Presidential Debate

[smeagol]

doctors dont maliciously perform abortions. nor can i imagine a women who gets [color=red][Edited by Raphael: We respect the sacred nature of sexuality on this site with proper and respectful terminology][/color] only to legally kill her unborn child. malice is not involved in abortion.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='smeagol' date='Oct 11 2004, 06:57 PM'] doctors dont maliciously perform abortions. nor can i imagine a women who gets [color=red][Edited by Raphael: We respect the sacred nature of sexuality on this site with proper and respectful terminology][/color] only to legally kill her unborn child. malice is not involved in abortion. [/quote]
The intent of doctors and women seeking abortions is to destroy innocent human life. This is not the same as accidentally killing innocent civilians in attacks on foreign combatants.

[smeagol]

i noticed you hesitated to use the word malice. do they maliciously get or perform abortions? the answer is obviously no.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='smeagol' date='Oct 11 2004, 07:07 PM'] i noticed you hesitated to use the word malice. do they maliciously get or perform abortions? the answer is obviously no. [/quote]
I didn't hesitate. Malice is ill-will. Ill-will is obviously included in willingly destroying innocent human life, but not in accidentally destroying innocent human life.

[toledo_jesus]

selfishness is involved in abortion. Not owning up to our mistakes or responsibilities is involved in abortion. Not making right is involved in abortion. Willfully consenting to have what you know will become a living human being of intelligence (any intelligence) killed is murder.
Killing is not murder. Murder is planned(parenthood get it? ). Murder is deliberate. An Iraqi civ who gets killed by shrapnel...is not murdered. The insurgent who would shoot an American but is taken out by that shrapnel...not murdered. The hostages who were beheaded by those psychos...murdered. Sad to say, but War is not a good thing, not at all. Innocents get hurt and killed. Strangely, this seems to have a calming effect. People quit fighting when they aren't just losing armies. It's a time-honored way to end a war, massacre the inhabitants of a city or two. Takes the fight right out of the enemy, while eliminating potential future enemies. Heartless, I know. War smells of elderberries for everybody.
Except for these muslims, who are coming from all over to fight this glorious jihad. They seem to have no regard for non-muslim life. They view other muslims who 'conspire' with non-muslims as fodder. They don't care. Best to be in it for the long run and weed them out.
In other words, kill 'em all because they would like to do the same to us. Or is that enslave us? we are people of the book after all...just the wrong book. I think that grants us rights to be slaves instead of just decapitated. Whaddaya gonna do?

Seriously, war kills people. Get over it. Innocent people die, and it's collateral damage. It smells of elderberries. Really it does. I know I sound insensitive. It's because I am. I really don't think dead Iraqi civilians are an unacceptable loss. War is terrible and this is just more evidence. America could have just carpet bombed the whole place, and killed 150,000 civs. We could have just turned the whole middle east into a glass sandbox if we wanted. We are not murdering people. They are dying because they are in the middle of a combat zone.

Meanwhile we're murdering something like 1.3 million kids each year. Right in our neighborhood clinic.

Edited October 11, 2004 by toledo_jesus

[voiciblanche]

[quote]how is killing FIFTEEN THOUSAND INNOCENTS justified?[/quote]

-clenches teeth-

How is killing MORE THAN FOUR THOUSAND INNOCENT BABIES A DAY justified?!!

[voiciblanche]

[quote name='smeagol' date='Oct 10 2004, 05:30 PM'] you , like Bush, must adhere to trickle down economics, or "horse-and-sparrow economics" -- that is, if you feed the horse (the rich) well, some will pass on through and be there on the ground for the sparrow. i just think that if you want to feed the sparrows (the poor), feed the sparrows! the horses have way too much food as it is. i dont want to feed them anymore... [[hopefully, this metaphor isnt too weird]] [/quote]
Now, trickle-down economics is not my favorite theory, but yours doesn't work. Like Micah said, it's better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish, theoretically. If we keep feeding the sparrows without teaching them how to find food, we'll (theoretically) give away all the food until no food is left, and the sparrows still won't know how to get food. When we teach them how to get their own food, which we can do in the U.S. by opening up more jobs, they can get food for themselves, and we won't run out. This is all in theory, of course, but it makes more sense than just handing over food until everyone is poor.

