«   |   »

Are Republicans Really The Party Of Big Government?

by Ben Hoffman

Let’s look at a few recent events…

* Right-wingers believe that since ACORN has been accused of crimes, they are guilty of crimes, and should be prevented from being awarded any government contracts. In other words, right-wingers are ready to give up the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution which guarantees no one shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law.

* Right-wingers believe the government should be able to tell a woman what she can do with her body when carrying a fetus.

* Right-wingers believe the government should determine who should be able to get married and who shouldn’t based on sexual preference.

* Right-wingers believe the government should determine who should remain on life support systems — not the legal guardian. (Remember Terri Schiavo?)

* Right-wingers believe the government should be able to indoctrinate our children with religion and devalue science in our schools.

* Right-wingers want to use our tax dollars to pay for religious symbols on public property, which violates the First Amendment.

* Right-wingers claim the Second Amendment includes all arms. Our founding fathers didn’t believe in a standing army in times of peace, but felt it necessary to guarantee the right to bear keep and bear arms for a “well regulated Militia” during the times when an army was necessary. Right-wingers don’t respect the wishes of our founding fathers.

* Right-wingers don’t mind our government spying on us, wire tapping our phones, or looking at our email in the “name of security.” The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

And then we have events further back in history…

* Republicans were responsible for Prohibition, which was also known as the “Volstead Act.” Andrew Volstead was, of course, a Republican.

* Republican Senator Joe McCarthy was, of course, the face of McCarthyism, which violated the Fifth Amendment on many levels.

… or maybe right-wingers just don’t like our Bill of Rights.

Posted on October 27, 2009 at 7:48 PM in Education, Politics   |  RSS feed |   Reply   |   Trackback URL

239 Responses to “Are Republicans Really The Party Of Big Government?”

    
  1. sleepygirl
    October 27, 2009 at 10:01 PM

    This is what I’ve never understood. Republicans supposedly believe in small government, and yet they always try to use the federal government to legislate on “moral issues”. So, is it small government in order to protect businesses, but big government because they’re concerned about other people’s morality?

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      October 27, 2009 at 10:11 PM

      It’s whatever suits their needs at the time.

      Reply
    • Moe
      October 28, 2009 at 8:12 AM

      Terry Schiavo. A great moment in national pride. By the way, I will always believe that the country abandoned the GOP because of that event. People were just repulsed by that ugly show. That was the day it all changed. Katrina dug the knife in a little deeper but it was with the Schiavo over reach that they doomed themselves to lose big in ’06.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 28, 2009 at 9:51 AM

        A great moment in national pride? When a husband decides to kill off his wife on life support over her parents objections? Surely you jest!

        Still valuing life,
        An Informed Mind

      • Moe
        October 29, 2009 at 11:24 AM

        Informed Mind – what the husband did was quite normal. Even Tom DeLay said he had to make that decision to pull the plug on his own father.

        The ugly show wasn’t whatever the family did to poor Terry. It was congress intervening in a private family matter. That was the disgrace.

  2. An Informed Mind
    October 28, 2009 at 7:47 AM

    Not right, especially on the abortion issue. Republicans and conservatives believe that everyone is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Abortion denies the baby that fundamental right, if the woman doesn’t want a baby, DON’T GET PREGNANT!

    Conservatives don’t want to indoctrinate our children with religion, they want the free practice of religion permitted, AS PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION!

    The right to bear arms has no effect on the standing army. An army is a well regulated and standing force comprised of either volunteer or conscripted men and women that is subject to the orders of the commander in chief. Citizenry with arms is not a standing army.

    And Republicans are not saying ACORN can’t keep what ACORN earns. They are saying that they cannot take taxpayer dollars which are not rightfully theirs anyway.

    Your retort my friend, falls short.

    An Informed Mind

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      October 28, 2009 at 8:36 AM

      [Conservatives don’t want to indoctrinate our children with religion, they want the free practice of religion permitted, AS PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION!]

      No, conservatives want religion taught in public schools, which is a violation of our Constitution.

      [And Republicans are not saying ACORN can’t keep what ACORN earns. They are saying that they cannot take taxpayer dollars which are not rightfully theirs anyway.]

      Republicans are saying ACORN can’t be awarded government contracts, simply because of accusations. That would be a violation of our Constitution.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 28, 2009 at 9:49 AM

        [No, conservatives want religion taught in public schools, which is a violation of our Constitution.]

        Simply wanting the alternative to evolution taught in public schools is not indoctrination. Providing an alternative teaches young minds to question and find answers through research rather than just accept a theory as fact. Pushing evolution as fact actually violates the laws of science which teach a theory is just a theory until proven true.

        [And Republicans are not saying ACORN can’t keep what ACORN earns. They are saying that they cannot take taxpayer dollars which are not rightfully theirs anyway.]

        Actually, accusations are baseless until proven true, while charges have not been levied at this moment, video evidence confirms the courageous reporting of the two young videographers that show ACORN employees giving advice on skirting immigration and tax laws. Also, wouldn’t you want an organization to be proven to be worthy of taxpayer monies before they receive them? I certainly wouldn’t hand out my hard earned dollars to a corner swindler until I make sure he is legitimate. What about you?

        Hit me with your best shot.

        An Informed Mind

      • pino
        October 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

        That would be a violation of our Constitution.

        No. We can give or not give, money to anybody we want to. Putting ACORN members in jail without trial is prolly a violation of the Constitution. But not giving them money isn’t.

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 1, 2009 at 9:35 AM

        [Putting ACORN members in jail without trial is prolly a violation of the Constitution. But not giving them money isn’t.]

        But banning them from receiving government contracts is.

      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 11:25 AM

        But banning them from receiving government contracts is.

        Giving or not giving money isn’t not protected by the Constitution. Just because we once gave this organization money does not obligate us to continue to give it money.

        Jeepers; does the concept of earning anything enter the Liberal mind?

    • sleepygirl
      October 28, 2009 at 10:10 AM

      Don’t get pregnant? Are you serious? OK, then how about requiring all public schools to teach safe sex? Oh wait, it’s “abstinence only”, right? Did you know that the cases of teenage pregnancy are HIGHER in states that have an abstinence only policy? Yet another case of conservatives burying their heads in the sand.

      Also, tell that to the rape victim, or the incest victim. I’m sorry, but I’m tired of the party of white, middle-aged men telling me what to do with my own body.

      As for ACORN, it’s obvious that the conservatives saw an opportunity to punish an organization that works to help only poor people. But when huge defense contractors break the law overseas, or here at home, do you hear a peep from the right-wingers? HA.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 28, 2009 at 10:42 AM

        This comment was deleted for being too right-wing-nut-jobish.

      • Dave
        October 28, 2009 at 7:35 PM

        Acorn is not about helping poor people. Acorn is about helping the political aims of the Liberal/socialist agenda while draining the government coffers that are funded by our tax dollars.

      • pino
        October 31, 2009 at 10:18 PM

        OK, then how about requiring all public schools to teach safe sex?

        We should teach our kids about safe sex. And that sometimes, no sex is safe sex.

        Also, tell that to the rape victim, or the incest victim.

        I agree there are certain circumstances when the choice for an abortion should be extended to the mother. Victim of crime being one of them.

        I’m sorry, but I’m tired of the party of white, middle-aged men telling me what to do with my own body.

        To be very clear. That child in your body is not your body.

        punish an organization that works to help on

        They broke the law. The encourage the abuse of women. They do not “only help poor people.”

      • sleepygirl
        November 1, 2009 at 8:49 AM

        [To be very clear. That child in your body is not your body.]

        Your opinion. There are many scientists who would disagree with you.

      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 9:10 AM

        Your opinion. There are many scientists who would disagree with you.

        When does the child become a “real” child?

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 10:40 AM

        Pino – that ‘child’ in a woman’s womb IS part of my body. For most of its gestation, it cannot breath without me; it receives no nutrition without me; it’s blood doesn’t circulate without me. It depends entirely on my body functions to have any body functions. Do not tell me that is a baby. That is a fetus.

        Also, if one thinks abortion is a moral outrage, then don’t have one. But don’t tell me I cannot have a legal medical procedure.

      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 11:17 AM

        Pino – that ‘child’ in a woman’s womb IS part of my body.

        I’m sorry MOE. But that child inside of you is an individual person much much earlier than you care to admit. It is for this reason that people can be convicted of double homicide in the case of a pregnant mother and why families name and have services for miscarried babies.

        For most of its gestation, it cannot breath without me; it receives no nutrition without me; it’s blood doesn’t circulate without me. It depends entirely on my body functions to have any body functions.

        That describes almost every single Democrat.

      • thepoliticalmemo
        November 2, 2009 at 6:47 PM

        Sorry, young lady, but I’m tired of liberals telling women that they can deny their babies the right to life. The last time I checked, that is called murder. And murder is illegal.

        And as for rape and incest victims, they do have the choice to give their baby up for adoption, you know. They still don’t have the right to choose for their babies whether they live or die.

        Only in a case where the mother’s life is in danger from giving birth should the mother even entertain the thought of having an abortion. For everyone else, especially for those who want to have abortions out of conveinience, they should either learn to take responsibilty or give the baby up for adoption.

        Just as you think the government shouldn’t tell people what to do with their own bodies, people shouldn’t tell humans, especially at their earliest stage of life, if they should live or die.

        -D.R.L.

      • Moe
        November 2, 2009 at 7:08 PM

        [Sorry, young lady, but I’m tired of liberals telling women that they can deny their babies the right to life.]

        It was the Supreme Court who gave women that right. They’re the ones who told women that they could choose. And for over thirty years, it’s been the law of the land. You may work to have that ruling overturned, but meanwhile, abortion is legal. The laws of the United States of America say it is legal.

        I’m in my 60’s and I would oppose any effort to return us to a truly terrible time when women regularly died in back alley abortions.

    • Moe
      October 29, 2009 at 11:26 AM

      Informed – you say “if the woman doesn’t want a baby, DON’T GET PREGNANT!”

      Pretty cool how those women get pregnant all by themselves.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 29, 2009 at 6:29 PM

        So men bear half the responsibility of getting the female partner pregnant yet they do not get ANY say in whether the baby (Yes baby! It’s not a blob of nothingness or just a hassle.) lives or dies? How hypocritical.

      • Moe
        October 29, 2009 at 7:29 PM

        In every single pregnancy, there is a man involved. Every. Single. Once.

        And while there are increasing instances of men being shut out, they are very few. The ones that ‘make the news’ make the news BECAUSE they are the exceptions.

        All / Some – not the same thing at all.

      • Moe
        October 29, 2009 at 7:31 PM

        Informed – I’d be obliged if you would point out to me where I said blob or nothingness or made any kind of comment on what a fetus is or isn’t.

      • An Informed Mind
        October 29, 2009 at 7:51 PM

        Of course I know that there is a man involved in every pregnancy. But according to liberals, he is to blame for the pregnancy, yet he should have no say over the fate of the baby because ‘it’s a woman’s right to choose.’

        Also, I didn’t say you said the baby was a blob, liberals in general tend to deny that the fetus is actually a human to appease the fact that they support murder in the name of choice.

      • An Informed Mind
        October 30, 2009 at 7:55 AM

        What, you don’t allow me to comment at all because I have good points therefore denying your valuable liberal readers mental stimulation. That’s truly low.

      • Ben Hoffman
        October 30, 2009 at 9:03 AM

        No, your comments wind up in the spam queue because you have more than one link in your signature.

      • Ben Hoffman
        October 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM

        [What, you don’t allow me to comment at all because I have good points]

        You’re not bringing anything new to the table with your talking points. They’re the same talking points that have been used for years on the subject of abortion.

      • An Informed Mind
        October 30, 2009 at 10:14 AM

        I don’t bring anything new to the abortion debate? What about the people that harp incessantly of ‘the mother’s right to choose’? Isn’t that the same, tired, stale old argument that has led to the slaughter of 50,000,000 babies? What about the testimony of those that have had abortions and suffer from depression, physical injuries and regret to this day? What about those arguments?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Ben Hoffman
        October 30, 2009 at 10:40 AM

        [What about the people that harp incessantly of ‘the mother’s right to choose’?]

        If right-wingers weren’t constantly trying to get government to take away a woman’s right to choose, that wouldn’t happen. Again, it’s Republican big-brother government trying to interfere in people’s personal lives where they shouldn’t.

        I know… government prohibits murder, stealing, blah, blah, blah…

      • An Informed Mind
        October 30, 2009 at 10:47 AM

        So you blame the pro-life people for the pro-choice people’s arguments? You don’t deny that 50 million children have been systematically slaughtered then? What about their right to LIVE? Remember ‘All men are created equal with certain unalienable rights. That among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?” You are denying all three to the baby.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Ben Hoffman
        October 30, 2009 at 1:26 PM

        A lot of people believe a fetus is part of the mother and is not fully a person until it can live on its own, so it’s not protected by the Constitution. I’m one of those people.

        It comes down to religion, though. I’d be surprised if there are any pro-lifers who aren’t religious and our Constitution provides freedom FROM religion.

      • pino
        October 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

        is not fully a person until it can live on its own,

        If that were the case, every liberal I know isn’t fully a person. None of you can live on your own.

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 10:45 AM

        One more comment on abortion. Making it illegal may make you guys feel better, but it won’t stop abortion. Women have been intentionally aborting since the dawn of time – and for the same reasons; they won’t be able to care for them properly or they fear cultural banishment for their ‘sin’ of having sex. And, as ever, only the woman bears the shame of pregnancy.

      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 11:21 AM

        Making it illegal may make you guys feel better, but it won’t stop abortion.

        I’m not 7.

        If we use that logic we may as well make theft, speeding and murder legal too, right? After all, just because we have made it illegal it clearly isn’t stopping people.

        And for the record. My stance is that abortion in the case of crime or health of baby/mother is okay; up to the mother. Abortion in the case of birth control is not. How is that not reasonable?

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 11:29 AM

        Pino – you say “f we use that logic we may as well make theft, speeding and murder legal too, right? After all, just because we have made it illegal it clearly isn’t stopping people.”

        Actually, I give you that point.

  3. An Informed Mind
    October 28, 2009 at 2:08 PM

    I was going to say that I respect you for allowing me to comment, but that went out the window. Nice job in promoting free speech.

    An Informed Mind

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      October 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM

      There’s no such thing as freedom of speech on private blogs. I don’t generally delete comments, but opinions based on religion and faith are not worth debating.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 28, 2009 at 4:11 PM

        Ah, so the great defender of all things constitution doesn’t think that those things are worthwhile on a private blog? For your information, I allow such comments on my blog for the sake of discourse except in cases of the comment being hate based. Methinks you are just wanting to suppress someone else’s superior debate points.

        BTW, your point of intelligent design being a matter of faith, you are true. However, it takes more faith to believe that life sprang from non-life is absurd and scientifically unprovable. Therefore it takes more faith to believe in no god than it does to believe in God.

      • An Informed Mind
        October 28, 2009 at 5:12 PM

        Yes methinks, classical terminology.

  4. daveahand
    October 28, 2009 at 3:06 PM

    Point by point:
    There is a long history in business and government of suspending contracts pending legal proceedings. This is not a right-wing belief, but rather an intelligent response to potential scandal.
    Having a baby involves more than a woman’s body. It involves a child’s body as well.
    Marriage has always been legally defined from the dawn of civilization as being between a man and woman for the purpose of continuing the species. Same-sex relationships cannot continue the species.
    The government has no business in our schools, but all theories of the creation of man should be taught rather than just one; let the families make the determination as to which is acceptable.
    Nowhere in the first amendment will you find “separation of church and state.” Rather quite the opposite. The first amendment states clearly that the government cannot restrict the free expression of religion.
    The founding fathers clearly stated the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right. I agree that they did not–at the time–want a standing army. But once it became clear that an army was needed, the founding fathers did create one.

