Now that Ive cooled off....

[Voice]

Yeah, that same paragraph made me go WTF?

but it wasn't about Guiliani....it was about the people who decided to name the hospital wing after him.

[Dmitry M. (Lazer)]

Most of the article was ok, lets just name a couple of people and what was our nation found under and fought for.

But anyways the article did start to pick up at the end and these are probably the most important lines:

"If pro-choice Democrats were truly compassionate and even semi-smart, they would do something positive -- which conservatives and Republicans have failed to do -- to reduce the nation's abortion rate, already the highest among all industrialized nations.

If a young woman, facing an unplanned pregnancy, lived in an America that paid a living wage, had realistic welfare-to-work rules, available child care and early childhood intervention programs, then all available evidence tells us that that woman would be more likely to carry her baby to birth.

For the pro-life side to ignore the crucial importance of a genuine public support system in reducing the number of abortions is to insist irrationally that life begins at conception and ends at birth.

Finally, consider this: American Catholic bishops have declared that politicians who support abortion rights were "cooperating in evil" and "should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions" by Catholic institutions. "

Whoever wrote this defenitly has a much different stand point from voice or kcaa. Notice how he's in the middle of abortion right, he seems pro-choice and pro-life, in that it's good to have abortion rights but at the same time they need to be reduced.

[Voice]

It's about educating the youth of America, it's about providing them with the means to be able to effectively raise a child. As an alternative to illegalization. Which would do nothing to change the way a person thinks.

You also obviously have not been reading anything I've written here.....because I've already mentioned that Educating the youth would be more effective than making it illegal. As far as reducing the number of abortions goes.

So in fact, my views on abortion fall in line with this mans views.

Professor Ralph Whitehead - Democrat - University of Massachusetts. That's the "whoever" you're speaking of....

[Dmitry M. (Lazer)]

Originally posted by Voice
Professor Ralph Whitehead - Democrat - University of Massachusetts. That's the "whoever" you're speaking of....

Why not give the direct link to the source?

Secondly when i read the article, i don't see the article as being written by him. And i lines i quoted from the article seem the opinion of the author. I could be mistaken, please correct me if i'm wrong.

So the "whoever" i was mentioning was the author of the article.

[KCAA]

Im out. Im tired of arguing why my opinion is the way it is.

[Ryan H.]

Originally posted by KCAA


First of all, I never said that first "quote" if you can call it one. You are obviously putting words in my mouth. Secondly., I didn't LIE. If I was, then i would also assume you think or can prove that Kerry lied too when he was debating. You never acknowledged that I did get it correct in that it was 2.7 million jobs.

BTW Bryan - nice post. I concede defeat there. The menatility of republicans (granted its only one) is what i was getting at in the fourth link

You LIED. Kerry never said during any of the three debates that we have lost six million jobs. Show me where he said that. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim. I would like to see where Kerry said we lost six million jobs.

And you only got the 2.7 million AFTER I put the figure into the thread, so no I will not acknowledge that you got jack shit right, because you didn't; I will, however, acknowledge that once you were called on your bullshit and proven wrong, you at least had the common sense to drop it.

[Ryan H.]

Originally posted by Voice
mother****ER. (not directed at anyone, i'm just surley tonight.)

From the very start, my opinion on this matter has been based with my problem with Bush proposing an ammendment to make abortion, and same sex marriage illegal.

Then it turned into a huge political discussion, twisting and turning out of control.

All I should've said from the start is this.

Abortion shouldn't be illegal, because I'm pro-choice.

Same-Sex marriage shouldn't be illegal, because I think that anyone should be able to get married, gay or straight.

I should've left it at that, but I it turned into people QUESTIONING why I had this opinion....It's my opinion, and it should've been left at that.

Of course I know that there are many different reasons one could be against abortion, of course I know there are many different reasons one could propose such an ammendment.

I also know that George W. Bush thinks that God chose him to be our President. I also know that he is a very devout christian. I also know that since the first ****ing page of the bible was written, that nearly every single person who claims to be a devout christian follower, is against abortion.

