McCain chose Palin as VP

[geocajun]

It gets easier the more children you have because they're doing half the work of raising the younger ones.

Many hands make light work. My best friends growing up were both oldest girls in families of eight children, and we never went anywhere without two or three younger ones. They resented it. They complained. They had much smaller families when they got married, although they were devoted to the children they did have.

I hear you loud and clear. You support Governor Palin, and you support her even more because she can be a loving, devoted mother while traveling the country on tour buses 18 hours a day for nine weeks straight while dragging along a sick infant whose genetic heritage includes a predisposition to lung, respiratory and heart problems.

How dare anyone else look beneath the surface? How dare anyone whisper one word of doubt about her qualifications?

There were many, many, many pro-life Republicans with much more experience and credentials--Governor Huckabee, for example, who supported a Human Life Amendment, the only candidate to suggest the only way to end abortion and stem-cell research.

Well, excuse me if some of us think that a good Vice-President with good family values should be judged not by the number of birthstones in her mother's ring but by the strong foundation she supports for every child in this country.

Not only was Governor Huckabee in favor of a Human Life Amendment, he was the only pro-life Republican in the field, because he was the only one who had improved the lives of the already born in Arkansas by championing education and health care and because he was socially conservative and politically moderate.

If Huckabee was chosen, I'd have a hard time not voting republican to be honest.
He is really pro-life. I won't sell out for McCain, because he is a fraud, but Huckabee is the real deal.

 

[Fantine]

I agree. He was the best in the Republican field--and an excellent speaker and campaigner who brought charm, wit, and intelligence to the campaign floor.

And I agree that he exhibited enough concern and advocacy for a wide range of Catholic principles that he would have been easy for most Catholics to support, even the "social justice" Catholics.

 

[Secundulus]

Statistics from a war decades ago decades ago when we had a draft aren't very relevant to our present situation where our all volunteer force is at least partially dependent on financial incentives to encourage people to join.

The story is the same today, much to the chagrin of the Democrat pundits.

Overall, the wartime recruits are more similar than dissimilar to their civilian counterparts. The all-volunteer force displays near proportional rep­resentation of income backgrounds. Whites serve in approximate proportion to their population, although representation of minority groups varies.

Read the full report here http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

Ahh, but you think too clearly. You are not "complicated" enough for the pointy heads who like to intellectualize everything until they think themselves right into sin... ...and then find a way to justifiy that as well.

You see, McCain was too simplistic when he bluntly said life begins at conception. Oh no no, you need to be "deeper" and more "complicated" like Obama, who said that the answer to when life begins is "above his pay grade" and can at the same time rationalize killing beings which he himself admits he doesn't know if they are human beings or not.

You see, that is what being intellectual is. You can see it right here in this forum: People who rationalize voting for those who condone the murder of innocent babes. Isn't it great to be so complicated?

Of course, I'm just a simple guy. I only want to protect the unborn. I guess I'm just a prte-Vatican II throwback - too old fashioned, you see.



I rest my case.

.

.

Hmmm, seems like someone wrote something about an anti-intellectual strain in America.... what crazy talk...

The Church doesn't teach that one can only vote Republican. No matter how you twist Her words, you won't find that written anywhere. Our Faith is a faith of sophistication- it is one which teaches that we have a God who is infinite mercy and infinite justice...if that's not a complicated idea, I don't know what is. Our Faith is one which honors freedom of each and every individual. I haven't written anywhere that the unborn are unimportant, or that protecting them is irrelevant. I have only written that I don't think McCain is gonna do a darn thing to save any unborn babies.

LOL! It's funny, too, because you respond as though I am an Obama support, which I am very much not.

 

[katholikos]

Hmmm, seems like someone wrote something about an anti-intellectual strain in America.... what crazy talk...

The Church doesn't teach that one can only vote Republican. No matter how you twist Her words, you won't find that written anywhere....

