Misinformation On Spying Doesn’t Take A Holiday
Misinformation On Spying Doesn’t Take A Holiday
National Review’s Mark Levin “informs” his readers today:
Clinton bypassed FISA by extending warrantless searches to include physical searches.
Levin is referring to Clinton’s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA didn’t cover physical searches at the time, so the executive order did not, and could not, “bypass FISA.” Second, unlike the secret Bush administration program, Clinton’s public executive order did not apply to U.S. persons. If Bush’s program didn’t apply to U.S. persons there would be no controversy at all.
But Levin doesn’t have to read Think Progress to figure this out. He can read his own right-wing magazine. Here’s the National Review’s Byron York five days ago:
In the argument that has emerged over warrantless surveillance, there have been a number of overstatements. Some people, for example, have said that Bill Clinton signed an executive order authorizing such surveillance; he did not.
One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Levin just probably figured York was lying, which isn’t a bad assumption.
December 26th, 2005 at 6:07 pmHummm? Right Wing people lying? OMG! Next you are going to tell me Santa Claus isn’t real.
December 26th, 2005 at 6:20 pmit’s been a sad year… things have been sliding rapidly downhill in the u.s. since the stolen election over 5 years ago but never faster than in 2005… robert parry sums it up…
robert parry is one of the good guys… his consortium news is a consistently insightful and reliable source of perspective…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
December 26th, 2005 at 6:23 pmLook what they published in WingNutdaily today~!
December 26th, 2005 at 6:23 pmThey’ve gotten so knee-jerk at calling everything a lie that doesn’t represent their immediate argument that now they’re even accusing one another of lying. Soon they’ll be calling themselves liars.
I’m convinced that the only reason Chimp has a 35% approval rating is because they predomindantly include prisons and insane asylums on their calling lists.
December 26th, 2005 at 6:29 pmWhile we are killing myths from the Right, let’s put to bed the idea that “bin Laden using a satellite phone” was not known. From the Feb 13th, 2001 UPI article NSA Listens to bin Laden
December 26th, 2005 at 7:04 pm
[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 26th, 2005 at 7:17 pmThe rightwing has distorted the facts from the Clinton administration and fictionalized them to suit their false examples. They have also misrepresented half-facts from the so-called “Gorelick” wall and embroidered it into a half-assed news story. In a better world, the MSM would detect these dissemblers, challenge them with the truth and the public would be properly informed. As it is, charlatans are allowed to write their counterfeit fables, aided and abetted by the press; and the public, with its short attention span, is kept further disinformed.
December 26th, 2005 at 7:24 pmFor some reason categorizing this entire mess under “Intelligence” just doesn’t seem right.
December 26th, 2005 at 7:25 pmThe right wingers always fall back on two fail safe modes: 1) Lie 2) Blame Clinton. (Or in this case just make a comparision to Clinton).
As far as the comment (number 3) about Robert Parry’s year summary goes.. we cannot blaming the media for our problems is like blaming Nike for obesity. Americans are just plain lazy.. it’s not the fault of reporters. Average Joe sixpack does not read the newspaper. He might get a news updates on the halftime report on his ESPN channel, if he already has a cold one.
The fact is we are living in the era of information (thanks to the internet) and the only reason people do not get real news is because they are too lazy to read a paper and listen to conservative talk show hosts spew lies to them daily. I think the true crisis in America is the intellectual laziness of its citizens.
December 26th, 2005 at 7:33 pmThat was the “special purpose” of 9/11. It made “The Jerk” and the republicans immune to any and all contradictions of the Constitution, nor do they need to abide by the rules that they themselves wrote and used to impeach Clinton. No other administration or congress in history would have gotten away with what this one has were it not for that event. And still no one is held accountable for the attacks, and no one ever will be.
December 26th, 2005 at 7:36 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 26th, 2005 at 7:36 pmWhile we are killing myths from the Right, let’s put to bed the idea that “bin Laden using a satellite phone†was not known. From the Feb 13th, 2001 UPI article NSA Listens to bin Laden
It is perhaps ironic that a current defendant in the trial, Khalid Al Fawwaz, waiting to be extradited from Britain and who allegedly ran bin Laden’s “media information office†in London, procured for Bin Laden a satellite phone. Fawwaz also provided satellite phones for other members of the bin Laden’s group, “to facilitate communications,†the indictment said.
Comment by Dr Benway
Of course they know that the NSA listens. Even wiretaps of mobsters in RICO cases are of little evidentiary use. They talk in code words. I am sure the terrorists do, too. So this crap about listening in for vital information is just that, all crap. What did slip back then was that we could triangulate his location when he was on the phone and cruise missle him. That’s why he doesn’t use the phone anymore. Not because we could listen in. Like he gave a crap. No one expects to get anything useful from actually listening to their conversations. That’s total crap. It’s not about terrorism, it’s all political.
December 26th, 2005 at 7:45 pmFlying Pig- It’s all about terrorism. The question is just who are the terrorists?
December 26th, 2005 at 7:49 pm[Deleted by admin.]
December 26th, 2005 at 7:52 pmFlying Pig- It’s all about terrorism. The question is just who are the terrorists?
Comment by Godfry Daniel — December 26, 2005 @ 7:49 pm
It’s all about politics and political warfare. The war the right has been waging on the left since before FDR. Terrorism is just a tool in the toolbox.
A fellow I know, a lefty who used to be a rightwinger some years back posted this today on another blog…
We got our first computer in the late 90s. I think it was 99. I was on the interactive POV site, if I remember right, and one of the Neo-Cons I was arguing with said that when Bush became president there would be what they would call “a war on terrorism,†but it would really be a war on liberals and liberalism.
He didn’t know what to make of it back then. He does now.
If you don’t recognize that is what is happening, and act accordingly, you are part of the problem and you are just in the way. You are also as good as dead.
December 26th, 2005 at 8:00 pmWabbit Holes
tim Osman aka Osama
However, Michael and his father Marshall Riconosciuto, a friend of Richard Nixon, continued to run the Hercules Research Corporation. In the early 1980s Michael also served as the Director of Research for a joint venture between the Wackenhut Corporation of Coral Gables, Florida, and the Cabazon Band of Indians in Indio, California. Riconosciuto’s talents were much in demand. He had created the a-neutronic bomb (or “Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device”), which sank the ground level of the Nevada test site by 30 feet when a prototype was tested. Samuel Cohen, the inventor of the neutron bomb, said of Riconosciuto: “I’ve spoken to Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the a-neutronic bomb) and he’s an extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can’t prove, that they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the CIA.”
Riconosciuto’s bomb made suitcase nukes obsolete, because it achieved near-atomic explosive yields, but could be more easily minaturized. You could have a suitcase a-neutronic bomb, or a briefcase a-neutronic bomb, or simply a lady’s purse a-neutronic bomb. Or just pull out your wallet for identification and —. The Meridian Arms Corporation, as well as the Universities of California and Chicago owned a piece of the technology.
But there was more than explosives in the portfolios of the CIA agents who surrounded Riconosciuto like moths around a candle. Both Robert Booth Nichols, the shady head of Meridian Arms Corporation (with both CIA and organized crime conections), and Dr. John Phillip Nichols, the manager of the Cabazon reservation, were involved in bio-warfare work—the first in trying to sell bio-warfare products to the army through Wackenhut, the second in giving tribal permission for research to take place at Cabazon. According to Riconosciuto, the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was in charge of the classified contracts for biological warfare research. Riconosciuto would later testify under oath that Stormont Laboratories was involved in the DARPA-Wackenhut-Cabazon project. Jonathan Littman, a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle would relate: “Cabazons and Wackenhut appeared to be acting as middlemen between the Pentagon’s DARPA and Stormont Laboratories, a small facility in Woodland near Sacramento.”
December 26th, 2005 at 8:00 pmLevin is far too venomous to consider things like “truth” and “facts.” His purpose in life is to be angry, and hope that it lands him large higher ratings and fatter book contracts.
December 26th, 2005 at 8:18 pmA policeman working at his computer noticed electrical sparks and streamers in the wiring under the table several seconds before the explosion brought the building down around him. A woman on an upper floor noted a strong ionizing electrical sensation and hot air-flow entering the windows several seconds prior to the explosion which blew the same windows in on her. The lights in the building went out some five seconds before the explosion. A dictation tape recording made across the street from the “bombed” building recorded a loud “click” a few seconds before it recorded the sound of a huge explosion. This “click” was probably a local electromagnetic wave spike of considerable intensity picked up by the recorder circuitry.
December 26th, 2005 at 8:20 pmAn eyewitness located in a car a couple of hundred metres from ground zero observed a silver-white light flash or beam coming out of the top of the building, followed by a large blue-white electrical arcing flash or beam, followed by an orange-red light flash or beam that shot out from the top of the building.
“One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.”
No.
When someone says something that’s not true, it is a falsehood. It is only a lie when they know that the what they are asserting is false, yet they assert it as true.
I think it is a mistake to underestimate both the monumental stupidity of these people, and their manufactured blindness to fact which stems from their aggressive “true believer” commitments.
December 26th, 2005 at 8:27 pm#10, CJ,
December 26th, 2005 at 8:38 pmI do not disagree with you, in fact, what you say is very true, but I must hold the press to a higher standard. If only for their own preservation, they should recognize the diminishing intellect/attention span/reading skills of the average American citizen and spoon feed the news to him if necessary. Help him increase his vocaulary and his knowledge.
Until we reach the fast-approaching critical juncture, the public is not going to invest sufficient time or money in education. (I think back to when I was a child and Russia launched Sputnik — only then did we decide we needed to better educate our young or we would be lost to the competition.)
Today’s Americans are more interested in American Idol than American History. In 1960, the average high school student had a vocabulary of 24,000 words — today it is about 12,000 words. My figures may be a bit off, but you get my point.
Some might say I am suggesting pandering to the least common denominator, and perhaps they would not be wrong to say so, but we are all in this boat together and we have to to what is necessary to raise the water level keeping us all afloat — if we don’t improve all of us, we all will sink.
Uh, oh, the neocons are showing their fear of Hillary again.
December 26th, 2005 at 8:56 pmWhere’s Osama Bin Laden? I thought he was the enemy?
Death doesn’t take a holiday either.
Meanwhile, Two US soldiers were killed on Christmas in separate attacks in Baghdad, according to the US military.
The two were killed in separate road side bomb attacks on their patrols.
The announcement of the second casualty came late Sunday night and brings the toll for US casualties since the start of the war to at least 2,164 according to the news agency count based on Pentagon figures.
In another development, Guerrillas killed 10 members of the Iraqi security forces in separate attacks north of Baghdad Monday, officials said.
In an early morning attack in Buhriz, about 60 km (37 miles) from Baghdad, guerrillas opened fire on a checkpoint, killing five Iraqi policemen and wounding three others, police said. They said six guerrillas were killed when police officers returned fire.
In the village of Dhabab, some 100 km (62 miles) from Baghdad, five soldiers were killed by gunmen while leaving for work or during their morning routine, the army said.
On Friday, guerrillas stormed an army post, killing 10 soldiers and wounding 20.
guerrillas? Are they in their last throes too?
December 26th, 2005 at 9:17 pmWhat about the gunmen, are they in their last throes?
December 26th, 2005 at 9:21 pmIn response to the post:
”
Of course that is only your opinion. There are at least 3000 people who would disagree with you except for the fact that they are dead.”
In fact, the post-mortem shows that we didn’t need the President’s questionable secret spying program in America or widespread torture to stop 9/11. The US government had all the pieces, and all the warning signs. Right after Bush was first elected as President, the CIA briefed Bush that OBL was America’s no. 1 threat, but Bush just kept asking about Iraq. Knowing that Bush was fixated on Iraq, Condie and the Bush Administration ignored a further memo by Dick Clark entitled OBL about to strike. Dick Clark simply couldn’t get anyone to listen to him. The FBI and CIA had the information about people training to fly jetplanes but not to land as well as other info, but they couldn’t share it. Despite all the warning signs, no one focused or even gave a half-hearted try. It was bad.
Post-9/11 the President’s questionable program of secret spying in America and widespread torture has not resulted in the capture of OBL, the damping down of the threat of terrorism, nor the suppression of the terrorist-backed insurgency in Iraq. All the President’s misguided policies have done is to cause us to lose the moral high ground against the terrorists. Morally and pragmatically, these policies have been proven to be INEFFECTIVE.
We need some fresh thinking. We need to take all the 9/11 “F” grades seriously (it’s already a tragedy that we could have avoided deaths in Katrina if we had just followed the suggestion to permit all emergency workers and law enforcement personnel to share spectrum and thereby communicate with each other). We need to listen to people like Kristoff who write about how the terrorists are running circles around us on the Internet, how we need more translators, and how we need to be able to have our agents pose as Jihadists. Bush’s policies are selling the values of This Great Nation down the river when Bush should be focusing on other more effective, more moral, and more legal means.
December 26th, 2005 at 9:31 pmthanks for being alert on federal Christmas.
December 26th, 2005 at 9:39 pmFor all who matter: we are a nation of law. If President Bush violated the law, he must be held accountable. Either we sustain the rule of law or we belie our heritage. All apologists decrying obfascations for their man Bush are flirting with lawless authoritarianism. Mark them for who they are. Pointedly begin to query them on their views of law. Ask them what it is to be an American. If they put abiding by the law as a low priority, they are surely as unAmerican as any who they battle in our great American democracy.
It’s time American people shed the yolk of party and begin living the life of freedom loving small d democrats. Whomever would unlawfully limit or inhibit liberty so practaced by American citizens needs to answer to Constitutional remedy.
Anyone working to absolve Mr. Bush from culpability should these current revelations prove to be true mignt as well work to annoint him as our new king. -Kevo
December 26th, 2005 at 10:44 pmI would argue that York wasn’t even suggesting that the things being said about warrantless surveillance were untrue. Instead, I think he was merely suggesting that these arguments are not as important or serious as they seem to be. This is the dictionary definition of overstatement:
Bask in the warm glow of nuance.
December 26th, 2005 at 11:25 pmDon’t tell me, Levin’s one of them PNAC Jews.
December 26th, 2005 at 11:53 pmThe misinformation is done on purpose and with malice. He might even be getting paid to print it.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:34 amThe misinformation is done on purpose and with malice. Knowing the administration has been paying so called journalists, one must be skeptical of those who print misinformation and ask if they are on the administration’s payroll.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:47 amMy mom always asked: Do two wrongs make a right?
Who gives a rats ass what Clinton or ANYONE else done in the PAST. There’s NOTHING that can be done to change something that may or may NOT have happened.
These idiot repansycans need to stop living in the past and ignoring CURRENT CRIMES committed by THEIR president.
Bush the terrorist is GUILTY of NUMEROUS CRIMES and needs to be held accountable for his actions.
December 27th, 2005 at 1:05 amByron York is correct:
December 27th, 2005 at 1:10 am“But there is no doubt that presidents before George W. Bush, including Clinton, held the position that they had the authority to do what they believed was necessary to defend the United States against foreign attack.”
woo-ha,
Then they all, including George W. Bush are wrong.
December 27th, 2005 at 1:44 am“But there is no doubt that presidents before George W. Bush, including Clinton, held the position that they had the authority to do what they believed was necessary to defend the United States against foreign attack”
And we, as citizens of the U.S., hold the position that their authority was given to them by us. We have the right to take that authority away if we feel that they have violated our rights and our laws. This is not a Monarchy, it’s a Democracy — woo-ha.
December 27th, 2005 at 2:08 amThis link is very important, it shows you how we are being fooled by the governments all over the world just for the profit of a few.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=192012118972057552&q=The+Corporation
December 27th, 2005 at 6:36 am“One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.â€
No.
When someone says something that’s not true, it is a falsehood. It is only a lie when they know that the what they are asserting is false, yet they assert it as true.
I think it is a mistake to underestimate both the monumental stupidity of these people, and their manufactured blindness to fact which stems from their aggressive “true believer†commitments.
Comment by Gary L. Herstein
With all due respect… you are splitting hairs. There is what we know… and what we don’t know. We know far more than we have ever known, as Kurt Vonnegut points out here.
Tina Fey recently observed on her SNL Weekend Update report that 66 percent of Americans believe that President Bush is doing a poor job in Iraq, while the other 34 percent “believe that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church.” Whether they believe it or not, and I seriously doubt that anyone in their right mind does, that is a lie, not a falsehood.
“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
“Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”
“Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.”
- Mark Twain
FAITH, n.
Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.
Ambrose Bierce
The Devil’s Dictionary
A lie is a lie, whether you just whisper it to yourself or shout it out at the top of your loungs to the whole world.
December 27th, 2005 at 6:45 am*Lungs*
This link is very important, it shows you how we are being fooled by the governments all over the world just for the profit of a few.
http://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=192012118972057552&q=The+Corporation
Comment by ron — December 27, 2005 @ 6:36 am
That’s an excellent film. It’s The Corporation. Watch it.
The Corporation
Also on the Sundance Channel, for those who have cable.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:13 amThe Corporation Broadcast on the Sundance Channel
Monday 12.19.05 9:00 PM ET/PT
Sunday 12.25.05 9:30 AM ET/PT
Thursday 12.29.05 01:30 PM ET/PT
Cynicus, my favorite Ambrose Bierce definition is:
PRAYER: To ask that the laws of the Universe be annulled on behalf of a single petitioner, confessedly unworthy.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:42 amWASHINGTON, Dec. 26 (UPI) — U.S. President George Bush decided to skip seeking warrants for international wiretaps because the court was challenging him at an unprecedented rate.
A review of Justice Department reports to Congress by Heart newspapers shows the 26-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court modified more wiretap requests from the Bush administration than the four previous presidential administrations combined.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:02 amQuestions: Why is the right not saying one word about Sami Al-Arian? If his case ,21 counts, had been one by the justice Dept. you would have seen mr. York all over that one. Next; If Ben Keller and Pinch went to the white house to discuss a classified program, Do Journalists have de-facto security clearances? I bet Andrea Mitchell does.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:02 amThe 11-judge court that authorizes FISA wiretaps modified only two search warrant orders out of the 13,102 applications approved over the first 22 years of the court’s operation.
But since 2001, the judges have modified 179 of the 5,645 requests for surveillance by the Bush administration, the report said. A total of 173 of those court-ordered “substantive modifications” took place in 2003 and 2004. And, the judges also rejected or deferred at least six requests for warrants during those two years — the first outright rejection of a wiretap request in the court’s history.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:04 amOh and by the way:
CHICAGO (MarketWatch) – New York Times Co. said after the market closed Wednesday that its fourth-quarter profit would plunge 39% from that of a year earlier on charges related to job cuts announced in September, as well as stock-based compensation expense.
Truly a sign of a thriving economy. Hey at least the people that run food pantry’s have jobs.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:08 amGrounds for Impeachment
There are several compelling reasons for impeaching George Bush.
Violation of International Law
From a legal standpoint, the most compelling reason for impeachments is for his violation of international law relating to his War on Iraq. It is the most easily proven, and the most serious given the loss of life involved.
According to our Constitution, International Treaties are part of the “supreme Law of the Land”. Bush’s violations of the UN Charter and the Nuremberg Charter are, therefore, impeachable offenses.
Lying about the Rationale for the Iraq War
Bush and his team consistently lied to Congress and the American Public about the rationale for invading Iraq. Bush convinced a majority of Americans that Iraq was involved with Al-Qaeda and responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Yet the evidence says that the only relationship is that Al-Qaeda asked Iraq for support and they were rebuffed. Bush said in his State of the Union Address that “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa” to build nuclear weapons despite having already been told by the CIA that the evidence was forged. Bush claimed to have hard evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But the UN investigators could not verify any of these claims and searches of Iraq revealed no such weapons. The real reason may have more to do with the fact that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world, and sits strategically in the center of the Middle East.
Illegal Wiretapping of American Citizens
Bushy authorized the NSA to conduct illegal wiretaps on American citizens. Bushy claimed that these were justified on the basis of national security. But there is a legal mechanism for conducting emergency wiretaps followed by court approval within 72 hours. Bush ignored that mechanism and exceeded his executive authority.
Energy Industry Involvement
The depth of Bushes involvement in the energy industry scandal is yet to be revealed. Dick Cheney is in violation of a court order by refusing to divulge what went on in meetings with Enron and other energy companies. It is known that these energy companies were huge contributors to the Bush campaign. Bush has returned the favor by refusing to regulate them while they illegally gouged California for electricity, and by relaxing numerous environmental regulations that the industry did not like. One way to find out the nature of these talks is to impeach Bush which will lead to further investigation.
Election Fraud
Before the election in 2000, Bushy, his brother Jethro, and his Florida campaign manager Secretary of State Katherine Harris, illegally purged over 57,000 mostly Democratic Florida voters from the rolls. This was enough votes to account for Bush’s 537 vote margin over Al Gore. If this crime had not been committed then Al Gore would have been president.
In 2004, widespread fraud and intimidation in several states threw the votes to Bushy YET AGAIN.
IMPEACH THIS TERRORIST BEFORE HE DAMAGES OUR AMERICA ANY FURTHER!
December 27th, 2005 at 9:19 amRemember the technology to even hear conversations in your house with your phone not even picked up was available in the 1960 by the diaphram in your phone that vibrates all they do is amplify this diaphram to be able to hear what your saying in your house ……..bear in mind that computers pick up on words in your conversation to automatically record if the word bomb comes up anyway …….you are all being bugged all the time illefal or legal…..does anyone really care ….saying this I am against bush just on moral grounds and cannot wait for that Ba__ard to die … the day he does i will personally buy a bottle of dom perinion and drink it up …even though i dont drink i just smoke dope
December 27th, 2005 at 9:23 amI will rejoice in the street. Dancing like Scrooge after his visitations. I must do a head stand he-he!
December 27th, 2005 at 9:26 amQuestion: Why didn’t the President just order the NY Times not to print the story? I’m confused if it’s classified couldn’t the Attorney General filed charges against them? If they knew this was coming why not just threaten them with a crime? It still floors me to think that people with no apparent security clearances can obtain, and distribute Classified information. DO ANY JOURNALISTS HAVE SECURITY CLEARANCES?
December 27th, 2005 at 9:26 amyou need to group together as americans and have a public enquiry into 9/11 as i smell a fish after reading The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 – David Ray Griffin;
really
December 27th, 2005 at 9:27 amyou need to group together as americans and have a public enquiry into 9/11 as i smell a fish after reading The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 – David Ray Griffin;
really Ive never been so serious
December 27th, 2005 at 9:29 am“One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.”
Unless it comes from the Filthy Left then it’s simply an adjustment of the truth.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:32 am#59Mr. Debt. I think your points are valid but to call The President, Bushy just waters down the legitimacy of your points. I think always afford your enimies the dignity of manners and respect and I think any supporters of the President wont get distracted by your hysteria and then you can stick to the facts to them, which they will have to swallow. Thanks.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:32 amIRI, Good Morning, have you eaten all of your Xmas tamales yet? Question for ya? Is there any part of the Left that is clean? Thanks.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:35 am“Levin is referring to Clinton’s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA didn’t cover physical searches at the time, so the executive order did not, and could not, “bypass FISA.—
Assuming that Clinton didn’t bypass FISA is HUGE stretch in that first place considering it happened in 1993.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200512%5CPOL20051223a.html
December 27th, 2005 at 10:03 amIRI, Good Morning, have you eaten all of your Xmas tamales yet? Question for ya? Is there any part of the Left that is clean? Thanks.
Comment by the Fly-man
Ahhh….tamales…..they didn’t make it as far a Christmas….Hummm….something clean on the Filthy Left? Yes…I’ve heard they do a pretty good job with the whores and gambling in Nevada.
December 27th, 2005 at 10:28 amThey’re clean when I get done with them!
December 27th, 2005 at 10:33 amNew York Times Co. said after the market closed Wednesday that its fourth-quarter profit would plunge 39% from that of a year earlier on charges related to job cuts announced in September, as well as stock-based compensation expense.
