Thanks Bob

[PKevman]

Yes and if CHRISTIANS had stayed out of it the whole thing would've stayed at the state level. Instead we have a whole nation killing unborn babies.

I would really like to know what the source for this information is?

 

[S†ephen]

See I don't think he is Stephen Dale. As I read through his voting record I don't think that at all. I see a candidate who is still completely and totally sold out to Libertarian ideals, even if he is running as a Republican.

What makes you say that. He voted as best he could on the bills I posted.

 

[Lighthouse]

Good grief. I hope you're talking about yourself. He posts links and shows his research and all you do is throw some little kiddie insult. What an embarrassment.

An idiot's an idiot. And PatriotBeliever is an idiot, if he believes the idiocy he's spouting about Ron Paul, and how the law should work.

 

[S†ephen]

An idiot's an idiot. And PatriotBeliever is an idiot, if he believes the idiocy he's spouting about Ron Paul, and how the law should work.

:baby:

 

[PKevman]

First let me start with what we do agree on. This thread has gotten nasty when in fact I think we share way too many of the same views to be bickering like this.

I'm not bickering. I am rationally discussing the issues. I have responded point for point down the line to everything you and Stephen have said. I have exposed some serious holes in the some of the thinking. You have given me things to think about as well, and I've spent a good deal of time answering your questions. I don't think it's that nasty. I will say this, TOL is not your average "Mamsy-Pamsy" Christian website. It's more like a 2X4 in the face and I encouraged your dad to be ready to be challenged when he started posting. People on this site are generally far more concerned with the truth than someone's opinions, and that holds true for me as well. That is why I pushed your dad for the sources of the information that he cites. I want to see the data for myself, and see if it comes from unbiased and objective sources. I don't think those requests are unreasonable in the least.

It is an unbelievably lousy thing for a politician to pull something like what Turbo spoke of on elective and therapeutic abortions. Not only that I wouldn't trust a politician not to do it.

How about the whole point that he made about the fact that BEFORE abortion was made ok by our society, mothers weren't having their children murdered to save their lives. It wasn't happening. Unborn babies are now viewed as disposable by our society. This whole round of conversation began with the fact I believe there should never be an exception made for murder. A good doctor will see he has two patients and try to save both. A Godly parent will seek to see their child and their spouse survive. A Godly mother would not say, "Yes, murder the baby".

Do you know if Ron Paul was speaking of therapeutic or elective abortions? I don't know for sure and I intend to do some research. Let me know what you come up with.

To me it's crystal clear to me that exceptions were being made to allow the murder of the child.

 

[PKevman]

What makes you say that. He voted as best he could on the bills I posted.

Because my view from his voting record is one of a politician who has low regard for the life of the unborn. Regardless of the rhetoric he posits.

 

[PKevman]

Good grief. I hope you're talking about yourself. He posts links and shows his research and all you do is throw some little kiddie insult. What an embarrassment.

I don't know if he's an idiot, (YET) but quack would be a word I would use.

 

[Lighthouse]

:baby:

How was I whining?

 

[drbrumley]

In case you missed it PK

My system? What exactly is my system?

Yes, your system you are defending. That the Federal Government is the boss. States don't have any rights whatsoever. Tell me I'm wrong please.

Everyone here agrees abortion is murder. And it should be outlawed.

Colorado was the 1st state to legalize the practice. Knowing full well that the case would go to the Supreme Court and be ruled on for the state of Colorado. Legalized without the people of Colorado giving their disapproval. Thank you Federal Government. And this is what you support. The federalization of abortion, and every other stupid thing one can think of.

 

[PKevman]

In case you missed it PK



Yes, your system you are defending. That the Federal Government is the boss. States don't have any rights whatsoever. Tell me I'm wrong please.

Everyone here agrees abortion is murder. And it should be outlawed.

