Elk County Forum

As if we needed another example of how two-faced obama is, here he is yet again reversing himself...

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer – 38 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Widening an explosive debate on torture, President Barack Obama on Tuesday opened the possibility of prosecution for Bush-era lawyers who authorized brutal interrogation of terror suspects and suggested Congress might order a full investigation.

Less than a week after declaring it was time for the nation to move on rather than "laying blame for the past," Obama found himself describing what might be done next to investigate what he called the loss of "our moral bearing".


This isn't the complete post, you can get it at either yahoo.com or the Associated press.  How can the american people believe a thing that comes out of obama mouth?? 

  It's my understandin he said they weren't goin to prosecute the agents who carried out the interrogations because they were just following orders. The people who WROTE the "rules" are a whole other kettle of fish. Kind of like the "special rules of engagement" they wrote at Ruby Ridge that needlessly escalated and killed uneccesarily.

My question is this...why prosecute at all?  What did these people do that was so wrong?

  Changed the rules so they could try to get away with somthing that is against the law would be my guess. I've been hearin a LOT of basically people saying the ends justify the means.....no it doesn't.

What these folks did was to keep our country safe.  Something obama doesn't seem interested in doing.  Of course, he said he would so we have to look to him to  do the opposite. 

  Im not lookin to Obama for anything. Or anybody else in the government for that matter. Has the whole world forgot that yeah he can STOP bills by veto but he's basically the headless horseman when it comes to pushin things he wants. Nothin happens unless Congresss lets it...and yeah I know pelosi whatever....I would just bet you there are enough people on both sides of the aisle who do not want the very same things you all and a lot of other people don't want to keep things from getting anywhere NEAR what you all are scared of. But then I still have faith in common sense.......

I could go into a long argument about all the people sayin Oh I'm a great christian in one breath and then very next breath sayin as long as it gets you what you need the ends justify the means but I won't........oh hell I already did.  :P

  You know what....you seem like a decent intelligent person and we are just gonna butt heads on the subject of politics lol. I enjoy a good discussion but I really don't take politics as serious as you do. I really figure it's just SSDD and in four years we will have a new one to bitch about but it really won't affect my day to day livin one bit more than I let it :) I think Obama is just the "cool new toy" of the moment. He'll stick around as long as we let him, won't do anymore damage than we let him, and he'll fade away just like every other "new thing" does.

  I don't want to judge anybody anymore than I want them to judge me....but I AM human and when it comes to politics that is the nature of the beast :P So that's bad on me.

And once again you are criticizing Obama for examining the circumstances and making a decision on what he has learned or is about to learn.  He did not say that anyone would be punished or not punished.  I wish my memory was as good as yours as to the exact words I hear.  The gist of what I heard was that maybe we should take another look at it?  Is that about right?  Isn't it odd that we can hear the same thing and interpret it so differently?  Comes with age, I guess.  This thing of not jumping to conclusions.

  That's what I heard too Wilma.....

Criticizing...you bet I am.  He said that it was time to move on and to quit laying blame for the past, then in just a few days reversed himself.  It is the AIG thing all over again.  His administration is going after people that didn't break the law. 

The AIG people didn't break the law?  Weren't they one of the troubled institutions that had to have help?

Yes, they were. I was refering to the bonus thing.  the gov't knew about the bonuses before they gave AIG the bailout money, then when AIG executives were paid their bonuses the gov't was "outraged" that taxpayer dollars were spent that way.  Shortly after that gov't passed legislation to recoup the bonuses in the form of taxes aimed at only 70 people.

Let's see now, who was it that handed out the first stimulus package?  Back in late 2008?

Quote from: Wilma on April 22, 2009, 07:16:16 AM
And once again you are criticizing Obama for examining the circumstances and making a decision on what he has learned or is about to learn.  He did not say that anyone would be punished or not punished.  I wish my memory was as good as yours as to the exact words I hear.  The gist of what I heard was that maybe we should take another look at it?  Is that about right?  Isn't it odd that we can hear the same thing and interpret it so differently?  Comes with age, I guess.  This thing of not jumping to conclusions.

This is the "dance and stutter step" that obama is famous for, Wilma...... he can't make up his mind.  He has to see which way the "political" wind is blowing before he does.  So far, he's usually too late, like in the case of the captain and the 3 dead pirates.  He let that situation go far too long before making up his mind to snuff them.  It made us look WEAK to the rest of the world.

Yes, Bush screwed up with the first stimulus package through faulty info, some of it coming from Barney Franks and Chris Dodd and numerous other democratic "know-it-alls" who wanted to get their two-cents worth in.  Bottom line?  It probably shouldn't have happen. 

And on the bonus situation.  Large bonuses are NOT the problem.  The bonuses to AIG, or any corporation, were contractual obligations before AIG's seizure.  But the government forced themselves into things.  Obama jumped the gun giving billions to AGI before setting rules about the bonuses.  If AIG had gone into bankruptcy, then the standard proceedings would have decided whether to thin out these bonuses.  The two biggest Congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are, believe it or not, Senator Chris Dodd and Barack Obama.


But lets face it.... Obama seems to want to blame the existing economic woes on the prior Bush Administration.  Half of Americans actually believe him.  Many forget the Constitution dictates that the president will provide for the common defense.

Let's back up little.  The current economic morass was started by the Clinton administration in the 90's.  The Bush Administration and Senator McCain warned 11 times about Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac.  This became the 2008 financial crisis starting in 2002.  Democrats, like Barney Frank, extended loans to people who couldn't afford them.  Back then, Frank actually said the federal government wouldn't bailout anyone.  Starting in 2001, Bush raised several "red flags" about FME and FMA, and that this economic crisis was coming.  Alan Greenspan (past Chairman/Federal Reserve) repeated that in 2005. 

In 2006, McCain even warned of an impending depression.  But nothing could be done because Democrats had control of the Congress, and Frank was the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee.   You see where that led us to today.

And here's a few more things that irks me on Obama and the democrats.  Just in Obama's first 93 days, he has initiated 26 pro-abortion bills.  It's almost if Obama has rescinded or eliminated any pro-life bill Bush had initiated. 

Obama refuses to clear up a major eligibility question to the presidency.  The Constitution simply states that the president must be a natural born citizen.  He has provided a birth certificate, but it has been debunked as a forgery.  This needs to be looked into alot more than it has.

Missile defense was initiated by Bush but is degraded by Obama.  Missile defense completely neutralizes any rogue or enemy nation launch, or any terrorist launch.  It eliminates any blackmail, current technology allows for the US to hit a 'spot' on a 'bullet' with a 'bullet', and best of all, nobody is killed with this defensive action.

When the dust all settles, and everyone is in their mortal grave, each one of us will have to answer for our earthly actions.  At least Bush will get salutes for all those babies that were saved during is administration.  Salutes from all those Americans saved from additional terrorist attacks.  And from citizens who were, or could have been, saved by missile defense.

I would prepare a lengthy rebuttal to this, but quite frankly, this isn't my day.  I was out in the sun for awhile this morning and in spite of the required sunglasses and sun hat, the resulting headache is preventing me from any deep thinking.  I will, however, say one thing about abortion.  I don't know whether or not I believe in abortion, but I do believe in a woman's right to control her own body.  Abortion has been around as long as women have been getting pregnant.  Making it legal only gives women a chance to make a safe choice.  I see no difference in doing away with an embryo inside a woman's body and doing away with a whole lot of them instead of using them for research.  In all my years I have yet to hear of a woman having an abortion simply because she doesn't want to be pregnant.  Even the unmarried teenagers have chosen to have the baby, come what may.  But I am glad that they had the option.  Having the option may have shown them that they really wanted the child, not merely having it because there was no choice.

Now I am going to quit.  I have already corrected 10 errors in my typing.

wilma, you forgot one option...the option of responsibility.  If you don't want a kid, don't have sex.
There are about 1.37million abortions each year (as of 1996)
You can't tell me that each of these is due to a medical reason or whatever.  Abortion in this country has become just another form of "birth control".
And  speaking of giving a woman the choice, and control of her body, perhaps we should only  allow abortions to be performed if the child is a boy.  Because aborting a baby woman isn't giving her a choice is it?