Truly a sign of a thriving economy. Hey at least the people that run food pantry’s have jobs.
I’m confused here … are you saying that because the NYT profits have plunged 39% from last year/same quarter that this is somehow evidence of a poor economy? Can you not think of other causes for this phenomenon (here’s a hint, the AJC and LAT are experiencing similar losses).
December 27th, 2005 at 10:39 amLooks like the right-wing neo-cons don’t have any more straws to grasp at.
December 27th, 2005 at 10:54 amFly, thanks for the comments but to give, what is now, the office of president Capital First Letters shows a sign of respect. AND to call bushy “Bush” would show that I even have the slightest degree of respect for him. WHICH I DON’T.
I understand what you’re saying, but I personally would like to see anarchy in the streets to get our points across. Look what happened in France when they were rioting. Sure, some arrests were made but it also brought to light the problems they were facing AND it gained the attention to initiate some changes.
When are we going to stop being so passive and let this clown know that we’re not going to take his crap anymore? There’s a lot of truth to the old adage about the “squeeky wheel” getting the most grease.
I’ll fight MY way and you could fight YOURS. TOGETHER we’ll take the bastards down.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:22 amCynicus, my favorite Ambrose Bierce definition is:
PRAYER: To ask that the laws of the Universe be annulled on behalf of a single petitioner, confessedly unworthy.
Comment by ElectricBassPlayer — December 27, 2005
That’s a good one. They are all brilliant. And his short stories of the macabre are right up there with Poe’s, just underrated. There are many sites out on the net devoted to him, his writing, his life. He led a fascinating life. Some say he is still alive, at least he is in fiction. He pops up in other people’s fiction. And to be sure, no one really knows what happened to him after he went down to Mexico to fight with Villa.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:28 amThe enemy…
Faceless, because he is a coward. Being a coward, he will die a 1000 times.
“One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.â€
Unless it comes from the Filthy Left then it’s simply an adjustment of the truth.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005
December 27th, 2005 at 11:32 amGiacomo –
A little economic enlightenment for your holiday season…
What’s wrong with the economy?
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/pm110
by EPI President Lawrence Mishel and Policy Director Ross Eisenbrey
1. Profits are up, but the wages and the incomes of average Americans are down.
· Inflation-adjusted hourly and weekly wages are still below where they were at the start of the recovery in November 2001. Yet, productivity—the growth of the economic pie—is up by 13.5%.
· Wage growth has been shortchanged because 35% of the growth of total income in the corporate sector has been distributed as corporate profits, far more than the 22% in previous periods.
· Consequently, median household income (inflation-adjusted) has fallen five years in a row and was 4% lower in 2004 than in 1999, falling from $46,129 to $44,389.
2. More and more people are deeper and deeper in debt.
· The indebtedness of U.S. households, after adjusting for inflation, has risen 35.7% over the last four years.
· The level of debt as a percent of after-tax income is the highest ever measured in our history. Mortgage and consumer debt is now 115% of after-tax income, twice the level of 30 years ago.
· The debt-service ratio (the percent of after-tax income that goes to pay off debts) is at an all-time high of 13.6%.
· The personal savings rate is negative for the first time since WWII.
3. Job creation has not kept up with population growth, and the employment rate has fallen sharply.
· The United States has only 1.3% more jobs today (excluding the effects of Hurricane Katrina) than in March 2001 (the start of the recession). Private sector jobs are up only 0.8%. At this stage of previous business cycles, jobs had grown by an average of 8.8% and never less than 6.0%.
· The unemployment rate is relatively low at 5%, but still higher than the 4% in 2000. Plus, the percent of the population that has a job has never recovered since the recession and is still 1.3% lower than in March 2001. If the employment rate had returned to pre-recession levels, 3 million more people would be employed.
· More than 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since January 2000.
4. Poverty is on the rise.
· The poverty rate rose from 11.3% in 2000 to 12.7% in 2004.
· The number of people living in poverty has increased by 5.4 million since 2000.
· More children are living in poverty: the child poverty rate increased from 16.2% in 2000 to 17.8% in 2004.
5. Rising health care costs are eroding families’ already declining income.
· Households are spending more on health care. Family health costs rose 43-45% for married couples with children, single mothers, and young singles from 2000 to 2003.
· Employers are cutting back on health insurance. Last year, the percent of people with employer-provided health insurance fell for the fourth year in a row. Nearly 3.7 million fewer people had employer-provided insurance in 2004 than in 2000. Taking population growth into account, 11 million more people would have had employer-provided health insurance in 2004 if the coverage rate had remained at the 2000 level.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:32 amFly, thanks for the comments but to give, what is now, the office of president Capital First Letters shows a sign of respect. AND to call bushy “Bush†would show that I even have the slightest degree of respect for him. WHICH I DON’T.
Comment by The Debtonat
A typical comment from folks you don’t respect themselves.
I understand what you’re saying, but I personally would like to see anarchy in the streets to get our points across. Look what happened in France when they were rioting. Sure, some arrests were made but it also brought to light the problems they were facing AND it gained the attention to initiate some changes.
I’d like to see you rioting in the streets too. Wear a red beanie for me will ya?
When are we going to stop being so passive and let this clown know that we’re not going to take his crap anymore? There’s a lot of truth to the old adage about the “squeeky wheel†getting the most grease.
Grow some balls and get out there, we’ll be more than happy to grease you up a little.
I’ll fight MY way and you could fight YOURS. TOGETHER we’ll take the bastards down.
Grow up,idiot.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:36 am“by EPI President Lawrence Mishel and Policy Director Ross Eisenbrey”
Where are their sources for the their stats? How about presenting a non-partisan organization….which EPI is not.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:42 amWow, you MUST have some deep seeded mental issues. For you information douche nozzle, I AM out there initiating change. YOUR opinion means NOTHING to me. You are no better that the child murdering pedophile that YOU call president.
Just so you know, IF YOU ever grow some balls, my contact information is ALWAYS posted on my website. I would LOVE to get together with you. But then again, you ARE a coward just like YOUR leader.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:43 amWhere are their sources for the their stats? How about presenting a non-partisan organization….which EPI is not.
Comment by Tracy — December 27, 2005 @ 11:42 am
How about whining at a neo con blog, which this is not.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:48 amUnbelievable … hope your Holiday went well. I responded to the other thread (the one from like a week ago).
I didnt really intend to get on a debate on the economy … I just didn’t understand what “The Debtonator” (sounds like he/she works for Ditech) was saying.
That said, the “eonomy” and overall economic health are less about the individual indicators (ie. wages, profits, CPI, GDP, etc.) than it is the summation of those indicators. Most of your indicators are correct … I take issue with the job growth one (if unemployment is at acceptable or low levels, then it’s at acceptable and low lovels. If people were actively looking for jobs, and they couldn’t find them (due to the slower job growth) unemployment would rise … and rise faster than normal) and the health care one (health care costs have been rising dramatically for years and are a function of 1) unhealthy americans (ie. smoking and eating) 2) a culture of competition in employee benefit packages 3) greedy insurance companies (ther are other causes) and not a function of Bush policy. The other vectors you pose are accurate and salient.
What needs to be added to the discussion for a macro-focused picture is;
1) Performance of the capital markets
2) Inflation
3) Fed policies around interest rates / Yield Curve
4) Corporate growth
5) Housing market
6) Attractiveness of the USA as an investment as compared to emerging markets
7) CPI
8) GDP
9) Global Markets vs. Domestic
10) etc.
The presence of troubling indicators (and there are some) does not necessarily (and shouldn’t) mitigate the positive indicators … even in times where it’s universally agreed that the economy is “soaring” there are indicators that are troubling (one small example would be the 90s – huge growth coupled with crippling coporate malfeasance). Time will tell on the economy so there’s no need to argue it (at least politically).
December 27th, 2005 at 11:55 amWhere are their sources for the their stats? How about presenting a non-partisan organization….which EPI is not.
Comment by Tracy — December 27, 2005 @ 11:42 am
How about whining at a neo con blog, which this is not.
Comment by unbelievable — December 27, 2005
Now you get it. Like some other commenter said, they deserve all the clarity of a boot stomp in the face. You have to understand what and who you are dealing with. TBogg and Wolcott can explain it to you.
IRI is a total pansy. He’s got his XBox 360 and his Navy Seals SOCOM3 for Christmas and he thinks he’s a bad ass. He cracks me up.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:58 amUnbelievable … hope your Holiday went well. I responded to the other thread (the one from like a week ago).
Hi Giacomo – hope you had a nice holiday as well. We tried a consumer-free one this year. Only homemade stuff. Was very nice.
3) greedy insurance companies (ther are other causes) and not a function of Bush policy.
I do think this is a very direct result of the Bush policies in general. He favors cutting programs to assist the poor in order to give more and more breaks to Corporate America’s elite. He’s paved the way for their greed with his economic policies.
The other vectors you pose are accurate and salient.
Thanks, but I can’t take the credit, I got the link off Buzzflash and found it be interesting to understand why things don’t feel that great despite the reports and the stock market saying they are better. I do think the Bush administration is to blame for the majority of it. I know you don’t agree, but things were much better under Clinton for most people, and we didn’t have the weight of this escalating deficit, an unhealthy war, bad foreign policy and so much hate. I cannot wait for him to be out of office and out of sight.
Will go dig for the other forum to finish our conversation… be back!
December 27th, 2005 at 12:09 pmHi KillCon,
Absolutely – on guys like that, intelligent dialog is simply wasted breath.
Well, I now have this scary visual of chubby IRI in his Dallas Cowboys jammies with pizza sauce stains, and disheveled hair (what remains of it) frantically working his X-box joystick… Welcome back!
December 27th, 2005 at 12:15 pmSadly, there is no talking to any of them. There really isn’t. They are all like the chimp, himself. Blessed with an undying convinction in their own certitude and infallibility.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:19 pmI haven’t read it yet, but it took six years for the WaPo to figure out Bush is a liar. I knew this years ago when his old man was in office. If your name is Bush, lying is what you do. Except for that hag Babs. She can’t help but speak her “beautiful mind”. At least Poppy got elected, dumb Americans.
White House Prevarications
If the Bush administration or their supporters tell you the economy is good, you know it’s not, if you have a brain, a memory, even just short term, and can see and think for yourself.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:27 pmImportant!!!!!!! Watch how we are being fooled!!!!
Dems or reps, it doesn’t matter!!!
*Lungs*
This link is very important, it shows you how we are being fooled by the governments all over the world just for the profit of a few.
http://video.google.com/ videoplay?docid=192012118972057552&q=The+Corporation
Comment by ron — December 27, 2005 @ 6:36 am
That’s an excellent film. It’s The Corporation. Watch it.
The Corporation
Also on the Sundance Channel, for those who have cable.
The Corporation Broadcast on the Sundance Channel
Monday 12.19.05 9:00 PM ET/PT
Sunday 12.25.05 9:30 AM ET/PT
Thursday 12.29.05 01:30 PM ET/PT
Comment by cynicus — December 27, 2005 @ 7:13 am
December 27th, 2005 at 12:34 pmI’ve listened to Levin’s radio show on a lengthy commute. Like others of his ilk, he can’t have a reasoned conversation about terrorism without raising his ugly voice to instill more fear in his simplistic audience. He seems embarrassed by the low quality of their intellectual discourse when he puts them on the air.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:46 pm“One clarification: when someone says something that’s not true, it’s not an overstatement, it’s a lie.”
Think Progress… don’t let these words come back to bite you. Beware.
December 27th, 2005 at 12:49 pmLyle, don’t let your dog into the house. He will bite you.
When cabbies are kicking ass and the homeless shelters in sunny and warm CA aren’t turning people away, the economy is booming. That’s the way it was during the Clinton admin. The economy is in the toilet, judging by the cabbies I know, who are not only barely making a living, are being robbed at gunpoint for the little money they aren’t making. And the homeless shelters I already covered. Whatisface can cite all the micro and macro babble he wants and obfuscate the reality with numbers till the poor old folks freeze to death this winter. He doesn’t know shit, or care about anything but the fact that he and his clients are having a good ride on the backs of the poor and middle class. I hope he and his whole client list and all their families freeze to death this winter, too. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you, whatsisface.
This is the best reccomendation for a “non-partisan” site on economics. Hardly, far too far to the right for me, but if the assclowns at the club for growth say unkind things like this…
Concord Coalition
I’ve never been a big fan of the Concord Coalition, especially since I heard its RINO founder, Warren Rudman, state that his biggest regret as a US Senator was voting for Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts because he believes those created the huge budget deficits. Anyone so clueless as to ignore the fact that the deficits were completely caused by out of control spending (as they are today), has no right to call himself a fiscal conservative.
However, they have an interesting study on how hiking the payroll tax to shore up Social Security wouldn’t be very helpful. Thanks to TaxProf Paul Caron for the heads-up on this.
Based on their soak the rich mentality, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to see the Concord Coalition come out in favor of leaving the payroll tax rates the same, but removing the earnings ceiling on which they are assessed, plus means testing who can receive any benefits at all, in order to force the “evil rich†to pay more in and take out less.
The Concord Coalition’s mission is very specific
The Concord Coalition is a nationwide, non-partisan, grassroots organization advocating fiscal responsibility while ensuring Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are secure for all generations. The Concord Coalition was founded in 1992 by the late former Senator Paul Tsongas (D-Mass.), former Senator Warren Rudman (R-N.H.), and former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Peter Peterson. Former Senator Bob Kerrey (D-Ne.) was named a co-chair of the Concord Coalition in January 2002.
But any complex and technical talk of the economy is just better left to the experts, which is none of us here, and still usually partisan bullshit. Anyone who says the economy is great, or even improving is one of these idiots with a diploma he can’t read.
Ambrose Bierce once wrote the following …
ACADEME, n.
An ancient school where morality and philosophy were taught.
ACADEMY, n.
[from ACADEME] A modern school where football is taught.
Today he would have to amend it to include business.
Business, if it’s taught at all, should be taught in trade schools where it belongs. It’s what has caused the decline in our university system. People like jerkamo are living proof. American idiots.
December 27th, 2005 at 1:01 pmIf the Bush administration or their supporters tell you the economy is good, you know it’s not, if you have a brain, a memory, even just short term, and can see and think for yourself.
Comment by KillCon2006 — December 27, 2005 @ 12:27 pm
I am truly amazed at the way the neocons will just accept what they are told by that corrupt administration… no verification, no fact checking, no reasonable consideration for rationality. And unfortunately, they only encouraged more of that behavior by re-electing chimp. Yet we free thinking folks get to suffer for it… I’m signing every petition I can get my hands on and writing my elected neo-cons on a regular basis threatening to fire them. I’ve even managed to convert a few conservative relatives to our side. But it still doesn’t seem like things are moving fast enough. I genuinely am concerned that they will start bombing another country now… uh, oh I said bombing, giess NSA will flag this post now! See you in the gulags… after all, Hitler started his tyranny with the liberals, artists, and free thinkers…
December 27th, 2005 at 1:55 pmI would LOVE to get together with you. But then again, you ARE a coward just like YOUR leader.
Comment by The Debtonator
George can take you and so can my sister, that is if hypertension doesn’t get you first. You remind me of the effeminate pudgy boys we used to beat the crap out of in gym class. You never got over it either did you?
December 27th, 2005 at 2:00 pmI already HAD your sister. I say bring your sissy ass on and we’ll see who will NEVER get over it. Cool that you admit to being a bully though. Typical re-pansy-can. You fit the profile PERFECTLY.
December 27th, 2005 at 2:13 pmGiacomo – I didn’t see it – what’s the headline name of where you posted?
December 27th, 2005 at 2:24 pmCool that you admit to being a bully though. Typical re-pansy-can. You fit the profile PERFECTLY.
Comment by The Debtonator
I was putting Darwin’s theory to the test. It worked. Fat assed potato chip eating pussies didn’t hold up well under pressure. Most of them turned homosexual.
December 27th, 2005 at 2:25 pmI was putting Darwin’s theory to the test. It worked.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 2:25 pm
You do know that they’ll revoke your Evangelical Sunday School membership for saying anything positive about Evolution, don’t you? I think they might still stone you or burn you at the stake even… After all Darwin was another free thinker one who intelligently gave up religion for reality.
December 27th, 2005 at 2:36 pmIF you have the balls, look me up. I’m not that difficult to find. That is if you could put you chips down long enough. It’s good that you admit to being homosexual though. Maybe NOW you’ll be able to date someone other than your dad.
December 27th, 2005 at 2:39 pm12/27
December 27th, 2005 at 2:48 pmRaw Story reports Condoleeza Rice approved phone taps and other surveillance of UN Security Council members in the run up to the Iraq invasion.
It also reports, in a separate story, that the FISA Court had questioned Bush’s applications for surveillance and that would explain why Bush chose to circumvent the Court in wiretapping.
Rice wiretapping the UN?
December 27th, 2005 at 2:52 pmGeorge can take you and so can my sister, that is if hypertension doesn’t get you first. You remind me of the effeminate pudgy boys we used to beat the crap out of in gym class. You never got over it either did you?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005
ROFL! You mean like Karl Rove! Hey was that your sister that beat him up?
LYNCHBURG, Va. (AP) — President Bush’s chief political adviser, Karl Rove, counseled graduates of the Rev. Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University on Saturday to ignore the cynics and judge leaders by their character.
America, he said, needs people who have “the moral clarity and courage to do what’s right, regardless of consequence, fashion or fad.â€
In other words someone who isn’t part of the current administration.
“These things can’t be taught in a government textbook … or the editorial page of The New York Times. You either have values ingrained in your heart and soul that will not change with the wind or you don’t,†Rove said.
Cue Bette Midler for a chorus of Wind Beneath My Wings
Rove reminded the 2,041 graduates to pay off their credit cards. He advised them that when they go to job interviews, “don’t act like you’re smarter than the person you’re interviewing with. Even if you are.â€
Lucky for Rove, George W. Bush is stupid.
Everyone, he said, should find a career they truly love. He shared a tale of how he persevered in politics from an early age.
“As long as I can remember, I’ve always loved politics,†Rove said. “At the age of 9 I put a Nixon bumper sticker on the wire basket in the front of my bicycle. Unfortunately the little Catholic girl down the street was a couple years and about 20 pounds on me. She was for Kennedy.
“When she saw me on my bike with my bumper sticker for Nixon, she put me on the ground, flattened me out and gave me a bloody nose,†he said.
“Despite that beating I never lost interest in politics.â€
And where is that girl today? Guarding “enemy combattants†in Iraq perchance?
Rove, who said he never earned a college degree, was presented an honorary doctorate of humanities by Falwell for his “commitment to conservative ideas.â€
“Conservative ideas†apparently only being worthy of a High School Equivalency Diploma.
Liberty University is a private school affiliated with Falwell’s Baptist ministry.
See? What did I just say?
The graduates were greeted Saturday by about 40 supporters of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
Infidels! Don’t they know their country needs them? Don’t they know their President was chosen by God?
Don’t they know that Midge Decter has a book to sell?
December 27th, 2005 at 2:59 pmI was putting Darwin’s theory to the test. It worked. Fat assed potato chip eating pussies didn’t hold up well under pressure. Most of them turned homosexual.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @
As opposed to this…
Creationism n. Pseudoscience that claims George W. Bush’s resemblance to a chimpanzee is totally coincidental.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:03 pmI am truly amazed at the way the neocons will just accept what they are told by that corrupt administration… no verification, no fact checking, no reasonable consideration for rationality.
It would be a mistake to lump them all into one group. They are a broad coalition. Someday I wish some serious scholar would attempt this with the rest of the political landcape in America. That would be no small accomplishment and much more difficult than attempting it with the right.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:08 pm
Hi everybody. Been reading this long string and I am impressed by what a melange it really is. Democracy in action.
Would somebody please explain to me just WHAT a person has to write to have his/her comment deleted by the comments administrator? The way I see it, people keep insulting each other personally, mostly I-R-I and the Right, but they are by no means the only folks here who see fit to hurl epithets. It bothers me to see progressives engage in demagoguery. Not every Republican is a closet butcher of the poor (some just don’t know any better and need us to help them learn history). Why do some get removed and others not?
I offer this to I-R-I, Mighty Aphrodite, anyone really: Come to my blog, comment, leave a number or email where I can reach you, and we’ll sit down and have a talk. I promise not to insult you, your intelligence, your ethnic heritage, etc. I’ll by a round of drinks or a bite, and you don’t even have to reciprocate. We can even hit the pistol range if you like, and you can borrow some firepower from my collection if you aren’t armed yourself. All comped. You are my guest!
I realize that I-R-I might want to call me a “fat-assed potato chip eating pussy” or some other classy name gleaned from Mensa meetings or the Algonquin Round Table, but I promise not to respond in kind. You see, I believe in treating all human beings with respect, especially those who do not reciprocate in kind. Even “bad” people!
After all, it’s easy to get along with those who agree with you; rules of decency are only necessary when dealing with those with whom you DON’T agree. I have plenty of right-wing friends and acquaintances and we manage to not hurl slurs at one another across the backyard fence. Perhaps the blogosphere is a new forum for rage like the “privacy” of your car.
Down with Blog Rage! Up with politeness!
BTW, I’m no pussy. Fat-assed potato-chip eater, maybe.
Actually, I-R-I, your spelling is incorrect. I believe that the Republican-approved spelling of this noble tuber, as explained by that beacon of Republican genius, Dan Quayle, is “POTATOE.”
December 27th, 2005 at 3:16 pmAfter all Darwin was another free thinker one who intelligently gave up religion for reality.
Comment by unbelievable —
Darwin had a great influence on your Progressive buddy Mr. Hitler. When all is said and done free thinking progressives are responsible for 99.999% of the evil and mass murders of the last century. You should know this being a accredited teacher and all.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:18 pmI’m signing every petition I can get my hands on and writing my elected neo-cons on a regular basis threatening to fire them. I’ve even managed to convert a few conservative relatives to our side. But it still doesn’t seem like things are moving fast enough. I genuinely am concerned that they will start bombing another country now… uh, oh I said bombing, giess NSA will flag this post now! See you in the gulags… after all, Hitler started his tyranny with the liberals, artists, and free thinkers…
Comment by unbelievable —
Good for you. You have more patience than I do. There is some concern that Iran will be the target in 2006. We will just have to wait and see. Most people have that moment of epiphany when reality intrudes upon their fantasy. Then you can get through the denial and programming. It’s very difficult for the wealthy and well off, if they are not inclined to change their narrow and self-centered worldview. Some prejudices are too deeply ingrained.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:21 pmWould somebody please explain to me just WHAT a person has to write to have his/her comment deleted by the comments administrator?
It’s usually limited to gory and violent fantasies.
I offer this to I-R-I, Mighty Aphrodite, anyone really: Come to my blog, comment, leave a number or email where I can reach you, and we’ll sit down and have a talk. I promise not to insult you, your intelligence, your ethnic heritage, etc. I’ll by a round of drinks or a bite, and you don’t even have to reciprocate. We can even hit the pistol range if you like, and you can borrow some firepower from my collection if you aren’t armed yourself. All comped. You are my guest!
Good luck with that.
I think those days are over for the forseeable future. Maybe for good. I do believe that now there is no one on the planet to check our bully boy ass, we will proceed to tear ourselves apart. I, and a few others I know, predicted this very thing at the fall of the Soviet Union. The world was actually a much more stable place when the Soviet Union was in existence.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:28 pmBut I’m damn glad you are gun friendly, like me, and on my side.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:31 pmDarwin had a great influence on your Progressive buddy Mr. Hitler. When all is said and done free thinking progressives are responsible for 99.999% of the evil and mass murders of the last century. You should know this being a accredited teacher and all.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 3:18 pm
“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work.”
-Adolph Hitler, Speech, Reichstag, 1936
Not exactly the words of an Evolutionist. Darwin didn’t influence Hitler, your imaginary friend Hay-soos (Jesus) did. Just like he influences you and your war mongering ilk.