Abortion is murder, and that is Church teaching. Voting for people when one knows they intend to make sure abortion stays prevalent, puts the blood of those innocents upon their hands.

My conscience will be clear when I stand before God: When the blood of the innocents cries out for justice, I will be able to say: "Not I, Lord. I did not empower those who killed your children."

.

.

 

[AMDG]

Oh good grief! You all sound like a bunch of squabbling children!

McCain picked his runningmate Sarah Palin. She wasn't on the short list and we need to get to know this strong lady Governor from Alaska. So far we know that she was considered for the VP position awhile back but her actual choice was kept "under wraps". We know that she ran on a ticket of reform, is against corruption, and has dealt with the powerful oil companies. We know that she succeeded as Governor. We know that she was a mayor in a medium-sized town before. We know that she was a former union member (and her husband is still a union member). We know that she is articulate and a good speaker (she didn't use a teleprompter in her acceptance speech.) And of course, we know of her husband and five children--including the oldest son who is soon to be deployed to Iraq and an infant who was born (and is welcomed into the family) with Downs Syndrome. So we know that she isn't just talk--she "walks the talk".

I figure that we will all learn a lot more about Governor Palin in the coming days-months, and this is going to be one interesting and historic election. So why not just say "congratulations" to McCain's runningmate instead of trying to tear the poor woman apart with ad hominem attacks. It's the proper thing to do.

 

[katholikos]

Oh good grief! You all sound like a bunch of squabbling children!

If only that were the case. Children squabble over unimportant things.

Unfortunately, there is an evil in this land which conscienceous people must stand and fight. And nothing is more evil than the wanton, willful killing of innocent children and the laws which make it legal !! There is no straddling the fence. You either fight it, or you surrender to it. Many in this forum have surrendered. I never will.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Tell that to the murdered children when you face them in heaven. Tell them that you were being "smart" when you voted to empower their murderers. I should enjoy watching that very much.

First of all, a pro-choice politician is not a "murderer". I'm pro-life, but I can recognize over-the-top rhetoric when I hear it.

Secondly, I'd be comfortable defending my votes before anyone -- Jesus, Mary, Joseph, a baby, bambi, barney the dinosaur, whomever. I am casting the only votes my conscience allows me to cast in most races, for Democrats.

Don't you dare talk to me about "twisting" words. Abortion is murder, and THAT is Church teaching. By voting for people who intend to make sure that abortion stays legal, the blood of those innocents is upon your hands as well as theirs.

By that logic, anyone who votes for a Republican is guilty of the murder by neglect of any person who denies from lack of adequate health care, food, water, or shelter.

My conscience will be clear when I stand before God: When the blood of the innocents cries out for justice, I will be able to say: "Not I, Lord. I did not empower those who killed your children."

If only that were the case. Children squabble over unimportant things.

Unfortunately, there is an evil in this land which conscienceous people must stand and fight. And nothing is more evil than the wanton, willful killing of innocent children and the laws which make it legal !! There is no straddling the fence. You either fight it, or you surrender to it. Many in this forum have surrendered. I never will.

How old are you?

 

[D'Ann]

Ahh, but you think too clearly. You are not "complicated" enough for the pointy heads who like to intellectualize everything until they think themselves right into sin... ...and then find a way to justifiy that as well.

You see, McCain was too simplistic when he bluntly said life begins at conception. Oh no no, you need to be "deeper" and more "complicated" like Obama, who said that the answer to when life begins is "above his pay grade" and can at the same time rationalize killing beings which he himself admits he doesn't know if they are human beings or not.

You see, that is what being intellectual is. You can see it right here in this forum: People who rationalize voting for those who condone the murder of innocent babes. Isn't it great to be so complicated?

Of course, I'm just a simple guy. I only want to protect the unborn. I guess I'm just a prte-Vatican II throwback - too old fashioned, you see.



I rest my case.

.

.

I don't think it's about them being intellectual, I think some are hurting and discouraged and angry because they feel betrayed by the Bush administration. I understand as much as I can what their reasons are, and with all of my heart, I pray for Christians who feel this way.

