Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Always dancing to a far off tune --- Fiddlefeet
123 posts, read 391,300 times
Reputation: 89
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve97415
Well, if that's true, then we can note the rise of the American Al Qaeda Movement in Kansas as well as the American Taliban. For this is precisely what terrorists do: they shun the oppressive rule of human law to act directly on their own higher moral convictions...selflessly sacrificing their own lives to bring down the boastful Towers of Babel erected by the Great Satan.
Civilization is about conforming to the Rule of Law, not venerating your own moral reflex as the ultimate arbiter of what should be. There is no widespread consensus on what is "moral" and what isn't. Mores vary with geography, language groups and religious indoctrination. Some still hold that birth control is by its very nature immoral. For many decades the church railed against "miscegenation", interracial marriage, as "degenerate and immoral." For others, it is immoral to engage in interspecies cannibalism by consuming the flesh of other animals. Drinking alcohol is immoral. The Puritans fined early colonists for the immoral act of celebrating Christmas. The Amish condemned members of their fellowship for the moral violation of sewing zippers on their clothing. The Bible, in the 19th Chapter of Leviticus forbids shatnez (wearing clothing made of mixed fibers) as part of Hebraic moral code.
If people want to exercise their own construction of personal morality in their own lives...let them. Let people eat meat or not, marry whomever they want, dress as they see fit, control their own reproductives lives...what does it subtract from your life if you allow them to live by the dictates of their consciences just as you demand to be allowed to live by the dictates of yours? Doesn't the Golden Rule require that you extend them that reciprocity of moral self-determination?
If you are a talibanist, then it does not. You hold the moral insight of your own culture to be infallible and that of that of others to be degenerate.
All this claptrap does not change the fact that the radical right fundamentalists gin up hate against people they do not like, Does any one remember Matthew Sheppard? And how a couple of so called Christian haters of gays took him beat him and then tied him to die on a fence post? Then all those Hagee types said that they had nothing to do with it just as the same hate spewers try to distance themselves from the man that shot tiller. Any of you who have railed against a group of people weather it is Abortion Drs, or Gays or immigrants, and someone has been empowered by hate speech has blood on their hands. You can not on one hand sit in a church such as Hagee's and listen to speeches that say Katrina was gods revenge on a Gay pride parade and then say that you love your fellow man or you had nothing to do with the mentally ill that kill on the basis of that same hate speech. When the people of the towns were paraded through the death camps after the war, they tried to say they had no idea or were not part of any of it. But because they did nothing when their leaders preached hate they were part of it. This is why they drew contempt from the soldiers and officers that liberated the camps, and these people would have been punished very hard if they stood up, but you people who could just stand up and maybe receive a small amount of ridicule shrink back into lumps on quivering jelly, or worse yet raise your fist like so many hate mongers at the so called Tea bagging party’s and say, succeed from the union, or like some did at the campaign rallies "Kill Him" "He is a terrorist" or "He is an Arab" You are part of the hate that ends up in violence and then when it does happen you step aside with your hands in your pockets like you are a simple bystander. Those of you that do this make me sick.
So from your post I can assume Obama was affected by Rev. Wright's sermons on hate America and the people in charge. I thought we were told it all depends on the person and not what they hear. Guess I was wrong. Thanks for correcting me.
People keep parroting this like it's fact.
The number changes- only 2 others, only 3 others, only 5 others- but it's always low.
The fact is, nearly every major hospital performs late term abortions routinely.
When a woman's life and health is imminently threatened by her pregnancy, do you guys suppose they just leave her to die? Do you suppose they call for Dr. Tiller or one of these other "three" villains, who then fly across the country to perform the procedure?
If so, I've got some oceanfront lots in Arizona to sell you.
Only three do late term abortions as their business. They have clinics where women go just to have late term abortions. Yes, hospitals do them if the woman is about to die if it's not done but these clinics are only there to do the late term abortions. Hospitals would not do those kind unless it was an emergency. Late term abortions are against the law in most states.
Well, if that's true, then we can note the rise of the American Al Qaeda Movement in Kansas as well as the American Taliban. For this is precisely what terrorists do: they shun the oppressive rule of human law to act directly on their own higher moral convictions...selflessly sacrificing their own lives to bring down the boastful Towers of Babel erected by the Great Satan.
Civilization is about conforming to the Rule of Law, not venerating your own moral reflex as the ultimate arbiter of what should be. There is no widespread consensus on what is "moral" and what isn't. Mores vary with geography, language groups and religious indoctrination. Some still hold that birth control is by its very nature immoral. For many decades the church railed against "miscegenation", interracial marriage, as "degenerate and immoral." For others, it is immoral to engage in interspecies cannibalism by consuming the flesh of other animals. Drinking alcohol is immoral. The Puritans fined early colonists for the immoral act of celebrating Christmas. The Amish condemned members of their fellowship for the moral violation of sewing zippers on their clothing. The Bible, in the 19th Chapter of Leviticus forbids shatnez (wearing clothing made of mixed fibers) as part of Hebraic moral code.
If people want to exercise their own construction of personal morality in their own lives...let them. Let people eat meat or not, marry whomever they want, dress as they see fit, control their own reproductives lives...what does it subtract from your life if you allow them to live by the dictates of their consciences just as you demand to be allowed to live by the dictates of yours? Doesn't the Golden Rule require that you extend them that reciprocity of moral self-determination?
If you are a talibanist, then it does not. You hold the moral insight of your own culture to be infallible and that of that of others to be degenerate.
