What is it that lead you to conservatism or liberalism?

[rtwngAvngr]

ignostic. Haha. Was that intentional?! That's gold, Jerry, Gold.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Gop guy
Okay:
Liberals support abortion, the RCC, and all other Christians consider this murder, so does every other religion on earth that i know of.

Pro-Choice is exactly that. It's believing that a person, in this case it's women, have the right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy or not. On the cover, this does seem to be a mainly Liberal issue, however, blanket statements like this are most definitely not true. I'm sure there are conservatives who are pro-choice just as there are liberals who are anti-choice.

Liberals support the seperation of church and state, this country was founded a Judeo-Christian nation, there's nothing about that "seperation" in the constitution.

While I certainly don't claim to be the 'majority opinion' of liberals, heres my take on 'seperation'. Religion, or spirituality, is a deeply personal thing. It's about your relationship with god, not your schools relationship with god or your governments relationship with god. Prayer should be an individual thing, not a forced group issue. This country was built with the concept of individuality, not to be a cult like mass of followers.

Liberals support gay marriage and gays as ministers and such, HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN, SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE.

According to your bible, god loves everyone equally. He created us in his image, right? He also created free will. People are allowed to develop and be whoever and however they want to be. While the bible, a book written by men and not god, claims homosexuality is a sin, does not God forgive us our sins if we confess and repent? Liberals and conservatives alike confuse the issue. It's not about supporting sin, it's about supporting the ability of god's allowance of free will.

Liberals support "under God" being taken out of our Pledge of Allegiance.

Please refer to history and see when and how "under god" was entered into the pledge.

Any real Bible going Christian is a conservative.

We are a mixed culture. We have, and allow, beliefs of all type. There are conservatives who don't believe in god just as there are liberals who are quite religious or spiritual, right moi?

Don't take this personally either, I respect you and all, just those don't sound very Christian to me.

No personal offense taken, I just think that maybe you've got a bit more exploring to do so that you can be better informed.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Do women have the right to choose if murdering other citizens who are walking down the street is right for them? Why or why not? Should embryos be merely an innocent victim of location? "there goes the neighborhood!" Should a baby be at highest risk of being murdered in utero?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Do women have the right to choose if murdering other citizens who are walking down the street is right for them? Why or why not? Should embryos be merely an innocent victim of location? "there goes the neighborhood!" Should a baby be at highest risk of being murdered in utero?

More extremism I see.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
More extremism I see.

What is this world coming to when people think advocating that children live is extremism.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
More extremism I see.

I think they're good questions, knob.

I'm actually pro-choice under circumstances or rape, severe deformity, or mother's health. What I cannot tolerate is the liberals who say it's not a human life or that it's not killing. They pretend it should be considered a moral impact equal that of feminine hygiene product choice. And THAT is obscene.

Thanks for participating in the discussion in a meaningful, and non-dismissive way,dk , really, 'preciate it.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
What is this world coming to when people think advocating that children live is extremism.

Its not the advocation of children to live thats extreme, its trying to compare the choice of continuing a pregnancy with choosing random people on the streets to murder at whim.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Its not the advocation of children to live thats extreme, its trying to compare the choice of continuing a pregnancy with choosing random people on the streets to murder at whim.

It's comparing killing a human to killing a human. Did you get cher cupajoe tiday?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I think they're good questions, knob.

I'm actually pro-choice under circumstances or rape, severe deformity, or mother's health. What I cannot tolerate is the liberals who say it's not a human life or that it's not killing. They pretend it should be considered a moral impact equal that of feminine hygiene product choice. And THAT is obscene.

Knob? WTF is a 'knob'?

What you can't tolerate is people not thinking, doing, and saying like you do but understand this, RWA, you're not right on everything. You don't know everything, and you certainly can't be everything. I don't give a rat's ass what you can and cannot tolerate. What you HAVE to tolerate right now is that the law allows for CHOICE, not what your uneducated and ill-informed thoughts on what constitutes life is.

As it stands right now, the 'partial birth ban' couldn't have set the standards any better, in my opinion, because I've thought all along that if a woman can't decide in the first trimester then we'll make the choice for her.

Thanks for participating in the discussion in a meaningful, and non-dismissive way,dk , really, 'preciate it.

don't whine and bitch to me because you're incapable of more than one color of thinking.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Knob? WTF is a 'knob'?

What you can't tolerate is people not thinking, doing, and saying like you do but understand this, RWA, you're not right on everything. You don't know everything, and you certainly can't be everything. I don't give a rat's ass what you can and cannot tolerate. What you HAVE to tolerate right now is that the law allows for CHOICE, not what your uneducated and ill-informed thoughts on what constitutes life is.

