that is why he didn't close it right away, he just is deciding to start following the constitution and the Geneva Convention when it comes to gitmo.
Bush was not really successful, i recall for Iraq. Iraq was not a good idea. he lied to congress to go in, but most of Europe smelled something, and smartly stayed away. if you read the New Yorker article on it, there is much negotiation and the Obama team is pushing into that direction. if you wont negotiate, what will they do for peace?
in science, the embryo can not survive without car at 20 months, so you know it is not alive, because at that point it can not join our world called Earth, where things are living. a 20 month old embryo can't survive for one second outside the womb a baby born regular time can. that is why it is living.
but an argument is based on logic, if you don't use logic, then there is no argument. you have to use a good logical argument. without it we aren't doing anything. you talk about what might could possibly happen if we extend rights to gays. so we do what is safe and we discriminate against them. is that what you are saying? for the safety of 14 year old boys, gays can't have rights?
Logic Trumps youtube again though. because we don't fall for logical fallacies, that is why. the debate is over rights, guaranteed to all people. and gays deserve the equal protection of law, right or wrong?
just as laws denying gays the right to marry is spitting in the eye of those rights passed down from our founding fathers. thanks for affirming my point.
but you deny them the right to marry who they want under what pretense? the fact that they are gay, which is discriminatory. Equal Protection Under Law, or no? i guess since john doe is gay, he can't do those things like have a weeding.
Obama hasn't closed Gitmo, he simply stated his desire to do so. But he still has no idea where to put the terrorists that currently reside there.
Bush went to Europe as well to get support for Iraq and Afghanistan and was actually much more successful than Obama was. Obama accomplished nothing in his trip and I am sure he will have the same level of success that every other president has had with Israel and Syria. There is no negotiating when one side wants the other dead!
Explain why the mother denying care for her baby 20 weeks after conception is any different than a mother that refuses to feed her baby after it is born. In both cases, the baby is totally dependent on someone else for its survival. Dead is dead, regardless of whether the baby is starved to death or fed into a Cuisinart!
No, gays have the same exact rights as straight people when it comes to marriage; a gay person can marry anyone they want of the opposite sex, same as me.
And if someone makes the argument that a precedent exists to redefine a 14 year old child as a consenting adult because a 14 year old can be tried as an adult, how can you make the argument that NAMBLA members should be excluded from the right to marry if we've already expanded the definition of marriage to include gays?
Answer those questions and stop trying to create a distraction with arguments about logical fallacies.
that is why he didn't close it right away, he just is deciding to start following the constitution and the Geneva Convention when it comes to gitmo.
Bush was not really successful, i recall for Iraq. Iraq was not a good idea. he lied to congress to go in, but most of Europe smelled something, and smartly stayed away. if you read the New Yorker article on it, there is much negotiation and the Obama team is pushing into that direction. if you wont negotiate, what will they do for peace?
matisforever 2 years ago
in science, the embryo can not survive without car at 20 months, so you know it is not alive, because at that point it can not join our world called Earth, where things are living. a 20 month old embryo can't survive for one second outside the womb a baby born regular time can. that is why it is living.
matisforever 2 years ago
but an argument is based on logic, if you don't use logic, then there is no argument. you have to use a good logical argument. without it we aren't doing anything. you talk about what might could possibly happen if we extend rights to gays. so we do what is safe and we discriminate against them. is that what you are saying? for the safety of 14 year old boys, gays can't have rights?
matisforever 2 years ago
Logic Trumps youtube again though. because we don't fall for logical fallacies, that is why. the debate is over rights, guaranteed to all people. and gays deserve the equal protection of law, right or wrong?
matisforever 2 years ago
just as laws denying gays the right to marry is spitting in the eye of those rights passed down from our founding fathers. thanks for affirming my point.
matisforever 2 years ago
but you deny them the right to marry who they want under what pretense? the fact that they are gay, which is discriminatory. Equal Protection Under Law, or no? i guess since john doe is gay, he can't do those things like have a weeding.
matisforever 2 years ago
Obama hasn't closed Gitmo, he simply stated his desire to do so. But he still has no idea where to put the terrorists that currently reside there.
Bush went to Europe as well to get support for Iraq and Afghanistan and was actually much more successful than Obama was. Obama accomplished nothing in his trip and I am sure he will have the same level of success that every other president has had with Israel and Syria. There is no negotiating when one side wants the other dead!
williambellor 2 years ago
Explain why the mother denying care for her baby 20 weeks after conception is any different than a mother that refuses to feed her baby after it is born. In both cases, the baby is totally dependent on someone else for its survival. Dead is dead, regardless of whether the baby is starved to death or fed into a Cuisinart!
williambellor 2 years ago
No, gays have the same exact rights as straight people when it comes to marriage; a gay person can marry anyone they want of the opposite sex, same as me.
williambellor 2 years ago
And if someone makes the argument that a precedent exists to redefine a 14 year old child as a consenting adult because a 14 year old can be tried as an adult, how can you make the argument that NAMBLA members should be excluded from the right to marry if we've already expanded the definition of marriage to include gays?
Answer those questions and stop trying to create a distraction with arguments about logical fallacies.
williambellor 2 years ago