[voiciblanche]

[quote name='Mrs. Bro. Adam' date='Oct 11 2004, 10:51 AM'] Smeagol:


Let me tell you what will happen if Kerry gets elected President.


1. He'll tax the rich like he said he would.

What will happen when he taxes the rich?

1. The rich business owners will fire the middleclass workers to save the money that they're losing from their tax raise.

2. Because the middle class is being fired, they will become poorer and poorer, because small business won't be hiring. They too will have been taxed.

3. The middle class has lost jobs, can't get jobs, are now lower class.

4. Lower class really can't afford much, and without spending the money that keeps this economy alive, the economy will suffer.

5. Economoy suffers because money is not being spent. Jobs will continue to be cut.

6. Jobs continue to be cut: this means two things.
a. the middle class is being eliminated, it's now rich and poor.
b. the rich keep getting richer, and the poor keep getting poorer.


(I thought you might like a little lesson in economics)

Healthcare:

1. He wants government controled healthcare.
2. With gov't controlled healthcare, the gov't is in control, less options, less quality in some areas.
3. Who needs insurance, or can afford insurance with the tax raises to fund this healthcare?
4. Good doctors are going to become endangered, no one will be able to afford them, we lose them.
5. We lose the good doctor, the middle class gets tax raises, even though Kerry, in the previous plan said he will give them a tax cut, and we're in the spiral again.
6. People are going to be told what to do, and where to go,
7. We lose are democracy, welcome to communism.


You see, one slight error in thinking brings an entire country and economy down. You want to become poorer if you're in the middle class, then I suggest you vote for Kerry.


The economy:

1. It is not dependent on what President is in office.
2. Clinton did not make the economy any better, if former President Bush had won that election, he would've been accredited for the economy.
3. Economy is a circle, it keeps going around and around and around. Ntohing a President, or candidate, says or does, will affect that circle.

Kerry says he has the plan, he doesn't even understand the basics of an economy.


Kerry's people:

Do you realize that the people who elected Kerry for Senate wants him out of the Senate? He has completely ignored their needs, and has done a huge disservice to them.


Office of Presidency:

1. It is the first things foreigners look at.
2. The office is like a parent residing over their children.
3. The parent has the eyes looking at them, and it is their impression that they give that the other countries look at.
4. If one cannot, will not, stand on the morals and beliefs that they have, what will they stand on?

A person who does not stand on their morals and beliefs are very unstable. What makes anyone think, that when an individual (who will not stand on their belief or morals) will follow through with anything else that they claim to do?

Kerry won't stand on his beliefs, he supports abortions, and by supporting him, you are partaking in that support, and partaking in each abortion that takes place. You are partaking in murder. If you won't stand against it, then you are for it, you cannot have both worlds.

Why should we elect a President based on their beliefs, or even one issue?


There was a man in history, who turned his country's economy around, who did a lot of good things for his country. Shoot! I'd have voted for him too, if I had agreed with his beliefs. You see, that man, who did so much for a country, was Htiler. If I had supported him, and ignored his beliefes, or one issue, then I too, would have partaken in the Holocaust. That is, of course, if I was a German citizen alive at that time.


Issues are very important. Kerry has yet to prove that Bush has failed as a President. Bush has strong morals, beliefs, values. We know where he stands on issues. Kerry, he's a walking contridiction.

In this election, we really are forced to vote based on a few issues. Abortion being one of them. And let me reiterate, if you vote Kerry into office, it's no different than if you were performing the abortion.


Don't rely on media to make a choice, and don't rely on liberal media to form your views. Look at the facts. Then vote the 'lesser evil' as it's been called.


But I tell you, the last thing that this country needs is a President who is going to do nothing to stop abortion or homosexual marriage. [/quote]


That was probably the best post in this entire thread! Go Mrs. Bro!

