Who are you Voting for?

ok i will vote now................first time...

 

I agree with you all the way. We can't sit here and be pushed around by morons like punkdude. I just can't believe he has the nerve to post this political crap on a site about computers! If he can't accept that Bush may like to read the Bible, like billions of other people on Earth, then why the heck whould I care? Keep it to yourself, punkdude.

 

How is it better when you call him a moron? Does he not deserve the same respect you and everyone else deserves?

 

I was just cracking wise, no harm meant. I just read this entire thread and I must say we certainly have quite a number of interesting and often heated opinions...politics do that. The reality for me this election is simply this...we, the people, lose no matter who wins. They are both not fit for office IMHO. Kerry, to me, is a fence straddling wussie who will tell you what he thinks you want to hear. Regardless of what we have heard in the news and such, NOBODY has seen (or heard) the real John. Bush, on the other hand, is a self-righteous, arrogant man that cannot carry on a decent conversation unless it is written for him. He contradicts himself all of the time. I call that a wash, how sad for this country.

Yes, Pegg, George W is a fundamentalist, and he often uses his morals and values in lieu of what the people want, and against the advice of his trusted advisors. .

 

I'm not intending to make things better by calling anybody anything. I hate politics and I hate discussing politics even more. I think punkdude does deserve respect, but when a person like punkdude calls someone a moron because they exercised their American right, they should just shut their mouth.

 

Obviously

You should heed your own advice.

 

somebody just shut down this thread

if one is not mature enough to make their opinion
known without excepting others should not post

then don't discuss it

politics are based opinions andand point of view
but this is not a political site
and even if it was. . .there is no reason to be rude

I thought it was funny

 

Yes he does, and so do you and I at work sometimes, and so do department heads and CEO's, and so does a "liberal politician" and a "left-wing whatever" and anyone else with opinions.

Anyone in charge of anything will use their morals and values AT TIMES in lieu of what the majority wants and against the advice of trusted advisors. We've made heroes out of many of men and women who have done just that and we've also vilified many men and women who "use their morals and values in lieu of what the people want". One's view of them (hero or enemy) often depends on where your values and morals line up with theirs, I think.

 

One's view of them (hero or enemy) often depends on where your values and morals line up with theirs, I think.
Reply With Quote

thats a fact. . . .
people value emotion over logic as a rule
not always good, no
what you feel is right and what you know is right are often clouded

and in a public office especially would make it tough for any person
some people thought charles manson was right in his views

but thats where logic prevailed, of course

 

What exactly is a liberal?

 

A liberal is one who wants there to be no higher authority except oneself. Kinda exactly why Lucifer fell.

 

ADJECTIVE: 1a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism. d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States. 2a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor. b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes. 3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation. 4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education. 5a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman. b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.



http://www.onelook.com/?w=liberal&ls=a

 

You are right Pegg, we do. I am in management where I work and am responsible to the owners to account for 96 people and their efforts. I do make decisions based on my morals and values. I often have to make decisions that are counter to what my employees want or advise. BUT, there is a huge difference.

We, you and I, and people like us, are not responsible to make decisions for millions of people. We did not make outrageous promises to millions of people and then renege. We are not responsible for the health and welfare of millions of people. HE IS, and he is supposed to be accountable...which at the present time he cannot do, IMHO. I am not bashing the man, he is simply in water that is way over his head. Kerry would certainly do things differently. Sadly, though different, probably just as disasterous. Bush, again IMHO, is a power monger that finds himself in a power game that he whoamightedly misfigured, and is now scrambling to put an acceptable spin on an unacceptable situation.

 

*yawn*

American politics are just aweful... and I'm bored to tears hearing about them. I just hope that whoever wins will do a good job for your country.