"Let's see now, who was it that handed out the first stimulus package?  Back in late 2008?"-wilma

Bush, so what, I didn't agree with it then either.  What does that have to do with obama and his adminstration passing legislation that targeted only 70 people AFTER THE FACT?

Is Obama and his administration through passing legislation dealing with this?  Can't you wait and see?  Don't you have any patience?  Do you have to peek at your Christmas presents as soon as they are put under the tree? 

Wilma, do you understand what happened?  I don't mean that in a smartass way, so don't take offense, please.  But you do realize that what the gov't did was pass legislation AFTER the supposed crime was committed?  How much more of this are we supposed to take?  Do we wait until they completly revoke and trash the consititution before we say something?  They are in violation of at least 3 (4th, 6th, 8th) constitutional admendments. 

So what do you want Obama's administration to do about the way things were allowed to develop over the past 16 years?  I understand, all right.  I just can't get excited and up in arms and want an immediate solution or blame someone I don't like for a situation that somebody else created.

Well, for starters he can stop violating peoples constitutional rights just to appease his leftist friends, he can start standing up for this country instead of making us out to be the bad guy, he can stop apologizing for the U.S. doing the most to make the world a safer place, and weakening our defenses.

"The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes 'viable,' that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[1]"

This is from Wikipedia and is from the summary of the case of Roe v. Wade and the Supreme Courts' decision. Notice that abortions are PERMISSABLE FOR ANY REASON A WOMAN CHOOSES....therefore It sounds to me that if she didn't WANT the kid she could kill it! No medical reason necessary. So Billy you are RIGHT when you say that not all of those 1.37 million MURDERS were for medical reasons...It's just because some women can't keep their legs together!

Just for the record, I am totally against Abortion. It is MURDER. People in this country stick up more for Death Row inmates trying to keep them from being executed for CRIMES than they do for innocent babies that DID NOT ASK TO BE BORN!

Women don't get pregnant without help.

No they don't get pregnant without help, but the FATHER doesn't have any say in keeping and raising a baby. If she wants to KILL the BABY she can...He has NO SAY! I have 2 children of my own and the same man HELPED me both times and is still HELPING me every night. I enjoy my girls and can't imagine life without them!

Do you know anyone that had an abortion simply because she didn't want to have the kid?

I sure do. Was raised with her. We used to get along but not anymore. She PRETENDS to be a Christian too

AND she wasn't raped, or in any danger or the baby in any danger. She got pregnant by a person my parents didn't want her around and KILLED the baby because she was IRRESPONSIBLE!

And now since I'm the only one arguing about this....here's some information on Late Term Abortions. Remember Roe v. Wade was "only abortions for ANY REASON before the baby was VIABLE"...Late Term Abortions should NOT be legal. From Wikipedia, because I like to make well informed and educated posts AFTER I research something so I know that I'm speaking truth.....

A late-term abortion often refers to an induced abortion procedure that occurs after the 20th week of gestation. However, the exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 12 completed weeks' gestation as "late".[1][2] Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[3][4] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[5] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[6]

The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly between pregnancies. Nearly all pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[6]

And here's some REASONS why women have late term abortions. Pretty lame reasons if you ask me, which of course no one did. Be sure to note that Fetal Problem diagnosed late in pregnancy is only 2% of the reasons they are performed....


71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

222% ? Hmmmmm------ :o :o

Quote from: kshillbillys on April 26, 2009, 06:37:48 PM
And now since I'm the only one arguing about this....here's some information on Late Term Abortions. Remember Roe v. Wade was "only abortions for ANY REASON before the baby was VIABLE"...Late Term Abortions should NOT be legal. From Wikipedia, because I like to make well informed and educated posts AFTER I research something so I know that I'm speaking truth.....

A late-term abortion often refers to an induced abortion procedure that occurs after the 20th week of gestation. However, the exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 12 completed weeks' gestation as "late".[1][2] Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[3][4] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[5] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[6]

The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly between pregnancies. Nearly all pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[6]

And here's some REASONS why women have late term abortions. Pretty lame reasons if you ask me, which of course no one did. Be sure to note that Fetal Problem diagnosed late in pregnancy is only 2% of the reasons they are performed....


71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other

In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute polled 1900 women and got the info you posted above. That information is over 22 years old. Wikipedia is seldom a good place to support an issue as controversial as this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion

David

Do you know anyone that had an abortion simply because she didn't want to have the kid?-wilma

I have never met anyone that has actually been to space either, so I guess by your logic no one ever has.  I have never met anyone who died in a car crash, so I guess that doesn't happen either. 

David you bring up a good point.  With those numbers being 22 years old they don't take into account the murders conducted under the heading of "Partial Birth".

or the murders of those using/working @ abortion clinics over the last 22 years.

I can honestly say that i knew of at least one young beautiful woman who died as the result of a back alley abortionist way back then. I can also say that abortion would not have been a choice for myself. Would you consider a vascectomy as murder? Or tubal ligation? I do not like the idea of abortion, however I would not send a woman to her possible death over my opinion.

Jerry, I cannot call the active support of unborn life murder. 

Vascectomy and tubal ligation murder?  Not even close.

I would not send a woman to her possible death over my opinion.  No one is forcing women to abort, that is a choice they make, just like the choice to have sex.  I would however, force that woman (and man if she knows who the father is) to accept some responisbility for their actions.

Billy, if Allen Sheppard counts, I have met someone who went into space ( and Buzz Aldrin was here on Saturday) and unfortunately I knew several who died in car accidents, including a high school friend and my Mom's father. I personally feel it's a woman's right to choose and hope that they will choose life, but it's none of my business. I do wish more young men were more willing to not pressure young girls into having sex. Like you say, no sex, no baby. BUT.....I personally heard every line in the book long ago and the pressure was tremendous. I was smarter that, that but not every girl is.

Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on April 26, 2009, 09:09:31 PM
Jerry, I cannot call the active support of unborn life murder. 

Vascectomy and tubal ligation murder?  Not even close.

I would not send a woman to her possible death over my opinion.  No one is forcing women to abort, that is a choice they make, just like the choice to have sex.  I would however, force that woman (and man if she knows who the father is) to accept some responisbility for their actions.

Perhaps you misunderstood, I was stating what about the murder of those attending or working at abortion clinics over the last 22 years.

I might be banned for the rest of my life, but............How is abortion any different from birth control?

Birth control is used to PREVENT getting pregnant...Abortion is used as a way to MURDER a baby...use the birth control you don't get pregnant and "need" an abortion!

People use tubal ligation and vasectomies as BIRTH CONTROL...yes they are different. If you have a tubal or a vasectomy then you don't get pregnant in the first place...Abortion is MURDER...i just can't stress that enough!

A woman's right to choose should begin by NOT HAVING SEX! AND there are plenty of girls who don't need to be pressured by a guy to have sex. Let's not blame the men for all of this! :'(

No, of course men can't be blamed for it all....There are very foolish girls out there too. They pay the price if an unexpected baby happens, in both mental and physical health.

No, jerry, I didn't misunderstand, I think that those butchers who perform abortions just because the woman doesn't want a baby should be subject to the same treatment they give to unborn children they murder.

Wilma, life begins at conception, period.  by preventing that conception life doesn't exist so it cannot be terminated.  Abortion is ending a life that has already begun. 

There is alot of talk about a woman having a choice, well what about the choice of the child?

To me its not a baby until it can live independently from the mother. I know that's a rough one, but that's how I feel. Babies that have only the brain stem and others that have horrible malformations inconsistent with life are not "babies." Nature unfortunately creates  one chamber hearts, livers and kidneys the size of a quarter and other awful things that science cannot fix.... maybe someday, but not yet. To me that's between the mother ( and father if he's available,) and the doctor.)

So by that logic, old people who cannot live independently, we should go ahead and slaughter them too?

So how's that for twisted logic?  ;) That's up to the person. We do have elder suicides and cases when the machines are turned off. Not the same at all.   We don't do CPR on everybody either.

