Bachmann signs The Family Lead pledge

[Foxfyre]

Thats strange

Democrats in the North supported abolition and Civil Rights
While Republicans in the South opposed both abolition and Civil Rights

What a simplistic worldview. Can you explain why you are arguing that Democrats were the real liberals, while other people in this thread argue that those same Democrats were the real conservatives? Are you talking about different Democrats?

You are taking a North/South political position and converting it to a Democrat/Republican political position

Southern Republicans opposed integration and Civil Rights. You could not get elected dog catcher in the South if you supported Civil Rights

You're full of it. There weren't enough Southern Republicans at the time of slavery to elect a dog catcher. There certainly weren't enough to compile any statistics that anybody could post. But keep posting that nonsense anyway. There are people ignorant enough to believe it and thank you, maybe even pos rep you for it. You might as well be a hero to somebody. And it was NOT the Southern Republicans who were opposing integration and civil rights. Sure you can find somebody among any group to hold up as an example, but without those Southern Republicans supporting it, integration and civil rights would not have happened when it did.

As a matter of fact, the record shows that since 1933 Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes. http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/194350.shtml

 

[ABikerSailor]

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Not that I question your story, but 5 year olds beaten with a bullwhip are generally referred to as a corpse.

Nose was broken twice, made the papers in my town for having a rodeo buckle emblazoned on my back so badly, you could see the lariat from the cowboy on my back.

Yeah.......I could have been a corpse, but I got lucky.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Thats strange

Democrats in the North supported abolition and Civil Rights
While Republicans in the South opposed both abolition and Civil Rights

What a simplistic worldview. Can you explain why you are arguing that Democrats were the real liberals, while other people in this thread argue that those same Democrats were the real conservatives? Are you talking about different Democrats?

You are taking a North/South political position and converting it to a Democrat/Republican political position

Southern Republicans opposed integration and Civil Rights. You could not get elected dog catcher in the South if you supported Civil Rights

Actually, you are the one doing it, I am simply asking why two people who both believe that Democrats are the people who support civil rights say Democrats were the true liberals and the true conservatives. It seems a bit farfetched that they could be both at the same time.

 

[bodecea]

I am well aware of their personal ideologies.
I am also well aware of the fact that my religion does not believe in hell but many others do.
I am well aware that many conservatives are against gay marriage, yet I am a conservative who is for gay marriage.I am well aware of many conservatives against abortion whereas I am one who believes in the right to choose.

But I am also well aware that just becuase a candidate believes something different than I do does not mean that candidate is not a good choice overall as we all know that a President may have a belief system, but only he or she can sign or veto a law....but congress...who has their fingers on the pulse of the nation...are the true legislators.

thanks for the thumbs up...but I would have much preferred you responded to the gist of the post.

There is not a single politician...OR PERSON...that I agree with 100%.

The fact that we are picking on certtain bits of ideologies in an attempt to define that person based on that single item is bs...

Sure...Bachmann is against gay marriage....sure, she signed something stupid...likely under pressure from her base......it does not define her as a candidate....just as "57 states" and "spread the wealth" didnt define Obama as a candidate.

I have yet to find anything about her definition as a candidate that would make me want to vote for her.

 

[Jarhead]

thanks for the thumbs up...but I would have much preferred you responded to the gist of the post.

There is not a single politician...OR PERSON...that I agree with 100%.

The fact that we are picking on certtain bits of ideologies in an attempt to define that person based on that single item is bs...

Sure...Bachmann is against gay marriage....sure, she signed something stupid...likely under pressure from her base......it does not define her as a candidate....just as "57 states" and "spread the wealth" didnt define Obama as a candidate.

I have yet to find anything about her definition as a candidate that would make me want to vote for her.

I wouldnt expect you to. You have nothing in common with her. As a conservative, I have much in common with her. I dont agree with her stance on abotion, gay marriage, and I dont think ANY candiddate should sign a pledge...But I agree with her as it pertains to limited government, major cutback on spending and personal responsibilty. She has yet to secure my vote....I have a lot to learn about her....but I dont discount candidates just becuase they feel strongly about one social or two social issues.

 

[Seawytch]

We've talked about how black kids had it better back in slave times (according to Bachmann).

Question........with the degradation of marriage (i.e. 51 percent divorce rate), doesn't that mean that white kids had it better back then as well?