    Reply
    • sleepygirl
      October 28, 2009 at 10:08 PM

      [Same-sex relationships cannot continue the species.}

      So what? It’s not like there’s a problem with underpopulation…quite the opposite, in fact. Our species has already exceeded the carrying capacity of our planet. Besides, don’t forget that that these couples can provide loving and safe homes for children who need them. Any “objection” to this is a case of personal opinion and morality, and doesn’t need legislation. I mean, come on, what do you care if Gary and Bob want to get married. What on earth does it have to do with you?

      Reply
    • Moe
      October 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM

      Dave, you say:
      “Having a baby involves more than a woman’s body. It involves a child’s body as well.”

      And the man’s body? How does that one fit in? I guess these women just keep getting pregnant all by themselves. Which begs a question – dare you to answer it.

      Reply
    • Moe
      October 29, 2009 at 11:37 AM

      Nuther point, Dave. You say:
      “Marriage has always been legally defined from the dawn of civilization as being between a man and woman for the purpose of continuing the species.”

      That’s just incorrect – sex is what perpetuates the species, not marriage.

      In fact, marriage from the dawn of civilization has been an economic contract, especially in the millenia when women were property. Families didn’t pay dowries for procreation. People married for multiple reasons and societies legalized these contracts for multiple reasons. Mostly having to do with land, money, property, security and status.

      You make babies with sex. You make partnersips with marriage.

      Reply
      • sleepygirl
        October 29, 2009 at 12:09 PM

        I agree. Considering the fact that women here in America haven’t even had the right to vote for 100 years yet, let’s not overstate the positive impact that marriage has had throughout history. Only a few generations ago, a woman was a bargaining chip used in business transactions between men.

      • An Informed Mind
        October 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM

        Okay, supposing you are taking all accounts of morality and faith out of the equation. Doesn’t nature alone tell us of the worthiness of one man, one woman marriage? Do you see two male lions mating? What about two male gorillas? Why then should we, if we are after all only a noble animal, go against the statutes of nature and make gay marriage normal?

      • Moe
        October 29, 2009 at 4:58 PM

        Dear informed:
        Same sex sex is widely observed in the animal kingdom. Google it up. Tenderest stories about penguins. And how they help out their heterosexual friends with the little ones. Honest.
        Sex and marriage. Not the same things.
        Procreation and marriage. Not the same things.

  5. daveahand
    October 28, 2009 at 4:43 PM

    Blank dismissives do not support your position. In fact, it pretty much invalidates it.
    You do not counter any argument with a salient point and you refuse to listen to any argument with a religious message. That could be taken as being pretty close-minded.

    Reply
  6. Mister Person
    October 29, 2009 at 8:57 AM

    “Nice, you didn’t even acknowledge my post. Great way to disprove my point. Can’t you debate without running away from it?”

    Get used to it, man . . .

    Reply
  7. Moe
    October 29, 2009 at 7:35 PM

    I must get a life.

    I think this is the longest thread I’ve ever participated in and while I admire the vigor of some of the arguments, I don’t think any of us is changing any minds here.

    Reply
  8. prehistoric rocket science
    October 30, 2009 at 11:09 AM

    Wow, what a great debate! I’m glad I stumbled on this blog. Conservatives have been trying to rewrite the Constitution ever since the ink dried.
    Thank you for getting the Second Amendment right. Also, conservatives need to remember that if Jefferson were alive today, he’d be working for the ACLU.

    Reply
    • sleepygirl
      October 30, 2009 at 11:56 AM

      I think a lot of them would like to just replace the Constitution with the Bible and leave it at that. LOL!

      Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      October 30, 2009 at 9:30 PM

      [Conservatives have been trying to rewrite the Constitution ever since the ink dried.]

      You mean to tell me that the Constitution allows for the government to provide EVERYTHING to EVERYONE? You mean the Constitution allows for free health care? Or that free speech only goes as far as it is ‘fair’? What are you talking about? Liberals are always the ones talking about the Constitution being a ‘living document’. Liberals are trying to make the government all powerful, something the framers NEVER INTENDED!

      Reply
    • Moe
      November 4, 2009 at 10:28 AM

      PRS – Just in case you drop in here, wanted to say

      “Oh jeez. I just met you a week ago and as I’m entirely new to this business, I consider that a long standing relationship. I’ve been checking in often, hoping for a new post, because you’re smart and clever and a fine writer.
      And I don’t even know what flagged means. Hope you find a way back in. Feel free to drop in at my place anytime.”

      Reply
  9. Jonathan
    October 30, 2009 at 2:01 PM

    “A lot of people believe a fetus is part of the mother and is not fully a person until it can live on its own, so it’s not protected by the Constitution. I’m one of those people.

    It comes down to religion, though. I’d be surprised if there are any pro-lifers who aren’t religious and our Constitution provides freedom FROM religion.
    ”

    Pro-Life Atheists

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    As you can see, the first amendment clearly provides freedom of, not freedom from, religion.

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      October 30, 2009 at 4:59 PM

      [Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion]

      Right there is our freedom “from” religion.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        October 30, 2009 at 9:24 PM

        Yeah, that means that there is no official religion of the U.S. That DOES NOT mean that we Christians are supposed to have our rights trampled on by ‘sophisticated’ atheists.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • pino
        October 31, 2009 at 10:29 PM

        Right there is our freedom “from” religion.

        You understand that “freedom from religion” means that the leaders of the church should be separate from the leasers of the state. Right? Further, you understand that our Nation was founded on the principles of religion? That our Rights are given to us by the Deity? That our Founders felt that without the Divine, our cause would be lost?

        You know that Freedom from religion does not mean no religion. Right?

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 1, 2009 at 9:39 AM

        [Further, you understand that our Nation was founded on the principles of religion? That our Rights are given to us by the Deity? That our Founders felt that without the Divine, our cause would be lost?]

        “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”
        ~ Thomas Jefferson

    • truelogic
      November 2, 2009 at 10:57 PM

      Yes, if you want to believe in one of the Gods and claim that ONLY your God is true, you can do that. If our country slowly moves to a Muslim belief system then that is also acceptable and we can even elect Muslims into government. Which we have and that is what it is all about.

      Our founding fathers referenced the divine or creator as a general term. That creator, what ever it might have been. It is possible it was any one of the many Gods but it is likely not do to a God….not any God created by men or worshiped by men. The Gods we follow were created in very primitive times by primitive people. At times where they didn’t have the power of easy access to information we have today.

      We are protected from religion through the separation of church and state. That is our protection, no matter how much one of the religions works to push their belief on all of Americans and thus remover our freedoms in the process.

      i will gladly die protecting our freedoms from religion and that includes allowing religion to take control of our government. Muslim or Christian or any other. Our founding fathers were smart enough to know the dangers. They were very much aware of the Church power when they came to America and how it destroys a country and freedom.

      Reply
  10. sleepygirl
    October 31, 2009 at 3:17 AM

    [That DOES NOT mean that we Christians are supposed to have our rights trampled on by ’sophisticated’ atheists.]

    Informed, how are your rights being trampled? Because a woman can choose whether or not to have an abortion? How does that violate your rights? Obviously it offends your sense of morality, but that’s YOUR morality, YOUR opinion. Your morality shouldn’t be forced on everyone else. That would violate everyone else’s right to freedom FROM religion.

    Reply
    • Moe
      October 31, 2009 at 8:59 AM

      Don’t forget that gay marriage! It will destroy every single marriage in the whole entire US of A and maybe in all the whole world. And all the kids will grow up gay. Which may be a good thing, because then they wouldn’t have abortion to kick around any more!

      Reply
      • sleepygirl
        October 31, 2009 at 10:23 AM

        Hey, that would solve everything!

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

        Not only will they not have abortions like the straight couples (which makes them more moral?) but since they can’t have their own they can offer to take the child of a mother that might otherwise want to have an abortion. Seems like Gay marriage keeps getting more support all the time, and for good reason.

        You know those straight couples that are Christian and go before God and swear “until death do us part” ? Seems their divorce rate is equal to non-religious Americans. I would have expected Christians that made a promise to their God…to GOD in front of GOD and in his name would have the morals to not get a divorce. imagine how they are teaching their children how a promise to their God counts for nothing. Teaching their children their it is ok to make a promise to God and then break the promise. therefore, if we can lie to God, we can lie to anyone.

        if they truly care about the children then they would work to do much more than to attack those that love each other and want the right to make the same promise and maybe to the same God.

    • An Informed Mind
      October 31, 2009 at 1:22 PM

      Morality is not the issue. Marriage is the bedrock of society. And when you begin to redefine marriage to include two men or two women where is the end? Can one man marry two women, what about one woman marrying three men? How about a man and his horse? What about a fifty year old man and a thirteen year old girl? Where is the end to the restructuring of marriage?

      Do you allow for a person to kill another person? Why then do you insist that it is a woman’s ‘right’ to slaughter her unborn? Why is murder in the womb any different than in the world? The place where babies are meant to be protected until they can survive in the world shouldn’t be their own tomb.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • Ben Hoffman
        October 31, 2009 at 1:25 PM

        [How about a man and his horse? ]

        We don’t want to hear about your childhood, AIM

      • An Informed Mind
        October 31, 2009 at 7:37 PM

        Real classy Hoffman. I notice though that you don’t have any responses to my points except attacking me. Where does the slope end?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • pino
        October 31, 2009 at 10:32 PM

        Can one man marry two women, what about one woman marrying three men? How about a man and his horse? What about a fifty year old man and a thirteen year old girl?

        Informed; I think you are wrong here. Conservatives feel that every single person being given Liberty. This would include the Liberty to marry whom they choose. For you to include minor children or animals is beyond the pale. No one here feels that consent doesn’t apply. Clearly you can not marry a child nor can you marry an animal.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 1, 2009 at 12:14 AM

        [Informed; I think you are wrong here. Conservatives feel that every single person being given Liberty. This would include the Liberty to marry whom they choose. For you to include minor children or animals is beyond the pale. No one here feels that consent doesn’t apply. Clearly you can not marry a child nor can you marry an animal.]

        You state that for me to include minors or animals is beyond the pale, but there is a growing movement to make polygamy the next lawful marriage. Would anyone have considered that back in the seventies? The truth is, the assault on marriage by those wanting to define it as between men and between women has opened a pandora’s box of other people wanting to further redefine it. Eventually after gay marriage, polygamy, after that the slope gets very slippery.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 9:08 AM

        Would anyone have considered that back in the seventies?

        The 70’s are hardly the bedrock of modern thinking.

        there is a growing movement to make polygamy the next lawful marriage

        Explain how outlawing polygamy does not restrict the Liberty of a free people?

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 1, 2009 at 9:42 AM

        [there is a growing movement to make polygamy the next lawful marriage.]

        There’s no movement to make polygamy lawful. You can’t just make crap up.

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 10:54 AM

        Informed – polygamy WAS perfectly legal in this country for a very long time. Most people didn’t chose it but it wasn’t illegal. And pino’s point is absolutely correct – consent is implied in a marriage. Horses and children can’t consent, so that’s just a false argumnent.

        And – polygamy and child marriages and forced marriages are the legal norm in at least half the world. Why just ocncentrate on what goes on here. If you think it’s an affront it’s an affront everywhere. How far are you willing ot go to combat it?

      • An Informed Mind
        November 1, 2009 at 5:02 PM

        Several groups have been trying to legalize polygamy based not only on the growing acceptance of gay marriage but also on the repeal of anti-sodomy laws. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33409

        One can easily see that when one definition of marriage is torn down to accommodate others, the marriage contract is further weakened until the point in which almost anything is permissible. Lawrence vs. Texas is the law upon which polygamists and other non-traditional marriage proponents base their hopes.

        Also, on the point of guaranteed liberty guaranteeing the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. NAMBLA or the North American Man/Boy Love Association has argued for years that boys as young as 13 can consent to sexual relations with men old enough to be their grandfathers. When this becomes legal, the boundary has been ripped to shreds and bestiality or incest becomes a side issue for a broken and utterly depraved society. If you are guaranteed a right to marry someone of the opposite sex, does that mean you can marry someone younger? Look to Europe, their model has allowed same-sex marriage and society is in ruins. There are certain limits to freedom to keep their from being anarchy.

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM

        You say Europe is in ruins??? Really? That’s simply an astonishing thing to say. Last time I looking it was pretty nice there. Didn’t see any ruins that weren’t Roman.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 1, 2009 at 7:23 PM

        European society is indeed in ruins. The birth of children outside of wedlock is at an all time high and the institution of marriage is looked upon with disdain by the youth. Youth crime is rampant and anarchy is much more prevalent there than here.

        Moe, have you been to Europe? Also, the ruins are not visible to the eye, hence the phrase, ‘society in ruins’ not ‘Europe is in ruins.’ You can’t possibly tell me that society in Europe is, in your opinion, better than here? If you think it is so much better there than here, why don’t you just state it?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 10:09 PM

        My goodness Informed, everything isn’t an either/or proposition. I can love my country and would rather be an American than anything else. And at the same time I can love Europe with all its history and grandeur, culture and art. Societies are made up of more than cultural norms. You cannot go around disapproving of the whole world because of their attitudes toward marriage!

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 10:10 PM

        And adding, informed, I’ve been to Europe and I’ve lived in Europe and I have relatives in Europe. Just sayin’.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 2, 2009 at 6:00 PM

        Glad to hear you have relatives in Europe. And on certain issues it is an either/or. Marriage is one of those issues. You cannot want to have both the European model of marriage and the current American one. I never said I don’t like Europe. My ancestors came from Europe therefore I guess I owe them gratitude. However, as an American I value values that have largely fallen by the wayside in Europe, including one man/one woman marriage.

        And contrary to your statement, I CAN disapprove of cultures based upon their view of marriage. I can appreciate the beauty, grandeur and history of nations without approving AT ALL of their attitudes on marriage, the family, military, peace, economics and every other issue.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 10:00 PM

        An Informed Mind: Marriage is the bedrock of society. Can you explain how it is the bedrock? I am not sure I understand and I am not trying to be a smartarse.

        If you are a Christian and then claim morality is not the issue then you are being dishonest because to the Christian mind it is all about morality and has been. It is objected to because of religious belief and not that there is any fear it will harm society by allowing other forms of marriage.

        If marriage allows for only specific humans with a specific orientation to get married then it is not providing equal rights to all legal adult Americans.

        If marriage to animals and children is a concern then you should realize that for it to happen, the American people would decide. If they make it legal then that is how it will be. I don’t see this as an issue but we have seen several religions that don’t seem to have a problem with children (usually girls) marrying adult men. We do seem to have a problem with priests claiming to follow jesus having issues with children and the religious side working to hide the acts or pay them off.

        No, we don’t allow a person to kill another person. UNLESS, we are of the christian party of family values and create a war based on lies to do just that. slaughter innocent people, send americans to their death and torture others. in that case, we seem to allow it as long as it has some connection to God and his “mission”.

        Why do we allow abortion? Because the courts decided that life doesn’t begin until it hits a specific age.

        I agree that a baby and an unborn baby should be protected and given every opportunity to a life. They shouldn’t have to pay for the sins or mistakes of others. But I guess if we use God as an example then that little flood did just happen to slowly torture babies through drowning and even caused the abortion of children in the womb of the mother. They didn’t do anything wrong but God wanted them to die, slowly by drowning. Like water boarding but actually finishing the torture. Seems for God murder is the womb is not a problem. If you would like some scripture I can show that it supports the ripping of a child from the womb and dashing children to the stones. Not sure why God can murder a baby at any age is ok but when men honestly work to decide when life becomes life and then only allows it in those specific conditions there is something wrong with it?

        in that case, I am glad we don’t do as god would do and instead we put limits to when a we can end a pregnancy.

    • The Arbourist
      November 1, 2009 at 12:23 PM

      Wow, I’ve never seen so much fallacy wrapped into one post.

      Help! I’m the oppressed majority!

      The US was not founded on religious principles. Just because it makes you feel better to think so does not make it correct.

      The slippery slope of allowing gay marriage… You need to demarcate exactly how allowing homosexuals to marriage would lead to each case you stated. That is A—>B—>C—>D— (et cetera). Right now as your marriage argument stands you propose A—->D with no proof of the intermediary steps. Aptly, later in the thread, you call it a slippery slope, because your argument, as it stands, is precisely that…fallacious.

