Anyone Listen to Michael Savage?

[child_of_God85]

Basically it says that in the cases of a woman who says “no”, but does not fight back, or in cases of statutory rape, those women would be denied Abortion coverage by medicaid.
I’m a democrat, nothing can change that, and I feel very strongly about it. I don’t try to change peoples political views, I feel that would be none of my business, and eeryone has a right to believe what they believe. Same with religion. But I feel I have a right to talk about my beliefs as well, without being attacked. I am part of a very conservative household, and the amount of times I’ve been called “that dumb liberal”, “your an idiot”, “you don’t know what your talkin about because all liberals are scum”, it hurts to say the least.

 

[scipio337]

Basically it says that in the cases of a woman who says “no”, but does not fight back, or in cases of statutory rape, those women would be denied Abortion coverage by medicaid.

Can you tell me where the bill actually “says” that? Which section?

I’ve provided a link with the text of the full bill, from a government source. Please point out where the bill uses this verbage, or even suggests that.

child_of_God85:

I’m a democrat, nothing can change that, and I feel very strongly about it. I don’t try to change peoples political views, I feel that would be none of my business, and eeryone has a right to believe what they believe. Same with religion. But I feel I have a right to talk about my beliefs as well, without being attacked. I am part of a very conservative household, and the amount of times I’ve been called “that dumb liberal”, “your an idiot”, “you don’t know what your talkin about because all liberals are scum”, it hurts to say the least.

I’m sorry you feel that way, I’m pretty open to ideas, and have voted for both parties, although I am particular to some issues.

I’m just trying to show that your ideas on this bill may not be factual.

 

[scipio337]

No takers, huh?

Don’t believe everything you read on the Huffington Post or Mother Jones. Take the initiative to read the original sources, you may be surprised at what you find.

God bless, child_of_God85

(Back on topic, can’t stand Michael Savage, bombastic and annoying).

 

[Kit15]

I did listen to him for a while whenever I happened to be driving while he was on. I went though a major talk radio phase for 6 years.

But then I heard a comment regarding some Glenn Beck controversy from a Catholic priest (outside of Mass of course). It was something along the lines about not really wanting to listen to or watch people that get paid to make people angry at each other whether they are angry at the host and the host’s fans or the host riles up people to be angry at their opponents. Even if they agree with them, it does nothing to further the cause of civil discourse.

After some thought on the subject I decided I couldn’t take part in it either. It’s been a very VERY long time since I’ve been able to read a meaningful discussion on some topic without having someone from any side of the fence embarrass themselves by saying something rooted in anger. Political based entertainment in it’s current form is not the only, or even the primary, cause of this but it’s certainly no help.