No wonder Newt wouldn't sign it.

No, people like YOU have talked about how black kids had it better in slave times according to Bachmann.

People like ME have talked about how Bachmann never said that, that was never in the pledge, but some keep saying it anyway because they seem to be so desperate for it to be true.

The issue of white kids has not come up, but the white kids, Asian kids, Hispanic kids, black kids--ALL kids--are absolutely better off with a loving mother and father in the home than in any other circumstance. Which is the point that both Bachmann and Family Leader has been consistent in promoting. And you can try to dispute that til the cows come home, but good luck.

Or you can continue to mischaracterize and misrepresent the statement in the pledge and Bachmann's position on it. Your choice.

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Blanket statements are seldom the best course of action.

We know that two PARENTS is generally better than one. There are no studies that show those parents having to be of opposite genders, however.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, based on their religious beliefs, they likely are against those things.

Doubtful.

They probably are against sex outside of marriage and masturbation to pornography.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have yet to find anything about her definition as a candidate that would make me want to vote for her.

Funny, I had the same reaction to Barry Obama.....

 

[Si modo]

No, people like YOU have talked about how black kids had it better in slave times according to Bachmann.

People like ME have talked about how Bachmann never said that, that was never in the pledge, but some keep saying it anyway because they seem to be so desperate for it to be true.

The issue of white kids has not come up, but the white kids, Asian kids, Hispanic kids, black kids--ALL kids--are absolutely better off with a loving mother and father in the home than in any other circumstance. Which is the point that both Bachmann and Family Leader has been consistent in promoting. And you can try to dispute that til the cows come home, but good luck.

Or you can continue to mischaracterize and misrepresent the statement in the pledge and Bachmann's position on it. Your choice.

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Blanket statements are seldom the best course of action.

We know that two PARENTS is generally better than one. There are no studies that show those parents having to be of opposite genders, however.

Not quite.

Appreciating How Fathers Give Children a Head Start (and references therein)

 

[Seawytch]

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Blanket statements are seldom the best course of action.

We know that two PARENTS is generally better than one. There are no studies that show those parents having to be of opposite genders, however.

Not quite.

Appreciating How Fathers Give Children a Head Start (and references therein)

Yes quite. The comparisons were not to same sex couples raising children. Studies show there are no significant differences.

 

[Sallow]

Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann are all against oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, divorce, fertility clinics etc

holy smokes, WHO CARES.

WTF do you mean, who cares?

How is any of this the business of the government?

 

[Stephanie]

Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann are all against oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, divorce, fertility clinics etc

holy smokes, WHO CARES.

WTF do you mean, who cares?

How is any of this the business of the government?

They are not trying to Legislate this stuff. And don't pretend they are..
How is you think ABORTION and Homosexual marriage is the business of the Government?

 

[Sallow]

Suuuuure. That's why Democrats fought the emancipation of slaves and civil rights.

You're going nowhere and you don't even know that you are.

Thats strange

Democrats in the North supported abolition and Civil Rights
While Republicans in the South opposed both abolition and Civil Rights

It's bad enough to have to watch you distort and mischaracterize and misrepresent the Pledge and Michelle Bachmann's involvement with that. Must we also endure the rewriting of history to suit your partisan prejudices?

The Republican Party was formed in 1854 and was made up of mostly anti-slavery Whigs and previously anti-slavery Free Soil Democrats. There was almost no GOP presence in the South at the time as that was the bastion of the pro-slavery Democrats. Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, by his election, pretty much ended an alliance between pro-slavery southern democrats and the northern democrats who didn't own slaves but tolerated the concepts. Those northern democrats had to choose between the north and south a year or so later and most chose the north.

If it was not for the Republicans, slavery would not have ended when it did. If it was not for the support of the minority Republicans, segregation would not have ended when it did.

None of that has anything to do with the situation black kids endure today, but we can at least keep the history honest maybe?

Let's get down to brass tacks.

Conservatives supported slavery at the time..Liberals did not.

It's as simple as that.

And being this is generally considered a settled issue..and generally considered a bitter and terrible chapter in American history.

The very fact, that conservatives keep bringing it up over and over again..to make some really BAD points..is disgusting.

No kid in 1860..that was black (or white for that matter)..had it better in this country then they do now.

 

[Sallow]

holy smokes, WHO CARES.

WTF do you mean, who cares?