All we can do in a loving and caring and positive way, yet speak the truth with respect is to convey our thoughts on it, while not excluding and furthering the hurt and anger that others may be having.

I am a simple creature too. And yet, my husband says, I'm complicated...lol hehe But the bottom line is my hope and prayer is that we have a prolife agenda. My hope and pray is that roe vs wade is abolished and the only way that this can happen is by having more prolife supreme judges and the only way that this will happen is with a prolife president.

This is the first time in a very long time that I have felt good about the presidential election. I wish that others felt this way too, it is wonderful to have hope again.

I don't believe that you are a throw back from pre Vat. You are speaking what Vat II teaches.

God's Peace

 

[BAFRIEND]

.

 

[BAFRIEND]

If Huckabee was chosen, I'd have a hard time not voting republican to be honest.
He is really pro-life. I won't sell out for McCain, because he is a fraud, but Huckabee is the real deal.

I would rather vote for the fraud, then the real deal co-sponsor of the Freedom of Choice of Act baby butch Obama who tells Planned Parenthood their agenda will be his priority.

 

[geocajun]

I would rather vote for the fraud, then the real deal co-sponsor of the Freedom of Choice of Act baby butch Obama who tells Planned Parenthood their agenda will be his priority.

Well, that's up to you. I'm not telling you how to vote, but rather telling you how I'm going to vote.

You may want to read this before you vote: http://thewittenbergdoor.blogspot.com/2008/03/how-john-mccain-threatens-pro-life.html

 

[D'Ann]

I'm voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

 

[katholikos]

First of all, a pro-choice politician is not a "murderer". I'm pro-life, but I can recognize over-the-top rhetoric when I hear it.....

You know, in American law, a murderer can get sentenced to life, but an attempted murderer or an accomplice to murder can recive the same sentence. Society deems that the attempt to commit murder, or complicity in a murder, is just as weighty as murder. So is my "rhetoric" really that far over the top? If a politician enables millions of murders (and I assume we all agree that abortion is murder) then isn't that politician complicit in, and a party to, those acts?

 

[WarriorAngel]

but I'd rather vote for a pro-choice Democrat than a pro-life Republican because the Democrat usually cares about life from birth to death rather than just for nine months. I'd rather have the total package, but given the choice, I'll take birth to death versus 9 months in the womb.

So knowing Obama wants babies who survive and are living after a botched abortion - to die...
Are you going to tell me, Fishy, i mean really tell me that you adhere to this standard rigidly?....... and knowing Obama wants actual death to babies who are survivors....?
So this isnt about who cares about life - this is about democrats...
And voting democrat only.

So i find it perplexing that you arent looking at the scope of death to children that Obama is in favor of...
And yet you just said it is in fact because the domecrats care after birth.

But i find that inconsistent with the man you want to vote for...who is democrat...and just because he is democrat...and not on what he actually stands for.

According to his voting record - he does NOT care about life AFTER exiting the womb.

Protecting life is more complicated than just abortion--we voted Bush in on the abortion stance, and what has he done?? Is Roe V Wade overturned? Did he capitulate and allow for fetal stem cell research? And in the interim, while no strides have been made politically to end abortion other than partial birth abortion (which is still allowed in cases of threat to the mother, making it rather a non-law)- we've sent our young men and women off to the slaughter, harmed our relations with much of the rest of the world, and watched our country plunge into debt and less wealth. Those things seem like proportionate reason. If we all get blown to kingdom come, there is not "life", either.

(For those who think I am wrong about the Partial Birth ABortion ban wording:
Here's the whole thing:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/2003s3.html

I have read about that only in severe cases - where the mother may die.
However; how many women who are seeking an abortion are really in danger.
Whereas i know of a woman who had a PBA and regret doesnt even begin to explain her emotions...
And she did only because she could.

