Ranchers.net Bull Session

 
Log in Register Ranchers.net Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index FAQ Memberlist Search


Libs want to talk about this yet?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index -> Political Bull
Author Message
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18244
Location: Nebraska
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldtimer wrote:
Sandhusker wrote:
I'm not talking about abortion, I'm talking about killing live, breathing, babies. That's murder. How can you possibly defend that?


I told you- I don't-- but I also don't want to see Roe v Wade challenged or changed...My understanding of the ruling is that states can still set time time limits and decisions about how it is regulated- under limitations....

Altho if you've ever spent time at one of those institutions for the severely retarded- you'd have to wonder if late term abortion or mercy killing wasn't the better way to go....I still think the woman, the family, and the doctors are better suited to make the decision than a bunch of old politicians ....


But, OT, if you defend Obama's actions on that bill, you ARE defending murder. It's infanticide.
Back to top
Oldtimer
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 24734
Location: Northeast Montana
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sandhusker wrote:
Oldtimer wrote:
Sandhusker wrote:
I'm not talking about abortion, I'm talking about killing live, breathing, babies. That's murder. How can you possibly defend that?


I told you- I don't-- but I also don't want to see Roe v Wade challenged or changed...My understanding of the ruling is that states can still set time time limits and decisions about how it is regulated- under limitations....

Altho if you've ever spent time at one of those institutions for the severely retarded- you'd have to wonder if late term abortion or mercy killing wasn't the better way to go....I still think the woman, the family, and the doctors are better suited to make the decision than a bunch of old politicians ....


But, OT, if you defend Obama's actions on that bill, you ARE defending murder. It's infanticide.


His actions were because it threatened Roe v Wade and has been explained many times......

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html

I've also read his policy on abortion and birth control and its much more realistic than the McCain/Palin Constitutional amendment ban all abortions-- then just stick your head in the sand and pretend sex/pregnancies/illegal abortions are not happening plan is....
He's still in the 20th century- while we need to move into the 21st century...
Back to top
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 18244
Location: Nebraska
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
His explaination was a LIE. He didn't explain many times, HE LIED MANY TIMES! The same damn bill passed on the Federal level with not a single "no" vote. The most ardent abortionists in Washington voted for it! Even the pro-abortion groups backed down on this one, and Obama has reservations? Come on, OT, just how bad do you want to believe this guy? He said he would vote for an Illinois bill if had the same language as the Feds - it did and he didn't - HE LIED AGAIN.

This is NOT about abortion! Obama is trying to make it an abortion issue, to cover what a cold btard he is, but Roe v Wade or abortion rights has nothing to do with a BABY, and that is what this is!
Back to top
Mike
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 16951
Location: Montgomery, Al
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
HE LIED AGAIN.


OT thinks this normal conversational procedure. Rolling Eyes Mad
Back to top
Vision
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Oct 2008
Posts: 339
Location: Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fff wrote:
Exactly what is it you want to discuss? He's been very clear on his stand for women's rights. I'll post the entire discussion from FactCheck but the bottom line is:

"Obama's critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies' welfare. But his stated reasons for opposing "born-alive" bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden.

And that position is one shared by the majority of Americans in this country. Very Happy




The National Abortion Rights League (NARAL)even supported the bill to stop infantacide. They said it was no threat to abortion rights.

Nice try, but since Fact-check.org is tied to Obama financially, you have to be careful with them. They used to get it wrong 15% of the time, lately they are wrong 40% of the time.
Back to top
Vision
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Oct 2008
Posts: 339
Location: Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldtimer wrote:
TexasBred wrote:
Oldtimer wrote:
fff wrote:
backhoeboogie wrote:
It is a moral issue that the media won't touch.


And the only time the Republican Party wants to talk about it is election time when they use it to fire up their rightwingnuts. I didn't see them bring up banning abortions during the years they held both Congress and the White House. They know it would be the end of the Republican Party to cross that line.


Yep and the majority of the folks in the country anymore don't want Roe v Wade overturned-- with a large majority opposed to opening up our Constitution to do it....
The country has moved more Libertarian- thinking government should not have their noses in such issues...


OT whether you have an religious preference or whatever, it's hard to beat the 10 commandments as great of moral laws for a society to live by. I hate gov't getting into my business too but they can undo what they did wrong to begin with and that was pass Roe vs Wade...Everbody always bring up "rape".....not one pregnancy out a thousand is a result of rape...getting caught having sex perhaps but not rape. The woman made her choice with her body at that moment without considering the consequences.


And I believe the woman, her doctor, and her God can better decide on what is needed concerning her body than a bunch of grey haired old rich men sitting in D.C.....

If you're going to talk 10 commandments- how does killing hundreds and thousands of folks in a war follow the commandments Say what?



If follows it perfectly. Just killing in war is not murder. God directed the Jews to go to war several times. Jesus also talked about being armed for self defense in Luke 22:36.

OT don't try to argue Bible because you are clueless.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index -> Political Bull All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 




Powered by phpBB
Copyright © 2001-2011 Ranchers.net
All times are GMT - 6 Hours