megamattman1 Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 About that end justifies the means stuff. I think I'm just going to forget about that! I think I'm misapplying the concept. Or at any rate, i think I'm in way over my head! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamattman1 Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 (edited) Just to let you know that I'm well aware of my grammar, spelling, bias, and even the logic errors! (after I do them) (which is usually because of things being too generalized) I do proof, but obviously not enough. It's gotta be frustrating reading stuff like that! I could call suspect what they meant by the statement. Did they mean that we shouldn't be altogether bitter about the opposing candidates simply because we're right in a separate issue? Which would in this case be directed to those who are opposed to secondary issues of a pro-choice candidate. If that's the intent of that quote, this same type of statement could be made towards anyone who votes solely pro-choice and becomes bittered to all opposing non pro-choice side choices. I'll deal with regarding the abortion issue interpretation as you presented as number one later since that is the direct concern of that quote. should be: I could call suspect what they meant by the statement. Did they mean that we shouldn't be altogether bitter about the opposing candidates simply because we're right in a separate issue? Which would in this case be directed to those who are opposed to secondary issues of a pro-life candidate. If that's the intent of that quote, this same type of statement could be made towards anyone who votes solely pro-choice and becomes bittered to all opposing non pro-life side choices. I'll deal with regarding the abortion issue of abortion presented as number one later since that is the direct concern of that quote. I know it's what we'll all do to justify voting for him, but I'm not sure it's technically right when there's a better candidate. Cuz isn't that like saying the end justifies the means? I've always had a hard time with that concept. I know as a general rule of thumb, it's right, but in practice it's hard for me to say always. should be more clearly: I know it's what we'll all do to justify voting for Bush, but I'm not sure it's technically right when there's a better candidate who is more against abortion. Cuz isn't that like saying the end justifies the means? I've always had a hard time with that concept. I know as a general rule of thumb, it's right (that the end does not justify the means), but in practice it's hard for me to say always. seemed clear at the time. this is a major source of problems that I need to work on. I bet that conclusion you and I made about helping the poor versus abortion is the same discussion that the bishops had to ultimately prevail abortion, eh Bishop Jim? Edited January 22, 2004 by megamattman1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Yeah, and the Kennedy's are really scraping by giving all their fundage to the poor. Democrat leaders are rich. Why? Because at their level of income, the money being taken from their pockets ain't shinobi. It matters to my pocketbook and to those in my income bracket and below. It matters that I pay for a public school system that hates God (and which party did that, I wonder?) to the tune of 15K per student and a nice bill from Mr. Tax man that's due soon if not overdue now. Welfare is designed to keep people from working, and that's a fact. Work a little and you're worse off than not working at all. The 300 I got helped my family. I'm union. Clinton 8 friggin years in office and he didn't protect me from a democrat scumbag mayor. I got nothing for rich jerks who shed crocodile tears over the poor while designing socialist systems that do nothing to actually alleviate the burden on those who work for a living. And don't vomit anything at me about the working poor: I see them every day where I work. I see people with Satellite television in government housing: that's big money every month. I see people with big screen TV's in government housing. I foot part of the bill for that house and they've got AV equipment that George Lucas would tip his hat to. Democrats and their pandering tripe have done nothing to address actual social ills. They are at least as vile as the likes of Geroge Bush. Vote Cthulu. Why settle for the lesser of two evils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I'm not voting for anyone. The people who are as far left as I am fiscally (Green Party) are pro-baby murder. Bush is pro-baby murder (if they've been born and speak arabic). Therefore I shan't be rockin' da vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 (edited) I'm not voting for anyone. The people who are as far left as I am fiscally (Green Party) are pro-baby murder. Bush is pro-baby murder (if they've been born and speak arabic). Therefore I shan't be rockin' da vote. What a creative way to twist things so that you can accept lack of action. God Bless, ironmonk Edited January 23, 2004 by ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 ding ding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrndveritatis Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I'm not voting for anyone. The people who are as far left as I am fiscally (Green Party) are pro-baby murder. Bush is pro-baby murder (if they've been born and speak arabic). Therefore I shan't be rockin' da vote. Murder is intentionally taking innocent human life. Applied to the war: 1) Casualties of the war: terrorists or enemy soldiers, civilians, American soldiers. 2) Terrorists are not innocent. 3) Civilians are innocent. 4) Civilians are not being killed intentionally. 5) American soldiers are innocent human life. 6) We are not the ones killing our soldiers. Therefore, Bush is not pro-murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 man, syllogisms cannot have six parts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 How dare you Ironmonk? I find the entire thing disgusting and my conscience won't let me vote for any candidate who will be on the ballet in Alabama. I won't vote for a man who's prosecuting a war I don't believe in. I cannot vote for someone who thinks a baby is a glob of tissue. Therefore i won't vote. How dare you try to tell me what my motives for anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 my conscience won't let me vote for any candidate who will be on the ballet in Alabama. Alabama politicians do ballet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 :P BALLOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 yeah yeah, whatever. It's a bunch of people mincing around in tights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I want to agree with every thing Winchester said, accept that I am not Union and we got 600 dollars because we had both worked the year before. Other than that Winchester could have been speaking for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 (edited) How dare you Ironmonk? I find the entire thing disgusting and my conscience won't let me vote for any candidate who will be on the ballet in Alabama. I won't vote for a man who's prosecuting a war I don't believe in. I cannot vote for someone who thinks a baby is a glob of tissue. Therefore i won't vote. How dare you try to tell me what my motives for anything. No vote is a vote for the baby killers. How dare me as a question... no thanks, I stopped playing dares a long time ago, I just stick to the truth now. And you calling Bush a Iraqi babykiller is a twist. BTW, I don't know if anyone's told you yet... the war's been over for months. There is just some terrorist activity right now.... that, thank God for the soldiers there so that they can get the terrorist out so that the Iraqi people will one day have a real chance at peace. God Bless & Cheers, ironmonk Edited January 24, 2004 by ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrndveritatis Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Some more stuff on why the issue of abortion should trump all other considerations. "Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect and claims to the 'rightness' of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community." (US Bishops, 1998, Living the Gospel of Life, n.23) "Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights--for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture--is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right, and the condition of all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination." (Pope John Paul II, 1988, Christefideles Laici, n.3 (Both taken from the Jan/Feb 04 Priests for Life) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now