How is any of this the business of the government?

They are not trying to Legislate this stuff. And don't pretend they are..
How is you think ABORTION and Homosexual marriage is the business of the Government?

It's the business of government to insure all people have rights.

That's the very foundation of what government does.

Protect and defend our rights.

 

[Foxfyre]

What about the kids that are in a living hell because of abuse of one or both parents? I lived that nightmare from age 5-8, and was glad as all get out when my mother divorced Grissom, because being beaten with a bullwhip just ain't no fun.

That little slice of my life was in the late 60's, early 70's.

Kids aren't necessarily better off with two parents, especially if one of them is an abuser.

Blanket statements are seldom the best course of action.

We know that two PARENTS is generally better than one. There are no studies that show those parents having to be of opposite genders, however.

Not quite.

Appreciating How Fathers Give Children a Head Start (and references therein)

The fact is that there are not two parent families available for all kids these days, and that is a deplorable statistic within our current culture. Which was the point that Pledge intended to make however much the Left wants to make it into something else.

When it is the best available situation for the child, of course it is better to have one loving parent. I have stood up as a witness for a lesbian couple to adopt a child because I could see that they all loved each other and that was the best situation available for that child. But because all children, boys, girls, gay, and straight, benefit from having responsible, loving role models from both sexes, the ideal should always be the traditional home and, all things being equal, those should be given preference in adopting children. To promote that in no way says that gay couples or single people cannot be or aren't great parents.

The other component is that the single greatest cause of poverty for all children, most especially black children, is that there is one one parent providing for the child. Which of course is another reason to promote two parent families.

I had a bad father and was a battered child--physically, mentally, emotionally--and I would have been far better off without him around when I was growing up. But that does not change my opinion at all that children generally, on average, will do much better with a loving mother and father in the home than they will do under any other family structure.

 

[Si modo]

Blanket statements are seldom the best course of action.

We know that two PARENTS is generally better than one. There are no studies that show those parents having to be of opposite genders, however.

Not quite.

Appreciating How Fathers Give Children a Head Start (and references therein)

Yes quite. The comparisons were not to same sex couples raising children. Studies show there are no significant differences.

Oh, you don't like that one. OK. Here, try another. I have plenty more, so we'll just go all night.

Everything else being equal, two married parents of the opposite sex are better for the child. I know you don't want to hear that, but that is a fact.

 

[Stephanie]

WTF do you mean, who cares?

How is any of this the business of the government?

They are not trying to Legislate this stuff. And don't pretend they are..
How is you think ABORTION and Homosexual marriage is the business of the Government?

It's the business of government to insure all people have rights.

That's the very foundation of what government does.

Protect and defend our rights.

ah, so abortion and marriage is now a right..

 

[Seawytch]

Not quite.

Appreciating How Fathers Give Children a Head Start (and references therein)

Yes quite. The comparisons were not to same sex couples raising children. Studies show there are no significant differences.

Oh, you don't like that one. OK. Here, try another. I have plenty more, so we'll just go all night.

Everything else being equal, two married parents of the opposite sex are better for the child. I know you don't want to hear that, but that is a fact.

Another false comparison. Failed again. Gotta go back to work...in the meantime, check out what the APA has to say on the issue.

 

[Si modo]

Yes quite. The comparisons were not to same sex couples raising children. Studies show there are no significant differences.

Oh, you don't like that one. OK. Here, try another. I have plenty more, so we'll just go all night.

Everything else being equal, two married parents of the opposite sex are better for the child. I know you don't want to hear that, but that is a fact.

Another false comparison. Failed again. Gotta go back to work...in the meantime, check out what the APA has to say on the issue.

Well, you are stupid, so I can see why you are so confused.

"Most researchers now agree that together these studies support the notion that, on average, children do best when raised by their two married, biological parents"

The nature of the beast does not allow for direct comparisons. The fact that has to be pointed out to you is amazing.

Now, put your head back in the sand.

And, I don't do other's research work. You have a reference supporting any claim you make, you present it.

 

[Sallow]

They are not trying to Legislate this stuff. And don't pretend they are..
How is you think ABORTION and Homosexual marriage is the business of the Government?

It's the business of government to insure all people have rights.

That's the very foundation of what government does.

Protect and defend our rights.

ah, so abortion and marriage is now a right..

Privacy is a right.

Catch up.