I'm a one-issue voter

[nannygirl]

Rent the movie and you’ll see.

No thinking of the bigger picture here. Just me me me me me.

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about or what I have said that has gotten you so riled up. You must be reading something into my posts that isn’t there or you have me confused with another poster. I am simply trying to point out that citizens are losing their basic freedoms a little at a time.

You don’t know me at all. I don’t eat transfats or smoke, so I certainly don’t think I’m being selfish by defending others’ rights. If I were, all I’d care about is potholes being filled on my street at election time.

In the last 25 years, I have spent a lot of time standing across the street from Planned Parenthood praying and talking with people about abortion. I have also financially supported National Right to Life for decades. When the basic right to life in the womb or even to exist (as in the case of Terri Schiavo -sp?) is taken away from a citizen, the rest is easy. That’s why I will always vote for someone who is anti-abortion. They are usually more traditional and conservative in general. Maybe you think that is over-the-top, but I don’t see why.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about or what I have said that has gotten you so riled up. You must be reading something into my posts that isn’t there or you have me confused with another poster. I am simply trying to point out that citizens are losing their basic freedoms a little at a time.

You don’t know me at all. I don’t eat transfats or smoke, so I certainly don’t think I’m being selfish by defending others’ rights. If I were, all I’d care about is potholes being filled on my street at election time.

In the last 25 years, I have spent a lot of time standing across the street from Planned Parenthood praying and talking with people about abortion. I have also financially supported National Right to Life for decades. When the basic right to life in the womb or even to exist (as in the case of Terri Schiavo -sp?) is taken away from a citizen, the rest is easy. That’s why I will always vote for someone who is anti-abortion. They are usually more traditional and conservative in general. Maybe you think that is over-the-top, but I don’t see why.

It is over-the-top drama to say that we have the “worst government” because a city’s health department is regulating trans-fats. It is over-the-top drama to say that we have the “worst government” because a law is passed to protect workers (and patrons) by banning smoking in enclosed workplaces. That’s what I’m calling out.

I am horrified with the abortion issue as well. I am sorry about what happened to Terry Schiavo, but am also disgusted over the way that pro-lifers have been using her corpse to beat over the head of those who disagree with them in the smallest degree. To me, that is ghoulish and sick. Negative arguments like that only make enemies and push people away. Let’s try to be, oh, I dunno…positive and emphasize life.

 

[ribozyme]

I am horrified with the abortion issue as well. I am sorry about what happened to Terry Schiavo, but am also disgusted over the way that pro-lifers have been using her corpse to beat over the head of those who disagree with them in the smallest degree. To me, that is ghoulish and sick. Negative arguments like that only make enemies and push people away. Let’s try to be, oh, I dunno…positive and emphasize life.

I do not know how you can beat someone with ashes.

 

[Pier]

So am I.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I do not know how you can beat someone with ashes.

Figuratively.

 

[nannygirl]

It is over-the-top drama to say that we have the “worst government” because a city’s health department is regulating trans-fats. It is over-the-top drama to say that we have the “worst government” because a law is passed to protect workers (and patrons) by banning smoking in enclosed workplaces. That’s what I’m calling out.

I am horrified with the abortion issue as well. I am sorry about what happened to Terry Schiavo, but am also disgusted over the way that pro-lifers have been using her corpse to beat over the head of those who disagree with them in the smallest degree. To me, that is ghoulish and sick. Negative arguments like that only make enemies and push people away. Let’s try to be, oh, I dunno…positive and emphasize life.

Good grief! You are the one that’s making a mountain out of a molehill. You are entitled to your opinions. I don’t happen to agree with you. That’s my right- at least for now…

I don’t think it’s “over-the-top drama” to point out some of the small ways government is sticking its nose in the affairs of citizens. In my opinion it’s not the government’s place to make it a criminal offense to serve food made with transfat or to tell a business owner that he can’t smoke (which is legal) in his own business in a building that he owns, no less. I’ve already told you the options people have if they don’t wish to be exposed. That way, everybody keeps their rights. You don’t get it either, I’m afraid.
I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to your comments about Terri Schiavo either. You got all riled up with my other examples, but when I bring up a “more important” example of the government’s intrusion in citizen’s lives…sheesh, I’m doomed if I do and doomed if I don’t. I’ve never used Terri to beat up anybody. This is the first I’ve mentioned her. Sorry, but what happened to her was a negative thing.
Like I said before, you don’t know me at all…

 

[Delora]

“In my opinion it’s not the government’s place to make it a criminal offense to serve food made with transfat or to tell a business owner that he can’t smoke (which is legal) in his own business in a building that he owns”

I agree.