There are somewhere between 12% to 20% non-religious folks in the U.S.A. yet less than 1% of those in prison are non-religious. Hardly qualifies us as “evil-doers”. China is predominantly Atheistic and their crime rate is microscopic in comparison to our Christian dominated country. How exactly do you spin that?
It’s you evangelical lunatics who are creating havoc. After all, any insane group that can claim “the devil made me do it” as an acceptable excuse for poor behavior isn’t exactly playing with a full deck…
December 27th, 2005 at 3:48 pmI-R-I,
Evolution theory has been amply proven by actual scientists with millions of hours of lab experience who don’t decide the outcome first and then arrange the study to prove it. Many of them were practicing Christians, but many were not. They were all scientists studying nature with an open mind. There is no competing scientific theory to evolution. There is Creationism and its stealthy offspring, “Intelligent Design,” which refers either to God or aliens, I can’t figure out which.
“Faith” tells us what to think, and how. It also tells us our nation is “the best,” no matter which nation we happen to reside in. I gather from your writing that there is no need for the scientific method, an “enlightenment” of any kind, or any new learning. As far as progressives being responsible for approx. 100% of all evil and mass murders, well… I’d need to see your data on that.
Regarding evolution, I know you don’t like to hear it, but it is established fact. Just as mathematics theory is “just a theory,” and gravity theory is “just a theory.”
So… turns out Hitler was able to understand the theory of science… Darwin believed in God. Does that make God a mass murderer? John Wayne Gacy was a Christian. Does that mean all Christians dress in clown suits and murder children? Your logic – if it can be called that – is silly. Hitler believed in science? Wow. Guess science is bad!
Just ask yourself: how does a strain of bacteria become drug-resistant?
Evolution.
Pose an alternative explanation. Go on. I dare ya!
December 27th, 2005 at 3:48 pmI’m glad Clinton didn’t try that NSA stuff or I would’ve missed watching 3,000 people get burned to death in the towers…..nice going bubba! Our civil liberties are safe but we’re all dead….COOL!
December 27th, 2005 at 3:53 pmKc06 ,So the government crumbles to the point that distinct armed factions will have something collective to defend. Likes say a town. Then at what point and to whos authority do you oblige?
December 27th, 2005 at 3:53 pmMost people have that moment of epiphany when reality intrudes upon their fantasy. Then you can get through the denial and programming. It’s very difficult for the wealthy and well off, if they are not inclined to change their narrow and self-centered worldview. Some prejudices are too deeply ingrained.
Comment by KillCon2006 — December 27, 2005 @ 3:21 pm
Exactly – that’s the most concise and accurate way I’ve heard it put… and yet it describes the majority of our elected officials, even among the Democrats… Seems like it will get worse before it gets better. I read in a St. Petersburg, Russia paper during their 1998 economic collapse that there are certain criteria that are typical before the onset of revolutions… one was that the people had to be dying en masse. Iraq and Katrina have been a start, but I wonder if it will be enough to spur the masses to serious reform (unfortunately, I don’t think so).
December 27th, 2005 at 3:54 pmget rid of Bush you mentally retarded American Race. what do they feed you on apart from genetically modified mind set beans or something or is it the MMR jab at birth that makes 51% percent of you dumb …. get real while the rest of the world progresses and boycotts your goods…You will get your asses kicked in Iran ,,,70 million people a proper army mountainous terrain…you are really low life cowards that pick on countries that have been malnurished in 10 years of UN santions and 6 months blasting the shit out of there armed forces on a flat bed desert ..Iraq before you go in …..COWARDS ..now you bully people …your gonna get your asses kicked in Iran and North Korea hahaha
December 27th, 2005 at 3:58 pm“In science it often happens that scientists say, ‘You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,’ and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
December 27th, 2005 at 3:59 pm- Astronomer Carl Sagan – 1987
Charles Darwin’s views on religion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin’s_views_on_religion
Charles Darwin (1809 — 1882), who proposed the theory of evolution by means of natural selection.Charles Darwin’s views on religion have been the subject of much interest. His work was pivotal in the development of evolution theory which some argue helps show that God is unnecessary, while others feel that attacking Darwin and restricting teaching of evolution helps to evangelise their faith.
Charles Darwin had a Non-conformist background, but attended a Church of England school. He studied Anglican theology with the aim of becoming a clergyman, before joining the Voyage of the Beagle. On return, he developed his theory of natural selection in full awareness that it conflicted with the teleological argument. Darwin deliberated about the Christian meaning of mortality and came to think that the religious instinct had evolved with society. With the death of his daughter Annie, Darwin lost all faith in a beneficent God and saw Christianity as futile. He continued to give support to the local church and help with parish work, but on Sundays would go for a walk while his family attended church.
In his later life, Darwin was frequently asked about his religious views. He went as far as saying that he did “not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation”, but was always insistent that he was agnostic and had “never been an Atheist”.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:01 pmUnbelievable,
I am relentlessly polite and positive in these posts. It is an intelledctual position. I have no more hope than many among us on what was once the Left but is now an abandoned, rubble-strewn empty lot.
The reason I vote for civility in the blogosphere is (aside from its inherent decency and maturity) that the other side does grandiose moral posturing, thinly-veiled hate and aggression, innuendo, “swift-boating,” and slurs far better than we do. It reminds me of wimpy democrats feebly attempting to portray themselves as devout Christians in order to counteract the far right. Howard Dean proclaiming himself a religious man… who needs it? He should have said, “my religion is private. What this country doesn’t need is another C-minus man who didn’t do his homework because the Rapture is coming.” He wouldn’t have gotten far votes-wise, but he would have kept his integrity.
The choice between a corrupt power-monger with a bible in hand vs. a competent, ethical, non-religious candidate ought to be a no-brainer. This is true in much of Europe, which is poised for a golden age. Sadly, in much of the world but especially in our own house, the opposite is true. We are fast becoming a Taliban-junior State. Except that our Mullahs are Christians.
If the Left is to win back any hearts and minds it must be with humor, superior intelligence and honesty, and love. We can’t fight Moloch on his own turf.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:01 pmDarwin had a great influence on your Progressive buddy Mr. Hitler.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 3:18 pm
This argument is an ad hominen and so a logical fallacy. You are trying to discredit Darwin and his theory because of what someone else did with it.
First, Darwin influenced many people and/or used his ideas to their own ends. That does not invalidate Darwin’s central thesis of descent with modifications (as he called it). In fact, people have twisted it to propose other things, such as Social Darwinism
Second, Hitler was not a progressive -he was a Nazi. Nazism is a form of fascism. From the wikipedia:
There is a very close relationship between Nazism and Fascism. Since the term Nazism is normally used to refer to the ideology and policies of Nazi Germany alone, while Fascism is used in a broader sense, to refer to a wider political movement that exists or existed in many countries, Nazism is often classified as a particular version of Fascism.
Nazism
Third, your implication that somehow the Theory of Evolution leads to mass murder is plain silly. What drove Hitler to exterminate non-Aryans was not the Theory of Evolution. For him, ridding the planet of “inferior” men and women was a divine task: It is a sin against the will of the Eternal Creator if His most gifted beings by the hundreds and hundreds of thousands are allowed to degenerate in the present proletarian morass, while Hottentots and Zulu Kaffirs are trained for intellectual professions.
Also: What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purityof our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the Creator of the universe.
“His most gifted beings” and “our people” being, obviously, the Aryan race.
When all is said and done free thinking progressives are responsible for 99.999% of the evil and mass murders of the last century.
Well, I just showed you the only one example you named was not a progressive by any definition. As a matter of fact, Hitler was Catholic.
If you have evidence to support your 99.99% claim, please share it.
Also, keep in mind that the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, the conquest of colonies in the Americas, Africa, and the forced mass conversions of the natives, etc. were seen as divine mandates.
You should know this being a accredited teacher and all.
I want to bet Unbelievable does not know your version of history.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:06 pmget real while the rest of the world progresses and boycotts your goods…
Comment by Bushes best friend — December 27, 2005 @ 3:58 pm
I briefly read something about this… that Corporate America was starting to get upset with the Bush Administration because they were watching their international markets wither… And you know what happens when their bought-and-paid-for politicians hit them in their precious wallets – regime change… hmmm, how absolutely ironical that Corporate America could just yet turn out to be Bush’s biggest adversary in this, eh?
December 27th, 2005 at 4:07 pmIraq, with just over 20 million people, a flat terrain and a dilapidated military, has given us quite a bit of trouble. Try Iran, which has nearly 70 million people, a mountainous terrain and a much more effective military. You Bush lovers should write your man and advise him to let that sleeping dog lie.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:12 pmThe choice between a corrupt power-monger with a bible in hand vs. a competent, ethical, non-religious candidate ought to be a no-brainer. This is true in much of Europe, which is poised for a golden age. Sadly, in much of the world but especially in our own house, the opposite is true. We are fast becoming a Taliban-junior State. Except that our Mullahs are Christians.
If the Left is to win back any hearts and minds it must be with humor, superior intelligence and honesty, and love. We can’t fight Moloch on his own turf.
Comment by gun toting liberal — December 27, 2005 @ 4:01 pm
Definitely why so many of my 35 yr. old + friends are already starting to plan their retirements in France or Italy… I saw an interesting 60 minutes interview with Tina Turner. She said she didn’t see herself moving away from Europe ever because it was so much more of a tolerant culture than here.
IRI and I have a history of sarcasm. It’s his way of flirting with me. :) But in general, they see kindness as a weakness. The Prague Intelligensia were able to get the USSR out of their city by deploying their intellect. With the neocons, intellect isn’t a viable weapon when they themselves don’t have any. Just blind faith, raging hatred for diversity and lemming instincts.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:17 pmI-R-I,
Evolution theory has been amply proven by actual scientists with millions of hours of lab experience who don’t decide the outcome first and then arrange the study to prove it. Many of them were practicing Christians, but many were not. They were all scientists studying nature with an open mind.
Comment by gun toting liberal
That’s not only a contradiction in terms but it’s wishful thinking. It’s a contradiction because once a theory has been proven it’s no longer a theory. It’s wishful that scientist don’t determine the test by the outcome they want. They do it all the time. Evolution isn’t a hard science and is wide open to manipulation and cheating. Social “scientists” are well known for lying cheating and stealing.
Just ask yourself: how does a strain of bacteria become drug-resistant?
Evolution.
Pose an alternative explanation. Go on. I dare ya!
You have a brain and can reason that if it’s hot and hurts it’s not something you want to test again. A bear has claws, a lion teeth and your ex-wife knows where all the bones are buried. It’s called a self defense mechanism and evolution isn’t any better an explanation than is God’s loving and merciful design.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:20 pmWe can’t fight Moloch on his own turf.
Comment by gun toting liberal
You are Moloch.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:22 pmI want to bet Unbelievable does not know your version of history.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — December 27, 2005 @ 4:06 pm
Nor does she want to :)
Good post Gregor… I doubt he will bother to respond to you as this kind of sound and substantialed argument is impossible for him to crack with logic or facts… because it is logical and factual.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:22 pmDefinitely why so many of my 35 yr. old + friends are already starting to plan their retirements in France or Italy…
comment by unbelievable and with good reason
I only have one word to say to that…Bull Shit
By the way…just like a stupid black bitch to bite the hand that made her rich. No wonder Ike beat the crap out of her all the time.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:25 pmevolution isn’t any better an explanation than is God’s loving and merciful design.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I was waiting for you to pretend to be educated about religion. (fits your profile)
Belief in the invisible man cannot be compared to scientific FACT. Your religion is based on smoke and mirrors. NOTHING more.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:26 pmYou have a brain and can reason that if it’s hot and hurts it’s not something you want to test again. A bear has claws, a lion teeth and your ex-wife knows where all the bones are buried. It’s called a self defense mechanism and evolution isn’t any better an explanation than is God’s loving and merciful design.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 4:20 pm
You still haven’t managed to explain the intelligent design of the appendix… and I’ve been asking for weeks now.
Evolution, billions and billions of years of it, IS visible and a perfect explanation for why you have pseudogenes which exist but do not produce proteins (which are the same pseudogenes that chimpanzees have), why the bones are arranged ad hoc, and why the human eye is backwards (retina behind the optic nerve), and so on. Your God is not visible, and based on the premise of creation, then who created god? And who created that creator? And who created that creator, in finitim. It doesn’t make sense, but evolution does.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:28 pmI only have one word to say to that…Bull Shit
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 4:25 pm
Yes because you lack the ability to argue it with facts. My father used to say that when people resorted to cursing in an argument it was because they had reached the height of their intelligence. Clearly.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:30 pmThat’s not only a contradiction in terms but it’s wishful thinking. It’s a contradiction because once a theory has been proven it’s no longer a theory.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 4:20 pm
This demonstrates ignorance of what a scientific theory is.
First, nothing in science can be proven as such. Science works with evidence, not proof. Said evidence supports a hypothesis or doesn’t. If evidence is not found to support a hypothesis or contradicts it, it is abandoned.
Second, scientific theories always remain scientific theories. A theory, unlike the way you use the word, does not mean wild guess but “a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a certain natural or social phenomenon, thus either originating from or supported by experimental evidence.” Theory
I bet you are confused at this point. In a other words: A scientific theory is a model, a description, an explanation of how the world works.
With that in mind, there would be no Theory of Evolution if evolution was not a fact to explain. Evolution is both a theory and a fact.
To give you another example: Plate Tectonics is also “just a theory”. You are free to believe that earthquakes are caused by giant snakes moving under our planet’s crust.
It’s wishful that scientist don’t determine the test by the outcome they want. They do it all the time.
I don’t know what you are trying to say.
Evolution isn’t a hard science and is wide open to manipulation and cheating.
The Theory of Evolution is a Highly Confirmed Scientific Theory, and has withstood close scrutiny for about 150 years. Very few other scientific theories have been challenged so many times, for so long, and come out victorious every single time.
In fact, the scientific evidence supporting evolution is now overwhelming.
Social “scientists†are well known for lying cheating and stealing.
Your post has nothing to do with evolution at this point. Can you remain focused?
December 27th, 2005 at 4:52 pmI-R-I,
“Once a theory has been proven it’s no longer a theory.”
– I-R-I
Nice try, IRI. Are you actually claiming not to understand the meaning of the word “theory”? Your argument actually hinges on a vocabulary problem?
Since when does a “theory” in science stop being a theory? You obviously are mistaking the scientific definition of a theory from the colloquial definition as a “hunch.”
Gravity is a theory.
Mathematics is a theory.
This does not mean they haven’t been proven.
And do I understand you correctly – are you saying that bacteria avoid drugs because they are consciously aware of them?
Some people just don’t have the good common sense God gave a goose.
Honestly.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:07 pm#120
“and a much more effective military.”
Compared to what?
December 27th, 2005 at 5:15 pmRight between the I’s seems to have a problem with race.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:19 pmCompared to what?
Comment by Tracy — December 27, 2005 @ 5:15 pm
Compared to Iraq’s, obviously.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:22 pm#133
Oh, initially I thought #120 was suggesting that Iran’s military would actually have a chance against the coalition’s military.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:32 pmOh, I initally thought that #120 was suggesting the Iran’s military would actually have a chance against the coalition’s military.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:33 pmBubble boy (Bushie, laura’s term of endearment for her ugly husband) got two things for Christmas.
1. An increased dose of valium from his doctor
2. A certificate for a 30 minute hand holding session with Osama Bin Laden.
Guess which one he enjoyed most?
December 27th, 2005 at 5:39 pmOh, I initally thought that #120 was suggesting the Iran’s military would actually have a chance against the coalition’s military.
Comment by Tracy — December 27, 2005 @ 5:33 pm
This is what gets you in trouble… and your neocon ilk. We are not invincible. We can be beaten (see Vienam and the current predicament in Iraq). Mightier empires such as the Mayan or Roman Empires have fallen. Mighter Republics (not that we are one any longer) such as the 500 year old Venetian Republic (an adjective for Venice – in Italy – not the plant Venus, because I know you were confused here) have also fallen. We too are capable of falling. And at the rate your boy George is going, it will sadly be much sooner than later.
If we can’t beat an insurgency of farmers with guns in Iraq how can we defeat the Iranian Army while fighting Iraq and Afghanistan as well?
December 27th, 2005 at 5:49 pmA bear has claws, a lion teeth and your ex-wife knows where all the bones are buried. It’s called a self defense mechanism and evolution isn’t any better an explanation than is God’s loving and merciful design.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 4:20 pm
You seem to believe bears and lions consciously developed fangs and claws, as a mechanism of self-defence. That’s not how things work.
Species change and adapt through the generations in response to climate conditions, availability and quality of food and shelter, sexual preferences, among other factors. They do not do it consciously: The most successful individuals reproduce more and leave more progeny behind, leaving their traits with them.
Seeing a contradiction between religion and a scientific theory -whatever theory that might be- is your choice, and does not have to be so:
Evolution and Religion Can Coexist, Scientists Say
Evolution in the bible, says Vatican
By the way…just like a stupid black bitch to bite the hand that made her rich. No wonder Ike beat the crap out of her all the time.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 4:25 pm
Obviously racism and misogyny don’t take holidays either. Here I-RIGHT-I is saying that not only it is ok to beat up black women, they somehow deserve it.
Is this part of God’s “loving and merciful design”?
December 27th, 2005 at 7:44 pmDarwin had a great influence on your Progressive buddy Mr. Hitler.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 3:18 pm
LOL!
Don’t engage this moron, unless with a MARK19.
It was actually Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834) was an English political economist and historian who in 1798 published a book called “An Essay on the Principle of Population” that influenced Hitler. This moron confuses “social Darwinism” with Darwin’s theories of natural selection in his Origin of the Species. Sick people often take a scientist’s or philosopher’s work and draw false conclusions from it that the originator never intended.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:48 pmYes because you lack the ability to argue it with facts. My father used to say that when people resorted to cursing in an argument it was because they had reached the height of their intelligence. Clearly.
Comment by unbelievable
Some do it because they have reached the limit of their patience and cannot apply the cluebat of continual redemption to the sinner’s head.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:53 pmRight between the I’s seems to have a problem with race.
Comment by The Debtonator — December 27, 2005
Yeah, well… he’s cross-eyed. What a little pansy.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:56 pmYou seem to believe bears and lions consciously developed fangs and claws, as a mechanism of self-defense. That’s not how things work.
Species change and adapt through the generations in response to climate conditions, availability and quality of food and shelter, sexual preferences, among other factors.
You seem to have a knack for not really saying anything. That’s how you work. There is no evidence that a bear was ever anything but a bear or a lion anything else but a lion. If there were evolution wouldn’t be a theory it would be a fact.
Oh by the way…lions and bears don’t have sexual preferences. Only Liberal Losers have those. The rest of God’s creation has divine order which is a God ordained self defense mechanism against self extermination. Homosexuality and abortion both fundamental to the philosophy of the Filthy Left is self extermination.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:15 pm“Oh by the way…lions and bears don’t have sexual preferences.”
But those gay penguins?
I see the shift has changed at “paidshillsforBush.com” – what are their benefits like? Do you get workman’s comp?
December 27th, 2005 at 8:28 pm“You seem to believe bears and lions consciously developed fangs and claws, as a mechanism of self-defense. That’s not how things work.”
No. An invisible cloud-being decreed their existence,and “poof!” lions!
Saddle your dinosaur and head on down the trail – you’re not being paid to talk about evolution.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:33 pmYou seem to have a knack for not really saying anything. That’s how you work. There is no evidence that a bear was ever anything but a bear or a lion anything else but a lion.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 8:15 pm
And you have a knack for not making any sense and post wildly ignorant comments, but we already knew that. We have plenty of evidence of bears’ and lions’ evolutionary lineage. From the wikipedia:
The origins of the bears can be traced back to the raccoon-sized, dog-like Cephalogale from the middle Oligocene and early Miocene (approximately 20-30 million years ago) of Europe. Cephalogale gave rise to a lineage of early bears, the genus Ursavus. This genus radiated in Asia and ultimately gave rise to the first true bears (genus Ursus) in Europe, 5 million years ago. Extinct bear genera include Arctodus, Agriarctos, Agriotherium, Plionarctos and Indarctos. Bear
If there were evolution wouldn’t be a theory it would be a fact.
I already explained to you that in scientific terms a theory does not mean “wild guess”. You repeating this non-sense make you look ignorant beyond belief. The Theory of Evolution explains the fact of evolution.
Oh by the way…lions and bears don’t have sexual preferences.
All animals have sexual preferences. This is well documented now too.
The rest of God’s creation has divine order which is a God ordained self defense mechanism against self extermination.
Your message is about two centuries late.
Homosexuality and abortion both fundamental to the philosophy of the Filthy Left is self extermination.
So in your mind, evolution equals homosexuality? You are one twisted, sick person.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:35 pmSo in your mind, evolution equals homosexuality? You are one twisted, sick person.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
No, you really do need to work on your reading skills or your rhetorical devices, neither are working properly. I said that the Filthy Left holds both homosexuality and abortion dear. You’re the one that made the connection from homosexuality to evolution. I suppose in some perverted way you see homosexuality as a positive human trend instead of something despicable and deadly. It’s just another reason why I call you the Filthy Left.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:47 pmSome do it because they have reached the limit of their patience and cannot apply the cluebat of continual redemption to the sinner’s head.
Comment by Emmanuel Goldstein — December 27, 2005 @ 7:53 pm
More advocacy for violence from the wingnuts on the right…
What about turning the other cheek and humility? I hardly think your Jesus is quoted in your 16 Biblical versions as ever saying “Bullshit”….
Besides, by your own definition of sinner, I am not, but IRI and you are. Ironic that the more moral one here is the Atheist who does not condone using violence to settle debates.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:48 pmYou seem to have a knack for not really saying anything. That’s how you work. There is no evidence that a bear was ever anything but a bear or a lion anything else but a lion. If there were evolution wouldn’t be a theory it would be a fact.
Oh by the way…lions and bears don’t have sexual preferences. Only Liberal Losers have those. The rest of God’s creation has divine order which is a God ordained self defense mechanism against self extermination. Homosexuality and abortion both fundamental to the philosophy of the Filthy Left is self extermination.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 8:15 pm
What you know is astoundingly so little…
Yes there is proof of evolution and there are also examples of homosexuality in other species…
“Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms; even within the same species, researchers have drawn parallels between this and homosexuality, bisexuality, intersexuality and transgender behavior in humans. Homosexual behavior has been documented in over 450 species.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
And you still haven’t explained that divine intention of the useless appendix…
December 27th, 2005 at 8:52 pmOh by the way…lions and bears don’t have sexual preferences
Do you still read national Geographic to get a woody, cross between the i’s? Apparently not.
Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate
I know this will give you a “stiffy” you little right wing pansy.
==================================================================
Unbelievable,
I think Emmanuel Goldstein is on your side. He is just not a pacifist.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:59 pmI said that the Filthy Left holds both homosexuality and abortion dear. You’re the one that made the connection from homosexuality to evolution. I suppose in some perverted way you see homosexuality as a positive human trend instead of something despicable and deadly. It’s just another reason why I call you the Filthy Left.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 8:47 pm
You have to believe this nonsense in order to hate us and refuse to consider for one fraction of one second anything we think…
The reality is that we do not hold abortion dear. We respect the right of a woman to decide whether or not to bring another human being into this world. Better to abort a non-viable, non-consious grouping of cells than to inject a living, conscious being with lethal drugs.
How do you see homosexuality as deadly? Lesbians have the lowest transmission rate of SIDs or HIV. That makes you more filthy and deadly than they are.