 

Kerry was brave for going to Vietnam. However, in my opinion, he was even braver for speaking out against what he saw when he came back. All he had to do was come back, sit on his medals and his money, and he would have had it made for life, with not an ounce of criticism. What he saw going on in Vietnam was wrong. I watched every minute of his testimony on C-Span and not once did he dishonor the soldiers left behind. What he said was that we put our soldiers in a postion where they couldn't tell the enemy from civilians, and he was trying to save them, and this country from that awful fate. Yet here we are again, under a man who never went to Nam, doing it all over again. Our boys, with the best of intentions, are put in a position of kill or be killed, FOR NOTHING. The death toll of our soldiers mounts every day (you won't hear about it on FOX), the Iraqi death toll mounts every day. The world becomes more divided against us every day. America is less safe than it was four years ago. But all you can do is read a Clinton bashing book, and then match apples to oranges, without even a minute's thought to what the other side of the story is, and without any thought of applying the SAME standards you apply to Kerry, to the great pretender Bush, who hid out in a country club during vietnam. It's that attitude that has made America everything it is today--Friendless in a dangerous world, feeding the pockets of the rich few, and an economy that tanks out while we pour billions into rebuilding a country that hates our guts. Take off your blinders, the rest of America is. Singin' with Hope, cause Bush will be out in November.

 

Uh, um, uh - at least this "moron" knew that but thanks for clarifying what "morons" you were talking to.

I defended the entire MG posting population (and I even said you weren't a "moron") because no one deserves to be called names.

 

Those votes were pre-9/11 and the US is a much different place with different priorities. Bush was voted in in part because of his values and beliefs - compared to the crap that was the Clinton era.

We can no longer hold the opinions of other countries in a higher regard than our need to protect ourself.

We are being proactive in protecting ourselves by not waiting for those who would do us harm to actually carry through with an attack. The threat in Iraq was there - even if the realities were that his own scientists were lying about their progress. We are not about to wait for other countries or the UN to take care of our problems anymore.

 

So you're recommending politics over agression?

 

Before this you said ",The fact that someone believe wholy in a religion makes them unfit to run a country in my opinion it takes away logic and free thought i.e banning gay weddings,banning abortions ect."

So is banning abortions wrong? Or is partial-birth abortion (injecting an unborn child with nasty chemicals to kill him or her) not really killing?

 

So, in other words, you really aren't opposed to killing of any kind.

 

So, why can't I have the freedom to choose whom I would like to kill?

 

Unfortunately I don't see too many terrorist representatives stepping up wishing to negotiate. We are not fighting over a piece of land or who controlls it.

They are religeous zelots who despise our freedom and way of life. There is nothing to negotiate. Ignore or cater to a bully and it only empowers him.

 

Actually, he was talking about the percentage of votes right here at MG in this thread, on this poll, not the percentage of votes in the last US Presidential election, which is definitely post-9/11. Bush did NOT win the popular vote, not even by that close a margin, in the last election.

 

That was clarified a few posts up. I've seen stats that say otherwise. But then again stats don't always reflect the truth.

 

Other countries whine and cry about situations and expect the US to go in with troops and money - which we'll usually do - sacificing lives in the process. At the same time they want us to sit on our hands and wait out out own crisises.

 

My mistake. I read all the posts since last I was here, and none of them seemed to explain what percentage of votes he meant. However, if all of his posts are now invisible, that would make sense. As for stats, I'll go ahead and assume you mean the stats of the last US Presidential election, rather than the stats of this MG poll, since it's hard to misinterpret the stats clearly available at the top of the board here.

 

Yea, if you scroll up with every post and actually care what percentage of MG is voting for whom....no insult to anyone reading, but I don't really care about who is more popular, just who will do right by me, my family and my country.

 

Um, Archangel, your definition is saying that all liberals refuse to believe in God (or anything with more authority then them). That is wholly innacurrate; I can think of many liberal people that believe in God, in speeches made by liberals at conferences last month many of them referred to Him.

By the way, your stance on abortion is really down to personal beliefs. Where does life begin? Conception? Birth? or is maybe when a foetus' brain starts registering activity?
At first, all there is to be seen is an embryo, which then develops into a foetus...brain activity begins at six weeks.

