20 minutes ago
Friday, September 05, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Twitter Updates
Always Look at the Bright Side...
The "Religion of Peace" At Work...
About Me
- Brooke
- "Here sir, the people govern." -- Alexander Hamilton (speech in the New York ratifying convention, 17 June 1788)
Five Star Bloggers
-
-
1 hour ago
-
2 hours ago
-
2 hours ago
-
3 hours ago
-
4 hours ago
-
5 hours ago
-
5 hours ago
-
6 hours ago
-
10 hours ago
-
13 hours ago
-
14 hours ago
-
15 hours ago
-
17 hours ago
-
19 hours ago
-
20 hours ago
-
1 day ago
-
1 day ago
-
1 day ago
-
3 days ago
-
3 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
5 days ago
-
1 week ago
-
1 week ago
-
1 week ago
-
1 week ago
-
3 weeks ago
-
5 weeks ago
-
5 weeks ago
-
1 month ago
Liberal Warning Disclaimer
Buy This Book...
...At Lulu.com!
Gen. George S. Patton On Terror
Outrage!
Burqa-Free
Yes, She Has A Plot...
TR Says:
Housekeeping Is Important
Bad Decision
Allah Ack Bacon
9-11
Mother And Child
The Meat Of Islamo-Fascism
Blog Archive
-
►
2009
(199)
-
►
December
(15)
- Close Gitmo... Great Idea.
- "Religion of Peace" Attempts Another Airplane Jiha...
- Merry Christmas!
- Unbeliveable.
- A couple of Good Ones:
- Opportunity for the Muslim Ladies:
- Getting Us Coming and Going...
- How to Know You're About To Have a Bad Day:
- Minnesota: Another Cartonnifada?
- Imam: Catholic Jihad?
- Another Good One:
- Dayam. Worth a Thousand Words.
- Nothing to See Here, I'm SURE.
- Video Friday
- Short Hiatus: At New Job Orientation
-
►
November
(19)
- Skip the Trip to Best Buy This Year!
- Happy Thanksgiving
- Outrage Trinity:
- Islam: Women Under Attack
- On Your Mark...
- America: A Banana Republic
- Depressed.
- Video Wednesday
- Worth a Thousand Words:
- Americans Bow to Royalty?
- Guess What? The Border is Now Secure!
- Memorial Day:
- 43 Fails:
- Welcome to the Collective.
- The "Religion of Peace" Strikes Ft. Hood
- SWINE FLU!!!
- SWINE FLU!!!
- I'm Surprised the MSM Doesn't Just SAY IT:
- Monday Funnies:
-
►
December
(15)
Trolls Aborted:
Civil Discourse And Honest Opinions Are Welcome. Be Warned: Troll Abortions Performed Here!
Second Amendment Rights!
The Truth Hurts...
67 comments:
Just wondering if anyone heard any specific policy proposals at the RNC. Sure, there was lots of "we need to defend america" and "we need to reform the government" and "yay america yay!" but were there any specific plans for how to defeat islamic extremism or fix the financial sector and address the foreclosure crisis? The only proposal I heard was drill, drill, drill, which sounds to me like Big Oil's Big Dream.
You're always saying Barack OBama is just empty words, but were there any non-empty words at the RNC?
There's so much truth in that cartoon. The left wing propaganda machine from MSNBC to NPR is doing all it can to imply she's a bad person because her daughter is pregnant. Seems a bizarre position for them to be taking, given the fact that teenage pregnancy is so common among some of the ethnic blocks that support the Democrats.
You guys are such racists. Why does it matter that the blocks are "ethnic"? What's the point of mentioning that? I can't think of any reason, except to be racist. :)
It isn't racist to cite a fact about a particular ethnic group. No more than it would be sexism for me to say that more females wear skirts than males.
A racist is one who infers inferiority to a particular ethnic group merely because they are part of such group.
That's not what the hermit implied at all.
brooke - where'z the new info on toby keith?
Cube, why would Hermit bring up the fact taht these people are "ethnic"? What point does that make, exactly? Why would you want to point out that they are ethnic?
It's racist, pure and simple.