Colorado was the 1st state to legalize the practice. Knowing full well that the case would go to the Supreme Court and be ruled on for the state of Colorado. Legalized without the people of Colorado giving their disapproval. Thank you Federal Government. And this is what you support. The federalization of abortion, and every other stupid thing one can think of.

NOOOOOO!

I stand against abortion and against the government passing laws to protect murder. Perhaps you have missed that?

Why is it so difficult to understand?

It doesn't matter to me HOW the government is layed out so much as WHAT the government DOES!

And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with saying, "Do not murder" needs to be made a national law that is enforced in all 50 states and that ANY state or territory that wants to be a part of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA would also have "Do not murder" as a fundamental and foundational law for their government.

To allow each and every state to choose whether to allow children to be murdered is just plain wrong. Just as wrong as allowing states to have the right to own black people was wrong.

 

[drbrumley]

NOOOOOO!

I stand against abortion and against the government passing laws to protect murder. Perhaps you have missed that?

Not at all. The problem is getting the federal government to see that abortion is murder. States didn't have this problem circa 1967.

Why is it so difficult to understand?

EXACTLY!!!!

It doesn't matter to me HOW the government is layed out so much as WHAT the government DOES!

Then you need to stop the dancing around then.

And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with saying, "Do not murder" needs to be made a national law that is enforced in all 50 states and that ANY state or territory that wants to be a part of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA would also have "Do not murder" as a fundamental and foundational law for their government.

Again, circa 1967, not a problem.

To allow each and every state to choose whether to allow children to be murdered is just plain wrong. Just as wrong as allowing states to have the right to own black people was wrong.

Admittingly so. But come to find out, slavery was unconstitutional as well.

And BTW, as I told Knight before, Ole Dishonest Abe was a bigot and a liar to boot!

 

[sopwith21]

To allow each and every state to choose whether to allow children to be murdered is just plain wrong.

Then why would you permit each and every country to choose whether to allow children to be murdered?

There are numerous world governing bodies including the United Nations, European Union, International Criminal Court, Africa Union, Union of South American Nations, etc., etc., and many more who could pass legislation on a continental or worldwide level to outlaw abortion, yet you make no effort whatsoever to get legislation passed through these governing bodies.

And please, no comments about the evils of the United Nations or the legitimacy of the EU... you've already clearly stated that "It doesn't matter to me HOW the government is layed out so much as WHAT the government DOES!"

And no excuses about an approach to the UN or EU being unrealistic. In nearly forty years, your federal strategy has miserably and utterly failed to outlaw abortion yet no matter how unrealistic or unworkable the federal strategy has proven to be, you will consider no other options.

So I ask you to be consistent and consider this:

You accuse Ron Paul of being "pro abortion" because he does not try to outlaw abortion in one mighty stroke at the highest government level.

For the sake of intellectual honesty and consistency with your own agenda, I ask you to reconsider your position. You must either A) drop the allegations against Paul and reverse your position on this particular issue and admit that you are pro-abortion country by country, or B) adjust your strategy to match your argument and drop your efforts to outlaw abortion only in the USA, and begin working on a continental and worldwide basis.

Let's be honest... you are practicing the exact same strategy at a different level that has led you to accuse Ron Paul of being pro-abortion. You are not trying to outlaw abortion in one stroke at the highest possible level, which, to be honest and fair, makes you just as "pro-abortion" as Ron Paul.

 

[PKevman]

Then why would you permit each and every country to choose whether to allow children to be murdered?

I don't live in each and every country in the world and am not a CITIZEN of each and every country in the world. I am a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I am not a citizen of 50 individual countries who just happen to be in the same geographic location and thus share only that as a common bond.

 

[PKevman]

But to further answer your question, the murder of children should not be allowed anywhere in the world. And there is nothing wrong with saying that, now is there?

 

[PKevman]

There are numerous world governing bodies including the United Nations, European Union, International Criminal Court, Africa Union, Union of South American Nations, etc., etc., and many more who could pass legislation on a continental or worldwide level to outlaw abortion, yet you make no effort whatsoever to get legislation passed through these governing bodies.