 

[buckr02]

“In my opinion it’s not the government’s place to make it a criminal offense to serve food made with transfat or to tell a business owner that he can’t smoke (which is legal) in his own business in a building that he owns”

I agree.

I also have to agree with nannygirl on this whole issue. The government is getting too into our personal lives.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

“In my opinion it’s not the government’s place to make it a criminal offense to serve food made with transfat or to tell a business owner that he can’t smoke (which is legal) in his own business in a building that he owns”

I agree.

Many years ago I heard a talk by Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn in which he espoused the advantages of a monarchy over a democracy. He noted that in a democracy the government believes it has the support of the people in all that it does. On the other hand a monarch knows he has got to keep his people happy, or risk a violent termination. He noted that Louis may have said the State is Me, but he never believed it to the extent of telling his beloved subjects that they couldn’t drink wine.

 

[nannygirl]

I also have to agree with nannygirl on this whole issue. The government is getting too into our personal lives.

Yes. That’s why I will always support a candidate who will uphold the Constitution. As it is now, we’re not as free as we think we are. Our government is slowly becoming tyrannical, thinking “it” knows what’s best for us and our children. And if we don’t tow the line (believe what they want us to believe or do what they want us to do) there are punitive punishments.
And to all of you who think you “own” your home or property- just stop paying the taxes on it and see how long it’s yours. Just a few thoughts…

 

[johnlal]

I only vote on one issue–life.

Don’t worry. The torture will sort itself out.
Good work in making abortion illegal though.

 

[JKing]

Don’t worry. The torture will sort itself out.
Good work in making abortion illegal though.

Is this sarcasm? If so, it doesn’t come through in print very well. Why don’t you just say what you mean?

Torture? Are you talking about pulling children’s arms and legs off?

Abortion is still legal in the US so I have no idea what you mean.

Stupid OP

 

[estesbob]

Is this sarcasm? If so, it doesn’t come through in print very well. Why don’t you just say what you mean?

Torture? Are you talking about pulling children’s arms and legs off?

Abortion is still legal in the US so I have no idea what you mean.

Stupid OP

It was nothing more than the typical abortion apologist post trying to rationalize their support of the abject evil of abortion.

 

[johnlal]

Is this sarcasm? If so, it doesn’t come through in print very well. Why don’t you just say what you mean?
…
Abortion is still legal in the US so I have no idea what you mean.

OK. Sorry about the sarcasm. But here it is:

The 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections showed that people in the United States are split down the middle on liberal/conservative issues. At least until the 2006 elections, conditions were as good as they were going to get for the anti-abortion faction. A religious conservative republican was in the White House. A majority of Congress was republican, and a large number of democrats voted with the president. The media gave Bush a pass. The Supreme Court had, and still has, a republican majority. Two of the most extreme right wing Justices were added to the Court by President Bush. A majority of Federal Judges were republicans. The Justice department was politicized by Alberto Gonzalez, a machiavellian Catholic attorney General. The majority of State Governors were republicans. Conditions couldn’t have been any better for ending abortion. And abortion is still legal. And now the political pendulum is swinging the other way.

While you were voting for politicians who gave lip service to pro-life, billions of dollars were stolen from our treasury by lack of oversight and fraud. Back room deals were made with Big Oil and other energy interests which has resulted in $4.00 per gallon gasoline. There is a global food shortage, causing starvation and riots. We are perceived in the world as torturers. And then there’s the war. I don’t know whether any other candidate could have done a better job on these issues, but I do know that many of these issues are very important to my choosing a president.

 

[estesbob]

OK. Sorry about the sarcasm. But here it is:

The 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections showed that people in the United States are split down the middle on liberal/conservative issues. At least until the 2006 elections, conditions were as good as they were going to get for the anti-abortion faction. A religious conservative republican was in the White House. A majority of Congress was republican, and a large number of democrats voted with the president. The media gave Bush a pass. The Supreme Court had, and still has, a republican majority. Two of the most extreme right wing Justices were added to the Court by President Bush. A majority of Federal Judges were republicans. The Justice department was politicized by Alberto Gonzalez, a machiavellian Catholic attorney General. The majority of State Governors were republicans. Conditions couldn’t have been any better for ending abortion. And abortion is still legal. And now the political pendulum is swinging the other way.

While you were voting for politicians who gave lip service to pro-life, billions of dollars were stolen from our treasury by lack of oversight and fraud. Back room deals were made with Big Oil and other energy interests which has resulted in $4.00 per gallon gasoline. There is a global food shortage, causing starvation and riots. We are perceived in the world as torturers. And then there’s the war. I don’t know whether any other candidate could have done a better job on these issues, but I do know that many of these issues are very important to my choosing a president.