We’re not filthy, we’re just tolerant of accepting people for who they are. You want everyone to be like you. Only you fail to notice that we don’t all look, act or think the same to begin with. You’re trying to force a homogenization of cultures that is despicable and deadly (kill everything on the planet that isn’t human and humans will die… fact. Therefore other forms of life are valuable and necessary to our survival. But I guess in your make-believe world baby Jesus will send you a miracle while he continues to ignore all of those molested children and cancer patients…)
And I still want to know how the appendix is intelligently designed…
December 27th, 2005 at 9:02 pmRight between the I’s craves attention. How VERY pathetic. Still waiting on your call loser.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:04 pmIt’s OK to call him a pansy, It refers to the fact that he would wet his pants if he was actually confronted by violence, or had actually committed any of the violent acts he hints at having a desire to act out on his “perceived enemies”. It’s also because his violent opposition to homosexuality is a good indicator of the latent homosexual tendencies he suppresses.
Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal? Henry E. Adams, Lester W. Wright, Jr., and Bethany A. Lohr University of Georgia
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
APA doesn’t have free access to the Journal of Abnormal Psychology’s archives, so a direct link is out of the question, but the citation for the article is:
Adams, Henry E. (Ph.D.); Wright, Lester W., Jr. (Ph.D.); and Lohr, Bethany A. ‘Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?’ Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp 440-445.
A press release describing the findings is here.
New Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
December 27th, 2005 at 9:07 pmRight between the I’s craves attention. How VERY pathetic. Still waiting on your call loser.
Comment by The Debtonator
Keep waiting dummy. I wouldn’t want to be the cause of your next heart attack.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:09 pmWe’re not filthy,
We aren’t sterile, either. Maybe that’s his problem…
December 27th, 2005 at 9:10 pmHomophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
APA doesn’t have free access to the Journal of Abnormal Psychology’s archives, so a direct link is out of the question, but the citation for the article is:
Adams, Henry E. (Ph.D.); Wright, Lester W., Jr. (Ph.D.); and Lohr, Bethany A. ‘Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?’ Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp 440-445.
A press release describing the findings is here.
New Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
Comment by KillCon2006
Yep, that’s right. People who hate homosexuality are homosexuals, according to the rump rangers that now infest the APA anyway. I think the opposite is true. Men who are tolerant of homosexuals must have that tendency, either that or they are morally bankrupt as well as irrational. Or it could be that they are just cowards.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:15 pmNew Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
Comment by KillCon2006 — December 27, 2005 @ 9:07 pm
Very interesting… And mostly likely true in his case. He is very derisive to women, which is not a trait equated with appreciation for something. KillCon, I think you have him pegged!
December 27th, 2005 at 9:16 pmYep, that’s right. People who hate homosexuality are homosexuals, according to the rump rangers that now infest the APA anyway. I think the opposite is true. Men who are tolerant of homosexuals must have that tendency, either that or they are morally bankrupt as well as irrational. Or it could be that they are just cowards.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 9:15 pm
Not one single thing you said was coherent or rational. Most of my students speak more eloquently than this.
I’ve dated men who were not threatened by homosexuality because they knew they were straight and there was nothing to feel threathened by. Honestly, they really didn’t spend time thinking about it like you seem to.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:18 pmHe has a juvenile fascination with guns. He worships phallic objects and symbols. He really wants to see Brokeback Mountain. He’ll sneak into a matinee someday. probably in a wig, sunglasses and trenchcoat, with nothing on underneath.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:21 pmThis is true. I have never understood the hostility towards other males who weren’t competing for the available breeding stock. (Sorry, Ma’am, I know that sounds). The only explanation that makes sense is that he is a latent homosexual. All of them, who are so violently opposed to it are.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:25 pmI agree with you. If I think about the Navy pilot I dated when I was 25 and his intense fear of gays, I have to wonder about him. He went to an all boys high school, a mostly male Naval Academy, and worked in a predominantly male career where every 3 years he was isolated with 500 other men on an air craft carrier for 6 months. (I am not suggesting all men in military are gay). He was proud that he’d never been hit on by another man. A guy who’d been awarded higher honors and was once the Captain for the United States Rowing team was more proud of never having another man hit on him.
In contrast with my other boyfriends who were obviously straight who nearly never talked about other men…. It does make you wonder.
I think you’ve nailed this one (well, figuratively :)
December 27th, 2005 at 9:32 pmI said that the Filthy Left holds both homosexuality and abortion dear. You’re the one that made the connection from homosexuality to evolution.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 8:47 pm
You are the one who mentioned homosexuality in a comment about evolution. I didn’t make the leap. You did.
Don’t try to blame it on me now.
I suppose in some perverted way you see homosexuality as a positive human trend instead of something despicable and deadly.
I see that you, in a perverted way, see homosexuality as despicable and deadly.
From an evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality is not negative or positive. It just is. Although I know that it is a negative trait in your own, pesonal version of Christianity. But then being non-WASP is also a negative in your opinion.
It’s just another reason why I call you the Filthy Left.
And I see you have declined to debate about evolution and instead went on a tangent, bringing up homosexuality and name-calling. Funny how a lot of your posts wind up that way.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:39 pmYou’re the one that made the connection from homosexuality to evolution.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 27, 2005 @ 8:47 pm
To further show that you are the one who made the connection from evolution to homosexuality, this is the kind of sexual preference I was talking about in my post #137:
Attraction to Orange: Sexiness, Not Gluttony
IN HER ARTICLE GUPPY SEX AND GLUTTONY guided by orange glow (News of the Week, 8 March, p. 1816),
Virginia Morell reviews recent evidence published by Rodd et al. suggesting that the sexual preference of female guppies (Poecilia reticulata) for males with orange spots is explained by the notion that orange resembles food (1). Of course, it is difficult to separate females’ attraction to food from the attraction to males that are stronger and faster and, thus, able to consume more orange-colored cabrehash fruit, which is limited in supply. Indeed, our observations suggest that, for female guppies, orange spots signal sexiness and, moreover, the virility of a potential mate.
This kind of sexual preference is very well documented in all species -one where the females are more willing to mate with males with a certain set of characteristics.
I thought it was obvious from the context. I said “The most successful individuals reproduce more and leave more progeny behind, leaving their traits with them.” Successful individuals reproduce more, because they have more of whatever it is that makes them attractive to other individuals of the same species. That is sexual preference.
Although the kind of sexual preference you were thinking about is also documented in other species as well, as other bloggers have already indicated.
I am still baffled how every other of your posts has to end with a put down on homosexuals, non-WASPS, and women.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:08 am#149
“We respect the right of a woman to decide whether or not to bring another human being into this world.”
She made that decision when she decided not to use some type of birth control.
“Better to abort a non-viable, non-consious grouping of cells than to inject a living, conscious being with lethal drugs.”
At what point during a pregnancy do you believe a that so called “non-consious group of cells” becomes a human being?
What about the rights of the unborn?…or do they not have any rights?
“We’re not filthy, we’re just tolerant of accepting people for who they are.”
I totally agree, except for the tolerant part at least as far as the FAR left is concerned. The far left constantly bags on people of faith just like IRI vomits hatred in his/her posts. They are no different…they are both bigots.
“But I guess in your make-believe world baby Jesus will send you a miracle while he continues to ignore all of those molested children and cancer patients…)”
Damn, you just put yourself in the bigot category.
December 28th, 2005 at 9:52 amI’ve dated men who were not threatened by homosexuality because they knew they were straight and there was nothing to feel threathened by. Honestly, they really didn’t spend time thinking about it like you seem to.
Comment by unbelievable
I don’t feel personally threatened by homosexuals however I do feel the country is threatened by homosexuality as a practice and as a tool to affect radical social change. Any man that doesn’t recognize the perverse nature and inherent danger of a human being that defines himself by his deviant sexual behavior isn’t much of a man. Any man that can stand by and ignore the evidence of the predatory nature of the homosexual isn’t deserving of the title Mr.
It should be clear from the tactics and statements of the homosexual “rights” activists that they are after more than “rights”. The massive and open infiltration of the Churches, Child Welfare Agencies, Boy Scouts, Big Brothers and Sisters organizations and public schools all have one thing in common. It puts homosexuals in close contact with children and in positions of authority often without much in the way of accountability. It’s a disgrace and a crime that mature and thinking adults look the other way or condone this without consideration of the facts. There is no excuse for this. Here are some facts:
Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse
Timothy J. Dailey, Ph. D.
The circle of abuse is the tragic legacy of the attempts by homosexuals to legitimize having sex with boys. For too many boys it is already too late to protect them from those who took advantage of their need for love and attention. All too many later perpetrate the abuse by themselves engaging in the sexual abuse of boys. Only by exposing the lies, insincere denials, and deceptions — including those wrapped in scholastic garb — of those who prey sexually on children, can we hope to build a wall of protection around the helpless children among us.
Scandals involving the sexual abuse of under-age boys by homosexual priests have rocked the Roman Catholic Church. At the same time, defenders of homosexuality argue that youth organizations such as the Boy Scouts should be forced to include homosexuals among their adult leaders. Similarly, the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a homosexual activist organization that targets schools, has spearheaded the formation of “Gay-Straight Alliances” among students. GLSEN encourages homosexual teachers–even in the youngest grades–to be open about their sexuality, as a way of providing role models to “gay” students. In addition, laws or policies banning employment discrimination based on “sexual orientation” usually make no exception for those who work with children or youth.
· Pedophiles are invariably males: Almost all sex crimes against children are committed by men.
· Significant numbers of victims are males: Up to one-third of all sex crimes against children are committed against boys (as opposed to girls).
· The 10 percent fallacy: Studies indicate that, contrary to the inaccurate but widely accepted claims of sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, homosexuals comprise between 1 to 3 percent of the population.
· Homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses: Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children.
· Some homosexual activists defend the historic connection between homosexuality and pedophilia: Such activists consider the defense of “boy-lovers” to be a legitimate gay rights issue.
· Pedophile themes abound in homosexual literary culture: Gay fiction as well as serious academic treatises promote “intergenerational intimacy.”
MALE HOMOSEXUALS COMMIT A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF CHILD SEX ABUSE CASES
Homosexual apologists admit that some homosexuals sexually molest children, but they deny that homosexuals are more likely to commit such offenses. After all, they argue, the majority of child molestation cases are heterosexual in nature. While this is correct in terms of absolute numbers, this argument ignores the fact that homosexuals comprise only a very small percentage of the population.
The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.
http://www.frc.org/?i=IS02E3
December 28th, 2005 at 10:11 amShe made that decision when she decided not to use some type of birth control.
I get it – you hate your mommy and you’re still a virgin. No moron, sexual desire is a normal animal trait. Survival of the species depends on it. As a result, people have sex. It’s you zealot idiots who want to ignore the reality of our world and try to condemn the act of sex. Sex is natural. And so is abortion (you call it miscarriage). Plus, birth-control is the responsibility of both the man and the women. And when it fails, there is abortion.
At what point during a pregnancy do you believe a that so called “non-consious group of cells†becomes a human being?
What about the rights of the unborn?…or do they not have any rights?
Your bible says that life begins with breath. That would be birth for you. Do a search for abortion in the bible. You won’t find anything.
Rights of the unborn? Are you serious? You better stop masturbating then…
“I totally agree, except for the tolerant part at least as far as the FAR left is concerned. The far left constantly bags on people of faith just like IRI vomits hatred in his/her posts. They are no different…they are both bigots.”
you might wanna try http://www.dictionary.com before you type…
big·ot
n.
One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Word History: Bigots may have more in common with God than one might think. Legend has it that Rollo, the first duke of Normandy, refused to kiss the foot of the French king Charles III, uttering the phrase bi got, his borrowing of the assumed Old English equivalent of our expression by God. Although this story is almost surely apocryphal, it is true that bigot was used by the French as a term of abuse for the Normans, but not in a religious sense. Later, however, the word, or very possibly a homonym, was used abusively in French for the Beguines, members of a Roman Catholic lay sisterhood. From the 15th century on Old French bigot meant “an excessively devoted or hypocritical person.†Bigot is first recorded in English in 1598 with the sense “a superstitious hypocrite.â€
“Damn, you just put yourself in the bigot category.”
I have Christian friends, therefore I am not a bigot. How many Atheist friends do you have?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 9:52 am
December 28th, 2005 at 10:53 amI totally agree, except for the tolerant part at least as far as the FAR left is concerned. The far left constantly bags on people of faith just like IRI vomits hatred in his/her posts. They are no different…they are both bigots.
Comment by Tracy
Now that hurt. I certainly do not vomit hate. I merely point out the inconsistencies of the Walking Dead’s feeble humanitarianism with what is right. Some people may call that hateful but I call it good policy. The fact is if you do not hate the Filthy Left you do not understand them or what is at risk.
I won’t hold it against you that you used me to make some tolerance points with the enemy as I understand that women rarely can be counted on to take the high road if it means being labeled an unfeeling intolerant bigot. That’s why I don’t think they should be allowed to vote or hold public office.
December 28th, 2005 at 11:45 am“No moron, sexual desire is a normal animal trait.”
And for animals like you who can’t control that desire makes an elective abortion about as significant to you as getting a flu shot.
“It’s you zealot idiots who want to ignore the reality of our world and try to condemn the act of sex”
I don’t condemn sex at all it’s just that I was under the assumption that most people can control their desires and hold off untill they get married, but apparently you don’t have that self control ability, because you think with the wrong head and/or that is where your brain is. It is a BS excuse that people can’t wait.
“And so is abortion (you call it miscarriage).”
You do know that walking into an abortion clinic is a elective choice and a miscarriage is not…right? I can see why it would be confusing to you considering your disregard for life.
“Plus, birth-control is the responsibility of both the man and the women.”
Responsibility is also living with a CHOICE knowing full well what that choice might produce. BTW the ONLY reason, in MY opinion, to get an abortion is that the pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk.
“I have Christian friends, therefore I am not a bigot. How many Atheist friends do you have?”
BS! Just because some of your friends are or claim to be Christians doesn’t mean that you aren’t a bigot. Your intolerance towards their beliefs and mine, makes you one. I don’t know if some of my friends that aren’t religious are athiests. I never asked and they never brought it up. If I found out that they were athiests it wouldn’t affect my friendship with them. In fact it would only strengthen my own beliefs and pursue them in order to change theirs. I would NOT however FORCE my beliefs on them or shun them because I did not convert them. It is not for me to judge them.
“Your bible says that life begins with breath. That would be birth for you. Do a search for abortion in the bible. You won’t find anything.”
It also says PLENTY about the unborn.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/bioethics/faqs/a0030469.cfm
You don’t know anything about the bible so don’t even try to dilude yourself into thinking you do know.
“For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works: and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” Psalms 139:13-16.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:22 pmI am still baffled how every other of your posts has to end with a put down on homosexuals, non-WASPS, and women.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
I think you exagerate. It would be ever third post.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:22 pm#168
“The fact is if you do not hate the Filthy Left you do not understand them or what is at risk.”
Hate is a powerful and very meaningful word. I DISAGREE with those on the left but I don’t hate them. That is why I post here…to try and get people to agree with me. BTW you or I are in no position or authority to judge anyone here.
“Some people may call that hateful but I call it good policy”
No, it’s hateful because all you are doing is making them resent you even more. You aren’t helping the conservative movement…at all, just as many here aren’t helping the liberal cause either.
“That’s why I don’t think they should be allowed to vote or hold public office.”
This yet another example where you and I are on the opposite end of the spectrum.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:36 pmAnd for animals like you who can’t control that desire makes an elective abortion about as significant to you as getting a flu shot.
I’ve never had an abortion. So that blows your ridiculous absolutist irrational theory.
Hitler’s mother wanted an abortion. So you zealots denied her own with your maked up concern for life. Look at what YOU wound up doing to humanity as a result… Ever consider that abortion of certain fetuses is your God’s plan, which is why he doesn’t condemn them in his so-called holy scripture? Hmmm? Maybe you are the evil-doers for interfering with your God’s plans…
I don’t condemn sex at all it’s just that I was under the assumption that most people can control their desires and hold off untill they get married, but apparently you don’t have that self control ability, because you think with the wrong head and/or that is where your brain is. It is a BS excuse that people can’t wait.
Clearly you do have sexual problems… It’s apparent in your posts that you’d like to have sex with your mother.
What part of ’survival of the species’ do you not get? Marriage was invented by fat fera-mongering pigs like you who could only get a woman to marry him if he made her first feel inadequate otherwise. It’s not necessary for conception, and wouldn’t a perfect God have made marriage a requirement for conception if that was the plan??? So what are you saying, God isn’t perfect or one doesn’t even exist in the first place? That’s why you hang out with us liberals, isn’t it. Your a closeted atheist.
You do know that walking into an abortion clinic is a elective choice and a miscarriage is not…right? I can see why it would be confusing to you considering your disregard for life.
I’m anti-war, vegan (i eat no animals), am against the death penalty in most cases, have never killed anyone. Clearly I don’t value life. Your arguments are remarkably crude and ineffective. After all, your side allowed Hitler to be born. Clearly you have the least regard for life.
Responsibility is also living with a CHOICE knowing full well what that choice might produce. BTW the ONLY reason, in MY opinion, to get an abortion is that the pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk.
Good think you can’t get pregnant, eh? Did you think that fails to escape us? Because it doesn’t. If you could get pregant you’d be writing your elected representatives everyday to make sure it stayed legal.
BS! Just because some of your friends are or claim to be Christians doesn’t mean that you aren’t a bigot. Your intolerance towards their beliefs and mine, makes you one.
I’m not intolerant of people who are loving and humble. You are neither.
I don’t know if some of my friends that aren’t religious are athiests. I never asked and they never brought it up.
Liar. Your actions invalidate that claim.
If I found out that they were athiests it wouldn’t affect my friendship with them. In fact it would only strengthen my own beliefs and pursue them in order to change theirs.
Yeah, just like it is here. None of your friends are atheists. We are free thinkers. No way anyone with an ounce of intelligence or self-esteem would hang around you. Your an absolutist who only sees one way and never questions that way.
I would NOT however FORCE my beliefs on them or shun them because I did not convert them. It is not for me to judge them.
In this country most Atheists are atheists by choice, and most of us are born into religion. Unlike you who just accepted his lot in llife, we think for ourselves. therefore, you ‘converting’ us is not onlu pointless, but quite obnoxious. As people in this forum routinely point out – even true Christians (which you are not).
But forcing your opinion on others is exactly what you’re trying to do. nd you’re failing, so you resort to these hissy fits. They aren’t working either.
You don’t know anything about the bible so don’t even try to dilude yourself into thinking you do know.
Of course I do, I was Christian for 33 years, and then I read the Bible and realized it was a war mongering, hatred filled religion, so I quit.
Your quote was not anti-abortion. It was pro-mother. No wonder you want to sleep with yours.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:49 pm#167
“Your bible says that life begins with breath.”
Here’s some more clarification for you ill informed comment:
http://www.prolifetalk.com/message-board-forum/about287.html
“Consider first, Genesis 2:7, “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
First, God forms Adam, he forms of dust, a flesh and blood body. SECOND, he “breathes into his nostrils the breath of life” and THEN man became a living soul. Man did not become a living soul when God first formed the IDEA of creating Adam, in Genesis 1:26. Man did not become a living soul when God created his BODY. Not until God gave man his first BREATH did he become a living soul.”
December 28th, 2005 at 12:53 pmThat is why I post here…to try and get people to agree with me.
Your failing. How likely are you to change your mind and agree with us? Okay, then… see your futility here? So, now you can leave us alone. We think you are wrong and dangerous. Why would we ever agree with that??? Our lives are more peaceful than yours. No one here is going to give that up for ignorance and fear. Go away now.
BTW you or I are in no position or authority to judge anyone here.
Doesn’t see to stop you.
You’ve called me a bigot, hypocrite, murderer, etc. – that’s all 100% judgment. You do know what the word means, don’t you?
http://www.dictionary.com (it’s free and you might learn something).
December 28th, 2005 at 12:53 pmThe far left constantly bags on people of faith just like IRI vomits hatred in his/her posts. They are no different…they are both bigots.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 9:52 am
I don’t know who you are talking about when you say “far left”. You will find that a lot of people in this blog are actually people of faith too -being a “lefty” and having a religious belief are not contradicting ideas.
As for I-RIGHT-I, you are wise to distance yourself from him. He calls himself a Christian, but his posts hateful, derisive comments against everyone who is not a WASP male. He cannot help it. In fact, he just posted another one (you found it and responded to it). He is not a conservative -he merely cloaks himself in that mantle to gather support for his racism.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:54 pmThis yet another example where you and I are on the opposite end of the spectrum.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 12:36 pm
Not really… you advocate the exact same thing. Atleast he’s honest about it (do NOT think that means I like you IRI, I just respect your honesty about being a woman hating, war mongering racist pig :)
December 28th, 2005 at 12:54 pmSECOND, he “breathes into his nostrils the breath of life†and THEN man became a living soul.
Tracy you are ridiculous – and beating yourself – your quote only validates MY point that life begins with breath in your religion…
(you seem to be overlooking an important fact: fetuses in utero do not breath air… they are suspected in liquid – whihc is why the water breaks just prior to birth…)
December 28th, 2005 at 1:01 pm#174
“You’ve called me a bigot, hypocrite, murderer, etc. – that’s all 100% judgment.”
That’s not judging you that is just pointing out a fact. Judging you would be to say that I am moral and you aren’t, or that I am better than you because I belive in God and you don’t.
“Our lives are more peaceful than yours.”
How do you know that? Your utter contempt for others that post things that you don’t like makes it clear that you are in the same “hate” boat that IRI is in, eventhough you might sit on stern and he/she might sit on the bow.
“So, now you can leave us alone.”
Leave you alone to do what?…to keep spreading false information and lies about those on the right?
“No one here is going to give that up for ignorance and fear. Go away now.”
Ignorance and fear is exactly what this blog is FULL of!! BTW no one is forcing you to respond to any of my comments.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:07 pmTracy,
Gregor is right. Not everyone on the left is an Atheist. My Christian friends are also Democrats and liberals. They believe YOU are not the true Christian. You should talk to Zwack. He’s a Christian who is very liberal.
You’re not changing our minds any more than we are changing yours. The difference is that this is a liberal blog and you’ve come here to convert people…
December 28th, 2005 at 1:07 pm“Not really… you advocate the exact same thing. Atleast he’s honest about it”
You got some evidence to back up that BS comment little man?
December 28th, 2005 at 1:09 pmThat’s not judging you that is just pointing out a fact. Judging you would be to say that I am moral and you aren’t, or that I am better than you because I belive in God and you don’t.
You do believe you are better than me or you wouldn’t have started this argument. You are judging us, because you are name-calling to people you don’t even know. I’m not the liberal coming into a neocon website, yet you are a neocon in a liberl blog. That definitely makes you the hypocrite, and judgmental.
How do you know that? Your utter contempt for others that post things that you don’t like makes it clear that you are in the same “hate†boat that IRI is in, eventhough you might sit on stern and he/she might sit on the bow.
My utter contempt – yes that is why I am against war, don’t kill animals to eat, and support pacificist behavior. You really need a new dictionary.
Hate? See – more judgment Tracy. You’re totally judging me. You think your betterthna us or you wouldn’t have bothered to come in here. the notion that you can change our minds suggests that you know better and so, you think you are better come in here to convert. That is judgment.
Leave you alone to do what?…to keep spreading false information and lies about those on the right?
It’s a liberal blog you moron. Besides, we’re not spreading anything. We’re posting on a blog that people conscious and electively choose to visit. Have a problem with that? Then move to a country without a Constitution granting freedom of speech. We have every right to speak our minds as you do. Until you see and acceptthat yo are no differetn from the Crusaders. After all, your Jesus said taht prayer was a personal thing that you should do in private. This isn’t very privacy Tracy…
Ignorance and fear is exactly what this blog is FULL of!! BTW no one is forcing you to respond to any of my comments.
Yes, I agree – there is fear and ignorance in here – you.
No one is forcing you to respond to mine. So hypocritical how it’s okay for you to defend your position but not okay for me to defend mine. You’re not a true Christian. Not even close.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:18 pm#175
“I don’t know who you are talking about when you say “far leftâ€.”
Who are those that you see in this blog that constantly insult people because of their religious beliefs or conservative views?
