President Obama!

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
Re: Obamanation here today

Listen:

More, even you cannot get away with simultaneously supporting and then denouncing and objecting to FREE SPEECH; and then trying to pin it on Obama both ways.

The 'article' in your link is idiotic.

Is this where you get your 'news'?

She quickly forgets that BUSH apologized for the european cartoon and so did BUSH's state department saying that attacking anothers religion goes beyond the first amendment of our country and should never be allowed.

But, that information isnt convenient right now, so they ignore it.

Peace

TOS
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
Re: Obamanation here today

Listen:

More, even you cannot get away with simultaneously denouncing and objecting to FREE SPEECH, and trying to pin it on Obama both ways.

The 'article' in your link is idiotic.

Is this where you get your 'news'?
There are boundaries here.
The president apologizes for a anti-Muslim film, yet could care less about ridicule to Christians here. He's the one being one-sided. Why didn't he come out and denounce the "art"?

It doesn't matter where the news comes from, it's the same story all over...
check your own "trusted" news source. Where that first artcle was reprinted to WZ from was Fox News. So now you are saying Fox is not a reputable source??? More people watch it than any other news station.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/w...ter-repeatedly-denouncing-muhammad-movie.html


WH denounces "Innocence of Muslims," Won't denounce "Piss Christ"? - Riehl World News
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
Re: Obamanation here today

There are boundaries here.
The president apologizes for a anti-Muslim film, yet could care less about ridicule to Christians here. He's the one being one-sided. Why didn't he come out and denounce the "art"?

It doesn't matter where the news comes from, it's the same story all over...

WH denounces "Innocence of Muslims," Won't denounce "Piss Christ"? - Riehl World News

The problem with your premise is that Obama never apologized for the anti-Muslim film.

Hit me back with a quote from the President within which he 'apologized' for the idiot film: I've got all night, and the whole weekend.

Here's the thing...you seemingly don't have a problem with the anti-muslim 'film', per se....your problem is the Muslim reaction to it.

And right you are...most of the people protesting haven't even seen the film (and also largely can't read and certainly don't have an internet connection, never mind the fact that YouTube has been shut down in these countries for days), and are being told by their 'leaders' to just RAGE against the US over a supposed injury to Islam. This has been the situation for decades.

Yet, you have a problem with a 1987 photograph which 'insults' Christianity.

You do realize that you're acting like the Muslim rioters, don't you?

See, here in the US, we have FREE SPEECH, which means if someone wants to make an idiot video for the sole purpose of inciting Muslims, we allow that person to do that, even if it means riots around the world.

If an American photographer wants to take a picture of the Crucifix in a jar of piss...

Well, you know the rest.

It's called FREE SPEECH.

Obama shouldn't apologize for either.

(and he hasn't...)
 

toonertoo

Most Awesome Dog
Staff member
57 states.jpg
57 states.jpg
 

TechGrrl

Space Cadet
So, you are willing to "bargain" for a babie's life?

Abortion is a subject that generates strong opinions and emotions. The Bible actually speaks to a pregnancy being a baby after "quickening". With today's medical science, the fetus can survive outside the mother's body earlier and earlier. It may not be too long before a fertilized egg can be taken all the way to term outside the mother in a "uterine replicator". If so, would you support a woman's choice to move the blastocyst/embroyo/fetus to such a device, giving up all rights and interest to the 'baby'? If you would support that, how do you propose paying for the care of the fetus to term, and then after birth?

I have ambiguous feelings on this topic. I do not believe that a group of 8 or 16 or 32 cells is a 'baby' or a human being. It is estimated that up to 30% of all fertilized eggs spontaneously miscarry or abort before the woman even realizes she is pregnant. So why would God discard that many human beings?

Ectopic pregnancies never result in a viable fetus. If left untreated, they result in a dead woman. I find that the Catholic Church's stance that treating an ectopic pregnancy chemically (resulting in generally saving the woman's fertility) is abortion and surgically (which generally results in the woman losing the ability to have more children) insane. And in some cases, bishops have excommunicated women and doctors who treat ectopic pregnancies. I consider that morally indefensible. When did the life of the mother become less than nothing?

One last comment. Even after "quickening", or viability outside the womb, there are medical conditions that occur that boil down to the mother or the baby, and a choice must be made. A difficult, terrible choice. I vote for the mother. A friend of mine had two pregnancies that had to be aborted in the 7th month, or they would have killed her. She was devastated. She did not want to lose those babies. But she is still alive. Would it have been better for her to die along with the baby?

This topic is not one that can be discussed with any hope of opinions being changed. I suggest we let this topic fade away.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
........."I have ambiguous feelings on this topic. I do not believe that a group of 8 or 16 or 32 cells is a 'baby' or a human being. ".....(tech girl)
On the ambiguity, what you are calling not a baby can be tested DNA and it will show it's a homo sapien.Not a canine, ot a feline etc.....
 

TechGrrl

Space Cadet
........."I have ambiguous feelings on this topic. I do not believe that a group of 8 or 16 or 32 cells is a 'baby' or a human being. ".....(tech girl)
On the ambiguity, what you are calling not a baby can be tested DNA and it will show it's a homo sapien.Not a canine, ot a feline etc.....

As I said, we're not going to change any opinions with this discussion. There is no argument concerning the DNA. There is room for you and I to disagree whether 8 cells of human DNA should be considered a human being with all the rights and privileges of a fully grown woman.

Having spent 12 years at a Jesuit university, let me throw in a theological argument: what differentiates humanity from the animal kingdom is our soul, given to us by God. We have no way of knowing when ensoulment takes place within the womb. Therefore, one person may say, to be safe, assume ensouldment at the moment of conception. Another may say, ensoulment takes place when the fetus become viable to live outside the womb. I ask, why would God ensoul so many people just to throw them away? (that 30% of miscarriages I mentioned above)

Let us agree that this is a Faith Mystery that cannot be resolved by logic, and let it go.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Blamer in chief? When are you guys going to realize that calling Obama names isn't going to get Romney or any republican senate candidate any more votes?
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll

thats funny coming from a shirt tail riding accomplish nothing like Mike Reagan, who other than being the son of the former president, never did anything for himself but can sure talk the talk on fox spews...

But lets see>??? who else was a blamer in chief while in office????

OH YEAH, RONALD REAGAN. Who in his address to the nation after relection BLAMED the CARTER administration for his first 4 years in office!

Lets see what he says in both 1981 and 1984

"The problems we inherited were far worse than most inside and out of government had expected; the recession was deeper than most inside and out of government had predicted. Curing those problems has taken more time and a higher toll than any of us wanted." ~~Ronald Reagan

"To understand the State of the Union, we must look not only at where we are and where we're going but where we've been. The situation at this time last year was truly ominous."~~Ronald Reagan

"First, we must understand what's happening at the moment to the economy. Our current problems are not the product of the recovery program that's only just now getting under way, as some would have you believe; they are the inheritance of decades of tax and tax, and spend"~~ Ronald Reagan

And my personal favorite right wing statement of the decade:

"Now the budget deficit this year will exceed our earlier expectations. The recession did that. It lowered revenues and increased costs."~~Ronald Reagan

Tell Mike Reagan to STFU.

Peace

TOS
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
Your very first reaction is to attack the author. You may not like him, but he has an opinion and I agree with it.

Thats because both you and M Reagan dont understand the reality of the nations history. MIKE REAGAN is PAID to say what he says, you on the other hand repeat it for free.

Peace

TOS
 
Top