Michael Vick and abortions
Michael Vick will lose tens of millions of dollars and go to prison for a significant period of time for killing dogs. Planned Parenthood will be subsidized with taxpayer dollars and glorified for aborting (murdering) millions of human babies.
Isaiiah 5:20 condemns the calling of evil good and good evil. That’s right about where we are right now, and the leftist media is complicit in supporting that mentality. And, something to muse over is the fact that people in other parts of the world eat dogs and in a few instances people!
This letter has not been edited.
Okay, I`m musing.
Murder is a legal term and Isaiah was a sheep herder fixated of sin. Name spelled wrong, by the way.
Planned parenthood also helps women have healthy babies and healthy sex lives.
Because some people eat dogs, what Vick did it okay? Was that the point, or was there one?
Musing done. On to better things.
Posted by Sharon B. on August 30, 2007 02:26 PMThe ASPCA will euthanize countless dogs and cats, and their workers will not face prosecution. Muse on that.
Planned Parenthood prevents more abortions than you, Operation Rescue, any religion, and anyone else, combined.
You are now condemned for calling good, evil.
Muse on that.
Posted by HistoryRepeats on August 30, 2007 02:35 PMI think.we should fight babys.then the dogs wood be ok.
Posted by Keef on August 30, 2007 02:36 PMGeorge,
Michael Vick agreed to a plea deal and pled guilty by his own volition. He has broken laws and will serve the consequences for breaking those laws.
Whatever happened to the Republican Party's "Law and Order" mantra?! I have seen more back-pedaling and excuses from the "Party of Ethics" than I care to stomach.
And before some wingnut comes on and says "Well Clinton this or Dems that", I will say if they broke laws they should have been punished too.
Quit acting like children by blaming others or making excuses for yours or their transgressions. Republicans claim to be the party of responsibility-- that we as individuals should make our own decisions and then stand by the consequences. So prove it. Demand more from your leaders and your peers.
Vick broke the law. He isn't the victim of the left or the media or anybody. You guys berate liberals for the victim mentality, but you constantly fall into it yourselves. Be a man, George, and quit whining.
Posted by Dan on August 30, 2007 02:50 PMDogs are sentient beings.
Fetuses are not.
Posted by on August 30, 2007 03:02 PMPlanned parenthoods main business is birth control, George, if you want less abortions, support anal sex!! Dr Seuss: "one fish two fish, red fish blue fish"(some other insignificant book)
Posted by Terry on August 30, 2007 03:20 PMAll you far left liberal socialists want glory four PPS defcamps to sell dead babys four dogfood four you're beloved animal companios in the people's repuiblic of boulder
Posted by Hanks on August 30, 2007 03:38 PMGeorge Lilly would have you believe that "Planned Parenthood will be subsidized with taxpayer dollars..." for abortion, which is of course plainly false. The federal Hyde amendment prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion, which remains less than ten percent of Planned Parenthood's business (dollars or patients) both nationally and locally.
What the US government funds Planned Parenthood to do (nationally, not in CO) is to provide Title X services for birth control and family planning, and for basic reproductive health care (Paps, mamograms, cancer screening) for the disadvantaged.
If you believe that getting poor people birth control and cancer screening is bad, please explain why you think so. If you think that birth control and cancer screening for the poor is good, but shouldn't be done by Planned Parenthood, please tell us why, and who you think would better provide these services.
I have a few extra dictionaries and a book on grammar and would gladly send one to Hanks, if he can figure out how to use them.
Posted by Stan Broyles on August 30, 2007 04:04 PMDear George,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your frequent letters, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
Posted by on August 30, 2007 04:07 PMStan you far left librul socialist should no that reality has a librul biass
Posted by Hanks on August 30, 2007 04:11 PMSorry. I was just trying to help, Hanks.
Posted by Stan Broyles on August 30, 2007 04:18 PMI dont kneed help, I'm personally responsable
Posted by Hanks on August 30, 2007 04:21 PMHank,
The book should be easy for you. It opens on the right.
Please treat the posters here with respect. Differences of opinion in this area are almost always based upon thought, study and logical reasoning. The answers we develop are also subject to contradiction by others who have those same assets of reason, thought and study. Read and reply with logic. There are good people on both sides of this issue. It is neither simple nor clear and involves many other issues that must be addressed if we are to make sense.
I am a long time pro-life activist and have been involved at many different levels political battles on this subject. I often stood toe to toe with January 22, protesters which once resulted in me finding my picture on the front page of the Rocky the next day. That particular day, I car pooled with a neighbor who disagrees with my viewpoint and she and I brought friends home to have lunch and talk.
Even among the most vocal pro-choice advocates, I was treated with courtesy. Now, show us your reasons and the thought and study behind them. Leave the slurs and insults behind if you want your opinion to be treated reasonably.
Answers to bible questions. 4:07,
if they are librals the anser is yes they.should all be put.to deth..
I think we are all getting sappy in our posting on these subjects because this letter, and others like it, have hit a new note of absurdity.
Why not just post like we all did jello shots for 6 hours? What more can be said on abortion, pph, vick, babies, feti, comparing something here to cannibals and dog eating cultures?
Hi Queen. Welcome back to Bedlam.
Anon at 2:30 do they strangle them or just electrocute them or maybe tear them limb from limb. What is your comparison for?
Posted by Sharon B. on August 30, 2007 05:52 PMwow, all of you people are the reason why our country is draining down the tubes.
Posted by Fresh on August 30, 2007 05:55 PM4:07
Please excuse the extensive quoting but 4:07's questions need to be read with my answers.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
Depends on what seasonings and woods you used. Now mesquite is always allowed in Colorado, but hickory and apple have seasonal limitations. If you live in an apartment or other attached community, smiting is unnecessary as other neighbors are probably upset by their constant whining. In a suburban setting remind them of the Make My Day Law..
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
Actually the price depends on the market. If you do it on E-BAY allow for the shipping charges although you can negotiate the packaging. Local markets are chancey as most won't buy today's kids. Girls today are problematical because few of them are willing to be docile and meek. Even fewer are capable of commanding any price worth the trouble. Best solution is to cut her allowance.
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
This requires a bit of stealth. Arrange to visit her home or apartment. If tampons or pads are in the front of the bathroom closet, suspect uncleanliness. Count the number of items in each package and keep track. As long as the number stays the same you're OK. Unless you are trying to score on a first date you should be able to tell. Another clue is if they wear darker skirts or pants or look at the chair seats when they stand up. If they get really upset when you ask they are probably off-limits.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
Your friend has it backwards. You may own Canadians not Mexicans. The scripture clearly states a NEIGHBORING nation. Canada is a neighbor who trades with us and obeys our immigration laws. Mexico sends its people to invade and disrupt our country. You might be able to get around this by declaring Mexicans captured enemy soldiers but use caution. Don't leave any ID where they might see it.
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
You need not actually smite him. Just work on your landscaping and the outside appeaarance of your home. Buy an expensive car and park it in the driveway. Have pricey people attend frequent parties. In order to match you he will work even harder and give himself a coronary.
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
Your friend is right. Eating shellfish is a food provision which limits it to the kitchen and dining room. Homosexuality is in the bedroom. Since the shellfish is subject to a location division it will be a lessor abhomination. Don't even think of eating shellfish in the bedroom with a homosexual. The level of abhomination would be too high to calculate. Besides, homosexuals are known to be students of food and other arts and you might be embarrased by your ignorance.
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
Now here we have a problem. The text clearly states sight so the best solution would be to close your eyes and be careful..altar fires ya know. But, since wearing the reading glasses corrects the defect, you could wear them. You might try contact lenses too. Most congregations would not be upset if you merely backed up to the altar as approach assumes forward motion. Again watch out for those flames.
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
Find pictues of them as teenagers. Have them printed as 8x10's and paste them up all around their children's high schools. Be sure to put the names on them and attribute the posting to the parents. The kids will complain so much those men will wish they were dead or, at least, deaf. Make sure pictures are also posted in the lawbreaker's office.
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
You can play football with or without gloves but tell the coach you aren't going to pick up any fumbles. The NFL will probably not permit you to wear the gloves so coat your entire body with olive oil and lanolin. Don't try out for wide receiver or quarterback.
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
These violations need to be addressed but why put the whole burden on you? Open up the irrigation canals and flood his fields. When he tries to clean it up, call the EPA and tell them he is destroying a wetland. Take pictures of your aunt and send them to the local ladies' society. Tell them you plan on using the pictures in a national magazine article about local women. The women will go straight to cutting her apart with their scorn and embarrasssment. No stones needed. Don't burn the house, just replace the fornicators' sunscreen with tanning oil and let Global Warming do the job.
Hope these suggestions help.
(no way to spell check this I apologize for any errors.)
Posted by momma y on August 30, 2007 06:00 PMmomma y,
BEST YET! BRAVO! AND MANY THANKS!
The original has been a favorite of mine for a long time. But, I must say, you have managed to out do the original by a goodly margin.
Thanks again.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 30, 2007 06:08 PMThanks OG. High praise indeed coming from you. Besides, I am in need of more smiles. I got a private request for permission to post it on a website. I'll put the link up when I get it.
Posted by momma y on August 30, 2007 06:53 PMWhat an odd letter. Odd responses too.
Dan pondered:
"Whatever happened to the Republican Party's "Law and Order" mantra?! I have seen more back-pedaling and excuses from the "Party of Ethics" than I care to stomach."
Was your post meant for a different thread? I don't see the link between Michael Vick and the Republican Party.
Posted by John II on August 30, 2007 07:06 PMOK, momma y, I am your new biggest fan! Like OG (how often does one get to type that!), I've loved that original post for a long time, but you had me laughing in fits! Which is odd, because I'm usually laughing in disgust. Very nice work!
And to George Lilly, the original letter writer:
Yes, that's just about right where we are right now. Ain't it a great country! That, and WTF do your last two "something to muse about" points have to do with your argument??!! It's already flimsy, why make it weaker?
Posted by shaupeen on August 30, 2007 07:27 PMMy favorite thou shalt not is kill. Kill is not the word in the original Hebraic language, which is also is not the modern day linguistic usage. But, of course, people don't care what the original said, they insist the, let me see, I believe it's the 4th maybe the 5th translation of the original that was ordered by King James 1st to unify the Christian church is the real, verified Word of God.
This, despite the well known fact that that translation omitted some of the original written sacred script, due to the Church, and of course, political expediency concessionsons that needed to reach agreement so on the final version could be written in the English version of Latin version of the Greek version of the then unintelligible original Hebraic version.
There may have been an Arabic version in there somewhere also, hence my statement 4th or 5th.
Now as to my point. Conceding only for the sake of arguement that Kill is the word following Thou Shalt Not, do you know that every hunter and fisherman, every soldier in every war that ever happened including those who took part in the wars ennumbered in the King James version of the Bible as well as all those who had a part in that smiting stuff, patricide, matricide, infanticide, genocide and the endless sacking, pillaging, plundering and ravaging that resulted in death for so many, are guilty and, according to the claims of those who think the King James Bible is, in it's entirety as written, the Word of God, damned by one of the seven deadly sins.
That takes out almost half the population that existed in BC times including the many godly men that kids are taught about in sunday school. And, in AC times everybody on the planet that in has never heard of Christianity, never mind those who have heard of it but will be slain if they admit it.
Now, somebody tell me about this all loving God you've created in your own mind out of misinterpreting what you call the Word of God. Next time I'll compare the man Jesus everyone is always saying is the son of God to the Christ that is. Have a good day!
Posted by Allen Campbell on August 30, 2007 08:34 PMYou didn't finish your point, Mr. Campbell. I was waiting for you to say what the actually word was.
It was not kill, it was murder.
Posted by John II on August 30, 2007 08:42 PMAffordable and accessible birth control will decrease abortions. This is quite simply Planned Parenthood's main mission.
Let's encourage our kids to wait as long as possible for the emotional, mental and physical roller coaster of sex. But in this day and age, no one should be dealing with an unwanted pregnancy because they can't afford reliable birth control.
Posted by Michael R on August 30, 2007 08:56 PMWhen you think about...if you follow religious logic tha God has a plan for everyone, doesn't GOD kill more babies than anyone?
How many babies died in the tsunami two years ago?
How many babies are dying in Africa from AIDS, malnutrion and warfare EVERY SINGLE DAY?
Does God "have a plan" when he allows a child to be born with downs syndrome or physical deformities or was he completely helpless to prevent it?
Maybe, just maybe, God isn't keeping score, after all.
Maybe the universe is God's immense wild garden and he just lets it grow on it's own and and enjoys it's natural beauty and doesn't try to control every little detail of it.
Maybe abortion, although not of God's creation himself, is still part of his plan because WE created it...and HE created us.
Posted by Thomas on August 30, 2007 08:56 PMMichael R. announced:
"But in this day and age, no one should be dealing with an unwanted pregnancy because they can't afford reliable birth control."
How about this:
But in this day and age, no one should be dealing with an unwanted pregnancy because they lack self-control.
See.
Courteous conversations and well expressed ideas.
John II
The closest English word to the Greek and Latin texts is slay with additional context in the suffix making it a deliberate act of killing an innocent or vulnerable person. You are perceptive to note the difference in the texts. It is interesting to see how each person or group re-translates them.The first record of the compilation is remarkable for the various arguments for and against the various books and their translations. There was a remarkable video on the subject. I'll see if I can find the name.
I know that John11, but I left that out on purpose to make the point and I left it to people to ponder. You spoiled that part but, I forgive you,ha,ha, for it. I should have known somebody would know.
And Thomas, I agree that God is too busy to cater to every want people have. What amazes me are the preachers that claim to have the ability to make your prayers be answered by God on his next television speacial if, cure your every ill because God is with him if, and also that he can insure that God will answer your every emailed or every letter you write prayer if , you send in a donation to fight evil that surounds you on a constant and continuing basis.
And, I'm getting a bit concerned, I mean John, Thomas, Michael, as in archangel? What do you guys know about God that I don't.
Posted by Allen Campbell on August 30, 2007 10:34 PMVery well said John II, but remember in the Liberal mindset personal responsibility is taboo and mistakes are someone elses fault - not your own.
So if you "accidentally" get pregnant it must be the baby's fault so just abort it - you can try to use protection or abstaining the next time.
As for taxpayer money going to planned parenthood, how in the world can they ever prove or account for where the money is actually used?
Then Thomas tries make babies & children dying from hunger, AIDS and Tsunamis analagous with abortion. How in the world does allowing someone to scrape a fetus from a womans womb compare to a child washed away from a natural phenomenon? Abortion is hardly "Natural"
While both are very tragic in my mind only one of those is tragic in yours isn't it Thomas?
That is a big stretch sir - better luck next time.
Also think of all people who had birth defects or mental deficiencies that went on to greatness, when someone like you would have just aborted them rather than give them a chance at life.
Posted by Jack Bauer on August 30, 2007 10:38 PMSorry John - I can't back the concept of self-control over reliable birth control. Speaking for myself , the minute passion enters the picture, self-control flies out the window. I'd rather be prepared.
Posted by Michael R on August 30, 2007 10:43 PMInteresting comments, Michael R. Sorry to hear about your self-control problem. Try not to let it fly out the window too often lest your "passion" is misconstrued as rape.
Posted by John II on August 30, 2007 11:13 PMOf course abortion is natural. That is what a miscarriage is. The actual term is "spontaneous abortion".
Birth control fails, girls get raped. stuff happens.
Posted by Sharon B. on August 31, 2007 12:37 AMSharon,
I know you mean well and are a good person but please reconsider combining rape with the sub-moronic phrase "stuff happens." Rape is a violent assault upon the physical and the mental privacy of women. Rape victims are much more than "stuff." I'm certain you had no intention of minimalizing the brutal realities of rape. Thank you.
Posted by momma y on August 31, 2007 01:28 AMDon't try to spin Sharon - it is a pathetic way of trying to make abortion a "natural" procedure and it is unbecoming of your usual intleligent posts.
Posted by Jack Bauer on August 31, 2007 07:52 AMJack Bauer,
There is a very simple way by which to account for monies received and monies spent, sir. It's called "book-keping". And it is something everybody shuld learn how to do; even with the income from his/her summer lemonade stand in the front yard.
Planned Parenthood does an excellent job of showing - to Internal Revenue, among others - just what comes in, and what goes out for what. And, they have demonstrated this on several ocassions, when funds for women's health programs have been cut off by the Right-wingnuts, who really have no interest at all in programs for HUMAN health and welfare - especially that of women - just a fanatic hatred for the idea of choice, and the thought that a woman need not always be under the thumb of a modern pater familias.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 31, 2007 08:05 AMJohn - Now you're just being silly. I'm an old man who has been married a very long time. Don't mistake a healthy, loving sex life with the lack of self control that leads to rape.
My point is simply that in order to fully enjoy intimacy with your partner, birth control is your best friend.
Posted by Michael R on August 31, 2007 09:50 AMMichael R.,
I'm being silly? You said when you're passionate...wait I'll repost your quote:
"Speaking for myself , the minute passion enters the picture, self-control flies out the window."
Now, I'm not saying you're a potential rapist. But, what if a younger single man said the same thing? What do you think may happen when his passion meets her self-control? Do you think he would want a jury to hear his thoughts on self-control?
Wow! Interesting thread...
Thomas - I think you are correct. The world is like Gods garden and for now he's letting it grow of it's own volition. But, be ever mindful, for one day he will kneel down and do some very serious weeding.
Michael R - you said "the minute passion enters the picture, self-control flies out the window." Were you describing the recent situation at an airport involving a certain politician?
OG - When PP receives non taxpayer donations and designates it as spent on abortions, and then uses the taxpayer monies to pay rent, utilities, etc... it's no different than if they'd applied the tax dollars to the abortions.
This is why the referendum was carefully worded that no tax dollars, whether directly or indirectly, can be used to fund abortions.
No amount of creative bookkeeping (also known as Lotus massage) can change that.
Posted by KW on August 31, 2007 11:02 AMWhy does everyone think that sex for pleasure is bad? Please tell me this! I'm a married man, my wife and I aren't in a financial position to have children while we are trying to grow a business, so birth control is a must. And, good golly, are we both in a better mood after a night of "marital obligations". And amazingly we had the same benefits from sex even before we got married. The rings on the fingers only signify your vows, it isn't a magic charm to make sex better.
A healthy sex life, married or single, young or old, is absolutely necessary to be a complete human being. There is also a responsibility to it as well, but guilt and recrimination to make them stop all together is bad. The longer you insist on making this shameful, the longer half-truths and extreme measures will result in more abortions, more unwed mothers, more sexually transmitted diseases and making life miserable for EVERYONE.
Posted by Roger on August 31, 2007 11:19 AMWho made it shameful, Roger? I don't think you're saying anything we don't know about the pleasures of sex. The point of the discussion is about the consequences of sex, not the benefits of it.
Posted by John II on August 31, 2007 11:46 AMAllen: Would love to be a fly on the wall when you meet your maker! It is sure to be most interesting....enjoy your hateful, mean spirited, dogmatic life while you can... your day with the almighty is coming sooner than you think. Boy do I feel sorry for you. Sad, sad person you are.
Posted by behold on August 31, 2007 02:27 PMKW,
The point that has been made - time and again - when the question was brought up is, simply, that there are two (2) distinct, separated, funds; and the book-keeping is done accordingly.
You anti-choice people are the ones who freely mix up that which is not mixed up elsewhere. It provides you with a simplistic argument - for the simplistic people who either cannot distinguish, or are too lazy to bother with distinguishing - to shout from your bull-horns. However, noise value isn't the measure of FACT, or TRUTH.
But then, neither fact nor truth is of much concern to your movement to begin with.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 31, 2007 02:53 PMOG - Thats just like to two (2) distinct, separated pockets I put my money in!
Do you understand why the law was worded directly or indirectly? It was to prevent PP from being able to ignore the will of the voters, find a loophole and set up some creative accounting system.
When this was voted on, the measure wasn't asking the voters if they approve of PP's current system of accounting or not.
The voters overwelmingly decided they didn't want tax dollars funding abortions. Period.
Posted by KW on August 31, 2007 03:30 PMKW - Perhaps if Senator Craig acknowledged his sexuality and had felt free to enter into a loving, committed relationship with another man, he wouldn't have been trolling public restrooms in the airport. Sorry if I think it's a stretch to compare that behavior with true intimacy between consenting adults.
That said, I must add that birth control is imperative for people who enjoy casual sexual relationships. Hopefully Senator Craig practiced safe sex practices if this was normal behavior for him.
Posted by Michael R on August 31, 2007 05:20 PMKW,
That is NOT LIKE 'two pockets you're putting your money in", sonny. And if you have ever dealt with the IRS, and the procedures concerning tax exemption, and/or receiving government monies, you would know better. They hang you out to dry for any form of "creative accounting" faster than a New York Minute.
I've seen the results of the anti-choice gang before. The mess with Amendment 2 some years ago gave us all a pretty good look at how that bunch operates.
And, just to save the trouble of questioning what I meant, I think we both know that the Dobsonite operation is the financial fountainhead - and provides the leadership, as well as the little busybody cult followers - for all the Right-wingnut anti-anything "causes" in Colorado.
But, it would appear that we are at cross purposes here. I was speaking about the kind of thing done when Owens cut off funds already appropriated for health care; and by way of Social Services paid to Planned Parenthood - among other organizations - because HE CLAIMED they WOULD BE used for abortions.
As I said, neither fact nor truth are of much concern to the Right-wingnuts.
The anti-choice gang suckered the voters later. Which, I believe, may be already in the Courts. Which is another side to the matter. Either way, the book-keeping meets rigid standards - Federal ones. Which probably will lead to elimination of a whole lot of the referendum's otherwise harmful effects.
Posted by Old Grouch on August 31, 2007 05:28 PMOG
The referendum has survived judicial review in other jurisdictions and the federal Hyde amendment, upon which this referendum is based, went to appeal and was upheld.
There was also a very well financed attempt to rescind the provision, accompanied by shrill cries of all the damages it would cause if left in place. That attempt failed.
Abortion is legal. It is the law of the land. We can try, with little or no success, to change it nationally or we can go back to the states and face victory and defeat across the country as the people will speak and the results will never satisfy either side completely.
I know that Planned Parenthood, well I don't know but it is only reasonable, is completely honest in their accounting because they stand to lose so much more than they could ever gain if they cheat. Smaller agencies and those with less experienced accountants are more prone to break this law if only by accident, which is why the wording is what it is.
So soon after you said such nice things I have to tell you that I know a great deal about both elections. I was in the middle and did a great deal of the writing and PR work as well as organizing volunteers. We stand on opposite sides. But we will speak reasonably to each other because neither of us believes this issue is all one or the other. There are too many good ideas and reasons out here to waste time name calling when we can find common ground and share our strength. I remember one bill in the Colorado house years ago and we discovered that Right to LIfe and NOW both hated it. Vanished faster than a teenager watching daddy gas up the lawnmower.
Be well. But we do disagree on this.
Posted by momma y on August 31, 2007 09:10 PMThe difference between an opponent and an enemy is in the courtesy of speech and the honest consideration of other's opinions.
Posted by momma y on August 31, 2007 09:19 PMPoor impotent George Lilly, anal wart.
Posted by on September 1, 2007 12:09 AMmomma y,
As to the referendum, I agree that we will have to agree to disagree. And I have always been of the opinion that the entire issue generates a great deal more heat than light. I certainly accept the belief-systems as having the right to oppose that which they oppose. I do, however, oppose the idea of enshrining any particular belief-system in our secular Law.
My own annoyance here - and I am certain it came through - was/is with the constant assertions that PP is, somehow, "fiddling the books". It is this kind of refusal to learn the facts about something, while constantly insisting that there is "wrongdoing" going on, that tends to make me lose whatever "cool" I might have. And, unfortunately, that is the format in which so many of the "conservative" posters present their arguments, especially about those issues about which they really know nothing, but are parroting some form of "party line" - usually a "religious" one.
Some nearly 50 years of experience dealing with IRS - as CEO (and therefore, the one who signs off - under penalties of perjury - on forms and reports) for a number of Corporations, comments such as, "It's just like two pockets in the same pair of pants", etc., etc., make me wonder at times about the integrity of the person commenting.
And, unfortunately that has been my experience with so many of the people in, and so much of, "conservative" politics over the years. Never mind the facts; and forget about the truth. Just get out a bullhorn and rant.
And then, when there is opposition, whine, cry, and snivel about how the "conservative"/"christian" side is being persecuted, or prevented from presenting its arguments, etc., etc. Especially when a measure winds up in the Courts, and is finally thrown on the garbage heap, where it belonged in the first place.
But, that's life. And, in the end, it is also what makes the form fun - with some really good belly laughs at times as well; so many expert pundits, who know little or nothing about anything, but always have the last word on everything.
(The reference to the "bullhorn "comes from experience as well. It's mighty difficult to attempt to carry on reasonable dialogue, when the other party keeps bellowing at top volume.)
There is nothing personal there, momma y. Just an early morning - maybe even a bit of "wrong side of the bed" - reflection on some generalities over time.
Thank you for being one of the reasonable, sensible, and intelligent voices in discussion here. I hope there will be more, as time goes on. But, it is a real enjoyment to have you currently with us.
Posted by Old Grouch on September 1, 2007 07:23 AMMommy. Birth control fails, girls get raped. Life, in all its messy, miserable unplanned and sometimes horrible events happens.
If you are sure I was not minimizing rape then your post to me was unnecessary.
Jack, spontaneous abortion takes over %50 of all human conceptions.
How you deal with this fact is up to you.
Abortion by the mother is not "natural' but it is permitted.
Thanks for the left handed compliment.
I still would rather have the pregnant women decide, and not government ran mostly by men and Christians.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 1, 2007 11:24 AMSharon B.
In discussions on this issue it is not unusual to have rape treated with too little respect for the victim. I probably wrote the post more to prevent one of those attack packs (either side, pick one) from moving forward on the premise that rape is a minor inconvenience, or that women who get raped have to bear part of the blame. Please accept my apologies if you felt that I failed to treat you with respect.
As I told OG, we are on opposite sides. That is no reason to ignore the possibility of a ream of attacks on you and your well reasoned and logical opinions. To do nothing would have been to approve of and cooperate in intentionally twisting your posting from one that tried to show many have too little respect for the causes of abortion and the women involved. I prefer listening and talking to shouting and ignoring.
Posted by momma y on September 1, 2007 08:53 PMOG
If you want to hear a man's true thoughts ask while he's smiling.
It's a complicated issue. No one side is all right or all wrong. Some individuals are ALL WRONG when they resort to violence or frivolous lawsuits.
Sometimes we can agree to disagree. Other times we will agree on the problem and some parts of the solution and if there is real communication and cooperation there will be a great deal more solution than problem. Stone headed stubborn idiots make more problems and darn poor company.Give me an honest opponent anyday.
I have many early morning rants. Fortunately I also have cats who jump on the keyboard until they have all been brushed. By that time I'm awake. See you around for awhile at least.
Posted by momma y on September 1, 2007 09:04 PMThanks momma y, I appreciate your vigilance. :-)
Posted by Sharon B. on September 2, 2007 08:09 PM