“You will find that a lot of people in this blog are actually people of faith too -being a “lefty†and having a religious belief are not contradicting ideas.”
I agree, but that’s why I said far-left, i.e. those who talk down and insult those who have religious or conservative beliefs.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:21 pm“Not really… you advocate the exact same thing. Atleast he’s honest about itâ€
You got some evidence to back up that BS comment little man?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:09 pm
That’s little woman to you… Sure do, all of your remarks about women in this thread. Go read your own posts. You make all kinds of derogatory insults about women. Just because you’re passive agressive about it doesn’t mean it is any less obvious.
If you can’t trust women with a choice, how can you trust them with a child???
December 28th, 2005 at 1:21 pm#179
“Gregor is right. Not everyone on the left is an Atheist.”
I never said or inferred that they were.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:22 pmWho are those that you see in this blog that constantly insult people because of their religious beliefs or conservative views?
This is your problem. We don’t knock your religious views. We knock your need to try to force them down our throats or use them for irresponsible behavior. Big differnce. You should get your fact staright before you start hurling judgments.
“I agree, but that’s why I said far-left, i.e. those who talk down and insult those who have religious or conservative beliefs.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:21 pm
You write your own dictionary? You should share your definitions.
Just because we insult you does not make us intolerate to your religion, political views, skin color, gender or culture. It makes us intolerant of YOU specifically. You who are in here in a liberal blog judging us. See the difference?
December 28th, 2005 at 1:25 pmI never said or inferred that they were.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:22 pm
I never said or inferred that you did. Just agreed with Gregor’s post.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:27 pm“You make all kinds of derogatory insults about women.”
Provide an example than little woman.
“If you can’t trust women with a choice, how can you trust them with a child??? ”
The proceeding remark was IRI’s, not mine. You weren’t trying to pass it off as mine were you? You better not be. That’s as low as some other people that posted something vile and signed my name.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:29 pm“If you can’t trust women with a choice, how can you trust them with a child??? â€
The proceeding remark was IRI’s, not mine. You weren’t trying to pass it off as mine were you? You better not be. That’s as low as some other people that posted something vile and signed my name.
No Tracy, I was not giving you credit for saying something that intelligent. You didn’t even get that it was a liberal defense for why women should have the choice. IRI didn’t say it. He’s not that intelligent or open-minded either.
Man you are high strung. OOOh don’t accuse me, don’t judge me – what are you so afraid of? A peaceful and loving God? Why ever would you fear something peaceful and loving??? Hmmm…
December 28th, 2005 at 1:37 pm“We respect the right of a woman to decide whether or not to bring another human being into this world.â€
Tracy said: She made that decision when she decided not to use some type of birth control.
Insult. Passive-agressive, but insulting. You think women cannot control themselves, cannot protect themselves, and cannot choose for themselves, so you need to indirectly call them whores and legislate what they do with their own bodies. That’s insulting no matter how you tryto spin your way out of it.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:41 pm#185
“We knock your need to try to force them down our throats or use them for irresponsible behavior.”
When have I ever tried to force them down your throat? I said specifically, multiple time, that my views are MY opinion, not that they are the only true and correct ones or that you are less of a person because you think differently.
“It makes us intolerant of YOU specifically.”
The only things you know about me is what I post in this blog, i.e. my religious beliefs, my political views, ect…, so for you to say that you aren’t intolerant of those things and then in turn say that you ARE intolerant of ME personally, is BS and a cop out.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:41 pmWho are those that you see in this blog that constantly insult people because of their religious beliefs or conservative views?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:21 pm
Whew! This is quite the thread now….
In my experience, most of the heated exchanges are not because someone holds a religious view, but the interpretation some pseudo-conservative bloggers give them -they use the Bible to justify racism, misogyny, murder, etc.
Also, a lot of pseudo-conservative visitors to this site come here to insult, unload their frustrations and anger, not to debate, exchange ideas, or understand a different point if view. That approach will also elicit very angry responses.
In a nutshell: Many regulars here are very jaded and have precious little patience.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:51 pmWhen have I ever tried to force them down your throat? I said specifically, multiple time, that my views are MY opinion, not that they are the only true and correct ones or that you are less of a person because you think differently.
What was calling me a murderer supposed to be complimentary? You knock IRI for his manner because he is direct. At least he is honest about trying to force his opinion down our throats. You dress yours up in pious clothing and then act all offended when we call you on it. We can see that the Emporer is wearing no clothes Tracy, and we’re not afraid to say so.
You said that you came here to change opinions. We didn’t invite you. We make it clear that while we are receptive to honest debate (see Giacomo or Michael for examples) we don’t want your judgment or coercion, and yet you persist. Unsolicited advice is coercion. You are therefore forcing yourself upon us. It’s like that saying about don’t pee on my leg and then tell me it is raining, because I’m not that stupid or ignorant.
The only things you know about me is what I post in this blog, i.e. my religious beliefs, my political views, ect…, so for you to say that you aren’t intolerant of those things and then in turn say that you ARE intolerant of ME personally, is BS and a cop out.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:41 pm
Exactly! And it is all judgment, intolerance and assumption that we are wrong, you are right and therefore you can come into our forum and tell us so. Clearly you were expecting to be the first one to come tous and make your case and that we would fall over, admit we were wrong and welcome you. So, how’s that theory working for you? Not so well, because you fail to recognize that we are intelligent human beings who think for ourselvesand believe just as strongly in our view point as you do in yours.
No we are intolerant of you. Take it personally and leave. There are other Christian conservatives here who come to try to understand and find a compromise. YOU don’t want a compromise. You want it your way 100%. And how is that working for you? Didn’t think so. Bye bye now…
December 28th, 2005 at 1:52 pm#189
“Insult. Passive-agressive, but insulting.”
Well I’m sorry you are taking it that way because I wasn’t trying to insult women by suggesting that they are incapable of protecting themselves. Read what is there, NOT what you hope is there.
“…so you need to indirectly call them whores and legislate what they do with their own bodies.”
Where are you getting all of these BS insinuations from? All I am saying, and this is MY opinion, is that choosing to have sex and knowing what the outcome could produce, is no excuse for aborting a life because you made a mistake. The fact the you don’t think that a fetus is a life puts us on two totally different paths for starters. My sister made a mistake by having a baby when she was eighteen, but she couldn’t in good conscious destroy a life, eventhough the father wants absolutely nothing to do with my niece or that she was in no way financially capable or mature enough to raise a daughter. My sister put her daughter’s life above her own wants and desires.
A question: At what point during a pregnancy would you consider it immoral to abort a baby? When it has a heart beat? When it is easily recognizable as a human with head, eyes, fingers, and toes? I am not trying to belittle you here, I just what your opinion.
December 28th, 2005 at 2:00 pmI see that you, in a perverted way, see homosexuality as despicable and deadly.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
It should not be necessary to explain a praiseworthy revulsion.
~ Mark Helprin
….even to a stupid Mexican
~iRi
December 28th, 2005 at 2:06 pmWell I’m sorry you are taking it that way because I wasn’t trying to insult women by suggesting that they are incapable of protecting themselves. Read what is there, NOT what you hope is there.
I did read was there. I just don’t think you understand what you are suggesting. No one is in favor of abortion. But some of us know that keeping it legal and medical is necessary. Women will get abortions whether or not they are legal. It is not your choice to tell them that they can’t. And the Constitution afford us that discretion. You may not like it. Fine, then don’t have one, but to go around condeming those who do is not supporting women. Period.
Where are you getting all of these BS insinuations from? All I am saying, and this is MY opinion, is that choosing to have sex and knowing what the outcome could produce, is no excuse for aborting a life because you made a mistake. The fact the you don’t think that a fetus is a life puts us on two totally different paths for starters. My sister made a mistake by having a baby when she was eighteen, but she couldn’t in good conscious destroy a life, eventhough the father wants absolutely nothing to do with my niece or that she was in no way financially capable or mature enough to raise a daughter. My sister put her daughter’s life above her own wants and desires.
Yes it is your opinion, and you think it is more valid than mine and all the other women and men who believe that abortion should be a choice. You’ve even said so. And that’s not BS it is a fact.
A question: At what point during a pregnancy would you consider it immoral to abort a baby? When it has a heart beat? When it is easily recognizable as a human with head, eyes, fingers, and toes? I am not trying to belittle you here, I just what your opinion.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 2:00 pm
Tracy, the problem here is that you do not understand my viewpoint. I don’t think you can. And explaining it to you is frustrating and probably pointless.
I live my life based on reality. Not on theory or some faith in a super-human morality. But I have traveled the world, and I have known many people. I’ve read and I’ve studied and I will continue to support a woman’s choiceto have an abortion. It’s not a moral issue to me. It is a matter of personal freedom. This does not mean that I am pro-abortion. In a perfect world, I would think they wouldn’t exist because we would respect women. But it’s not a perfect world. And as long as it remnains imperfect I would chose to abort a non-concsious cluster of cells over killing a conscious chicken or a cow. I understand that this does not make sense to you. But it does not make me wrong and you right. It makes us different. And I will continue to fight for that. You can hate me for it. But in doing so you miss a great opportunity to find compromise and harmony. And I can say that because I used to be a conservative Christian. This is the side I chose and will continue to choose. I don’t expect you to understand that as long as you think I am wrong without understanding me or why I chose it. But that is your pregogative…
I need to go. Have somethings I need to do today. I’m sure someone else will be happy to continue. Good lluck.
December 28th, 2005 at 2:15 pm“What was calling me a murderer supposed to be complimentary?”
But, that’s not trying to force my beliefs down your throat.
“You dress yours up in pious clothing and then act all offended when we call you on it.”
What’s this we stuff? It’s all YOU.
“We didn’t invite you.”
I didn’t need an invitation.
“We make it clear that while we are receptive to honest debate”
Then you need to start practicing what you preach.
“Clearly you were expecting to be the first one to come tous and make your case and that we would fall over, admit we were wrong and welcome you.”
The fact that you respond to so many of my posts clearly demonstrates that you had the same expectations.
“Not so well, because you fail to recognize that we are intelligent human beings who think for ourselvesand believe just as strongly in our view point as you do in yours.”
There you go again with your BS assumptions! I understand that the left is intelligent and believe in their view points…very well. If however there are no OPPOSING views in this blog what is the point other that to pat each other on that back and go ra-ra-ra BUSH sucks!!!?
“No we are intolerant of you. Take it personally and leave.”
No YOU are intolerant of me, which is why you are a bigot and no I won’t leave. You are in NO position of authority to even suggest such a thing.
“There are other Christian conservatives here who come to try to understand and find a compromise.”
Like who? Please point out some of their posts. BTW you are not willing to compromise your beliefs and views, though you admire those that do? Hypocrite.
December 28th, 2005 at 2:19 pm#195
“And the Constitution afford us that discretion.”
The Constitution doesn’t afford you the right to an abortion any more than I have the right kill your mother. Please cite in the constitution where it say that you have the right to an abortion. Another question: If a man intentionally punches a 36 week pregnant woman in the belly and that baby dies should he be charged with murder?
“Yes it is your opinion, and you think it is more valid than mine…”
NO I DON’T!! Damn you are dense. I DISAGREE with it but I don’t think it’s any more or less valid than mine.
“And as long as it remnains imperfect I would chose to abort a non-concsious cluster of cells over killing a conscious chicken or a cow.”
AGAIN, you haven’t been paying attention to my posts. I said specifically that if the mother’s life is a stake than an abortion it OK.
“You can hate me for it.”
I don’t.
“And I can say that because I used to be a conservative Christian.”
I find that very hard to believe.
I am going to ask it again and please don’t give another unrelated answer chalked full of spin. Don’t let your need for political correctness guide you. It’s a simple question that you can answer in less two dozen words.
At what point during a pregnancy would you consider it immoral to abort a baby? When it has a heart beat? When it is easily recognizable as a human with head, eyes, fingers, and toes? I am not trying to belittle you here, I just what your opinion.
December 28th, 2005 at 2:36 pm#172
“I’ve never had an abortion.”
And if you were face with the prospect?
“So you zealots denied her own with your maked up concern for life. Look at what YOU wound up doing to humanity as a result…”
You the hell are you to place blame for what Hilter did on my fellow Christians!? Hitler was a religious pervert about like bin Laden and his cohorts are. They both perverted a religion and used it to evil cause.
“Clearly you do have sexual problems… It’s apparent in your posts that you’d like to have sex with your mother.”
Oh so you do believe those assholes that posted something that I didn’t write and signed their name. How typically gullible of you.
“Marriage was invented by fat fera-mongering pigs like you who could only get a woman to marry him if he made her first feel inadequate otherwise”
I don’t think that my wife is any less of a person than I am. Only someone like you who would never be able to convince and in your case con, another man to marry them would say such things.
“It’s not necessary for conception, and wouldn’t a perfect God have made marriage a requirement for conception if that was the plan???”
It wasn’t the plan considering marriage was a human invention.
“After all, your side allowed Hitler to be born. Clearly you have the least regard for life.”
My side? I you think that is true then it’s safe to say the your side gave us the Soviet Union, Carl Marx, and communism, and all of it’s misery that they attempted to spread around the world.
“If you could get pregant you’d be writing your elected representatives everyday to make sure it stayed legal.”
No way! I feel the same way my sister does about abortion.
“Liar. Your actions invalidate that claim.”
To call me a liar you must know some of my friends. What are their name bitch?
“Yeah, just like it is here. None of your friends are atheists. We are free thinkers.”
So you admit to being an athiest? Well at least you finally admitted to it…your BS tip toe answer to my question about when, during a pregnancy, does a “fetus” become a baby made it crystal clear.
“No way anyone with an ounce of intelligence or self-esteem would hang around you.”
Thats funny because most of my friends all graduated from college and are licensed professional architects and engineers. BTW no one would be fool enough to marry you and torture themselves for the rest of their lives.
“In this country most Atheists are atheists by choice, and most of us are born into religion.”
Which proves that your parents did a piss poor job in your upbringing.
“Unlike you who just accepted his lot in llife, we think for ourselves.”
LOL! Yeah right you were brainwashed by your so-called friends!
“Of course I do, I was Christian for 33 years, and then I read the Bible and realized it was a war mongering, hatred filled religion, so I quit.”
You couldn’t have been a Christian because the New Testament, i.e. the Gospel, is far from making it a war mongering and hate filled religion. It wouldn’t be Christianity without the Gospel.
“Your quote was not anti-abortion. It was pro-mother. No wonder you want to sleep with yours.”
No wonder you stopped being a Christian, because apparently you didn’t understand what you were reading.
December 28th, 2005 at 3:53 pm“What was calling me a murderer supposed to be complimentary?â€
But, that’s not trying to force my beliefs down your throat.
Yes it is.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:30 pmWhat’s this we stuff? It’s all YOU.
No it’s not, you’re in regular battles with most of the progressives here.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:32 pm“We make it clear that while we are receptive to honest debateâ€
Then you need to start practicing what you preach.
You are the one who preaches. Go talk to Giacomo or Michael. I have very reasonable conversations with them. But they are reasonable and I’ve yet seen you to be. Name one progressive who considers you cordial. You can’t.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:34 pmThe fact that you respond to so many of my posts clearly demonstrates that you had the same expectations.
How you are missing that this is a LIBERAL blog where we discuss and defect things from a Progressive viewpoint is a clear demonstration of your lunacy. I didn’tand don’t go to conservative blogs looking to convert anyone.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:36 pmThere you go again with your BS assumptions! I understand that the left is intelligent and believe in their view points…very well. If however there are no OPPOSING views in this blog what is the point other that to pat each other on that back and go ra-ra-ra BUSH sucks!!!?
Assumptions? Do you really know what that word means, cause I don’t think you do.
Besides – so what? It’s called freedom of speech. I know it scares you, but there are plenty of countries out there without it where you are free to go.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:39 pmNo YOU are intolerant of me, which is why you are a bigot and no I won’t leave. You are in NO position of authority to even suggest such a thing.
I already said that I was intolerant of YOU, but you do not represent all of Christianity, all of the Republican party, all of the male gender or all of anything. Therefore the word bigot is incorrect usage.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:41 pmLike who? Please point out some of their posts. BTW you are not willing to compromise your beliefs and views, though you admire those that do? Hypocrite.
I have – Giacomo and Michael.
Give me an example of how I am not willing to compromise. Abortion is a choice. you have the choice not to get one. That is a compromise.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:43 pmNO I DON’T!! Damn you are dense. I DISAGREE with it but I don’t think it’s any more or less valid than mine.
Dense? I think you mean that I’m convicted that you can not change my mind, and you’re upset that I’m able to see through you and counter everything you have to say.
People who think their belief is equal to others don’t come into opposing blogs to criticize. Try thinking about that. You know I’m right – you just won’t admit it because you need to feel right. I don’t. It’s why I am a liberal in a libral blog. I think my views are equal to others, so I leave the conservatives to their own forums to blame Clinton and bash Kerry. I’m not in there trying to convince them that I’m right because I don’t need to to validate my own opinions. Get it yet? Nah… you’re too blinded by your need to be right.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:49 pm“And as long as it remnains imperfect I would chose to abort a non-concsious cluster of cells over killing a conscious chicken or a cow.â€
AGAIN, you haven’t been paying attention to my posts. I said specifically that if the mother’s life is a stake than an abortion it OK.
So how exactly does this response have anything to do with the line above it that I wrote? Nothing. That would mean that you aren’t paying attention to my posts, not the other way around.
I do hear you. I just think your perspective is based on a need to convince me that you are right and to have a valid discussion. And I don’t agree.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:51 pm“And I can say that because I used to be a conservative Christian.â€
I find that very hard to believe.
Tracy I really don’t care what you believe. That’s the difference between us.
I am going to ask it again and please don’t give another unrelated answer chalked full of spin. Don’t let your need for political correctness guide you. It’s a simple question that you can answer in less two dozen words.
At what point during a pregnancy would you consider it immoral to abort a baby? When it has a heart beat? When it is easily recognizable as a human with head, eyes, fingers, and toes? I am not trying to belittle you here, I just what your opinion.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 2:36 pm
I already gave you an answer. And I then told you that I didn’t expect you to understand it. And I was right. You don’t get it. I’m not ‘guided’ by anything. I think for myself. Unlike you I don’t see consultation before I answer. You don’t getthat because you don’t think for yourself you just regurgitate a lot of stuff that you are told by your religion, politicians and your parents.
I don’t consider abortion to be a moral or immoral issue at all. I don’t consider human life superior. And I do know that you threatening to kill my mother will get you arrested.
December 28th, 2005 at 4:56 pmYou the hell are you to place blame for what Hilter did on my fellow Christians!? Hitler was a religious pervert about like bin Laden and his cohorts are. They both perverted a religion and used it to evil cause.
You sure like to curse a lot… kiss your mother with that mouth?
I was using your own logic back at you. Didn’t like it? not surprised, it is pretty ignorant. Perhaps you should reconsider it.
Butthat’s typical – attack mode you life in you assume the worst in everyone else.
Sure you wanna keep going, you really are exposing your irrationality and hatred – not to mention your ignorance…
December 28th, 2005 at 5:00 pmTo call me a liar you must know some of my friends. What are their name bitch?
Tracy, now now… you said:
I agree, but that’s why I said far-left, i.e. those who talk down and insult those who have religious or conservative beliefs.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 1:21 pm
So are you now considering yourself to be ‘far-left’. by your own definition, you came looking to convert and were then converted!
December 28th, 2005 at 5:04 pmSo you admit to being an athiest? Well at least you finally admitted to it…your BS tip toe answer to my question about when, during a pregnancy, does a “fetus†become a baby made it crystal clear.
Finally? What hole have you been hiding in? I’m very vocal about being an Atheist. I didn’t tiptoe around your question, you’re just too stupid to understand my answer.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:06 pmWhich proves that your parents did a piss poor job in your upbringing.
They were conservative republicans like you…
December 28th, 2005 at 5:07 pmThats funny because most of my friends all graduated from college and are licensed professional architects and engineers. BTW no one would be fool enough to marry you and torture themselves for the rest of their lives.
hahahahaha! You know better. You’re just jealous because of that latent homosexuality thing.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:12 pmLOL! Yeah right you were brainwashed by your so-called friends!
That’s the thing about your zealots. We weren’t brainwashed. I didn’t know any atheists at the time I decided to become one. Unlike you we don’t turn to others to know how to think – we do it for ourselves.
You couldn’t have been a Christian because the New Testament, i.e. the Gospel, is far from making it a war mongering and hate filled religion. It wouldn’t be Christianity without the Gospel.
You do know that they haven’t dropped the Old Testamnet from the Bible, right? Besides there’s enough smiting by Jesus alone in the ‘gospels’ to prove it… Where to start… Yes… the murdering children section seems most appropriate…
Kill Sons of Sinners
Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants. (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)
God Will Kill Children
The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered.” O LORD, what should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don’t give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, “All their wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children.” (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT)
Kill Men, Women, and Children
“Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple.” So they began by killing the seventy leaders. “Defile the Temple!” the LORD commanded. “Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!” So they went throughout the city and did as they were told.” (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)
God Kills all the First Born of Egypt
And at midnight the LORD killed all the firstborn sons in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn son of the captive in the dungeon. Even the firstborn of their livestock were killed. Pharaoh and his officials and all the people of Egypt woke up during the night, and loud wailing was heard throughout the land of Egypt. There was not a single house where someone had not died. (Exodus 12:29-30 NLT)
Kill Old Men and Young Women
“You are my battle-ax and sword,” says the LORD. “With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms. With you I will shatter armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer. With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers. “As you watch, I will repay Babylon and the people of Babylonia for all the wrong they have done to my people in Jerusalem,” says the LORD. “Look, O mighty mountain, destroyer of the earth! I am your enemy,” says the LORD. “I will raise my fist against you, to roll you down from the heights. When I am finished, you will be nothing but a heap of rubble. You will be desolate forever. Even your stones will never again be used for building. You will be completely wiped out,” says the LORD. (Jeremiah 51:20-26)
(Note that after God promises the Israelites a victory against Babylon, the Israelites actually get their butts kicked by them in the next chapter. So much for an all-knowing and all-powerful God.)
God Will Kill the Children of Sinners
If even then you remain hostile toward me and refuse to obey, I will inflict you with seven more disasters for your sins. I will release wild animals that will kill your children and destroy your cattle, so your numbers will dwindle and your roads will be deserted. (Leviticus 26:21-22 NLT)
More Rape and Baby Killing
Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)
No wonder you stopped being a Christian, because apparently you didn’t understand what you were reading.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 3:53 pm
What’s there not to understand? How about some more quotes to prove how murderous your god is…
God’s Murders for Stupid Reasons:
Kill Brats
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. “Go up baldhead,” they shouted, “go up baldhead!” The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)
God Kills the Curious
And he smote of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of Jehovah, he smote of the people seventy men, `and’ fifty thousand men; and the people mourned, because Jehovah had smitten the people with a great slaughter. And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before Jehovah, this holy God? and to whom shall he go up from us? (1Samuel 6:19-20 ASV)
Killed by a Lion
Meanwhile, the LORD instructed one of the group of prophets to say to another man, “Strike me!” But the man refused to strike the prophet. Then the prophet told him, “Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, a lion will kill you as soon as you leave me.” And sure enough, when he had gone, a lion attacked and killed him. (1 Kings 20:35-36 NLT)
Killing the Good Samaritan
The ark of God was placed on a new cart and taken away from the house of Abinadab on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, sons of Abinadab guided the cart, with Ahio walking before it, while David and all the Israelites made merry before the Lord with all their strength, with singing and with citharas, harps, tambourines, sistrums, and cymbals.
When they came to the threshing floor of Nodan, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God to steady it, for the oxen were making it tip. But the Lord was angry with Uzzah; God struck him on that spot, and he died there before God. (2 Samuel 6:3-7 NAB)
December 28th, 2005 at 5:19 pmhahahahaha! You know better. You’re just jealous because of that latent homosexuality thing.
