Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
disruptivehair
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:28 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:24 pm

I like him as an actor; he's a bit one-dimensional but his characters are always entertaining. I wouldn't vote for him for president, though; too caveman.
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:51 pm

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
He would fall more under the lines of a strict constitutionalist than anything, and I have problems with that.

Yes, why would you want anyone to actually follow the Constitution?

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 36):
Since when did being a strict constitutionalist becomea bad thing?

Probably in 1789 when the Constitution was adopted, since it was written by Rich, White, Slave-owners. To Falcon84 and those like him the Constitution should only be followed when it is politically convenient, like Freedom of the Press, but if it isn't in the Constitution then judges can just make it up depending on how important the political group is. What they do in other countries is far more important than our own law.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 39):
1. none of us know what the Founding Fathers were thinking when they created it

Actually we do. We have Jefferson's writings (Which a favorite quote of the Left actually comes from "Separation of Church and State" Not actually in the Constitution Jefferson wrote about the concept to a friend who was confused about the Constitution.) and we have the Federalist papers.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 39):
The Founding Fathers couldn't have forseen the future, and how the Constitution would fit into an unknown future. I do believe that it is a living document, and can be subject to interpretation.

Careful with that "believe" crap Jaysit will mark you down as an ignorant bigot.

No, the founders could see the future, so they left much of the power to Individuals and the States. And over the course of 80 years or so (since the New Deal) the Democrat party has slowly and steadily taken those powers for the Federal government.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 43):
Thanks for playing.

Canada does, Belgium does, Netherlands does, Spain does, South Africa does. etc. I suppose you only count the "cultures" you want to count?

Stop for a second and read what I said. Anthropologically. Legally is a different subject. I made a very clear distinction which you chose to ignore so you could put up your cute red flag. Additionally the countries you cited are in the Western Culture for the most part. All countries that share a common root culture with minor variances, not entirely distinct ones. Thank you for showing your ignorance now go to the library and open a book.

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 49):
That almost makes me want to change from a registered independent to libertarian.

I used libertarian as an adjective not a noun. Libertarians are too weak to be a player in politics.
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:05 pm

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 48):
Quoting DL021 (Reply 45):
Stop it. Poor imagery.

The fact you are reffering to that statment as Imagery tells me one thing beyond a reasonable doubt.










You have spent too much time with Westy

or too much time reading your posts....  Wink

Quoting Disruptivehair (Reply 50):
I like him as an actor; he's a bit one-dimensional but his characters are always entertaining. I wouldn't vote for him for president, though; too caveman.

hey....that's uncalled for.....we're modern guys who are just like you...only hairier and with nicer cribs....
http://www.cavemanscrib.com/
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:00 pm

DLO21:
Going off on another tirade?
I am sure your fellow GOP southern voters will toss Rudy out of the race so he is a non-issue.
Bring back the Concorde
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:07 pm

Quoting Superfly (Reply 53):
I am sure your fellow GOP southern voters will toss Rudy out of the race

Right, because unlike Liberals Souther Conservatives are one issue voters. Is that what I'm supposed to believe?
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
jaysit
Posts: 10185
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:31 pm

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 23):
I'm sorry you're panties are in a bunch because you are a self-loathing gay man but give it a rest once in a while. When you state things in this manner people just look past your opinion as a joke.

LOL.

My dear man, the only people who look at my opinion as a joke, are jokes themselves.

You know who you are.

Incidentally, my "opinion" if you want to call it that is quite correct. Thompson is indeed trying to present himself as the "true" social conservative in a field of candidates James Dobson and other King makers of his ilk do not exactly embrace.

Oh, and btw, drop the BS already. I have nothing to be self-hating about. I've had the best education this country has to offer, I've worked incredibly hard all my life, and so I'm very successful, and make tons of money. I also get to do good by doing hundreds of hours of pro bono work for indigent clients a year,have a BMI of about 21, have never wanted for love (or sex) in my life, have a handsome partner of 9 years with whom I intend to spend the rest of my life, a huge circle of friends, and both my partner and I have families who love us unconditionally. Oh, and my "in-laws" are white, southern, presbyterian Republicans from the Carolinas. They're religious, but they sure aint ignorant. Or intolerant. I can see intolerance and ignorance when I see it, and, boy, is it just oozing out of the pores of many a right wing rant trashmeister on here.

But I know that others aren't as fortunate as I am, and so I do my best to change the world. Which usually entails having a zero tolerance policy for overt intolerance.

Now you go back to your schoolyard. I'll go back to being fabulous.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 53):
I am sure your fellow GOP southern voters will toss Rudy out of the race so he is a non-issue.

I'm not sure they're all that doctrinaire. A large number are, but although I think that Rudy may not take the primary, it will be because he hasn't courted those Southern Republican primary voters in South Carolina, etc. Mitt Romney and McCain have been hanging around Greenville, SC blowing the opinion deciders at such bastions of learning as Bob Jones University. But once the primaries roll along, Republican primary voters may decide that Rudy stands the best chance of winning against a Democrat and holding their noses may vote for him, in the belief that a Rudy administration may not be as bad to them as a Hillary administration.

Frankly, I think that a Rudy administration is likely to achieve more on civil rights issues than a Hillary one. Coming from the right, and knowing that much of his support base lies in the middle and to the left of center, Rudy will be as progressive as politics can allow. Hillary will ALWAYS be trying to burnish her religious credentials and if in office, will be offering sops to the right just to stay viable.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:40 pm

Quoting Superfly (Reply 53):
DLO21:
Going off on another tirade?