Now, I'm not sure, but from my observations of your views, you see all abortion as 'wrong'. Why?
If it's a religious issue, then fine, but surely you have no right to impose your beliefs on someone else. If it's a 'morality' issue, then question it; why is it immoral to abort an embryo? They have no signs of 'life' until 6 weeks, unless, of course, you bring religion into the argument and argue that life begins at conception. Also consider the psychological implications of what may happen if a woman is forced to abort the child by other methods, rather than the clinical, and sterile method. There will be no support for these women either, which they will need.

There is also the question of 'doublethink'. How can you support the death penalty, and at the same time the abolishion of abortions, on the grounds that you cannot take life?

 

Actually, it doesn't even require going to each post, since the percentage of people who voted in the poll is listed by each option at the top of every page of this thread.

Oh. Wait. Did you mean scrolling up after each person posts as if the percentage of votes changes with each post? Nevermind, I misunderstood. You don't need to do that, either, since we are only allowed to vote once, and most of us are posting more than once. I check the results of the poll periodically because it interests me (and actually, for this group of people, I'm surprised to see that many votes for Kerry...y'all didn't strike me as the types to vote for him).

 

I use the goto last post arrow thingy.

 

As do I. But I also periodically check the results of the poll by clicking on the thread title, or using the "home" button on my keyboard.

 

The U.S. isn't the only country facing an election soon. In Australia, we have Federal Election coming up on October, 9 and a state election for the West not too far away, either. So it’s not Bush or Kerry here, it’s Latham (Labour) or Howard (Liberal), or maybe some 3rd party virtual non-entity.

More inept Govt., or an even worse alternative - not much of a choice is it?

 

Yeah, you're right. I shouldn't have gotten into this, because stuff like this gets me frustrated. I'm going to a different thread.

 

Here's my guy. Can't be worse than the other two clowns we're stuck with.

 

Regardless of the victor....a clown indeed.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to infer that they all didn't believe in God. They just don't believe that the King James Bible (KJB) is the word of the ultimate authority. I do. [Side note]Yes, there are some mistranslations, unintentional I'm sure. That is why I use my e-Sword program. Then I can check and see how the original word was translated elsewhere.

As far as abortion: How can we decide when a (fetus) is a real person? I do not wish to have to stand before the judgement throne of God and try to justify one more of my sinful actions to Him. If you believe in God, believe this: Satan loves to disrupt through lies. That is his major tool to separate us from the Father. It all started in the garden.

This is what I said: A liberal is one who wants there to be no higher authority except oneself. Kinda exactly why Lucifer fell.

Reply With Quote

 

Arch, I have no doubt that you are a supremely better religious scholar then myselef, hell, I wouldnt consider myself religious, although I think about it quite a lot. I will believe you about the reason Lucifer fell... but doesn't God view Himself as the highest authority?

I also take issue with the fact that lying started with Lucifer in the Garden of Eden; surely temptation and modesty were the original sins commited by Adam and Eve?

And I agree with you that it is a philosophical decision on when a foetus is alive, but different people believe different things, and surely, just because you can abort a child, doesnt mean you have to, any more then Adam had to eat the apple (or fig.. lol)

 

Yes, God views himself as the highest (only actually) authority. Lucifer thought he could do better.

Actually Adam's & Eve's sin was disobedience. But Lucifer lied to them about the consequences, and supposed benefits, of that disobedience; that's the first recorded instance of lying in the Bible. Followed shortly by Adam & Eve lying to God about why they were covering up their bodies.

True. Heck, they didn't even have the language to describe all the nuances of human biology thousands of years ago. The only references I can think of is a statement by one of the prophets that God "knew me" (him) in the womb, plus numerous references to fetuses being human and being given souls by God. While a fetus is obviously life, trying to pinpoint when it becomes human is a matter of both philosophy and science. In the first 2 trimesters, it turns from blob to functional human, and both theologians and scientists can differ on what condition it is in. Hard to prove. By the start of the 3rd trimester, it's a fully functional human, capable of living on it's own, although not as safely or surely as one at full term. My mom was a 6 month promie, born in the 1920s, with NO medical help (although most died back then). Our country has a long tradition of erring on the side of caution where human life is concerned, and until Roe vs. Wade, fetuses were given the benefit of the doubt as to humanity. And Roe vs. Wade did NOT give a woman a "right to choose" in the 3rd trimester; that was left to the courts to determine the merits of individual cases. We've slid a lot further down the slope since the Supreme Court's decision.