Comment by unbelievable
Sooooo, you swing both ways do you? I suppose I’m the only guy you know that doesn’t find that attractive.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:20 pmTracy, these are also from your Bible… See why Hitler was not an extremist, but only following instructions to kill those who are not Christian or Jewish:
You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20
Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10
Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16
Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7
Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13
Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20
Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11
Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5
Well that last one must be a lie… only 33% of the world’s population is Christian.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:22 pmAnd perhaps Tracy, this is the most appropriate for you hanging out here (take it to heart and do as your Bible commands):
Ignorance is bliss. Christians should not practice free inquiry nor socialize with non Christians:
Don’t associate with non-Christians. Don’t receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them. 2 John 1:10
Shun those who disagree with your religious views. Romans 16:17
Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy. Colossians 2:8
http://www.evilbible.com/BiblicalIntolerance.htm
December 28th, 2005 at 5:29 pm#199
“Yes it is.”
Explain.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:41 pm#200
“No it’s not, you’re in regular battles with most of the progressives here.”
That doesn’t mean that they are intolerant of me, unlike yourself, just that they disagree with my views.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:48 pm#201
“But they are reasonable and I’ve yet seen you to be.”
How would you define “reasonable”?
December 28th, 2005 at 5:52 pm#202
“How you are missing that this is a LIBERAL blog where we discuss and defect things from a Progressive viewpoint is a clear demonstration of your lunacy.”
Progressive view point? Where did you guys come up with that euphemism? Why not just say “liberal viewpoint” instead of trying to make something sound better?
“I didn’t and don’t go to conservative blogs looking to convert anyone.”
Why wouldn’t you want to see how the other side thinks instead of insulating yourself in your own little world?
December 28th, 2005 at 5:54 pm#203
“Assumptions? Do you really know what that word means, cause I don’t think you do.”
Yeah assumptions. How do you falsely assume that I don’t think that liberals can think for themselves or don’t truely believe in their views?
“I know it scares you, but there are plenty of countries out there without it where you are free to go.”
You are the one who is scared of free speech because you are the one who has told me to leave this blog. None of your other “liberal” cohorts have asked me to.
December 28th, 2005 at 5:59 pm#204
“Therefore the word bigot is incorrect usage.”
If you are intolerant of me then you are a bigot.
December 28th, 2005 at 6:03 pm#205
“I have – Giacomo and Michael.”
Do you have some the links of their posts that I can see?
“Give me an example of how I am not willing to compromise.”
Here’s a compromise. You get pregnant, you compromise and carry the baby to term and then give it up for adoption. Fair enough?…considering that the vast majority of American’s, including yourself, don’t like abortions.
December 28th, 2005 at 6:18 pm#206
“I think you mean that I’m convicted that you can not change my mind…”
I thought that you suggested that you are willing to compromise?
“I’m not in there trying to convince them that I’m right because I don’t need to to validate my own opinions.”
The simple fact that you are responding to all of my arguments and comments in THIS blog, proves otherwise. If you were 100% confident you wouldn’t respond to my posts so frequently.
December 28th, 2005 at 6:28 pm#207
“So how exactly does this response have anything to do with the line above it that I wrote?”
You were suggesting that I don’t believe that an abortion should be performed under any circumstances…were you not?…when you said “And as long as it remnains imperfect I would chose to abort a non-concsious cluster of cells over killing a conscious chicken or a cow.”
“I just think your perspective is based on a need to convince me that you are right and to have a valid discussion.”
If you think that is true then your perspective is based on that same need, because again, you constantly reply to my posts.
December 28th, 2005 at 6:38 pmDo you have some the links of their posts that I can see?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 6:18 pm
Giacomo is a bona fide, O’Reilly Show watching conservative:
Since I’ve actually watched the show before, and I have seen O’Reilly issue retractions (at the end of his show before he reads the mail). Since most of you would vomit for having watched it, I’ll Tivo and see if he does retract … we’ll see (I think he will).
Comment by Giacomo — December 14, 2005 @ 3:00 pm
You can also read his opinions in this very same thread. He is the kind of conservative I am more familiar with: I have several like him in my own family.
considering that the vast majority of American’s, including yourself, don’t like abortions.
They might not like it, but they are not in favour of banning it altogether:
Poll: Americans back abortion limits, oppose ban
Abortion and Birth Control
Poll: Thirty Years After Roe vs. Wade, American Support Is Conditional
According to these polls, the majority of Americans are for keeping abortion legal in most or all cases.
December 28th, 2005 at 6:45 pm#208
“I gave you an answer”
Your answer didn’t even pertain to the question. I will ask in another way
“You don’t get that because you don’t think for yourself you just regurgitate a lot of stuff that you are told by your religion, politicians and your parents.”
What I think as far as what I consider to be a human life is based on pure logic. I will ask my question in an even simpler way that even you can understand. Do you believe that a baby at 36 weeks into a woman’s pregnacy is human or not? Yes or no. For you to suggest that somehow you are a free thinker and I am just repeating what I have heard is utter BS and extremely arrogant on your part. Who has the authority or ability to validate that you are a free thinker?
“I don’t consider abortion to be a moral or immoral issue at all.”
Even just before birth? Do you have children of your own?
“And I do know that you threatening to kill my mother will get you arrested.”
When did I do that? BTW what is your mother’s view on abortion?
December 28th, 2005 at 6:52 pm#209
“You sure like to curse a lot… kiss your mother with that mouth?”
I wasn’t the one ignorantly bashing an entire religion.
“I was using your own logic back at you.”
And it didn’t work.
“Sure you wanna keep going, you really are exposing your irrationality and hatred – not to mention your ignorance”
Again you are the one who blame Christianity for Hilter. Your views on the left being responsible for Carl Marx and communism?
December 28th, 2005 at 6:59 pm#210
“So are you now considering yourself to be ‘far-left’. by your own definition, you came looking to convert and were then converted!”
I am not the one who is talking down to those with religious beliefs and conservative views. I said I didn’t know if my non-religious friends were athiests and I also said if I did I would denegrate them for their views. You in turn called me a liar and said that none of my friends are athiests when you don’t even know who they are.
December 28th, 2005 at 7:05 pm#211
“I didn’t tiptoe around your question, you’re just too stupid to understand my answer.”
I asked you specically when YOU believe that a fetus becomes a baby and you never gave any logical answer. I challenge any of those here in this blog to defend you answer as a vaild one.
December 28th, 2005 at 7:09 pm#212
Again they didn’t do a very good job. Conservatives and liberals both have their weak links.
December 28th, 2005 at 7:11 pm#213
“hahahahaha! You know better. You’re just jealous because of that latent homosexuality thing.”
Jealous of what? What are you talking about?
December 28th, 2005 at 7:14 pm#214
“We weren’t brainwashed. I didn’t know any atheists at the time I decided to become one”
So what? Just because you didn’t know any self proclaimed athiests doesn’t mean that you didn’t, IN PART,derive your current views from what you read or heard. Question how do you know it’s wrong to kill, or to steal, or to cheat?
“Unlike you we don’t turn to others to know how to think – we do it for ourselves.”
You must have learned it from someone or something.
“Besides there’s enough smiting by Jesus alone in the ‘gospels’ to prove it… Where to start… Yes… the murdering children section seems most appropriate…”
Well then could you please cite something some of those horrible things you cited, that came from from the New Testament, i.e. the part of the Bible that contains things that Jesus said…you know the Gospels. It would be helpful. You really don’t know the significance of the New Testament do you? Without the New Testament, Christianity is nothing more(and that isn’t an insult) than Judaism.
December 28th, 2005 at 7:34 pm#216
All those things you cited are from the Old Testament. Again do you even know why Christianity is called Christianity and not Judaism version 1.1?
“Well that last one must be a lie… only 33% of the world’s population is Christian.”
Refer to my question above.
December 28th, 2005 at 7:39 pmWhy wouldn’t you want to see how the other side thinks instead of insulating yourself in your own little world?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 5:54 pm
Now I know why you accuse me of not hearing you… He who is guilty is the first to blame others for his crime…
I already told you more than once – I have lived on your side – for 33 years. I hated it. It sucked. I walked away and came to this side, all by choice. You have nothing to say that I haven’t already heard or considered. This is why I am able to shred your argument, because I know it. And it is based on blind faith in something you cannot prove. That never wins against reality. Go ahead, keep banging you head against the wall in here, it’s your choice to do so. But then don’t wonder why progressives (it’s a synonym, moron) don’t respect you.
Been there, done that, done.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:06 pmYou are the one who is scared of free speech because you are the one who has told me to leave this blog. None of your other “liberal†cohorts have asked me to.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 5:59 pm
Because you are obnoxious, not because your opinion is different. because you seek to convert and therefore think you are better, notbecause I’m threathened. I’m happy to talk to others who are respectful and have something to offer – you aren’t and you don’t.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:08 pmIf you are intolerant of me then you are a bigot.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 6:03 pm
http://www.dictionary.com try it – it’s free
December 28th, 2005 at 8:09 pmDo you have some the links of their posts that I can see?
Yep. http://www.thinkprogress.org
Here’s a compromise. You get pregnant, you compromise and carry the baby to term and then give it up for adoption. Fair enough?…considering that the vast majority of American’s, including yourself, don’t like abortions.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 6:18 pm
That’s not a compromise -it’s your way. NO abortions is your goal. By there being no abortions, you’ve gotten your way. A compromise is you choose for yourself and I choose for myself instead of you forcing your way on me.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:12 pmI thought that you suggested that you are willing to compromise?
Compromise does not mean that I change my mind.
Again – http://www.dictionary.com – it’s free
December 28th, 2005 at 8:14 pm“I just think your perspective is based on a need to convince me that you are right and to have a valid discussion.â€
If you think that is true then your perspective is based on that same need, because again, you constantly reply to my posts.
No… I’m a liberal in a liberal blog. It’s not the same thing. not even close.
I’m not replying, I’m debunking, shredding, giving you a dose of your own medicine, combatting ignorance, revealing the superficiality in a troll, showing the Emporoer is in fact naked, and most of all keeping you focused on this so you’re less of a nuisance to my fellow progressives…
December 28th, 2005 at 8:17 pmWhat I think as far as what I consider to be a human life is based on pure logic. I will ask my question in an even simpler way that even you can understand. Do you believe that a baby at 36 weeks into a woman’s pregnacy is human or not? Yes or no. For you to suggest that somehow you are a free thinker and I am just repeating what I have heard is utter BS and extremely arrogant on your part. Who has the authority or ability to validate that you are a free thinker?
“Is it human” is not the same as “Is it moral”. Yo’re changing the context completely. I’ve repeatedly answered your question. You want to discuss it as a moral issue and I do not think it is a moral issue at all.
When did I do that? BTW what is your mother’s view on abortion?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 6:52 pm
Read back and you’ll find your remark. I’m not doing it for you.
Mom is Pro-choice. Dad was anti-abortion until later in life, when he changed his mind after my brother had a baby at 20 (behave yourself – the child died). Most Americans are pro-choice. Gregor gave you some excelled links because he’s more willing to accommodate you than I am at this point.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:25 pm“You sure like to curse a lot… kiss your mother with that mouth?â€
I wasn’t the one ignorantly bashing an entire religion.
Neither was I. I was just point out it’s stance on issues based on it’s boly book. Those weren’t my words. Don’t lik ethem, don’t blame the messanger.
“I was using your own logic back at you.â€
And it didn’t work.
Of course it did. You just don’t get it.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:27 pmAgain you are the one who blame Christianity for Hilter. Your views on the left being responsible for Carl Marx and communism?
Amazing, really how you compare apples to oranges and wonder why I think your agument is ridiculous.
Communism was a theory. It was distorted by tyrants into something Marx never intended. See the difference here is that I will admit that there are rotten Atheists, rotten women, rotten white people, rotten Italians, rotten Americans, etc. just as much as there are benevolent ones. And none of those people define them in their entirety. You cannot do the same for your own attributes.
I did not say Hitler was a Christian, so therefore all Christians are evil. I said that based on the Bible, Hitler was guided by Christian doctrine to commit his heinous crimes. You guys write down your tennets, so I can read them and see whatthey say. You can tryto say that this gospel over rides that scripture or that New Testament trumps old, but that is simply you imposing your own value system upon a book that does not tell you how to pick and choose, because that is not an option. It expects you to follow it all. I know you are incapable of seeing a difference, so was I went I had blind faith. But, frankly I’m done trying to explain it. Until you’ve lived on both sides of the fence, you cannot argue my side. I have lived on your side, and there are many reasons why I prefer itover here. Thanks for reminding me.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:35 pmI asked you specically when YOU believe that a fetus becomes a baby and you never gave any logical answer. I challenge any of those here in this blog to defend you answer as a vaild one.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 7:09 pm
Your opinion, or rather lack of ability does not define my answer. You didn’t ask me when a fetus becomes a baby, you asked me when it becomes immoral to have an abortion. I can’t tell you ‘when’ since I don’t think it is a moral matter to begin with. Do you really not understand? It’s like me asking you when the sky turns green… You never see it as green, so you can’t say when.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:39 pmSo what? Just because you didn’t know any self proclaimed athiests doesn’t mean that you didn’t, IN PART,derive your current views from what you read or heard.
Nope… it was purely personal. Just like you turn it out, so did I. The brain is able to selectively decide what it wants to let in because otherwise it would be overloaded from the billions of stimuli it is exposed to each miute. Someone ever startle you when you were focused? It’s because your brain wasn’t absorbing the of signals of their approach.
Question how do you know it’s wrong to kill, or to steal, or to cheat?
Exactly the same way people before religion did (even Christianity says people have been around 3,000 years – although science has proven it’s much longer. But going with 3,000 and a 2,000 year old religion, well… ). The same way all other social animals do. It’s inherent, taught and reinforced by the socialization. In fact, religion took it’s semi-morality from humanity. I saw semi- because there’s alot of nurder and smiting in the Bible which are not in sync with teh ‘no not kill’ stuff.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:46 pmYou must have learned it from someone or something.
Why? Because you can’t? I did learn certain things, but you can’t forget that Christianity teaches you not to question it out of fear of punishment, Hell, and worse. I was afraid, so who was I talking to? No one. I kept it to myself out of fear for quite a while. It wasn’t until more and more added up that I was able to deduce my opinions that I started talking about it. But by then, I was well past the fear thing.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:50 pmWell then could you please cite something some of those horrible things you cited, that came from from the New Testament, i.e. the part of the Bible that contains things that Jesus said…you know the Gospels. It would be helpful. You really don’t know the significance of the New Testament do you? Without the New Testament, Christianity is nothing more(and that isn’t an insult) than Judaism.
All those things you cited are from the Old Testament. Again do you even know why Christianity is called Christianity and not Judaism version 1.1?
Look, it’s not my book or my rules. YOU don’t get to pick and choose – you are a Christian who has the Bible, yor holy book. Until the Church cuts a portion of the book out, then you are stuck with the whole thing.
Damn – get me this, tell me that, show me where… you’re demanding. Get it yourself… (with this one caveat because I can)
Matthew 26:51
And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear.
Mark 10:14
But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Luke 14:25-27
December 28th, 2005 at 8:59 pm25Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: 26″If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple. 27And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.
hahahahaha! You know better. You’re just jealous because of that latent homosexuality thing.
Comment by unbelievable
Sooooo, you swing both ways do you? I suppose I’m the only guy you know that doesn’t find that attractive.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 28, 2005 @ 5:20 pm
Where did you come from? You’re like a sex cockroach… talk about abortion and you come out of the wood work looking for sex…
Not that it’s any of your business, but to save myself from having to repeatedly deal with your perverted twists in the future – I’m as straight as it gets. Never kissed a girl. Wasn’t even curious… in fact, I’d go as far as saying I’m repulsed at the thought if it, although I have lesbian friends and respect who they are, it’s just not appealing to me. Guess you could say that I’m a flaming hetero :). Don’t you wish you were?
December 28th, 2005 at 10:31 pmBTW the ONLY reason, in MY opinion, to get an abortion is that the pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 12:22 pm
Okay then, you should favor ALL abortions, because abortions not performed in medically sound and sterile conditions put the mother’s life at HIGH risk (many women during the period that abortions were illegal died or became sterile from ‘back-alley’ abortions). You cannot legislate what people will do in reality. they will have abortions. Keeping it legal ensures the risk to the mother is minimal.
And teh beauty of of pro-choice is in the choice. If you give the government the right to limit abortion, yo also give them the right to force abortion (see China). Pro-choice means that we are fighting for your sister’s right to refuse to have an abortion.
Since you’re too lazy to go to http://www.dictionary.com:
com·pro·mise
December 28th, 2005 at 10:43 pmn.
A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.
#245
“Until the Church cuts a portion of the book out, then you are stuck with the whole thing.”
Who says? The “Church” is not my lord.
Those quote you cited…do you know what any of them mean?
Matthew 26:51 is citing what one of the followers of Jesus did when they tried to arrest him. You however conveniently omitted the next passage:
Matthew 26:51
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”
..nice try though.
Here is a little help with Mark 10:14
http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/?action=getCommentaryText&cid=49&source=2&seq=i.48.10.2
And some more with Luke 14:25-27
http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/?action=getCommentaryText&cid=50&source=2&seq=i.49.14.4
December 28th, 2005 at 10:58 pm#247
“Okay then, you should favor ALL abortions, because abortions not performed in medically sound and sterile conditions put the mother’s life at HIGH risk”
At risk I mean that the pregnancy will probably cause the mother to die, i.e. a serious birth defect or disease.
“Pro-choice means that we are fighting for your sister’s right to refuse to have an abortion.”
It also means that we are NOT fighting for the unborn or their right to life. They are at our mercy or lack there of. If you don’t believe in the unborn’s right to life…then you and I just simply disagree.
Any resoponse to my compromise of bringing a pregnancy to term and then giving the child up for adoption…instead of getting an abortion?
December 28th, 2005 at 11:08 pm#236
“This is why I am able to shred your argument, because I know it.”
You haven’t shredded anything. I had a dorm roomate for a year in college that shared many of the same views that you do, therefore I too have been there, done that, done. I didn’t hate it and in fact knowing how he thought helped me reinforce my own views. I tried to change his mind but in the end we parted ways each still entrenched in his own beliefs but the BIG difference with him, compared to you…he was NOT an asshole/bitch that popped his little mouth with the name calling and personal insults on a constant basis.
“But then don’t wonder why progressives (it’s a synonym, moron) don’t respect you.”
Why would you think I would care if a spineless liberal respects me?
December 28th, 2005 at 11:33 pm#237
“Because you are obnoxious, not because your opinion is different.”
If you would stop being a insulting name calling little bitch YOU wouldn’t get an ear full. I gurantee your little mouth wouldn’t be saying such things if you and I were face to face.
“I’m happy to talk to others who are respectful and have something to offer – you aren’t and you don’t”
With the way you hurl insults and names is a wonder ANYONE wants to talk to you.
December 28th, 2005 at 11:39 pm#236
“That’s not a compromise -it’s your way.”
Where is your concession then?
“NO abortions is your goal.”
No it isn’t. I have already said multiple times that abortions are OK under certain circumstances.
“A compromise is you choose for yourself and I choose for myself instead of you forcing your way on me.”
The definition of compromise says nothing about each of us having a their own choice represented.
December 28th, 2005 at 11:54 pm#237
Compromise does not mean that I change my mind.
It does mean making concession(s)…which you are unwilling to do.
December 28th, 2005 at 11:56 pm#238
“…and most of all keeping you focused on this so you’re less of a nuisance to my fellow progressives…”
The small amount of time that I devote to this blog make me LOL at your self serving nobility.
December 29th, 2005 at 12:00 am#239
Do you believe that a baby at 36 weeks into a woman’s pregnacy is human or not? Yes or no.
“Read back and you’ll find your remark. I’m not doing it for you.”
I didn’t threaten to kill your mother. You are mistaken or lying.
“Mom is Pro-choice. Dad was anti-abortion until later in life, when he changed his mind after my brother had a baby at 20″
So neither is a Christian anymore? You cohersed them to follow your athiest views or did they choose as you did?
December 29th, 2005 at 12:17 am#241
“Communism was a theory. It was distorted by tyrants into something Marx never intended.”
Hilter, a tyrant, did the SAME thing to Christianity.
“I said that based on the Bible, Hitler was guided by Christian doctrine to commit his heinous crimes.”
And you couldn’t be more wrong. Hitler distorted Christian doctrine to fit his perverted racist views just as bin Laden perverted Islam.
“You can try to say that this gospel over rides that scripture or that New Testament trumps old, but that is simply you imposing your own value system upon a book that does not tell you how to pick and choose, because that is not an option.”
That is exactly why Christianity came to be! Jesus was rebelling against the Jewish leaders who held the Old Testament above his own word.
“See the difference here is that I will admit that there are rotten Atheists, rotten women, rotten white people, rotten Italians, rotten Americans, etc. just as much as there are benevolent ones.”
I too see rotten Christians. Falwell and Robertson are both prime examples!
December 29th, 2005 at 12:29 am#243
“The same way all other social animals do. It’s inherent, taught and reinforced by the socialization.”
You just said it wasn’t taught that it was purely a personal decision.
“In fact, religion took it’s semi-morality from humanity.”
I agree and BTW I never said that it was religion that was responsible for humans knowing that it was wrong to lie, cheat or steal. I said it was taught by other people.
December 29th, 2005 at 12:38 am#244
“…but you can’t forget that Christianity teaches you not to question it out of fear of punishment, Hell, and worse.”
That’s not what Christianity taught me. I do it because I want to, not because I am afraid of what will happen to me if I don’t.
“I was afraid, so who was I talking to? No one. I kept it to myself out of fear for quite a while.”
Chalk another one up for your parents doing a lousy job teaching you about Christianity.
December 29th, 2005 at 12:44 amChalk another one up for your parents doing a lousy job teaching you about Christianity.
Comment by Tracy
She was Catholic, what do you expect? But yours didn’t do all that well either so what’s your excuse?
December 29th, 2005 at 9:14 amAnd you couldn’t be more wrong. Hitler distorted Christian doctrine to fit his perverted racist views just as bin Laden perverted Islam.
Comment by Tracy
Wrong. Bin Laden is right on target with the teaching of Moohamet. You’re the one that’s off.
December 29th, 2005 at 9:15 amWho says? The “Church†is not my lord.
What resorting to spinning sematics? The ‘church’ is a synonym for Christianity. You seem to have a real problem with synonyms? Some fear of thesauruses you wanna discuss?
Those quote you cited…do you know what any of them mean?
I suppose you have your own interpretation, thinking you know better than we heathens in here…
Matthew 26:51 is citing what one of the followers of Jesus did when they tried to arrest him. You however conveniently omitted the next passage:
Matthew 26:51
“Put your sword back in its place,†Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.â€
I love how you guys always assume the worst in people. But, they say it takes a snake to know one. So, if you think I was intentionally deceptive (which I’m not), then it’s only because you are to begin with.
Ever hear the adage ‘you are the company you keep?’ He was hanging around people like this… well…
Here is a little help with Mark 10:14
http://www.biblegateway.com/ resources/ commentaries/ ?action=getCommentaryText&cid=49&source=2&seq=i.48.10.2
And some more with Luke 14:25-27
http://www.biblegateway.com/ resources/ commentaries/ ?action=getCommentaryText&cid=50&source=2&seq=i.49.14.4
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 10:58 pm
What, can’t speak or think for yourself? Didn’t think so.
Nonsense…
Those actually helped me to see that you are incapable of thinking on your own and are willing to spin anything to make yourself look better. You just validated my points. All of them.
December 29th, 2005 at 9:56 am“But yours didn’t do all that well either so what’s your excuse?”
How would you know?…you are in the same boat with the neo-Nazis…and they definately don’t represent Christians.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:03 amAt risk I mean that the pregnancy will probably cause the mother to die, i.e. a serious birth defect or disease.
