One can criticize the existence of nuclear weapons, but MAD has a clear deterrent effect.
Nuclear weapons have not been used in a military strike since WW II.
- Status
Nuclear weapons have not been used in a military strike since WW II.
P
Peeps
Guest
Boy, is that ever true!
I was watching ABC’s news this morning. They did a story about Florida’s upsurge in COVID-19 cases, and were interviewing a Republican (I believe it was a mayor). They asked him if the hospitals can handle the increased number of patients, and he described how there are still plenty of beds and surplus equipment and anti-virals meds.
Then the scene swtiched back to the main news desk and the journalist stated that “hospitals are in crisis and there is insufficient equipment to handle the surge in new cases.”
I kid you not!
I was shocked at the BLATANT contradiction of the Republican’s description of the situation in his city! I guess he didn’t say what they wanted him to say–much more boring news than "everyone is dropping like flies!!! OMG!!! What can possibly be done to stop this!!!
Depending on exactly when you walked into the room, you would have gotten two incredibly different perceptions of the situation!
So I think the “crisis” is with American journalism. It’s no wonder that many of us are very suspicious of what is actually happening in regards to the corona virus in the U.S., and wonder if we are being fed propaganda.
My daughter, who has her doctorate in physical therapy and works with COVID patients in her hospital, believes that when Vice Pres. Biden wins the election and becomes President, the COVID-19 “pandemic” will go away within a few weeks. I’m actually wondering if the Democratic campaign managers are subtly infusing this “doctrine” into their campaigns–“if you elect Democrats, COVID will stop,” and if they have recruited the news media into this.
I know–it’s sounds bizarre, but after watching that news story this morning, I’m flummoxed!
Last edited:
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
That’s a given re the Covid disappearing if JB is elected.He has also promised to cure cancer
P
Peeps
Guest
Oh, that’s good!That’s a given re the Covid disappearing if JB is elected.He has also promised to cure cancer
Of course, when so many children will be killed by abortion on demand during his Presidency, that’s a lot of people who will never have the opportunity to die of cancer! So statistically, he will be able to prove that he “stopped cancer.”
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Ohh the irony!:woman_facepalming:t2:
Last edited:
P
PaulinVA
Guest
This is the top of the list:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
V
Victoria33
Guest
I think the international community and leading world super powers should step in if places are undergoing genocide, such as Syria which Assad and ISIS are accused of, as what happened in Rwanda, Somalia and so on. This seems to be the Christian thing to do.
Doesn’t sound like a very pro-life statement to begin with.
We don’t elect dictators. They can not do things at the signing of a pen.
The problems in the streets has been nothing but agitation, some may well be funded by foreign powers. It’s clearly a controlled movement with some of the founders of BLM espousing Marxism.
Last edited:
E
EmilyAlexandra
Guest
Exactly my point. This would work for you if you had something more like the British constitution, under which a government that commands a majority in the House of Commons can repeal or enact any law it wishes. But under the American system of government, this is much more difficult. Given that the issue of abortion has been determined chiefly by the Supreme Court, it seems likely that the only ways of banning abortion in the United States would be a sufficient run of pro-life presidents to get a majority of pro-life judges on the Supreme Court (and even then they must still interpret the Constitution with regard to the law, not with regard to their own personal opinions) or amend the constitution in such a way as to make abortion unconstitutional (which is not within the power of the president anyway and would almost certainly fail, unless the Republicans can take control of the House, the Senate, and 38 state legislatures). It therefore does not seem very sensible to continue electing presidents on the basis of their position on abortion. Why not take abortion out of party politics, as many other countries have done?
G
GKMotley
Guest
On an American wheel.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Yeah, Supremes have this knack for not voting the way people expect them to.
I don’t know, in some states killing a pregnant woman gets you two murder charges, but abortion is legal.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Just before this quote there was a citation of a number of shooting in Chicago. Perhaps if the funds for Chicago police had been shifted to community development programs instead of military style combat forces, there would not be so many shootings.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Before such a ban can be effective we need to convince people that abortion is not the answer. As we saw during Prohibition, bans without popular support do not work, and are eventually overturned.
A
AlNg
Guest
Yes, there are numbers 0, 00, 1,2,3,4,…36.
A
AlNg
Guest
So far they have not been used. But what happens if a mad dictator of some small country gets a nuke and decides to use it? Perhaps this is not likely, and perhaps it is not likely that one of the big powers would use a nuclear bomb, but is it possible? Over the long run, things that are not likely to happen, may still happen, given enough time. How likely was it that a small cell could evolve into an intelligent creature? In 1848, how likely was it thought to be that your whole encyclopedia and several of the greatest books could be stored and read on a light tablet? In the middle ages, how likely was it thought to be that the Church would approve processing loans at a reasonable interest rate? How likely was it thought that a large section of the Church would split off into Protestantism? Mind altering drugs are more common nowadays and there are even such bought and sold on US college campuses. Even politicians and movie stars have admitted to using these mind altering drugs at various times. What is to prevent an accident occurring when someone in charge has used these drugs? Not likely, but is it possible that much of the world could be incinerated by an accident of some kind. It is not likely that if you go to Las Vegas, you will win one million dollars, but it has happened from time to time to some lucky person. It is like a stock market crash. It is not likely, but it could happen at any time and wipe you out completely.
V
Victoria33
Guest
Even with that, I don’t need a president that pushes what the prior president did; and we can even leave that out.
Rise of ISIS.
Refugees from Honduras because of US acts.
Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt.
Iran nuclear deal.
North Korea lobbing possible nuclear missiles.
What am I missing, Libya, need we address that? Syria?
Yes, maybe the US system is weaker than that of the United Kingdom. With a proper understanding of the Constitution though, individual states should be able to make abortion illegal. As it is, I believe some states have severely restricted it.
G
GKMotley
Guest
And on the French/European style wheel, no 00.
G
GKMotley
Guest
You cannot put the genie back into the bottle. One might, I suppose, try to change human nature, to establish the Committee to Abolish Original Sin, or something. But I know no way to make humans rational or saintly. Only ways to control or coerce them. In a world in which the idea of nuclear weapons is a given.
We already have that in North Korea, don’t we?
A life-ending asteroid is also possible. At least with nuclear weapons we’ve tried to develop missle defense. The left in America opposed it.
A
AlNg
Guest
With more genies coming out of the bottle, and more countries getting nuclear weapons and with more people using mind altering drugs, and with the increase in instability as we see in the recent protests, the probability of the detonation of a nuclear weapon only increases.
And as time passes by, can we expect more small countries to possess nuclear weapons, thereby increasing the possibility of their use?
Last edited:
E
EmilyAlexandra
Guest
It depends what you mean by weaker. It is of course intentionally set up to ensure that power is distributed among the three branches of government, both chambers of legislature, and the federal and state governments. The British system is set up in a way that usually creates strong governments. The period from 2010 until 2019 was an interesting period in which we had relatively weak governments depending upon cross-party cooperation and, ultimately, a government that was unable to govern because it had all but lost the support of the House of Commons.
In that case, perhaps pro-life Americans should be focusing their efforts on banning abortion at the state level.
- Status