EMW

vswimsfly wrote:i know i havent been on here in awhile but now that the election is over i kknew ppl would talking bout this...
and yes. im just thrilled that obama won...thrilled that my parents will be paying more taxes for some hobos medical care and thrilled that oil prices will probably go higher (cuz once he takes the troops out there will be more terroist attacks which means the place we RELY on for oil will b infested with terroists).

Fiction thrills me as well.

Lol. ^

Look at it this way. The world needs Obama just as much as we do. This is our chance to change the way the world considers the US.

I refer you to http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/06 ... countries/

We're throwing tens of billions a year into the war. The idea that moving some troops out of there will make gas prices expensive is just speculation.

Where exactly did you read that Obama's health insurance plan will "raise taxes to cover hobos"?

At any rate, America made its decision. The best thing we can do right now is support our new president. We can agree and disagree with his ideas all we like, but it's crucial that we stand beside him. If not, then that's undermining everything we stand for and every vote that was cast. Are you prepared to support our president?

ok so i added in the hobos BUT it will be someone else who may or may not be a hobo

and i think this election wasn't really about who was running. it was more of america was tired of the way we were going and we wanted the OPPOSITE of bush and obama just happened to be an amazing inspirational speaker

and yeah i agree we should support him. and its a big step being as this is the first African American prez for USA.

Obama will raise taxes, that much is certain. He will also do a host of other things that will be very detrimental to our society, especially economy. I just interviewed our former governor on Wednesday. He is a Democrat and he himself says Obama will be one of the worst thing to happen to this country in a long time and the his economic policy is not sound at all. He wants to institute a number of very expensive programs when we need to be saving money and working on turning around this financial crisis. I think America made a rather poor and uninformed decision when they elected this man into office. Only time will tell the truth though.

Do keep in mind that although he is president, the legislature can check his power. Just because someone got in office doesn't necessarily mean that they can implement all the plans that they'd like.

Obama's tax plans help a majority of the middle class, and cut breaks for companies that send jobs overseas.

I'm sure that by working with his staff and others that he will come up with a good plan...but none of us can see into the future

the senate is mostly democrat and now we have a democratic president so the checks thing may not work very well now.

and another thing is there any truth to whole whole obama pro partial abortion. where the lady has the baby and onces its "out" they kill it by either crushing its skull or something..???? i heard this from a friend today and i wasnt sure if it was true (see rackfocus im checking it out..NOT being a parrot. u should b proud. )
my dad said they voted on this in congress and he voted to make it legal.
its just horrible that the baby comes out takes its first breath to be stabbed????

He also supports leaving abortion survivors in a room to die.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politi ... ortion.cnn

http://www.latimes.com/features/religio ... 6052.story

its just horrible that the baby comes out takes its first breath to be stabbed????

He also supports leaving abortion survivors in a room to die.

Is there any legit site that actually says that Obama said these things?

Let's also not forget that no candidate was perfect. McCain supported stem cell research and continuing the war, which isn't exactly pro-life.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59702

Here is a web site about what he thinks. Most of the sources I found were right winged partisan but this one seemed rather neutral. (Although it is on a conservative web site.)

This bill that Barack Obama voted down is electively used to protect babies that are born after a failed abortion attempt.

^ Thanks for posting that up! Very informative.

This one passage in the article caught my eye,

But my opponent's accusations nagged at me. ... If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

I think this might have some validity (and at least will spark a debate!).
(And I'll put out that I think abortion is wrong - but I'm interested to see where this will lead us)
Abortion violates Christian values, only because we have come to the conclusion that life starts at contraception. However, people of different faiths (or no faith) may not believe that at all. For the sake of argument, pro-life seems to be mostly pro-religion. In other words most supporters of pro-life are so, because their beliefs come from their religion.

Thusly, playing the devil's advocate, I will put out the following:

Abortion must be proved that it violates a principle accessible to people of all faiths, and of no faiths. Therefore, if some people believe that life does not begin at contraception, the principle that life starts in the womb may not be applicable to them. What then, for all people, are other principles that abortion violates, exempting the belief that life begins at contraception?