Not as much as you do.....seriously.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 53):
I am sure your fellow GOP southern voters will toss Rudy out of the race so he is a non-issue.

I don't know about that. If Thompson enters the race he'll be the most competition for Rudy as it stands right now....other than McCain, of course.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 55):
I'll go back to being fabulous.

I told that dude you were in love with yourself.....

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 55):
Frankly, I think that a Rudy administration is likely to achieve more on civil rights issues than a Hillary one.

Probably right...he'd have some serious leverage on both sides of the aisle to get things moving forward.

If he says that he's going to stay out of gun control and abortion he'll be fairly tough to beat anywhere as long as people believe him. We know where he stands on the issues, but what he's going to focus on is up in the air.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:52 pm

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 51):

Stop for a second and read what I said. Anthropologically. Legally is a different subject. I made a very clear distinction which you chose to ignore so you could put up your cute red flag. Additionally the countries you cited are in the Western Culture for the most part. All countries that share a common root culture with minor variances, not entirely distinct ones. Thank you for showing your ignorance now go to the library and open a book.

Nope. Anthropologists have many definitions of culture, and actually arguing about it has been an important aspect of the field in the last forty years. But pretty much all would agree that first, legal sysems are part of "culture"; and second, cultures constantly evolve and change, including this way.
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:00 pm

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 49):
Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 8):
"Is "pro-life," and believes federal judges should overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 8):
Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that."

Two  thumbsup  thumbsup 

Do me a favor, and don't quote me when you spew your right-wing crap. Do the work yourself - go find the quotes and leave me the hell out of it.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:02 pm

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 55):
it will be because he hasn't courted those Southern Republican primary voters in South Carolina, etc. Mitt Romney and McCain have been hanging around Greenville, SC blowing the opinion deciders at such bastions of learning as Bob Jones University. But once the primaries roll along, Republican primary voters may decide that Rudy stands the best chance of winning against a Democrat

Keep in mind, most of the early primaries and super Tuesday is early in the primaries. The winner in those primaries get the most media coverage and the finacial backers. So who knows.
Rudy as President wouldn't be a terrible thing but I still don't like the man at all.
If the political winds shift to the left, he'll march out in front as a champion of leftist ideals. He'll do the same if the winds shift to the right.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 56):
Not as much as you do.....seriously.

Relax Ian, I don't go in to tirades.  Smile
Bring back the Concorde
 
jaysit
Posts: 10185
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:04 pm

Btw, didn't Fred Thompson date some blond tarty C&W singer awhile back. She was the same singer who had a thing going on with Troy Aikman.

Gosh, going from the hotness that is Troy to the fugliness that is Fred Thompson must have taken plenty of qualudes and a quart of gin.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:05 pm

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 55):
I can see intolerance and ignorance when I see it, and, boy, is it just oozing out of the pores of many a right wing rant trashmeister on here.

Not debating you here. The righties are plenty bad with the intolerance but the left surely isn't guilt free themselves.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 55):
Now you go back to your schoolyard. I'll go back to being fabulous.

Whatever. Look fabulous all you want. I really don't care but I do stand by my opinion of you.

I just took issue to you popping into the thread with a snarky comment when the discussion so far had been civil about Sen. Thompson. Regardless of your opinion on him one way or the other you don't have to be an ass to get your point across. But then that's just the way you operate and will continue to operate.

Despite this little tit-for-tat I think you do have valid opinions on many topics here. I just think you go about getting them across the wrong way.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:15 pm

Quoting N229NW (Reply 57):
But pretty much all would agree that first, legal sysems are part of "culture"; and second, cultures constantly evolve and change, including this way.

Go ahead. Go to the database Anthropological Database Harvard University keeps, and look up marriage. Show me a culture in the world that has recognized same-sex marriage.

I've made my position very clear above. It is a pragmatic solution to satifiy all sides.
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
jaysit
Posts: 10185
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:42 pm

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 61):
Not debating you here. The righties are plenty bad with the intolerance but the left surely isn't guilt free themselves.

The left tend to be hypocrites. And often lazy. And generally quite stupid on most matters. And believe that wearing $500 jeans while screaming themselves hoarse about global capitalism make them champions of the people.

But I don't know if I'd call them "intolerant." At some point, one has to decide at what point does intolerance of those one sees as intolerant, make one's stance self-defeating. Its become a popular ploy now to label liberal distaste for religious absolutists as "intolerance," but its because many of us who live in a predominantly secular society in which the worst aspects of a fundamentalist, cold, hard-nosed, muscular Christianity have been banished from the public sphere. Religion has either become a cultural facet of ones live (Church weddings, Christmas caroling and the like) or been relegated to one's personal belief system, distinct from one's public persona, and so many believe that religion can never make its way back into ruling the civil realm. Plus, we all come from families in which we see an Uncle Bob or an Aunt Martha as being more than just loonybin Fundies - why, they're also real sweet and all, and Aunt Martha makes a killer peach pie. So we refuse to believe that good people like them would want a theocratic society. But what if you did live in a theocratic society, or even, say, cultures within America in which theocracies hold enormous power? Would you be willing to tolerate the intolerance of Mullahs? Should Muslim liberals in Detroit be made to believe that condemning fundamentalist Islamic dogma makes them intolerant? What's intolerant, or more intolerant? Being forced to wear an Islamic chador as a young American girl, or being freed from it?

