TexasCHLforum.com

Oldgringo wrote:"...here come de judge, here come de judge..." Who said that?

I believe that was General Motors. (Just thought I'd provide an in-kind flippant answer.)

Republicans 4 Obama wrote:Having abortion as a litmus test prevented us from nominating somebody who could beat Obama. However, given the choice between Obama and somebody who wants to put the government in my bedroom, I choose Obama. If nothing else, when push comes to shove, I shot at Communists 40 years ago and I can do it again.

You won't get the chance to shoot at them, because they're about to take your guns away.

pcgizzmo wrote:So, you've never taken a drink? Maybe one too many? You've taken a drug if so. Morality is just a number on a dart board based on who you talk to. in the 1600's men routinely married girls as young as 9. Many societies allowed polygamy. Amsterdam allows smoking of hashish and prostitution. You can get prescription drugs over the counter in Mexico. Ft. Worth Tx used to have legalized prostitution. What is sin to one may not be to another and it changes with the times and the mindset of the people.

It seems like everyone want's less government unless there is something the government legislates that somehow matches their idea of morality. This all stems from someone's idea of what is right for them should be right for everyone else. If we were to move away from the way of thinking we would all be a lot better off.

You completely missed my point. ALL men are immoral. It's the nature of the beast. Your argument is, because all men are immoral, we should never legislate against immorality.

So, again, I ask you, how do you justify the death penalty? On what basis?

If the basis is it harms other people, well so do drug use, alcohol use, prostitution, pornography and all those other so-called "victimless" crimes.

It's not a question of imposing anyone's morals on someone else. It's a question of whether or not the society will become so "tolerant" that any behavior is condoned. Murder and rape are condoned in Islamist countries. Would that be acceptable to you? If not, why not? On what basis would you disallow them?

There was a time in this country when a woman getting pregnant out of wedlock was frowned upon, thought to be a bad thing. Now women openly get pregnant out of wedlock and everyone celebrates the baby and its mother. Obviously our standards have changed. But what has the impact been on society? From a political standpoint we now EXPECT our leaders to have affairs and aren't the least bit bothered when they have sex in the Oval Office or lie on the witness stand. After all, boys will be boys, they say.

We now teach sex in the public schools and in some places teach homosexuality. What's next? Labs where they can practice? Would that be wrong? On what basis? With your standard of the government should stay out of the morality business, there would be no justification for a law preventing that practice. If two "consenting" 14 year olds want to practice, what's the harm?

If you think that's GOOD for society, I disagree. There's a reason America is the cesspool of ignorance and cowardice it is now, and it's not because we've upheld our high standards. It's because we fell for the lie that "everybody does it" and "no one's perfect" and therefore we have no right to tell anyone else what to do.

mamabearCali wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:This thread has devolved, through 9 pages, into a divisive and sometimes acrimonious debate on abortion. Has anyone changed their minds or is this ?

Nope, but it has shown me that the Republican Party is quite likely to split soon. Democrat lite republicans are blaming the prolife section of the base for their most recent losses (forgetting of course that it was two flip floppers on this very issue that were our last two presidential nominees). Pro-life republicans are not going to move on this issue because they see it as a bedrock issue. They think we lost the last two elections because we were not true to our principals. In reality we lost the election because of the Santa Claus effect, and the personality cult of Obama. Abortion was a useful sideshow for athe democrats and because the republicans did not stick to their principals it became an albatross. Had the republicans stood up for principals, it would have taken the wind of their sails a bit. Be either hot or cold, because lukewarm behavior gets you squished like a bug.

I totally agree. I don't see any way the current Republican party can survive. Conservatives will not tolerate the cowardice of the "leadership" any more. Either you stand for something or we won't vote for you any more.

I suspect the Tea Party will become a real party and the Republicans will fade into history as the party that went from principled politics to cowardly namby-pamby go-along-to-get-along politicians.

pcgizzmo wrote:So, I am guessing that all those that want less government are also for legalizng drugs right? They don't hurt anyone but the people that do them. If it doesn't affect you then it should be OK right? For the record, I don't see a problem with legalizing marijuana.

Drugs don't hurt anyone but the people that do them? What world do you live in? That's like saying prostitution never hurts anyone but the people involved. The effects of sin (pick a different word if you don't like the religious connotations) are far reaching. Watch any of the drug addition shows on TV and you will understand that when one person does drugs the entire family suffers. Even extended family members suffer. And that impact extends to those they interact with and eventually to all of society.

The effects of evil behavior are far reaching, damaging not only the participants but those around them as well as the society at large. Read Mayor Guiliani's book on leadership. Especially the part about the broken window syndrome. Each immoral behavior we allow without protest further weakens society. Why do you think America is in the shape it's in now? We didn't get there overnight. We're at the point now where immorality in leadership is winked out. A President having sex in the Oval Office is not even a reason for disgust, much less not re-electing him. A Treasury Secretary not paying his taxes is humorous. A UN Ambassador lying through her teeth to the American people evokes outrage against those who complain about it rather than the liar herself.

And yes, I know our Founding Fathers had their own share of peccadilloes. The problem isn't the reckless and immoral behavior of leaders. It's our willing acceptance of it as a nation without complaint. It's our failure to hold our leaders accountable for upholding the high standard that the Founding Fathers set for us. It's our constant abandonment of our lower standards and acceptance of even lower standards until there are no standards left and the worst kind of immoral behavior isn't even a good enough reason to stop voting for someone.

Look what it has brought us to. A nation adrift, with no moral boundaries left, sinking into financial desperation with no end in sight and still we party all night as if nothing at all is wrong. Even when the country collapses and our freedoms are completely gone, many will not see the connection.

talltex wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

talltex wrote:

baldeagle wrote:Saving the life of an unborn child is equivalent to saving the life of any other innocent being. Executing murderers is equivalent to executing abortion providers. See the difference?