Wait a minute, you said you were Pro-Life, you don’t care about the moother’s life unless it fits into a convenient little pious package that you prescribe??? That’s called prejudice.
prej·u·dice
n.
An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
A preconceived preference or idea.
The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions.
Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.
.
Dude, you really should get in touch with reality.
It also means that we are NOT fighting for the unborn or their right to life. They are at our mercy or lack there of. If you don’t believe in the unborn’s right to life…then you and I just simply disagree.
Do you live in Disneyland? Becuase, in reality, no one has a right to anything. A miscarriage is a natural abortion. Nature didn’t give a damn about your ‘right to be born’. And besides, if there was such an inane thing – what would you do with all the people?
Ever hear of natural selection? Where every species produces more offspring than are viable for the planet, so the fittest survive, and the weakest are eaten or killed. It’s a fact, but wait, I forget you don’t do facts, just fairytale fiction that we can accommodate every person on the limited resources that we already cannot divide among the 6.3 billion on the planet so that people are starving and dying from diseases. What’s better, to allow an unconscious cluster of cells be medically terminated under professional supervision to protect the life of the mother or to let an unwanted child be abused, neglected, permanently a burden on society – because that’s is what happens to a number of wanted children. One million children a year are documented as being abused in some form. Think of the ones who don’t get reported. We can’t properly raise the ones that are here and you want to add more? See, you don’t think about that in your pretty pink little palace made of feathers where reality in not welcome, but you should. You should think about the consequences of more people we can’t take care of on a planet already over capacity (and don’t post that we can all like in Texas nonsense – because we can’t.). Sometimes we have to choose between two ‘evils’… abortion is the lesser.
Any resoponse to my compromise of bringing a pregnancy to term and then giving the child up for adoption…instead of getting an abortion?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 11:08 pm
Yes. I already responded to this above. You should read what I write… because I’m not going to repeat it.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:12 amYou haven’t shredded anything.
I know, I’ve shreded everything. But of course some one who didn’t care wouldn’t have brought it up.
I had a dorm roomate for a year in college that shared many of the same views that you do, therefore I too have been there, done that, done. I didn’t hate it and in fact knowing how he thought helped me reinforce my own views. I tried to change his mind but in the end we parted ways each still entrenched in his own beliefs but the BIG difference with him, compared to you…he was NOT an asshole/bitch that popped his little mouth with the name calling and personal insults on a constant basis.
Tracy the only one name calling is YOU. “asshole/bitch” you’ve used repeatedly. I have not. And see, I knew you were misogynistic. “popped his little mouth”. That’s hardly the demeanor of a man who respects a woman’s right to debate. Especially when the only one popping is you.
I’m free to think you are wrong. The problem is, you can’t handle it. You’re also the only one getting angry…
Why would you think I would care if a spineless liberal respects me?
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 11:33 pm
Beacause you’re in a liberal blog responding to all of my posts. You do care.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:19 amIf you would stop being a insulting name calling little bitch YOU wouldn’t get an ear full. I gurantee your little mouth wouldn’t be saying such things if you and I were face to face.
Oh, I get it – it’s okay for you to repeatedly call me a bitch out of anger but not okay for me to point out your obnoxiousness. Yes folks, the double standard is alive in well in Tracy’s sick little mind.
That sounded like another threat… so much for your need to be pious. You sure are being ugly for someone who claims to be so righteous. It’s funny actually – your delusional little demented mind getting all pissy and name calling while condemning me for using appropriate adjectives. You don’t even insult well… bitch is such a third grade insult after all.
I would say it to your face. Would probably need a gas mask to keep from fainting at the smell of your fetid breath however…
With the way you hurl insults and names is a wonder ANYONE wants to talk to you.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 11:39 pm
I’m just stating the facts, your using ‘bitch’ and ‘asshole’. And mine are so much more effective – you’re clearly angry while I continue to make fun of you. Guess you’re pretty lonely, huh? Must be bad for you to come in here to talk to liberals. Oh that’s right, you wanna change our minds… how’s that working?
December 29th, 2005 at 10:25 amAnd you couldn’t be more wrong. Hitler distorted Christian doctrine to fit his perverted racist views just as bin Laden perverted Islam.
Comment by Tracy
Wrong. Bin Laden is right on target with the teaching of Moohamet. You’re the one that’s off.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 9:15 am
You’re fighting another troll? And on the topic of religion… You do like me :)
December 29th, 2005 at 10:27 amWhere is your concession then?
When the country faces a population crisis like China, we won’t force people to abort.
No it isn’t. I have already said multiple times that abortions are OK under certain circumstances.
Oh, you said! Well, that just changes everything because YOU said! Your circumstances… please get over your megalomaniacal egocentricity already.
The definition of compromise says nothing about each of us having a their own choice represented.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 11:54 pm
Yes it does. That’s exactly what it says. Damn, how do you funtion on a daily basis with such a delusion of reality and being such a poor Christian that you can’t even turn the other cheek. “Oh, wah, wah, you insulted me, it hurts, make her stop, wah, wah.” And I’m just laughing at you playing the victim… It’s soooo obvious.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:32 am“Compromise does not mean that I change my mind.”
It does mean making concession(s)…which you are unwilling to do.
Comment by Tracy — December 28, 2005 @ 11:56 pm
yes… you aren’t foced to do something you don’t want to do (have an abortion) while we are not forced to do something we don’t want to do (have a child). That’s consensus. You get something and we get something. Each side is happy not being forced to do something they don’t want to do.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:34 amThe small amount of time that I devote to this blog make me LOL at your self serving nobility.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 12:00 am
only a megalomaniac like you would…
December 29th, 2005 at 10:35 am“Mom is Pro-choice. Dad was anti-abortion until later in life, when he changed his mind after my brother had a baby at 20″
So neither is a Christian anymore? You cohersed them to follow your athiest views or did they choose as you did?
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 12:17 am
Coerscion is YOUR trick. Again, for the mentally impared (you) – I am a liberal in a liberal blog discussing from a liberal viewpoint. Don’t like it – go find a neocon nazi blog wre they’ll be happy to agree with you.
My mother was pro-choice her whole life. She was an unwanted child and knew the ramifications of that. She is like you, picks and chooses her Christianity.
My father is as dead as a Christian can be…
December 29th, 2005 at 10:39 amHilter, a tyrant, did the SAME thing to Christianity.
Nope – go read the Bible. It says to kill Jews! Hitler was just doing what the good book said he should do (clearly he didn’t pick and choose like you do).
No where does The Communist Manifesto say to be a tyrant who rules the land with a heavy hand.
Not the same at all. Not even in the same ballpark.
December 29th, 2005 at 10:46 am“I said that based on the Bible, Hitler was guided by Christian doctrine to commit his heinous crimes.â€
And you couldn’t be more wrong. Hitler distorted Christian doctrine to fit his perverted racist views just as bin Laden perverted Islam.
Actually, you are still wrong again. Not my turn yet.
The Bible says to kill non-Christians and he did. He was being a good little Christian, just like his lord’s book told him to do.
Esther 3:5-7 (King James Version)
5And when Haman saw that Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence, then was Haman full of wrath.
6And he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for they had shewed him the people of Mordecai: wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people of Mordecai.
7In the first month, that is, the month Nisan, in the twelfth year of king Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that is, the lot, before Haman from day to day, and from month to month, to the twelfth month, that is, the month Adar.
12Then were the king’s scribes called on the thirteenth day of the first month, and there was written according to all that Haman had commanded unto the king’s lieutenants, and to the governors that were over every province, and to the rulers of every people of every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language; in the name of king Ahasuerus was it written, and sealed with the king’s ring.
13And the letters were sent by posts into all the king’s provinces, to destroy, to kill, and to cause to perish, all Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in one day, even upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar, and to take the spoil of them for a prey.
14The copy of the writing for a commandment to be given in every province was published unto all people, that they should be ready against that day.
Hitler said:
“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work.” in a Speech at Reichstag, 1936 and also in Mein Kampf
No subversion – pretty much verbatim…
December 29th, 2005 at 10:53 amThat is exactly why Christianity came to be! Jesus was rebelling against the Jewish leaders who held the Old Testament above his own word.
The Old Testament is in the Bible. You can’t just discard it because YOU want to… hmmm… sounds like you’re agreeing more with Hitler’s views now. New knew you secretly have a swastika under your bed…
December 29th, 2005 at 10:56 amI agree and BTW I never said that it was religion that was responsible for humans knowing that it was wrong to lie, cheat or steal. I said it was taught by other people.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 12:38 am
Then what’s the point of religion at all? Because that’s exactly why they think they’re here – to tell you what you don’t know yourself.
If somewhere around 15% of our country is an Atheist or Agnostic, then why are less than 1% of the people in jail? Clearly we do not need religion. It’s redundant in most cases and in the hands of people like Hitler, bin Laden and George Bush, it is flat out dangerous.
But you can’t convert people to Atheism. They have to choose it for themselves. It’s why I’m not in Christian forums posting angry Atheism comments. It’s a waste of my time. And that is the bottom line.
December 29th, 2005 at 11:00 amThat’s not what Christianity taught me. I do it because I want to, not because I am afraid of what will happen to me if I don’t.
I don’t believe you. The Bible says that you should be afraid. Every Baptist service I ever attended insisted that you would go to hell if you questioned your faith. The Catholic services were more subtle about it – they used guilt.
Chalk another one up for your parents doing a lousy job teaching you about Christianity.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 12:44 am
You cannot be serious – this is like Twilight Zone material. I went to church every Sunday. That’s where I learned about Christianity. My parents just spouted the same stuff. If anyone’s parents did a rotten job it was yours. They taught you a complete disregard for other people or their plights in life. They didn’t teach you to appreciate that you were not unfortunate and so you should be humble and kind tothose who are. You wanna for the underpriviledged who can’t feed themselves to have more babies. Your parents taught you to be selfish. I’d rather be a bad Christian, since apparently being a good one makes you blind and ignorant and selfish. And fully detached from reality.
December 29th, 2005 at 11:07 amYou’re fighting another troll? And on the topic of religion… You do like me :)
Comment by unbelievable
Neither one of you hens has a clue but I found your blog and I’m feeling sorry for you today.
http://nakedjen.blogs.com/
December 29th, 2005 at 11:07 am“But yours didn’t do all that well either so what’s your excuse?â€
How would you know?…you are in the same boat with the neo-Nazis…and they definately don’t represent Christians.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 10:03 am
Interesting, attacking your own side (IRI is a neocon christian) with insults and name-calling. This is NOT practicing what you preach…
December 29th, 2005 at 11:09 am“But yours didn’t do all that well either so what’s your excuse?â€
How would you know?…you are in the same boat with the neo-Nazis…and they definately don’t represent Christians.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 10:03 am
Interesting, attacking your own side (IRI is a neocon christian) with insults and name-calling. This is NOT practicing what you preach…
Comment by unbelievable
This just shows to go you how a couple of old hens will turn on the rooster at the drop of a hat. By the way…I did not call Tracy any names even though she was mean to me and said I was puking hate. Welcome to the iRi fan club girls. Glad I could bring you both together.
December 29th, 2005 at 11:21 amYou’re fighting another troll? And on the topic of religion… You do like me :)
Comment by unbelievable
Neither one of you hens has a clue but I found your blog and I’m feeling sorry for you today.
http://nakedjen.blogs.com/
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 11:07 am
Oh like I need your assistance… since after all, you have yet to enlighten me to the contrary, and you do know that I give you every opportunity to do so. I’ve told you that if you can prove their is a God I will apologize. And I mean it.
No way I am clicking on your link. With a title like that on the link itself it has to be something lesbian, which is not my speed. Like you, I like men.
So, Ryan not around to beat you up today? Must be boring…
December 29th, 2005 at 11:23 amThis just shows to go you how a couple of old hens will turn on the rooster at the drop of a hat. By the way…I did not call Tracy any names even though she was mean to me and said I was puking hate. Welcome to the iRi fan club girls. Glad I could bring you both together.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 11:21 am
Clearly in Texas you don’t have men named Tracy? Tracy is a man, IRI.
December 29th, 2005 at 11:24 amClearly in Texas you don’t have men named Tracy? Tracy is a man, IRI.
Comment by unbelievable
I don’t believe it!
December 29th, 2005 at 11:30 amClearly in Texas you don’t have men named Tracy? Tracy is a man, IRI.
Comment by unbelievable
I don’t believe it!
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 11:30 am
You mean you don’t want to believe it…
December 29th, 2005 at 11:35 amNo way I am clicking on your link. With a title like that on the link itself it has to be something lesbian, which is not my speed. Like you, I like men.
So, Ryan not around to beat you up today? Must be boring…
Comment by unbelievable
I think Ryan has been banned, good riddance. Hey! I’m as big a lesbo as you ever thought about being. Oh, and I know you clicked on that link.
December 29th, 2005 at 11:41 amI think Ryan has been banned, good riddance. Hey! I’m as big a lesbo as you ever thought about being. Oh, and I know you clicked on that link.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 11:41 am
They wouldn’t have banned Ryan if you’re still here. He’s probably on a vacation somewhere.
I know you want to believe every woman has homosexual inclinations to make you feel better about your own, but I’m afraid I can’t help you here.
I didn’t. Don’t need to. I have no interest in seeing other women naked. Pretty much same as you.
(Tracy, in case you are reading this, this is a sarcastic exchange between two adults who can find humor rather than estrogen inducted temper tantrums about name-calling and insults. And Right Between the Eyes and I are pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to just about everything.)
December 29th, 2005 at 11:59 amAnd Right Between the Eyes and I are pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to just about everything
Comment by unbelievable
Well, we both agree that I’m hot and you want me. Right?
December 29th, 2005 at 2:51 pmAnd Right Between the Eyes and I are pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to just about everything
Comment by unbelievable
Well, we both agree that I’m hot and you want me. Right?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 2:51 pm
Not quite… it’s that I’m hot and you want me.
December 29th, 2005 at 2:58 pmNot quite… it’s that I’m hot and you want me.
Comment by unbelievable
Correction, you’re easy. That’s almost as good as being hot though.
December 29th, 2005 at 3:07 pmCorrection, you’re easy. That’s almost as good as being hot though.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 29, 2005 @ 3:07 pm
I think it’s that you’re easy, so you think I’m hot…
December 29th, 2005 at 3:16 pm#261
“The ‘church’ is a synonym for Christianity.”
True, but when I was referring to the “church” I was referring to the leaders and I DO NOT have to follow their directions or their rules.
“I suppose you have your own interpretation, thinking you know better than we heathens in here”
I absolutely do not, that is why I go and seek answers thru research instead of thinking that I am all knowing like you (you are the wanna be freethinker remember).
“But, they say it takes a snake to know one.”
Again, I was just pointing out that you really don’t know what that Gospels say. BTW you admit being a snake?
“What, can’t speak or think for yourself? Didn’t think so.”
If I am not clear on something I ask for help unlike you who can’t get it right because you are too stuck up to ask yourself.
“So, if you think I was intentionally deceptive (which I’m not), then it’s only because you are to begin with.”
The fact that you didn’t read the very next verse was very incriminating for you any way you try and spin yourself out of it….or was it like I said, you don’t really know much about the Bible or what it says?
“Those actually helped me to see that you are incapable of thinking on your own”
Then considering you didn’t understand the verses you cited I am glad you actually read my links about what the verses ment written by those who are far more rehearsed in Biblical knowledge that you OR I. You are one of the most conceited people I have ever had the pleasure of hammering.
December 29th, 2005 at 4:09 pm#266
“Wait a minute, you said you were Pro-Life”
I am going to say this one more time. If a woman gets pregnant, and as the pregnancy continues, her doctor determines that her life will be in danger, for what ever medical reason, then and only then would it be OK, IN MY OPINION, to get an abortion. If she still would like to take that risk then let her do it. To get an abortion out of “convenience” however, is NOT OK in MY OPINION.
“Becuase, in reality, no one has a right to anything.”
Just like you don’t have the right to an abortion? If you are going to state such asinine things then don’t demand rights that you yourself say you don’t have!
“A miscarriage is a natural abortion.”
An a doctor performed or self performed abortion IS NOT.
“What’s better, to allow an unconscious cluster of cells be medically terminated under professional supervision to protect the life of the mother/…”
Already said multiple times it was, but keep going.
“…or to let an unwanted child be abused, neglected, permanently a burden on society”
So that is your BS logic?…to kill unborn children that may or may not grow up in a household the MAY OR MAY NOT abuse them. The VAST majority of the people who adopt children do so because they can’t have children themselves and want child to love and care for, NOT to use them as a slave or a human pinata.
“We can’t properly raise the ones that are here and you want to add more?”
Speak for yourself! I have three of my own.
“Sometimes we have to choose between two ‘evils’… abortion is the lesser.”
That is your OPINION. You choose death and I will choose life. This is yet another reason why I see that you chose to abandon Christianity. I really pitty you.
December 29th, 2005 at 4:44 pm#267
“Tracy the only one name calling is YOU.”
Oh please! Let’s go back and see who cast the first stone. YOU DID! By you I have been called a moron, multiple times, an idiot, a neocon ilk, a liar, and to top it all off you keep on suggesting that I would like to sleep with my mother when you know I didn’t post anything that would suggest it, ect… You are such little hypocrite.
“That’s hardly the demeanor of a man who respects a woman’s right to debate.”
When the one, woman OR man, wanting to debate constantly insults the one on the other side of the argument, because they don’t like what they said, then a little ass whipping is in order.
“Beacause you’re in a liberal blog responding to all of my posts. You do care.”
And you are responding to all of my posts so the feeling is mutual.
December 29th, 2005 at 4:49 pmWow! You’ve all outdone yourselves here. Time for a break and a refreshment.
I love America because I have the right to say what I want, when I want, and not be silenced by the State. I protest things I believe are wrong which are done in my name and I praise things that are done in my name which I feel are beneficial for our nation and humankind.
I am thankful for what I thought was my right to privacy and have gratitutde as well that we as a culture reject prior restraint as a legal philosophy – until recently, anyway.
Every human being is my brother or sister and I love you all. This is what Jesus taught. Although I am not Christian and I reject organized religion I am a better Christian than many of you hate-filled types.
You are supposed to love your enemies. You can’t call someone filthy names while loving them. This is called “hypocrisy.”
Peace and a sharp salute,
the Gun Totin’ Liberal
December 29th, 2005 at 5:51 pmThen considering you didn’t understand the verses you cited I am glad you actually read my links about what the verses ment written by those who are far more rehearsed in Biblical knowledge that you OR I. You are one of the most conceited people I have ever had the pleasure of hammering.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 4:09 pm
Okay, pretend you’re winning when you aren’t. You’ve never met me, I’m some liberal pushing your buttons because I can. That’s not the definition of conceited. And though you constantly complain about people tossing insults, you are quite insulting. You are all the things you complain about. You insult, spin, changethe rules in the middle of teh game and then whine when you’re called on it, your egocentric and aren’t a very nice person despite all your pompousness.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:07 pmI am going to say this one more time. If a woman gets pregnant, and as the pregnancy continues, her doctor determines that her life will be in danger, for what ever medical reason, then and only then would it be OK, IN MY OPINION, to get an abortion. If she still would like to take that risk then let her do it. To get an abortion out of “convenience†however, is NOT OK in MY OPINION.
Well, in this country we don’t go by YOUR opinion. You are in the minority, fortunately for all of us, because with you at the helm the Titanic would look like a joy ride.
And I’ll say this one more time – Pro-Life means caring about ALL life just not life you find acceptable to care about. You should get some new opinions the old ones stink, especially for someone with thousands of pages of Bible penned by some drunk desert dwellers to tell him how to think so he doesn’t have to.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:11 pm“Becuase, in reality, no one has a right to anything.â€
Just like you don’t have the right to an abortion? If you are going to state such asinine things then don’t demand rights that you yourself say you don’t have!
In reality, you have no rights. In theory, the Consitution of the United States, you have presumed rights upon which we as a society abide (this includes abortion for people who are alraedy born, not fetuses). Different definition in a different context, but you’re afraid of synonyms so I don’t expect you to understand. See, not assinine, just WAY over your head Princess. You and the people you’re consulting when I am able to shred you with intellect alone. You’re outta your league dough boy, just admit it.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:16 pmSo that is your BS logic?…to kill unborn children that may or may not grow up in a household the MAY OR MAY NOT abuse them. The VAST majority of the people who adopt children do so because they can’t have children themselves and want child to love and care for, NOT to use them as a slave or a human pinata.
Did you flunk out of high school? Because the ridiculous way you connect and infer is really bordering on mental retardation.
Abortions are not “killing unborn children”. Those are your exaggerations to make it seem criminal. In the United States terminating an unwanted pregnancy is legal. The majority want it to stay legal, and you can whine about it ’til you are blue in the face, but until you grow a uterus you really don’t have any credibility in understanding the need for that choice in a civilized society. And fortunately, you have no power either, so no matter what you think, abortion will stay the legally protected right of the women to CHOOSE for herself, and you’ll just have to scream about the injustices of it. But frankly, you’re boring me now half-wit.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:23 pm“We can’t properly raise the ones that are here and you want to add more?â€
Speak for yourself! I have three of my own.
Now I know why the need for Psychologists is on the rise…
No doubt you’ve turned them into good little consuming zombies of blind faith and little ignorance.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:25 pm“Sometimes we have to choose between two ‘evils’… abortion is the lesser.â€
That is your OPINION. You choose death and I will choose life. This is yet another reason why I see that you chose to abandon Christianity. I really pitty you.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 4:44 pm
By choosing a system that forces a woman to have an unwanted child you are choosing death. You’re just too self-absorbed and ignornant to understand that.
You pity me, that’s priceless. Most people envy me. I doubt any one envies a selfish pig like you who wants to force your way on the rest of us. Deny it again, but you want to force your ways on the rest of us. You even siad that that’s why you came here – to make people agree iwth you. That’s not the behavior of someone respectful, just someone desperate.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:29 pmOh please! Let’s go back and see who cast the first stone. YOU DID! By you I have been called a moron, multiple times, an idiot, a neocon ilk, a liar, and to top it all off you keep on suggesting that I would like to sleep with my mother when you know I didn’t post anything that would suggest it, ect… You are such little hypocrite.
Gee does that “well she did it first mommy” work well for you at your job? You threatened to kill my mother and you brought out the curse words. That’s hardly equal to ‘moron’, which doesn’t get beeped out on television, since you are keeping score like such a little baby. You really are a pathetic loser.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:32 pmWhen the one, woman OR man, wanting to debate constantly insults the one on the other side of the argument, because they don’t like what they said, then a little ass whipping is in order.
Yeah, I knew you were violent. Unfortunately, I just put my hand onteh top of your head Napoleon because you can’t be very tall, and you’re just swinging at the air. While you are the one name calling because you can’t offer an intelligent debate, just “I said so”. Big deal. Whoi cares. No one.
December 29th, 2005 at 7:34 pm“Beacause you’re in a liberal blog responding to all of my posts. You do care.â€
And you are responding to all of my posts so the feeling is mutual.
Comment by Tracy — December 29, 2005 @ 4:49 pm
In a LIBERAL blog… damn, what’s your I.Q. 50, 65? Because it cannot be higher than my cat’s. She understand things the first time I tell her. You do not get it after 15 explanations. You are boring me. Is this all you have, because if so, I[’m getting tired of repeating myself. You’re clearly not a very bright individual who is in serious need of therapy…
December 29th, 2005 at 7:36 pmYou are supposed to love your enemies. You can’t call someone filthy names while loving them. This is called “hypocrisy.â€
Peace and a sharp salute,
the Gun Totin’ Liberal
Comment by gun toting liberal — December 29, 2005 @ 5:51 pm
Fair enough – we don’t love one another. I’m pretty convinced that Jesus wasn’t even a real person so I’m not much into what he supposedly said. I think Tracy’s mindset is dangerous as his kind in the White House is ruining this country. Maybe you can love that. You go right ahead. But, I think a duel is in order at this point – care to loan us a couple of guns (just kidding).
