And not just a "nice" liberal, but one who gets right up into people's faces and tells them that they're wrong when they're wrong!
And actually, God -- if I haven't thanked You for giving me that purpose, please allow me to do it now!
Speaking as a diabetic who could benefit from stem cell research: I know it's far more noble for diabetics like me to have our heart attacks, our kidney failures, and to have our limbs amputated one by one so that we can die betwen the age 60 and 70 than it is to do the research using stem cells so that we don't HAVE to die these lingering deaths -- but then again, I've also been told by probably not-so-well-meaning conservatives that diabetes is "God's punishment" for my being a liberal; and I've also received email from CF members wishing me a slow, agonizing death! (Thanks, guys. I love you, too.)
You want a President who "chooses life". What about the 153 people your President killed by lethal injection in Huntsville while he was governor of Texas (six of whom were later found to be innocent). What about the 20,000 Iraqi civilians who have been killed, even though NO weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. What about allocating money for AIDS prevention in Africa -- and then withdrawing the money from the budget? Frankly, I don't think a person like that is "Godly", at all.
And as far as the "legality" of homosexuality -- is it just possible that homosexuals could have the unmitigated gall to believe that THEY have a right to life just as much as us; that they think they are human beings every bit as much as us; and maybe they'd like to be left alone just as much as us?
Let's take a hypothetical case -- but one which is likely to come up in the next very few years. A test is developed which shows if a fetus's eventual sexual orientation will be heterosexual or homosexual. The test shows that the baby will be homosexual.
Does a baby whose sexual orientation is determined, embyronically, to be homosexual have a "right to life" and a "right to be homosexual" if allowed to come to term? Or should the parents have the right to abort such a baby?
Whether we like it or not, science and morality DO work together. We may have the science to play with our genes, but considering the number of people who were killed in the 20th century world wars and genocides, I don't think we may be morally developed enough to risk playing with our genes.
Finally, if I WERE a test tube baby, I'd hope I'd grow up to be a liberal!
Liberal, liberal, liberal: I just LOVE the word "liberal"!
Les Grands Pieds said:
What about comprimising his "strong convicitions". The life of a baby is not precious. He believes that science is more important than morality. That isn't the kind of president that I want running my country. I want a president who chooses life, not death.
That's a really hateful thing to say. I think that Bush has a lot of Godly reasons for the things that he does and you should notice that. What about saying that homosexuality and embryonic stem cell research should both be legal. That's messed up. I want a president who has a problem with killing babies, I don't care if they come from a test tube, God still created them and they still have the right to have a life. Just because their womb is glass does not mean that God doesn't weave them together just like any other baby.
What if YOU were a test tube baby and nobody ever told you. Would you be okay with being aborted at your current age? After all, you should have been aborted, lets just do it now. Would you have a problem with that? If you are okay with this embryonic stem cell research, technically you should be perfectly fine with it.
Just because you weren't born in a real womb doesn't mean you can't be a real person. You are blessed to have been born for a greater purpose than just to die before you had a chance to change the world.
