What Bush Has Done For The Pro-life Cause In America

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='havok579257' post='1637348' date='Aug 25 2008, 12:50 AM']I agree that Bush is not pro-life and that pro-life is more than just how a person views abortion. Its about all human life. A child/teenager/adult getting killed in Iraq is no different than an abortion in america.


Now the question is, who to vote for in this next election. YOur 2 canadates are both anti-life. So I guess it would seem, niether are ok to vote for according to the Catholic church.[/quote]

No different? How about the fact that this young man or woman is volunteering to be in the potential line of fire and know the risk of death serving their country? How about the fact that over a million people aren't walking around that were killed in the past year while a little over 4000 is the body count for the brave men and women who valiantly served the US even in the face of mortal peril? How about the fact that even though mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, brothers sisters, loved ones are hurting, they can say that their loved one died fighting for something that they believed in and that even though they can't behold them, that they love them and are in a strong, deep sense that you probably couldn't even begin to understand, [i]proud[/i] of them? Save Cindy Sheehan and her lackies who were basically trolling for their own reality show (as if magazine spreads, press conferences, and constant attention from the "objective" media wasn't enough), most families who have members in the military actually SUPPORT the war. That's why they're there. This fourth of July, thousands of soldiers who were stationed in Iraq stood in Saddam Hussein's former palace and renewed their oath to fight for the United States and for freedom and then burst into the glorious refrain "God bless America, my home, sweet, home!" I almost got EMOTIONAL watching it on the television screen. Does that count for something? You take something like fighting Islamofascism and the cause for freedom and not getting or letting anyone else get overrun by enemies on camel-back and turn it into a "life issue". Just like capital punishment when libs are setting murders loose for ridiculous appeals. Seriously, is that the only way you people can make an attempt at true discussion? How lame is that?

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='iheartjp2' post='1639268' date='Aug 26 2008, 11:12 PM']No different? How about the fact that this young man or woman is volunteering to be in the potential line of fire and know the risk of death serving their country? How about the fact that over a million people aren't walking around that were killed in the past year while a little over 4000 is the body count for the brave men and women who valiantly served the US even in the face of mortal peril? How about the fact that even though mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, brothers sisters, loved ones are hurting, they can say that their loved one died fighting for something that they believed in and that even though they can't behold them, that they love them and are in a strong, deep sense that you probably couldn't even begin to understand, [i]proud[/i] of them? Save Cindy Sheehan and her lackies who were basically trolling for their own reality show (as if magazine spreads, press conferences, and constant attention from the "objective" media wasn't enough), most families who have members in the military actually SUPPORT the war. That's why they're there. This fourth of July, thousands of soldiers who were stationed in Iraq stood in Saddam Hussein's former palace and renewed their oath to fight for the United States and for freedom and then burst into the glorious refrain "God bless America, my home, sweet, home!" I almost got EMOTIONAL watching it on the television screen. Does that count for something? You take something like fighting Islamofascism and the cause for freedom and not getting or letting anyone else get overrun by enemies on camel-back and turn it into a "life issue". Just like capital punishment when libs are setting murders loose for ridiculous appeals. Seriously, is that the only way you people can make an attempt at true discussion? How lame is that?[/quote]

All of this is well and good and I am def not with the Cindy Sheehan ilk. BUT, our soldiers "valiantly serving their country" is one thing. Our soldiers "fighting for freedom" is another thing. How can they be fighting for freedom when no one attacked us????

Being anti-Iraq war is NOT the same as being anti-military or anti-soldiers-in-Iraq. I believe our soldiers' bravery and integrity have been manipulated to justify this war and it sickens me. They don't belong in Iraq. They belong is Sudan, kicking the *@# of the Janjaweed like no one else can.

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1639375' date='Aug 27 2008, 08:09 AM']All of this is well and good and I am def not with the Cindy Sheehan ilk. BUT, our soldiers "valiantly serving their country" is one thing. Our soldiers "fighting for freedom" is another thing. How can they be fighting for freedom when no one attacked us????

Being anti-Iraq war is NOT the same as being anti-military or anti-soldiers-in-Iraq. I believe our soldiers' bravery and integrity have been manipulated to justify this war and it sickens me. They don't belong in Iraq. They belong is Sudan, kicking the *@# of the Janjaweed like no one else can.[/quote]


Um, anyone can fight for freedom without having been attacked, but if you're looking for something in particular, type September 11, 2001 into the search engine at google.com and tell me what you get.

