| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
22 Mar 2006 02:16:20 PM |
| Object: |
Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
.
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 08:29:05 PM |
|
|
I guess that means they provide all the food that people in Catholic
Heaven will EVER have.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Arizona Bushwhacker" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 02:31:15 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 09:10:22 PM |
|
|
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong? If a
person doesn't practice what he preaches, he should preach evil to correct
his error?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 09:18:19 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
If a
person doesn't practice what he preaches, he should preach evil to correct
his error?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 09:28:35 AM |
|
|
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right or
wrong?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bugman" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 03:38:00 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in message
news:H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or wrong?
You are correct.
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 12:14:34 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:28:35 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right or
wrong?
I am saying there is no absolute right or wrong.
I am amused by how so many equate 'right or wrong' with 'correct or
incorrect'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 05:38:04 PM |
|
|
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:99p52292t7u2pjjnbqg1am4g2cctamlkpu@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:28:35 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
I am saying there is no absolute right or wrong.
Are you absolutely right about that?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 06:15:10 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:38:04 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<yfGUf.902$q6.430@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:99p52292t7u2pjjnbqg1am4g2cctamlkpu@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:28:35 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
I am saying there is no absolute right or wrong.
Are you absolutely right about that?
BAM
I am correct about it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 07:52:14 PM |
|
|
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:pfe6221ena94amuuq9d5frcanjq0pvsc4t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:38:04 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<yfGUf.902$q6.430@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:99p52292t7u2pjjnbqg1am4g2cctamlkpu@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:28:35 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to
sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment?
More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
I am saying there is no absolute right or wrong.
Are you absolutely right about that?
BAM
I am correct about it.
So "correct" and "incorrect" are not subject to opinion, but right and wrong
are?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 09:26:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:52:14 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<kdIUf.2242$Ck.1666@bignews5.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:pfe6221ena94amuuq9d5frcanjq0pvsc4t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:38:04 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<yfGUf.902$q6.430@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:99p52292t7u2pjjnbqg1am4g2cctamlkpu@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:28:35 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<H4zUf.831$q6.285@bignews8.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to
sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment?
More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
I am saying there is no absolute right or wrong.
Are you absolutely right about that?
BAM
I am correct about it.
So "correct" and "incorrect" are not subject to opinion, but right and wrong
are?
BAM
Correct.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 11:44:54 AM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right or
wrong?
BAM
You are using a dishonest trick, changing the meanings of words in the
middle of the discussion to confuse the issue.
This is how you should have asked the question.
"Then you are saying that there is no such thing as "ethically right"
and "ethically wrong" from an objective standpoint. Am I correct or
incorrect?"
As you can see, this asks the same question, but it does not contain
the obvious trap that you included, and obviously intended to spring
when he answered your question. The rephrasing is an honest request
for clarification that does not include any linguistic traps.
And, to answer your question, you are correct. Attilla is saying that
there is no such thing as intrinsic values for the "ethical" meanings
of the words "right" and "wrong". And he is saying this because it is
true.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 05:37:34 PM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1143135894.360674.162240@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
bam wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to
sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment?
More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
BAM
You are using a dishonest trick, changing the meanings of words in the
middle of the discussion to confuse the issue.
This is how you should have asked the question.
"Then you are saying that there is no such thing as "ethically right"
and "ethically wrong" from an objective standpoint. Am I correct or
incorrect?"
Sorry bub - it was his statement that needed to be expounded upon - not
mine.
And, to answer your question, you are correct. Attilla is saying that
there is no such thing as intrinsic values for the "ethical" meanings
of the words "right" and "wrong". And he is saying this because it is
true.
You can't even define truth. Stop using words you don't understand. You
can't define right and wrong either.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 10:05:47 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1143135894.360674.162240@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
bam wrote:
"Attila" <prochoice@here.now> wrote in message
news:g0f522l0dd7p7qnuh209nr28deehpum3mc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:10:22 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> in alt.abortion with message-id
<CgoUf.1053$qe.260@bignews1.bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Arizona Bushwhacker" <ArizonaBushwhacker@cox.net> wrote in message
news:5niUf.9328$8Y2.9037@fed1read03...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to
sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment?
