he had a mistress of his own?

I have never spoken a single word in support of Delay. He was a corrupt ass. Just one of the reasons why I no longer support Republicans.

I don't trust a word that comes out of that creeps mouth.

Me either.

And I don't believe you voted for Clinton twice. Based on your hard on for Barr, I think you voted for Dole. Liar.

Wait so you voted for Bush 1 then Clinton twice but somehow you can't believe anyone else could make such changes in their views? I hardly have a hard on for Bob Barr. On the contrary I am only voting for him, in the hopes of sending a message to the republicans that Conservatives are fed up with them. In fact I think many of Bob Barr's and the Libertarians ideas are insane, if I thought he could actually win, I would rethink my vote.

people change dumb ass. I had kids, and grew up some, and my perspective on things changes somewhat.

Once again you simply assume you know what I did and call me a liar. Frankly you are starting to piss me off with your baseless accusations. So if you are going to call me a liar, every time you post, then I might as well do the same. I think you are full of shit when you say you voted for Bush1, and for Clinton twice. Because judging by your behavior in this thread, and over all, I am guessing you are about 15, and not even able to vote yet. You enjoy people making baseless accusations about you? I bet not.

buzz off Bobo.

 

[midcan5]

I am not anti abortion. I am anti late term abortion with the one exception being to save the life of the mother. There should be limits on abortion after the second trimester with the one exception noted above.

On this we agree.