And I still think that Fred Thompson is a jackass. His Senate record is basically worthless, and he isn't one of the Senate's brightest lights. He's stepping into this race now because he wants to yoke himself to the Christian right, who he believes control the primaries. And he thinks that if America voted for an actor once, they'd vote for one again. But the difference is that Reagan couched his supposed religious beliefs in all those vague affable phrases written by Peggy Noonan, and that even as a man in his 60s came across as a handsome, soft-spoken, "nice" guy; Thompson has neither the charisma, the looks, or the anti-cold war platform Reagan had. And while Reagan needed the votes of the Christian coalition to keep him in power, he didn't really give them anything they asked for (except, perhaps, Justice Scalia). Well, 20 years after Reagan, the Christian right want their pound of flesh, and what GWB didn't give, Fred Thompson may.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:12 am

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 63):
But I don't know if I'd call them "intolerant."

Liberals tend to be the most intolerant people I know. And I know them, I live in a Blue State, my wife works in the Arts, and while I'm at parties listening to the contempt they have for Republicans, Bush, Christians, you name it, I sit there quietly listening, knowing that while I disagree with them I would never stoops to the level they are at.

You claim liberals are tolerant yet in your next paragraph you call a potential political candidate a jackass.

You're so angry about fundamentalist's self-righteousness you can't see how you yourself are wrapped up in self-righteousness.

Religion only takes control of the society when the secular system breaks down. People begin looking for solutions they find the answers they are looking for. I won't get all involved with Anthony F.C. Wallace's Revitalization's and Mazeways, but look it up. It will explain a lot about religion and it's constructive and sometimes destructive role in societies. You can see his theory in action from Christian History through the rise and fall of the Taliban.
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:14 am

Quoting N229NW (Reply 43):
It's FAR from that simple. The obvious problem is that it is arbitrary to pick a single moment when a human becomes a "human" (not a bunch of living cells, or a living extension of a woman's body, but a human in its own right). Saying this happens exactly at the moment of birth is arbitrary and problematic, and so to is saying this happens at the moment of cenception. Unfortunately, there is a GIANT gray area in between, and lots of room for debate over when the woman's body and soul is more important than the foetus's and vice versa. The problem is that while every case may be different, laws can't take into account all the subtleties and individualities...

I'll grant you that a reasonable argument, based in science and law, can be made that life does not begin at conception. But by the same token, I believe that you will agree that it does begin at some point before birth. I'll venture a guess that you'll even concede that by the time their is a heart beat and brain activity, life is present. Therefore, under that logic, if life is present, why doesn't the fetus deserve constitutional protections?

I'm asking for the pro-choice side to draw that line, where do they think, based on medicine and science, that life begins.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:15 am

You make a compelling argument there Jaysit. I may not agree with it all but you did a good job getting your point across with this post versus the snarky one earlier.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:39 am

holy crap....reasoned discussion seems to have broken out.

I'm going to wait and see what Thompson has to say in the upcoming days and weeks.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 59):
Relax Ian, I don't go in to tirades.

dude....you say tomato, I say tirade....

You really like Ron Paul?

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 60):
Gosh, going from the hotness that is Troy to the fugliness that is Fred Thompson must have taken plenty of qualudes and a quart of gin.

Power is it's own aphrodisiac. Plus she is older than I am and her definition of hotness may be different than yours.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
jaysit
Posts: 10185
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:41 am

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 64):
You claim liberals are tolerant yet in your next paragraph you call a potential political candidate a jackass.

I also call Rosie O'Donnell a pompous, fat twit. And think that Al Gore is a pompous bore. And I think that Clinton is a charlatan. And I find Nancy Pelosi to be one of the dimmest bulbs on the Congressional Christmas tree. What's your point?

I think that Fred Thompson is a jackass of a politician. End of story.

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 64):
and while I'm at parties listening to the contempt they have for Republicans, Bush, Christians, you name it, I sit there quietly listening, knowing that while I disagree with them I would never stoops to the level they are at

Oh, gosh, contempt for Republicans, Bush and those self-aggrandized "Christians" with a capital "C" is THE mark of intolerance. Hate to tell you this, but I bet many of those liberals at your much-hated cocktail parties were probably Christian as well. Maybe not the CHRISTIANS that the religious right thinks they ought to be, but Christian by faith never the less. Just because many Christians aren't screaming against gay rights, or want a blanket ban on abortion, or think that GWB isn't God, or that his brand of Republicanism isn't the absolute in truth, doesn't make them any less Christian.

Its not blanket intolerance - its just intolerance of the intolerant - those much maligned Christian with a capital C, Bush-Republicans.

Maybe you shouldn't go to those parties where you're being persecuted by those artsy, wine-drinking, tapas eating, liberals coming at you with a cocktail swizzle stick.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:03 am

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 68):
Maybe you shouldn't go to those parties where you're being persecuted by those artsy, wine-drinking, tapas eating, liberals coming at you with a cocktail swizzle stick.

First off...I like the wine.

Second...I am artsy.

Third, I listen to them but I'm not persecuted.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 68):
intolerance of the intolerant

I'll say it again, that attitude puts you right there with them.

