Election 2004
-
captain dean
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 630
- Joined: September 16th, 2003, 12:22 pm
- Location: Greater Metropolis of Bedford
and the fact that animals arent homosexual. They are smart enough to know what kind of equipment they have. I dont think religion even comes into play in a situation that is just common sense. People also smoke or look at porn and hate themselves for it. Wouldnt you stop if you had the choice fleaflicker? Some people out there are just messed up in the head.
Buzzards have to eat, same as worms.
-
CRLionDawg
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: April 9th, 2004, 6:51 pm
OK fleaflicker. You obviously have put some long and hard thought into this.
1. Religious freedom. The right to practice your religion of choice as long as it does not violate or interfere with the general rights of the body politic.
2. Sin. Most of the sins involving sexual behaviour are between consenting adults or yourself,( as you so aptly referenced) these do not necessarily affect the rights of the group. Those that do: rape, child molestation, polygamy, etc. are punishable by law.
3. Amendment to ban Gay Marriage. A tricky one. Not sure where I personally stand on this. Difficult to legislate morality. ie. prohibition, salem with trials, etc. I think the real question with this issue is this: should we provide homosexual couples with the same exact rights that hetero married couples enjoy? I say no to this.
These are a few thoughts to ponder.
1. Religious freedom. The right to practice your religion of choice as long as it does not violate or interfere with the general rights of the body politic.
2. Sin. Most of the sins involving sexual behaviour are between consenting adults or yourself,( as you so aptly referenced) these do not necessarily affect the rights of the group. Those that do: rape, child molestation, polygamy, etc. are punishable by law.
3. Amendment to ban Gay Marriage. A tricky one. Not sure where I personally stand on this. Difficult to legislate morality. ie. prohibition, salem with trials, etc. I think the real question with this issue is this: should we provide homosexual couples with the same exact rights that hetero married couples enjoy? I say no to this.
These are a few thoughts to ponder.
Whiteshadow - I too want to thank you for the intelligent dialogue. First, let me say this loud and clear, I DO NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM!. I think you might have got that from a previous poster, definitely not from mine. I firmly believe that being gay is not natural, it is a choice that is made, period. But I don't believe in gay bashing, or intimidation either. They are human and I respect them for that, I just don't respect their choice of lifestyles.
I am a Christian, of the Catholic faith. And I am not a closet Catholic. I attend mass every week with my family and am actively involved in my Church.
I think where you and I may disagree on the abortion issue is this. I believe a fetus is a human being. I don't have a daughter, but in the example you gave me, I would welcome that child into this life as MY own child. While traumatic as any rape would be, and a pregnancy that followed, the fact that it happened is not the fault of the woman or the unborn child. I would support my daughter and the child through it all, whatever it would take.
There is only one, and one example only, of when I believe an abortion is necessary. That is when it is in the 1st trimester, and a TEAM of doctors agree that if the child is not aborted, the mother would lose her life. In this case, failing to do the abortion would result in the loss of 2 lives, not just one. If my family were put in that situation, the decision would be tramatic, but it is one I would make. However, too often abortion is used as a form of birth control, and that is just plain wrong.
Thank God that President Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban. There is no one that could convince me that aborting a child in the late 2nd or 3rd trimester saves the woman's life. Now before you all get heated on this, let me explain. At that point in the pregnancy, deliver the baby if the mother is having health problems. Medical science has progressed so far that 1 lb. babies are surviving, and thriving. My first born child was born 2 months pre-mature, due to health problems my wife was having. Had he not been delivered when he was, my wife would have died. After lengthy hospital stays for both, they recovered fully and both are doing well today. In fact, in a few years you'll be hearing about both my sons on this here forum, because both are very good athletes
.
So, with my beliefs as they are, I hope that you can understand my position. We all could agree that if someone killed a 1 day old infant, it would be murder. For me, the infant is one day old when it is conceived.
I am a Christian, of the Catholic faith. And I am not a closet Catholic. I attend mass every week with my family and am actively involved in my Church.
I think where you and I may disagree on the abortion issue is this. I believe a fetus is a human being. I don't have a daughter, but in the example you gave me, I would welcome that child into this life as MY own child. While traumatic as any rape would be, and a pregnancy that followed, the fact that it happened is not the fault of the woman or the unborn child. I would support my daughter and the child through it all, whatever it would take.
There is only one, and one example only, of when I believe an abortion is necessary. That is when it is in the 1st trimester, and a TEAM of doctors agree that if the child is not aborted, the mother would lose her life. In this case, failing to do the abortion would result in the loss of 2 lives, not just one. If my family were put in that situation, the decision would be tramatic, but it is one I would make. However, too often abortion is used as a form of birth control, and that is just plain wrong.
Thank God that President Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban. There is no one that could convince me that aborting a child in the late 2nd or 3rd trimester saves the woman's life. Now before you all get heated on this, let me explain. At that point in the pregnancy, deliver the baby if the mother is having health problems. Medical science has progressed so far that 1 lb. babies are surviving, and thriving. My first born child was born 2 months pre-mature, due to health problems my wife was having. Had he not been delivered when he was, my wife would have died. After lengthy hospital stays for both, they recovered fully and both are doing well today. In fact, in a few years you'll be hearing about both my sons on this here forum, because both are very good athletes
.So, with my beliefs as they are, I hope that you can understand my position. We all could agree that if someone killed a 1 day old infant, it would be murder. For me, the infant is one day old when it is conceived.
