Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Hmmm, I just keep wondering how we would view a past politician or group of people fighting for civil rights (for minorities) when it wasn't popular, creating political inertia with their whining. I doubt it was only in the 60s that people were fighting for equal rights. And even in the 60s, minds and hearts were not converted by any means. The Domcratic party took a HUGE loss at following (being coerced into) Lyndon Johnson's lead. The Democratic Party WAS the party of the South. They were the utterly racist party. In fact, Jimmy Carter led supporters in south to believe that he agreed with their racist views until he was elected governor and literally on the day of his inauguration let the cat out of the bag and past legislation that furthered civil rights. These people are considered heros for these very acts even though they disregarded a significant portion of their constituency... betrayed them. But in reality they didn't betray them because they didn't just do this to pass some law about using a cell phone while driving or a new tax. They furthered the cause of innate human rights. They did what was the right thing to do regardless of if people's hearts were changed or not. They didn't wait around until most everyone could calmly see their point. They bulldozed things through. That doesn't mean they thought with civil rights legislation racism would be gone... or even necessarily lessened. The racist probably got more racist. But the question is not what happened to them... but what happened to their children nd their grandchildren. As racist as some ares of the States may be they are nothing like their grandfathers' time.
And democrats use welfare, and countless do-good government programs as a wedge issue. Does that mean a person discount them as unimportant? Oh yeah, they also use choice as a wedge issue. I often listen to NPR and I love how I will hear people outrightly say "I couldnt vote for him because of his stance against abortion" and that is respected because the left has done a great job at making any polititian who is against abortion out to be a stupid caveman or heartless slaveowner. But then they will have topics dedicated to the mysterious "one-issue voter" ALWAYS referring to pro-lifers who won't vote for a candidate because he or she supports abortion.
I will agree with you that many (most) don't really care about abortion. They care about it as much as their constituecy does. I don't think McCain really cared about it (I didn't vote for him). However, some do and even when they don't, if their constituents can put enough pressure on them it can effect funding.
You're talking about a referendum? I don't know. I mean, here's the thing. It's about human rights so it's not about opinion. It's not about raising taxes or building a new school or even legalizing drugs. It's about killing humans. It is.
It should. Would it. I don't knwo. Are we not going to try because it might. It CERTAINLY won't if we have a series of pro-choice presidents who pakc the supreme court with those who are blinded on this issue. I don't knwo how Canadian politics works on this.
But no one is saying that education shouldn't be a part of it. It NEEDS to be a huge part of it. The biggest part of all. But by that I don't mean that legality is less important. It's just that education has to be fought on so many fronts. It's very complicated... it needs to be on-going for a long time.
But you advocate a government protecting a woman's right to do that. I'm not screaming at you. I really do get your point and I know (hope) you don't see this as a "right". I hope it is merely taht you see this as a pragmatic way to get to the point one day where in your mind it makes sense to outlaw it.
Actually, if McCain would have been elected I'm sure he would have kept his promise to the Pro-Life cause and the two new Supreme Court Justices would have been conservative. This would have given conservatives the majority in the Supreme Court. If this would have happened there would have been a strong possibility that Roe VS Wade would have been repealed with that conservative majority in the Supreme Court instead of the Pro-Abortion majority that we currently still have because of Obama's appointees. Obama kept his promise to further the interests of abortion giant Planned Parenthood which set the Pro-Life cause back at least a couple of decades if not until Jesus returns to straighten out the mess.
Bishop: Obama Telling Catholics ‘To Hell With You’ « CBS Pittsburgh
Yet you want Obama to win..? Am i correct?
Knowing everything he stands for?
At least i dont agree with pro choice politicians who condone death to the innocent unborn. Unlike a hineous murderer.
AND i remind you - you are NOT more pro life than the Catholic Church who represents Christ Himself - who does not condemn the death penalty. And i follow what they teach - even if you personally disagree with it - it remains acceptable by the Magisterium.
Not even the Pope can change that - but he can suggest it be less frequent in some places around the world.
So - if you are calling me less pro life based on my following the Church - well i guess you see yourself pretty highly?
AND after that short digression of trying to turn this on me....[which it wont work]
The politician you desire in our country - who you would vote for - is taking away religious freedom from Catholics in the medical industry who are usually protected from performing abortions - and yet you say you are more pro life.
I am not following you - but i doubt i can understand the mindset of politics over God's law.
Christ chose this method to die for us. So are you saying He should not have died for us?
