CPAC

[kygorski]

You cant have an argument with a conservaturd.They only have one point of view, and many are too shallow to admit it. get to facts and they throw in the GOD factor, that means to them GODdont make junk. He didn't make "queers" or mongoloid children, birth defects are the cause of liberal sinning.Poor people are not motavated. Natural disasters are "pay back" for sins.

[greenriverman1]

You cant have an argument with a conservaturd.They only have one point of view, and many are too shallow to admit it. get to facts and they throw in the GOD factor, that means to them GODdont make junk. He didn't make "queers" or mongoloid children, birth defects are the cause of liberal sinning.Poor people are not motavated. Natural disasters are "pay back" for sins.

God is the main factor.
mongoloid? Where did mongoloid come from? God created us all.
Abortion kills part of god"s creation.

God gave us a book of laws to follow. Who am I to say God was wrong and we should abort children?

[apb]

eo, I think that sums up one of the major differences between liberals and conservatives. A liberal will change their mind in light of new data. A conservative sticks by their original view and will not change no matter what new data is presented. It is not a question of morals, its about having some common sense in recognizing that one is not always right.

Your comment on late term abortion is complete bull. This discussion has come up here in the past and I do not recall any of the "liberal" members on this forum being in favor of late term abortion. The only time that I would see that as an option is in the case of dangers to the mother's health. For example, if it were determined that the fetus would be stillborn and delivering the baby has a high probabily of death for the mother, I would not have an issue with aborting the fetus. I seriously doubt any member on this forum would be in favor of having their wife or daughter risk their own life to deliver a stillborn baby.

God's values???? And where do we find these? Certainly not the bible with its stories of incest, murder, miss treatment of females, genocide, and general disregard for anyone who holds different beliefs. Sure, there are a few good stories here and there, but you have to have a good moral compass already to sort out the good from the bad there.

Andrew

[GeoFisher]

eo, I think that sums up one of the major differences between liberals and conservatives. A liberal will change their mind in light of new data. A conservative sticks by their original view and will not change no matter what new data is presented. It is not a question of morals, its about having some common sense in recognizing that one is not always right.

Your comment on late term abortion is complete bull. This discussion has come up here in the past and I do not recall any of the "liberal" members on this forum being in favor of late term abortion. The only time that I would see that as an option is in the case of dangers to the mother's health. For example, if it were determined that the fetus would be stillborn and delivering the baby has a high probabily of death for the mother, I would not have an issue with aborting the fetus. I seriously doubt any member on this forum would be in favor of having their wife or daughter risk their own life to deliver a stillborn baby.

God's values???? And where do we find these? Certainly not the bible with its stories of incest, murder, miss treatment of females, genocide, and general disregard for anyone who holds different beliefs. Sure, there are a few good stories here and there, but you have to have a good moral compass already to sort out the good from the bad there.

Andrew

* So you're good with supporting a politician who is completely on board with late term. THAT was the basis of my comment. Obama sponsored this in the senate...I'm not and never could be.

* On another point, I'm pretty clear with were I'm at but will not VOTE for someone I appose based on values. While I voted conservative this year, I did NOT vote for Mourdock in Indiana for Senate based on his foolish comments.

* My values are based up and centered around Christian teachings......Folks are right that there are a crap ton of messages in the old testament, and in some cases the new, that I simply don't agree with. THAT doesn't mean anything except I'm capable of free thought. Am I going to hell for that..I sure hope not.

[kygorski]

Geo, I might be wrong,but I'm pretty sure you started the name calling with libertards a few years ago. You like yo paint with a broad brush, but it irks you when someelse does. I couldn't think of the proper word at the time, its really called downs syndrome. No I dont think you are all the things you said I think about you, and I'm not the person you think I am. I'm a moderate with many views, a few are even conservative.