The bill in question was not about abortion, which I argue to be wrong from a purely scientific standpoint, no religion allowed. But about abortion survivors. Babies that are born after failed abortion attempts but left to die because they are a burden to the parents. This is undoubtedly wrong as it is effectively killing the baby even after it's born. I believe killing it before it's born is wrong, but killing it after it is born can only be called infanticide. Obama has a habit of siding with the underdog. The people who are down and out and who could not support an unplanned baby. I think that he was most likely thinking he could help these people out by providing them a chance to get rid of their babies after they are born so they they didn't have to deal with them. Unfortunately for him he has no right to do that. No one has the right to decide who lives or dies I don't care how much or little money you have you have no right to kill a living human just because you don't want to deal with it.

Amen.
and lets not forget the constitution. every man/woman has a right to life. and just because its not born on earth yet doesnt mean its not living.

All very true, but I don't think my statement was answered. Any takers?

Abortion violates Christian values, only because we have come to the conclusion that life starts at contraception. However, people of different faiths (or no faith) may not believe that at all. For the sake of argument, pro-life seems to be mostly pro-religion. In other words most supporters of pro-life are so, because their beliefs come from their religion.

Thusly, playing the devil's advocate, I will put out the following:

Abortion must be proved that it violates a principle accessible to people of all faiths, and of no faiths. Therefore, if some people believe that life does not begin at contraception, the principle that life starts in the womb may not be applicable to them. What then, for all people, are other principles that abortion violates, exempting the belief that life begins at contraception?

In other words, if people actually believe that abortions are OK because the baby hasn't been born, then is there any other way it can be condemned?

BUT THE BABY WAS BORN!!!

Let's all say this together ready, one... two... three... The baby was born!!!

There we go. The baby survived the abortion and now it's been born, but wait!!! We tried to 'eliminate' it but it didn't work so it STILL doesn't have the right to live. So now we're going to let it die. You see what I'm saying here? I baby that is alive with a BEATING heart outside the womans body is ALIVE. What he's proposing is letting that baby die, whether or not the doctors believe they can save it it has to die. Why? How is that right? Tell me please.

Now for another way abortion can be condemned. (Not the infanticide I'm talking about above but classic abortion) The question of abortion relies on two thing. Is the subject human, and it it alive. It must be both in order for a legitimate claim to life can be instilled in it. It only has constitutional protection if it is a living human.

Is it alive? Of course it is. If it wasn't alive you wouldn't have to kill it. In roe vs wade the primary argument was that the child was "not viable" if removed from the womb. What they are effectively saying is, let's take this baby out of its only life support, oh look at that, our machines can't keep it alive. And that's supposed to prove it's not viable? If life is incremental then invalids are less alive than well people. Disabled persons are less alive than us and people in comas and people with traumatic brain injuries are not alive enough to even count as a person. If life is a gray area things like euthanasia and the like would be legal.

Is it human? Most definitely. Humanity does not have to be defined by something fuzzy or relative like spirituality. It's in the DNA. Humans have specific DNA that's completely different than that of anything else, and each human, with the exception of identical twins, has a unique set of DNA. A baby is not simply a "part of the mother" as some people would lead you to believe. But a unique human form with a bio code and a future. Again, you can not simply be part human, you don't become progressively human as you go through the stages of a fetus. The moment that code exists and the egg splits that matter becomes a uniques human.

So really it comes down to if it's alive, or not alive. If it's human, or not human. Because those two are just not variable. It's black or white, binary, it's one or it's zero and they are both true statements. If you disagree that it's alive, or that it's human. I'd like to see why, but if it's alive and human it's protected under the constitution as a person with inalienable rights. And among these is life.

BUT THE BABY WAS BORN!!!

I wasn't referring to the issue that Barack was debating, but the general term for abortion, sorry if that caused any confusion.

But I think you hit on some awesome points showing that abortion has to be wrong. I agree with you. Great argument