Thanks Bob

[elected4ever]

I do not think that those who are complaining the loudest really wont a solution. In stead they wont to live under God's law and not the law we are under. That is Dominion Theology. It is ungodly and does not address a solution. We are to live under man's law and influence that law toward righteousness and not Old testament law.

If you are saved and you once again bring yourself into the subjection of the law you have departed from the grace that saved you and you are carnal in your walk before God.

I expect a solution and not a lot of religious noise. Several of us have presented a solution and still we have been ignored in favor of a warped religious view. Come let us reason together sayeth the Lord. If we are going to be unreasonable then this is a wast of time. The question is , how do we change human law to protect the unborn. That is where I am.

 

[Granite]

Fine (and please know that I actually agree with Jefferson), but SUPPOSING you are right, what in history proves the states will all choose rightly?
In fact history shows the exact opposite.

I would like to know something further though. Do you and your dad believe that we should be the United States of America, and what does that mean to you?

Ah. So you're tacitly admitting what I've said for a while now: abortion wouldn't be available in this country unless Americans wanted it to be so.

Are you guys reluctant to make this a state by state issue because you're afraid you don't exactly enjoy the public support you think you do?

Imposing your will from the federal level on down is the very same stunt, the very same tactic, and the very same abuse of power conservatives used to protest and oppose. I guess using the tactics of your enemy is acceptable if it suits you. How convenient, and how very situational.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
Idiot.

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.

Well when one cannot refute the facts given with facts of their own, name calling is one tactic, if one wants to stoop to that. It is revealing and this individual has reverted to it several times in this thread. It's o.k., I think most can see what we've both posted.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

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

You've been rather level headed throughout this thread so I'd like to know what specifically you are referring to. I'll assume you really have not lowered yourself to name calling also. That means you have no real ideas to discuss. Everything I have discussed here has been linked to source information that backs up my arguments. In fact, I have seen little or no rebuttals to any of the real information that I have contributed, just speculation and hypothetical situations that do not exist. How is that the position of a "quack"? This really makes your position weak.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

I do not think that those who are complaining the loudest really wont a solution. In stead they wont to live under God's law and not the law we are under. That is Dominion Theology. It is ungodly and does not address a solution. We are to live under man's law and influence that law toward righteousness and not Old testament law.

If you are saved and you once again bring yourself into the subjection of the law you have departed from the grace that saved you and you are carnal in your walk before God.

I expect a solution and not a lot of religious noise. Several of us have presented a solution and still we have been ignored in favor of a warped religious view. Come let us reason together sayeth the Lord. If we are going to be unreasonable then this is a wast of time. The question is , how do we change human law to protect the unborn. That is where I am.

Thank you. I pointed this out several times. The hypotheticals all eventually start sounding like Dominion Theology people, although I now think that several here who have promoted such ideas may not really know what that is. Then you get called names because you point it out.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

Ah. So you're tacitly admitting what I've said for a while now: abortion wouldn't be available in this country unless Americans wanted it to be so.

Are you guys reluctant to make this a state by state issue because you're afraid you don't exactly enjoy the public support you think you do?

Imposing your will from the federal level on down is the very same stunt, the very same tactic, and the very same abuse of power conservatives used to protest and oppose. I guess using the tactics of your enemy is acceptable if it suits you. How convenient, and how very situational.

And it's naive to believe that such power granted at the federal level would be limited too this issue or that the enforcement would remain pro-life indefinitely. Much like the pretend scenarios about the states that "might" legalize abortion once it's actually outlawed, the federal government might force it upon the states again. One protection from this is to remove the issue from the Supreme Court.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

I do not think that those who are complaining the loudest really wont a solution. In stead they wont to live under God's law and not the law we are under. That is Dominion Theology. It is ungodly and does not address a solution. We are to live under man's law and influence that law toward righteousness and not Old testament law.

If you are saved and you once again bring yourself into the subjection of the law you have departed from the grace that saved you and you are carnal in your walk before God.

I expect a solution and not a lot of religious noise. Several of us have presented a solution and still we have been ignored in favor of a warped religious view. Come let us reason together sayeth the Lord. If we are going to be unreasonable then this is a wast of time. The question is , how do we change human law to protect the unborn. That is where I am.

I read this again and have to reply with a "bravo"! Very well stated. I can understand emotional discussion about the murdering of the unborn, but some of what we have seen suggested here against Ron Paul has been bizarre and extreme speculation completely outside anything remotely (constitutional) American or Christian world views.

Again, well stated.

 

[Lighthouse]

Well when one cannot refute the facts given with facts of their own, name calling is one tactic, if one wants to stoop to that. It is revealing and this individual has reverted to it several times in this thread. It's o.k., I think most can see what we've both posted.

The stench of your words is like a port-a-john at the end of an all day concert.

I laid out for you the reason Ron Paul's bill won't end abortion, as have others, and you still refuse to accept it. You still defend the man who doesn't want the power to stop abortion in his own hands.

If I was running for President, I would want the power to end abortion in my own hands, not the hands of someone else who could go either way. And that fact that you believe the 29 states who didn't have abortion before Roe v. Wade will somehow go back to that if given the power is absurd. Not to mention that you think the 19 who did have it would stop!