I'm intolerant of ignorance. You are an ignorant person. I'm intolerant of your ignorance so I'm trying to help you see things in a different way.

You take out your intolerance on the people you deem intolerant.

I use a capital "C" for Christian for when I want to speak of people who are Catholic or Protestant. It is a blanket term for many faiths. Just like Muslim covers all sects of Islam and Jew covers not only Jewish religous sects but is also an ethnic category. I think relisions ought to be capitalized, be it Shintoism or Zorarastarism.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 68):
those self-aggrandized "Christians" with a capital "C" is THE mark of intolerance.

Listen to yourself. Fundementalists think people will carry the mark of the beast, you use the same terminology as those you hate. That ought to show you just how much like the ones you hate you have become. But somehow I think you'll remain blind to it. Your too self-righteous to see it in your self.
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
Superfly
Posts: 37705
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:38 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 67):
You really like Ron Paul?

Yep!
Bring back the Concorde
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:07 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 65):
I'll grant you that a reasonable argument, based in science and law, can be made that life does not begin at conception. But by the same token, I believe that you will agree that it does begin at some point before birth. I'll venture a guess that you'll even concede that by the time their is a heart beat and brain activity, life is present. Therefore, under that logic, if life is present, why doesn't the fetus deserve constitutional protections?

I'm asking for the pro-choice side to draw that line, where do they think, based on medicine and science, that life begins.

Again, the issue is not where "life" begins. It actually seems clear to me that "life" begins more or less at conception. But an amoeba is "life" and doesn't have constitutional rights. And I bet you've killed a fly too. So the point is where INDEPENDENT HUMAN life begins, and that is what I'm saying is much more complicated, and culturally determined. At what point do the live cells of the fetus stop being an extension of the mother's own life and body and become a viable independent human being that IS protected by "constitutional rights"? Surely that will vary from case to case. And that, again, is why the debate is not simple. It's not as though pro-choice people are some kind of vicious sadistic baby-killers. It's that they have different answers to those complicated questions than you do.

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 62):
Go ahead. Go to the database Anthropological Database Harvard University keeps, and look up marriage. Show me a culture in the world that has recognized same-sex marriage.

The Tozzer library anthropological literature database? It's full of aritcles on gay marriage. Again, find me a modern professional anthropoligist who defines "culture" in the static, narrow way you define it (like your claim that there is one monolothic entity called "Western Culture," or that legal systems are not a part of culture, etc.).

As for Fred Thomson, I don't find him moderate.

[Edited 2007-03-13 21:14:25]
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:53 am

Quoting N229NW (Reply 71):
And I bet you've killed a fly too. So the point is where INDEPENDENT HUMAN life begins, and that is what I'm saying is much more complicated, and culturally determined.

No. It's when human life begins. The "independent" aspect of your analysis has no basis in our Constitution. For example, Constitutional rights do not end when independent human life end - or else there would be millions of people in assisted living facilities that under your logic had no US Constitutional rights.

Therefore, if you're conceding that life begins at conception, are you arguing that the life isn't human? If human, then why (based on the Constitution) does it not merit protection under the 5th or 14th amendments.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 71):
It's not as though pro-choice people are some kind of vicious sadistic baby-killers. It's that they have different answers to those complicated questions than you do.

I've never said that they were vicious sadistic baby-killers. Don't try to distort the issue by creating a statement, attributing it to me and then trying to beat me over the head with something I never said.

As I did say, reasonable people can disagree on this issue. But the solution in our system of government needs to be based on our Constitution, not on what you or I believe on the matter.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:02 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 72):
But the solution in our system of government needs to be based on our Constitution, not on what you or I believe on the matter.

In conjunction with science as opposed to religion.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:55 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 73):
In conjunction with science as opposed to religion.

Absolutely. I've not once ever attempted to support or justified my position on this matter using morality or religion.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:19 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 74):
I've not once ever attempted to support or justified my position on this matter using morality or religion.

And I wasn't trying to insinuate that you had. Problem is, the Supreme Court, as currently constructed, may be more swayed by religious beliefs than by the findings of science. I really don't know, but the mere fact that one party can affect the make-up of the SCotUS leaves open the possibility that this could happen. The recent decisions of the court do seem to indicate that this is NOT happening, but still...I worry about these things.

I hate to make a partisan statement, but I have no concern that a liberal bench would ever draw upon religious beliefs, but I am concerned that a conservative bench might. I say this even under the premise that the liberal judges may be more religious thatn the conservative ones. Anything is possible.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:47 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 72):
No. It's when human life begins. The "independent" aspect of your analysis has no basis in our Constitution. For example, Constitutional rights do not end when independent human life end - or else there would be millions of people in assisted living facilities that under your logic had no US Constitutional rights.

We are quibbling over semantics with the word "independent." Fine then, my definition of "human life" (for which I used the phrase "ingependent human life") is human life that is mature enough to have consciousness and not be an extension of or inclusion within a woman's body. The assisted living facilities argument is not in any way analogous. It's not at all clear and obvious that a wanlut-sized fetus with a brain the size of a toad's brain, for example, deserves constitutional rights.

Quoting Pope (Reply 72):

As I did say, reasonable people can disagree on this issue. But the solution in our system of government needs to be based on our Constitution, not on what you or I believe on the matter.