      Reply
      • pino
        November 1, 2009 at 12:37 PM

        The US was not founded on religious principles. Just because it makes you feel better to think so does not make it correct.

        Of course it was. The fact that our Liberty is granted to us by the “Creator” seems to imply that our Founders felt that our Nation was a “religious” one.

        Just because it makes you feel better to think it’s not does not make it correct.

      • The Arbourist
        November 1, 2009 at 3:52 PM

        Well, if you’d like to go that route, let’s see what some of the FF had to say, along with others during the time frame:

        See the original post and comments where I took these quotes from here.

        Thomas Jefferson:

        “Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error
        all over the earth.” – Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363.)

        John Adams:

        “As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” – (Treaty of Tripoli, 1797 – signed by President John Adams.)

        James Madison:

        “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.” – James Madison (Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, 1785.)

        Thomas Paine:

        “Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.” – Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794-1795.)

        The founding fathers deserve to be commended they managed to construct a rational society despite the prescriptive delusional inanity (aka religion) that was prevalent at the time(and sadly still with us today).

      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 4:27 PM

        “The fact that our Liberty is granted to us by the “Creator” seems to imply that our Founders felt that our Nation was a “religious” one.”

        Yeah, they said that, but they weren’t quite sure whether that creator was Christian, jewish, Muslim, Buddhist etc. So what the heck religion would they choose. The New England Puritans wanted a religious country a hundred years before the Declaration, but their ideas had mostly died out by 1776.

        Ah the power of language and its forms. I am an agnostic, perhaps an atheist; nevertheless from habit and tradition of language, I find myself all the time saying ‘thank god’, ‘good lord’ and so many other language constructs. It says nothing about me. Or what I beleive.

      • pino
        November 2, 2009 at 7:49 PM

        Yeah, they said that, but they weren’t quite sure whether that creator was Christian, jewish, Muslim, Buddhist etc.

        I agree. I think that if you look carefully, I have maintained that the Nation was founded on religion. To the best of my knowledge, I have not named Christianity specifically.

        Mr. Washington was very careful to respect all faiths. And while he regularly attended church, only very very occasionally did he take part in Communion.

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 10:05 PM

        don’t forget, religious principle do not care about proof or even a single shred of evidence. It is all about what they believe to be true and if you don’t believe like they tell you then one day you are going to pay through torture by fire…apparently.

        they go from A to Z while skipping all the parts. A> I claim god is real. Z> therefore it is true.

        see how simple it is?

        they don’t like the links. Kind of like their objection to the links connecting evolution. lets just deny them

  11. John Nampion
    October 31, 2009 at 8:54 PM

    Ben, Eugene McCarthy was a DEMOCRATIC Senator from MN. I think you meant Joe McCarthy.

    As to same-sex marriage: A civilization has the right to decide what behaviors best benefit that society. Although I am sure there are exceptions to the rule, the rule wins out – the best environment for bringing up a child is a loving household comprised of a Mom and a Dad – it makes absolute biologival sense and is the best predictor of a child’s future success, even if you don’t like it.

    Finally, Terry S.’s spouse wanted her dead for financial reasons, among other things – and since she was a “vulnerable” adult (lefties LOVE that term, at least when it applies to someone who wants some sort of $ benefit from the government), it was our job to protect her, and we failed miserably. As someone already pointed out above, that is the same reason we shouldn’t condone euthanasia or abortion – because these are acts that are committed against the most defenseless of people – and if you don’t respect life, it is only a matter of time before no one has respect for ANYTHING – do some Middle Eastern countries come to mind?

    Keep blogging – I defend your right to believe what you do, even when I disagree with it.

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      November 1, 2009 at 9:44 AM

      [Ben, Eugene McCarthy was a DEMOCRATIC Senator from MN. I think you meant Joe McCarthy.]

      Ooops. Thanks for that catch. 🙂

      Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      November 1, 2009 at 9:53 AM

      [it makes absolute biologival sense and is the best predictor of a child’s future success, even if you don’t like it.]

      I agree, but that concerns whether or not a gay couple should be able to adapt.

      [Finally, Terry S.’s spouse wanted her dead for financial reasons]

      That may be part of the reason, but she had been brain dead for quite a while and had no chance of recovering. Her brain had severely atrophied.

      [and if you don’t respect life, it is only a matter of time before no one has respect for ANYTHING]

      That’s quite a stretch. It comes down to religion and the opinion of when a fetus becomes a person. It’s purely subjective regarding abortion and that’s why it should remain an individual’s decision — not that of the government.

      Right-wingers are concerned about the life of fetuses and people in comas but have little concern after the baby is born. Liberals are more concerned with the latter.

      [Keep blogging – I defend your right to believe what you do, even when I disagree with it.]

      Your opinion is always welcome. 🙂

      Reply
      • Moe
        November 1, 2009 at 11:01 AM

        Also John – the Terry S case wasn’t about the motive of her husband, even if was venal. The decision to ‘pull the plug or not’ is made every day in this country. Congress intervening in a single case was entirely inappropriate. And trying ot pass a law to protect a single person was just beyond the pale.

    • Moe
      November 1, 2009 at 10:58 AM

      John, while I disagree with you, I appreciate that you bring a real argument to this thread. We get nowhere yelling at each other (and for some reason, this damn thread is nearly addictive!). Anyway, thanks for the tone and for an argument that is well thought out.

      Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 1, 2009 at 1:15 PM

      the best environment for bringing up a child is a loving household comprised of a Mom and a Dad – it makes absolute biologival sense and is the best predictor of a child’s future success

      That would nice if it was true. The best environment for bringing up a child is a loving house hold composed of two loving parents of either gender.

      The best predictor of future outcomes is the parents (any gender) socioeconomic status.

      The term, ‘makes absolute biological sense’ is rather nonsensical as biologists have little to say on the quality of mate parings in the human species past evolutionary concerns.

      On the other hand ideologues usually have a great deal to say about what is ‘natural’ and ‘proper’ on any given issue.

      “that is the same reason we shouldn’t condone euthanasia or abortion – because these are acts that are committed against the most defenseless of people – and if you don’t respect life, it is only a matter of time before no one has respect for ANYTHING”

      Then any WAR must also fall into this category, because innocents are slaughtered in any conflict at an astounding rate. Oh, wait, those people are evil and that makes okay. Please explain that to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan(Vietnam, Chile, Nicaragua, Honduras, Cuba,…)then maybe they won’t hate us.

      One can respect life and condone euthanasia and abortion. Because we can *think*; we can understand that blanket statements such as all abortion is wrong or all euthanasia wrong cannot possibly be true. It is disrespectful to ‘life’ if we do not have all options on the table.

      1. Oh, you were raped?

      Your fault, no abortion for you. Your rights to your body (specifically your uterus) are suspended.

      2. Oh, you have a degenerative disease which will destroy the quality and dignity of your life?

      Well suck it up and let god (Zeus, FSM etc.) decide when you go. Your pain and suffering are not part of the equation.

      Two cherry picked examples, but they do bring to light problems with blanket conservative statements which sound moral and good, but are actually quite antithetical to the ideals of freedom and liberty.

      Reply
      • thepoliticalmemo
        November 2, 2009 at 7:02 PM

        “1. Oh, you were raped?

        “Your fault, no abortion for you. Your rights to your body (specifically your uterus) are suspended.”

        Ever heard of giving the baby up for adoption?

        Really now, have you liberals no shame over your willingness to deny babies, of all people, their right to life?

        -D.R.L.

      • Moe
        November 2, 2009 at 7:16 PM

        [Ever heard of giving the baby up for adoption?]

        Dear god, so nine months out of my life, perhaps the loss of my job or livelihood is perfectly okay? I guess so, since you don’t have to do it.

        I’m just astonished at the idea that a woman’s life is subservient to that of a fetus. And don’t kid yourself that they both survive intact; they very often do not.

        Those people who make the exception for incest, rape etc cannot call abortion murder. Not saying you said that, but it appears all over this thread.

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 8:52 PM

        I guess they are concerned about the life of a child that is legally not called a life but they have no problem sending full grown adults, mothers, fathers, sons and daughters to invade a country based on lies? Send them to be killed? Send them to murder? Send them to torture while claiming they are on a mission from God? The religious side is always claiming they are for life and yet support war and make excuses for the lies. What is even more amazing is that their lies for war allowed them to torture life. personally, if I am going to die, i prefer i am just killed. But hey, the Christian republicans love to support torture and excuse it. they love it so much, they will re-elect the guy that went on the mission from their god. I guess since Jesus was tortured to his death that he wouldn’t have a problem with their double standard.

        the right is always attempting to tell others how they should be moral like them? really? the red states that are the largest buyer of online porn want the rest of us to be moral like them?

        if they want to define life then i would guess that sperm is alive and all those red states buying porn online are aborting potential human life.

      • sleepygirl
        November 2, 2009 at 8:52 PM

        This is again the part of the abortion debate that the anti-abortion folks forget. Pregnancy takes a huge toll on a woman’s body…it can even kill her. While pregnant, she can lose her job, lose her health insurance, develop complications, etc. It’s easy for men to think of the fetus as completely separate from the mother, but it simply isn’t true.

        Also, you care so much for the fetus when it’s inside a woman’s body…but do you care what happens to it when it’s born? If you’re going to force women to go through pregnancies that they don’t want, usually due to her poor financial circumstances, are you going to offer to support her baby? Why is it that the same people who want to take away a woman’s right to choose are also the people who want to cut funding for the social programs those women end up having to depend upon?

      • pino
        November 2, 2009 at 9:18 PM

        If you’re going to force women to go through pregnancies that they don’t want, usually due to her poor financial circumstances, are you going to offer to support her baby? Why is it that the same people who want to take away a woman’s right to choose

        Okay, so now we are no longer talking about rape or health of the mother, right? We’re just talking about some poor woman and man irresponsible having sex? Just need to be clear here.

        No one is taking away her right to choose. If I really were about taking away her right to choose, I would make people apply for a license to have a child. That way we could make sure that you had the proper ability to raise a child. But no one is talking about that. We’re just saying that once she chooses, she should assume that responsibility.

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 9:24 PM

        sleepy girl, that is yet another good point. Seems the social programs that Jesus would have supported is yet another example of how the party of Christ continues to do the opposite of what Christ would have done. Need a war? just create lies to support your war and your desires. Need torture? No problem, we are on a mission from God so we can excuse it as just and moral in this case. Want to kill health care reform to help millions? No problem, we will just ignore what Jesus taught and died for and defeat health care reform for all.

        they have a double standard and their only concern get their way and destroy anyone in the process. they will work to divide american and actually managed to demonize those of us against killing based on lies and those of us against torture. These religious types claimed we were the evil ones for not supporting their immoral acts. Wow. They commit and support and excuse immoral acts but because they are doing it with God’s support it is now moral and those against it become evil and anti-American?

        The witnesses for Christ have continued to tell their Jesus where to stick it.

        Maybe they should help teach kids about safe sex instead of working against education. Instead they want to take what is legal and make it illegal because of a belief they have in superstition.

      • Moe
        November 2, 2009 at 9:27 PM

        [We’re just saying that once she chooses, she should assume that responsibility]

        Huh? Once she chooses what? Rape? Abuse? Ignorance? Poverty? Do we assume that all ‘she’s’ have the same circumstances and abilities? Like intelligence and means? And health?

        And no matter that you menitoned a man early on, it came right back to ‘she’ didn’t it.

        I repeat – women do not get pregnant by themselves.

      • pino
        November 2, 2009 at 9:38 PM

        Huh? Once she chooses what? Rape? Abuse? Ignorance? Poverty? Do we assume that all ’she’s’ have the same circumstances and abilities? Like intelligence and means? And health?

        MOE. Did you read my post? Did you see the part where I qualified that we are now talking about consensual sex between adults?

        And when in hell did being poor change any form of “rights” argument. Are you saying that by being poor you either have more or less rights than someone else?

        And no matter that you menitoned a man early on, it came right back to ’she’ didn’t it.

        So what you are saying is that you want both the woman AND the man to sign off on the abortion?

        I repeat – women do not get pregnant by themselves.

        Absolutely the man should be responsible for his fair share.

      • truelogic
        November 2, 2009 at 10:40 PM

        Moe: I guess if they made it clear that the man is responsible then it just might help. Men that want to decide for women clearly have no accountability and are able to escape financial harm. i think if a man and women are going to have a child then the man should assume the complete financial costs that are not covered should the mother not have insurance. They might think twice about how they enjoy their evens.

        If we bothered to teach our kids about the importance of protection, it just might help. One side seems to be against saving lives through the simple process of eduction.

        The fact that they work to defeat any education attempts to our children directly puts the blame of some “killing” of babies on their shoulders as well. i would think if they really cared, they would actually do anything they can to help end what they claim they are against.

        just a thought

      • Moe
        November 3, 2009 at 12:58 PM

        On this man/woman thing re abortion/pregnancy – I wasn’t clear I guess. The issue isn’t mutual consent for the abortion or mutual future responsiblity for the child. The issue is punishment. Who does society punish for the unwanted pregnancy? Who does society want to punish for the abortion?

      • An Informed Mind
        November 3, 2009 at 9:18 PM

        Moe, you are saying that the loss of your job is more important than the life of a human being? Dear Lord, where have we gone as a country? A human being isn’t worth 9 months of your life, considering that you in most instances consented to the act that brought about the conception of the baby?

        I do not make an exception even in cases of incest or rape because I believe that the unborn need to be protected no matter how they came about. Killing the baby does not negate the crime or the terrible effect on the victim. Abortion just makes another victim.

      • Moe
        November 4, 2009 at 8:39 AM

        Informed – Say I have other children whose security depends on my earning enough to buy food and stuff. My allegiance would be to them. Not to a hypothetical person. Perhaps you’d like to take over the responsibility and care of those other children?

        And I do not share your belief that the blastocyst or perhaps even fetus is a person and I do not believe that ending that pregnancy is murder. I live by what I believe, not by what you believe.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 11:37 PM

        Moe: Surely you have allegiance to your already born child. However, if you couldn’t afford to have another child, you shouldn’t have been engaging in behavior that would result in conception.

        If you need money to carry the baby to term, there are plenty of programs designed to aid less fortunate women. Charities included especially aim to help women avoid the horrors of abortion. And the truth is, abortion has been proven to harm women emotionally, physically and spiritually. Whether you want to accept that is up to you.

        You live and the blastocyst dies by your decision. Thank your mother she chose life.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 5, 2009 at 3:25 PM

        Informed – now we get to the heart of the matter.

        You say [if you couldn’t afford to have another child, you shouldn’t have been engaging in behavior that would result in conception.]

        There it is – women who don’t want to have babies should not have sex. Surprise, surprise. I bet you’d be happiest if women just didn’t have sex at all.

        But who are the men going to have sex with?

      • sleepygirl
        November 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM

        LOL! Yep, sorry Informed. I’m going to keep having LOTS of sex, even though I don’t want to have a baby (yet). But then, I’m living with my boyfriend of 11 years in sin, so you probably think I’m going straight to hell anyway.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 5, 2009 at 7:01 PM

        Moe: Okay, that’s exactly what I’m saying. I’m saying that men and women should not be having sex unless married and fully able to care for the child that comes about from that behavior.

        And men should have the moral values to not have sex until they are married either. The main point is, if you decide to do it with someone you are not married to, both man and woman should commit to taking care of the baby OR placing him/her up for adoption once born. I don’t think that you should be selfish enough to need to have sex and then be even more selfish to end the life of the baby because you didn’t foresee economic or physical hardship. Being raped is totally different from just having a one night stand and getting pregnant, though I disagree with abortions in that case as well. If someone had a child already born, but couldn’t afford to feed, clothe, provide for the child and himself/herself, would that give the person the right to kill the child? It is the same thing with abortion, only the baby is inside the mother rather than on the living room couch.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 6, 2009 at 10:32 AM

        Informed:

        I shall end my input on this subject with one question:
        What is the punishment for the man who has sex before marriage? Just wondering.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 6, 2009 at 2:38 PM

        Moe: So the baby is now punishment? Goes right back to Obama I guess. “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” The punishment for the man should be 1. Completely caring for the mother financially, 2. Providing a stable home for the mother and the baby, 3. Making sure the needs of the mother and the baby are met, 4. Make sure that the woman is supported so she doesn’t feel the need to have an abortion. Unfortunately many times the men run out on the woman when she gets pregnant. Those are the things the men should be held responsible for.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 6, 2009 at 5:18 PM

        [Moe: So the baby is now punishment? Goes right back to Obama I guess.]