I see you take the extreme to make your point. So if I follow your logic, killing anyone at anytime should be ok if it does not bother you personally.
Many people---half of America---acknowledge the baby in the womb is fully human and should have all the rights of any human and killing the baby is murder if done two minutes before the baby is born or two minutes after it is born. Not all laws are good laws. Just because we have a law does not mean it is right and good. BUT we all need to operate through legal channels to change the bad laws and not become vigilantes.
No, it will be the right's job to quickly condemn the Muslim community. The right has trouble with all things bearded apparently. Those on the left recognize that not everyone from the Middle East is a bad guy and we won't jump to the conclusion that the soldier killer you mention is a spokesperson for their whole group. On the other hand, it is easier to condemn the pro-lifers because they ARE extremists who feel compelled to interfere with other peoples' lives and choices. And they are local to this country. It's not selective outrage. The pro-lifers are perceived as a more dangerous "enemy" because of their hardline approach and interference in our personal choices. Pro-lifers make it personal.
Well when something is happening in your own backyard is it hard to turn a blind eye. I guess you want us to be like the German people whose death camps were next door and turned a blind eye. I don't think it will ever happen again. At least we can all hope not, but you never know about humans. Some are quite comfortable just as long as it does not interfere with seeing their favorite TV shows.
True conservatives don't want GOVERNMENT interferring with their personal lives. I don't believe in legislating morality and am an advocate for the separation of chruch and state.
Like I said before these so called "Bible Belt" red states have the HIGHEST teen pregnancy rates compared to much lower rates for most of the northern states.
With that being said, I do not like abortion in general- especially late term. However, the decision rests with the individual. Like other posters have said, extraneous medical situations or other complexities may arise. It is not what I would call a black and white issue.
Another big item is education. The more educated the populace the more informed they are about birth control options. Abstinence only sex ed has been promoted by the religious right, but the statistics prove that teen pregnancies have increased over the past few years.
Last edited by GraniteStater; 06-02-2009 at 12:31 PM..
I see you take the extreme to make your point. So if I follow your logic, killing anyone at anytime should be ok if it does not bother you personally.
Many people---half of America---acknowledge the baby in the womb is fully human and should have all the rights of any human and killing the baby is murder if done two minutes before the baby is born or two minutes after it is born. Not all laws are good laws. Just because we have a law does not mean it is right and good.
It isn't a question of what percentage of Americans hold any particular view on the beginning of personhood or reproductive rights. It's an issue of who should decide what moral code any particular person must live out their private lives under.
We can't govern a society with opinions of what is right and good. The exact boundaries of what is right and good are unknowable and drift from place to place and generation to generation. What is considered right in Japan or Algeria might be viewed as sinful in Kansas. Things that are perfectly acceptable to you would have horrified your grandparents.
In a democracy that operates within the framework of a constitutional form of government, policy is not established by majority opinion of what is right and good. It is established by Rule of Law. An important constitutional birthright therein is the right to privacy as a matter of due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment. A majority of Americans may believe that individuals should not own guns, that pornography should not be available, that alcohol should be prohibited or that abortion is immoral. It doesn't matter. The Constitution protects certain liberties so broadly that there will always be some practices within its cloak of freedom that some find objectionable. In the U.S. ,there is no regulatory burden of living a life that is "right and good" in the eyes of another.
The important thing to remember is that in the U.S., unlike in many countries of the Middle East, we have a secular society. People are free to hold whatever religious views they want, and use those views to exercise dominion over their own lives, so long as they don't deprive others of their right to do the same. But they don't have the right to force others to live under the tyranny of religious views that are not consistent with their own. The old bumper sticker that said, "If you don't believe in abortion, then don't have one" still sums up the prevailing principle: you can regulate your own reproductive life with whatever vision of "right and good" that you subscribe to, but you can't regulate the reproductive lives of others. That's un-American.
"Another big item is education. The more educated the populace the more informed they are about birth control options. Abstinence only sex ed has been promoted by the religious right, but the statistics prove that teen pregnancies have increased over the past few years."
I agree. I don't understand why folks would push for abstinence ONLY education. It is not realistic. I grew up in Kansas and we were required to have a health/first aid class to graduate. A large part of this class was sex ed composed of promoting abstinence as the only sure way to prevent disease and pregnancy but also discussed birth control and stds. For me this is definately the way to go. All the while I don't believe in any way that this made us as students any more frivilous. Those who had sex would have anyway.
On abortion, I do understand that there are circumstances that arise that may make abortion a gray issue. But these situations are definately the exception and not the rule. Most often it is simply used as a form of birth control because people aren't willing to step up and take responsibilty, even if it is just caring for a child for 9 months than passing that responsibility on to someone who is ready and willing to do so.
"On abortion, I do understand that there are circumstances that arise that may make abortion a gray issue. But these situations are definately the exception and not the rule. Most often it is simply used as a form of birth control because people aren't willing to step up and take responsibilty, even if it is just caring for a child for 9 months than passing that responsibility on to someone who is ready and willing to do so.
The true religious fundies live in a world that is black and white. Shades of grey do not remotely exist for these people. They feel that they are "right" and the people on the other side are "wrong." Thank goodness for the founding fathers, our solid constitution, and the fact that the US is a secular nation.
But the religious right have taken over the republican party, they with the help of the haters like Limbaugh and Hannity who are pure racisit along with the bill O'Rilleys who are racisit have full control of the party and are directed by the 20% that are the nut jobs that though bush and his holy wars were dogs will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