Of course all of the above has been refuted again and again not only in this thread but in mutliple threads before. What I always find most specious is the contention its ok to support the slaughter of 1.2 million children a year because the Republicans havent ended abortion. Well the Democrats havent ended poverty or war or oil dependency or any other number of the issues they supposedly care about.and they also support taxpayer funded kiling of children. As I have said many times before the mental mastrubation required to claim to oppose abortion but empower those who kill our children is a terrible ting to behold.

 

[JKing]

Thanks for clarifying.

So…what? Give up?

Tell me what difference what you posted should make to me.

Should I now start ignoring the fact that thousands of little innocent babies are torn limb-from-limb every day? Should I just forget about trying to change abortion and start voting for whoever I think is going to fill the pothole on my street? Should I forget about genocide and worry about terrorists being tortured at Gitmo? Should I just forget about the good of the nation and start worrying about who is going to give ME more from the government coffers?

Just wondering. See? I can use sarcasm too.

Thanks.

 

[fix]

OK. Sorry about the sarcasm. But here it is:

The 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections showed that people in the United States are split down the middle on liberal/conservative issues. At least until the 2006 elections, conditions were as good as they were going to get for the anti-abortion faction. A religious conservative republican was in the White House. A majority of Congress was republican, and a large number of democrats voted with the president. The media gave Bush a pass. The Supreme Court had, and still has, a republican majority. Two of the most extreme right wing Justices were added to the Court by President Bush. A majority of Federal Judges were republicans. The Justice department was politicized by Alberto Gonzalez, a machiavellian Catholic attorney General. The majority of State Governors were republicans. Conditions couldn’t have been any better for ending abortion. And abortion is still legal. And now the political pendulum is swinging the other way.

While you were voting for politicians who gave lip service to pro-life, billions of dollars were stolen from our treasury by lack of oversight and fraud. Back room deals were made with Big Oil and other energy interests which has resulted in $4.00 per gallon gasoline. There is a global food shortage, causing starvation and riots. We are perceived in the world as torturers. And then there’s the war. I don’t know whether any other candidate could have done a better job on these issues, but I do know that many of these issues are very important to my choosing a president.

Does this mean the openly pro abortion party and pols would do more to protect innocent children from direct abortion?

 

[johnlal]

Thanks for clarifying.

So…what? Give up?

David Kuo came to Washington wanting to use his Christian faith to end abortion, strengthen marriage, and help the poor. He reached the heights of political power, ultimately serving in the White House under George W. Bush, after being policy adviser to John Ashcroft and speechwriter for Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, and Bob Dole. It was a dream come true: the chance to fuse his politics and his faith, and an opportunity for Christians not just to gain a seat at the proverbial table but to plan the entire meal.

Kuo spent nearly three years as second in command at the president’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Yet his experience was deeply troubling. It took both the Bush White House and a severe health crisis to show him how his Christian values, and those of millions of Americans, were being corrupted by politics.

Instead of following the teachings of Jesus to serve the needy, Kuo found himself helping to manipulate religious faith for political gain. Public funds were used in battleground states, for Republican campaign events. The legislative process was used as a football, not to pass laws but to deepen purely symbolic fault lines. Grants were incestuously recycled to political cronies. Both before and after 9/11, despite lofty rhetoric from the president claiming that his faith-based program was one of his most important initiatives, there was no serious attempt to fund valuable charities.

Worst of all was the prevailing attitude in the White House and throughout Washington toward Christian leaders. Key Bush aides and Republican operatives spoke of them with contempt and treated them as useful idiots. It became clear, during regular conference calls arranged from the White House with a key group of Christian leaders, that many of these religious leaders had themselves been utterly seduced by politics.

It is time, Kuo argues, for Christians to take a temporary step back from politics, to turn away from its seductions. Tempting Faith is equal parts headline-making exposé, political and spiritual memoir, and heartfelt plea for a Christian reexamination of political involvement.

amazon.com/Tempting-Faith-Inside-Political-Seduction/dp/0743287126

So let’s say that from Reagan to Bush 2 you voted solely on the issue of abortion, an issue that is cynically used every four years for purposes of political pandering. You have opted out of decades of American history for an issue that will not be resolved by the people you are voting for.

 

[johnlal]

Does this mean the openly pro abortion party and pols would do more to protect innocent children from direct abortion?

No. My point is that no politician is going to ‘protect innocent children from direct abortion’.

 

[fix]

No. My point is that no politician is going to ‘protect innocent children from direct abortion’.

So, when they vote for or against certain laws they have no role in the matter? The law cannot protect us?