-
Gunner18
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 6688
- Joined: September 19th, 2003, 11:34 pm
- Location: New Bern, NC
- Contact:
if u take life from something that cannot live on its own..then how can u call it murder? an unborn child must depend 100% on its mother to survive, i say that about the 6 or 7 month mark...then its too late for an abortion or whatever, but the first 2 trimesters i dont c a thing wrong with that. its the same scenario for people on life support...they cannot function without 100% care from someone or something else, therefore there is no harm done.....just my two cents i guess
STRAIGHT
-
fleaflicker
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 1947
- Joined: March 13th, 2004, 12:32 am
Lionpride, he wasn't after you for gay marriage, I believe he was after me. And CRDawg, I did put a lot of intelligent thought behind gay marriage, and that is why I would support homesexual people being able to get the same rights as a hetero married couple. Some of these people are unable to see their partners if they are in the hospital in life threatening situations because they are not a legal family member (even though they may have been living together for ten or fifteen years), and they also are left out in the cold when funeral arrangements come around, though emotionally, the partner left behind may have been the closest person to the deceased. Just because they are homosexuals doesn't mean they aren't human. Think about how any married person would feel if they were in those types of situations. That's basically why I feel the way I do about that.
"To give anything less than the best is to sacrifice the gift." -Steve Prefontaine
Gunner - I've seen you put some really callous statements on here. But that one tops it all. You obviously have never seen an ultrasound of a 5 month old baby in the womb. Fully shaped head, fingers, toes - how could anyone possibly end the life of that child? And you cannot compare this situation to one of someone on life support. If someone is on life support, they were given a chance at life and something tragic put them on life support. But that person at least had x number of years to live, even though a tragedy ended it early. We would all certainly be up in arms if the person on life support was put there because of an act by someone else, as well we should be. My only question is, why can't an unborn child have those same rights.Gunner18 wrote:if u take life from something that cannot live on its own..then how can u call it murder? an unborn child must depend 100% on its mother to survive, i say that about the 6 or 7 month mark...then its too late for an abortion or whatever, but the first 2 trimesters i dont c a thing wrong with that. its the same scenario for people on life support...they cannot function without 100% care from someone or something else, therefore there is no harm done.....just my two cents i guess
We certainly have taken this topic off course from it's original intent, and I apologize for my part in that. I just felt it was necessary to make it known for the voters out there who aren't sure who to vote for and I want to clarify that one more time. Arlen Spector & John Kerry support abortions, Pat Toomey & Pres. Bush do not. There are many other issues I look at when voting, but moral issues are at the top of my list. My reason for that is simple. If the candidate has strong moral values, I believe that will guide him/her to make the best decisions for our country.
And just one more point from me about the abortion issue. Some agree with AS that abortions should not be part of government. If that's the case, then why have any laws at all? If we can't protect the most innocent of life, why protect any life? Rightfully so, our government creates laws against illegal drugs, child molestation, polygamy, and rape. I just believe that we should create a law to protect the unborn child as well. We create and enforce laws for the protections of our citizens, and my beliefs put the unborn child in that category.
-
Anonymous
I think we can all agree that this campaign year is no different than any other- we need to really examine each candidates agenda's and very carefully determine which in the next few years will be the better/best ones to vote for. Not all that we like will win, but we can only hope that with God's grace those that win , he/ she will do what's best for their constituents.
-
CRLionDawg
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: April 9th, 2004, 6:51 pm
Gunner, The difference between life support for an older person and a baby in the womb is this.
1. In a lot of cases life support has been a decided issue for the person relyong on it for survival
2. The life support machine is just that a machine. Years ago this was not an option.
3. The baby in the womb is relying on the mother for survival. Thr mother is a living breathing decision making person. Life begins at conception. Each tri mester is a growing stage for that unborn baby.
It is amazing to me how over 30 years of legalized abortion our society has become calloused to the basic concept of life.
When I was in high school, 20 years ago, I graduated with a class of about 300, there were at least 10 girls I knew personally who had abortions. All for the sake of taking care of an unwanted pregnancy. Terminating a baby that was the result of unprotected sex. Plain and simple. I have often wondered, if those babies would have been born, they now would be in their 20s, what kind of people would they have become.
1. In a lot of cases life support has been a decided issue for the person relyong on it for survival
2. The life support machine is just that a machine. Years ago this was not an option.
3. The baby in the womb is relying on the mother for survival. Thr mother is a living breathing decision making person. Life begins at conception. Each tri mester is a growing stage for that unborn baby.
It is amazing to me how over 30 years of legalized abortion our society has become calloused to the basic concept of life.
When I was in high school, 20 years ago, I graduated with a class of about 300, there were at least 10 girls I knew personally who had abortions. All for the sake of taking care of an unwanted pregnancy. Terminating a baby that was the result of unprotected sex. Plain and simple. I have often wondered, if those babies would have been born, they now would be in their 20s, what kind of people would they have become.