        Being forced to have a baby I don’t want is indeed punishment. And yup, it all goes right back to Obama, who was born when I was 26 years old. He traveled back in time to form my opinions for me.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 6, 2009 at 6:02 PM

        I find that incredibly selfish to know that there are hundreds or thousands of couples who are trying desperately to have their own child and can’t, yet there are women who are having abortions just because they wanted to have a good time and didn’t take the precautions to make sure that there wouldn’t be a life cut short.

        Also, I meant the statement goes back to Obama, addressing a crowd. He was speaking about his daughters Sasha and Malia: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.” Hmm… maybe I’m a young fogey, but I used to think people thought of babies, including the unborn, as blessings rather than punishments.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

    • truelogic
      November 2, 2009 at 10:33 PM

      Do you have some evidence that demonstrates the best environment for bringing up a child is a Mom and a Dad and that a Dad and a Dad or a Mom and Mom is not just as loving or able to raise a child. I would like to see that evidence before I just take someone’s word on it.

      I don’t understand your comment about Terry S. and “when it applies to someone who wants some sort of $ benefit from government”. I can’t seem to connect it to the overall comment but it may be that I am not up on the Terry S. debate.

      Abortion and euthanasia are interesting issue but currently Abortion is defined by law and as you stated above “a civilization has the right to decide” and they did. The “rule” did “win” out. It wasn’t a decision that was made lightly and if you have read both sides of the debate you can see that the decision makes a lot of sense. Especially if we compare it to the side that believes it is wrong and immoral but the drowning of most all life (including babies and abortion) in a flood is moral. it makes a lot more sense than sending billions into a pit of fire for unfathomable torturous pain for eternity for an act of just not believing something that is supported by no evidence. At least men have improved on their morals by putting some limits on what they will do.

      Too bad that the religious side is against teaching our children about sex and how to avoid what leads to abortion. Too bad they work so hard to demonize the use of condoms. Especially in countries like Africa when the lack of use can lead to more death through AIDS/HIV. Seems they have no problem with suffering and death that can be saved through education. If they are truly against it, they would support education. Therefore, I would say they are part of the problem for which they preach against.

      Euthanasia is a great thing if it is properly defined and carried out. Some people believe they have the right to take their own life should it get to a point that it is not worth living any more and only puts a strain on society or family. I love my family too much to cause them the financial pain and worries to keep me alive. I personally have no problem with electing for myself at what point I want my life to end. It works well in some countries.

      Not sure what you are speaking of about respecting life because of acts against the most defenseless people. I recall a war that was recently carried out and was based on lies of WMD and ties to 9/11. Seems the right didn’t have a problem with sending Americans to their death based on lies or the killing of what would naturally involve children, babies and the unborn child in the womb of a mother. Not to mention the suffering that comes along with it. Why are they so focused on Abortion when they completely support it through other methods? America is clearly the greatest power on earth with the military power to take out anyone. We were the ones committing acts against the defenseless and innocent and even torturing them. Yet the side against abortion supported those efforts, even after it was all clearly exposed to be a lie.

      When I wonder what can happen to American a middle easter country does come to mind. That country we attacked that was governed by religious ‘political’ party and creates a government and society that has no freedom. Another society where women are not equal and at many times no better than a slave. The middle eastern countries that allowed religion to take control and this allowed the attacks of 9/11.

      Those that want to make all the rules that others are to live by and promote a “moral” stance followed by their version of a God as being the one we should all follow would be wise to actually follow it. The principle of Jesus Christ were clearly liberal and believed in social/community works to do as he would have done. He fed the hungry and healed the sick and didn’t ask for a penny. He had the ability to provide and yet the religious side is so against providing for those in need. They seem to care more about defeating it and allowing others to suffer. Even directly putting them in harms way while they claim to be the moral party that are the witness for a moral Christ.

      peace

      Reply
  12. pino
    October 31, 2009 at 10:12 PM

    Right-wingers believe that since ACORN has been accused of crimes, they are guilty of crimes, and should be prevented from being awarded any government contracts. In other words, right-wingers are ready to give up the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution which guarantees no one shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law.

    No one is saying that ACORN doesn’t have the right to life, liberty or property. We’re just saying that we are going to stop giving them our money. Key word; “give”. What are you even talking about?

    Right-wingers believe the government should be able to tell a woman what she can do with her body when carrying a fetus.

    Nope. We think that the child has a choice.

    Right-wingers believe the government should determine who should be able to get married and who shouldn’t based on sexual preference.

    This one I agree with you on. Extending Liberty to all people includes allowing people to marry whom they want to marry.

    Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 1, 2009 at 12:48 PM

      Pino says: Nope. We think that the child has a choice.

      Well when fetuses and blastocysts become a viable voting block we’ll get right on that. We’ll ask their opinion, make polls, craft bumper-stickers. The whole nine yards.

      Back in reality, the woman has control of her body, including her womb, her placenta, her oxygen, her blood supply. She has the right to decide what goes on her body.

      Are women autonomous or not? If we grant them autonomy therefore they have control of themselves and every process that goes on with their body. If women are not autonomous, then how should we apply the coercive apparatus of the state to ensure their wishes are not met regarding their uterus? Birthing prisons perhaps, because female rights get trampled quickly once we start talking about a fetus/embryo/blastcyst having any sort of say about things.

      Furthermore, you need to answer:

      1. When does a woman lose her rights to her body, that is when will the state come in and say: your rights are now superceded by the parasitical organism growing inside you (which you may or may not have consented to in the first place.

      2. Where will you hold the no-goodnik women who defy your draconian legislation as the prison population is already maxed? (chained to a gurny at the local church perhaps? – think of child sweet jesus)

      3. If women do not have fundamental rights to their bodies, where does one stop when determining which rights they do have access to? The rights of women are precarious enough right now, to be subtracting basic freedoms.

      Reply
      • Shawn Gray-Fleek
        November 2, 2009 at 5:54 PM

        I’ll take this one Pino:

        1. When does a woman lose her rights to her body, that is when will the state come in and say: your rights are now superceded by the parasitical organism growing inside you (which you may or may not have consented to in the first place.

        – In a state that is goverened by religious conservatives of almost any stripe.

        2. Where will you hold the no-goodnik women who defy your draconian legislation as the prison population is already maxed? (chained to a gurny at the local church perhaps? – think of child sweet jesus)

        – Probably in the basements of churches, or something.

        3. If women do not have fundamental rights to their bodies, where does one stop when determining which rights they do have access to? The rights of women are precarious enough right now, to be subtracting basic freedoms.

        – Look it up in the Bible, I’m too busy watching CBN.

        Sound about right, Pino?

      • Moe
        November 2, 2009 at 7:25 PM

        I’m reminded of Margaret Atwood’s book – The Handmaid’s Tale. And I’m reminded of Cotton Mather and all those judgemental men of 17th century Massachusetts. Seems many men are still there.

    • pino
      November 2, 2009 at 8:22 PM

      when fetuses and blastocysts become a viable voting block we’ll get right on that.

      Sounds about right; liberals extending Liberty to only those that can keep them in elected office.

      Back in reality,

      If only….

      the woman has control of her body

      Agreed.

      including her womb

      Agreed.

      her placenta

      Agreed.

      her oxygen

      Agreed.

      her blood supply

      Agreed.

      She has the right to decide what goes on her body.

      Unbelievable. 6 for 6. Agreed. The only difference between you and I is that I would extend those same rights to the child. But hey, that’s just silly ol’ me.

      When does a woman lose her rights to her body, that is when will the state come in and say: your rights are now superceded

      They would be suspended, or perhaps more correctly, would cease to exist, in the same way that my rights would be “suspended” if I try to exercise my Liberty by taking something of yours. My Liberty does not extend past yours.

      Where will you hold the no-goodnik women who defy your draconian legislation as the prison population is already maxed?

      Draconian. Nice lead.
      Using the same logic, perhaps we should just make ponzi schemes legal too? And shoplifting? And rape? Cause, ya know, we just don’t have anywhere to put these people.

      But serious. In the spirit of extending Liberty to everyone AND solving this issue, why doesn’t your silly President make weed legal, release all the people locked up for that non-crime and then we’d have all your room.

      If women do not have fundamental rights to their bodies

      See #2 above. They do have rights to their own body. I am not advocating that they can’t get pregnant. That they HAVE to get pregnant. Nor am I trying to demonstrate that they get pregnant in a specific time or manner or by whom.

      All I am saying is that while they have the right to their body, they do not have the right to the child’s.

      Reply
      • pino
        November 2, 2009 at 10:16 PM

        I know I know.

        Faux News and all that. But this is good stuff:

        foxnews.com/story/0,2933,571215,00.html

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

        [All I am saying is that while they have the right to their body, they do not have the right to the child’s.]

        That’s your opinion but not the opinion of the majority. And when a fetus becomes a person is purely subjective.

      • The Arbourist
        November 3, 2009 at 1:24 AM

        Pino says: Sounds about right; liberals extending Liberty to only those that can keep them in elected office.

        Oh right, it was those darn liberals fixing the 2000 election.

        Using the same logic, perhaps we should just make ponzi schemes legal too? And shoplifting? And rape? Cause, ya know, we just don’t have anywhere to put these people.

        I think it would be a serious logistical problem. If you are committed to making abortion a criminal offence.

        But serious. In the spirit of extending Liberty to everyone AND solving this issue, why doesn’t your silly President make weed legal, release all the people locked up for that non-crime and then we’d have all your room.

        Good question. Not my president. Legalizing marijuana and other illegal drugs would be a major positive step in dealing with the root causes of crime in the US. Here in Canada, Marijuana is really not that big of a deal. Thank Cthulu marijuana’s potential risks to society have not been sensationalized as it is in the US.

        All I am saying is that while they have the right to their body, they do not have the right to the child’s.

        The child has nothing to do with the equation. Either a woman is autonomous or she is not. It is her health, her body, her decision whether to keep the parasitical free rider or not. She is the person fully endowed with the theoretical rights and protections provided by the state. Her rights to her body do not change if she decides to have sex or not.

        Answering this claim by saying ‘what about the child….’ is avoiding the question of the rights of the woman while systematically marginalizing women in general.

        So if you want to go save children, send the 10 bucks for a mosquito net to prevent malaria, or for constructing wells for clean water. 3,000(+) children die a day from preventable diseases, we can take action and save them without denuding the personal autonomy of women.

  13. indyfromaz
    November 2, 2009 at 7:08 AM

    * Right-wingers don’t mind our government spying on us, wire tapping our phones, or looking at our email in the “name of security.” The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

    So why did the Democrats just re-ratify all that evil Right winger legislation then??

    Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 2, 2009 at 9:42 AM

      Because in the US, the two party choices are Right and Further Right. Both represent the interests of the business class.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        November 2, 2009 at 6:18 PM

        Riiight. So the democrats wanting to raise taxes on big business is a GREAT way to pad the pockets of those greedy business people. Get real. Democrats have been at war with the free market for decades. The Republicans (when they stick to conservative principles) have at least not been trying to scare jobs out of the country due to high taxes.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • The Arbourist
        November 3, 2009 at 1:02 AM

        Now that is truly funny. Are you also in the camp that calls Obama a Socialist?

        The political spectrum in the US, as I said early, is highly skewed to the right.

        Just because the Dems do not necessarily want to complete the evil circle of corporatism as fast as the Republicans doesn’t make them liberal. At best center right compared to other industrialized countries with genuine parties on the left. The NDP in Canada and the SPD in Germany for example, or ‘old’ labour in the UK.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 3, 2009 at 8:20 AM

        To tell the truth, yes I do believe Obama is a socialist. And boy do I know how other countries have far further left candidates than American democrats. However, I am not comparing democrats to other countries, I am comparing them to the American public, conservatives, Republicans and the majority.

        So corporatism is evil yet socialism is great? I see. So how’s that working out for Cuba, Venezuela, and all those pseudo-socialist countries in Europe?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 3, 2009 at 10:18 AM

        [So corporatism is evil yet socialism is great? I see. So how’s that working out for Cuba, Venezuela, and all those pseudo-socialist countries in Europe?]

        France and Germany have experienced economic growth this year — both have socialized health care.

        As far as corporatism, the U.S. moved in that direction during the past decade and look what happened. Russia experimented with a completely free market economy and it was a total disaster. A lot of people there wanted a return to socialism.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 3, 2009 at 11:16 AM

        [This post was deleted due to “An Informed Mind” being a complete jack ass.]

      • Moe
        November 5, 2009 at 3:28 PM

        Informed, you say:
        [. And boy do I know how other countries have far further left candidates than American democrats. ]

        How do you know?

  14. truelogic
    November 2, 2009 at 8:21 PM

    You forgot that they want Gays to fight in American for freedom but don’t want to give those same people that right to say they are gay. You know, that freedom of speech to just say they are gay in public. But hey, come with us, and join our war that we created based on lies and help us torture and murder in the name of Jesus Christ our moral leader?

    You forgot that recent issue were the right seemed to want to defeat a woman’s rights as a victim of rape to hold those individuals accountable.

    You forgot that the Party of Christian and Family Values keep telling us they are the only ones able to protect us yet they rather you just not mention 9/11 where they failed completely to protect us and allowed thousands of Americans to die.

    OH yeah, that war they created based on lies…you know the WMD and the ties to 9/11 terrorist? Seems they didn’t have a problem sending more Americans to their death when it wasn’t necessary. Not important enough to check the facts before sending a brother or sister, mother or father to their death.

    The christian party of family values can be counted on to spread hate and lies. History has proven it. We can count on them to work to harm American. Defeat health care reform because they don’t really care to do as jesus stated and “do unto others as I have done for you”.

    it is ironic that the tea bagging christian republicans, as usual, lied and said there were “death panels” that would kill grandma in the health care reform. Yet their actual defeat of it truly WILL kill a large number of Americans…again.

    We can count on them to support big insurance and health care companies as more Americans die and suffer.

    This is their witness for Christ? No wonder so many are running from the church.

    Reply
    • Ben Hoffman
      November 2, 2009 at 10:41 PM

      Agreed. Christianity is a religion of creed — not deed.

      Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 3, 2009 at 7:29 PM

      I’ll go line by line so I make sure I get everything.

      I actually don’t think that gays should be allowed to serve in the military due to certain factors such as troop morale and inter-squad relationships. That is why they have kept females from serving in combat situations. Females are, let’s face it, less suited for physical situations on the battlefield. Females’ bodies are not built for lifting a fallen comrade or hand to hand combat. Also men and women serving together presents potentially harmful relationship issues. Something that needs to be kept off the battlefield. Same can be said for homosexual relationships.

      And why do you insist on claiming our troops are murdering and torturing? Do you have evidence to show that incidents such as Abu Ghraib(?) are widespread? And we are certainly not in Iraq based on Christian concerns. While I support the mission, saying we went in on Christian pretexts is disingenuous.

      Abortion is not holding the assaulter accountable, it is killing the baby that had no say over whether the crime was committed. Killing the product of a terrible crime is not taking away the pain. It introduces mountains of pain later in life to the woman.

      If you mean the Republicans failed to protect us on 9/11, you are partially right. However, the policies of Bill Clinton in the 90s could have taken bin Laden out, but he didn’t and that led us into a security lapse that allowed Al Qaeda to attack. America as a whole was complacent and that led to 9/11, but putting all the blame on Bush and the Republicans is also unfair.