Also, type "video" and "Osama Bin Laden" into the search engine next to each other and then see what you'll find among the results. To narrow it down, click on the "news" fiddler at the top of the screen.

It's pretty evident that these people hate us and want to destroy us.

And haven't you heard? Looked at Vanity Fair or People magazine lately? George Clooney's on Darfur duty!

No, really. Iraq is a free government that is growing stronger everyday and is evidently better at listening to the needs of their people than Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrat-controlled Congress is at trying to meet our own. They're the folks that attack those who want to tap into our own natural resources when those who do are for an all-of-the-above energy economy, while the Dems just want us to live like Europe (minus the nuclear power, duh! ), riding around on scooters, driving around in little clown cars that can get the passangers and both drivers killed on impact in case of a collision, not wearing deoderant or using aerosol sprays, on universal health care that cheapens the quality because of lack of competetion, the works! They don't care about real America. Why am I saying all this?

Darfur is a refuse hole. The government doesn't care about their people. How do we know this? They're the ones giving the darn weapons to the janjaweeb to rape women, pillage villages, and kill innocent people. If we did go into Darfur to kick butt the only America can, we actually WOULD be in a war with 1. people who didn't attack us, and, 2. an actual country, seeing as they're the suppliers of the enemy. It would be like another Iraq, especially when our men start dying. The president's approval rating will go down, George Clooney will find another charity case in which his figurehead celebrity status will be absolutely useless, and there will be the stupid Democrats who were "for the war before [they] were against it".

I say we keep doing what we're doing right now until the job is finished.

Edited August 27, 2008 by iheartjp2

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='iheartjp2' post='1639859' date='Aug 27 2008, 06:42 PM']Darfur is a refuse hole. The government doesn't care about their people. How do we know this? They're the ones giving the darn weapons to the janjaweeb to rape women, pillage villages, and kill innocent people. If we did go into Darfur to kick butt the only America can, we actually WOULD be in a war with 1. people who didn't attack us, and, 2. an actual country, seeing as they're the suppliers of the enemy. It would be like another Iraq, especially when our men start dying. The president's approval rating will go down, George Clooney will find another charity case in which his figurehead celebrity status will be absolutely useless, and there will be the stupid Democrats who were "for the war before [they] were against it".

I say we keep doing what we're doing right now until the job is finished.[/quote]

I'm sorry, but your lack of knowledge of the Darfur genocide is appalling. And the fact that you so blithely call it "a refuse hole" and not worth bothering with. They have begged and pleaded for us to help them and we ignore it (Iraq, OTOH, did not ask for our "help".). And you mock them because George Clooney is associated with their cause. So you don't take Clooney seriously, so by association you don't have to take Darfur seriously either. How you can write what you just wrote is...beyond me. I'm at a loss for words.

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1639881' date='Aug 27 2008, 07:26 PM']I'm sorry, but your lack of knowledge of the Darfur genocide is appalling. And the fact that you so blithely call it "a refuse hole" and not worth bothering with. They have begged and pleaded for us to help them and we ignore it (Iraq, OTOH, did not ask for our "help".). And you mock them because George Clooney is associated with their cause. So you don't take Clooney seriously, so by association you don't have to take Darfur seriously either. How you can write what you just wrote is...beyond me. I'm at a loss for words.[/quote]


Well, it looks like we'll be hearing from Madame Vengier a little less, people.

haha, just kidding

Just for good measure, why don't we review what I [i]actually[/i] said?


[color="#FF0000"][i]"Darfur is a refuse hole. The government doesn't care about their people. How do we know this? They're the ones giving the darn weapons to the janjaweeb to rape women, pillage villages, and kill innocent people. If we did go into Darfur to kick butt the only America can, we actually WOULD be in a war with 1. people who didn't attack us, and, 2. an actual country, seeing as they're the suppliers of the enemy. It would be like another Iraq, especially when our men start dying. The president's approval rating will go down, George Clooney will find another charity case in which his figurehead celebrity status will be absolutely useless, and there will be the stupid Democrats who were "for the war before [they] were against it".

I say we keep doing what we're doing right now until the job is finished."[/i] [/color]

I did say Darfur was a refuse hole. So what? It is. That's not to say that it's "not worth bothering with", as you suggested my meaning was. Yes, they have asked for our help, but see, there's this thing called the UN and they basically said that what was clearly a genocide wasn't one, and then they sent in over 20,000 troops to keep peace and then what does the Sudanese government do? They basically attack them. That's progress for you. Iraq was a rogue state under Saddam Hussein and he needed to be deposed. We COULD be doing something in Darfur, but the UN seems to not have the brains to figure out something that works. George Clooney, in case you didn't know, is actually an official UN Ambassador, which is why I actually can make fun of him for being an airheaded hollywood blowhard. I never said anything bad concerning Darfur in relation to George Clooney being connected to the issue somehow. I know that the things I write might not be paramount to produce the [i]greatest[/i] amount of tickle fits and warm fuzzies, but you've got to take it as it comes, not as something else.

