Bush Or Kerry

[Xaenn]

Any good leader would be able to put aside his/her religious convictions in order to lead a country...

[Kosmo Yagkoto]

Any good leader would be able to put aside his/her religious convictions in order to lead a country...

My point is that is how he leads. He leads with his religious beliefs to do what is right.

[Domingo]

My point is that is how he leads. He leads with his religious beliefs to do what is right.

That right there is the argument - many, many people think he's using his religious convictions to do what is not right. At least, that's how I feel... no gay marriage, illegal abortions, all of it - I disagree with him. It doesn't make sense to me why the government should have a say in what a woman wants to do with her child - it's her choice. It doesn't make sense to me either, why the government should have any right at all to tell a gay couple that they can't marry or even have a relationship that is recognized legally. I don't believe these to be the right ways to lead, and I know a great many people who believe the same.

[Kosmo Yagkoto]

That right there is the argument - many, many people think he's using his religious convictions to do what is not right. At least, that's how I feel... no gay marriage, illegal abortions, all of it - I disagree with him. It doesn't make sense to me why the government should have a say in what a woman wants to do with her child - it's her choice. It doesn't make sense to me either, why the government should have any right at all to tell a gay couple that they can't marry or even have a relationship that is recognized legally. I don't believe these to be the right ways to lead, and I know a great many people who believe the same.

i know many that don't believe like you though. So if your mother wants to kill you that is her choice? Is that what you are trying to say?

[Domingo]

i know many that don't believe like you though. So if your mother wants to kill you that is her choice? Is that what you are trying to say?

The whole abortion issue could go on and on and on for the rest of eternity, and still no one would ever agree on whether or not it should be legal. The way I really feel about it - abortion should be legal for rape victims, cases of incest, or when the mother's life is at significant risk. It should not be used simply as a form of birth control. Forcing rape victims to have the child that was forced on them is, in my opinion, simply not right, for a lack of better terms. The same applies with incest. Abortion should not simply be available because a woman didn't want to use birth control, and now doesn't want the child - that's they're mistake, let them deal with it.

EDIT: Granted, this sort of case-by-case definition of legality will never happen, but it's still how I feel.

No, I'm not saying that if your mother decides to kill you, she can. Someone deciding to get an abortion, and someone just waking up one day and thinking to themselves "You know what, today I feel like murdering my child." are two completely different scenarios.

[Kosmo Yagkoto]

The whole abortion issue could go on and on and on for the rest of eternity, and still no one would ever agree on whether or not it should be legal. The way I really feel about it - abortion should be legal for rape victims, cases of incest, or when the mother's life is at significant risk. It should not be used simply as a form of birth control. Forcing rape victims to have the child that was forced on them is, in my opinion, simply not right, for a lack of better terms. The same applies with incest. Abortion should not simply be available because a woman didn't want to use birth control, and now doesn't want the child - that's they're mistake, let them deal with it.

No, I'm not saying that if your mother decides to kill you, she can. Someone deciding to get an abortion, and someone just waking up one day and thinking to themselves "You know what, today I feel like murdering my child." are two completely different scenarios.

What is the difference between the two scenarios though? One is proformed by the doctor and the other is proformed by the mother. Sounds close enough to me. I am really talking about the birth control abortion though, so we agree there.

[Xaenn]

Don't bring abortion into this, because that's a whole different issue. You need to define things such as "living" and the like to have a decent argument. And even there people argue, so it cannot be resolved.

[Kosmo Yagkoto]

Don't bring abortion into this, because that's a whole different issue. You need to define things such as "living" and the like to have a decent argument. And even there people argue, so it cannot be resolved.

Indeed you are correct.

[reagan80]

DINGY ALERT.............

Why is it so difficult to understand what a brainless fool that bush is...I can't understand...very very frustrating. Someone give me a plane ride to washington and give me a gun so I can shoot the son of a bitch...

http://www.wbir.com/news/news.aspx?storyid=20241

Apparently, she couldn't afford a ticket to DC, so she had to settle with a Bush/Cheney campaign HQ in Knoxville, TN but she is still at large though. Beware...........

Unless you think of, say, the 16th century as the peak of human development, you shouldn't really be a big fan of any politician being openly religious, much less flaunting their beliefs to win an election.

OK, you're saying that you want devout Christian politicians to act more like "closet Christians." If I told an openly gay politician to keep the public gayness down, you would all call me an intolerant bigot. I've got more to add, but I think I'll post that for Xaenn's response.

Pay attention, silly. reagan80 was calling Xaenn a religious fanatic, and I sarcastically responded with that. I'm far above doing so seriously, you should know that.

Awwwww, did I miss anything good? Damn class schedule makes me miss everything.......

Actually, I didn't call Xaenn a religious fanatic. If I would have said, "Xaenn IS a religious fanatic," then you would have been right. Didn't you notice the punctuation at the end of my original quote? I didn't say he is one, but MAYBE he COULD BE one.

Religion had its place in government... during the 12th and 13th centuries. And, of course, nothing bad came out of those years. Oh, except for things like, you know... the crusades, where religion and politics were one and the same concept, and it left thousands of people dead, in God's name.

Religion doesn't have much of a place in our government today as it is. Nothing much has changed since the Clinton days. Bush hasn't changed any rules or laws that would discriminate against non-Christians or squeamish Church/State Christians. He doesn't make welfare recipients swear an oath to God before they can get their checks. He doesn't have an Affirmative Action program for Christians trying to get jobs over infid......err...I mean non-Christians. He doesn't make the elderly pray the Rosary before they can get their prescriptions or medicare. Nodody makes you say the God part in the Pledge of Allegiance. My former Catholic high school still doesn't get a dime in taxpayer's money even though my parents are paying taxes for the fuckin' mediocre public schools. Christians aren't the ones trying to make fundamentalist governments around the world. That's the Muslims' problem.