The problem of course again is that the constitution must be interpreted, and different lines and principles within it can be played off against each other in that process. The constitution doesn't define human life after all. In fact, the places where it did venture in that direction were hardly its lasting highlights: slaves counted as 3/5ths of a person for God's sake. Obviously we've had to change this and admit that the constitution, visionary and well-constructed as it was and is, wasn't perfect. That's why we have amendments, and why there will always (in a healthy democracy) be debate about how the constution has been and should be applied.
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:08 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 58):
Do me a favor, and don't quote me when you spew your right-wing crap.

I'll quote anyone, anytime, anywhere about anything, if I so choose. Calling my positions "crap" remains your ignorant OPINION (ignorant, in that you show you have little or no clue as to what I think unless you can show otherwise). I could just as easily give an opinion that liberalism is rooted in relativistic fallacy, but it's just OPINION, usually, until some leftist starts explaining his/her position(s).

Do what work? It's plainly obvious what he believes. If you think I'm not doing enough of my own work on the subject of his positions, then these are for you, Logan . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2007/03/11/AR2007031101849.html

What work on my part needed to be done? The same article from which I quote uses the same language that you do in your previous post.

If you can't hack my quotations of you, then part of your freedom of speech includes the right to remain silent.

-R
Living the American Dream
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:24 pm

Quoting N229NW (Reply 76):
It's not at all clear and obvious that a wanlut-sized fetus with a brain the size of a toad's brain, for example, deserves constitutional rights.

But as the law currently stands a 8.5 month old fetus with a fully developed brain can be killed through partial birth abortion.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 76):
The constitution doesn't define human life after all. In fact, the places where it did venture in that direction were hardly its lasting highlights: slaves counted as 3/5ths of a person for God's sake.

The 3/5 provision was for apportioning representatives in Congress not defining life. But even then the opposing side to slavery respected the rule of law and fought within the system to get it changed - ergo the 13th and 14th amendments. Funny how the same post-civil war amendment that freed slaves and created equal protection and due process whenever LIFE, liberty or property is being taken away is what now causes the pro-choice movement such problem. The judice prudence that involves the 5th and 14th amendments has given on group of people rights but still denies those very same basic rights (the right to live being the most basic) to the weakest members of society.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 76):
Fine then, my definition of "human life" (for which I used the phrase "ingependent human life") is human life that is mature enough to have consciousness and not be an extension of or inclusion within a woman's body.

So now you're changing your definition. At first it was independent human life. Now it's life "that is mature enough to have consciousness and not be an extension of or inclusion within a woman's body." Well I guess, under your "new" definition, abortion past the age of viability should be banned. Because under your definition, a post viability baby can meet all the criteria you've outlined.

But let me ask you this. What happens when medical science advances to the point that viability can occur near to or immediately after conception? I have no doubt that science will advance to this point in the future. Whether it takes 10 years or a 100 years, I'm certain that science will achieve this result; what then? Furthermore, how can life be a sliding scale. Under your definition, something that would have been considered dead yesterday is now alive becauses of advances in neonatal care.

If everything that depends on the host to live can be cut off, do you think that the state has any compelling interest from stopping you from walking into town square and cutting off your hand because it fails the standard you've laid out above?
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
disruptivehair
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:28 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:08 pm

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 63):
The left tend to be hypocrites. And often lazy. And generally quite stupid on most matters. And believe that wearing $500 jeans while screaming themselves hoarse about global capitalism make them champions of the people.

I don't consider myself a lazy stupid hypocrite, and I can't afford $500 jeans. I think capitalism is good, but I hate globalization because it's screwing over the middle class in Europe and America.

Frankly I'm insulted by your characterization of us. Sure, SOME leftists are like that...but most aren't. How would you feel if I characterized Republicans as intolerant stupid bible-thumping gun-toting rednecks?
 
disruptivehair
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:28 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:17 pm

Quoting Pope (Reply 78):
But as the law currently stands a 8.5 month old fetus with a fully developed brain can be killed through partial birth abortion.

That is such a gross mischaracterization of what actually happens.

The procedure that you're mentioning is sometimes used on fetuses that died in the womb; it's easier on the woman than slicing her open or inducing labor to deliver a dead baby.

It's sometimes used on fetuses that would be born so ill as to not have any quality of life at all.

It's sometimes used on abortions where other methods are no longer practical; this is usually past the point where the vast majority of abortions occur. The vast majority of abortions occur during the first 8 weeks of pregnancy before ossification occurs. At the point where it is likely to be used, the fetus could not survive outside the womb anyway, so 'partial birth' is a misnomer. 'Partial miscarriage', maybe.

It is rarely...and I mean 1 in a million here...used on a healthy, well-developed, normal fetus 8.5 months into pregnancy, mainly because you would be hard-pressed to find a doctor willing to perform such an unnecessary procedure. Actually, 99.99% of doctors would laugh you out the door if you waddled in 2 weeks from your due date asking for a partial birth abortion. They simply wouldn't do it for you because it's an insanely stupid thing to do. That's why it's so rare as to be a complete non-issue.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:11 pm

Quoting Disruptivehair (Reply 80):
The procedure that you're mentioning is sometimes used on fetuses that died in the womb; it's easier on the woman than slicing her open or inducing labor to deliver a dead baby.

It's sometimes used on fetuses that would be born so ill as to not have any quality of life at all.