Nevertheless; Clinton for 8 years absolutely refused to sign any bills passing thru his office if they were worded against PBA...
In fact the slob shut down the government 2 times [i think] just because of his veto....on THAT issue alone.

As bad as Clinton was, Obama is much worse.
One of like 3 in the senate who voted against the BORN ALIVE ACT.

As for what Bush has done, he has made it so stem cell research on embryo's ceased.
He took the bill that Clinton put into effect when it would be his term - that PPF would in fact receive so much per year from the government in funding and made PPF put it towards abstainance teaching....
AND nothing was allowed towards abortions.
I read the bill that Clinton put into effect - which they can set the date and time for the future - which Billary did because HE wanted ppl to be confused over Bush's term 'giving money to the PPF'. [I cannot tell you how much i need to pray to 'get over' the stuff he has done]

And Bush has made it easier for a LAWYER to get into court to overturn RvW.
Attorneys have to have a case to do this ...Presidents cannot do it.
BUT McCain found a way to get it out of the federal governments hands and into the states.
I am sure that wont happen UNTIL we have a conservative House...senate [et al]

I'm a pro-life Democrat and want abortion to be illegal. However, it is also important that we protect people who are already born and show them respect and acknowledge their dignity as human beings.

As I previously said - how do you defend Obama on your particular belief?

Obviously he doesnt care about life after birth.
He voted against the BORN ALIVE ACT.

How is that caring?

 

[Lisa0315]

Thank God for Catholics. Preach on my brothers and sisters!

 

[Fish and Bread]

So is my "rhetoric" really that far over the top? If a politician enables millions of murders (and I assume we all agree that abortion is murder) then isn't that politician complicit in, and a party to, those acts?

If a politician votes against a health care package and people die because they can't get chemo treatments, or early detection of important ailments that prove fatal, does that make a politician a murderer? What if he or she votes against food stamps and people who need them starve? To be consistent, if you're going to say that someone who votes against changing a law that allows for some abortions is a murderer, then those other politicians would also have to be called murderers. Personally, I try to tone it down a little bit and realize that it's probably not quite the same as someone grabbing a knife and going out to kill someone. It's bad, but it's a different situation.

So knowing Obama wants babies who survive and are living after a botched abortion - to die...

I don't believe what some very biased groups are saying about Obama's beliefs in regard to infants born alive after botched abortions. I don't believe it, because I listened to him when he was asked about it and explained his side of the story. He says that before the bill he voted against, it was already illegal to kill an infant in the state of Illinois or to let it die of neglect purposely (which makes sense, I don't know of anywhere where something like that would be legal). So, in his view, the bill was mainly a political thing, because it would have had no real effect. You seem like you follow politics, so you probably know stuff like that is pretty common -- politicians like to grandstand. And that's what Obama felt the supporters of this bill were doing.

Now, I would have voted for the bill, because I'm pro-life, and I wouldn't mind grandstanding to make a point like that. But Obama is pro-choice and so he was opposed to the grandstanding. Still, you, Obama, and I all agree that infants born as a result of botched abortions are human beings who should be protected. No one wants to let the babies die after they are born.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

So knowing Obama wants babies who survive and are living after a botched abortion - to die...
Are you going to tell me, Fishy, i mean really tell me that you adhere to this standard rigidly?....... and knowing Obama wants actual death to babies who are survivors....?
So this isnt about who cares about life - this is about democrats...
And voting democrat only.

So i find it perplexing that you arent looking at the scope of death to children that Obama is in favor of...
And yet you just said it is in fact because the domecrats care after birth.

But i find that inconsistent with the man you want to vote for...who is democrat...and just because he is democrat...and not on what he actually stands for.

According to his voting record - he does NOT care about life AFTER exiting the womb.



I have read about that only in severe cases - where the mother may die.
However; how many women who are seeking an abortion are really in danger.
Whereas i know of a woman who had a PBA and regret doesnt even begin to explain her emotions...
And she did only because she could.