Not because of Science, because religion doesn't exist in the same realm of science, but because of their religious beliefs.

Seperation of Church and State is more to protect the church from the state....then the other way around.





I haven't quoted KCAA at all. I also disagreed with his first post in this thread.

What you don't seem to get is that it's not just someone's opinion that matters, it's how they came by it. It's been proven that you've come by your opinions through some very flawed logic, which you've reinforced through willfull ignorance.

I think it behooves you to re-examine your views and why you have them. I'm not saying your views are wrong, they're opinions; but it's important for you, and everyone, to formulate their opinions based on logic and fact, not on fantasy and fiction.

[Ryan H.]

Originally posted by Voice







I like that, I like that alot.

That was from CNN.com.....so I don't think that qualifies as a dubious source.

The source isn't CNN, the source is the person who wrote the article. CNN, FNC, ABC, and all stations put people on their outlets to state their views. Just because CNN, FNC and MSNBC are, themselves, credible sites does not mean that everyone who appears on their network is also.

For example, I could go on CNN tonight as a guest on one of their analysis shows, claim that 9/11 was a plot by the Principality of Monaco, which worked in collusion with aliens from outer space.

The fact that I would say that on CNN makes it no more credible than had I said it on a street corner during rush hour.

That you confer credibility on any person appearing on CNN or other major media outlets is frightening, Voice.

[Voice]

Ryan.

If you were a person claiming that about 9/11, CNN wouldn't even talk to you.

The fact remains that the source of what I posted is a PROFESSOR.

Why not post a link to the direct article? Because I can't. I tried to, but every time I try to copy a link or open a new window in IE I get an error and IE shuts down.

I shouldn't have to in the first place, go to CNN.com, that article is on the front page of their website.

Just the fact that you are willing to dismiss what was said in that article is enough to show me that you are so caught up in yourself and your "higher education" that you aren't willing to even listen to what a PROFESSOR has to say.

Now you'll come back and say "Just because he's a Professor doesn't mean that anything he says is right."

And you'd be half-right.

It doesn't mean what he says is right, but it does mean what he says has the backing of what you hold so high over my head, a college education. One that is much greater than anything you've done.

So go ahead and dismiss it, bring up aliens planning 9/11....do whatever you can to distract from my post. You're so high and mighty, that you didn't even TRY to comment on ANYTHING in that article at all. Did you even read it?

At least Dmitry read the ****ing thing.

[Ryan H.]

Voice, the fact that he is a professor and that his thoughts appeared on CNN is just a ****load of logical fallacy, namely Appeal to Authority.

The fact that he is a professor doesn't make him right, it just makes him educated, and educated people can be wrong, too.

And I've seen people on both FNC and CNN who claim the government hijacked the plane that they 'alledge' hit the WTC, took it to a military base, executed the passengers, then shot a missile at the pentagon.

So don't give me this bullshit that CNN has some incredible vetting process that keeps crackpots off their shows- CNN, like FNC or any other outlet, is a ratings-oriented business; what makes them money gets put on the air.

Michael Moore has appeared on CNN, FNC, ABC, etc..... does that make the shit he said in F9/11 somehow more credible? No, he's still been proven to have been full of shit.

It's getting to the point where making you aware of your flawed logic is becoming tiresome. Why don't you get a ****ing clue already?

I don't lord college education over your head, pal. I lord common ****ing sense, something you are, apparently, completely lacking.

As for the PROFESSOR, he made some very good points about what the democratic party needs to do, because they're never going to win with their current platform. He also made a very good point about the party of tolerance not being very tolerant.

However, his bullshit about 'living wages' raised my hackles, as it does any time someone mentions it, because it's a ****ed up socialist concept that so closely resembles communism that it should have no place in American political discourse.

And I never dismissed the article, I just pointed out how ****ing stupid it is of you to assign credibility to something because it's said by a professor or it appears on CNN, and even if I agreed 100% with the editorial you quoted, it would still be moronic to assign it credibility for the reasons you cited.

I am really becoming frightened by your total lack of logical thought.