Report comment to moderator

Excellent points.

Report comment to moderator

Again and again you’ve repeated the assertions that CCR’s (whatever they are) have lost their moral compass. Now, without knowing what your abbreviation means, it’s a little hard to address it with confidence, but in context I’m going to assume you mean Christians, or Republicans, or both.

Many Republicans are wishy-washy people who hold their political fingers in the wind, and lack a moral compass. Many are not. You’d have to name an individual person before one could say whether this is a fair accusation. As a group accusation, it’s simply too general, and thus false.

The same is true of many so-called Christians–some have a moral compass and some don’t. Too general.

But true, Bible-believing Christians are about the only people in the world who even have a moral compass, so if you (who do not have one) are judging them by some perceived “loss,” you’re deceiving yourself. Why? A compass is pre-set. North is always north; it can never be south or east. And it means that moral issues don’t change with the times. In other words, it demands moral absolutes–most commonly, biblical absolutes. So, the concept of a moral “compass” cannot even be reasonably discussed by someone whose moral boundaries are set by what feels good or what is in vogue today. Every time you say this, I want to say, “Huh? A person who argues that homosexuality is OK simply because he says it is dares to lecture others (who believe in moral absolutes) about a moral ‘compass’? Does he have any idea how absurd this sounds?”

Report comment to moderator

Perhaps you aren’t aware that a party platform isn’t a “law”? Nor does the platform say that “no exceptions will be made”; it simply affirms the value of human life. A platform isn’t an attempt to work out all the details, and perhaps they didn’t get into where a line is drawn because Republicans disagree on that specific issue. (For instance, if they said, “We allow abortion in case of rape or incest,” many Republicans can’t sign that. If, on the other hand, they were to say, “We won’t allow abortion under any circumstances, even to save the life of the mother”–which of course they do not say –then people like you would point out that they draw the line at a cruel place. So they don’t get into the details at all, and you pretend that they do.)

But again, a platform is not a law, AND no Republican would be in favor of a law that says doctors can’t do abortions even to save a mother’s life, so relax.

All right, now that this has been addressed, could you answer TRS’s question? Also, since you don’t have a “moral compass” (as addressed on another thread a few days ago, though you may not have seen my notes), it’s a little absurd to go around talking about other people’s moral compasses.

Report comment to moderator

>Sarah Palin has shown us all that it can be done
I think Angelina Jolie was there first with her 6 kids. She must really be a seen as a women’s rights champion, regardless of her position on the political spectrum!

>You really need to get out more
I have nowhere to go. The “bridge to nowhere” that Palin flip flopped on was canceled. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Palin_nowhere.jpg

>those who use the Lord God’s name in vain.
Is that near the part about shellfish being an abomination, or the part about blended cloth, or the part that deals with women being the property of their father’s until they are married and ownership is transferred to their husbands? Or the part about lying with a woman when she is “unclean?”

Maybe you should work on your self-righteousness before telling other people what to do.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

******Tell me, Anlir, how many baby deaths does it take before it disturbs your conscience? 10,000? 100,000? 1 million? 1 billion?

Report comment to moderator

The Democratic Party platform of 2008 finally dropped its old abortion language (”safe, legal and rare”), which had asked that women not have abortions unless they absolutely must. The 2008 platform, just announced, says instead, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” Should a woman desire to bear her child, the Dems advocate prenatal care, income support, and adoption programs to help her there, too. But in the world of the new Democratic platform, it’s the woman’s decision to make.

Obviously the Palin family has made clear its views on this moral issue.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

Indeed, her unmarried, pregnant, teenage, (still living at home) high school daughter is living proof that Sarah is showing America how to successfully raise a family and work full-time. Apparently, in “CCR Land” the more pregnant teenagers you have at home the more successful your family is considered to be. Yikes!

Report comment to moderator