      The WMDs were not the sole reason we went to war, but they were a large part. In retrospect we might have went in on the wrong reason, but going in of itself was not wrong in that we deposed a madman that was killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis per year. He had already used chemical weapons on his own people as well as the Iranians back in the 80s and had shown us no compelling evidence that he didn’t have WMDs. While I mourn every person that dies because they are precious in God’s sight, they knew that theirs was a noble calling and if they were sent to war to defend their country and her interests, they were willing. I thank God for men and women like that.

      America has prospered under Republicans and Democrats when we stand on principle. The country under Ronald Reagan was vastly more prosperous and safer than under Jimmy Carter. Under Bush we suffered 9/11, under Clinton we suffered the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, and WTC 1.

      Defeating health care is not to stick our thumbs in the eye of Obama, it is to keep socialism from destroying the country from within. Health Care reform will cost over 2 trillion over the next decade. While the CBO and every other estimate puts it lower, everything the government does works out costing more than original estimates. More and more spending can only be sustained by higher and higher taxes, printing money which leads to inflation or borrowing which increases our foreign debt.

      Did you read the original health care bill? Did you make sure that there was no death panel? I don’t believe that there was a death panel, but I believe that certain people, like Rahm Emanuel’s brother Ezekiel, believe that old people are less productive to society and younger people should receive preferential treatment over their older counterparts. (This is fact, you can google Ezekiel Emanuel.)

      The tea party protesters have every right to voice their concern over health care. When liberal young people write statements like “Get out of the way grandma, we want our health care and we want it now.” Older people have a right to be concerned about their futures under a liberal president and liberal congress. Lack of health insurance might kill Americans, but European style socialist health care kills more Europeans than lack of universal care kills Americans. If universal care doesn’t work with countries with not even 1/3rd of the people in America, how the heck would it work here?

      I don’t support big insurance. I know that they can rip people off. But government has been ten times worse over the years. If the government allowed intra-state competition, insurance coverage would be higher and costs would be lower.

      Our witness for Christ is in that we support those that support life, traditional marriage and values. Helping the poor is something individuals and non-government groups do best. When the government gets involved with helping the poor it devolves into corruption, inefficiency and power grabs.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • The Arbourist
        November 4, 2009 at 12:54 AM

        European style socialist health care kills more Europeans than lack of universal care kills Americans

        In a post filled with fatuous assertions this one really stood out.

        Tell me about Norway, Sweden and Finland…heck…even the UK and Canada. All with socialist systems that work better than what is available in the US.

        Stop making false claims. If the US has better healthcare than countries with universal healthcare, prove it.

        The American Exceptionalism is really off the meter here.

      • Moe
        November 4, 2009 at 7:41 AM

        [European style socialist health care kills more Europeans than lack of universal care kills Americans]

        Arbourist is right to pluck this one out. It’s so demonstrably untrue. In every single measurement of health care outcomes done in recent years, we aren’t just way behind Europe. We are behind just about everyone – Europe, Asia, South America etc.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 10:28 AM

        The Taxpayers alliance in London estimated that 17,000 deaths occurred unnecessarily in Britain under the National Health Service in 2004 alone.

        In Canada, the median wait time to have an MRI is 9.7 weeks. The media wait time to see a neurosurgeon is 31.7 weeks and the median wait time to see a orthopedic surgeon is 36.7 weeks, nearly nine months. (See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/07/government_medicine_should_horrify_americans_97810.html)

        http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/HL711.cfm
        The above is a site with various facts and stats on European health care from 2004.

        The truth is, Europeans are dying from their health care. The reason our health care shows higher mortality rates is due to the fact that car accidents, smoking, obesity and other factors are not weighed in. In cancer rates, the U.S. has a much higher survivability rate than other countries in Europe and the European average. (See http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5aAsxFJOeMw/RvKD5XfZh2I/AAAAAAAAAfw/rcgx1dgK9gk/s1600-h/survival.GIF)

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 10:39 AM

        Arbourist: Fatuous assertions eh? Prove them wrong. Give me evidence that my assertions are fatuous. Dissect them, I don’t mind.

        Tell me about Norway, Sweden and Finland. Tell me about Canada, where a man pulled out eleven of his own teeth due to the fact that he can’t get a dentist. Tell me about Canada where cancer patients have to come to the U.S. to get treated because they are told to wait six months in Canada.

        Tell me about the UK, where Daniel Hannan, politician from the UK, states that ‘I wouldn’t wish the NHS on anyone.’ Go to http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/9407633/Americans_Dont_copy_the_British_healthcare_system/ to see what he really thinks of universal care. And this is in a country with a much smaller population that ours. The government here cannot run the post office, why would we trust it with our lives?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 10:41 AM

        Here are some bonus links for you talking about the universal nightmare going on in Europe and Britain in particular:

        http://www.progressive-vision.org/policies/health.htm

        http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jan/18/health

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 4, 2009 at 10:54 AM

        [The truth is, Europeans are dying from their health care. The reason our health care shows higher mortality rates is due to the fact that car accidents, smoking, obesity and other factors are not weighed in]

        You have to be kidding.

      • Moe
        November 4, 2009 at 10:55 AM

        [The truth is, Europeans are dying from their health care. The reason our health care shows higher mortality rates is due to the fact that car accidents, smoking, obesity and other factors are not weighed in]

        You really have to be kidding.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 12:06 PM

        Is that all you can say? What about proving me wrong? I’m there for the taking. Prove me wrong. Prove the websites and links wrong. Prove all those things wrong. Show me proof rather than just ‘you have got to be kidding’.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • truelogic
        November 4, 2009 at 9:03 PM

        An Informed Mind doesn’t seem to be too informed:
        If you haven’t already noticed, gay men and women are already serving in the military and doing very well. Religious types have often been against the minority to include women, blacks and now gays.

        Yes, some of our troops have tortured and I didn’t say they all do so don’t attempt to be dishonest and imply I stated it was wide spread. FACT is we tortured, and we have admitted to it in more than one instance. We have even admitted to torturing in order to build evidence for a war. Are you claiming that a little torture is fine? Are you claiming it is ok to support a little torture and a little murder? Pathetic

        “saying we went in on a Christian pretext is disingenuous” Really? George Bush (Christian) stated: ‘I am driven with a mission from God’. God would tell me, ‘George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan’. And I did. And then God would tell me ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq’. And I did.”

        Have you not done any reading on the matter? George Bush told us that GOD (that would be the Christians version) agreed with him on the matter of going to war. The Christian God agreed with war based on lies and that would bring America the shame of torture and allow murder, suffering of children and destruction of families. All from the Christian party of family values and lets not forget they just happen to worship a different God and thus you realize what the bible says about those that worship other Gods, don’t you? You are naïve. George Bush the Christian, elected by Christians, re-elected by Christian, war supported by Christians and torture excuses by Christians and the Christian Party (republicans) doesn’t want any of it investigated. Yeah, I just can’t see how it is disingenuous to claim we went in on Christian pretext. Neither can you , if you are honest.

        ABORTION: The Christian God used a flood to kill more all life on earth. That includes babies and the unborn child in the womb of the mother (abortion). The “moral” Christian God slowly and torturously drowned these lives that like you say “Had No Say” on the matter. Imagine the mountains of pain caused to the mind of children that are taught God is loving and moral and yet drowns babies and condemns billions (even children) to an eternity of torture by fire. Those that have abortion likely heard the story of this “moral” God of your and his “moral” acts.

        As a matter of scriptural FACT it is your God that is the reason for Abortion and no one else is to blame. If God’s word is true then we clearly know that:
        “God is operating ALL in all” (I Cor. 12:6)
        “Yet ALL is of God” (II Cor. 5:18)
        “…shall there be EVIL in a city, and the Lord has not done it?” (Amos 3:6).

        It appears you don’t even read the Bible. A child can not be aborted unless your God: “…for He has appointed a time for every matter, and for every work…”

        Your God is the one that knows everything that is going to happen before it happens. Your God plans everything “declaring the end from the beginning…”

        So as you can see, the evidence demonstrates that your God. We can also see that humans have learned from God and like they always say, Do as Jesus would do (Father/Son/Holy Ghost = God).

        I would say all the problems in this world are the result of religion. What caused 9/11?

        Hosea 13:16
… because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open. Yeah, I know…praise be to God, glory to God in the highest!
        Sick!

        We DID go to war for the wrong reasons and WMD claims and ties to the terrorist of 9/11 were some of the lies told to go to war. Obama didn’t buy it but those that believe in invisible beings have no problem buying a line told to them by someone they feel believes like them. Those in power know this to be true and use it and used the Christian Republicans. You can make an excuse and say it was ok to depose a madman that we (the USA) put into power. I can list a number of leaders that are far more dangerous but the fact you are using this as an excuse. Iran and Korea are far more dangerous to use and others.
        If you show me no compelling evidence that you are not delusional, can I come into your home and take you out and have you committed? Of course not and again you use excuses for things you apparently supported.

        My brother and best friend was in that Christian war in Iraq. He was against it as well. The Christians here in America had no problem sending him to his death while they stayed back here supporting the immoral acts. People that supported it and supported Bush are the reason he and many others died and didn’t have to die. If you think about it, Bush is not much different than the xleader of Iraq. He is the one that killed Americans for his belief.

        I voted for Ronald Reagan and we may have been prosperous under him we were prosperous under Clinton as well in our economy and he even warned Bush of the very likely threat of 9/11 and suggest it could happen through the crashing of planes into buildings. Over 3,000 died under Bush in America and then he sent more to die for a lie so he could get the one that threatened his daddy. It is sad my brother had to give his life for the coward that was too chicken to do the right things and apparently to fight in his time. He was too busy being a drunk and snorting that white powder.

        FACT is that the right has made is CLEAR that want to defeat Health Care because they believe it will hurt Obama. They have said it and repeated it and the right media has also stated it. I heard the right call Obama a socialist. They also called him a communist, terrorist supporter, Marxist, fascist, racist, un-American, not a citizen and a muslim. Clearly, they couldn’t care less for facts and clearly he can’t be all those things. Clearly the right is full of hate and not giving a shit about the millions of Americans without health insurance or how many are going to die and are suffering from it.

        Christians will spend 1.5 trillion for a war based on lies that sends Americans to their death and they won’t vote for health care and spend a single dime to help Americans. Absurd and again, you are making excuses. Instead, the Christians Conservatives want to protect big business, allow them to screw the American people more and continue to rake in billions. The insurance companies have KILLED innocent people by denying them coverage or taking it away. So go ahead and make your excuses and do what Jesus would do. Jesus was a liberal and a socialist but Conservatives don’t give a shit what Jesus would have done unless it benefits them.

        Promoting things like death panels is another excuse and deceiving and exactly what the right does to old the young alike. Using the fear card just like they did in the war based on lies. FEAR or great harm. You know, like that fear of torture in a pit of fire by a god of moral love….ridiculous. Stop making excuses and start being a real human with some compassion like the Christ you follow apparently had.

        The tea party has every right to voice their concerns, and I agree. I watched as Conservatives (the ones that follow the Jesus of love) shouted down old and young alike for suffering they complained of due to lack of health coverage. I watched one blame a woman’s mother for her own cancer that killed her because the insurance company denied her. It isn’t about what one side did and therefore we can do the same or worse. It is about what is right and what is wrong and if you are human you would care what is happening to others. You would stand up to protect those that are less fortunate and if you believe in this God Jesus Christ you would do as he did and asked. Based on his teachings, you shouldn’t care one bit for money or what it will cost, you should care about the human life and human suffering. Instead, you make excuses for why it is ok that you are not like that.

        You got your facts wrong on European care as well. Even when I lived in a communist country I was able to get free medical care. I had insurance but didn’t even have to use it in some parts of a communist country where I lived.
        The FACT is that just because some people die in some other country doesn’t mean ours has to be like that. If people actually worked to the right goal we can define how it will work and it could be great. Instead, the followers of Jesus Christ fight it and want to defeat it for the very clear reasons they have stated. To defeat Obama.

        If Jesus had lots of money do you think he would have a problem giving it all to help others get coverage? Why don’t you tell Jesus how he is wrong to care for others and sacrifice, even his life, so others would be well, and healed, and cured and loved. Tell Jesus how you were right to support the war in Iraq and even though you are sad, you didn’t speak out against it and work to end it. Tell him how it was right to vote for Bush a second time and support all those lies and killing. Go ahead, tell Jesus he got it all wrong.

        I love this “Our witness for Christ is in that we support those that support life, traditional marriage and values. Helping the poor is something individuals and non-government groups do best. When the government gets involved with helping the poor it devolves into corruption, inefficiency and power grabs.”

        Clearly, with 44 million that don’t have health care coverage the Christians that are supposed to be witnessing aren’t doing it. You apparently have time and money to blog. Let me guess, you have a car and a home and a cell phone and a tv with cable? Let me guess, you eat three meals a day? Let me guess, you have a savings and retirement? Read your bible and notice all of what you have is against what Jesus did and asked. Do you need me to provide a very long list of what you are not doing that jesus specifically asked?

        You have proven you make excuses, are no kind of witness but you want to believe you are because it makes you feel Good….even if it is a lie. As a human, you are pathetic, in my opinion. People like you allow more harm to come to others through your “witness” for Christ. NOTHING like Christ. Your kind(Christians) have worked to deny women equal rights and right to vote, denied the same to blacks and tried to keep them as slaves, worked to destroy the love and happiness of same sex couples, voted for wars, excuses torture and under your Christian president destroyed our economy and left it for Obama to clean up. As Obam works his ass off, your side continue to hammer at him and work to destroy but when anything remotely like that was done to Bush, your side demonized it. The biggest group of hypocrites the world has witnessed.

        So, go tell Jesus how he got the whole social, liberal, love, compassion and NON judgment thing wrong. Tell him how you feel it is up to you to deny people the rights you have. I am sure your version of Jesus would agree.

      • truelogic
        November 4, 2009 at 9:09 PM

        Informed mind:

        do you not realize that we have the power to design the system of health care so it can work. we are a nation of intelligent beings and we can look at that parts that work and don’t work and over time can evolve a system that is wonderful for all.

        but hey, Jesus wouldn’t want that, would he? He would rather watch more suffer and die because our current system allows it.

        why not fight for what is right and help others. fight to build a system that would work. our system isn’t working we know that. other systems work very well in some countries and is paid for by the government/people. demark is a great place to replicate to some extent. take the good of that system, the good of ours and do the right thing.

        we get no where with the hate pushed by the tea bagger christians.

        Do you think Jesus would want to keep the system we have here and watch children die and suffer? Do you think Jesus would support insurance companies denying coverage for almost anything?

        all you do is make excuses for saying no. the group of no people. instead, work to fix the problem. notice, your side hasn’t bothered to put together a solution…nothing.

        obama isn’t helping the matter by not pushing a public option and pushing various aspects that need to be in place. obama is not holding others accountable either so don’t think I am all pro obama.

        i am for being honest and doing what is right for humanity, for life. what is true compassion, mercy, love. you don’t seem to know

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 10:20 PM

        Wow, you have quite a long post, so give me some time to refute your beliefs.

        I do know that gay men and women are serving in the military and I applaud their courage and willingness to serve their country. However I believe that men should not be attracted to other men in the same platoon, battalion etc. and be expected to perform as if there were no temptation.

        I absolutely do NOT condemn torture, however, when you imply that because of one or two incidences ALL military men and women are guilty is despicable when most men and women, recruits and officers, want to serve their country and keep it safe. Murder even? Why don’t you condemn the terrorists that actually murder innocent civilians?

        George Bush was not the only one involved in the decision. While he may have been the driving force, the Senate needed to confirm the decision, which it did. George Bush’s war is an oxymoron since most every senator voted for the approval.

        If you want to blame Christians for electing George Bush, you can also blame atheists (presumably like yourself) agnostics, Buddhists, Muslims and others. George Bush was elected by America, not by Christians alone.

        The flood came about as punishment after hundreds of years of God reaching out to a wicked generation. The babies that died as a result went to heaven as God takes every soul that has not reached the age of accountability to spend eternity in paradise with Him. God does not torture children in hell. Jesus said, “Suffer the little children to come to me, for of these is the kingdom of God.”