 

Thanks again GT. As usual, I couldn't have put it any better. And I believe you to be correct on all points.

But what's a promie? Somebody who went to the prom every year in High School?

Sizjam, I'm no more a biblical scholar than you or anybody else. Nor am I any more saintly than the next guy. But the blood of the Lamb will cover my sins if I worship only him.

 

Yeah. Mom was one hot babe when she was younger.

Typo obviously. Premie. Premature birth. Itty bitty little thing. Her first "bed" was a small dresser drawer with blankets folded up to make a soft bed.

 

Yeah, I knew. But, you know me (or maybe you don't want to), always a wise guy.

 

If only our agenda driven media would show what really happens during abortions (pro-choice), most people would be sickened to death.

 

Well - since it was brought up...

Words from Psalm 139:13-18

You shaped me first inside, then out;
You formed me in my mother’s womb.
I thank you, High God – You’re breathtaking!
Body and soul, I am marvelously made!
I worship You in adoration – what a creation I am!

You know me inside and out
You know every bone in my body;
You know exactly how I was made, bit by bit,
how I was sculpted from nothing into something.

** Like an open book, you watched me grow from conception to birth;
all the stages of my life are spread out before you,
The days of my life all prepared before I’d even lived one day.

Your thoughts – how rare, how beautiful!
Oh God, I’ll never comprehend them!
I couldn’t even begin to count them –
any more than I could count the sand of the sea.
Oh, let me rise in the morning and live always with You!


(** v. 16 in the NIV says: “Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be.”)

We must take this to it's logical conclusion. If it isn't Human YET someone has to decide when it is human (that's the great debate). If it isn't Human YET -- what is it? So it's "life" that isn't anything specific for awhile? Just living cells (a blob) that could potentially become anything -- a cow? a dog? a ? And then somehow (at some date that is questionable) it turns into a human?

Now, now, don't say, "Of course not, it always had the 'potential for human life'" -- who says? What does that statement mean? Potential? It either has the dna/genetic material to be one species or another. If life at conception can't be proven scientifically, how can "the potential for human life" be proven scientifically? Oh, wait, it can be proven scientifically because each and everyone one of those "potentials" actually ARE babies. Wow 100% accuracy.

Hmm...Someone still has to decide WHEN this "thing" becomes human. I'm glad I don't have to decide.

 

Abortion has been a red hot issue for what seems forever. I try to keep my take on it very simple. If you don't believe in it, don't have one. Let the rest decide for themselves. Ultimately, we are accountable in the long run. I've known people that have had one and thought no more about it. I've known others that have had their lives nearly ruined behind their own guilt and shame. I think in the long run, regardless of religious beliefs or moral values, each person confronted with the situation has to make their own choice...and then live with it.

 

No problems. I cringed when I noticed the typo (too late to edit), and laughed out loud at your post. Good sense of humor.

@ pegg:
Excellent quote and post. My own personal opinion is human from conception, but in general public discourse such as this, I tend to try (sometimes too hard) to be an objective observer, and consider all sides of the argument. "Proving" actual humanity scientifically at conception would be near impossible, hence I don't push that too hard. Proving humanity by all criteria possible at the third trimester is simplicity itself, which is why the pro-abortion crowd doesn't WANT to see pictures, or real data, as it would instantly turn all 3rd trimester abortions into the murders which they obviously are. That wouldn't end "choice", but would take 3rd trimester choice out of the individual's hands and put it back into the courts to be decided as what's best for the TWO lives being considered. Planned Parenthood and company don't want anything to restrict their cash cow.

 

Therein lies the problem. Moral values. We do not allow murderers to run around and simply kill at random. Why then should we allow others to murder innocent beings who cannot even defend themselves. Why doesn't the ACLU stick up for them? They stick up for every thing else. Which seems to mainly be things that my Bible says is immoral. Well, someone has to stick up for them.