| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"wg bradley" |
| Date: |
17 Oct 2003 11:51:18 PM |
| Object: |
Political Question |
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
.
|
|
| User: "Hylander" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
19 Oct 2003 10:43:49 AM |
|
|
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message news:<aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Most of the starving children in Tunsania or sub-saharan Africa or
less developed parts of Asia do starve and I bet you could hardly name
the countries that many republicans can due to the amount of charity
they do privately. Do you yourself do something? Many times, charity
isn't allowed in because of fears about missionary efforts or
"imperialism". There are dictators that like the masses to be
subservient. Of course, any effort by charitable people is seen as
imperialism...Many of the reachable have already been reached...it is
still not perfect so now, you may notice that there are other efforts
to provide shoes, coats, clothing etc as well and other needs. Also,
you may know that agricultural efforts are often fought off because of
PC GMO rants. I suggest you do some study.
Where is their outrage and compassion here?
There is and believe it or not, there are most often no strings
attached as in trying to promote religion or "imperialism" as some
would suggest. Private charities abound because of many efforts.
Christian Children's Fund is one popular program. I'm not sure its the
best but I know many who donate to that including myself before. This
isn't to brag. I'm sure liberals do this too...although differently.
You see, many times, it is communist governments...often befriended by
liberals that make reaching out less feasible. They insist you do
things "their" way. ie: include abortion programs or do nothing at
all. (read the news lately on that one globalist organization that did
denied aide because of that?) They don't say "leftist" for nothing.
These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
Depends on your point of view.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
19 Oct 2003 01:18:38 PM |
|
|
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message news:<aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Most of the starving children in Tunsania or sub-saharan Africa or
less developed parts of Asia do starve and I bet you could hardly name
the countries that many republicans can due to the amount of charity
they do privately.
ROFL! Yeah, like Gates.
If I were to "earn" $40 billion through the use of an illegal monopoly
then I sure wouldn't mind giving away $39 billion either.
After all, it's the Republican ideal: Steal hundreds of millions of
dollars and give away some of it.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hylander" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
20 Oct 2003 01:29:00 AM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bmukht$i2j$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message news:<aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Most of the starving children in Tunsania or sub-saharan Africa or
less developed parts of Asia do starve and I bet you could hardly name
the countries that many republicans can due to the amount of charity
they do privately.
ROFL! Yeah, like Gates.
If I were to "earn" $40 billion through the use of an illegal monopoly
then I sure wouldn't mind giving away $39 billion either.
After all, it's the Republican ideal: Steal hundreds of millions of
dollars and give away some of it.
After all, its the Democrat ideal: Tax hundreds of billions of dollars
and give away some of it. (like Gray Davis did)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
20 Oct 2003 12:03:22 PM |
|
|
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
rfischer@bolt.sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bmukht$i2j$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
Most of the starving children in Tunsania or sub-saharan Africa or
less developed parts of Asia do starve and I bet you could hardly name
the countries that many republicans can due to the amount of charity
they do privately.
ROFL! Yeah, like Gates.
If I were to "earn" $40 billion through the use of an illegal monopoly
then I sure wouldn't mind giving away $39 billion either.
After all, it's the Republican ideal: Steal hundreds of millions of
dollars and give away some of it.
After all, its the Democrat ideal: Tax hundreds of billions of dollars
and give away some of it. (like Gray Davis did)
And now you're reduced to lying outright again. You obviously don't
know the first thing about California politics.
As for taxes: Right now 25% of your federal income taxes do nothing
but pay interest on the debt that Reagan and Bush ran up. If it
weren't for them you could pay 25% less with no cut in services.
Being Republicans means supporting higher taxes so that rich people
can pay less.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hylander" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
21 Oct 2003 12:17:45 AM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bn14gp$r4b$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in message news:<bmukht$i2j$1@bolt.sonic.net>...
Hylander <dontbothermeplease3333@hotmail.com> wrote:
Most of the starving children in Tunsania or sub-saharan Africa or
less developed parts of Asia do starve and I bet you could hardly name
the countries that many republicans can due to the amount of charity
they do privately.
ROFL! Yeah, like Gates.
If I were to "earn" $40 billion through the use of an illegal monopoly
then I sure wouldn't mind giving away $39 billion either.
After all, it's the Republican ideal: Steal hundreds of millions of
dollars and give away some of it.
After all, its the Democrat ideal: Tax hundreds of billions of dollars
and give away some of it. (like Gray Davis did)
And now you're reduced to lying outright again. You obviously don't
know the first thing about California politics.
As for taxes: Right now 25% of your federal income taxes do nothing
but pay interest on the debt that Reagan and Bush ran up. If it
weren't for them you could pay 25% less with no cut in services.
Being Republicans means supporting higher taxes so that rich people
can pay less.
This is a dry discussion. I'll have to give you the Krisblake response.
[...]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MheathXX" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
19 Oct 2003 02:17:20 PM |
|
|
1st argumentive question is:
Who is intentionally killing this children you spake of?
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message news:<aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MheathXX" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
21 Oct 2003 11:32:38 AM |
|
|
HMMMM....No response to this?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
18 Oct 2003 11:28:41 PM |
|
|
In article <aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>, wg bradley
<wgb@bogus.ca> wrote:
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
It is worse than that. This "slow painful death from starvation" along
with lack of health care and education, could be avoided if the
Republicans would support programs to help these children. (Or at
least stop opposing Democrats who try to help them.)