But it is also sometimes used as an elective procedure.

Quoting Disruptivehair (Reply 80):
It is rarely...and I mean 1 in a million here...used on a healthy, well-developed, normal fetus 8.5 months into pregnancy, mainly because you would be hard-pressed to find a doctor willing to perform such an unnecessary procedure.

But the law should not rely on a doctor's subjective judgment on whether he or she is morally ok with doing this. Again, the issue needs to be resolved within the confines of the US Constitution and not based on anyone's (no matter what side of the debate they're on) moral beliefs.

So are you are saying that the 8.5 month old fetus is a life? If not, why? If so, why doesn't it get Constitutional protections?
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
allstarflyer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:43 am

Quoting Disruptivehair (Reply 79):
How would you feel if I characterized Republicans as intolerant stupid bible-thumping gun-toting rednecks?

I appreciate Jaysit's honesty, because, in the past, I've taken him to be leftist. The truth is, a lot of Republicans fit the mantra you just laid out (intolerant - a lot of them; stupid - some of them; Bible-thumping - some of them, but, then, I'm a Bible-believing Christian who advocates from it on Anet, and I don't necessarily consider myself "Bible-thumping"; gun-toting - amen; rednecks - a bit of a stretch on that one).

Quoting Pope (Reply 81):

 checkmark  Thanks for advocating on behalf of the unborn. Too few voices out there for that.
Living the American Dream
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:26 am

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 82):
Thanks for advocating on behalf of the unborn. Too few voices out there for that.

Though the effect is obviously beneficial for the unborn, I consider myself as advocating for the Constitution. I'm tired of liberals advocating an ever expanding interpretation of the 5th and 14th amendments when it suits their cause and then turning around and readily ignoring the protections afforded under it when they don't like the outcome.

My point was that the abortion debate need not have religious or moral overtones when it arises in the US judiciary.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:18 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 78):
So now you're changing your definition. At first it was independent human life. Now it's life "that is mature enough to have consciousness and not be an extension of or inclusion within a woman's body." Well I guess, under your "new" definition, abortion past the age of viability should be banned. Because under your definition, a post viability baby can meet all the criteria you've outlined.

Pope, you are a good debater, and I think there's an honest debate to be had on subjects like this. But don't play games; I haven't changed my definition, I'm just explaining what I meant by "independent human life" in the first place.

As for late abortions, I think you'll find that most reasonable pro-choice people believe that abortion past the age of viability is extremely problematic, and should be limited to exceptional cases. While most Americans support legal first-trimester abortion, that number goes down to about 25% for second trimester and about 10-15% for third trimester. So the whole "partial birth abortion" thing is a red herring that the pro-life lobby uses to distort the situation. The VAST majority of abortions occur during the first trimester--in fact during the first 10 weeks or so of pregnancy.

Quoting Pope (Reply 78):
But let me ask you this. What happens when medical science advances to the point that viability can occur near to or immediately after conception? I have no doubt that science will advance to this point in the future. Whether it takes 10 years or a 100 years, I'm certain that science will achieve this result; what then? Furthermore, how can life be a sliding scale. Under your definition, something that would have been considered dead yesterday is now alive becauses of advances in neonatal care.

How can you argue that beginning of human consciousness, or real "human" life is not a sliding scale, unless you resort to religious arguments? An enbryo is not a person--it is more like a potential person. An embryo does not have human consciousness, while a mother does. To choose the moment of conception (which you obviously want to do) as the definite start of human life and human rights is based on the idea that there is something inviolable about a few cells without even a brain. Basically your only support here is the relgious concept of the human soul. While I understand and respect this viewpoint, you must realize that it basically IS a relgious argument rather than a scientific argument.

I concede quite willingly that it is rigid to use the moment of birth arbitrarily as the beginning of human life, but you don't seem to want to relent on your claim that the moment of conception gives someone human rights
from a scientific standpoint...I say again that the gray area is massive.

{Edit: I somehow missed disruptivehair's post, so I realize some of this has been said already, but}

[Edited 2007-03-15 04:34:18]
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:32 am

Quoting N229NW (Reply 84):
As for late abortions, I think you'll find that most reasonable pro-choice people believe that abortion past the age of viability is extremely problematic, and should be limited to exceptional cases.



Quoting N229NW (Reply 84):
While most Americans support legal first-trimester abortion, that number goes down to about 25% for second trimester and about 10-15% for third trimester. So the whole "partial birth abortion" thing is a red herring that the pro-life lobby uses to distort the situation. The VAST majority of abortions occur during the first trimester--in fact during the first 10 weeks or so of pregnancy.

Again, you keep raising the issue of what people think. Constitutional law shouldn't be based on opinion polls. If that were the case, blacks would never have been freed and women might not be able to vote. So whether or not anyone finds anything problematic is irrelevant. What the Constitution says about due process and equal protection is relevant.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 84):
I concede quite willingly that it is rigid to use the moment of birth arbitrarily as the beginning of human life, but you don't seem to want to relent on your claim that the moment of conception gives someone human rights
from a scientific standpoint...I say again that the gray area is massive.

If you go back and read my posts, I've never said that life begins at conception. I have said that it begins somewhere between conception and birth and have asked you to define what constitutes life. So please don't once again create a statement that I didn't make, attribute to me and then try to use that statement to "reply to" a non-existence position.