In other words, suppose I was talking about Palin's views on some topic, and i mentioned that she has a nice hairdo and is wearing a skirt. Would it be sexist to mention that, out of nowhere, for no apparent relevant reason? I think it would.
Hermit said noithing ill of any racial group. He stated a fact. There are ethnic blocks that have a higher percentage of teen pregnancy and those same ethnic blocks tend to favor democrat politicians. That is not racism that is reality. I am also not saying anything bad about them either. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy.
The hermit was talking about a particular ethnic group that constitutes an almost monolithic voting block for the dems which also has a high rate of unwed pregnancies. Facts.
I don't have a problem with you mentioning Palin's hairdo & skirt as long as you didn't believe
that that was was all there was to her candidacy. To assume that she is just a pretty face in a skirt would be sexism.
Besides, I think Sarah's shoulders are broad enough to handle critique about her hair & outfits. She's not going to whine about it.
As oft and quickly as the left flops the race card when they have no better argument,Dora's calling us racists holds as much water as if she'd called us Cocker Spaniels.
Nanc: I'll post the vid right now! :)
Race baiting is a form of racism Dora.
Hermit said noithing ill of any racial group. He stated a fact. There are ethnic blocks that have a higher percentage of teen pregnancy and those same ethnic blocks tend to favor democrat politicians. That is not racism that is reality. I am also not saying anything bad about them either. Merely pointing out the hypocrisy.
05 September, 2008 12:31
Blogger cube said...
The hermit was talking about a particular ethnic group that constitutes an almost monolithic voting block for the dems which also has a high rate of unwed pregnancies. Facts.
Yes, those are facts, what's your point?
Hermit said: "There's so much truth in that cartoon. The left wing propaganda machine from MSNBC to NPR is doing all it can to imply she's a bad person because her daughter is pregnant. Seems a bizarre position for them to be taking, given the fact that teenage pregnancy is so common among some of the ethnic blocks that support the Democrats."
We weren't talking about race, we were talking about teen pregnancy. Why did he have to bring race into it? That's what I don't udnerstand. He could have said "Seems a bizarre position for them to be taking, given the fact that teenage pregnancy is so common among some of the voting blocks that support the Democrats." Why bring up "ethnic"? What point does it serve? That "the ethnics" have higher teen pregnancy rates? What does that have to do with anything in this discussion? Were we talking about Palin's race?
That's where the racism is.
I don't have a problem with you mentioning Palin's hairdo & skirt as long as you didn't believe
that that was was all there was to her candidacy. To assume that she is just a pretty face in a skirt would be sexism.
It would be sexist to talk about her clothes and hairstyles when those things don't have anything to do with the topic being discussed. Suppose we were talking about offshore drilling, and then i said, "and my, what a pretty face she has," out of nowhere, really. That wouldn't be sexist?
I missed something fun here , it seems.
Funny to hear Dora calling someone here a racist when her candidate for VP is well known for his racist remarks.
Dora, sometimes you just need to stop being an attorney and just be a person.
Political correctness has led to the US being a litigous society, and that's a shame. You are the perfect example of someone who takes political correctness to the extreme. Hermit was stating a fact. It's hypocritical of the left to criticize Palin for her daughter being pregnant when there is such an issue with teen pregnancy among democratic constituents. See? Simple.
Don't use logic, Pinky. You'll confuse poor Dora, and she'll be late for her shift at Arby's trying to convince you that leftists are imbeciles well after she did.
This all reeks of incredible hypocrisy. We -- both sides of the political spectrum -- should accept the tags of "hypocrite". It is a complete lie that certain Republican voters have not, at some point, ripped into the parents of teenagers who have gotten pregnant. It is also a complete lie to suggest that the right has never attempted to slander any of their opponents based on completely dubious and baseless statements. By the same token, the left must accept this same charges. It's an unfortunate reality in this country, but one we must accept because of the the ridiculously facetious and petty concerns of most voters.
Sorry. I may be a hypocrite on some issues, but not this one. What's a parent to do? Follow the girl around 24/7? Tie her knees together? You can teach her right from wrong, but in the end she has free will. People make mistakes. We are all human. We've had pregnant teens in our church, asked to leave the youth group. I was one of the only adults who stood by the young couple with. Nobody is perfect.