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
It is hypocritical. Welcome to the Republican Party. (Look at Rush
"The Drug Addict" Limbaugh, George "The Deserter" Bush, and William
"The Gambler" Bennett.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
19 Oct 2003 05:03:32 AM |
|
|
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<181020032128412345%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>, wg bradley
<wgb@bogus.ca> wrote:
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
It is worse than that. This "slow painful death from starvation" along
with lack of health care and education, could be avoided if the
Republicans would support programs to help these children. (Or at
least stop opposing Democrats who try to help them.)
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
It is hypocritical. Welcome to the Republican Party. (Look at Rush
"The Drug Addict" Limbaugh, George "The Deserter" Bush, and William
"The Gambler" Bennett.)
Lets see, Democrats have
KKK Byrd
Felon Clinton
Alchoholic Kennedy
Back and Forth according to what the polls say Kerry
Jew hating Hillary
Not to mention some of the role models that liberals love
Howard Stern
Larry Flynt
Ex radical liberals
Rosey O Donald (who only recently after 9/11 came to her senses)
Dennis Miller (who only recently after 9/11 came to his senses)
Geraldo Rivera (who only recently after 9/11 came to his sense)
Then of course we have David Barnes who thinks that cheating and lying
is ok only if it is done by Bill Clinton, and liberals don't tell lies
according to David. They only mislead, and according to David, that
is ok.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
19 Oct 2003 09:54:31 AM |
|
|
In article <8912d58d.0310190203.72a50e2d@posting.google.com>, osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<181020032128412345%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no>, wg bradley
<wgb@bogus.ca> wrote:
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
It is worse than that. This "slow painful death from starvation" along
with lack of health care and education, could be avoided if the
Republicans would support programs to help these children. (Or at
least stop opposing Democrats who try to help them.)
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
It is hypocritical. Welcome to the Republican Party. (Look at Rush
"The Drug Addict" Limbaugh, George "The Deserter" Bush, and William
"The Gambler" Bennett.)
Lets see, Democrats have
KKK Byrd
Felon Clinton
Alchoholic Kennedy
Back and Forth according to what the polls say Kerry
Jew hating Hillary
Not to mention some of the role models that liberals love
Howard Stern
Larry Flynt
Ex radical liberals
Rosey O Donald (who only recently after 9/11 came to her senses)
Dennis Miller (who only recently after 9/11 came to his senses)
Geraldo Rivera (who only recently after 9/11 came to his sense)
Then of course we have David Barnes who thinks that cheating and lying
is ok only if it is done by Bill Clinton, and liberals don't tell lies
according to David. They only mislead, and according to David, that
is ok.
Firstly, even IF you find liberals who do the same it doesn't excuse
the conduct of the Right. (And this list doesn't do that.) You try to
fall back on this a lot. You seem to believe that acting reprehensibly
is acceptable if you can find others who do it. It doesn't make it
acceptable and the fact that you reach so hard to explain away the lies
only proves a desire on the part of the Right to lie and justify it
afterwards.
Secondly, Dennis Miller and Geraldo Rivera are whores. Fox pays them,
so they say what they are told. Larry Flynt was shot by a right wing
goof who was afraid to go out in public without his gun (probably a
guard going to get his mail.)
Howard Stern is VERY conservative on many issues.
Thirdly, your list that includes Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and
Kerry are so ridicules and full of out-and-out lies (Jew hating, for
example) as to be not worth discussing. Sad that you resort to lies to
refute the truth. It says a lot about you.
The Republican Party has become a party of pure propaganda. The Left
has no counterpart.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Heishman caught lying again |
19 Oct 2003 01:16:20 PM |
|
|
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
It is hypocritical. Welcome to the Republican Party. (Look at Rush
"The Drug Addict" Limbaugh, George "The Deserter" Bush, and William
"The Gambler" Bennett.)
Lets see, Democrats have
KKK Byrd
Felon Clinton
Alchoholic Kennedy
Back and Forth according to what the polls say Kerry
Jew hating Hillary
Heishman, you're a hate-filled liar and bigot.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wg bradley" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
18 Oct 2003 06:16:46 PM |
|
|
hmmmm...nobody has an answer for me. I guess I'm not surprised.
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message
news:aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that
is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I
mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he
sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a
stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Political Question |
18 Oct 2003 10:54:36 PM |
|
|
wg bradley <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote:
hmmmm...nobody has an answer for me. I guess I'm not surprised.
You're not the first to notice this inconsistency.
Of course the obvious answer is that these right-wingers really don't
give a ***** about human lives. They just want to control women. An
Christian version of Islamic fundamentalists.
"wg bradley" <wgb@bogus.ca> wrote in message
news:aF3kb.117592$pl3.104346@pd7tw3no...
My understanding is that Republicans tend to be "pro-life" - that
is,
opposed to most or all forms of abortion. A fetus is a life and a
creation of God they say, so abortion must be abolished. Yet by most
estimates 15,000 - 25,000 real living breathing children die a slow
painful death from starvation EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Where is their outrage and compassion here? These kids can be saved
for pennies a day, but does Bush move in and put a halt to it? I
mean,
after all, these are God's children...right? I realize he can't save
*all* of them. But with the hundreds of billions of dollars he gave
away to the very wealthiest Americans in the form of tax cuts, he
sure
could have saved a good percentage. I mean, why tax cuts at all?
Shouldn't we be all be paying *more* taxes in an effort to put a
stop
to this senseless loss of human life?
Just wondering. It all seems very hypocritical to me.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