        God has allowed fallen humankind to operate in all its wickedness due to the fall of Adam and Eve. Through the fall they were given free choice, to follow Him and live or to disobey Him. Saying that the verse, “for He has appointed a time for every matter, and for every work…” means that God condones abortion is like saying that because a builder built a building, it was his will for the building to collapse and kill hundreds. The Bible says, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you…” Jeremiah 1:5.

        God, in His wisdom, has known from the beginning of time what man will choose to do and He does not stop it from happening, lest man not have free will. Without free will, men would be forced to serve God which would be a worse punishment to the atheist than hell.

        What caused 9/11? A religion based on hate. A religion based on killing Jews and Christians. Religion as a whole is evil. (What? Surely you didn’t read what I just said right?) Religion is based on laws, regulations and rules. Christianity is a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It is liberating in that Christ bore our sins for us on the cross.

        Hosea 13:16 is not a verse saying God will personally do these things. It is a prophecy that would happen to Shalmaneser V. God is not saying that this is a good thing, but the result of the man’s actions. Consequences are a part of life and free choice.

        How exactly did we put Saddam in power? Come now, you’re shooting blanks now. I agree that Iran and N. Korea are absolutely dangerous. Have I said contrary? You forgot Robert Mugabe as dangerous. And perhaps Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.

        Delusional, I beg to differ. But that is what makes this a debate is it not? Have I not answered your every point with a counter point? Have I attacked you personally as you have me?

        I am sorry that you lost your brother in Iraq. I am sorry if it is causing you your grief and distrust of the Republicans and condescension of my posts. I am truly sorry for your loss and absolutely understand your opposition to the war. But comparing Bush who cried when he honored the slain with Medals of Honor with Saddam who slayed more people than we have inn Iraq and Afghanistan combined is a falsity.

        There has been no proof that Bush avoided his duty. If you can show proof than I will accept it. But isn’t it about time that people get over what happened thirty years ago? What about Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky? How come we don’t bring that up? Because it isn’t relevant to the debate anymore.

        Perhaps you haven’t seen the stories about the women coming from Canada to get American health care for cancer. Maybe you haven’t heard the stories of Europeans dying unnecessarily from socialist care. Either way, European health care comes to America and many more Americans die as a result.

        The right has every right to call Obama what they want. I believe the left called Bush liar, drunk, fascist, lunatic, religious nut, etc. And if I’m correct, I believe at least four Obama officials have expressed their approval of Mao Tse Tung, who has killed over 80 million people.

        The cost of the Iraq war is under 1 trillion. Health care will cost 2 trillion over ten years and send many to a premature grave. But back to the war, would you argue that WWII was bad? Or WWI? How about Korea? All those wars had more soldiers killed than Iraq and Afghanistan. Like I stated before, I am truly very sorry for your loss, but constantly blaming the war on Christians is false.

        Jesus never said “The Romans should take from the rich and give to the poor.” Jesus was not liberal, conservative, capitalist or socialist. He was the Son of God. He stated that a person giving out of his or her livelihood was more than a person giving out of his or her abundance. Clearly the intention here was charity, not taxes etc. Jesus valued the life of children and babies and didn’t like gay marriage either. Remember “Therefore, a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves unto his wife, and the two become one flesh.”

        I have compassion. My compassion is shown in not wanting anyone to have to suffer through a European, government run health care system run by people who apparently think twenty somethings are more important to society than 80 year olds. (See Ezekiel Emanuel)

        I disagree with anyone shouting down someone based on their opposing viewpoints. America is based upon civil discourse. And those examples you listed are wrong. The people were caught up in the moment and said wrong things. I do stand for the less fortunate because the poor will suffer some of the most in a socialist health care system in that them without connections to big government will wait for months to get life saving surgeries that are needed now.

        The cost alone does not constitute my biggest fear. I don’t want Americans dying in the waiting rooms because of the long wait times associated with government care. You state that we can make universal care great. With 300 million people we could not keep it running. The post office is broke and we can’t find a way to fix it, do you want the government that broke the postal service running health care?

        Individual wealth is not the issue. National wealth is and Jesus never condemned the Romans for being wealthy. If we go broke, we can’t take care of the world anyway. Remember, the U.S. is the world’s leading charitable giver. Whenever a tsunami hits, our aircraft carriers are never far behind. When an earthquake happens, our aid is some of the first to arrive. If we go broke, a lot of the world will be hurt because of it.

        The poor are never turned away. Emergency rooms are open to everyone regardless of their ability to pay. The percentile of people without health insurance in the 50s was higher than now and health care was much better back then. Why the disparity?

        Oh so you know about my economic situation eh? I am unemployed, receiving nothing from the government. I have put in applications in every business I can find surrounding me. At least ten places. (It’s a small town) I have a car, but it is shared by five people. I have no cell phone. I have no savings and no retirement. What about you?

        Pathetic eh? Well I guess that hurts. Nah, I’ve been demonized by liberals before. My kind? Christians have helped tear down walls between groups of people. Billy Graham tore down barriers between blacks and whites in his crusades. Christians have not always been for the right things I admit, but that does not give you the right to demonize an entire group of people based on religion.

        Obama may be working his a** off, but it is to the detriment of the country. We need less government, not more. The truth is, liberals whine and complain about us attacking Obama when they did the exact same thing to Bush. Conservatives hypocrites? Look in the mirror.

        Liberals deny some of the most basic teachings of Jesus, such as life is precious, yet conservatives get demonized? How can you attack me for my faith or my supposed dereliction of it when you don’t accept it but have a presupposed bias against it?

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • An Informed Mind
        November 4, 2009 at 10:26 PM

        Thanks for impugning my honor True Logic. I appreciate it. I did nothing but refute your claims and you have to resort to attacking my dignity and faith without cause. I am not whining, but no wonder no one responds to your attacks. They simply do not wish to fall to your level of baseless accusations and false character assassinations.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • The Arbourist
        November 5, 2009 at 12:22 AM

        Informed mind said: What about proving me wrong? [about levels quality of medical care…]

        Life Expectancy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy)

        7 Australia 81.63
        8 Canada 81.23
        10 Sweden 80.86
        11 Switzerland 80.85
        14 Iceland 80.67
        19 Italy 80.2
        20 Gibraltar 80.19
        23 Spain 80.05
        24 Norway 79.95
        26 Greece 79.66
        30 Netherlands 79.4
        32 Germany 79.26
        50 United States 78.11

        Infant Mortality Rate -Infant mortality rate
        (deaths/1,000 live births) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate)

        1 Iceland 2.9
        4 Sweden 3.2
        5 Norway 3.3
        11 Belgium 4.2
        23 Canada 4.8
        28 Cuba 5.1
        33 United States 6.3

        Human Development Index (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index)

        1. Norway 0.971 (▬)
        2. Australia 0.970 (▬)
        3. Iceland 0.969 (▬)
        4. Canada 0.966 (▬)
        5. Ireland 0.965 (▬)
        6. Netherlands 0.964 (▲ 1)
        7. Sweden 0.963 (▼ 1)
        8. France 0.961 (▲ 3)
        9. Switzerland 0.960 (▬)
        10. Japan 0.960 (▬)
        11. Luxembourg 0.960 (▼ 3)
        12. Finland 0.959 (▲ 1)
        13. United States 0.956 (▼ 1)

        In each case the US is below the mentioned ‘hubs of socialist horror’.

        Consider yourself proven wrong.

      • The Arbourist
        November 5, 2009 at 12:35 AM

        Informed mind said:
        “How exactly did we put Saddam in power? Come now, you’re shooting blanks now. I agree that Iran and N. Korea are absolutely dangerous. Have I said contrary? You forgot Robert Mugabe as dangerous. And perhaps Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.”

        History Fail. The US was a huge supporter of Iraq before Saddam pissed off the wrong people. The US has, and continues to support oppressive regimes the world over because it is good for business. A time line, fully referenced. Welcome to what the rest of the world knows about American History.

        1981-1988: Reagan Administration Gives Covert Support to Iraq Against Iran

        The Reagan administration provides covert support to Iraq in an effort to prevent Iran from overrunning the oil-rich states of the Persian Gulf. [New York Times, 8/18/2002; Nation, 8/26/2002; Washington Post, 12/30/2002]
        US Air Force officers are secretly deployed to Iraq to assist their counterparts in the Iraqi military. [Nation, 8/26/2002]
        The US provides satellite photography to Iraq revealing the movements of the Iranian forces. [Washington Post, 12/15/1986; New York Times, 8/18/2002 Sources: senior military officers with direct knowledge of the program, Unnamed informed sources interviewed by reporter Bob Woodward]
        The US provides Iraq with intelligence gathered by Saudi-owned AWACS operated by the Pentagon. [Nation, 8/26/2002]
        Iraq uses US-supplied military intelligence “to calibrate attacks with mustard gas on Iranian ground troops….” (see 1984) [Washington Post, 12/15/1986]
        “[M]ore than 60 officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency…. secretly [provide] detailed information on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for airstrikes and bomb-damage assessments for Iraq.” [New York Times, 8/18/2002]
        President Reagan and Vice President George Bush personally deliver military advice to Saddam Hussein, both directly and through intermediaries (see 1986). [Affidavit. United States v. Carlos Cardoen, et al. [Charge that Teledyne Wah Chang Albany illegally provided a proscribed substance, zirconium, to Cardoen Industries and to Iraq], 1/31/1995 ; Washington Post, 12/30/2002]
        The US closely monitors “third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure Iraq [has] the military weaponry required.” [Affidavit. United States v. Carlos Cardoen, et al. [Charge that Teledyne Wah Chang Albany illegally provided a proscribed substance, zirconium, to Cardoen Industries and to Iraq], 1/31/1995 ; Washington Post, 12/30/2002]
        According to the censured portion of Iraq’s December 7, 2002 declaration to the UN (see December 7, 2002) (see December 19, 2002), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories help train Iraqi nuclear weapons scientists and provide nonfissile material for Iraq’s nuclear weapons program. [San Francisco Chronicle, 1/26/2003]

      • An Informed Mind
        November 5, 2009 at 1:01 AM

        Arbourist: I applaud you on your history lesson, however, supporting someone and installing them are two different things. I agree that we never should have supported Saddam. But supporting and installing are two totally different things.

        You didn’t notice that I said, “How exactly did we put Saddam in power?” While it is no excuse, America is hardly the only country that has supported despots at various points in history. I recall Britain turning back Jews to Hitler when they tried to emigrate to what was then known as Palestine. America is not perfect, but we are not alone in our imperfection.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 5, 2009 at 3:10 PM

        Informed:
        Since you keep just throwing in odd ‘facts’, may I note that the US Post Office in my opinion is the most amazing organization in the world and I’ve never understood the mockery that’s everywhere. For 47 cents they will come to my house, pick up a letter and deliver it to someone else’s house 3000 miles away. In about three days.

        I’d say that’s some fine performance.

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 5, 2009 at 4:41 PM

        Exactly, Moe. It makes you wonder why right-wingers hate our postal service so much.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 5, 2009 at 6:48 PM

        Arbourist: Wikipedia is hardly the bastion of facts you make it out to be. What about the fact that U.S. cancer survivability rates are far higher than all of Europe? That is a solid fact. American health care is not flawless, but European, government run, rationed health care is NOT the solution.

        Moe: Yeah the Post Office is in great shape. Right. The CATO institute notes that first class mail delivery time is approx. 10% slower than 15 years ago and Congress is considering cutting Saturday deliveries completely. Post office costs are rising to the point where it is no longer profitable.

        You want to talk about the marvel of the post office? In 1976, a pack of cub scouts tried raising money by delivering Christmas cards. The postal service’s attorneys threatened the ten year olds with a $76,000 fine if they didn’t cease and desist immediately. The New York Times editorial lambasted the postal service saying that too bad the delivery isn’t as quick as the post office’s attorneys. (“Postal Disservice,” Inquiry, February 21, 1981.)

        How do you explain the cheaper yet more reliable delivery from UPS, Fed-Ex, DHL and other private carriers?

        Let’s look at your $.47 bargain shall we:

        You mention standard issue mail costing $.47 correct? Let’s contrast that with the price of a kiwi fruit from New Zealand. Go to a supermarket and the kiwi most likely costs between 40 and 50 cents. The kiwi needed to be shipped to the U.S. for consumers here to buy it. The travel between New Zealand to the West Coast of the United States is more than 4,000 miles. The price of the kiwi needs to take into account profit margins for the grower, transporter, and supermarket.

        Unlike paper deliveries, kiwis require very specific shipping conditions. Kiwis cannot stand extreme temperatures, either hot or cold. They need to be handled carefully otherwise no one will want to buy the fruit. They need to be shipped at the perfect time lest they ripen before being bought and spoil and not be overly unripe to force the store to hold the kiwi in inventory until it ripens. Kiwis also need to be protected from insects, unlike mail.

        So when you consider that kiwis from New Zealand are at times cheaper than a standard piece of mail, does the post office seem quite so efficient? Remember the kiwi is shipped farther, has more handling involved, needs to be protected from bruises, spoiling, insects and shipped at the exact right time and has more people profiting from it. This make the post office look overly costly, under performing and wasteful.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

        PS: Resource: Justin M Ross at The Perfect Substitute on Blogspot.

      • Moe
        November 6, 2009 at 10:27 AM

        [Moe: Yeah the Post Office is in great shape. Right. The CATO institute notes that first class mail delivery time is approx. 10% slower than 15 years ago and Congress is considering cutting Saturday deliveries completely. Post office costs are rising to the point where it is no longer profitable.]

        Look, the post office doesn’t matter to me and will probably go away altogether in 10-20 years. Facts, however matter to me a great deal and I know you don’t like accepting my facts – or Sheepygirls either.

        Nevertheless:
        The Post Office is and has always been a non-profit (and now only quasi government) corporation. So if mail runs 10% slower than 15 years ago,the letter I mentioned that took 3 days to arrive? I guess it now takes 3 days and 1 hour. Quel horror! Not bad, again for an organization that’s lost the prime source of its revenue (first class mail).

        You also say:
        [In 1976, a pack of cub scouts tried raising money by delivering Christmas cards. The postal service’s attorneys threatened the ten year olds with a $76,000 fine if they didn’t cease and desist immediately]
        So you’re saying that 33 years ago a local post office did something stupid? Okay.

        You say:
        [How do you explain the cheaper yet more reliable delivery from UPS, Fed-Ex, DHL and other private carriers]

        You really have to be kidding this time. My letter travels 3000 miles for 47 cents! And that is the point.
        And the kiwi comparison is frankly bizarre. So I”ll just leave it at – mail is deliverred to my house. Every day.

        Honestly, I don’t know why I’m even bothering here.

  15. truelogic
    November 2, 2009 at 9:15 PM

    I think the real problem is that one side believes an invisible man(ONLY their version) in the sky really, really loves them, and that invisible man will destroy and torture those that don’t believe like they believe. That same group, (like Muslims and Muslim Terrorist) believe an invisible man will reward them greatly on day. Even if they do horrible vile acts like send Americans to invade a country based on lies which will cause many of them to be killed, many to suffer and many to return disabled. One side had no problem with supporting this act and claiming it was good, just and supported by their invisible man.

    When you have large groups of people like muslims or christians believing there is a greater power that put them above other groups, you are clearly going to have problems. Nothing matter more to them than to destroy those that don’t believe like them (like Obama or those that follow another religion)…seems love your enemies means nothing. They will lie, deceive, divide, and spread hate just to defeat their enemies and they have proven it throughout history. They will do it and claim it is good because they do it in the name of their version of God. Just like those that carried out the acts of 9/11 believe they will be rewarded in their version of heaven.

    People that follow gods are forced to lie all their life in order to make excuses for why they can’t provide a shred of evidence supporting their version of God is real or that any other God isn’t real (since the Christian Republicans believe ONLY their God is real). They have learned to lie to themselves all their lives and this allows them to lie to anyone else to become a simple matter.

