Not that I think ANYONE (including the fundagelical boosters for the Republicans) really believes "all life is precious" or even "all human life is precious" (if deeds are regarded as weightier than pious rhetoric) - but it really is striking that the "good Christian" supporters of the neo-Cons seem UTTERLY INDIFFERENT to the human tragedy (both actualized and worse yet, potential) caused by U.S. foreign policy. American fetus - priceless: "perpetual warfare" - acceptable. Pro-life my ass.
Does someone having an abortion effect you more then the economy? Does it effect you more then the war? Does it effect you more then homeland security?
Don't forget Waco, Ruby Ridge and all the other blunders.
...what a wonderful world we live in! To finally see what happens to someone who is downright corrupt and evil....
+ * + * + EXPOSED & EXAMINED * + * + *
Hellary Rotten ClinTURD is sliding right into the toilet. Her negative ads, her endless lies, her annoying cackle, her obnoxious smile, her troublesome husband, her shady ideas & most horrifying....her pantsuits with the orthopedic pumps!!!!!!
They identified themselves and provided plenty of information at the end of the call. Oversight is not a problem here. If you want propaganda turn on your TV. I canceled my cable months ago and haven't regretted it since.
Because IT IS A LIE! to try and hurt Barack Obama. This is either McCain or Clinton's work. Whose ever it is would never admit it because it is an act lower than pond scum.
No actually its true. He voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and killed it in committee when he was the chair of the Health and Human Services Committee in Illinois.
Just because something hurts the candidate you are obsessed with does not mean the evil republicans are lying about it.
What about the no call list? How convenient that political groups got themselves exempted from the restrictions intended to stop these invasions our privacy. "How dare they!" is right.
Privacy? I don't know about you but I have never had a political action committee spy on me in the shower. Even if one was i don't see how the do not call list would help you.
Calling my house is an invasion of privacy. And political (& charitable) groups of all sorts have exploited their Congress-given loopholes in the law to disturb my peace. The no call list is a joke as long as any group with an agenda is allowed to disturb the sanctity of my castle.
It is absurd to say that a phone call is an invasion of privacy. If you don't like the current do-not-call list write your congressman, don't make absurd claims on privacy invasion.
Hillary is republican light. They would probably want her from a policy standpoint, but she would be harder to beat. So it would take a bit of game theory on their part to decide who would be "better."
The pro-choice vs pro-life argument is simply asinine.
One can (and should) be pro-life under whatever instance, i.e. believe in the sanctity of life, but also be pro-choice, i.e. uphold a woman's right to choose whether she wants to go through with a pregnancy or not, as it relates to her most personally and directly.
Abortion per se is a red-herring, the key is implementing social and economic programs to curb and ultimately stop unwanted pregnancies on a national scale.
The problem is that the pro-life people draw the line at conception, where is is ridiculous to give full rights to a bundle of cells, and pro-choice draw the line at birth where it is insane to say that is ok to kill a baby just because it has not been born yet.
But you're talking about the two extremes on both sides, i think the majority of people realize that there is a middle ground where both terms are not mutually exclusive.
FlailingJunk, do you support the death penalty? Do you support ANY wars? I know almost all of you hypocritical pro-lifers do. You have no moral authority.
Yes, I really think most of them (though not all - some really are pretty pacifistic) should really call themselves "pro-SOME-lives." And y'know, I wouldn't make any judgments about that - I can easily understand such prioritizing. It's not like we don't do it already - it's just these folks want to re-arrange the shuffle a little (usually involving killing more crooks, less babies.) Indeed, the fuzzy "all life is precious" shit is really tired - it's clear VERY FEW really believes this.
One thing I'd take issue with, a 3 month old embryo is not a baby. A 3 month old embryo is not conscious and does not feel pain or any sensation for that matter. The mother and anyone associated with her however, is conscious and can feel pain.
Additionally, making something illegal will not make it go away, look a prohibition for example.
Education is what's needed, not criminalization, not guilt, not road blocks.
