Supreme Court Nominee

[Barney]

All you did was repeat yourself with different wording. What is your supporting evidence that the majority of the people support choice? homosexuality and pornography aren't one of my huge concerns.

So, for the sake of keeping it simple. What has caused you to believe that the majority support "choice"?

If you cite a poll, I'd also be interested in the question that was asked in the poll.

[MO]

There is nothing in the Constitution that gives people a right to abortions, gay marriage or porn. That means that the supreme court has no authority to decide the outcome of any of those issues. Even legal scholars who like the outcome of R v W admit that it was a poor legal decision, and was judicial activism. There are some issues for the state voters, not appointed elitists.

By the way, most people do not support unrestricted abortion, as R v W allows for.
www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2862&department=CWA&categoryid=

[Ian]

Just for the record, whenever I have some "alone time" I usually like to use my imagination as I am always looking for a way to exercise my mind.

Perhaps midcan should give it a shot; the little pervert.

[midcan5]

It is very difficult to get accurate statistics as abortion has changed from when I was young and woman died in back allies botch ups. It looks to me that the figures are changing but I am unsure whether it is an accurate assessment of the situation. Most I have seen are slightly pro choice but I can't find a good source.

I am not pro abortion but I am not as a male able to tell another how they should live, that is part of our freedoms. I know some will say it is murder but one out of 4 or 5 conceptions are discarded so are they deaths? The argument that cellular life is a person forgets that we usually define person with brain function, without brain function is there a person? Will the cells become a person, yes, will the cells eventually die, yes.

The conservatives argue against abortion but conservative positions kill children everyday and no one argues against them. I am referring to pre and post natal care, of welfare assistance, of foreign aid, of condoms, and of sex education. Since conservatives do not support those things as adamantly as they oppose abortion can it not be said that conservative policies kill children?

It is ironic that abortion goes up under a conservative presidency as they did under Reagan and now Bush. Again conservatives are responsible because of their policies for the deaths of children. How many conservatives support for instance the UN and UNICEF in its attempt to help the poor? Again you know the refrain.

womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm

Ian, I love your suggestion. Once many years ago I was watching one of the big names in broadcasting being interviewed and he was asked what were the gifts of middle age. He thought and answered with a few and one thing he said struck me as oh so hopeful. He said that he didn't always think of sex. I am not sure exactly how he phrased it but I thought won't that be nice. When we were young we called them impure thoughts and confessed them on our Saturday ritual. All I can say is he wasn't exactly correct unless middle has been pushed back for me. LOL Showing the faults of conservatives is my thinking btw. lol

[scrap]

Quote:
Just for the record, whenever I have some "alone time" I usually like to use my imagination as I am always looking for a way to exercise my mind.

Ian :

Is that what they call it nowadays.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Sorry pal I just had to say something and this was a lot mellower than what I was going to say.

[TNRighty]

Medican,

Please explain to me how the conservative stance on condoms and sex education kills children.

[groucho]

midcan5 said:

The conservatives argue against abortion but conservative positions kill children everyday and no one argues against them. I am referring to pre and post natal care, of welfare assistance, of foreign aid, of condoms, and of sex education. Since conservatives do not support those things as adamantly as they oppose abortion can it not be said that conservative policies kill children? Showing the faults of conservatives is my thinking btw. lol

Ya got it bass-ackwards, dude. Thinking is the fruit of your fault.

As such, I won't bother Wind Talking your entire quote; I'm too tired, and you're not worth it, as the snippet from your post shows.

Pre and post-natal care is the responsibility of the PARENTS (BOTH of them), not the Government's. If the parents can't handle the responsibility to begin with, they have absolutely no business adding to the already swollen burden of the rest of American society by dumping yet another Ward of the State into the mix, and then refusing to at least help raise them.

Foreign aid to help our children? Don't tell me, let me guess - you endorse China's way, right? (and what kind of ass would look to a foreign country to help them avoid their responsibilty, lest they have to do for themselves)?

Condoms? Even the best of them can't beat simple self-control; abstinence NEVER leaks, communicates disease, and is totally FREE 24/7/365. A true bargain unless you really believe that taking a flaming hot roast out of the oven in your bare hands is the way it ought to be.......(or you own stock in Viagra).

Sex ed happens with the first DIRECT personal coital experience; in other words, theory can only become fact AFTER it is directly experinced first-hand. Can you tell someone who has never experienced it how a banana tastes, without saying "like a banana" in a way they will fully understand?

Points made.
The fallicies may now continue.......

[midcan5]

Sorry being a busy liberal I missed replies to some questions posted above.

TNR, Fear and stupidity cause people to vote for candidates that are not very good. That was aimed at your election comment not you. Let me give an example of stupidity, voting for because they are for automatic weapons or they are for ruining the last beautiful places on earth to get oil.

You guys really need a sense of humor the porn comments were mostly jokes. Ah but when you are young....

Mo, The constitution was brilliantly written so it is timeless. Of course it does not contain issues that are only contemporary, that is the beauty of it and now we need some good people to interpret the different world we face.

TNR, Sex education and condoms help the young understand and they provide protection. By not supporting these things more children are aborted - I am using your position on when life begins - that is why abortion has gone up under Bush. Reality is education etc help not hurt.

Groucho, a banana tastes like a banana, sex has a whole world of complexity. Sex is like early mornings and good coffee or a day fishing, it makes life oh so nice.

So we should let the children starve because there is a drought or their parents are drug addicts or lazy or whatever. Nah, in my world we recognize we exist for a brief second, why waste it or cause others to waste it too, doesn't make sense doesn't take much.

[TNRighty]

Medican,

I agree we should look out for children who have dead beat parents, but how does putting money in the pocket of a drug addict parent help protect the children?

For some reason I doubt those parents will spend the money on food and diapers. People who have addictions will support their habit first. If you want to look out for the kids you take them out of homes where parents do drugs and you put the parents in jail or in rehab until they straighten themselves out.

Giving them a check every month does not solve the problem. We've been doing that for decades and it hasn't worked. Parents have no incentive to change their lifestyle when they live in a system that excuses their behavior and provides them the means to continue doing what they do. Anyone receiving any sort of welfare should have to be drug tested monthly, and if they fail, they should lose their check.

As for your comment about weapons, allow me to explain to you why gun control does not reduce crime. If you were a criminal wouldn't it make sense for you to commit crimes in areas where people are least likely to have a gun, areas with strict gun laws. Wouldn't you think twice about snatching a purse or forcing a woman into the back of a van if there were a good chance she was carrying a gun? When you take away people's right and ability to defend themselves you create an environment that invites criminals.

If gun laws worked, how is it that career criminals seem somehow to always be able to get their hands on a gun? Gun laws keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Criminals don't obey laws, and they don't obey gun control laws either.

[midcan5]

You are assuming again - money goes to drug parents, maybe not, ever think that? Sorta like the hero of the right Reagan who made up the cadillac mom story you guys still repeat. All people in need are not drug addicts. Gosh Limbuaugh was a druggy - kinda funny.

I said automatic weapons not guns and I think even though it is OT we have more to worry about concerning explosives today. And crime is too complex to think about tonight had a tough day.

[TNRighty]

I never said all people who are needy are drug addicts. I only said that people who are needy and have been convicted for drug crimes or tested positive for drugs should not recieve one cent of government aid. Do you disagree?

Limbaugh had a drug problem, but taxpayers weren't the ones footing the bill for it. My point is, I don't care what you spend your own money on, but when the price of your addiction outgrows your bank account, I shouldn't be obligated to pay for it.