More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I right
or
wrong?
BAM
You are using a dishonest trick, changing the meanings of words in the
middle of the discussion to confuse the issue.
This is how you should have asked the question.
"Then you are saying that there is no such thing as "ethically right"
and "ethically wrong" from an objective standpoint. Am I correct or
incorrect?"
Sorry bub - it was his statement that needed to be expounded upon - not
mine.
Which means that you did not understand what I said. I was talking
about the dishonest way that you asked your question, putting a trap in
the words. I was telling you how to honestly ask the question.
And, to answer your question, you are correct. Attilla is saying that
there is no such thing as intrinsic values for the "ethical" meanings
of the words "right" and "wrong". And he is saying this because it is
true.
You can't even define truth.
Yes, I can. If you remember, I asked you the context of your questions
because the questions themselves were too broad and vague. You refused
to answer the reasonable questions for specification of context. That
means that you did not care what I said. You had planned on saying
that I was wrong no matter what I said. You tipped your hand and
showed your dishonesty by how you replied to a reasonable and pertinent
question.
Stop using words you don't understand.
I don't. Unlike you, I understand the importance of context. That is
why I asked the context of the words that you were using, so that I can
use the words PROPERLY.
You can't define right and wrong either.
Yes, I can, as well. In several contexts. In sewing, it is used to
define which side of the cloth or garment is supposed to viewed by an
observer, and the wrong side is the opposite side. There are also
different definitions when "right" and "wrong" are used in geometry,
politics, and physical location.
However, if you are talking about "right" and "wrong" in an ethical
context, there is no firm, absolute definition. Ethics and values
change over time, between cultures, across socio-economic lines,
between religious beliefs, and even between families. All "right" and
"wrong" means in an ethical context is what behavior you personally
approve or disapprove of respectively.
Mark Sebree
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Pervert" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
24 Mar 2006 01:40:11 AM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
What does this have to do with whether abortion is right or wrong?
Right and wrong have no intrinsic values and will change from
person
to person and over time.
Then you're saying there's no such a thing as right or wrong? Am I
right
or
wrong?
BAM
You are using a dishonest trick, changing the meanings of words in the
middle of the discussion to confuse the issue.
This is how you should have asked the question.
"Then you are saying that there is no such thing as "ethically right"
and "ethically wrong" from an objective standpoint. Am I correct or
incorrect?"
Sorry bub - it was his statement that needed to be expounded upon - not
mine.
Which means that you did not understand what I said. I was talking
about the dishonest way that you asked your question, putting a trap in
the words. I was telling you how to honestly ask the question.
And, to answer your question, you are correct. Attilla is saying that
there is no such thing as intrinsic values for the "ethical" meanings
of the words "right" and "wrong". And he is saying this because it is
true.
You can't even define truth.
Yes, I can. If you remember, I asked you the context of your questions
because the questions themselves were too broad and vague. You refused
to answer the reasonable questions for specification of context. That
means that you did not care what I said. You had planned on saying
that I was wrong no matter what I said. You tipped your hand and
showed your dishonesty by how you replied to a reasonable and pertinent
question.
Stop using words you don't understand.
I don't. Unlike you, I understand the importance of context. That is
why I asked the context of the words that you were using, so that I can
use the words PROPERLY.
You can't define right and wrong either.
Yes, I can, as well. In several contexts. In sewing, it is used to
define which side of the cloth or garment is supposed to viewed by an
observer, and the wrong side is the opposite side. There are also
different definitions when "right" and "wrong" are used in geometry,
politics, and physical location.
However, if you are talking about "right" and "wrong" in an ethical
context, there is no firm, absolute definition. Ethics and values
change over time, between cultures, across socio-economic lines,
between religious beliefs, and even between families. All "right" and
"wrong" means in an ethical context is what behavior you personally
approve or disapprove of respectively.
Are you trying to make sense to some of the idiots in here again? Haven't I
warned you about that? Stop it now before somebody has an aneurysm.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 04:01:36 PM |
|
|
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JD" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 12:28:30 PM |
|
|
<yarrido@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1143064896.751423.293050@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
"Screeming." Hehe.