As it stands right now, the 'partial birth ban' couldn't have set the standards any better, in my opinion, because I've thought all along that if a woman can't decide in the first trimester then we'll make the choice for her.



don't whine and bitch to me because you're incapable of more than one color of thinking. [/B]

is that 'roid acting up? you seem cranky.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
It's comparing killing a human to killing a human.

No, it's making an irrational comparison to something that has no connection with the original debate.

comparisons like your's would mean that we'd have to take the death penalty under consideration of abolishment. After all, Vengeance is mine, sayeth the lord.....right?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
No, it's making an irrational comparison to something that has no connection with the original debate.

comparisons like your's would mean that we'd have to take the death penalty under consideration of abolishment. After all, Vengeance is mine, sayeth the lord.....right?

So do you want to actually have a discussion or do you just want to be a knob?

Your last post was completely nonresponsive. Which part of my argument do you not agree with.

1. Is a fetus not "alive"?
2. Is stopping a life not killing?
3. Do we as a society not typically establish sets of extreme circumstances under which killing is accepted?
4. Are the current reasons proferred by the liberal wing of the pro choice movement to justify this killing acceptable to you? Will the liberal wing of the pro choice even admit it's killing? (revisit 1 through 3) If they won't, what is their agenda for twisting the truth?

I believe killing evil killers is justified killing, regarding your mention of capital punishment. Innocent children are a different story.

 

[DKSuddeth]

1. Is a fetus not "alive"?

Not in the first few weeks, its just a collection of cells

2. Is stopping a life not killing?

this is rhetorical, is it not?

3. Do we as a society not typically establish sets of extreme circumstances under which killing is accepted?

I don't think they are extreme

4. Are the current reasons proferred by the liberal wing of the pro choice movement to justify this killing acceptable to you? Will the liberal wing of the pro choice even admit it's killing? (revisit 1 through 3) If they won't, what is their agenda for twisting the truth?

I don't know, nor do I care, about the 'movements' reasons or justification, I have my own independent thought on it. Something you seem to be missing.

So do you want to actually have a discussion or do you just want to be a knob?

So do you want to contribute to society or just be an opinionated asshole the rest of your life?

Your last post was completely nonresponsive. Which part of my argument do you not agree with.

reading comprehension has never been your strong suit, has it? I don't agree with your comparison, in case you were wondering.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

just a collection of cells. jesus wept.

 

[pegwinn]

I am a realist. I don't claim to be either conservative or liberal because my opinion is made by each issue. My wife says that I am conservative by majority vote. I believe in dealing with the issue as it is now, not as it was, nor as you hope it will be. More on that in another thread.

BTW, abortion is basically wrong. IF there is a clear and present danger to the mom, then maybe its alright. The deformity rule doesn't wash, ask Stephen Hawkings mom.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
I am a realist. I don't claim to be either conservative or liberal because my opinion is made by each issue. My wife says that I am conservative by majority vote. I believe in dealing with the issue as it is now, not as it was, nor as you hope it will be. More on that in another thread.

BTW, abortion is basically wrong. IF there is a clear and present danger to the mom, then maybe its alright. The deformity rule doesn't wash, ask Stephen Hawkings mom.

yeah. I've been thinking about the deformity exception.

 

[KLSuddeth]

The deformity rule doesn't wash, ask Stephen Hawkings mom.

Stephen Hawkings has ALS - he was never symptomatic or even diagnosed till young adulthood.

Maybe Im dense, but I dont see how this example is applicable?

 

[KLSuddeth]

wait - I think I see where youre coming from - I hadnt had enough coffee...sorry.

Your meaning because of the genetic testing available for that now?

Or do I still need more caffeine? lol

:cof:

 

[rtwngAvngr]

It just relates generally to the issue of whether or not even individuals with disease can have valuable, productive and fulfilling lives. If we determine they can then justifying abortion for extreme disease or deformity becomes harder, for me at least. That's how I understood his point.

 

[KLSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
It just relates generally to the issue of whether or not even individuals with disease can have valuable, productive and fulfilling lives. If we determine they can then justifying abortion for extreme disease or deformity becomes harder, for me at least. That's how I understood his point.

Yeah, I can see that. It just kinda seemed like apples and oranges to me.

For example (and yes this is true - not 'just' an example:

I have SLE - it can be a nasty, insideous pain in the ass of a disease. I was diagnosed at 15.
However, since I wasnt symptomatic or diagnosed till 15 years AFTER my birth.............see my point?

I think I see what she/he is trying to say....or even saying.
However, unless Im missing something, it apples and oranges.

But then again, Im not the brightest star in the sky yet today
(still not enough coffee)

:cof:

(Btw, thank you to whomever made the ref to Dr Hawkings - that man rocks. I referenced him ALOT in my dissertation. Talk about a mind....WOW - he is just incredible!!!!)