    The real problem are those that believe they are following a God or “on a mission from God”. Those that think they are right and everyone else is wrong because they believe the most powerful and all mighty being that created all things just happens to be on their side. Therefore, how could they be wrong? Thus, they are never able to admit the clear mistakes made or take accountability. No investigations wanted because it just might expose what the moral secular side stated about how it was wrong to lie for a war and to kill and to murder and to torture. I wonder which side was right?

    History has shown us that those that believe in Gods have a rather warped understanding of morals. If a group is against them, they will excuse torture and support witch burning or the torture and slaughter of Muslims. They will do evil and commit vile acts while claiming it is good because they follow the right version of God and they are doing it in the name of God. We are the Christian party of family values, we are clearly right? and moral?

    The real problem is religion mixed into politics.

    If we enforced the separation of church and state and stopped giving money to help churches or make them exempt from taxes, then our politics would be based on what is truly right for the people. Not what is right for the people that believe one way and in one God. Religion destroys freedom and if you don’t believe in it, go to Iraq where their government has been ruled by religion.

    Sad that people that claim to follow Christ and believe in being a witness for Christ, don’t actually care what he asked them to do. “Do for others as I have done for you”, “love your enemies (that includes Obama)”. “thou shalt not kill” that includes even the wars you really really want. “do unto others as you would have done onto yourself” not torture those you want. “don’t bear false witness” not lie to create a war or to excuse immoral acts.

    Notice, a war based on lies, killing, murder, torture, defeat of health care reform, are not items on that list and not items that Jesus would have supported. Again, demonstrating just how far they will go to defeat those they hate (obama or anyone that doesn’t believe like them). They will tell their own Christ that died for them to get fcuked by ignoring ALL he taught.

    Yes, the real problem is Religion and the great harm it allows based on a belief in an invisible man of one version or another. Superstition controlling people like it has from the primitive time they were created. Superstitious people making decisions for the world of reality.

    Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 3, 2009 at 12:54 AM

      Nice to see you again TL. It is fun to watch the identified conservative posters not respond to your posts.

      I especially like the party of life/party of war dichotomy.

      Keep up the good work.

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        November 3, 2009 at 2:02 PM

        No arbourist, the fact is, some of us don’t have time to reply to every posting right away. Believe me, a reply is coming.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • truelogic
        November 3, 2009 at 3:04 PM

        I expect not to responds on most counts. How can they? Peace

      • truelogic
        November 3, 2009 at 3:12 PM

        Often when religious types do reply, they address the points they want and avoid the real issues. Often when I post many scriptures to support my point, they will search for one scripture out of that bunch that they believe will allow them to claim all scripture are therefore not applicable. Giant leaps from claim to claim.
        Whats great about debating religious issues is that those groups are known to be the most deceiving and manipulative by nature due to the needs to make excuses for their beliefs. It makes it easy for those of us that work towards truth and equality for all.

        Religious conservative types have an agenda which is based on their belief. So they can’t claim religion isn’t part of the subject or issues of morality. Secular/Liberal types are more concerned about what’s best for all (like Jesus). Ironic, isn’t it?

  16. Moe
    November 5, 2009 at 8:28 AM

    Informed said above:
    “Our witness for Christ is in that we support those that support life, traditional marriage and values. Helping the poor is something individuals and non-government groups do best. When the government gets involved with helping the poor it devolves into corruption, inefficiency and power grabs.”

    I was raised Catholic. My brother is a priest. Even though I am agnositic today, many of the teachings of 12 years of Catholic school remain with me. And by the standards of what I was taught, you, sir, do not espouse any Christianity I am familiar with. Not help the poor as a Christian??? THAT is blasphemy! Becasuse who is the governemnt but US.

    Reply
    • sleepygirl
      November 5, 2009 at 11:42 AM

      Moe, people forget that the government exists to work for them. Also, to only “support those that support life, traditional marriage and values” I guess means that it’s not Christ-like to help anyone else? So people who disagree with you don’t deserve help or basic rights? Jesus was non-judgmental and helped everyone. If you’re going to be Christian and charitable, accepting others is a huge part of that.

      Reply
      • Moe
        November 5, 2009 at 3:04 PM

        Be careful of trying to parse the words – there is the real danger that your head might explode.

      • sleepygirl
        November 5, 2009 at 4:23 PM

        Thanks for the warning, Moe. LOL! I have felt close to it at times.

      • pino
        November 6, 2009 at 10:45 AM

        Independent of the current conversation, I find it wonderfully ironic that we should be lectured on Christianity by two folks that have walked away from Christianity.

        Pardon me if I don’t take your insights into that religion seriously.

      • The Arbourist
        November 6, 2009 at 2:19 PM

        Pino says: I find it wonderfully ironic that we should be lectured on Christianity by two folks that have walked away from Christianity.

        Oh..editing time…

        two folks that have walked away from Christianity.
        have embraced rationality.

        There we go..fixed.

        Yes, how dare you infidel heretic swine dare comment on my magic book because my opinions are privileged because I *believe* them.

        The real irony is your lack of faith in christianity so you feel you have to defend your magic-handwaving-ritual-delusions to rational people.

        It’s probably just the Devil tempting you, but then again you are well equipped(?) to deal with that.

        Pardon me if I don’t take youseriously.

    • An Informed Mind
      November 6, 2009 at 7:07 PM

      Indeed we are the government, however, we help the poor individually and in privately formed charities. God did not tell us, ‘run to the government and get them to help the poor.’ No, He said to help the poor with what we have. Not taking from someone else to pay for it, which is exactly what government does.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM

        An Informed Mind stated:
        “Indeed we are the government, however, we help the poor individually and in privately formed charities. God did not tell us, ‘run to the government and get them to help the poor.’ No, He said to help the poor with what we have. Not taking from someone else to pay for it, which is exactly what government does.”

        I love how conservatives twist the bible to fit their agenda. How you claim God didn’t specifically to run to the government to help the poor. How you seem to think the bible intends for us to create private institutions and only help through this method or individuals.

        Back Up You Claims!! I think you prove time and time again that I have every right to “attack” your faith and your character.

        READ YOUR BIBLE and stop trying to put words into your Gods mouth. There is GREAT punishing for falsely representing your God. Have you not read that either?

        Romans 13:1-7
        Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

        Exodus 22:28
        “Do not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people.”

        According to your GOD, Obama is in place because God wants him there. He works for God so when you attack Obama, you attack your God’s judgement.

        The real reason you and some of your kind don’t want to reply to my comments is that I expose the truth and that is something you are afraid of and that is something you can’t debate.

        It is interesting to note that the secular liberals don’t have a problem spending or giving extra in taxes to help the poor and the suffering. Like you stated, we give to other nations all the time when they are in need. We should first give to ourselves, build a strong America so we are more able to help others.

        Your side had no problem spending money for war which raised the deficit by at least a trillion and before it is over they say 1.5 trillion. A war which paid our soldiers to kill/murder innocent people. A Conservative war that sent innocent American Soldiers to their death for lies. Yet, to HELP fellow Americans that ARE suffering today, that WILL die for lack of health care coverage, you make excuses, twist the words of your God to meet your agenda.

        In almost all your comments, you validate the “attacks” I have made on your faith, the way you people behave and your character.

        You make claims and then excuses and then more claims and excuses in an attempt to cover up your lies. You do it all because you can’t be honest with yourself.

        My comments are not intended to hurt you. They are intended to help you. Help you change and become a person that is like Jesus, that has compassion for fellow Americans and even our children that are suffering. There is a website that list the number of dead caused by lack of health insurance. It list them by representatives in the states.

        You know Jesus wouldn’t support your stance. You know Jesus wouldn’t support killing in Iraq, the lies used to invade, the death of American soldiers, the suffering of children and breakup of families. YOU KNOW it but you rather lie to yourself so you can support Christian Conservative Agenda.

        You God directly against the words, teachings, life example of Jesus Christ and you think I should have respect for you? If you actually follow Christ, if Christians all over actually follow Christ, I would have no need to “attack” and expose their true nature. I could spend my time “attack” the superstition of your type.

        Start backing up what you claim, stop making excuses that have no substance. Start being honest and you will feel much better about yourself and your life may just turn around.

    • An Informed Mind
      November 6, 2009 at 7:15 PM

      Arbourist: What is your problem? Do atheists hold a monopoly on rational thinking? Can a Buddhist be rational? Or is it only Christians that are irrational hate-mongers?

      Pino: It does seem rather unconventional to be lectured on faith by them that choose to not accept faith. Indeed I have read the Bible cover to cover, and I have found that conservatives have a much better grasp of Biblical concepts and practicing them, than liberals. Life is important to God, yet apparently not to liberals who think they can ‘abort’ the unborn and have plenty of reasons as to why the ‘blastocyst’ shouldn’t be considered life. My question is, does life spring from non-life?

      Sleepygirl: Government works for us. And we say to stop ‘working’. Everything it does, it screws up. As I have already stated numerous times, helping others because mandated from government is not really help. Helping others springs about from our own innate desire to help the people around us, not from some government mandate. And I disagree, all people deserve rights. The unborn for example deserve the right to live, to breathe, to grow up and live fulfilling lives.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • The Arbourist
        November 7, 2009 at 12:39 AM

        Informed Mind said: “conservatives have a much better grasp of Biblical concepts and practicing them, than liberals”

        From same minds that brought us that gift of knowledge known as Conservapedia.

        Life is important to God,

        Life is more important, and more relevant to people who do actually exist.

        My question is, does life spring from non-life?

        The short answer: Yes. The long answer see here.

        Everything it [the government] does, it screws up.

        Like not enforcing the separation of church and state strictly enough. I believe that through your distorted view of the government, you honestly think that the government can do no right. I suggest you start here and start ticking off the things you can do without; I’d start with those darn inefficient water and sewer services, hospitals, roads, the army.

        helping others because mandated from government is not really help

        I assume you would also be for cutting all tax breaks to churches as well, because as you say mandated government largess really isn’t giving. The corporate welfare would have to stop as well, business would not be pleased.

        The government exists to help people, by redistributing wealth and helping those who are unable to help themselves is a redeeming virtue of governments. Private charity is fickle and not particularly egalitarian. Can you see the magic underwear brigade helping out homosexual charities or single unwed mothers? Not impossible but unlikely.

        The unborn for example deserve the right to live, to breathe, to grow up and live fulfilling lives.

        The woman already under siege in patriarchal society deserves to be treated as an autonomous individual. Her rights are paramount and supercede any rights of an organism that happens to be growing inside of her.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 7, 2009 at 1:08 AM

        Arbouristt: Okay, if you are an atheist, and there is nothing beyond the grave, what is your excuse for killing someone and keeping them from having any chance to live a life?

        Life springs from non-life? So that means the rock in your backyard is going to get up and run around?

        Yes, everything the government does it screws up. Yeah let’s get started on the water and sewer. I live out in the country with our own well and sewer system. I don’t rely on the government for those things. Hospitals I haven’t been to for myself in five years, maybe more. Hospitals are by and large run by individuals and boards, not the government. The roads near my house are actually worse off now thanks to the ‘stimulus’ than they were before. Before it was at least pavement. But now, it’s all chip and seal. Feels like driving on a dirt road without the fun. Now it’s on to the army. That should really be the ‘military’ since it is comprised of the air force, navy, army, marine corps, coast guard and national guard. But they are semi-autonomous and basically run themselves.

        Tax breaks are not largesse since the money belongs to you anyway. Taxes are largesse, tax breaks are letting you keep what was already yours. Corporate welfare they can stop any day. I’ll throw a party. Capitalism is based on you taking risks and accepting the consequences and rewards afterwards.

        The Constitution states in Amendment X:

        The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

        The Constitution says nothing about the U.S. federal government guaranteeing health care, redistributing wealth or promoting one group of people over the others. Government exists solely to protect us from foreign enemies, protect our rights, and ensure that we are not extorted or abused. That is ALL. The tax code is not for taking money from the overly rich and distributing it to the overly poor. It is to allow the government to function and carry out the duties relegated to it under the Constitution.

        As to your disparaging private charity: There have been many cases of Christian based charities helping out people that have conflicting beliefs opposed to Christianity. They do this to show compassion, something the government does not understand. Private charity does a far better job than government charity and organization. ACORN anyone?

        Patriarchal society? What the… She is treated as autonomous. She had every right to not get pregnant. As someone once said, ‘your rights end where mine begin.’ Her rights do not trample on the rights of the BABY growing inside of her. How you libs treat and name the unborn is despicable. SHE WAS HALF THE REASON FOR THE BABY BEING INSIDE HER! Thank your mother she decided to keep the ‘organism’ that was ‘growing inside her’.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 7, 2009 at 8:43 AM

        [I live out in the country with our own well and sewer system. I don’t rely on the government for those things.]

        You’re receiving mail service subsidized by people living in the city. It costs far more to deliver a letter out in the country than it does in the city. If the natural laws of supply and demand were allowed to act, you’d be spending several dollars to mail a letter — not 47 cents.

        In other words, you’re receiving welfare every time you mail a letter.

      • Moe
        November 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM

        Informed, re the military you say
        [But they are semi-autonomous and basically run themselves.]

        Good for them. And who gives them the money and the authority to exist and do anything they do. Do they choose their own wars? Uh-uh, they go to war when the civilian elected Commander-in-Chief tells them to go to war. Who created them? The civilian government created them. Who commands them? Top brass, appointed by the civiian executive branch of the GOVERNMENT.

        [

        [I live out in the country with our own well and sewer system. I don’t rely on the government for those things.]

        How you liking those roads you disparage? Or would you rather create your own. Liking that electricity? You know, the stuff that runs our world? How about that internet that lets you in here? How about radio broadcast waves that allow the lucky duckies among us to hear Rush Limbaugh every day without his personally having to fight for a broadcast band. (that’s actually my favorite example – Rush broadcasts over a government run broadcast system!!)

        How about those cancer survival rates you talk about in the US? The researchers who made that happen work mostly for universities and their work is funded by the Federal Govt. And yes, there are exceptions. Remember Nixon’s War on Cancer? Who the hell paid for that?

      • An Informed Mind
        November 7, 2009 at 4:24 PM

        Hoffman: No, I’m receiving mail subsidized by my tax dollars. The price of the mail is only to try and keep it from going completely belly up. Taxes cost me the same as they do the people in the city. If supply and demand were to work, their would be several private companies vying for the delivery slice of the pie and efficiency would go up and price would go down.

        Moe: The money that goes to the military comes from the government indeed. My point was that everything the government tries to run, they screw up. Hence the military being autonomous and runs itself. The money is no different if it comes from the government or any other place. When the government commands someone or some organization to do something, yet they allow the organization, in this case the military, the organization basically runs and decides strategy themselves. When Washington politicians decide how to handle and micromanage wars, Vietnams happen. About the promotions of the top brass… they are promoted based upon their previous experience and records. So I don’t know where you’re going with that one.

        How do I like the roads? They stink. Private companies would make much better roads and in my opinion there should be a privatization of roads where the grants come from the LOCAL government but the people have a say in which company does the roads. This would also lead to competition, increased jobs and better quality. When someone has to answer for their work to the people they are working for, efficiency skyrockets.

        Electricity? You do know that private companies provide electricity right? We have at least four electric companies in my state and they do a rather good job of making sure everyone gets the supply they need.

        The internet was created by the government, yet when it was privatized and opened to the public and companies, it exploded into the greatest medium the world has ever seen.

        About the radio? Since we the people are the government, the government is obligated to allow free transmission of information through radio and television broadcast bands. BTW, with $400 million dollars, I hardly think Rush would have a problem with the radio band.

        The funding for those universities that have led to the U.S. having the highest survival ratings of anywhere in the world is a good thing I admit. But saying that the work done there is thanks to the government is disingenuous. While the money came from the government, the actual work, research, development, marketing all comes from PRIVATE sources.

        Lastly, I do not remember Nixon’s War on Cancer. I was not alive then.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 7, 2009 at 6:35 PM

        [Electricity? You do know that private companies provide electricity right? ]
        Sure they do – on a national grid built with tax dollars half a century ago.

        The internet was never privatized. Private companies began using it.