I don't live there or I would be!

 

[sopwith21]

I don't live in each and every country in the world and am not a CITIZEN of each and every country in the world. I am a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I am not a citizen of 50 individual countries who just happen to be in the same geographic location and thus share only that as a common bond.

You live in the world, don't you?

And Ron Paul doesn't live in all fifty states either.

Your position is inconsistent and you are violating your own logic. You practice the exact same strategy for which you accuse Paul of being pro-abortion. Kevin, you are truly, indisputably "pro-choice country by country" by your own standards. You practice the exact same things for which you condemn others.

 

[sopwith21]

I don't live there or I would be!

You don't live in Iowa either... yet you condemn anyone who tries to outlaw abortion in any way that doesn't include Iowa.

Kevin, you are pro abortion country by country. You practice the same strategy that you condemn others for. I ask you to be consistent with your own standards.

 

[Lighthouse]

You don't live in Iowa either... yet you condemn anyone who tries to outlaw abortion in any way that doesn't include Iowa.

Kevin, you are pro abortion country by country. You practice the same strategy that you condemn others for. I ask you to be consistent with your own standards.

That is the most asinine argument I have ever seen anyone put forth. You should be ashamed of yourself. Your son should be ashamed of you. That's pathetic.

 

[S†ephen]

To me it's crystal clear to me that exceptions were being made to allow the murder of the child.

But you didn't answer my question. Therapeutic or elective? I'm currently reasearching but I haven't found much. What about you?

 

[PKevman]

And please, no comments about the evils of the United Nations or the legitimacy of the EU... you've already clearly stated that "It doesn't matter to me HOW the government is layed out so much as WHAT the government DOES!"

The UN has no business running our country. I believe that firmly.

And no excuses about an approach to the UN or EU being unrealistic. In nearly forty years, your federal strategy has miserably and utterly failed to outlaw abortion yet no matter how unrealistic or unworkable the federal strategy has proven to be, you will consider no other options.

Don't worry, it's an utterly irrelevant argument because, as I already stated I am a citizen of the USA and therefore have a right to voice my opinion the same as you do.

So I ask you to be consistent and consider this:

I have been consistent. Abortion is murder and it is always wrong. And every citizen should use whatever influence that they have to stop the murder of innocent babies. My position has not changed.

You accuse Ron Paul of being "pro abortion" because he does not try to outlaw abortion in one mighty stroke at the highest government level.

And because he has proven to be openly ok with the murder of innocent babies in some instances.

For the sake of intellectual honesty and consistency with your own agenda

,

I have no agenda except to defend the rights of the unborn. If I lived in Timbuktu, I would be fighting for the rights of unborn Timuktians, or Timbuktoozies, or whatever you call them!

I ask you to reconsider your position.

:think: No. Do not murder is wrong and always will be wrong. Nothing you say, nothing anyone says will EVER get me to change that position.

You must either drop the allegations against Paul and reverse your position on this particular issue,

No I must not. I must keep the pedal to the metal and fight against people like Ron Paul and George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton and Rudy Guiliani getting into office.

or admit that you are pro-abortion country by country.

No. I'm anti-abortion everywhere in the world. I fight for the rights of the unborn IN THIS COUNTRY because I live in this country!

You are practicing the exact same strategy that has led you to accuse Ron Paul of being pro-abortion.

No I am not. How so? Because you say so? Just because you say something doesn't make it true my friend.

You are not trying to outlaw abortion in one stroke at the highest possible level, which, to be honest and fair, makes you just as "pro-abortion" as Ron Paul.

If there were a King of the World, and he had the direct decision to outlaw abortion all over the world, I would be pushing him harder than you could imagine to do so. If there were a President of the World, I would be pushing for a pro-life candidate to be the President of the World who would not compromise on Do not Murder. Since there is no such thing, I must confine myself to the area of influence that I have and that is here in the country that I am a citizen of.