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
How many die from pregnancy? Waaaaay more than from the drug RU486.
Slightly off topic for you life-from-conception types: birth control pills
don't prevent conception, only implantation. RU486 is basically the same
thing, just at a later point in the pregnancy. So to be consistent, birth
control pills should be banned as well?
And horseback riding - why, a woman could lose her fetus that way too. How
are we - or the woman herself for that matter - to know that a woman is
pregnant before horseback riding? I say we either forbid horseback riding
for pre-menopausal women, with exceptions for those who undergo a virginity
check.
Agreed?
JD
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 05:59:16 PM |
|
|
JD wrote:
<yarrido@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1143064896.751423.293050@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
"Screeming." Hehe.
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
How many die from pregnancy? Waaaaay more than from the drug RU486.
You can buy pregnancy in a drug store? No kidding?
Slightly off topic for you life-from-conception types: birth control pills
don't prevent conception, only implantation. RU486 is basically the same
thing, just at a later point in the pregnancy. So to be consistent, birth
control pills should be banned as well?
I think that is why some support abstinance.
And horseback riding - why, a woman could lose her fetus that way too.
That's how we lost Superman.
How
are we - or the woman herself for that matter - to know that a woman is
pregnant before horseback riding? I say we either forbid horseback riding
for pre-menopausal women, with exceptions for those who undergo a virginity
check.
Why burden the horse... let them run free.
Agreed?
JD
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 05:59:59 PM |
|
|
JD wrote:
<yarrido@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1143064896.751423.293050@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
"Screeming." Hehe.
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
How many die from pregnancy? Waaaaay more than from the drug RU486.
You can buy pregnancy in a drug store? No kidding?
Slightly off topic for you life-from-conception types: birth control pills
don't prevent conception, only implantation. RU486 is basically the same
thing, just at a later point in the pregnancy. So to be consistent, birth
control pills should be banned as well?
I think that is why some support abstinance.
And horseback riding - why, a woman could lose her fetus that way too.
That's how we lost Superman.
How
are we - or the woman herself for that matter - to know that a woman is
pregnant before horseback riding? I say we either forbid horseback riding
for pre-menopausal women, with exceptions for those who undergo a virginity
check.
Why burden the horse... let them run free.
Agreed?
Women should not ride horses...Agreed!
JD
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 04:28:11 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug?
No, since it is safer than most drugs they dispense, including aspirin.
RU486 is not a "death drug".
How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six?
More people die from taking aspirin every hour than have died from
RU486.
Why aren't we screeming
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison.
Because it is a very safe drug, and no drug is perfectly safe. It is
not a poison, no matter how much you lie and call it one.
We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street.
That leaves these pharmaceutical companies out, since they are not
selling death. They are selling medicines, including a safe one that
is supposed to cause an abortion when used correctly.
They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
No, they do not. Pharmaceutical manufacturers make no claim that the
drug is perfectly safe, and they have extensive research to show what
the side effects are and their frequency. The extremely low death rate
from RU486, far lower than the number of women killed during the same
period from surgical abortion, and almost non-existant when compared to
the number of women killed by their pregnancies over the same period,
means that RU486 is a viable alternative to both.
The only people that is lying about RU486 are people like you that
would rather force women to suffer from continuing an unwanted
pregnancy. You cannot deal with how safe a surgical or medicinal
abortion actually is.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 05:07:36 PM |
|
|
On 22 Mar 2006 14:01:36 -0800, "yarrido@aol.com" <yarrido@aol.com>
wrote:
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six?
The last count you heard was wrong.
Why aren't we screeming
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
Why aren't you screaming about having aspirin banned? If you were
truly against drugs with ACTUAL known and documented side effects,
that's one to go after. But you're not after them, are you?
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
‘Republican’, but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I’ll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 09:16:58 AM |
|
|
On 22 Mar 2006 14:01:36 -0800, "yarrido@aol.com" <yarrido@aol.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1143064896.751423.293050@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug?
Aspirin kills more people than RU486. I wonder how many refuse to
sell aspirin?