It's really not a political issue at all.
I have a question, would it be sexist to say "Dora, don't git yer panties in a bunch?"
buwhahahahaha
AA: It depends on your tone, sweetie-pie. ;)
AA -- It would depend on whether you are a Democrat or a Republican. If you're a democrat she would excuse you and make an excuse for you but f you are a Republican you would be a racist and sexist. It's that simple to a simple mind.
All I know is that Palin's daughter is exercising her CHOICE to have her baby. You can't go around claiming to be "Pro-Choice" if you're only "Pro-Choice" when that choice=abortion.
If they're all about supporting the "right for each woman to make choices regarding her own body" then damn-it! support her no matter what her choice is.
That includes Palin's daughter.
And leave off about Palin not being able to control her daughter. Does ANYONE in that party remember being 17 ?! Besides, isn't it the Democrats who support handing out condoms at school, birth control pills for minors from Planned Parenthood, and the rights for minors to have abortions, both without parental consent?! Right there they prove that they FULLY SUPPORT MINORS HAVING SEX BEHIND THEIR PARENT'S BACKS. And they HELP them!
Someone in the dimocrap leadership needs to be slapped...
Krystal...EXACTLY!!!!
AA, just use a different word..p@nties wigs me out.
How about skivies, drawers, bottoms, bloomers, or underoos?
I have issues. I know.
Um, Krystal...you do realize that those measures are taken because people are aware of the fact that a lot 17 year olds are going to be having sex behind their parent's backs, regardless of the "values they instill in them", right? And of course you'd be aware of the fact that they're also to ensure that people who do have sex can avoid unwanted pregnancies, right? Cool, we're straight then.
fotr -- YOU do realize that those measures are given out to promote irresponsible behavior and to promote the culture of convenience created by death on demand.
I encourage commentary about Palin's hairdo and skirts...she is hot and she has great legs! I don't care if it comes up in a discussion about nuclear weapons...
The racist word is just annother dem tactic to avoid the issues and the things that truly affect America, like the rage against the cost of the war yet we sopend 334 billion dollars a year in social programs that have resulted in 1) lower education standards 2) no decrease in poverty, adn 3) an increase in abortions and teen pregnancies since the "safety net" of the 1960s.
Ignore the accusations and press on with what we need to do. As I tell my son about people who call others names, pretend you don't hear it and they will go away.
I hope all this broo-haa-haa over Palin being a gasp, WOMAN instead of issues wakes up a few of the so-called feminists.
I doubt it, but I do hope so.
All I know is that Palin's daughter is exercising her CHOICE to have her baby. You can't go around claiming to be "Pro-Choice" if you're only "Pro-Choice" when that choice=abortion.
If they're all about supporting the "right for each woman to make choices regarding her own body" then damn-it! support her no matter what her choice is.
That includes Palin's daughter.
And leave off about Palin not being able to control her daughter. Does ANYONE in that party remember being 17 ?! Besides, isn't it the Democrats who support handing out condoms at school, birth control pills for minors from Planned Parenthood, and the rights for minors to have abortions, both without parental consent?! Right there they prove that they FULLY SUPPORT MINORS HAVING SEX BEHIND THEIR PARENT'S BACKS. And they HELP them!
It's not about Palin's daughter, it's about Palin. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are happy to trot out their Iraq-bound children to demostrate their own values and commitment to country -- the logic is that the candidate's children's actions reflect who the candidate is and the candidate's own values. Well, if you want the benefits of that logic, you have to take the costs as well. And so Palin's daughter's actions do reflect on who Palin is and Palin's values.
The racist word is just annother dem tactic to avoid the issues and the things that truly affect America, like the rage against the cost of the war yet we sopend 334 billion dollars a year in social programs that have resulted in 1) lower education standards 2) no decrease in poverty, adn 3) an increase in abortions and teen pregnancies since the "safety net" of the 1960s.
On (1), how have these social programs resulted in lower education standards? On (2), in the 1950s, 50% of black people lived in poverty, for example. You think that hasn't decreased? On (3), don't you think that the legalization of abortion nationwide in 1973, and not social programs, resulted in the increase of abortions?