[Nihil Obstat]

While we're on the topic of other conflicts, what is the consensus on the war in Afghanistan?
That one I know a bit about, and I support it.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='iheartjp2' post='1639859' date='Aug 27 2008, 06:42 PM']Also, type "video" and "Osama Bin Laden" into the search engine next to each other and then see what you'll find among the results. To narrow it down, click on the "news" fiddler at the top of the screen.[/quote]

Oh, I've done that.

I watched the video where Osama Bin Laden must have dyed his beard because he has gray patches in it -

[img]http://lh3.google.com/fisherwy/RuGjsXMYCFI/AAAAAAAAIH0/gSWgHO62IT0/osama%20bin%20laden%202007%20picture[5].jpg[/img]

Wow, he must have been a bad Muslim, because dying your beard during one of their holy months is wrong!

When you guys learn - Osama Bin Laden = Boogey Man, and he's already dead.

Edited August 28, 2008 by MakeYouThink

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='MakeYouThink' post='1640195' date='Aug 28 2008, 01:04 AM']Oh, I've done that.

I watched the video where Osama Bin Laden must have dyed his beard because he has gray patches in it -

[img]http://lh3.google.com/fisherwy/RuGjsXMYCFI/AAAAAAAAIH0/gSWgHO62IT0/osama%20bin%20laden%202007%20picture[5].jpg[/img]

Wow, he must have been a bad Muslim, because dying your beard during one of their holy months is wrong!

When you guys learn - Osama Bin Laden = Boogey Man, and he's already dead.[/quote]
I think that whatever you just said is irrelevant to what we're actually talking about.
That's like someone saying "Obama would make a terrible President." and you countering with "The tie that he wore two weeks back looked so bad with that suit!" (With any emoticons you want to add to that.)
Even if it's true, I honestly don't need to hear it.

[MakeYouThink]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1640196' date='Aug 28 2008, 01:10 AM']I think that whatever you just said is irrelevant to what we're actually talking about.
That's like someone saying "Obama would make a terrible President." and you countering with "The tie that he wore two weeks back looked so bad with that suit!" (With any emoticons you want to add to that.)
Even if it's true, I honestly don't need to hear it.[/quote]

Well, heart said to type that into google and see what we can come up with, and so I did. I followed his instructions fully.

Since Osama Bin Laden is the center point of this conflict, I think my comment was entirely relevant to this.

But I will leave it at that.

BTW, I'm Canadian too, and I read about the war in the papers, I have a friend who is a soldier, and I don't support the war in Afghanistan at all.

[atheling]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1636235' date='Aug 23 2008, 10:14 PM']Saying he isn't satan incarnate is--I'm sorry--profoundly silly. This is NOT an appropriate argument/defense when having a discussion about whether or not someone is a good President. Becuase OF COURSE he's not satan incarnate, therefore the assertion of such as a defense against him being "bad" is really just not an apt argument.

Also, WRT a pro-choice person being a bad President, this is really not the issue in a discussion about the current President. This is also not an appropriate defense.

As for a different topic...no. My comments about GWB fit right in with the current topic, because I was pointing out that being pro-life does NOT make GWB a good President and that I for one am tired of the abortion being the litmus test for what makes a good or bad President. My goodness! So if we had a President who ruined our country but he did one good thing by putting a pro-life judge on the Supreme Court, this would excuse the fact that he brought our country to ruin? So tired of it![/quote]

Being pro life tells us something about a person's character and morals. If we cannot trust the morals and character of the President, who is a powerful man, we are in deep trouble.

You cannot equate war, immigration, or even the death penalty with the abortion issue. According to the Magisterium, abortion is unqualified, that is, there are no ifs, ands or buts regarding it. However, there are just wars, and capital punishment is also an option under certain circumstances.

I understand that you are disappointed in President Bush on various issues. However, you're quite wrong in thinking that his being pro life doesn't matter. It does, deeply.

Secondly, instead of participating in the Bush Derangement Syndrome that so infects our media and daily life, perhaps you should consider praying for him. Goodness knows, he needs it. It would also be the charitable thing to do, instead of lashing at him. I think many people never really sit down and think about the heavy burden of the office a President carries. It's very complex and difficult.

[vianney]

To say that 911 is somehow [i][/i]directly[i][/i] derived from Iraq is a bit disingenious. There may be correlation and even some causation but we cannot have a stare decisis where we flood into any country we suspect harbors terrorists, for numerous reasons, like being mistaken about their harboring....

I am not in a love fest with Saddam, but at the same time they never affirmatively attacked us. The country of Iraq never affirmatively attacked us. The doctrine of premptive war is dangerous and imo violates just war theory.

That said, Bush was incompetent in foreign policy, but not a liar. I dont believe he got us into the war for oil or to pay back Saddam for daddy.

[StColette]

[quote name='atheling' post='1640207' date='Aug 28 2008, 02:26 AM']Secondly, instead of participating in the Bush Derangement Syndrome that so infects our media and daily life, perhaps you should consider praying for him. Goodness knows, he needs it. It would also be the charitable thing to do, instead of lashing at him. I think many people never really sit down and think about the heavy burden of the office a President carries. It's very complex and difficult.[/quote]

Maybe you could consider that she does pray for him. I believe you are making a conclusion that you really have no right to make. Disagreeing with a Presidents policies is not lashing out at him, nor does disagreeing very strongly with some of his decisions or policies equate to not praying for him nor is it uncharitable. So unless you know definitively that Madame V doesn't pray for or care about the President, I don't believe you should be making such conclusion about her or anyone else. That "Bush Derangement Syndrome" can go both ways, always remember that.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='atheling' post='1640207' date='Aug 28 2008, 01:26 AM']Being pro life tells us something about a person's character and morals. If we cannot trust the morals and character of the President, who is a powerful man, we are in deep trouble.

You cannot equate war, immigration, or even the death penalty with the abortion issue. According to the Magisterium, abortion is unqualified, that is, there are no ifs, ands or buts regarding it. However, there are just wars, and capital punishment is also an option under certain circumstances.

I understand that you are disappointed in President Bush on various issues. However, you're quite wrong in thinking that his being pro life doesn't matter. It does, deeply.

Secondly, instead of participating in the Bush Derangement Syndrome that so infects our media and daily life, perhaps you should consider praying for him. Goodness knows, he needs it. It would also be the charitable thing to do, instead of lashing at him. I think many people never really sit down and think about the heavy burden of the office a President carries. It's very complex and difficult.[/quote]

Nobody "equated" anything.

Just because two things are not equal, this does not mean the lesser thing doesn't deserve discussion.

The same Pope you all quote on life issues is the same Pope who decried the Iraq invasion as an unjust assault against life. Nothing you can say change that.

Don't EVER refer to me as "part of the Bush Derangement Syndrome". How dare you. First of all that phrase was SPECIFICALLY invented by conservative Republicans to use against liberal Democrats. I am not a liberal Democrat. I am a conservative Republican and an orthodox Catholic. So don't you dare use insults against me like you're talking to some godless liberal. And I resent being called "deranged" in any case.

I have said it before and I'll say it as many more times as necessary. I have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to criticize my government. If you don't like it, blame the Constitution.

And no, I don't trust the moral character of the President. I hope for it but I don't trust it. I trust God. God is running this world, not the President.

Edited August 28, 2008 by Madame Vengier

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='StColette' post='1640313' date='Aug 28 2008, 09:10 AM']Maybe you could consider that she does pray for him. I believe you are making a conclusion that you really have no right to make. Disagreeing with a Presidents policies is not lashing out at him, nor does disagreeing very strongly with some of his decisions or policies equate to not praying for him nor is it uncharitable. So unless you know definitively that Madame V doesn't pray for or care about the President, I don't believe you should be making such conclusion about her or anyone else. That "Bush Derangement Syndrome" can go both ways, always remember that.[/quote]


Word.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1640184' date='Aug 28 2008, 12:29 AM']While we're on the topic of other conflicts, what is the consensus on the war in Afghanistan?
That one I know a bit about, and I support it.[/quote]

I'm fully in support of it.

That said, I think the situation in Iraq has had negative impact on our work in Afganistan.

I truly believe we should not have gone into Iraq. Instead we should have centered our forces and money in the following places:

Afghanistan

Sudan


It would have right and just, and the world would have supported us and loved us for it. George Bush would have become a beloved leader. Instead he followed his ego and has ignored the desperate pleas of the people of Darfur who, whenever they see a white journalist, they believe George Bush is coming to save them. But George Bush never shows up. And he never will.