How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison. We need to go after the salesmen of death just
like we go after the pusher on the street. They both sell the same kind
of crap and both make lies as their promises.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 04:41:35 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and "yarrido@aol.com"
<yarrido@aol.com> posting the following on 22 Mar 2006 14:01:36 -0800
iin alt.atheism?
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six?
And over 200 deaths linked to Viagra. And *thousands* in the last
year dead from aspirin!
Where is your outrage over those deaths?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 05:54:15 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
What's so funny about peace, love and "yarrido@aol.com"
<yarrido@aol.com> posting the following on 22 Mar 2006 14:01:36 -0800
iin alt.atheism?
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six?
And over 200 deaths linked to Viagra. And *thousands* in the last
year dead from aspirin!
Where is your outrage over those deaths?
You see....we need to shut down this menace to society. Those
companies are only interested in making a buck. They don't care about
anything else. They don't care what human lives they destroy and they
don't care about human beings at all. The capitalistic monster has
taken on a life of its own and it will destroy all of us. No one
controls it anymore it is just randomly killing us. Stop all of these
poisons.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
23 Mar 2006 06:51:09 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and "yarrido@aol.com"
<yarrido@aol.com> posting the following on 23 Mar 2006 15:54:15 -0800
iin alt.atheism?
Douglas Berry wrote:
What's so funny about peace, love and "yarrido@aol.com"
<yarrido@aol.com> posting the following on 22 Mar 2006 14:01:36 -0800
iin alt.atheism?
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six?
And over 200 deaths linked to Viagra. And *thousands* in the last
year dead from aspirin!
Where is your outrage over those deaths?
You see....we need to shut down this menace to society. Those
companies are only interested in making a buck. They don't care about
anything else. They don't care what human lives they destroy and they
don't care about human beings at all. The capitalistic monster has
taken on a life of its own and it will destroy all of us. No one
controls it anymore it is just randomly killing us. Stop all of these
poisons.
Sorry, but those "poisons" save far, far more lives than they take.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 08:33:30 PM |
|
|
in article 1143064896.751423.293050@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com,
at wrote on 3/22/06 5:01 PM:
Arizona Bushwhacker wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their conscience
objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
on the subject at this website:
http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq
--
----------------
" The truth shall set you free "
These republicans would flip out if an Iraqi
woman would have an abortion, but would
have no problem if the same pregnant Iraqi
woman was raped, beaten to a pulp, and
shot in the head while in US custody. That
they can all support. But killing the fetus
without raping and killing the mother would
be bad.
Any chance that some of these pharmacists object to killing the woman
with the RU486 death drug? How many dead woman are there because of
this poison? The last count I heard was six? Why aren't we screeming
from the towers and suing he hell out of the company that makes and
MARKETS this poison.
Because it STILL won't make women put out for you...
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The People -Ä$$xoÃ-¥LxS£Æ§RÐ" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 03:04:05 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:sYOdncagE6EyLbzZ4p2dnA@giganews.com...
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby
Yet you condone War on Children in the Middle East.
What a hypocrite.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 04:04:16 PM |
|
|
*Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a
"Conscience
*Clause" for pharmacists. Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell
wares
*that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,( if their
conscience
*objects to such things ) Whatever became of the First Amendment? More
info.
*on the subject at this website:
Don't worry, J Young, we'll find a way to apply the First Amendment in
due time and let you suffer and die in order to respect our "conscience
clause".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 02:55:55 PM |
|
|
Because if you are going into the medical field you have to be prepared
for these kinds of things. What are all of you wingnuts going to do
when the cures for cancer have derived from stem-cell research? Refuse
to give them out too? Refuse to give out HPV vaccinations becuase it
could lead to promiscuity? How about refusing condoms because they can
break!??! Tell them to just be abstinent!
It's not about your conscience, it's about serving the customer's
health needs. If they don't like that they need a new profession.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof that liberals are totally full of sh*t. |
22 Mar 2006 10:29:02 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Why does the liberal establishment object so vehemently to a "Conscience
Clause" for pharmacists.
Why do you fascists oppose liberty for women?
Why must these pharmacists be forced to sell wares
that will ultimately lead to killing a pre-born baby,
You sound like a Nazi spewing propaganda and lies in order to justify
fascism.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