[GeoFisher]

Geo, I might be wrong,but I'm pretty sure you started the name calling with libertards a few years ago. You like yo paint with a broad brush, but it irks you when someelse does. I couldn't think of the proper word at the time, its really called downs syndrome. No I dont think you are all the things you said I think about you, and I'm not the person you think I am. I'm a moderate with many views, a few are even conservative.

Doesn't bother me one bit.........I'm a staunch conservative.... but I do have viewpoints that are not completely on that realm.

And I think you're quite a bit left of moderate, but hey that is just me.

[RoadToad]

* So you're good with supporting a politician who is completely on board with late term.

This illustrates another tendency among conservatives: the refusal, or perhaps it's inability, to see nuance. To them, everything is white and black (and no, I don't mean racially).

Geo, exactly what do you mean by "completely on board with late term?" Do you mean "in support of it any time a woman chooses?" I don't think you'll find a whole lot of people that support that, and I don't think Obama does, either. If you mean "in support of having it as an option when the mother's life is in danger," then yes.

What specifically did Obama sponsor in the Senate that means he's "completely on board with late term?"

[GeoFisher]

This illustrates another tendency among conservatives: the refusal, or perhaps it's inability, to see nuance. To them, everything is white and black (and no, I don't mean racially).

Geo, exactly what do you mean by "completely on board with late term?" Do you mean "in support of it any time a woman chooses?" I don't think you'll find a whole lot of people that support that, and I don't think Obama does, either. If you mean "in support of having it as an option when the mother's life is in danger," then yes.

What specifically did Obama sponsor in the Senate that means he's "completely on board with late term?"

It took me 2 seconds to find this.

The question SPECIFICALLY asked.......was do "even late term abortions"......ANSWER.....I am pro choice.

But hey, how about his words EXACTLY so I don't mis quote him.

[GeoFisher]

It took me 2 seconds to find this.

The question SPECIFICALLY asked.......was do "even late term abortions"......ANSWER.....I am pro choice.

But hey, how about his words EXACTLY so I don't mis quote him.

AND this is just like liberals.....the inability to EVALUATE effectively just what an Obamunist stands for.

I evaluated it.......EFFECTIVELY.

Later,

Geo

[RoadToad]

Great, you found the clip, and it makes a nice sound bite. But you specifically said "Obama sponsored this in the Senate" and I asked what you're referring to that he sponsored. That question you haven't answered.

Here's what the "On The Issues" web site Barack Obama on Abortion quotes Obama saying (in a Fox News interview, btw) about late-term abortion, specifically:

"On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I’ve said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn’t have that."

Source: 2008 Fox News interview: presidential series , Apr 27, 2008

[GeoFisher]

Great, you found the clip, and it makes a nice sound bite. But you specifically said "Obama sponsored this in the Senate" and I asked what you're referring to that he sponsored. That question you haven't answered.

Here's what the "On The Issues" web site Barack Obama on Abortion quotes Obama saying (in a Fox News interview, btw) about late-term abortion, specifically:

"On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I’ve said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn’t have that."

Source: 2008 Fox News interview: presidential series , Apr 27, 2008

Ok.......I'm wrong..he did not PROPOSE the legislation......I was pretty sure he did...

Done with it.

[apb]

* So you're good with supporting a politician who is completely on board with late term. THAT was the basis of my comment. Obama sponsored this in the senate...I'm not and never could be. .

I didn't vote for him, so no, I do not support him. Said that many times here. As far as late term abortions, my views are the same as what RoadToad posted earlier.

** My values are based up and centered around Christian teachings......Folks are right that there are a crap ton of messages in the old testament, and in some cases the new, that I simply don't agree with. THAT doesn't mean anything except I'm capable of free thought. Am I going to hell for that..I sure hope not.

Problem is that there are a multitude of "Christian teachings". Too many folks take an al acart approach to religion/bible: they'll pick the parts that they agree with and disregard the rest. So how does one define Christian teachings? Even the answer of yours I quoted is cryptic in that regard.

Andrew