Papa Frank, I don't know what you think happens in a teenager's head, but because I was one more recently than you, I'll fill you in on a little secret: most teenagers do NOT abstain. Yes, it's bad when high school kids are forever going out and having one night stands, but many form pretty strong relationships, and sex is only a natural evolution of that. Surprisingly enough, the vast majority of the population does not believe in the Christian "value" of no sex before marriage. You are NEVER going to decrease the amount of people having sex at that age, let alone stamp it out completely. In implementing sex education and ensuring people have ready access to contraception, you are ensuring that the number of pregnancies that would have resulted had you promoted abstinence as an effective means of prevention, is cut drastically. I don't understand how this is promoting "irresponsible" behavior. ABSTINENCE IS NO SOLUTION!
What, you think PF hatched from a pod as a full grown adult?
LOL!
There's nothing new under the sun, FOR.
And yes, plenty of teens can and do abstain. You clearly ran in a different circle from those.
FOTR -- If you take very conservative figures of the number of abortions you still have at least 20 million. Abortion, as long as it is legal, will never be for the last choice scenarios that Obama would have you believe it is used for and should be for. It will ALWAYS be convenience killing. That's just a simplke truth. By the way, how old do you think I am? Oh yeah, and did I mention that I spent my teen years living in NYC. LOL!!!
I agree with you! Of course it's going to be used in scenarios where perhaps it's not a "last resort", but that doesn't mean the decision to have an abortion is made flippantly. Take for example my good friend...she had an abortion at 18 and regularly tells me that it was the most terrifying, nerve-wracking, stressful and guilt-inducing decision she's ever made. I object to you calling it "convenient killing" because people REALLY struggle with these decisions.
Besides, the majority of abortions would happen as a result of a contraception failing to work, and not because of irresponsible sex, meaning that these are unfortunate incidents in which people who are practicing safe and reasonable sex but are not ready for a child, are forced to choose an abortion. Abstinence would only increase this.
Also, I didn't mean to imply that you're ancient! I merely meant that I've deduced, through your blog, that older than I am. Sorry if I offended!
Brooke, I didn't run in extreme social circles. My group of friends were highly responsible when it came to sex, but that didn't mean they weren't having it, or felt as if they needed to abstain.
Just as in the energy situation, there are those who see one solution instead of a multi-pronged solution.
Abstinence is not the only way to cut abortions and single parent/underaged mothers who would prefer not to have children. Sex education, birth control access, AND abstinence should be taught. We should seek alternative energy sources, but drill the hell out of Alaska because it is what we have at the moment.
A little less extremism, and a little more focus on the mission.
FOTR wrote: "I agree with you! Of course it's going to be used in scenarios where perhaps it's not a "last resort", but that doesn't mean the decision to have an abortion is made flippantly. Take for example my good friend...she had an abortion at 18 and regularly tells me that it was the most terrifying, nerve-wracking, stressful and guilt-inducing decision she's ever made. I object to you calling it "convenient killing" because people REALLY struggle with these decisions."
My apologies ahead of time to your sensibilities. I understand that your friend struggled with this decision and that it was a horrifying experience for her. That is because abortion has more than one victim. Our very nature and conscience tell us that it is wrong to end the life of another person and plead with us not to do it. Your friend was a willing participant in something that went against her very nature in order to be free of the responsibility that comes with a child. That is the choice she made. She chose the convenience of ending a life in order to not have to drastically change hers. That is truth. A very hard and cruel truth but a truth nonetheless. I do feel for her and I do not judge her because it is not to me that she stands or falls. Many girls do not realize ahead of time the extent of remorse or guilt that could set in. I'm not saying that it was in any way a flippant decision but it was a decision made for convenience. The real problem here is that our government allows and in some instances encourages and pays for the weakest and most vulnerable of our Americans to be terminated and their mothers, all too often, to enter a life of remorse and guilt. That is why abortion is completely unacceptable. I am not saying that everything under the sun should be abstinence education but it should be taught and should be clearly taught as the ONLY completely effective method of birth control.
I just don't get the need for such an abortion.