Oh come now...you know full well that when mom wants the kid, "<3-month-old-fetus", it's a friggin' baby. I just can't be bothered dressing this up anymore; it's the flip side of my disdain for the "all life is precious" baloney. We don't poison invalids or coma patients either. It's all a silly name game, built upon a screwed up, incoherent, and indecisive patchwork of Judeo-Christian baggage mixed with Enlightenment principles. Unfortunately, we're growing beyond BOTH of these.
"We don't poison invalids or coma patients either"
Yeah but Terry Sciavo... Did she feel anything? Hmm, don't think so. Was she conscious? Hmm, don't think so.
"growing beyond BOTH"
Yes but it's a good thing, and nearly all of it is the enlightenment side, enlightenment 2.0 you might call it.
Honestly the pro-life wedge, gay issue, etc is just a ploy to get social conservatives to vote republican, they couldn't get elected with their platform otherwise. They are way right of the US pop.
wrt. euthanasia - I was addressing the distinction made in ethics and law (at least in most western nations) between commission and omission. IOW. it's one thing to, say, withhold extraordinary life saving measures, but another to inject a poisonous overdose of say, morphine, into someone's blood stream to euthanise them. Now some western nations accept euthanasia. But the distinction is still there, and had to be addressed. In the abortion debate, many stones have still been left unturned.
wrt. euthanasia - Yeah, that's a big weakness in my argument and I figured you'd point that out. Although I think some euthanasia (old age, terminal diseases, and other cases where the individual requesting death isn't a provider for someone else) can be justified under the same metric I used for 1st trimester abortions. It's getting people to accept that metric that's the hard part. =/ Good exchange of ideas though.
wrt. the "new age" - I don't view it as a bad thing either. The forming and enlightening of the psychological "individual" as we homo sapiens currently experience him/her is not a purely biological process, but one formed by thousands of years of linguistic and cultural development. ENOUGH people may be reaching a point now, where the dream of vast freedom AND socialization (ability to co-exist) MAY begin to unfold. But we have long had such people, from the beginning really. Just very few.
One note, on the abortion issue I'm only using a cost/benefit heuristic based on net pain experienced by all the concerned parties. Before 3 months gestation, there isn't any pain suffered nor knowledge of that pain suffered by the fetus. Since there both of these things can be experienced by the mother then her wishes over rule those (nonexistent) wishes of the fetus, or "baby" if you will.
They think of themselves as followers of Christ yet use dishonesty as a tactic to further their cause. Shame on them. Note the use of the phrase 'taxpayer dollars' - designed to appeal to people's baser instincts.
It is not dishonest, obama voted against and killed in committee a bill that would have made it illegal to leave babies to die if they are born alive in the process of an abortion. This is infantacide.
Infanticide n. 1. The act of killing an infant. 2. The practice of killing newborn infants. 3. One who kills an infant.
Isn't the point of an abortion to kill the fetus? Why would you abort then save its life. Abortion is an unpleasant process that should never happen.
Hillary no doubt voted exactly the same way - but Republicans would rather fight against her in the fall than Obama. Hence the use of unborn babies to further McCain's cause.
Obama is the villain nowadays because of the racism that underlies U.S. politics. Examine YOUR conscience on that one if you dare.
The majority of American's including myself were willing to vote for him for president before we learned about his unpleasant associations and positions on certain issues.
Who ever these people are, they are SICK! Calling people and saying that Obama will kill babies is an outrage and should be investigated. I do not support any person in this bullsh*t race. I support my search for truth.
He killed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act when he was the chair of the Health and Human Services Committee in Illinois. Obama supports infanticide, this is a fact. Babies have no worth if the mother decides to kill them even moments before birth. They are to be left to die even if they survive the process.
Everyone can understand why this is wrong, democrat/republican, christian/athiest, whatever.
The only time this operation is used is if the live of the Mother is at stake, and it is her choice. She does not have to die if she does not wish to, in order save the life of her baby. But she can if she so desires. But this operation is illegal otherwise. Please check your facts before you make false statements, or talk to a doctor.
Not that I think ANYONE (including the fundagelical boosters for the Republicans) really believes "all life is precious" or even "all human life is precious" (if deeds are regarded as weightier than pious rhetoric) - but it really is striking that the "good Christian" supporters of the neo-Cons seem UTTERLY INDIFFERENT to the human tragedy (both actualized and worse yet, potential) caused by U.S. foreign policy. American fetus - priceless: "perpetual warfare" - acceptable. Pro-life my ass.
KosmicCitizen 3 years ago
Does someone having an abortion effect you more then the economy? Does it effect you more then the war? Does it effect you more then homeland security?
Don't forget Waco, Ruby Ridge and all the other blunders.
AAL 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
+ * + * + * + * + * + * + * + * + * + * + * +
...what a wonderful world we live in! To finally see what happens to someone who is downright corrupt and evil....
+ * + * + EXPOSED & EXAMINED * + * + *
Hellary Rotten ClinTURD is sliding right into the toilet. Her negative ads, her endless lies, her annoying cackle, her obnoxious smile, her troublesome husband, her shady ideas & most horrifying....her pantsuits with the orthopedic pumps!!!!!!
SooN 2 B GONE!!!! YAY! Fly away Witchy Woman!!
chuckinla 3 years ago
Who did she say was responsible for the call? Whoever is doing these things should be put in jail.
Pennee101 3 years ago
what are you a commi?
sexdrugsRnR 3 years ago
It boggles the mind how robocalls are acceptable in the US
jellygraph 3 years ago
People expressing themselves by sending messages to published telephone numbers? How dare they!
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
They are deceptive and more susceptible to being used as a propaganda source, which at the same time is more difficult to have oversight of.
jellygraph 3 years ago 3
They identified themselves and provided plenty of information at the end of the call. Oversight is not a problem here. If you want propaganda turn on your TV. I canceled my cable months ago and haven't regretted it since.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
bravo ! well said !
bebop54 3 years ago
Because IT IS A LIE! to try and hurt Barack Obama. This is either McCain or Clinton's work. Whose ever it is would never admit it because it is an act lower than pond scum.
Pennee101 3 years ago
No actually its true. He voted against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and killed it in committee when he was the chair of the Health and Human Services Committee in Illinois.
Just because something hurts the candidate you are obsessed with does not mean the evil republicans are lying about it.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
What about the no call list? How convenient that political groups got themselves exempted from the restrictions intended to stop these invasions our privacy. "How dare they!" is right.
dafttool 3 years ago
Privacy? I don't know about you but I have never had a political action committee spy on me in the shower. Even if one was i don't see how the do not call list would help you.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
Spying in a shower?
Calling my house is an invasion of privacy. And political (& charitable) groups of all sorts have exploited their Congress-given loopholes in the law to disturb my peace. The no call list is a joke as long as any group with an agenda is allowed to disturb the sanctity of my castle.
dafttool 3 years ago
It is absurd to say that a phone call is an invasion of privacy. If you don't like the current do-not-call list write your congressman, don't make absurd claims on privacy invasion.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
and the bullshit of the Republican party of election '08 has commenced!!!
inaeurotrance 3 years ago
If by bullshait you mean reality.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
So any Hillary supporters who want to argue that the Republicans DON'T want her to get the nomination?
antipyrene 3 years ago
Hillary is republican light. They would probably want her from a policy standpoint, but she would be harder to beat. So it would take a bit of game theory on their part to decide who would be "better."
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
Republican vs Republican light...the Republican will win everytime
If the right of women to control their own body is to survive, Obama has to win the nomination
antipyrene 3 years ago
You just made my mind up for me. Thank you.
dingorex 3 years ago
The pro-choice vs pro-life argument is simply asinine.
One can (and should) be pro-life under whatever instance, i.e. believe in the sanctity of life, but also be pro-choice, i.e. uphold a woman's right to choose whether she wants to go through with a pregnancy or not, as it relates to her most personally and directly.
Abortion per se is a red-herring, the key is implementing social and economic programs to curb and ultimately stop unwanted pregnancies on a national scale.
ruddypoo86 3 years ago 2
The problem is that the pro-life people draw the line at conception, where is is ridiculous to give full rights to a bundle of cells, and pro-choice draw the line at birth where it is insane to say that is ok to kill a baby just because it has not been born yet.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
and of course the real problem is that it's a gray area in between, and nobody will even admit that it's a gray area!
CallMeNiel 3 years ago
There is certainly a gray area, but it does not include babies that can survive outside the womb.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
And who is saying they want to abort those babies?
Visfen 3 years ago
But you're talking about the two extremes on both sides, i think the majority of people realize that there is a middle ground where both terms are not mutually exclusive.
ruddypoo86 3 years ago
FlailingJunk, do you support the death penalty? Do you support ANY wars? I know almost all of you hypocritical pro-lifers do. You have no moral authority.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Yes, I really think most of them (though not all - some really are pretty pacifistic) should really call themselves "pro-SOME-lives." And y'know, I wouldn't make any judgments about that - I can easily understand such prioritizing. It's not like we don't do it already - it's just these folks want to re-arrange the shuffle a little (usually involving killing more crooks, less babies.) Indeed, the fuzzy "all life is precious" shit is really tired - it's clear VERY FEW really believes this.
KosmicCitizen 3 years ago
One thing I'd take issue with, a 3 month old embryo is not a baby. A 3 month old embryo is not conscious and does not feel pain or any sensation for that matter. The mother and anyone associated with her however, is conscious and can feel pain.
Additionally, making something illegal will not make it go away, look a prohibition for example.
Education is what's needed, not criminalization, not guilt, not road blocks.
studio7manga 3 years ago
Oh come now...you know full well that when mom wants the kid, "<3-month-old-fetus", it's a friggin' baby. I just can't be bothered dressing this up anymore; it's the flip side of my disdain for the "all life is precious" baloney. We don't poison invalids or coma patients either. It's all a silly name game, built upon a screwed up, incoherent, and indecisive patchwork of Judeo-Christian baggage mixed with Enlightenment principles. Unfortunately, we're growing beyond BOTH of these.
KosmicCitizen 3 years ago
"We don't poison invalids or coma patients either"
Yeah but Terry Sciavo... Did she feel anything? Hmm, don't think so. Was she conscious? Hmm, don't think so.
"growing beyond BOTH"
Yes but it's a good thing, and nearly all of it is the enlightenment side, enlightenment 2.0 you might call it.
Honestly the pro-life wedge, gay issue, etc is just a ploy to get social conservatives to vote republican, they couldn't get elected with their platform otherwise. They are way right of the US pop.
studio7manga 3 years ago
wrt. euthanasia - I was addressing the distinction made in ethics and law (at least in most western nations) between commission and omission. IOW. it's one thing to, say, withhold extraordinary life saving measures, but another to inject a poisonous overdose of say, morphine, into someone's blood stream to euthanise them. Now some western nations accept euthanasia. But the distinction is still there, and had to be addressed. In the abortion debate, many stones have still been left unturned.
KosmicCitizen 3 years ago
wrt. euthanasia - Yeah, that's a big weakness in my argument and I figured you'd point that out. Although I think some euthanasia (old age, terminal diseases, and other cases where the individual requesting death isn't a provider for someone else) can be justified under the same metric I used for 1st trimester abortions. It's getting people to accept that metric that's the hard part. =/ Good exchange of ideas though.
studio7manga 3 years ago
wrt. the "new age" - I don't view it as a bad thing either. The forming and enlightening of the psychological "individual" as we homo sapiens currently experience him/her is not a purely biological process, but one formed by thousands of years of linguistic and cultural development. ENOUGH people may be reaching a point now, where the dream of vast freedom AND socialization (ability to co-exist) MAY begin to unfold. But we have long had such people, from the beginning really. Just very few.
KosmicCitizen 3 years ago
wrt. the "new age" - Cool, agreement is good, perhaps we are hitting critical mass. It will be interesting to see what kind of society we make.
studio7manga 3 years ago
One note, on the abortion issue I'm only using a cost/benefit heuristic based on net pain experienced by all the concerned parties. Before 3 months gestation, there isn't any pain suffered nor knowledge of that pain suffered by the fetus. Since there both of these things can be experienced by the mother then her wishes over rule those (nonexistent) wishes of the fetus, or "baby" if you will.
studio7manga 3 years ago
You are incorrect in this statement. A little more research is needed here on the positions of adovocates of pro-life and pro-choice.
ISLAMOM 3 years ago
They think of themselves as followers of Christ yet use dishonesty as a tactic to further their cause. Shame on them. Note the use of the phrase 'taxpayer dollars' - designed to appeal to people's baser instincts.
mcresearch 3 years ago
It is not dishonest, obama voted against and killed in committee a bill that would have made it illegal to leave babies to die if they are born alive in the process of an abortion. This is infantacide.
Infanticide n. 1. The act of killing an infant. 2. The practice of killing newborn infants. 3. One who kills an infant.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
Isn't the point of an abortion to kill the fetus? Why would you abort then save its life. Abortion is an unpleasant process that should never happen.
Hillary no doubt voted exactly the same way - but Republicans would rather fight against her in the fall than Obama. Hence the use of unborn babies to further McCain's cause.
Obama is the villain nowadays because of the racism that underlies U.S. politics. Examine YOUR conscience on that one if you dare.
mcresearch 3 years ago
The majority of American's including myself were willing to vote for him for president before we learned about his unpleasant associations and positions on certain issues.
Crying racism at this point is just desperation.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
Well I'm glad you think you speak for the majority of Americans, too bad you're full of shit
studio7manga 3 years ago
One more reason to vote FOR Obama.
abassler 3 years ago 4
501(c) groups, such as National Right to Life, are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities to influence elections to public office.
The Federal Elections Commission is conveniently without a quorum and is therefore unable to act swiftly on such violations.
On the other hand, the IRS is quite capable of investigating a violation of tax codes.
dogstar7 3 years ago
Who ever these people are, they are SICK! Calling people and saying that Obama will kill babies is an outrage and should be investigated. I do not support any person in this bullsh*t race. I support my search for truth.
hunterswine 3 years ago
WoW
hunterswine 3 years ago
DISTRACTION
andrewheine 3 years ago 5
We need these babies to fuel Hillary's war machine into Iran.
socksnogger 3 years ago
Saving the lives of babies who survive late term abortions,,,, When did that ever come up for a vote?
gamoonbat 3 years ago
He killed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act when he was the chair of the Health and Human Services Committee in Illinois. Obama supports infanticide, this is a fact. Babies have no worth if the mother decides to kill them even moments before birth. They are to be left to die even if they survive the process.
Everyone can understand why this is wrong, democrat/republican, christian/athiest, whatever.
FlailingJunk 3 years ago
Im going to have to agree.
It sounds like the original reason why we invaded Iraq when Bush Sr was President. Because babies were being left on the cold floor to die.
Only difference is, that story was a lie we made up to get us into war and this story is real and made by a Presidential Candidate.
Mike Gravel '08
EricIndiana 3 years ago 3
The only time this operation is used is if the live of the Mother is at stake, and it is her choice. She does not have to die if she does not wish to, in order save the life of her baby. But she can if she so desires. But this operation is illegal otherwise. Please check your facts before you make false statements, or talk to a doctor.
dejahthoris 3 years ago
Yep, but the other two candidates that voted to murder a bunch of innocent people on the other side of the world? Ahh, we'll just ignore that.
studio7manga 3 years ago
ron paul is running and is against the war ...
bebop54 3 years ago