You are the one who first defined life one way, then another and the a third - each time modifying or as you say explaining the definition.

The point I make is that the pro-choice movement (of which you may or may not be a part of ) is stuck with the problem that if they ever concede that life begins before birth, they end up in a very difficult position under US Constitutional law because they can't answer the basic question - Why should an unborn baby be denied protection of the 5th and 14th amendments?
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
User avatar
zippyjet
Posts: 5189
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:04 pm

At least on presence, and speach, Thompson has what it takes. He's command more respect than the current POTUS.
He'd fly hypersonic circles around Newt Gingrich who I loathe and, Mitt Romney. Get the flames out folks but, I would not feel comfortable with a Morman President from either party. I don't think they hold my people (Jewish) in high regard.
I'm a Dem but, I'd have to read more about Thompson and for that matter all the folks running in my party. I don't think Hillary has the mass appeal to pull off a victory. Gingrich as I stated would be laughed at and I feel a lot of us would be less than enthused with a Morman President.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve this message!
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:00 pm

Quoting N229NW (Reply 71):
It's full of aritcles on gay marriage. Again, find me a modern professional anthropoligist who defines "culture" in the static, narrow way you define it (like your claim that there is one monolothic entity called "Western Culture," or that legal systems are not a part of culture, etc.).



Quoting Pope (Reply 72):
Quoting N229NW (Reply 71):
It's not as though pro-choice people are some kind of vicious sadistic baby-killers. It's that they have different answers to those complicated questions than you do.

I've never said that they were vicious sadistic baby-killers. Don't try to distort the issue by creating a statement, attributing it to me and then trying to beat me over the head with something I never said.

Pope it's hopeless. Distortion is what liberals do best and it's a tactic that apparently N299NW has picked up on very well.

Look how he distorted what I said. I never said cultures were static. I never said legal systems were not part of a culture, just as religious systems are part of the culture. But when you just calmly argue a rational position that is clear and makes sense they have to distort it so that it appears like it the position of a zealot.

I explained how you can oppose Gay-marriage with supporting the rights of gays to have a legally sanctioned relationship, but that doesn't matter.

Like the Gay lobby, the word MARRIAGE has to be applied or it doesn't count. Which is completely uncompromising, coming from the side that claims the right is intransient.

Then look at the abortion issue.

Can anyone reasonable say that abortion is a good thing? I've had friends whose girlfriends had to abort. Neither the mother or the father thought the abortion was a great thing, but it was a necessary thing for them.

Roe v. Wade as it is right now is bad law. No less that Ruth Bader Ginsburg has made that assessment. Constitutionally if you want to do it right overturning Roe is a good thing. It would do NOTHING immediately but send the issue back to the states to decide, which is where the issue belongs.

But is this a pragmatic and thoughtful solution to the Pro-Choice crowd. No. They would label me a religious zealot for my position, as I have been labeled here for this position many times.

So you just keep explaining. Eventually it might sink into their heads.
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:35 pm

Quoting Zippyjet (Reply 86):
I feel a lot of us would be less than enthused with a Morman President.

Do you think he's an American first or a Mormon first, and if so why?

Has he ever displayed any religious prejudices?

Would you feel the same way about Obama, since he's a Muslim?

I'm looking for more clarity since you're honest about your feelings in the first place, which is rare when it comes to this sort of thing. I hope you have your Nomex pants on.....
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
itsonlyme
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 3:52 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:36 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 88):
Would you feel the same way about Obama, since he's a Muslim?

Barack Obama is not Muslim
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:46 pm

I have had the distinct pleasure of interviewing then Senator Fred Thompson several times. If he runs, he's got my vote. He is as an upstanding individual as I have ever met.

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f294/DrHansZarkov/Sen.jpg
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:18 am

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 89):
Barack Obama is not Muslim

Maybe some folks are maybe mentally confusing Obama with Osama?  scratchchin 

Quoting Zippyjet (Reply 86):
I feel a lot of us would be less than enthused with a Morman President.

Why? Do they have horns? (It's "Mormon", BTW)
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:33 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 88):
Would you feel the same way about Obama, since he's a Muslim?

Oops, you been relying on Fox news a little too much for your info? That's pretty sad...

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 87):
Look how he distorted what I said. I never said cultures were static. I never said legal systems were not part of a culture, just as religious systems are part of the culture.

 scratchchin  Let's go back a bit, shall we?

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 13):
The anthropological definition of marriage...no culture defines a relationship between two people of the same sex as marriage

1.) There's no such thing as "the anthropological definition of marriage"--modern anthropology considers cultures as a whole.

2.) You claimed "no culture has same sex marriage." I gave you several counterexamples, after which you claimed that those examples didn't count because:

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 51):
Anthropologically. Legally is a different subject. I made a very clear distinction

So you made it clear that you believe that somehow "legally" is different from a "culture" that recognizes marriage. But then you claim that you never said that legal systems were not a part of cultures? So, either I didn't distort what you said, or you changed your mind and proved yourself wrong. Then you resorted to ad hominem attacks. At least Pope can actually argue.

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 87):
But when you just calmly argue a rational position that is clear and makes sense they have to distort it so that it appears like it the position of a zealot.

You're right, only liberals do this. Conservatives would never do that--for instance they'd never try to make everyone who is pro-choice look like they advocate partial-birth abortions or anything like that...
_______________________________

Quoting Pope (Reply 85):
If you go back and read my posts, I've never said that life begins at conception.