Let's just say that your friend wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer and couldn't figure out how to take a little pill each night at dinnertime, so she winds up getting pregnant.
What's wrong with adoption? She's only put out for the few months it takes her to incubate that little kicking lump of tissue, deals with none of that agonizing guilt you mentioned, and a couple who DESPERATELY wants yet cannot conceive a child gets one.
Sounds like a win/win to me.
What's wrong with adoption? She's only put out for the few months it takes her to incubate that little kicking lump of tissue, deals with none of that agonizing guilt you mentioned, and a couple who DESPERATELY wants yet cannot conceive a child gets one.
Sounds like a win/win to me.
(1) Brooke, you've had children. Was labor painful? Is it painful for some women? Was being a waddling pengiun pregnant lady, eating for two, taking vitamins, not eating this and that, was that any kind of inconvenience or imposition on your life? Isn't that an imposition on someone's freedom, to mandate that they do that?
(2) More importantly, until you prolifers are willing to adopt all those unwanted babies, basically, STFU.
How about until you're willing to face the possibility of raising a child -- CLOSE YOUR LEGS!!!
PF, you beat me to the punch. Once again, a demonstration that the liberals desire all of the benefits of adulthood, yet refuse the responsibility.
Or put another way, they want to do what they want yet not be held accountable for the consequences.
I'm sorry that I had to be so crass but dora is no lady. I am all about choice but to respect life you must KNOW that the choice is whether or not to put yourself at risk of going against the desires of your life WITHOUT treading on the desire for life of a small child.
Yes. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
I guess to Dora, taking a vitamin and putting on a little waddle is a hassle that justifies taking a life.
I do find it interesting, although not surprising, the outright contempt she shows toward pregnant women.
As for the STFU, there are plenty of folks out there just waiting to adopt a child. So until every house here is full and the red tape is not such that folks actually find it easier to adopt from foreign counrties, how 'bout youSTFU.
Hey, this person was not having casual sex every weekend and not worrying about contraception. She was in a long term relationship, and the pill + condom "combo" is still not a 100% guarantee that you won't get pregnant.
Thus the need for abstinence education. Tell people that there IS a 100% effective method and then let them make the choice of taking a risk opr not. However, when their risk goes south make them take responsibility for that risk.
As for the STFU, there are plenty of folks out there just waiting to adopt a child. So until every house here is full and the red tape is not such that folks actually find it easier to adopt from foreign counrties, how 'bout youSTFU.
I have nothing to do with the red tape, although don't you think it's warranted? After all, you don't want to be giving out orphans without checking who you're giving them to. There are already a lot of orphans in this country who grow up in foster care. We don't need more.
As for taking responsibility, I'm happy to take responsibility for my actions by having an abortion and not bringing a child into this world that I may not want and may not want to or be able to take care of. Why do you people think it's a good idea to force people who don't want to have children to have children? Don't we have enough problems with domestic abuse and violence and abandonment, etc., already?!
Thus the need for abstinence education. Tell people that there IS a 100% effective method and then let them make the choice of taking a risk opr not. However, when their risk goes south make them take responsibility for that risk.
This logic is so ridiculous. It's like saying: I'm against seatbelts, and I'm against treating car crash victims in hospitals. If someone wants to drive around on the road, then they need to take responsibility for their choice to do so, and suffer the consequences if they are in a wreck. Giving them seatbelts and the knowledge that a hospital will treat their injuries just encourages irresponsible driving.
Do you think that this logic would actually cause fewer people to drive?
Like most of your arguments, that is completely specious.
Merely declaring it to be specious doesn't make it so.
It's actually quite a good analogy. In fact, any analogy with a behavior that will not decrease works: sleeping, eating, etc. It doesn't matter how many education programs you have telling people not to eat or not to sleep, they will still do it, so it's better to have a program that educates them about the risks and benefits, and helps them protect themselves from the dangers. Abstinence-only education is a pipe dream, get real. And no, the fact that you personally were abstinent until marriage doesn't prove anything about the tendency of the wider population to have teen and premarital sex.
Merely declaring it to be valid doesn't make it so! LOL!