All of this has been brought to your attention, time and time again. And you still blather on. I'm done with you, because it's a futile attempt. So there is nothing left to do but to label you as the idiot you are.

 

[Granite]

And it's naive to believe that such power granted at the federal level would be limited too this issue or that the enforcement would remain pro-life indefinitely. Much like the pretend scenarios about the states that "might" legalize abortion once it's actually outlawed, the federal government might force it upon the states again. One protection from this is to remove the issue from the Supreme Court.

Of course. Get another pro-choice president in office and you're back to square one. There is no end all be all solution to this issue and it's naive to think otherwise.

 

[Lighthouse]

Are you guys reluctant to make this a state by state issue because you're afraid you don't exactly enjoy the public support you think you do?

Who are you talking to? I doubt there is anyone here in the anti-abortion crowd who thinks there is major public support for that stance.

 

[Granite]

Who are you talking to? I doubt there is anyone here in the anti-abortion crowd who thinks there is major public support for that stance.

I've heard different before. Anyway let's just cut to the chase: do you think the majority of Americans support abortion on demand?

 

[S†ephen]

Fine (and please know that I actually agree with Jefferson), but SUPPOSING you are right, what in history proves the states will all choose rightly? In fact history shows the exact opposite.

All the states may not choose rightly. But consider this: Right now NO state can outlaw abortion. Even the states that want to, can't. Also, consider Ron Paul has written 2 books on abortion tried to pass the sanctity of life and the we the people act and numerous other things to stop abortion.

NO RON PAUL MAY NOT LIMIT ALL 50 STATES BUT ISN'T 12 A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW.

And don't you think, after all the work he has done, he would try to do something someway to further prohibit it.

Consider in retrospect what all the Ron Paul haters are suggesting. Men like Alan Keys may talk a big fight but they'll never make it into office. And if they ever did they would only solve the abortion problem for their term. They are too dimwitted to see that unless government structure is changed the problem will rear its ugly head the next time a bad president gets into office. Ron will completely change the entirety of the structure.

To those against Ron Paul I ask you this and I want an answer from all of you: Are you willing to blow your vote and fight a man who YOU KNOW is against abortion in some measure?


If so every one of you should be ashamed of yourselves. Ron Paul is a good man and every one of you know it! He sees a bigger picture than any other candidate and will make our current abortion problem more difficult to bring back for many terms after his.

 

[Lighthouse]

I've heard different before. Anyway let's just cut to the chase: do you think the majority of Americans support abortion on demand?

Yes. Why?

 

[Lighthouse]

NO RON PAUL MAY NOT LIMIT ALL 50 STATES BUT ISN'T 12 A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW.

No. It isn't. You know why? Because it won't be better until no more innocent children are being murdered in the womb, period.

 

[Granite]

Yes. Why?

Actually I just wanted a straight answer, though this leads to other significant questions...

 

[S†ephen]

No. It isn't. You know why? Because it won't be better until no more innocent children are being murdered in the womb, period.

So you would sacrifice the lives of countless unborn children since you didn't get your wish 100%?

Are you that blind? No one with any chance at office is even making an attempt at stopping abortion except Ron Paul and all you can say is if he isn't going to use the federal branch as a huge dictator style hammer we aren't gonna vote for him.

You should be ashamed. At least you'll have a starting point with the states. With the Federal situation the way it is you've got nothing.

You should publicly apologize to everyone for such a stupid unchristian comment and apologize to God for the thousands of unborn kids who will die because you're to arrogant and single minded to care.

 

[Lighthouse]

So you would sacrifice the lives of countless unborn children since you didn't get your wish 100%?

Are you that blind? No one with any chance at office is even making an attempt at stopping abortion except Ron Paul and all you can say is if he isn't going to use the federal branch as a huge dictator style hammer we aren't gonna vote for him.

You should be ashamed. At least you'll have a starting point with the states. With the Federal situation the way it is you've got nothing.

You should publicly apologize to everyone for such a stupid unchristian comment and apologize to God for the thousands of unborn kids who will die because you're to arrogant and single minded to care.

First off, Ron's plan isn't going to save one single child. Even if 12 states did decide not to allow abortions. That's 38 who won't, and that's 38 states those in the other 12 can choose from, to get abortions.

 

[S†ephen]

First off, Ron's plan isn't going to save one single child. Even if 12 states did decide not to allow abortions. That's 38 who won't, and that's 38 states those in the other 12 can choose from, to get abortions.

That's a blatant lie and you know it.:hammer: Unless someone decides to drive who knows how many hours to get out of state and spend who knows how much money, it will stop at least some. You are stretching beyond reason to prove your point.

What's more... Ron will open up the flood gates for other states to outlaw it which we can't do right now.

 

[Lighthouse]

That's a blatant lie and you know it.:hammer: Unless someone decides to drive who knows how many hours to get out of state and spend who knows how much money, it will stop at least some. You are stretching beyond reason to prove your point.

What's more... Ron will open up the flood gates for other states to outlaw it which we can't do right now.

:sozo:NOT ONE SINGLE STATE IS GOING TO OUTLAW IT!

 

[Granite]

:sozo:NOT ONE SINGLE STATE IS GOING TO OUTLAW IT!

What makes you so sure?