Whoooaaa....do you actually believe what you just wrote...That killing a Doctor or Nurse that works at a medical clinic which provides abortion services is equivalent to the state executing a convicted murderer? THAT is scary!

Well, perhaps you need to think about it for a while. Note that I am *not* advocating for the execution of abortion providers. I am simply saying that there is NO moral ambiguity about being both pro-life and pro-captial punishment. Both honor life. Being pro-abortion does not honor life, and neither does being anti-capital punishment.

Perhaps, you need to think about exactly what you wrote...your statement stands on it's own. You are in favor of the death penalty for convicted murderers and you state that executing them is EQUIVALENT to executing abortion providers. Not much ambiguity in that statement. You may not be advocating it, but you have made it plain that you think that they deserve it.

Of course they do. Murderers kill innocent people. That's why we put them to death. Abortionists kill innocent babies. They deserve the same fate and for the same reason.

Don't worry. It will never happen. Far too many people think it's a personal "choice". And those same people would never think that killing an annoying neighbor would be their choice. Nor can they see the illogical inconsistency of their position.

talltex wrote:I am also in favor of the death penalty...for those convicted of a crime that justifies it as legally defined in the penal code...people working in an abortion clinic have broken no law, and in no way are they the equivalent of a convicted murderer.

There are man's laws, and then there are the laws of nature - you know - the ones our forefathers referenced in the Declaration of Independence, that forgotten document that no one bothers to read or think about any more because it's so passe.

talltex wrote:I am not pro-abortion or pro-life...I simply don't think me, or you, or anyone else has the right to impose our views on others regardless of how certain we may be that ours is the correct view. Let's all tend to our own moral shortcomings and let others do the same...I'm pretty sure we all have plenty of them to go around.

Again, the moral equivalence argument. Because none of us is perfect, none of us can judge, which is the moral equivalent of you can do anything you want so long as it doesn't harm someone else - except for fetuses, of course.

I'm curious though. How do you justify imposing your views on others regarding the death penalty? Do you think it's fair, simply because you think murder is wrong and it happens to be against the laws of our society, that you then impose that view on others?

Or is it just possible that there really are some moral absolutes that don't change just because people's opinions change? Was slavery wrong when it was legal? Or did it only become wrong after it was illegal? Would raping a woman be OK if the law permitted it, as is the case in Islamic countries? (In fact, even murder is condoned "for the family honor".)

You see moral equivalence is a slippery slope upon which any behavior can be justified if you can just get enough people to agree with you to make it legal.

talltex wrote:

baldeagle wrote:Saving the life of an unborn child is equivalent to saving the life of any other innocent being. Executing murderers is equivalent to executing abortion providers. See the difference?

Whoooaaa....do you actually believe what you just wrote...That killing a Doctor or Nurse that works at a medical clinic which provides abortion services is equivalent to the state executing a convicted murderer? THAT is scary!

Well, perhaps you need to think about it for a while. Note that I am *not* advocating for the execution of abortion providers. I am simply saying that there is NO moral ambiguity about being both pro-life and pro-captial punishment. Both honor life. Being pro-abortion does not honor life, and neither does being anti-capital punishment.

pbwalker wrote:I assume all the pro-lifers are as vehemently against Capital Punishment?

There you go. Moral equivalence rears its ugly head. The infection has spread throughout the populace.

Saving the life of an unborn child is equivalent to saving the life of any other innocent being. Executing murderers is equivalent to executing abortion providers. See the difference?

Gameover wrote:I dont belive in abortion but I'm pro choice. Its not for me or anyone else to tell someone what the can and cant do with there body. This is one of the many things the government needs to get there hands out of.

I don't believe in murder, but I'm pro choice. It's not for me or anyone else to tell someone what they can or can't do with their body. This is one of the many things the government needs to get their hands out of.

MeMelYup wrote:If you think abortion is wrong, the only type of birth control acceptable would be abstinence.

That makes absolutely no sense.

gdanaher wrote:Why is it that so many folks seem to think that abortion is a black and white issue? First, there are far too many of these procedures. Some use it in lieu of protection or abstinence. The health of the mother is a vital issue and seems to be often overlooked. Yes, there are medical reasons for abortion. Legitimate reasons. Reasons that should be a matter between a woman, her doctor, and her g-d. There are Biblical references and Talmudic laws that cover this. What I fail to understand is that the same people who speak of freedom from government seem to be the first to support government legislation that would prohibit abortion of any kind, for any purpose.

Why is it that people who speak of freedom from government insist on government punishing those who commit crimes? Perhaps it's because they're opposed to immorality? Abortion is immoral. If you don't believe it is, please explain the difference between killing a living being in the womb and killing a living being outside the womb. Why is it wrong to kill a baby after it's born but perfectly acceptable to kill it before it's born? What is the moral difference between the two?

mamabearCali wrote:If y'all think that will help the GOP go right ahead. However I think to do so will cut out the very heart and soul of the GOP and all they will get in return is contempt from those they wish to court.

There are many of us already who have nothing but contempt for the party of squishyness and cowardice.

If anyone thinks this election was lost because of abortion, I'd like to see the proof of that. I seriously doubt abortion was the issue that won the day.

pbwalker wrote:Why can't we just stick to the issues anymore? Why all this birther stuff? Enough already...

You mean like you're a racist if you vote against Obama? You're a homophobe if you oppose gay marriage? You're a sexist pig if you oppose abortion? You're a right wing bigot if you don't think Catholics should be forced to provide contraception and abortion against their religious beliefs? Those kinds of issues?

The people who put out this stuff need to reassess. Their message clearly isn't getting out. It's time to take a new tack.