I've explained twice now why it's a good analogy. You have yet to explain (not merely declare) why it's a bad one.
The difference is that in a crash the victim is in danger of losing their life. Pregnant women having abortions are typically not in any sort of danger because they are pregnant.
Thanks, PF.
The difference is that in a crash the victim is in danger of losing their life. Pregnant women having abortions are typically not in any sort of danger because they are pregnant.
Bullshit. Not all car crash victims are in danger of losing their lives. Are you saying that only those in danger of losing their lives get treated at hospitals? Please. And seatbelts prevent lots of injuries that are not at all lifethreatening, but are still unpleasant and are in fact injuries.
Well feel free to run headlong into the field of your own ignorance then. I've done what I can to help you.
Neither of you has explained why this is a bad analogy.
Here's another version: "if you didn't want to be obese, you should have kept your mouth shut instead of stuffing it with food. Now that you have heart disease and diabetes, you have to own up to the consequences of your own actions, instead of having hospitals and doctors bail you out."
LOL! By why bother with that when you can have gastric bypass and a little liposuction, eh?
Your argument works against you; it is just what we've been saying.
If you don't want to be pregnant, then close the legs or, now that you're pregnant, own up to the consequences of your actions instead of having hospitals and doctors bail you out.
Sorry. BUT why bother...
The real problem here, dora, is how you view the child. You view that child as a punishment and a problem that interferes with your lifestyle and a non-human. Brooke and I view that child as a gift and a life. If you saw the child as a human then you would have to admit that abortion violates the rights of the child. The mother is only one of three people involved in the issue.
Brooke said...
LOL! By why bother with that when you can have gastric bypass and a little liposuction, eh?
Your argument works against you; it is just what we've been saying.
If you don't want to be pregnant, then close the legs or, now that you're pregnant, own up to the consequences of your actions instead of having hospitals and doctors bail you out.
So when are you going to start posting here and arguing for throwing obese people who come in with heart attacks out onto the street?
The real problem here, dora, is how you view the child. You view that child as a punishment and a problem that interferes with your lifestyle and a non-human. Brooke and I view that child as a gift and a life. If you saw the child as a human then you would have to admit that abortion violates the rights of the child. The mother is only one of three people involved in the issue.
It's actually you guys who view the future child as punishment -- you opened your legs, now pay for your transgressions, you whore -- you can't escape the consequences of your sinful actions that easily.
I am for the best interests of the pregnant woman and the future child -- why FORCE a woman who doesn't want a child to have one? How much more inhumane can you be? How is this good for the woman or the child?!
The woman becomes stronger and the chld...well...has BREATH.
Why do you not view the child as a human with rights?
The woman becomes stronger
What does this mean??? No, the woman is forced to have a child she does not want. How is that a good thing?
Why do you not view the child as a human with rights?
Because it's not a child, it's a clump of cells, like my pinky.
And there is the REAL problem. It is not like your pinky -- he or she has a pinky of their own. Two of them as a matter of fact. A heart, a brain, hands, feet, and even a personality. I knew my girls personalities before they were born because I got to know them while they were still in the womb. I could tell the difference between them immediately not by how they looked but by how they acted. Before they were born I knew that one was a thumb-sucker and one wasn't. And my wife knew infinitely more about them. They were amazing even then and they are amazing to me now as I interact with them. And their personalities are still the same personalities that I knew when they were in the womb.
PF, when do yo think you started learning about their personalities? 5 months into the pregnancy? 6 months? Most abortion (like 95%) happen in the first 3 months. When it really is just a clump of cells.
How is he/she just a clump of cells at 3 months but a child at 5 months? You make no sense at all.
You start to know the personality of the baby in the womb around five months because that is when you are able to perceive it's movements... Not because there is none.
And until you've been pregnant, you're really out of your realm to say otherwise. Each baby really does have it's own pattern of movements, things it likes, ect.
Perhaps a developing infant isn't as self-aware as you'd like. That's no excuse to kill it for convenience sake.
I don't know when it becomes a child with rights. But I do know for sure that at 1 week, it's not a child or even a fetus. it's an embryo -- technically, a clump of cells. And it continues to be a clump of cells for a few months.
Post a Comment