The state isn't meant to be run on by fundamentalist Christian ideology. As Skinner said, separation of church and state. The reasoning behind it is quite simple and logical actually, perhaps you should read up on your history.

Anti-gay, Anti-abortion...those values are those of Christian Fundamentalists...and he's trying to whip em out on us.

All that said, I AM A CHRISTIAN! Did you get that? We're not saying we hate Christians, but we hate Bush trying to run a country off of his fundamentalist ideologies.

How is it fundamentalist? Bush didn't ban abortion even though it goes against his faith. He only banned the Treblinka-styled partial birth flavor, so you shouldn't be so distressed. Anti-gay? If you are just basing that assertion on the gay marriage issue, well that is beneath my expectations. I'm not a big fan of gay marriage, but I could TOLERATE it only if a majority of voters in the states support it as opposed to liberal activist Federal judges telling us what to do. Give me a worse example of Bush being anti-gay, then I'll think about agreeing. How is he whipping these values onto you then? There must be more than that..........

The implications of that are really uncalled for. And you're really just pulling them out of your ass. I have no more to say about that.

OK, maybe I made a mistake. Maybe you are a fanatic. Afterall, you have a sig of an ideology that was proven FUBAR a little over a decade ago. Only a Leftist fanatic would cling to an ideology that even China has started abandoning(econmically anyway) so they could more effectively compete with us capitalists. Maybe this will convince you that Communism never works without Capitalism to prop it up..........http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../dprk-dark.htm

It's funny you bring up the subject of my ass because my clingy sphincter is getting tingly. If you'll excuse me..........

EDIT: I just wanted to inform my readers that while I was gone from EP I hung around many interesting bloggers. An atheist pro-Bush conservative chick(she made an appearance on Dennis Miller's show last summer) and a second generation Iraqi-American that reminded me somewhat of Dingy(except she was pro-Bush, pro-Israeli, and bashes terrorism everywhere including when the Palestinians do it) are among my favorite bloggers. While away, I learned how to be like Jimmy Onestroke, but without the parts where he pisses down my back and tells me it's rain. Come back, Jimmy. We have much to discuss.........

[Xaenn]

Anti-gay? If you are just basing that assertion on the gay marriage issue, well that is beneath my expectations. I'm not a big fan of gay marriage, but I could TOLERATE it only if a majority of voters in the states support it as opposed to liberal activist Federal judges telling us what to do. Give me a worse example of Bush being anti-gay, then I'll think about agreeing.

What else could on try to do? Put someone in jail for being gay? It's denying them of a basic right for couples...obviously meaning that you are opposed to homosexuals...

OK, maybe I made a mistake. Maybe you are a fanatic. Afterall, you have a sig of an ideology that was proven FUBAR a little over a decade ago. Only a Leftist fanatic would cling to an ideology that even China has started abandoning(econmically anyway) so they could more effectively compete with us capitalists. Maybe this will convince you that Communism never works without Capitalism to prop it up..........

Communism is entirely related to religion afterall...

If you want to get into that, there's a place for it.

[reagan80]

What else could on try to do? Put someone in jail for being gay? It's denying them of a basic right for couples...obviously meaning that you are opposed to homosexuals...

First, being anti-gay marriage doesn't make you opposed to homosexuals. That's like saying being anti-pedophile makes you opposed to homosexuals.

Secondly, I said I would be okay with gay marriage becoming a law if people in the states decided whether or not to allow it. I am NOT okay with Federal liberal activist judges legislating from the bench and telling states or the nation how we should run society. In my state of Louisiana, 80% of voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage here. I don't want some asshole judge to come over here and tell us that our votes didn't mean shit........

[GundamGuy]

First, being anti-gay marriage doesn't make you opposed to homosexuals. That's like saying being anti-pedophile makes you opposed to homosexuals.

I am NOT okay with Federal liberal activist judges legislating from the bench and telling states or the nation how we should run society. In my state of Louisiana, 80% of voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage here. I don't want some asshole judge to come over here and tell us that our votes didn't mean shit........

LOL so you realy think that "liberal activist judges" make an HUGE diffrence in society. LOL... Their are not as many Liberal Activist Judges in the US as you would think. I would say under 100... and most of them are local or state judges.

See the thing is Judges make decisions, that's their job, when that decision does not suport the consertives, or the public for that matter, Somthing like Brown V Board of Edu., Then those Judges are labled as "Liberal Activist" wether or not the decison was well founded. It's quite silly and stupid to call an Judge you dont know an "Liberal Activist" unless you have read all the justifications of their decisions... bah what's the use your so indocrinated that it does not matter what i say...

[Fighter17]

Bush all the way, end of story.

[Mason]

OK, maybe I made a mistake. Maybe you are a fanatic. Afterall, you have a sig of an ideology that was proven FUBAR a little over a decade ago. Only a Leftist fanatic would cling to an ideology that even China has started abandoning(econmically anyway) so they could more effectively compete with us capitalists. Maybe this will convince you that Communism never works without Capitalism to prop it up..........http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../dprk-dark.htm

My little speech to Skinner now goes to you too. If you're going to start labeling people then just stop posting here altogether.

[Xaenn]

First, being anti-gay marriage doesn't make you opposed to homosexuals. That's like saying being anti-pedophile makes you opposed to homosexuals.

Then please tell me why one would have a problem with gay marriage other than being against homosexuals?

There is no other reason, because the sanctity of marriage doesn't exist.