Nevertheless; Clinton for 8 years absolutely refused to sign any bills passing thru his office if they were worded against PBA...
In fact the slob shut down the government 2 times [i think] just because of his veto....on THAT issue alone.

As bad as Clinton was, Obama is much worse.
One of like 3 in the senate who voted against the BORN ALIVE ACT.

As for what Bush has done, he has made it so stem cell research on embryo's ceased.
He took the bill that Clinton put into effect when it would be his term - that PPF would in fact receive so much per year from the government in funding and made PPF put it towards abstainance teaching....
AND nothing was allowed towards abortions.
I read the bill that Clinton put into effect - which they can set the date and time for the future - which Billary did because HE wanted ppl to be confused over Bush's term 'giving money to the PPF'. [I cannot tell you how much i need to pray to 'get over' the stuff he has done]

And Bush has made it easier for a LAWYER to get into court to overturn RvW.
Attorneys have to have a case to do this ...Presidents cannot do it.
BUT McCain found a way to get it out of the federal governments hands and into the states.
I am sure that wont happen UNTIL we have a conservative House...senate [et al]



As I previously said - how do you defend Obama on your particular belief?

Obviously he doesnt care about life after birth.
He voted against the BORN ALIVE ACT.

How is that caring?

You understand right- that all of the experts who testified, said that partial birth abortion was never in the best interest of the mother's health...and yet that exception is in there, basically allowing partial birth abortion to continue more or less unrestricted. All a provider has to do, if challneged, is say that the woman's health was threatened. Of course the other way around the ban is to inject the baby with lethal drugs, to kill the baby before he or she is dismembered.

It's a useless statue, which has made pretty much no difference.

The Supreme Court is meant to interpret law, not to create law. I honestly don't see abortion ever going back to being entirely illegal, as I think most Americans favor it's legality in cases of rape and incest and 'selective reductions' and for birth defects and mother's health (which is a fallacy, since if the mother's health is endangered, the baby could just be born alive and allowed to die naturally if less than the age of viability). But I don't think abortion will ever become entirely illegal- it might end up with lots of restrictions and regulation, but I don't believe it will disappeear.

 

[SolomonVII]

I

I don't believe what some very biased groups are saying about Obama's beliefs in regard to infants born alive after botched abortions. I don't believe it, because I listened to him when he was asked about it and explained his side of the story. He says that before the bill he voted against, it was already illegal to kill an infant in the state of Illinois or to let it die of neglect purposely (which makes sense, I don't know of anywhere where something like that would be legal). So, in his view, the bill was mainly a political thing, because it would have had no real effect. You seem like you follow politics, so you probably know stuff like that is pretty common -- politicians like to grandstand. And that's what Obama felt the supporters of this bill were doing.

This is a total cop-out. I am sorry. You have been presented with primary sources on way too many occasions for you to be able to continue to blame biased groups as misrepresenting the facts here.

I am sorry, you say you are pro-life, but with friends like you, the unborn really wouldn't need enemies, do they?

The term pro-life has just been rendered meaningless.

This much is clear. You are first and foremost a Democrat.

 

[isshinwhat]

...I listened to him when he was asked about it and explained his side of the story...

Which story, the one where he said he didn't vote for the bill because it didn't contain protection for RvW, or the one issued through his campaign where they admit that the protection for RvW was there? Maybe it was the one after the fact where he said he didn't vote for it because is was already a law in his state...? He can claim whatever he wants to after the fact to cover his rear, but that does not change the fact that he specifically said he voted it down to protect Roe vs. Wade and the right to abort.

Really, though, what do you expect? As the editor of the Harvard Law Review, he never bothered publishing anything, and during the Saddleback Forum we all saw his lack of willingness or ability to give anything more than vague answers... Did he give any in Denver last week? Nope... He is an empty suit who tells you what you want to hear and nothing else... same with the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. So which version makes you feel the most gooshy and giddy inside, Fish?