December 29th, 2005 at 7:46 pm#268
“Oh, I get it – it’s okay for you to repeatedly call me a bitch out of anger but not okay for me to point out your obnoxiousness.”
Your name repeated name calling is out of pure anger as well and yes it is OK for you think that I am obnoxious.
“You don’t even insult well… bitch is such a third grade insult after all.”
Oh, but it fits you soooo well.
“I would say it to your face.”
Yeah…once. LOL!
December 30th, 2005 at 12:10 am“Each side is happy not being forced to do something they don’t want to do.”
What about the side that has no say in the matter?
December 30th, 2005 at 12:15 am#271
“Nope – go read the Bible. It says to kill Jews!”
Please cite your passage(s) because I will probably have to help you again with their meaning(s).
“No where does The Communist Manifesto say to be a tyrant who rules the land with a heavy hand.”
I didn’t say that it did…tyrannts are just an inevitable product of a crap theory, i.e. communism, that doesn’t work.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:24 am#275
“The Bible says to kill non-Christians and he did.”
There is nothing in the book of Esther that even mentions God or that God commanded anyone the kill the Jews. This book is almost entirely a historical account and not much else. Once again you demonstrate your ignorance.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:51 am#276
“The Old Testament is in the Bible.”
Not without the New Testament it isn’t.
http://lds.about.com/library/glossary/bldefbible.htm
December 30th, 2005 at 12:55 am#277
“Then what’s the point of religion at all?”
You don’t have the mental capacity to understand such a complex question.
“Clearly we do not need religion.”
Uh, no YOU don’t need religion.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:59 am#278
“I don’t believe you.”
I don’t care if you don’t believe me. I don’t believe that you don’t think there is a God.
“Every Baptist service I ever attended insisted that you would go to hell if you questioned your faith. The Catholic services were more subtle about it – they used guilt.”
“They taught you a complete disregard for other people or their plights in life.”
Oh I have done more for those who are disadvantaged than you ever have or will. I have helped build at least twenty houses with my local Habitat for Humanity and served well over 1,000 hours of community service whether it be being a mentor to local highschool kids or helping coach little league baseball.
“They didn’t teach you to appreciate that you were not unfortunate and so you should be humble and kind tothose who are.”
I am humble and kind to those who are unfortunate…however you are one of those people.
You obviously never attended many Lutheran services.
“Your parents taught you to be selfish.”
How do you know and how have I been selfish?
December 30th, 2005 at 1:10 am#297
“Pro-Life means caring about ALL life just not life you find acceptable to care about.”
And since you don’t care about ALL life that definately exempts you from being Pro-Life.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:22 am#298
“(this includes abortion for people who are alraedy born, not fetuses).”
That is your OPINION.
“You and the people you’re consulting when I am able to shred you with intellect alone.”
You wish! Everytime you say that you make my stomach hurt I am laughing so hard.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:26 am#299
“Did you flunk out of high school?”
I have masters degree in Architecture and am a licensed professional architect going on five years now…so uh no I didn’t flunk highschool.
“Abortions are not “killing unborn childrenâ€.”
BS!!! Well once again we are going to have to agree to disagree. Question: A baby at 36 weeks isn’t a child?
“…abortion will stay the legally protected right of the women to CHOOSE for herself, and you’ll just have to scream about the injustices of it.”
Well at least you admit to the injustices of killing the unborn.
“But frankly, you’re boring me now half-wit”
I thought you said that I was the only one calling you names? LOL!
December 30th, 2005 at 1:34 am#300
“No doubt you’ve turned them into good little consuming zombies of blind faith and little ignorance.”
The fact that you don’t have any children is a blessing to those souls that would have had to suffer the torture of being under your supervision and upbringing. I consider them very lucky.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:38 am#301
“By choosing a system that forces a woman to have an unwanted child you are choosing death.”
That child can be given up for adoption. BTW ,AGAIN, I am not for forcing a woman to have a unwanted child that would in turn cause her to sacrifice her own life for that child.
“Most people envy me.”
What’s to envy?
December 30th, 2005 at 1:44 am#302
“You threatened to kill my mother”
No, I didn’t! AGAIN please post what I said, untill then you are a liar.
“That’s hardly equal to ‘moron’, which doesn’t get beeped out on television,”
Bitch doesn’t getting beeped out on TV…or do you watch any?
December 30th, 2005 at 1:47 am#303
“I just put my hand onteh top of your head Napoleon because you can’t be very tall, and you’re just swinging at the air.”
6′-2″ @ 210lbs. You are easily handled, although all I would need to do, is thump you with my middle finger or let just let my wife have her way with you.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:52 am#304
“Is this all you have, because if so, I[’m getting tired of repeating myself.”
Then why are you?
December 30th, 2005 at 1:53 am#305
“I’m pretty convinced that Jesus wasn’t even a real person”
Then you don’t know your history very well and the Jews, the Muslims, and the Christians made him up. LOL!
“But, I think a duel is in order at this point – care to loan us a couple of guns (just kidding).”
I got mine! (Para-Ordance 45) although you would be to scared to pick up or wouldn’t know which end was the dangerous one. I wouldn’t shoot you though…that would be a waste of good ammo.
December 30th, 2005 at 2:02 amIt’s got to be a girl. I wish you ladies would just get a room or something.
December 30th, 2005 at 8:18 amTracy,
The more you jabber on, the clearer it becomes that you think there is only one right way to live – yours. You think there’s only one way to interpret the Bible – yours. You think that there is only one valid perspective – yours.
You came in here criticizing people who threw insults, yet the first time you were cornered, you threw enough explicatives to make a sailor blush.
The reality is that you are one of those men past the prime of his life who wonders why his life is so boring, and so he decided to go try and convert a few heathen liberals to his way of thinking to make him feel better about his mediocre existence. To validate himself. Except that the heathen liberals aren’t so easily swayed and they actually fight back with facts and experiences and reality.
I’ve been pushing your buttons to see how much you ‘practice what you preach’. You don’t. Not even close. So, if that mid-life crisis has you in need of fixing something – try yourself. There’s much work that needs to be done there. And, besides, you are really the only thing in this world that you can ever truly control. You can’t change other people’s minds – they choose to change their own if at all because they want to not becuase you berate them. And trying to force them, as you can see in the posts above only generates anger, frustration and resentment.
This was a test of your own standards. And you failed. So, good luck with that. I’m bored and am done conversing with you. I have much better things to do with my time.
IRI, dude you know I think you’re a pervert, but at least you’re honest about it. See, I told you you weren’t a bad guy. And this guy proves it. :)
December 30th, 2005 at 10:43 amIRI, dude you know I think you’re a pervert, but at least you’re honest about it. See, I told you you weren’t a bad guy. And this guy proves it. :)
Comment by unbelievable
Nope. I am a bad guy. Believe it. If I had more time I’d make you cry since it’s pretty much a given that I can’t make you think. I have that same problem with just about every woman I’ve met recently. I guess I’ll have to lower my standards and go with a gal who is a little less hot and a little more grounded. The two seem to be impossible to find together.
Tracy is trying to tell you that, among other things, abortion is wrong under almost every circumstance and that as a woman you should intuitively know that. My guess is you do but years of practice in ignoring your conscience has left it all but inoperatable, the Bible nails it; ”
“Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.”
I leave you with a little Bible verse that is impossible to ignore, to interpret more than one way and capsulizes for me the meaning of the descriptive phrases I coin for people who reason as you do. In short we have below what I fondly refer to as the “Filthy Left” and “Walking Dead Losers”.
2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
2Ti 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
2Ti 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
2Ti 3:6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
T.S. Elliot has a word for you too….
Those who put their faith in worldly order
December 30th, 2005 at 12:11 pmNot controlled by the order of God
In confident ignorance, but arrest disorder
Make if fast, breed fatal disease,
Degrade what they exalt.
IRI,
The Bible holds as little authority for me as the Buddhist Sutras or the Jewish Torah do for you. Quoting it at me is pointless. No one has brainwashed me. I am my own authority. I think for myself. It’s why I find religion inane.
Read this, it’s the best argument for birth control and abortion that I have seen in a while (although it’s actually not a website for either):
http://www.thesahara.net/starving.htm
If you still support both after reading this, you’ll win and I will think you’re a bad guy. I will not change my mind. As a woman, I know that the life that is conscious is valuable (this includes ALL life, not just human). The cluster of cells in utero are not, any more than a corpse, which is still human, is.
You can’t make me cry IRI. People have to care about you in order for you to hurt them. I don’t find conservative, religious and misogynistic men worthy of that kind of emotion – either positive (love) or negative (why I don’t hate you either). And I’m not really attracted to chubby short pigs either. I find you funny, but that’s about it.
Damn, I used to like T.S. Eliot… another mindless lemming. How about some Nietzsche…
“…affirmative acts and negative acts belong together. One is good on condition one also knows how to be evil; one is evil because otherwise one would not understand how to be good.”
“…we have no desire whatever to be better, we are very contented with ourselves, all we desire is not to harm one another.”
“We new philosophers, teach estrangement in every sense, we open up gulfs such as never existed before, we desire that man should become more evil than he has ever been before. In the meantime, we are still strangers to and from one another. We have many reasons to be hermits and to put on masks–we shall therefore be poor at looking for those like us.”
I think all the time. You’re the one who won’t debate me. You haven’t answered my question about the intelligence behind the useless appendix. Go ahead, here’s your shot.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:01 pmIn science it often happens that scientists say, ‘You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,’ and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
- Astronomer Carl Sagan – 1987
December 30th, 2005 at 3:11 pmI guess I’ll have to lower my standards and go with a gal who is a little less hot and a little more grounded. The two seem to be impossible to find together.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I-Shite-I #321
Raping sheep is NOT considered “dating” for human beings. The barnyard animals with which you cavort (though your intellectual equals) are incapable of making informed decisions, formulating opinions, or engaging in political banter…much to your chagrin I’m sure.
Even more unfortunate for you is the fact that one minute of conversing with you reveals how sage the advice parents offer their offspring concerning the importance of genes when considering potential mates.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:15 pmIRI,
The Bible holds as little authority for me as the Buddhist Sutras or the Jewish Torah do for you. Quoting it at me is pointless. No one has brainwashed me. I am my own authority. I think for myself. It’s why I find religion inane.
comment by unbelievably large breasts
I wasn’t trying to convert you just pointing out the uncanny resemblance to your society. But I’ll tell you this much Sugar, the fact that you hold yourself up to be your own authority just shows that the doctor has a fool for a patient. And, I’ll tell you something else. You didn’t think up that idea all by yourself, you had help. You were seduced. You should have called me first. At least you’d have gotten a t-shirt and learned a few tricks.
December 30th, 2005 at 4:04 pm-Shite-I #321
Raping sheep is NOT considered “dating†for human beings. The barnyard animals with which you cavort (though your intellectual equals) are incapable of making informed decisions, formulating opinions, or engaging in political banter…much to your chagrin I’m sure.
Comment by big papa
Funny you should mention screwing animals because your side doesn’t have a problem with it. Really……Just another reason why I call you losers the Filthy Left.
Much of Singer’s review is simply not fit to be reprinted on NRO, but rest assured that he gets graphically specific at times, trying to demonstrate just how widespread the sex-with-animals scene is — and has long been.
And while Singer explains that a human male who has sex with hens ultimately kills the hen, he wonders if it is any “worse than what egg producers do to their hens all the time.”
Peter Singer is not only a professor at Princeton, and acclaimed academic — an “ethicist” of all things — but he was appointed to his position at Princeton by President Harold Shapiro, chairman of President Clinton’s National Bioethics Advisory Commission.
http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment030501a.shtml
December 30th, 2005 at 4:13 pmI-Shite-I #326,
Most red state Bushites are rural farm perverts and inbreds. There are few “live” chickens, pigs and sheep in blue state urban areas, so shifting characteristics is a non-starter for you.
December 30th, 2005 at 5:09 pmThere are few “live†chickens, pigs and sheep in blue state urban areas, so shifting characteristics is a non-starter for you.
Comment by big papa
I happen to know that the Filthy Left will screw anything but it’s particularly fond of dogs, exotic animals and children. Let’s face it, any group who can condone, support and even glamorize two guys in cowboy hats putting it to each other on the open range, incest and pedophilia don’t require much of a shift from Bossy boffing. It’s just another reason I call you losers the Filthy Left.
January 1st, 2006 at 3:03 pm#320
“You came in here criticizing people who threw insults, yet the first time you were cornered, you threw enough explicatives to make a sailor blush.”
The reason YOU started thowing the insults is because you ran out of ideas and valid thoughts and the only things that you could think to do is hurl the vulgar name calling. I NEVER insulted you for any of your view points or called you a name because I didn’t agree with your convictions. You lost all creditablity; however, when you threw down the gauntlet an started with the UNPROVKED insulting. It pretty typical when you brain is taxed out. It pissed you off because you couldn’t understand how anyone could have a totally different view than you own and the you in turn did the only thing you knew how to do…insult them.
“And trying to force them, as you can see in the posts above only generates anger, frustration and resentment.”
I NEVER tried to force you. I did ask a very simple question about whether or not you thought a baby at 36 weeks was child and you NEVER answered the question. You danced around the issue and said that abortion wasn’t a moral issue with you BUT never gave a straight yes or no answer to a very simple logic question.
January 1st, 2006 at 4:51 pmI NEVER tried to force you. I did ask a very simple question about whether or not you thought a baby at 36 weeks was child and you NEVER answered the question. You danced around the issue and said that abortion wasn’t a moral issue with you BUT never gave a straight yes or no answer to a very simple logic question.
Comment by Tracy — January 1, 2006 @ 4:51 pm
No, you asked me when was it immoral to abort a fetus. And then you changed the question every time you asked it because I didn’t give you the response YOU wanted. I’m sorry if you’re too stupid to understand my answer. But, you know, you didn’t answer all of my questions either. I just didn’t get all pissy about it and throw a temper tantrum like a four year old who missed her naptime. Because I know your reposnes will be pure pre-programmed lunacy of the extreme right anyway.
January 1st, 2006 at 8:18 pmI happen to know that the Filthy Left will screw anything but it’s particularly fond of dogs, exotic animals and children. Let’s face it, any group who can condone, support and even glamorize two guys in cowboy hats putting it to each other on the open range, incest and pedophilia don’t require much of a shift from Bossy boffing. It’s just another reason I call you losers the Filthy Left.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 1, 2006 @ 3:03 pm
I bet you a million dollars that you know and like someone homosexual who you don’t even know is gay. None of my gay friends are any different from normal people. Of course there are gay jerks just like every other ‘grouping’ out there, but because most of them have been mistreated for who they are, they tend to be very sensitive and compassionate people. Something you could really stand to learn.
As for the beastiality, most neocons will screw anything. The problem is that even dogs (who hump legs) and chickens (roosters are sex addicts) don’t want to sleep with them either.
January 1st, 2006 at 8:24 pm“No, you asked me when was it immoral to abort a fetus.”
I understand that you don’t consider a fetus to be a human, but YES I did ask you ANOTHER question…and again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
“I’m sorry if you’re too stupid to understand my answer.”
There you go again with insults…why do you do that?
“I just didn’t get all pissy about it and throw a temper tantrum like a four year old who missed her naptime.”
You are the one who started the name calling because you couldn’t think of anything intelligent to say as a point of fact.
“Because I know your reposnes will be pure pre-programmed lunacy of the extreme right anyway”
My responses ARE as much or more thought out then your responses, I just don’t insult others I don’t agree with them. Just because I have conservative views and you have liberal ones doesn’t mean the yours are somehow “thought out” more than mine are. Please don’t make me laugh as such arrogant BS. Your move from the right to the left doesn’t make you somehow automatically superior in your thought process…in the least. You said the you move to being a conservative to being a liberal 30+ years ago? How old are you now?
January 1st, 2006 at 9:47 pmTracy –
Seriously… now you’re just a three year old who has thrown himself onto the floor at the grocery store in a raging fit of whining, crying, and holding his breath because he isn’t getting his own way. Really, stop, you’re embarrassing yourself, and your mother.
And when you are done, you should go get a head exam, as you’ve made too many gross misrepresentations in your current rant. I think you might’ve hit your head during this tantrum and done some serious damage.
No, not 30 years ago. Time for some reading glasses too Grandpa.
January 2nd, 2006 at 7:45 amI bet you a million dollars that you know and like someone homosexual who you don’t even know is gay.
Comment by unbelievable
Not likely. Every guy I know is married or single getting more tail than me. But likeability isn’t the point. It was never the point. My hatred of homosexuality and the organizations that forward the homo-agenda is never personal. If I actually knew any of the big-wig homogenizers I’m sure that would be another story. God, in His wisdom has made sure that those people and I have never crossed paths. I have a big gun and a hot temper. I don’t think He trusts me. Hummm…imagine that?
January 2nd, 2006 at 7:28 pm#336
“Really, stop, you’re embarrassing yourself, and your mother.”
Hey, just answer my question and I will quit asking…
I understand that you don’t consider a fetus to be a human, but YES I did ask you ANOTHER question…and again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
…if you don’t want to answer it, just say so.
“No, not 30 years ago. Time for some reading glasses too Grandpa.”
How old were you when did you switch from being a Christian to being an athiest? BTW you are definately older and more cranky.
BTW there isn’t anything at this point that you could say that will make me lay off…other than just answering my question.
January 3rd, 2006 at 11:41 amTracy says:
Hey, just answer my question and I will quit asking…
I understand that you don’t consider a fetus to be a human, but YES I did ask you ANOTHER question…and again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
…if you don’t want to answer it, just say so.
How old were you when did you switch from being a Christian to being an athiest? BTW you are definately older and more cranky.
BTW there isn’t anything at this point that you could say that will make me lay off…other than just answering my question.
Comment by Tracy — January 3, 2006 @ 11:41 am
Translation: I’m gonna jump up and down on the new sofa and then hold my breath and turn blue until you give me what I want…
Go right ahead, Tracy, go right ahead.
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:28 pmI understand that you don’t consider a fetus to be a human, but YES I did ask you ANOTHER question…and again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
Unbelievable’s answer: I’m gonna jump up and down on the new sofa and then hold my breath and turn blue and I am NOT going to answer your question. You see I a very stubborn and hard headed and I am not going to do it and you can’t make me….hummph!
January 3rd, 2006 at 10:47 pmI understand that you don’t consider a fetus to be a human
Don’t be ridiculous… cats have cat fetuses, pigs have pig fetuses and humans have human fetuses. A fetus is just as human as a corpse is human. Mammals don’t shape shift.;
Unbelievable’s answer: I’m gonna jump up and down on the new sofa and then hold my breath and turn blue and I am NOT going to answer your question. You see I a very stubborn and hard headed and I am not going to do it and you can’t make me….hummph!
Comment by Tracy — January 3, 2006 @ 10:47 pm
You really can’t think for yourself can you? You just plagerized what I’d written first by copying my answer and posting it as your own. That another one of your Christian ideals in action? Ignore all the the Commandments or just those on coverting?? Good thing we pagans stopped you guys from smitting people for that…
I’ve already answered your question three times. I seriously doubt a fourth time would make any difference, as you’re just stuck with that 85 I.Q.
January 4th, 2006 at 3:03 pm“A fetus is just as human as a corpse is human. Mammals don’t shape shift.;”
OK now you agree that a human fetus is a human…good, however there is a HUGE difference between a human corpse and a human fetus. And again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
“You just plagerized what I’d written first by copying my answer and posting it as your own.”
That would be true if you knew the definition of plagerize was.
http://www.wordreference.com/definition/plagiarize
I modified your answer and even cited you as the source!
January 4th, 2006 at 6:25 pmhowever there is a HUGE difference between a human corpse and a human fetus.
Nope… according to you, human is human.
And again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
Is a tree an orange if it is raining in Nigeria on the third full moon after you get a haircut… Yes or no? (just as nonsensical as your question).
I modified your answer and even cited you as the source!
Gee, big deal. You didn’t provide anything original, just regurgitated what I’d come up with creatively on my own (which is plagerizing). Yawn… This IS the height of your ability – to copy me.
What exactly is your point now anyway?
January 5th, 2006 at 3:57 pm“Nope… according to you, human is human.”
A human fetus is alive and a human corpse is dead…understand.
And again is a baby at 36 weeks a child or not? Yes or no.
“What exactly is your point now anyway?”
Answer my question first…quid pro quo here. Answering a simple/direct question (mine) with a nonsensical question (yours) isn’t showing off your intelligence…just your stubborness. My kids do the same thing.
This is going to go on for quite some time is see…or not…it’s up to you.
January 5th, 2006 at 5:07 pmA human fetus is alive and a human corpse is dead…understand.
So? A human chiold who is beaten is alive. A human injected to death is still a human. A human stealing money from another is still a human. They are all human, so what? None of them are guaranteed life. You seeme to have a delusion that live is wonderful for everyone. It isn’t. My father was one of those children who was conceived in a Catholic family where his teenage parents were forced to get married and have him. His father was a raging alcoholic, and his mother was a basket case because she was the product of an affair her father had, and was adopted by his wife, who treated my grandmother appallingly because she was a reminder of his infidelity. My father was abused by his war hero uncle while his mother was working her way through 3 bad marriages where she was abused because abused children are mostly self-abusive. My father became an alcoholic who spent 15 years of his life battling cancer, which finally killed him. Unwanted chidlren do not have happy lives. I’ve not yet met one who has. If any exist, it is because they are the rare exceptions. Even adopted children will blame themselves for their birth mother giving them up for adoption. You may not get that life is extremely difficult for these people because you were fortunatel enough to have had a great childhood. But you have no right to force life on another person if that life is 95% likely to be dismal and self-destructive.
I am not afraid of death. I find that those who are are the one who cannot except it as something that happens, even to what they see as ‘innocent’ life. You intentions might be good, but your ignorance of what life is like for the majority of unwanted children is forcing them into lives that are not fair to them. Everyone deserves a good life. Not everyone gets one. And until you understand that, nothin I say will matter on any level. You’ll just go one seeing it as a very short-sighted issue and blame people like me who’ve witnessed the ramifications of being an unwanted child, and find that to be the real immorality in the equation.
This is going to go on for quite some time is see…or not…it’s up to you.
Comment by Tracy — January 5, 2006 @ 5:07 pm
I am not getting into a semantics battle with you. There’s a reason the word fetus exists in the first place… because that is what it is in the womb – a fetus.
Actually, this is a waste of my time. You want me to answer your questions and agree to your perspective, but you cannot understand what you have not lived. You should consider yorself fortunate to not know, but on the other hand you should respect that other people have not lived your life, and that it’s not your right to impose your views upon them. You haven’t even considered what we’d do with all of those extra people when we’re running out of respources as it is and billions of people are already malnourished, living in poverty, and do not have access to clean drinking water. Adding more people would make life worse for many others. It just doesn’t exist in your backyard so you don’t see it. Good for you, but don’t be so blinded by your morality that you injure others.
Good luck Tracy. I hope one day you wake up and understand that this is not about you. And it’s not your choice.
January 5th, 2006 at 9:38 pm[...] folks here can look at this lie of yours and correlate its veracity with the rest of your spew… Think Progress ? Blog Archive ? Misinformation On Spying Doesn’t Take A Holiday Levin is referring to Clinton?s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA [...]
March 23rd, 2008 at 9:36 am[...] folks here can look at this lie of yours and correlate its veracity with the rest of your spew… Think Progress ? Blog Archive ? Misinformation On Spying Doesn?t Take A Holiday Levin is referring to Clinton?s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA [...]
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:19 am[...] folks here can look at this lie of yours and correlate its veracity with the rest of your spew… Think Progress ? Blog Archive ? Misinformation On Spying Doesn’t Take A Holiday Levin is referring to Clinton?s 2/9/95 executive order and his claim is totally false. First, FISA [...]
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:55 pm