Well, You've strongly implied it, because you have basically claimed that any other answer to the question is untenable and that it is a "simple" question. So, if I misunderstood you, why don't you explain yourself. Let's turn this around:

Quoting Pope (Reply 85):
I have said that it begins somewhere between conception and birth and have asked you to define what constitutes life. So please don't once again create a statement that I didn't make, attribute to me and then try to use that statement to "reply to" a non-existence position.

At what point do YOU propose the law should recognize (under the "constitution") the beginning of human life? What constitutes human life for YOU?
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
UALPHLCS
Posts: 3232
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 5:50 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:04 am

Quoting N229NW (Reply 92):
1.) There's no such thing as "the anthropological definition of marriage"--modern anthropology considers cultures as a whole.

Of course there is an anthropological definition of marriage. Marriage is one of the few institutions that is almost universal anthropologically. Yet there are different kinds of marriage anthropologically, not just one. In some cultures it's monogamy, in others polygamy, a few are polyandric, there are all kinds of marriage customs and rites and legal statues and customs based on them in the cultures of the world. But none have same-sex.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 92):
2.) You claimed "no culture has same sex marriage." I gave you several counterexamples, after which you claimed that those examples didn't count because:

What you gave was examples of variants of Western Cultures. Show me an African or Asian or South American culture whose culture isn't based on Western Philosophy and Christianity, that also has same-sex marriage as a rite. Of course in a western liberal (small "L") democratic culture they are having similar debates to our own debate and some have chosen solutions already. But that doesn't make them right and it doesn't make them more advanced.

There is a distinction between the legal customs and systems and the religious customs of a culture and marriage straddles both in most cultures. I clarified my position I didn't change it. I'm sorry if your too blinded by ignorance to see that.

Final word to get back on topic.

Fred Thompson would be a fine candidate. His positions on these issues are pragmatic and reasonable to anyone willing to compromise. His position on abortion is not based on religious belief but on the legal and Constitutional problems with Roe v. Wade. Problems obvious to anyone not passionately worked up. His position on Same-Sex marriage likewise is a reasonable one. As I have been arguing. He draws a distinction between the Religious and Cultural values of Marriage and it's Legal aspects. Allowing same-sex couple the rights of the Law without the need to "bless" it with the same status a marriage.

The real ideologies are the gay marriage lobby who have taken the intractable position that if it doesn't say "marriage" no matter what rights come with it, it isn't what they want. Why take the all or nothing position? but that's for another discussion.

Candidates are coming forward that offer real workable compromise on the big issues of the day. Isn't it telling that it's Republican candidates that are offering solutions while Democrat interest groups are calling it a no go. Who are the zealots?
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:14 am

Quoting N229NW (Reply 92):
Quoting DL021 (Reply 88):
Would you feel the same way about Obama, since he's a Muslim?


Oops, you been relying on Fox news a little too much for your info? That's pretty sad...

Sad? No.....I was making a point. He was born of a Muslim father and has declared his Christianity.....but for people who are making their decisions based on religious fears alone then we may as well reach for generalities. Hitler declared that anyone with Jewish blood, even if they declared something else, was Jewish and destined for relocation.

I don't think Zippy's a fascist or Nazi...far from it....but he's apparently making a decision based on fear rather than reason.
I was simply asking for clarification.

What's sad is your inability to not be snide when trying to make a point.

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 89):
Quoting DL021 (Reply 88):
Would you feel the same way about Obama, since he's a Muslim?

Barack Obama is not Muslim

see the above......

I apologize if the irony skipped some heads here........
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
LogansGirl
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:48 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:13 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 8):
Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that."

States should be in control of "civil union" decisions, but isn't this political double speak at it's finest?
I Love CastleIsland!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26790
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:50 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 8):
Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that."

I guess Constitutions don't matter either then.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
LogansGirl
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:48 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:07 am

Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 18):



Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 18):
Anyway in France you have to have a civil ceremony and you can also have a religious ceremony on top of that. If a couple want to have the legal rights of marriage they go for the Civil Union Homo or Hetero alike, but only Hetero couples can go on and have the religious certificate as well.

That is the Way it should be. What is legal, should be different from what "the Church" says is right.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 96):
guess Constitutions don't matter either then.



Quoting N1120A (Reply 96):
I guess Constitutions don't matter either then.

Which Constitution are you refering to? The state's Constitution, or the State's Constitution?. Because as far as I'm concerned, the State's Constitution has precedence. State with a capital "S" means one of the "UNITED STATES," while state with a lower case "s," means the country of the United States of America.
I Love CastleIsland!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:18 am

Quoting LogansGirl (Reply 97):
Because as far as I'm concerned, the State's Constitution has precedence.

Legally however, I believe the Constitution of the United States takes precedence over the constitutions of the various states.


And welcome aboard, by the way.  wave 

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
LogansGirl
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:48 am

RE: Fred Thompson.. A Conservative I Can Vote For?

Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:31 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 98):

The Rights of the individual States is why we fought the "War of Northern Aggression"(a.k.a.the Civil War). I am a Confederalist. I believe the rights of the people who are closest to their elected representatives should supercede said representative's opinions. As well as the Country in general's opinions.
I Love CastleIsland!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dutchy, tommy1808 and 34 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos