Bush is a hero
lisw

Delaware, OH

#158412 Jan 29, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't say that what you are warning about surprises me. You guys have been on this thread for years and years battling away and getting nowhere. It is rather dysfunctional. But, at least occasionally, the fun part of dysfunction makes its appearance.
I used to be in a group of ladies who went on and on with their flowery phrases. It made me glaze over. I try not to get to wordy but sometimes I can't help myself! Thanks for the shout out. I am impressed with your tenacity. It is amazing that so many are still here.
Dysfunctional is the right word. I've always said I come here to talk politics because I just don't want that to get in the way of friends and family. Funny thing is that the people here feel like family and friends sometimes. I won't tell you what part of the family each one plays.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158413 Jan 30, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it is sad when an employer with a real conviction regarding the loss of human life that happens with abortions and the morning after pill is belittled and bemoaned by anyone. It is nice to see someone take a stand even though it causes them to be regarded with derision. I think it is sad when we no longer respect heartfelt conviction. It is mocked and laughed at instead of valued as integrity. Once we were a nation that valued integrity. Now all we do is argue who has a right to make a moral stand based on whether a company has gone public or takes tax deductions that may make it beholden to the federal government. So from now on, entrepreneurs and business owners with convictions, who want to use incorporation as a way to protect their personal property from risk of loss in a business failure, will have to decide whether they want to take the incorporation plunge and lose their right to freedom of speech/religion? There is something wrong with that.
Well, you've expanded it with some red-flag words that aren't involved in the original question. You might have missed the earliest part of this dialogue. It's about contraception, not abortion. As I said then, way back when this issue first arose, I was torn. Half of me was inclined as you say, the other half thinking Hey it's just birth-control pills. I largely stayed out of any debates on the issue, because of the murkiness of the question.

Is tyranny only a concern if it's a gov't entity? Consider - the vast majority of women, something like 97%, avail themselves of contraception at some time in their lives. This holds among Catholics as well - contraception is near universal. It is wise and good, it saves much misery. If a person or couple aren't ready for a child, by all means I applaud them to not have a child, and want to see them afforded any means to do so, esp. a product this cheap and easy. There's too many undisciplined little "flowers of love" out there as it is, and that among the people that >want< the kid. After I've been in captivity at a social function and been accosted by some precocious little sh*t for two hours, and the parent smiling so lovingly ("Isn't he precious? We believe in letting their spirit express itself."), there is a dark corner of my mind that gleefully envisions contraception mandated and enforced by persons with dark helmets and jackboots, and the repeal of child labor law.

I digress (surprise!). Isn't it just as much a tyranny when a monolithic organization insinuates itself beyond the walls of it's original function, morphs into a quasi-secular entity, but then imposes it's faith-based "principle" upon a population at large, believer or not, who almost universally violate that principle, and engendering further a universal hypocrisy among believers. That to me is creeping tyranny disguised as a protected right.......

Like I say, I stayed out until I saw the hypocrisy of denying that a fetus is a person with legal rights IF it involves a pecuniary motive. It happened recently in CO, and on further research, we see that there is precedent; they've used it before. Different hospital, same basic situation.

So, it's not a 1st amendment issue. It's not a business issue, because the added cost is infinitesimally small. It's an example of an entity dancing both sides of a question as it suits them, with society forced to accept the result BOTH ways. As I say, readily available contraception serves the couple and society at large, no different than public safety and welfare standards employed in myriad other ways, which we accept as reasonable and prudent.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#158414 Jan 30, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
I prefer predead.
I prefer 'alive'.

:)

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158415 Jan 30, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
Then please let us allow those of you who don't have conviction about this to pay for their need and allow those who don't to opt out. What right does society have to force everyone to pay for what is seen by some as murder?
Talk about forcing your moral values on others.
Again, you're expanding beyond the original question. Contraception as proscribed by the PRAC Act is just birth control pills, not abortion. I'm going to assume you're not aware of the original question, and not just muddying the issue with red-flag trigger issues.

Common birth-control prevents contraception, thus "murder" is not part of the discussion. Please....

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158416 Jan 30, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, which akes my point that noone can define what the Catholic church is all about. It is extraordinarily diverse. The only thing the same is I can go to chruch anywhere in the world and follow along.
I think you should differentiate, because in discussion I feel you've used two senses interchangeably. The church is the people, which is certainly diverse. The Church is another thing, it's doctrines and practices are not diverse, which is exactly why you can go anywhere in the world and follow along.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158417 Jan 30, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>

That's why, in the U.S., it's nice to be wealthy.
Let's work to change things, that's all I'm saying.
It's nice to be wealthy if you're Warren Buffet, Al Gore-Jezeera or Bill Gates but if you're name is Mitt Romney and you're getting a little too close to the Oval Office, "you're a tax evader and we shall destroy you......." Well done! The Obama crushing machine did a hell of a job.
Moving on..........
====
The magic of the liberals is to impose more laws and restrictions and make it look as though they care more for people than the republicans.

Tell us how much salt we should consume, tell us what size drinks we should drink, control what we buying, control the schools and the lunches they provide. Control purchases --> aka "gun control" all the while pretending it will have an effect on crime. It isn't about crime, it's about control. The horrible actions of a few were the springboard for the dems to punish and take away guns from the majority who are the law abiding responsible citizens. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's all about power, Catcher. If they can control what people own and consume & take as much as you can from them in the form of taxes, you control the masses.
It's all about power and you are one of those weepy liberals who think democrats are the giving, caring party. Think it through. Study their actions and check the outcomes. Your party wants as much control over the people and their behavior as they can possibly get.

I can imagine the shock on the face of a 60 year old cigarette smoker when the Obama healthcare plan he looks forward to, imposes a $5000.00 PER YEAR surcharge because the daddy government doesn't like that he smokes. Wait until they get involved in what people weigh. And head injuries in an American pastime.... we can't have that. Let's get them to run the NFL too.

The daddy government disapproves and doesn't think people have the sense to know how to behave and since "you don't know how to behave we're going to corral all of you and MAKE you behave."

The immigration issue runs along the same lines. Be the party who gives them amnesty and you'll own their vote and you'll own the underclass and you'll hold the office which will keep you in POWER.
And it all in the house that the libs built.......

Rise and shine, Catcher!

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158418 Jan 30, 2013
Pernrider wrote:
<quoted text>
Bull crap. Way to pull it out of your butt Willie. You just needed something to rile you up. Take it and run with it. It's what you dems do.
I was over the top in my previous post, and I apologize.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158419 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Al Gore-Jezeera
Not that it'll make any difference, but just so's we know, the English Al Jazeera is a separate entity from the Arabic Al Jazeera cited by Muslim-baiters. This would be the Al Jazeera, for instance, to whom Rumsfeld gave an extensive interview in the run-up to the Iraqi adventure.

I'm sure you're also not interested in Murdoch's NewsCorps' financial stake in Rotana, a virulently anti-Semitic, anti-West media conglomerate owned by one of those ubiquitous Saudi princes. We can show a clip of them saying that Jews make their matzos with human blood, for one instance. They also produced a movie that portrayed American soldiers massacring Iraqi civilians and selling their organs to Jews.

But please try not to think of that when Fox entertainers are having fun with Al Gore Jazeera......

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/01/w...

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158420 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
It's nice to be wealthy if you're Warren Buffet, Al Gore-Jezeera or Bill Gates but if you're name is Mitt Romney and you're getting a little too close to the Oval Office, "you're a tax evader and we shall destroy you......." Well done! The Obama crushing machine did a hell of a job.
Moving on..........
====
The magic of the liberals is to impose more laws and restrictions and make it look as though they care more for people than the republicans.
Tell us how much salt we should consume, tell us what size drinks we should drink, control what we buying, control the schools and the lunches they provide. Control purchases --> aka "gun control" all the while pretending it will have an effect on crime. It isn't about crime, it's about control. The horrible actions of a few were the springboard for the dems to punish and take away guns from the majority who are the law abiding responsible citizens. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's all about power, Catcher. If they can control what people own and consume & take as much as you can from them in the form of taxes, you control the masses.
It's all about power and you are one of those weepy liberals who think democrats are the giving, caring party. Think it through. Study their actions and check the outcomes. Your party wants as much control over the people and their behavior as they can possibly get.
I can imagine the shock on the face of a 60 year old cigarette smoker when the Obama healthcare plan he looks forward to, imposes a $5000.00 PER YEAR surcharge because the daddy government doesn't like that he smokes. Wait until they get involved in what people weigh. And head injuries in an American pastime.... we can't have that. Let's get them to run the NFL too.
The daddy government disapproves and doesn't think people have the sense to know how to behave and since "you don't know how to behave we're going to corral all of you and MAKE you behave."
The immigration issue runs along the same lines. Be the party who gives them amnesty and you'll own their vote and you'll own the underclass and you'll hold the office which will keep you in POWER.
And it all in the house that the libs built.......
Rise and shine, Catcher!
Is the extra charges this 60 year old (well, will be in 2 1/2 months) smoker pays for insurance because the government doesn't like that I'll smoke, or is it because smoking is a voluntary choice over which I have control that increases my health risks?

I mean, I appreciate your willingness to pay extra to cover the costs of my choices, although I wonder where the hell you've been for the past 25 years or so when I've paid higher premiums via private insurance.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158421 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Control purchases --> aka "gun control" all the while pretending it will have an effect on crime. It isn't about crime, it's about control. The horrible actions of a few were the springboard for the dems to punish and take away guns from the majority who are the law abiding responsible citizens.
"Just prosecute the laws we already have!"

This would have more traction if the NRA and like entities hadn't also exerted political and legislative pressure to keep the ATF and other entities from doing that very thing. Are we aware that appointment of a Director for the ATF has been held up for six years now, and that their funding has been eroded steadily over that same frame? Sad but true. Hard to "prosecute the laws we already have" under those conditions, which of course is the intent.

Substantiation available on request, but not into wasting my time with those who would rather hold tenaciously to ideological "smoke and mirrors".
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158422 Jan 30, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Is the extra charges this 60 year old (well, will be in 2 1/2 months) smoker pays for insurance because the government doesn't like that I'll smoke, or is it because smoking is a voluntary choice over which I have control that increases my health risks?
I mean, I appreciate your willingness to pay extra to cover the costs of my choices, although I wonder where the hell you've been for the past 25 years or so when I've paid higher premiums via private insurance.
Your health insurance premiums were not my responsibility and your personal habits are none of my business. And I'm not willing to pay for your choices but I'm very willing to stand up and fight so that you can have the reasonable freedom to make them.
The big O and Co. is trying to control your choices because father knows best..........

Put that salt shaker DOWN!

lol!

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158423 Jan 30, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text> You know I always think you have alot to say in a really unwordy way. You get down to the nitty-gritty.
Unwordy?

I'm sorry, where are my manners? lisw, meet Pernrider of the High Country.

>[email protected]<
Chris Clearwater

Clearwater, FL

#158424 Jan 30, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Yeas, I hear you. A bitter and hollow cackle devoid of lightness or humor. Perhaps it's time to once again for the ninety-eleventh time to piously declare your priorities in life.
As opposed to the countless times you bash Christ and those that serve Him in these forums hypocrite. Perhaps its just me but it gest old. Now on with you pretending to care about the poor.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#158425 Jan 30, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>"Just prosecute the laws we already have!"
This would have more traction if the NRA and like entities hadn't also exerted political and legislative pressure to keep the ATF and other entities from doing that very thing. Are we aware that appointment of a Director for the ATF has been held up for six years now, and that their funding has been eroded steadily over that same frame? Sad but true. Hard to "prosecute the laws we already have" under those conditions, which of course is the intent.
Substantiation available on request, but not into wasting my time with those who would rather hold tenaciously to ideological "smoke and mirrors".
Right on cue. It's the NRA......

Whatever makes you feel like less of a lemming, Hip.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158426 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Your health insurance premiums were not my responsibility and your personal habits are none of my business. And I'm not willing to pay for your choices but I'm very willing to stand up and fight so that you can have the reasonable freedom to make them.
The big O and Co. is trying to control your choices because father knows best..........
Put that salt shaker DOWN!
lol!
If you were in the same insurance company as W then of course you'd be subsidizing his choices, and he yours. That's the fundamental nature of insurance. Where is the difference between a gov't mandate and a private mandate, except that we have >some< modicum of influence over the gov't? Throughout the years of this discussion I've found it amazing how private insurance companies for many have undergone this magical transformation into beneficent and downtrodden defenders of freedom and health. Just a coincidence those who argue this view just >happen< to display general political opposition to the current admin.
Chris Clearwater

Clearwater, FL

#158427 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on cue. It's the NRA......
Whatever makes you feel like less of a lemming, Hip.
Just like his master.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#158428 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on cue. It's the NRA......
Whatever makes you feel like less of a lemming, Hip.
As I said, those that can't respond, retort.

It's a safe bet that I own more guns, and use them more regularly, than the majority here. I will strongly defend my right to own and use them for recreation and defense, and am thankful that the SC has affirmed this. I do so not just with my mouth, but my wallet. I know it unsettles you greatly when people won't sit in the box you've assigned them, but that's how it is.

But I also agree with the SC that my right is not carte blanche. I think the laws we have are not allowed to be enforced, and I said I could substantiate that. Of course you don't want to know (speaking of a lemming mindset). That's why I didn't waste my time.

We could not wipe out tragic events. Life is not all or nothing in any undertaking. But we can be much more rational about the availability and distribution. I will always remember in the "torture" debate, someone said, "if one American life is saved, it's worth it."

Why are we selective with that conviction?

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158429 Jan 30, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Your health insurance premiums were not my responsibility and your personal habits are none of my business. And I'm not willing to pay for your choices but I'm very willing to stand up and fight so that you can have the reasonable freedom to make them.
The big O and Co. is trying to control your choices because father knows best..........
Put that salt shaker DOWN!
lol!
If you're gonna fight for what you term my 'freedom', don't use disingenuous arguments like smoking, m'kay?

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#158430 Jan 30, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like his master.
You calling someone a lemming ... that's a hoot'n a half.
Chris Clearwater

Clearwater, FL

#158431 Jan 30, 2013
Country Singer Charlie Daniels Slams President Obama's "Nanny State Policies"

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/celebrities/co...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 12 min here 64,111
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min Steve III 654,116
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 16 min Classic 3,818
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 27 min crucifiedguy 281,884
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 47 min gundee123 824
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 48 min entezariabbass 106,544
girls, when is the first time u saw a penis (Feb '14) 49 min Leslie 13
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Lumatrix 973,845
More from around the web