You said that a person cannot be classified as alive if it cannont live independently from its mother.  So how is my logic twisted?  Also, it is not up to the person, suicide is illegal in most states.  As far as CPR you're right.  But an unborn child isn't given the choice.

"... and others that have horrible malformations inconsistent with life are not "babies." "-Diane

what would you consider inconsistent with life?

"Nature unfortunately creates  one chamber hearts, livers and kidneys the size of a quarter and other awful things that science cannot fix...."-Diane

Actually, science can fix all of those things.

How many of the babies that Diane just described would choose to be born and stay alive by artificial life support?  Just as old people choose not to be resuscitated if they are being kept alive by machines.  Or even if very elderly and have a heart failure.  

I am afraid that I have to support abortion just for the reason that a woman should have the choice of terminating a pregnancy that is endangering her life or will not result in a baby that can be kept alive.  Just because she has the choice doesn't mean that every woman is going to terminate.  Many, many women choose to have the child even when advised not to and when it appears that she will have to raise the child without help.  Why should a responsible woman be kept from the relief of an abortion just because some women are irresponsible?  Besides they don't just walk in and get an abortion just because they want one.  I understand that they have to go through counseling.  I don't really know, having never had to or know anyone that has.

I can't see that an embryo that cannot be kept alive outside the womb is a viable life.  Not any more so than the female's ovum and the male's sperm.  All the essentials are present in the ovum and sperm and when they are prevented from joining, life is being prevented.  Abortion is life being prevented.  Isn't birth control just a means of having your fun without having to pay for it?

Billy, you must lead an interesting life if nobody you ever heard of had a DNR order, or were told there is nothing more anyone can do, or were brain dead from some awful trauma. Inconsistent with life? I listed a couple already and no those cannot be fixed. Are you a neonate surgeon? You are assuming transplant or in utero surgery. It can't always be done....I wish it could. And who could afford it?   No insurance?According to you, too bad. Twisted logic? A fetus or collection of cells is hardly the same as a older person with cancer.

Well, then if it's a woman's choice to kill her baby, why then can't women that kill their young children get away with it? They get put on trial and given a death sentence. What's the difference...it's just another form of the stupid woman NOT WANTING HER KIDS!

Elderly people are given the CHOICE ...the baby is NOT! What about Terry Schaivo? SHE WASN'T GIVEN A CHOICE EITHER! Her husband didn't want to take care of her anymore because he wanted to get remarried. Her parents were willing to keep her alive and take care of her! THEY STARVED AND DEHYDRATED HER TO DEATH...What say you to that one? Is it ok to kill a grown woman too?

Suicide is illegal in most states just like Billy said. Wasn't Dr. Jack Kervorkian (sp?) in prison before he died for assisting people with their deaths? I'm sorry but after you turn 18 then it's your choice to live or die. Under the age of 18 is a whole different matter. What exactly makes a person alive? A beating heart? Usually on the tv shows, if you have no heartbeat, you're not alive. The heart of a baby begins to beat 18 DAYS AFTER CONCEPTION!!! 18 DAYS! And after the heart is beating, no one considers this MURDER?Biology is crystal clear that at the moment of conception (also known as fertilization), a unique, organism comes into existence. Since this new life possesses human DNA and is the offspring of human parents, it can legitimately only be described as human life.

Diane, just three examples of In-Utero surgery, that if it didn't happen, the children wouldn't survive.  Bear in mind that the child in the first article had a heart the size of a grape. 


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/27/AR2006012701619.html  - they fixed that one
http://www.med.wayne.edu/wayne%20medicine/wm96/frontiers.htm
http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/12573.html


How is a fetus any different from an older person with cancer, or althizmers, or dementia?  Neither one can exist without help from someone else or medicine? 


Wilma, what do you consider Artifical Life Support?  Also, I have already stated that I would agree on abortion being an option if the womans life were in danger, she was a victim of insest or rape.  But thats it.

 :o ::)

What does   :o and  ::) stand for and who was it meant for?

 ;) ;D  Stand down, Ellie May...I'm keeping out of this particular catfight.  ;D

Stand Down, Hell, Give'em Both Barrells!!!!

 :o ;D

LOL Billy....I get VERY passionate about this subject! I will defend BABIES rights til I die. So I will never apologize for being defensive on this subject. It just makes me sick. There are soooooooo many people that want children that can't have them and most of these women are just killing them for no reason! It's disgusting!

Quote from: kshillbillys on April 27, 2009, 06:24:49 PM
Well, then if it's a woman's choice to kill her baby, why then can't women that kill their young children get away with it? They get put on trial and given a death sentence. What's the difference...it's just another form of the stupid woman NOT WANTING HER KIDS!

Elderly people are given the CHOICE ...the baby is NOT! What about Terry Schaivo? SHE WASN'T GIVEN A CHOICE EITHER! Her husband didn't want to take care of her anymore because he wanted to get remarried. Her parents were willing to keep her alive and take care of her! THEY STARVED AND DEHYDRATED HER TO DEATH...What say you to that one? Is it ok to kill a grown woman too?

Suicide is illegal in most states just like Billy said. Wasn't Dr. Jack Kervorkian (sp?) in prison before he died for assisting people with their deaths? I'm sorry but after you turn 18 then it's your choice to live or die. Under the age of 18 is a whole different matter. What exactly makes a person alive? A beating heart? Usually on the tv shows, if you have no heartbeat, you're not alive. The heart of a baby begins to beat 18 DAYS AFTER CONCEPTION!!! 18 DAYS! And after the heart is beating, no one considers this MURDER?Biology is crystal clear that at the moment of conception (also known as fertilization), a unique, organism comes into existence. Since this new life possesses human DNA and is the offspring of human parents, it can legitimately only be described as human life.

I don't see it as your business what that person does with their body.  I believe that it is their right to decide and accept whatever consequences, moral or otherwise, that result from those actions.  At 18 days the heart may beat, but the fetus is not viable, thus not technically independently alive.

I guess I respect that you don't find it any of my business as to what another woman does with her body. I have an opinion. I will make it known with my freedom of speech right. Just as you have the right to disagree with me. I'm outspoken and people know it. I know I won't change any minds on here but I will continue to try to make my point. Viable at 18 days, no, BUT viable at 21-26 weeks, maybe and most likely. Late term abortions are wrong and SHOULD NOT be legalized. Roe v. Wade, as stated in my earlier posts, was for unviable babies. If a baby can live, they should not try to abort it! I don't buy the excuses those women gave for killing their babies late term!

here is my two cents on this subject.  I personally do not believe in abortion however I also believe that I have no right to tell somebody else they shouldn't either.  Every woman that has an abortion has a reason, whether others agree with her or not.  If an unwanted baby is brought into this world and given to someone who will love it and raise it, fine, but what happens to an unwanted baby that is not given up for adoption??? abuse, starvation, and a slow painful agonizing death.  Which is worse?

Jeremiah 1:5 KJB
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Uh, this is the political thread...Keep scrolling to the Religion thread.  :angel:

Quote from: redcliffsw on April 27, 2009, 08:44:18 PM



Jeremiah 1:5 KJB
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

And?  I'm sorry if I have an opinion contrary to that.

You don't owe me an apology.  I'll take God's word over an opinion.

Well, one more point...The GOVERNMENT decided Abortion was A-OK, that a woman could MURDER a baby. But the GOVERNMENT won't let people do drugs, or drive a car without a seatbelt, or drink and drive cuz we might HURT or KILL ourselves or someone else! What's the FREAKING difference? I mean hell if we can kill babies, then why are people on death row for killing adults? Makes no sense.

RIDDLE ME THIS....WHY was Scott Petersen found guilty of 2, count them 2, counts of murder when it was just his wife and some collection of cells that he murdered? Laci and CONNER Petersen...Why was he found guilty of TWO counts of MURDER????

AND a little closer to home...why is there now Alexa's law in the state of Kansas where it's a crime to kill a mother AND unborn child? That's the case in 35 states in this country now....

The reason these laws exist is that they are an attempt to create a slippery slope by those who oppose a women's right to choose.  They believe that by additional in fetal rights in various laws they begin to create a legal standing for the fetus.

Billy, I finally had a moment to read those articles you posted. Very interesting ,but it's sadly very rare, that's why it was written. Unfortunately one cannot repair a ventricle that doesn't exist. A 20% chance of survival isn't much, but I'm glad they tried. I had a friend whose baby was developing with its organs outside the body, long enough ago that they couldn't fix it like they sometimes can now. The organs were developing poorly and were going to be useless. She had a spontaneous abortion before she could decide what she wanted to do. Very sad. Her own body disowned the child...is that murder too? KS, wasn't Laci Peterson's baby 7 months along? That is a viable baby and should count as two homicides. And my comments are my opinion only, they don't mean to suggest that other opinions are wrong, just different.

I just seriously don't understand why the age of the BABY has to play a role. A BABY is a BABY! 7 months doesn't make a difference in the case of someone killing the mother. The laws state that when a woman is pregnant and she is murdered it is considered murder for both, whether she's 7 months, full term or 1 month along!

A spontaneous abortion where the body rejects the child is to me God's way of taking care of the situation. PEOPLE should NOT play GOD!

Don't play with fire and you won't get burned.... :)

Isn't birth control playing with God's decisions?

Outlaw guns and you WILL NOT stop crime.  Outlaw abortion and you WILL NOT stop abortions.  You only move them to the back room of some filthy backstreet building.

Right on, flo.

Amen, Flo!

I don't believe birth control is playing with God's decisions either. Birth control is a wonderful PREVENTATIVE measure until the woman is READY for a baby. Birth control is NOT permanent! Murder is permanent.

I told myself at work today that I was not going to get into this tonight because I just want to scream over this subject. But here I am, because as I stated in another post I am a sh*t starter. An innocent baby should NOT be slaughtered just because some slutty woman can't keep her legs together. No one will change my mind on that. If there's something wrong with the baby, God will take care of it. If a woman is raped, maybe. I just have a hard time with murdering an innocent baby when so many people would adopt it and LOVE it, no matter how it was conceived.

I must go take a blood pressure pill or something now or I'm gonna end up having a stroke and end up a vegetable and then you all will be screaming, unplug her, she wouldn't want to live that way!

Ok, the issue here it seems is that to classify a "fetus" as a baby it must be viable, meaning it must be able to survive on its own.  With that being said I will state a question that no one has given an answer to, other than "thats different."  If we are allowed by law to kill something that isn't viable, why can't we include old people who cannot survive on their own?  Or anyone of any age?  Without giving them a choice.  For example, an elderly woman, who must have somone look after her (dementia, or whatever) but whose childern do not want the responsibilty of either doing it personaly or financialy, instead they opt to just kill her.  How is that any different from a woman who doesn't want the responsibilty of raising a child and has it legally killed?

Maybe someone can tell me just how easy it is to get an abortion.  Just what does a woman go through to get there?

Maybe some of the liberals on this fourm could answer a question without changing the subject???

In going through all the comments on this subject of "Abortion," I would have to say Flo made more sense.  I personally do not believe in abortion.  That's my humble opinion.  In Bush's first term, Congress passed a bill making third trimester abortions, or "partial birth abortions", illegal.  Many of Bush's judicial nominations have been thwarted by the Democrats usually for one reason and one reason only -- their stance on Roe vs. Wade, the controversial court decision that first made abortion legal.  Which side is right?  Are there any shades of gray in this dispute? 

Should abortion be banned ( except in special circumstances like saving the mother's life)?

Yes

1#   Abortion is a form of murder and demeans the value of human life. When a pregnant women feels a kick in her belly, she doesn't say "Oh, the fetus kicked" or "Oh, the mass of cells that hasn't become a person kicked", she says "The baby kicked." Yes, after conception you have a real human being waiting to enter the world. Why should taking someone's life when they're in the womb be any different than taking their life when they're a baby in the crib? Pro-choice advocates claim this isn't a real baby only to justify their wrong acts in their own minds. Even if you don't believe abortion is murder, it still demeans the value of human life, since women can so callously stomp out a living being simply because they're inconvenienced.


2#   Other birth control is readily available; thus, abortion shouldn't be a form of birth control. There are dozens of birth control methods that can keep you from becoming pregnant, including the 100 percent effective one: abstinence. Maybe if abortion wasn't available, people wouldn't be so careless in the first place.


3#   The societal contributions of a potentially valuable human being are wiped out. What would the world be like if the mothers of Abe Lincoln, George Washington, or Thomas Edison had had an abortion?  (Or better yet, Flo, Varmit, Wilma, Diane, KSHillbilly.... or Teresa.... there probably wouldn't be any Elk County Forum for us to rant and rave on.... think about it)  Just maybe a woman has become pregnant despite all birth control attempts because the child is destined to do something great.


4#   Women who have abortions often suffer major psychological damage from the experience along with, in some cases, the father of the child. Many women who have abortion in their younger years end up living the rest of their lives in perpetual guilt. Even if that women doesn't consider it murder at the time, that may change as she matures. Even Jane Roe (not her real name), the original woman behind the famous court decision, has completely changed her mind on abortion. She filed a petition to have the decision overturned to help relieve the guilt of hundreds of thousands of needless deaths she blames on herself. Also, let's not forget that there are two parents of every aborted child. The father may feel just as guilty. The father may even want the child, but he has no choice if the mother chooses abortion.


5#   The advances of genetic testing may prompt more abortions (to avoid having the non-ideal child). All of us who have or want kids imagine them growing up to be doctors, senators, sports stars, or whatever. But what would you do if you knew the child would have Down's Syndrome? What would you do if you knew the child would have an intelligence level lower than that required to enter public school? What if the child had a strong risk of schizophrenia? Would you still have the child or would you want an abortion? As genetic knowledge continues to grow, we are able to determine more and more about what a child will be like as an adult. Legalized abortion could turn babies into science experiments.


6#   There are many couples who spend years on waiting lists trying to adopt a child. The number of couples out there who cannot have a child of their own for physical reasons are too numerous to count. The waiting list for adopting babies can be 5-10 years or more. Young women in their teens are right to be concerned that they're not ready to effectively raise a child. However, if that is the case, there are plenty of wonderful people out there who are. Not only would you be bringing a valuable life into the world, you'd also be making the dream of a childless couple come true.


7#   The abortion decision is often made by minors or young adults, who don't have the maturity and life experiences to make good decisions. There's a good reason why we don't allow people to drink alcohol, smoke, or drive until they're a certain age. It's because they haven't matured enough to make good, sound decisions. We've all made bad decisions in our younger years that provide us with life experience to make sounder judgment in the future. The one skill that seems to take the longest time to develop is the ability to consider the feelings and needs of someone besides ourselves. Why should such a life or death decision as abortion be made by a person who probably hasn't developed that capacity?


8#   People have the right not to see their tax dollars go to something they find immoral. Abortion is a medical procedure that must be performed by a doctor. The government contributes to many health care institutions such as Healthcare for the Homeless, Planned Parenthood, free clinics, etc. All of us who pay taxes have the right to prevent that money from going to something we consider murder.


9#   Abortion eliminates legal rights of the unborn child. The documents of our founding fathers state that we are all entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. By legalizing abortion, we take those rights away from a future American citizen. Just because the babies can't speak for themselves doesn't mean they have no rights. If a 1-month old is murdered, it that really different than abortion as far as protecting an American's life? If a person shoots and kills a pregnant woman, shouldn't the punishment be more severe? If you legalize abortion, it would tell the courts there is no difference.


10#   Abortion is against doctors' Hippocratic Oath. Every American doctor must take this fundamental oath, which says "First, do no harm". It threatens the very fabric of the entire medical field if doctors start using their own personal philosophies on life to decide who should or shouldn't be harmed. Whether or not you think abortion should be allowed, it cannot be disputed that a doctor is harming a living organism. Killing a human being doesn't serve any higher medical purpose and is therefore a violation of the oath.



No

1#   Government gets to control a woman's body. By making abortion illegal, you're introducing a slippery slope that gives government control over a woman's body. You're taking away a personal freedom. Who knows what other controls the government may legislate in the future. Will it have the power to force sterilization? Will it have the power to make motherhood mandatory? Will it next take away the right to use other birth control methods such as The Pill?


2#    "Back alley" abortions would increase if it were made illegal, leading to increased risk of young women dying or becoming sterile. Regardless of what laws are in place, there will always be young women out there who want to have an abortion. They may not want to face the wrath of their parents, the embarrassment at school, or the lifetime responsibility of motherhood. If we criminalize abortion, many woman will simply look for other ways to get rid of the child. They could starve themselves or seek unlicensed "back alley" abortions. So instead of getting an abortion in a controlled environment where there is one last chance for counseling on options, women may subject themselves to a potentially dangerous situation. These type of methods often lead to sterility or other harm, even death.


3#   It's arguably better for society to have babies aborted than have them be brought up poor and neglected, where not only will the child suffer but society when that child develops a higher attraction to crime, welfare, etc. This is probably a controversial point but it has to be said. Without legalized abortion, a lot more women will become parents whether or not they want to be and whether or not they're ready to be. Raising a child properly is a full-time labor intensive process. The children who are neglected or abused are usually the ones that grow up to be drug addicts, lifelong government aid recipients, and criminals. Do we want to subject the child to such misery? Do we want to saddle society with the added burden? Some people say, "What if Abe Lincoln's mom had an abortion?". You could also ask, "What if Adolf Hitler's or Saddam Hussein's mom had an abortion?"


4#   One brief mistake can take away a woman's childhood and trap her for life. We all make mistakes in our life, especially when we are young. The pressure to have sex at an early age is fierce in today's society. Even a girl who lives a good, responsible life can have one slip up. But that one slip-up can take away all her life plans and trap her. She may have planned to go to medical school, train for the Olympics, travel the world, or just have fun while she's still young. All this can be thrown down the drain with one brief mistake. We shouldn't penalize someone for life.


5#   Giving up a child for adoption can be just as emotionally damaging as having an abortion. Women develop an emotional bond with a child when they carry it through the full term and go through the experience of delivery. Giving up that child for adoption might be the only reasonable option for a young girl too immature or poor to raise a kid. However, the women now has to live with a feeling of abandoning their child for the rest of her life. Why do you think so many adoptive parents seek out their kids when they're grown? There's no doubt that some women suffer psychological damage from having an abortion; however, the damage done from giving a child up for adoption is much worse.



6#   Abortion is not murder because it is performed before a fetus has developed into a human person. A fetus doesn't become a real human being until it is physically delivered from a mother's womb. If you define a fetus as a human, are you going to go back and say a sperm or egg is a human? Should we ban birth control altogether then since we'd be killing a "human"?

God, I am glad someone can say things so much better than I can.  Thank you, Warph.  Now I am done with the subject.

Warph, you had me until "NO"

You know, the more I thought about this the angrier I got.  For those of you who support abortion I have a few  questions:

1)  Do you feel that is okay for a child who feels things like heat, cold, can hear and respond to a persons voice, cries, sucks it thumb, and play to be literally torn apart with a suction device used to remove that child from its mothers womb?

2)  Is it a womans right to burn her child in an acid like solution?

3)  Would you allow a woman to leave her premature child to die, even though that with medical help that child could be kept alive and made healthy?

4)  Would you allow a woman the right to chose to stab her child in the back of the head with a pair of scissors simply because
      a) the woman didn't want the child?
      b)  the childs foot was still inside the mother?

The above questions all contain various methods used to abort so called "unwanted" babies.  Barbaric and absoueltly evil in the most exterme.  If you answered yes to the above questions, remember, Hitler, Obama, and satan himself would be so very proud of you!!

Warph, good remarks on both sides of this issue.

BillyakaVarmit, I do not believe in abortion when in occurs in the second or third trimester, unless it is to save the life of the woman. No other reason should be considered for this operation at this time.

Billy, what does the "foot still being inside the mother" have to do with anything.That's easy to deliver. Now a footling presentation, when an accident has forced the foot out first, that's something else. ( I delivered 8 over the years. 7 good, one awful) The mom did all the work, I just guided her.

I've tried so hard to stay out of this one.. .. but I feel I want to say some stuff.

It  is a very personal issue in my belief.
I do not believe abortion should be made illegal.
I agree with Flo and  DeeGee on this one .. After 6 weeks, I don't think it should be done.
But if it is.. I don't think a butcher in a back alley with a dirty clothes hanger is the answer either.

Would I have an abortion? No. I could never... BUT.. that is for ME to decide..
That is between me and my God. And the unborn baby who is an  "Old Soul" who has chosen to take that road with me this lifetime. *my personal beliefs*
We ..and We  alone...will deal with the consequences in this life and on the other side for my actions.
It is not for anyone ..anywhere... to tell ME what I can or can not do with my body. ( goes the same for a Full auto gun.. if I want one and I am a law abiding citizen, I should have be able to have one. It is not for anyone else to decide that for me.)   If anything I do in this life has the repercussions of a negative factor.. "I" will be the one to deal with it.
You worry about your body..and I will worry about what I do with mine, kind of thing. 

And abortion used as a means of birth control I am soooo against.
But ..
No one wants to have sex education.. no one wants their kids to take birth control.. everyone talks about abstinence.. ( which is great.. if you can fast forward your 16 year old raging hormonal body to think and rationalize like a 40 year old)   Parents stick their heads so far up their constricted butts where this subject is concerned that it makes me sick.

The procedures are heinous..yes..  the thoughts make me cry real tears and bust my heart in a million pieces. But the cold facts are:
Women are going to have abortions whether they are legal or not.
To ban anything only makes the getting of it unsafe and more beneficial to those who are selling the product.

To be honest.. I would rather a woman have a safe and legal abortion than give birth to her baby .. and dump it in a trash can.. or abuse it.. or a million other horrendous results in having an unwanted child.

There is so many edges to this passionate issue. Because from this issue  comes all the strand of issues feathering off it.
Birth control and sex education taught in schools..( and by whom) ..... abstinence... adoption... private and public ( and the years of red tape  that goes with it)  single parenting.. marriage..   
I could go on and on about  all the factors of sex and babies.
But it isn't going to make either side 100 % right.

You and I totally agree on this one.. I also have one more thing I truly believe and I don't talk about it much. I believe with all my heart that the wee tiny ones that have "human potential'', that for one reason or another isn't fulfilled, or the still births and such, go back to God to be reassigned to someone else until they are actually born to someone somewhere. That may seem totally ridiculous to some   but I believe it with my whole being. Human potential is never wasted.

Once again I am glad, so glad that there is someone that can say things so much better than I can.  Thank you, Teresa.  And, Diane, that is such a nice thought.

Another 10 ringer for you Diane..
There ARE NO ACCIDENTS.. There is a learning purpose for every single teeny tiny thing that is done on this planet.. and God has the diplomas at each end of each life ( school term)

Diane-

Reassignment?  It's not in the Bible.  Where'd you come up with that? 

It came from me, myself. I've seen so much over the years.... That's OK, I don't expect anyone to agree with me. That's just me being introspective and finding a place in my heart for how things work.

Unfortunately, that's how much of the world accepts as "truth".

Now I  promise I am not going to write pages and pages and pages on this ..
but I will go head to head ..toe to toe.... on this subject!

Quote from: redcliffsw on April 29, 2009, 11:21:17 AM

Diane-

Reassignment?  It's not in the Bible.  Where'd you come up with that? 

Reassignment.....................

.*better said*...Reincarnation is a starting point on explaining a bit..
and don't even get me started on "the Bible"... which all the books that Reincarnation was spoken about "are gone.. "
Just because it isn't in whats left of the the story book  of stories that were told and retold and retold until they were written down.. does not mean it isn't so.
This IS a subject that I have personal deep experience in.. and I don't think we want to open up that can of worms.  :)
Takes waaaay too much bandwidth on the server.. LOL  ;D

 Red, that's why I don't talk about it much and I certainly don't preach it to anyone else or try to convince anyone else about it. I'm not going to set up a store front church based on reassignment. Now I'm sorry I mentioned it. :P :'(

Don't be sorry Diane.. You have every right to believe the way you want.. just as we all do.
But I am like you. I tend to like to keep my beliefs and the way I talk and worship my God private and not make it a social event.

Don't be sorry that you present a thought Diane. And thank you for presenting an alternative for what seems to be such cut and dried ideals for some. I too think that reassignment makes good sense and in some ways so does reincarnation. I certainly think that the real truths if there ever were any have been lost in the clouds of time. And Teresa, after a couple of years, we finally agree on something! You are slipping up girl! LOL!  ;D

Quote from: sixdogsmom on April 29, 2009, 11:51:21 AM
. And Teresa, after a couple of years, we finally agree on something! You are slipping up girl! LOL!  ;D

(http://www.rightnation.us/forums/style_emoticons/default/groan.gif)
ohhhh say it isn't so!   ;D ;D

Diane, the foot thing was in relation to partial birth abortions, which obama supports.

A persons religious beliefs are their own.  weather I agree with them or not, the best I can do is to try and point them toward Christ, it is up to them to go. 

That being said, it is my belief that one day we each will have to answer for our deeds.  And trust me I have alot of explaining to do!  However, one question I will not have to answer is, why didn't I speak out for the unborn.  I truly believe that ANY child concieved is a gift from God, regardless of the childs condition. 

Diane, does that include miscarriage, stillbirth and the beautiful darling little five year old great granddaughter that I lost?

I think the little ones who were miscarried, aborted, (naturally or artificially) are reassigned to another life. But the ones who are fully born alive, with heartbeat, lungs working and brain function, even for a short time, go straight to heaven to be with God. Then it would be decided whether they would stay or be reassigned. I think if the kids are old enough to be aware of God, they would stay there. So threes, fours, fives and beyond would probably stay, but I really don't have a strong feeling on that. I'm so sorry you lost a granddaughter. I would expect she would have stayed with her relatives who were already there, and would wait for her family to come later.

Wilma and Diane, I think that it is the young ones who are most aware of God.  After all, He was the first one to hold them.

Diane, she is with her relatives in heaven.  I saw it in a dream.

Aw, :) :) :) that's so sweet.

Abortion.  That word.... If our nation fights another Civil War, it will probably be about this.  And I would remind you that this all from my perspective, the male perspective, a one-step-removed perspective, because I will obviously never have to decide on whether or not I should have an abortion.  And by the way, my belief is that if men were the ones getting pregnant, abortions would be easier to get than food poisoning in Moscow.  Having men or the Courts or Congress or Obama decide the fate of a woman's reproductive system makes about as much sense as asking me to run for governor of Kansas.  Who's this Mark Parkinson clown anyway?  He and Spector need to get together and reminisce about the good/bad times they had in the ol' GOP.  I have a feeling they are going to miss it.

Anyway, there's no doubt that passions run high on both sides of the abortion issue.  Pro-life activists attempt to paint anyone pro-choice as having no morals.  On the other side of the ledger, pro-choicers are tagging pro-lifers as crazed and backward bible-thumpers bent on running the lives of the people who disagree with them.  The truth, as always, is, the case of human endeavors lies somewhere in between.  As much as the advance scouts on either side of this issue might not want to admit it, good people do get abortions and other good people are pained by their decision to get one.

Where do I stand?  Well, I'm like most of you, I presume, I think there are far too many abortions performed in this country.  And I also believe that at the end of the day, as much as I might disapprove, none of them are really any of my business.  Look, there are always going to be arguments on this issue.  The debate will rage until the end of time no matter what the whim of the Papal infallibility or the politics of the decade.  But the simple truth is, that such a passionate and personal decision dictates that the choice be left to the individual.  And you know, that's really all we can do, because we're just human beings, stumbling around in the dark, trying to get to the bathroom and kicking the crap out of our shins on the way there..... whatever that means.

Now there's some things all right-minded human beings should agree on.  We should all agree that abortions should be legal in the case of rape, incest and when the mother's life is at risk -- that's just common sense.  But excluding that obvious assumption, everything else in the abortion arena is "in play."  There are many quagmires complicating this issue. Religion.  Now it seems that religion is most often the backboard for every bank shot put up by someone making it their business to get into your business.  Roman Catholic doctrine forbids abortion.  Fine.  Take that into consideration when you make your your decision.  Right-to-life proponents contend that abortion is immoral.  Fine.  Take that into consideration when you make your decision.  Another pothole on the road to a sensible resolution to abortion is "when does life begin?"  At conception?  When a heartbeat is detected?  At the first drawn breath?  You know, for me it wasn't until last Tuesday.  Until then I was just a sperm with an accountant!

Okay, so those are the variables, and there are obviously millions more variables that make each individual case unique.  But the more you think about it, and the more it makes your head spin, and the more confused you get trying to figure out someone else's life for them, it becomes increasingly apparent that it has to be the call of the individual who is pregnant, because the collective, one way or another, won't have to suffer the consequences of that most personal of all decisions.

I dunno..... but I think it is time to suck it up.  Look deep into your immortal soul.... if you believe you have one.... and do the right thing.  Have the courage and strength to live your own life, by your own standards, and stop trying to call the shots for everyone else.  We all live with glaring inconsistencies, and sometimes, when you see something going on right in front of you that offends you to the very core of your being, sometimes the best thing you can do is just walk away, because you know that's exactly what you would want them to do for you. 

There's only one judge on all this and that's God. And you don't get to meet him until you go backstage after the play is over.  And believe me, you do not want to get a "thumbs down" from the guy who created thumbs, all right?  In the interim, everybody has got to tend their own garden vis-a-vis abortion.  And remember, when it comes to your body, only you wear the robes, and only you carry the gavel.  That's the way I look at it, anyway.   :angel:

I never dreamed I'd be typing these words, but....

Warph, I agree with you 100 percent on this issue. Yours was a thoughtfully and compassionately written post about a very sensitive topic.

Whew. That just about took it out of me. Time for a refill on coffee.

Warph, it took you a lot more words to say it than it would me, but you said it just like it should be.  I totally agree with you.  You run for Governor of Kansas?  Maybe you should, you definately have the gift of going the long way around to get to what you are saying. (I mean that in a good way).

Good one, Warph, I totally agree with you and if you run for anything, you got my vote. 

I have been asked over the years if I am pro-life or pro-choice or just how I feel about this subject.  My answer is that I am pro-if it doesn't involve me or my family, it is none of my business.  Obviously, if there is a danger to the mothers life or in the case of rape, then it is the womans choice.  But, other than that I think it is none of my business.

Larryj

WOW  Warph, they have you running --- hope you don't have to run for cover.   :D 
I do not believe what one does with their own body is of anyone's business but their own.  To have an abortion ***That decision would be very difficult to make, but for anyone to tell me what I could or could not do, in such a case, would be like lighting a fire under me -
  The people in power (?)  have never made the rapist get a vasectomy,  have they?? And incest is the one act that just makes me livid!!!   Now, in that case,  Fred says they should be castrated and them hung upside down in the courtyard for everyone to view their worthless hides.  Maybe we should turn Fred loose on some of those bad boys.  lol
Jo

GO GET 'EM FRED

If I disagree with Warph right now I will probably be hung and quartered.  But I am safe.  IMHO he said it just right.  And on that basis, I have to say, I will never be faced with that decision for myself, so it is none of my business. 

My mom sometimes comes in here to see what all i'm talking about and what's going on up here in our county. I would just like to

THANK YOU MAMA for letting me BEAT ROE V. WADE and not MURDERING ME while I was in your womb!! And I know that you made SACRIFICES in your life to raise an UNEXPECTED child! Together WE can hold our heads up high whenever we meet God to answer for our book of life..I LOVE YOU!  HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY early!

Question for all those involoved here:  When did we as Americans and Christians start defining the morality of "right and wrong" on a personal basis? 

The argument of "my body, my choice" is flawed in that it is hypocrtial.  We want our children to abstain from sexual contact until they are married but its their body their choice right?  We don't want our children to do drugs, but, their body their choice right?  If we are to be a moral nation than we have to stand on our principles no matter how hard that might be.  We cannot just pick and choose when the time is conveint.

Billy, you have presented agood querstion about "right and wrong" on a personal basis.
Nowadays, people go around the Bible to get their own way.  Of course, if
they are not really Christians, it probably wouldn't much matter.

Just look at the entitlements and payments and bailouts from the
Federals!  The gov't money comes from somewhere and that source is
somebody else.  Much of the debt is being burdened upon the
unborn - those fortunate to escape the "personal rights" of others too.

I agree, I mean, I know that the gov't cannot generate it's "own" money, it has to get it from somewhere.  What they do with that money does concern me.  It should not go to "social engineering" projects like planned parenthood (what a misnomer) or the like.  If there is a surplus after securing our defense and delievering the mail, it should go back to the people.

Amen to that!  Billy, you are not talking "nonsense".

The Treasury is not for the public or the States to draw funding.

Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on May 02, 2009, 10:06:41 AM
    If there is a surplus after securing our defense and delievering the mail, it should go back to the people.

LOL! I thought that is where the money goes, education, highways, etc, etc, the people.

Billy, the old "post roads" were so they could deliver the mail. So that's it, huh, just defense and mail?  OK the next time I hear someone say "Why don't they do something about that"....Or "Why do they let them get away with that?" I'll tell 'em you said so. No more Federal Marshals, no more Dept. of Justice. No more Supreme Court. We can have two branches instead of three.  ;D In fact no more "United States," just "those 50 states, some of which aren't states but commonwealths." I can ask for your papers at our state line. ;D"

No CDC, no FCC or FAA. No medical research, no public schools, no Fema, no Fish and Game. Surely you do not think that with a population the size of the US that fish and game would just be there when you want it? What about water, food, and medicine standards? What about the mining industry? Strip mining would be legal any old how, with any kind of pollution allowed. Example is Galena Kansas, a disaster area due to lead poisoning. And the danger was known even way back then, there wasn't any regs to stop it though. Lots of men working in those mines lost their sight due to lead poisoning. The water is still unpotable. Where does a farmer or rancher go when they are having some kind of production problem they cannot resolve? They go to the extension service (funded with tax dollars). Your kids do not work in a sweatshop due to federal regulation. Children survive to adulthood due to many federal programs. I remember when I was in grade school, they lined everybody up and gave smallpox, diptheria vaccinations and tested for tuberculosis. I just saw a program on the history channel recently that was about that outbreak of smallpox (1947). It occurred in New York City, but due to government reaction and the actions taken, it was contained in a short time. We rely on government for many things and most are good and benefit all of us. We the people are the government, and fortunately we are a self governing body. We are charged as citizens to vote and to serve on jurys. We also pay taxes, and that seems to be what the main gripe is, all about the money. Idealism has very little to do with it.

Edie, I wish we had applauding hands on here.  I could sure use them now.  I can't even find a happy face that says it.

Wilma, I have pretty much been sitting on the sidelines since losing Ted, but I can thank Billy for kindling the fire again.  :P

Diane, I don't know about the Federal Marshalls but the Dept. of Justice...if it worked so well under federal rule then why are our prisons filled to overflowing, many with repeat offenders?  Why are people sitting on death row for years at a time?  Why have they been waging a war on drugs with no victories? 

Supreme Court...has gotten so used to abusing its power they feel that they have a right to legislate from the bench.  And to make matters worse one adminstration can't seem to agree with the next.  So, whatever laws they don't like they just rule oppisite to what was already ruled upon.  Which causes confusion in an already chaotic Dept. of Justice.

The next time you hear someone complaining that the federal gov't isn't doing anything about something, ask them why they haven't told their state to do something about it. You know, excrise their 10th admendment rights.

"Unitied States"...hell, we can't even decide what language we speak, we divide ourselves on race, political views, religion, etc, what is so united about that?  We are a Confederacy, individual states working together, but some how the left forgot that.

CDC...I don't know about that one.  FCC...I don't need a gov't organization telling me what to watch, or listen to, I believe that if you don't like what is on then don't watch or listen to it. 

FAA...competion will spur quality and craftmanship.  Do you really think that if someone kept building a sub-standard plane that kept crashing people would chose to fly on it?

Medical Research...should be done by private organizations without the interference of gov't.  Again goes back to competition and the free market.

Public Schools...oh yeah, those turned well :P :-X  If the gov't does such a great job on these then why are there kids graduating who can't read, write, or answer basic history questions?

FEMA...ask the folks in New Orleans how this one worked out for them?

Fish and Game...what a waste, teach kids to respect and use nature as it was intended and there wouldn't be a need for this one.  It is a sad state when a person has to purchase a license to catch a fish.  By the way, I have never wanted fish and game.  The wardens around here act like they can go anywhere and do anything even on private land.  It is my land, I will do as I damn well please.

Water, Food, and medicane standards...if the gov't enforced these so flawlessly then why is the water in my small little town unfit to drink?  Why are foods purchased in grocery stores filled with more 20 letter words than actual food? 

Strip mining...if the majority of folks in an area don't want it then they should stop it, with either local leglislation or local action.  Pollution is the same way.  If a community has a set of pollution laws that are broken, the people doing it are arrested and made to make restitution.

Farmers or Ranchers...this one hits close to home, However, that is the nature of the beast isn't it?  Every person who is in business takes risks, some you win some you lose.

My kids don't work in a sweatshop because I don't allow them to.  I think that most americans wouldn't stand for it, not on our soil anyway.

As far a vaccinations goes, I really don't like the idea of my children being forced to take a medicine without my approval.  Which without said shots they cannont attend a public school. 

If We the People were the gov't, then they wouldn't pass legislation that most americans were against would they?  If gov't actually cared for the American people then they would act in the best interest for the American people and not just themselves.  They sure as hell wouldn't vote for a pay raise when most Americans are either taking a pay cut or losing their jobs all together.
Yes, we are charged to vote and serve on jurys.  But what good is that vote when they can be thrown out, miscounted, forged etc?  What good is that jury when they are not allowed to hear all evidence just because of the way it was obtained?
Yes, money is part of the gripe.  Folks work hard to earn that money and get a little mad when they see it taken from them and given to some lazy dead beat without a job, who doesn't want to work, and who feel that those with money owe them something.  Or worse yet, when they see a president who continually spouts off about how bad things are, and how we need to tighten our belts, and then throws parties (on taxpayers dime) and serves $100 servings of JAPANESSE beef! 
Idealism has everythng to do with it.  Ideals like honesty, integrity, loyalty, honor, duty,...words the left knows nothing about.

That's pretty well said Billy.  Don'y you just love those Federal
approved tomatoes from the grocery and restaurants?

Billy, there's not many of us like you that don't like socialism.

There has always been a question around that hasn't been answered. 

If you don't like the country you are living in, why don't you leave?  Is there another country in this world that you could criticize so openly without going into hiding?  Oh, that's right, you are in hiding.  None of us know who you really are, do we?

Billy, do you consider yourself a Populist? I could re comment on some of your others, but I won't. you are entitled to you opinions if even if I think they have a rather narrow range sometimes.

Quote from: Wilma on May 03, 2009, 07:33:05 AM
There has always been a question around that hasn't been answered. 
If you don't like the country you are living in, why don't you leave?  Is there another country in this world that you could criticize so openly without going into hiding?  Oh, that's right, you are in hiding.  None of us know who you really are, do we?

Wilma, I was born here, this is my country.  One that has stood on the ideals of freedom.  No, I am not leaving.  And yes, I will continue to criticize what I think is wrong.  Thats the beauty of this country, the freedom that we have to speak our minds without fear of oppresion, at least thats how it used to be.  There are plenty of countries around the world that are socialist, marxist, whatever..if that is what some people want, THEY can move THERE.  And I am not in hiding, would it make you feel better if I published my full name, address, picture, whatever.  Wilma, I don't know who you are either, so I guess that kinda makes us even.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on May 03, 2009, 09:33:18 AM
Billy, do you consider yourself a Populist? I could re comment on some of your others, but I won't. you are entitled to you opinions if even if I think they have a rather narrow range sometimes.

Diane, I don't know what a Populist is.  I don't really consider myself anything other than American.  Narrow range..maybe, but I will take the road less traveled anyday.

You might be an undeclared Anarchist. And I don't mean the modern mean "anti - everything" definition. Look it up sometime, not just the definition, but the political history of it.

Diane, I don't really like applying labels on this kinda thing.  I believe in strong individualism, self reliance, a belief in God, coupled with a neighborly demenor.  I believe the Bill of Rights is there for a reason and that they are not to be tampered with.  I believe that when the liberites of citizens are stripped away revolution will, and should follow. 

Try reading the book "From the Ashes:  America Reborn." by William W. Johnstone.  It is a work of fiction, however, the political aspect of it is something I could live with and would like to see in this country.

You sure do throw "socialist" around a lot for someone who isn't crazy about labels!  ;D I think I will try to read that book. And you do to generalize ....A lot!

ok, you got me on the label thing, i worded that posts the wrong way. I guess I should've said that I don't subscribe to any one way of political thinking.  As far as generalizing..how do I do that alot?

Most American public schools are good.There are a few bad ones. Most American public school kids do just fine with whatever the curriculum is. Some don't learn easily and need more help, which can be very expensive. ADA is a part of it too. Drug and alcohol babies are not just discarded academically. Kids who just aren't ready to learn or who have a different agenda, can be tough but public schools have to take them. You seem to think public education in general is bad. Most people on welfare are on it for a short time and do well later. They are not "lazy deadbeats." There are some of course,but not all. I don't think you realize how many people get help for a good reason. It is a very big number. I'm sure I could find more but I don't want to demoralize you.  ;)  By the way I totally agree on the Kobe beef, if that can be verified. The White House should serve the best of American products unless there is a cultural, religious or dietary reason to do otherwise.

As to public schools...just because the kids are "passing" doesn't mean they are getting a good education. The curriculum has been dumbed down so much that even a monkey that skipped class could still pass with at least a "C"

As to welfare...I don't mind people who need help for a short time (around 90 days).  Its the folks that don't want to work that piss me off.

As to the Kobe beef...it has been verified, many times.  The White House should serve American products at all times, regardless of circumstances.

Hell Billy, maybe it should be a prerequisite for us to all scan our driver's license on here AND our birth certificate so then EVERYONE will know who WE are...They don't care if the POTUS is the person he says HE is, but you, now that's another story! I wouldn't know Wilma or Flo or SixDogsMom (real name?) if I ran into them on the street but Teresa and Diane and Jo all have pictures so I'd know them. No, I don't have a "real" picture of me up either, but in the roll call to all members thread I have a nice long post up about WHO I AM...name and all..no address but in Longton if you got a name you can pretty much find anyone you want to...

I guess my point is WHY THE BIG HANG UP ABOUT NOT KNOWING WHO BILLY IS? HIS NAME IS BILLY. HE LIVES IN ELK COUNTY. Isn't that enough?

JENNIFER WALKER, LONGTON, ELK COUNTY, KANSAS

I totally agree --- at least with Billy his profile is an American Eagle AND an American flag.  Good enough for me -- maybe some of the rest should take a look at their profile picture...... I don't think we could identify them in the main stream of people.

Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on May 04, 2009, 08:32:34 PM
Diane, I don't know about the Federal Marshalls but the Dept. of Justice...if it worked so well under federal rule then why are our prisons filled to overflowing, many with repeat offenders?  Why are people sitting on death row for years at a time?  Why have they been waging a war on drugs with no victories?

Supreme Court...has gotten so used to abusing its power they feel that they have a right to legislate from the bench.  And to make matters worse one adminstration can't seem to agree with the next.  So, whatever laws they don't like they just rule oppisite to what was already ruled upon.  Which causes confusion in an already chaotic Dept. of Justice.

The next time you hear someone complaining that the federal gov't isn't doing anything about something, ask them why they haven't told their state to do something about it. You know, excrise their 10th admendment rights.

"Unitied States"...hell, we can't even decide what language we speak, we divide ourselves on race, political views, religion, etc, what is so united about that?  We are a Confederacy, individual states working together, but some how the left forgot that.

CDC...I don't know about that one.  FCC...I don't need a gov't organization telling me what to watch, or listen to, I believe that if you don't like what is on then don't watch or listen to it.

FAA...competion will spur quality and craftmanship.  Do you really think that if someone kept building a sub-standard plane that kept crashing people would chose to fly on it?

Medical Research...should be done by private organizations without the interference of gov't.  Again goes back to competition and the free market.

Public Schools...oh yeah, those turned well Tongue Lips Sealed  If the gov't does such a great job on these then why are there kids graduating who can't read, write, or answer basic history questions?

FEMA...ask the folks in New Orleans how this one worked out for them?

Fish and Game...what a waste, teach kids to respect and use nature as it was intended and there wouldn't be a need for this one.  It is a sad state when a person has to purchase a license to catch a fish.  By the way, I have never wanted fish and game.  The wardens around here act like they can go anywhere and do anything even on private land.  It is my land, I will do as I damn well please.

Water, Food, and medicane standards...if the gov't enforced these so flawlessly then why is the water in my small little town unfit to drink?  Why are foods purchased in grocery stores filled with more 20 letter words than actual food?

Strip mining...if the majority of folks in an area don't want it then they should stop it, with either local leglislation or local action.  Pollution is the same way.  If a community has a set of pollution laws that are broken, the people doing it are arrested and made to make restitution.

Farmers or Ranchers...this one hits close to home, However, that is the nature of the beast isn't it?  Every person who is in business takes risks, some you win some you lose.

My kids don't work in a sweatshop because I don't allow them to.  I think that most americans wouldn't stand for it, not on our soil anyway.

As far a vaccinations goes, I really don't like the idea of my children being forced to take a medicine without my approval.  Which without said shots they cannont attend a public school.

If We the People were the gov't, then they wouldn't pass legislation that most americans were against would they?  If gov't actually cared for the American people then they would act in the best interest for the American people and not just themselves.  They sure as hell wouldn't vote for a pay raise when most Americans are either taking a pay cut or losing their jobs all together.
Yes, we are charged to vote and serve on jurys.  But what good is that vote when they can be thrown out, miscounted, forged etc?  What good is that jury when they are not allowed to hear all evidence just because of the way it was obtained?
Yes, money is part of the gripe.  Folks work hard to earn that money and get a little mad when they see it taken from them and given to some lazy dead beat without a job, who doesn't want to work, and who feel that those with money owe them something.  Or worse yet, when they see a president who continually spouts off about how bad things are, and how we need to tighten our belts, and then throws parties (on taxpayers dime) and serves $100 servings of JAPANESES beef!
Idealism has everything to do with it.  Ideals like honesty, integrity, loyalty, honor, duty,...words the left knows nothing about.

I DO have clapping hands.................and by golly you sure as hell deserve 'em!

Head Shot!!! 10 Ringer!!!

(http://www.cascity.com/howard/animations/bravo.gif)

Hm...I certainly don't disagree with some of Billy's retort, but I thought you all were proud of your Elk County schools and the education your kids get. and for much I can answer with one word. LAWYERS!

Quote from: Diane Amberg on May 05, 2009, 10:45:00 AM
and for much I can answer with one word. LAWYERS!

Huh? ???

Quote from: kshillbillys on May 04, 2009, 08:36:21 PM
...... I wouldn't know Wilma or Flo or SixDogsMom (real name?) if I ran into them on the street but Teresa and Diane and Jo all have pictures so I'd know them. .....

just what do you call this under my name?  Or maybe you think it is a picture of someone else.

Flo, that is a very good picture.  You have done nothing but improve with age.  Or should I say as you get older.  That doesn't sound right, either, does it?  Oh, well.  Good picture, Flo.

Billy,I know I'm going 'way back, but when I said "Lawyers" I was referring to your long post on your reply #112. A lot of things happen or don't happen because someone gets a lawyer involved and /or an injunction to stop something from happening. I could go through it point by point, but I won't, and as I said, I do agree on some.

fair enough, thanks for clarifiying that for me.

I'm sorry Flo, didn't mean to offend...I must've been thinking of someone else and just pulled your name out of a hat...how about Greatguns...I wouldn't know her if I saw her. But now that I've studied your picture, I would know you...Sorry about that!!  ;)