[qfnol31]

Smeagol, the problem with using Canada as an example is that their politics no longer to speak of morals.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='smeagol' date='Oct 11 2004, 05:47 PM'] there's no justification for killing innocent people. unborn babies or Iraqi mothers and children... its murder either way. [/quote]
However, great care was taken so that innocent lives would be spared.

[smeagol]

wow, i just went to supper and all these replies... **takes off gloves, rolls sleeves up**

we're just in a battle over definitions. what i think malice constitutes: "Feeling a need to see others suffer" is not evident in abortion. they're not getting abortions for the only reason to kill an unborn. that's my point and i think we can agree that's undisputed.

toledo, is it only murder if one of us white Christian Americans gets killed? an Iraqi life is not worth as much as an American life? because we are somehow favored by God?! nonsense, the lives of all God's creatures have merit. i will not simply accept or ignore your ignorant and immoral "opinion" . the death of an innocent is NEVER justified, even if it's on "accident."

toledo, you obviously don't understand Muslims or the goal of terrorism. They do not want to enslave us, they just want us out of their holy land. it's not that hard to comprehend. imagine if during the cold war, the soviets had bases in jerusalem. that's what it's like to them. They want to live their own lives unaffected by Americanism. (yes, i know they've chosen the wrong means, but so have you in that you want to "weed them out" as though they are lifeless things instead of people, instead of God's creatures) open your mind!

voiciblanche, i agree abortion is NOT justified either. i don't know where you got the idea that i thought abortion was a noble pursuit from, but i never said or thought it. i'm just saying that the hasty decision to go to a war that killed over fifteen thousand innocent civilians is a great error of judgment.

you are all correct that teaching a man to fish is better than giving him a fish. but this has no relevance to giving the rich an enormous tax break. more money in Bill Gates' pocket does not mean the poor will be taught how to fish (metaphorically speaking, of course). it just means the rich are being fed even more. also, this isn't free money. it is income tax breaks. the people who get this money back have earned it at their job. the tax break means that they pay less to the govt, not that they get free money, so it's not like feeding someone for free.

qfnol, you sound in favor of a Catholic theocracy... the separation of church and state is a good thing. Politics aren't supposed to involve morals. the government ought not tell us what is right or wrong, only what is allowable. **see below** when government does involve religion, bad things have always empirically happened. crusades, genocides, the holocaust, civil wars, terrorism,...

[i] However, great care was taken so that innocent lives would be spared.[/i]
don't lie to yourself just to make the truth less harsh. Bush admitted "miscalculations" with five times as many civilian deaths as 9/11 , don't tell me that great care was taken. that's rubbish.

**case in point: murder is illegal because it infringes on someone elses rights. burglary is illegal because it takes for oneself what is someone else's. neither is illegal because it is "wrong" because God said so... t

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]we're just in a battle over definitions. what i think malice constitutes: "Feeling a need to see others suffer" is not evident in abortion.[/quote]

The American Heritage Dictionary doesn't capture the true meaning of the word. The word originates from the Latin [i]malitia[/i], and means [i]ill-will[/i]. In fact, that is included as one of the meanings for the English cognate.

[quote]They do not want to enslave us, they just want us out of their holy land.[/quote]

No, they want to stop our widespread immorality.

[quote]don't lie to yourself just to make the truth less harsh. Bush admitted "miscalculations" with five times as many civilian deaths as 9/11 , don't tell me that great care was taken. that's rubbish.[/quote]

Please don't lie to [i]your[/i]self. You have no reason outside of conspiracy theory to claim that Bush lied and no right to make such bold claims here. Please do not do it again.

[quote]case in point: murder is illegal because it infringes on someone elses rights. burglary is illegal because it takes for oneself what is someone else's. neither is illegal because it is "wrong" because God said so...[/quote]

Abortion [i]should be[/i] illegal because it infringes on someone else's rights to live, rights upheld by the Supreme Court under the order of natural law, upon which all legislative law is based.