| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Lloyd Parker" |
| Date: |
08 Sep 2004 06:48:14 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Abortion = Terrorism |
In article <iuG311RlEHA.444@prospero.stardock.local>,
Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote:
I think that after September 11, the American people are valuing life more
and we need policies to value the dignity and worth of every life.
So capital punishment is out?
President
Bush has worked to say, let's be reasonable, let's work to value life,
let's
reduce the number of abortions, let's increase adoptions.
I think you'll find every pro-choice person says this too. Bush wants to
the government to prohibit abortions though.
And I think those
are the kinds of policies the American people can support, particularly at
a
time when we're facing an enemy and, really, the fundamental issue between
us
and the terror network we fight is that we value every life.
Except poor children (whom conservatives would let starve because of a bad
choice by their parents), the elderly (whom conservatives would let starve
if they haven't saved enough money on their own), the poor if they cannot
afford health insurance, etc.
.
|
|
| User: "Gactimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion = Terrorism |
08 Sep 2004 10:57:53 AM |
|
|
(Lloyd Parker) wrote in
news:chn9h8$nhe$15@puck.cc.emory.edu:
And I think those are the kinds of policies the American people can
support, particularly at a time when we're facing an enemy and, really,
the fundamental issue between us and the terror network we fight is
that we value every life.
Except poor children (whom conservatives would let starve because of a
bad choice by their parents), the elderly (whom conservatives would let
starve if they haven't saved enough money on their own), the poor if
they cannot afford health insurance, etc.
The above "reverse logic" you mention seems tragically similar to that
used by leftists against conservatives in political debate.
For instance, if I say I do not support welfare, suddenly I want to
starve children. A lack of support for the political program does not
equal a lack of support for the stated purpose (charity), only the
**method** used in the program. Yet, being against welfare means
hating the poor, desiring to cull SS and Medicare means hating the
elderly, desiring to get rid of the Department of Education means wanting
people to be ignorant, etc.
This seems to be typical of the scare tactics practiced by the Democrats.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion = Terrorism |
08 Sep 2004 09:32:07 AM |
|
|
In article <chna61$t8d$1@news1.usf.edu>, Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote:
lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote in
news:chn9h8$nhe$15@puck.cc.emory.edu:
And I think those are the kinds of policies the American people can
support, particularly at a time when we're facing an enemy and, really,
the fundamental issue between us and the terror network we fight is
that we value every life.
Except poor children (whom conservatives would let starve because of a
bad choice by their parents), the elderly (whom conservatives would let
starve if they haven't saved enough money on their own), the poor if
they cannot afford health insurance, etc.
The above "reverse logic" you mention seems tragically similar to that
used by leftists against conservatives in political debate.
For instance, if I say I do not support welfare, suddenly I want to
starve children.
Because that is the effect of your position.
A lack of support for the political program does not
equal a lack of support for the stated purpose (charity), only the
**method** used in the program.
So you'd give poor children food? How is that not welfare?
Yet, being against welfare means
hating the poor, desiring to cull SS and Medicare means hating the
elderly, desiring to get rid of the Department of Education means wanting
people to be ignorant, etc.
This seems to be typical of the scare tactics practiced by the Democrats.
Hey, if the shoe fits...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion = Terrorism |
09 Sep 2004 04:31:55 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:57:53 +0000 (UTC), Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net>
wrote:
lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote in
news:chn9h8$nhe$15@puck.cc.emory.edu:
And I think those are the kinds of policies the American people can
support, particularly at a time when we're facing an enemy and, really,
the fundamental issue between us and the terror network we fight is
that we value every life.
Except poor children (whom conservatives would let starve because of a
bad choice by their parents), the elderly (whom conservatives would let
starve if they haven't saved enough money on their own), the poor if
they cannot afford health insurance, etc.
The above "reverse logic" you mention seems tragically similar to that
used by leftists against conservatives in political debate.
For instance, if I say I do not support welfare, suddenly I want to
starve children. A lack of support for the political program does not
equal a lack of support for the stated purpose (charity), only the
**method** used in the program. Yet, being against welfare means
hating the poor, desiring to cull SS and Medicare means hating the
elderly, desiring to get rid of the Department of Education means wanting
people to be ignorant, etc.
This seems to be typical of the scare tactics practiced by the Democrats.
Today I noticed the following in your postings:
- abortion is murder.
- invading other countries on the flimsiest excuses are justified.
- killing non combatants after this invasion is justified.
- gays are responsible for AIDS.
- not agreeing with you is being democratic or *shudder* liberal.
And you wonder why America gets a worse and worse reputation abroad.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