        Radio can transmit anywhere it wants into the radio waves in the atmosphere of the planet. But transmitters (stations etc) would bump into each all over the place if GOVERNMENT didn’t assign bands and act as ‘air traffic controllers’

        [While the money came from the government, the actual work, research, development, marketing all comes from PRIVATE sources.]
        Well, that’s a whopper. Universisties do the research, and the discovery. And then private companies do the marketing and selling. You betcha.

        [Lastly, I do not remember Nixon’s War on Cancer. I was not alive then.]
        Does that mean it didn’t happen? (you could like google it up).

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 7, 2009 at 9:52 PM

        [No, I’m receiving mail subsidized by my tax dollars.]

        Nope, the Post Office doesn’t receive any taxpayer dollars.

        [Private companies would make much better roads and in my opinion there should be a privatization of roads where the grants come from the LOCAL government]

        Private companies are generally hired by the government to build our roads.

        [You do know that private companies provide electricity right? We have at least four electric companies in my state and they do a rather good job of making sure everyone gets the supply they need.]

        Can you say “Enron?”

        [The internet was created by the government, yet when it was privatized and opened to the public and companies, it exploded into the greatest medium the world has ever seen.]

        The Internet has not been privatized. On the contrary, Internet protocols and designs are decided by the Internet Engineering Task Force (a volunteer organization) and the Internet Society (a non-profit organization operated for international educational, charitable, and scientific purposes).

      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 12:05 PM

        Dear An Informed Mind:
        I don’t believe anyone is suggesting that Atheist or Agnostics hold a monopoly or a patent on rational thinking. Christians have the ability to think rationally about many issues. They have the ability to be objective about many issues. However, history has proven you can’t be objective with respect to religion or your beliefs. Even resent history has proven you will jump on the band wagon of your group, no matter how immoral their actions. Your group will make excuses for it and sell the lies. Go back and look at Fox News. Watch them twist, spread hate and fear to sell their war. Watch them now do exactly the same thing to destroy health care and defeat Obama. Like scripture states, Obama is put there by God as there is “no authority except that which God has established”. Do you need more scripture for me to PROVE that your God put Obama in place? You twisting and ignorance of scripture is not going to be a good excuse when you stand before this God and explain your answers. There is direct punishment for changing the meaning of his words. Do you wish I should supply you with the punishment as detailed by your God?

        You state it is “unconventional to be lectured on faith by them that choose not to accept faith”. I guess you would then find it unconventional for anyone against evolution to argue against it? You stated that “conservatives have a much better grasp of Biblical concepts and practicing them, than liberals”. Would you care to back that one up? Or is this another claim? Why is 80 plus percent of the prison population Christian? Why is it that the number one purchasers of online porn living in Red States? Why is it that 80 plus percent of Americans claim to believe in the Christian God and yet we have such immorality as claimed by Christian? Why is it that I continue to need to provide you with scripture that contradicts your claims of what Jesus/God instructed or did?

        It isn’t liberals that think they can abort the unborn. I might be considered a liberal by many, and I happen to know many liberals and conservatives. I know of two conservatives that have had abortions and actually support that right of a women. I have no liberal friends that have had an abortion and there are more liberal friends than conservative. I personally am against abortion and I know of no one that isn’t against it. I am also for the rights of women to decide for themselves. The GOVERNMENT has decided at what stage an abortion can take place and the guidelines. Your God put the rulers in place and you should obey your God. You support killing and torture in Iraq (you support it through your support of bush and his re-electrion and making excuses). Lies that you know will kill thousands in a matter of months and then stand up and say you are against abortion with many of those the destruction of only a cluster of cells and what science has states is not yet life. Ironic. Kill based on lies…no problem. torture, no problem. End the life of cells which are not determined to be actual life….wrong? Wow. Excuses, Excuses, Excuses. Exposing you as a person that just joins the group, brainwashed to follow.

        An Informed Mind, you seem to contradict yourself depending on what agenda you are attempting to push. You stated: “As I have already stated numerous times, helping others because mandated from government is not really help. Helping others springs about from our own innate desire to help the people around us, not from some government mandate.” Wow, wow, wow!! You had just told me in an earlier reply about how we help other countries, how great we were to help other countries in need, when they have problems. Are you NOW telling us that our Government shouldn’t help others? If we do it because our Government wants to do it then it is mandated and thus it is NOT REALLY HELP? Therefore you said we were helping but now you claim we are NOT?

        Sir, you speak NONSENSE! Excuses. You are so easy to expose because you are so dishonest.

  17. pino
    November 6, 2009 at 10:41 AM

    Infant Mortality Rate -Infant mortality rate
    (deaths/1,000 live births)

    The thread got pretty long; moving down here.

    Regarding your infant mortality rate study. The numbers you are showing are the number collected by self reporting agencies within those governments. And in a vast majority of those governments, they don’t even use the same definition of a live birth.

    Further, there are several reasons why an infant would pass near birth. Few of them having to do with a medical care delivery system.

    For a more detailed explanation, I posted here:

    http://tarheelred.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/infant-mortality-rate/

    p.s. Consider YOURSELF proven wrong.

    Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 6, 2009 at 2:05 PM

      There are two other indicators of the general health of the population. Also from the CIA factbook via wikipedia.

      If the shady governments of Norway, Sweden, and Canada do not report according to your likings take that study out.

      Even with only two of the three general stats cited, one can make a fairly strong inference that countries with universal healthcare are in better shape that the US with it’s private system.

      So, no not really proven wrong.

      Reply
      • sleepygirl
        November 6, 2009 at 4:12 PM

        I’ve used the CIA World Factbook in the past for research papers, so I’m really familiar with it. After checking it out today to look at some statistics that give us a picture of our health care system compared to those of countries that have universal health care, I noticed a few things. Here are some of the stats that stood out the most (I apologize if some of these are repeats from other posts in this thread):

        Life Expectancy at Birth:
        United States: 78.11 (Rank: 50)
        United Kingdom: 79.01 (Rank: 36)
        France: 80.98 (Rank: 9)
        Canada: 81.23 (Rank: 8)

        Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 live births)
        United States: 6.26 (Rank: 180)
        United Kingdom: 4.85 (Rank: 193)
        France: 3.33 (Rank: 217)
        Canada: 5.04 (Rank: 189)

        Another source I’ve used is the book The Measure of America: American Human Development Report 2008-2009 (ISBN: 978023115495). The main point of this book is to evaluate the United States in 3 main categories: “A Long and Healthy Life”, “Access to Knowledge”, and “A Decent Standard of Living”. These criteria come from the UN’s Development Programme. Not only does the book compare the US to other developed nations, but it also compares the states, since there are vastly different programs and standards of living depending on where one lives. Here are some notable statistics in the category “A Long and Healthy Life”:

        Total Health Expenditure (% of GDP):
        United States: 15.3% (Rank: 1)
        United Kingdom: 8.3%
        France: 11.1%
        Canada: 9.8%

        Obesity (% of population as of 2005)
        United States: 32.2% (Rank: 1)
        United Kingdom: 23.0%
        France: 9.5%
        Canada: 18.0%

        The country with the highest life expectancy, Japan at 82 years, has a publicly funded health care system. The rate of obesity in Japan is 10 times lower than that of the United States. In other countries with universal health care, the vast majority of citizens describe themselves as having very good health and are very satisfied with their country’s health care system (especially in Denmark). Here’s an interesting quote about Denmark:

        “Denmark offers free public health, including general practitioners and hospital care, for all Danes. The decentralized system is administered locally and funded through local taxes, supplemented by the national government. Elected county officials assess the local need for general practitioners and hospitals. General practitioners, commonly self-employed private practitioners operating within the public system, play a key role. Patients are free to choose any GP, and anyone willing to pay a co-payment may bypass the GP and go directly to a specialist. However, few do, and the polls suggest that they are content with the GP referral system. At a fraction of the cost of the U.S. system, this decentralized, government-funded approach provides high-quality medical care and outcomes in key areas, including lifespan and infant mortality, that are equal or superior to those in the United States.” (pg. 73)

        Something to think about. It’s time to stop spreading lies about the “awful” universal health care systems in the rest of the world.

  18. truelogic
    November 7, 2009 at 11:45 AM

    I love this comment by The Informed Mind: “Wikipedia is hardly the bastion of facts you make it out to be.” amazing, a man that believes in the bible as the word of God and that believe God is real thinks he knows about facts.

    Let me help you with your excuses and deflection of responsibility in your other comments to me.

    First, you stated about yourself “I absolutely do NOT condemn torture”. I assume you intended to say you don’t condone torture? Or was that a Freudian slip?

    Let me expose your dishonesty again. I am not implying that ALL military men and women are guilty of torture. Did you catch that last statement? So, now that you have me telling you AGAIN that I am not implying or stating such a thing, you can stop attempting to be dishonest and speak to the facts.

    America as a country made the decision to tortured and the majority of Christian Republicans re-elected Bush after it was shown that we tortured. To imply that ONLY one or two incidences happened is again, Dishonest.

    FACT, those that claim to follow Christ, witnesses for Christ, supported Bush and re-elected Bush after his failure to protect Americans, After sending Americans to kill and die based on lies, and after torture. Make all the excuses you want for such horrific behavior. I can say I stood against it and I was right to do so.

    Tell me, how do we “serve” our country sending our men and women to die for a lie? That serves the terrorists, makes them stronger and increases their numbers. It kills, murders and causes the suffering of INNOCENT people supported by the Christian Conservatives, and excused by them. Just like you are doing here because you are part of the guilty.

    If you have taken time to read my blog, you would know I condemn terrorist. However, you don’t seem to understand in this case we “America” are the terrorist by invading a country, based on lies in the pursuit of political aims…”democracy”. The Muslim nuts invaded America on 9/11 based on lies, in the name of their God with political aim to destroy freedom…democracy.

    Terrorist: noun; A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

    Terrorism: noun; the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

    Not only did we have political aims in our invasion of Iraq, we did it based on lies (like the Muslims) and with the support of our version of God (like the Muslims). However, we managed to kill far greater numbers and send more Americans to their death than had been killed in 9/11. We killed more innocent people than the original terrorist of our land.

    You stated “George Bush was not the only one involved in the decision.” Maybe you should remember that as I have stated the overwhelming number of Christian Conservatives also supported it. Maybe you should remember that when you go after Obama and what he is doing. Remember the senate voted for the war (Except Obama was against it and voiced his opinion) but they voted based on the LIES told by Christian Conservatives, they were lied to by fellow Americans that they should be able to trust.

    You are just making excuses. Fact is, this happened, it would NOT have happened if not for the Christian Conservative push to make it happen. It would not have happened with out the Christian Conservative News Network (FOX NEWS) selling the fear and hate and dividing this country. Just like the Bush/Cheney administration worked to do.

    I happen to blame anyone that elected Bush. Anyone that elected him and supported him are to blame. HOWEVER, what group elected him in overwhelming numbers? You know for a fact the Christian Conservative of the republican party OVERWHELMINGLY are responsible for his election. You know that atheist, agnostics and muslims are not likely to have voted for him for very obvious reasons. George Bush was elected by Christians Conservatives of the Republican party.

    Again, you are exposed for making excuses. You are doing your best to deflect blame or be accountable for your part and the part of the group you support and follow.

    I also noticed that you seem to think America didn’t have a part in Saddam Hussein being put in power in Iraq. You clearly want to believe it and don’t bother to study history. A simple search on this would yield volumes of facts of how directly connected we where and what we got out of it and what they got from us. So again, please stop being dishonest. Read, educate yourself and remember if someone wants to start a war or get you to believe in a God they should provide proof, evidence and facts to backup their claims.

    I’ll address other parts of your comments in another reply.

    Reply
  19. The Arbourist
    November 7, 2009 at 1:19 PM

    How the threads here get nestled and strung out hurts my brain (not more than informed mind but close).

    Informed Mind says: “Okay, if you are an atheist, and there is nothing beyond the grave, what is your excuse for killing someone and keeping them from having any chance to live a life?”

    As soon as you talk about the fetus’s rights, you are marginalizing the rights of the woman who carries said child. It is her body, and she owns every part of it. It is her decision whether or not to let parasitical organisms take root in her body or not.
    I appreciate your concern for the potential child, but I will not acknowledge its precedence over a woman’s right her body.
    Life springs from non-life? So that means the rock in your backyard is going to get up and run around?

    Almost as hard to believe as someone rising from the dead after 3 days? Abiogenesis is the precursor to Evolution which is how we got here. Consider the quote from British astronomer Sir Arther Eddington:

    We are bits of stellar matter that got cold by accident, bits of a star gone wrong.

    I agree with his elegant words and the cosmology behind what the quote is saying. We are not a special race of beings with some ordained destiny, but rather the product of steady mutation and natural selection.

    Patriarchal society? What the… She is treated as autonomous.

    “Patriarchal society???” says the possessor of white male privilege. I will make some assumptions here.
    You assume we have a fair and equitable society.
    We do not.

    If you are charitable at all, please go see the feminism 101 blog. It will help you understand the basis of many of my arguments, and why perhaps some terms seem alien to you. (aka patriarchy: what we are immersed in right now)

    Let’s define autonomy – au⋅ton⋅o⋅my (dictionary.com)
     
    1. Independence or freedom, as of the will or one’s actions: the autonomy of the individual.

    An instructional yes or no heuristic.

    1. A woman can choose to have sex: Yes, she has autonomy.
    2. A woman can choose to use contraception: Yes, she has autonomy.
    3. A woman can choose to have cyst removed: Yes, she has autonomy.
    4. A woman conceives and does not want to endure a painful, possibly life ending event: No, she has to remain as is, and not have a say what is going on her body. Whoops – Not autonomous any more.

    In number 4, someone else is now deciding her reproductive future, it is her life on the line not someone else, yet they think it is their right to say whats going on in her body. Fail. Reproductive freedom lies at the heart of the rights of women.

    Women are not property, they are not mere birthing vessels, their bodily functions are not the purview of the state.

    Her rights do not trample on the rights of the BABY growing inside of her.

    An acorn is not an oak tree. A fetus is not a baby.

    SHE WAS HALF THE REASON FOR THE BABY BEING INSIDE HER!

    And bears the whole responsibility of keeping or terminating the pregnancy.

    Reply
    • The Arbourist
      November 7, 2009 at 1:27 PM

      *sigh* Someday soon, I will get my tag-fu up to snuff. Apologies for the paragraph link.

      Where is a preview button when you need one.? 🙂

      Reply
    • Moe
      November 7, 2009 at 2:03 PM

      Ditto. And did I say?, Ditto.

      Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 8, 2009 at 12:10 AM

      I don’t care about liberalism’s/feminism’s view of women. I care about the baby. My sisters, mother and female friends believe the same way. This is not simply a ‘privileged white male’ perspective. I know plenty of women who believe the fetus overrides their rights.

      The constitution protects life. A fetus is a live human being in early development. It breathes, needs nutrition etc. Therefore when abortions are done, they cut short a life. Effectively, they are murder. Therefore every woman that is considering an abortion should witness an ultrasound to see what she is going to consent to have killed.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 12:21 PM

        An Informed Mind Stated:
        “I don’t care about liberalism’s/feminism’s view of women. I care about the baby. My sisters, mother and female friends believe the same way. This is not simply a ‘privileged white male’ perspective. I know plenty of women who believe the fetus overrides their rights.”

        1. Again, you demonstrate that you can NOT be objective. You don’t care about the views of others. You don’t care about the debate, the evidence, the real reasons others oppose your point of view. Democratic? Those are statements like your George Bush would make: “I AM THE DECIDER” and follow a dictatorship.

        2. Our government of the people and by the people didn’t seem to agree with you and your many female friends. Again, they are not objective because they are FORCED to believe in your God and thus your Group or they will be tortured in hell fire for an eternity of suffering. That is not objective and that is not free choice.

        3. Every living thing breaths. Sperm needs oxygen and gets it from your body. Did that ever stop you from masturbating, did it? It doesn’t stop the millions of conservatives from Masturbating or using birth control. Effectively, you murder. Just like you supported in the invasion of Iraq and you KNOW fully grown humans to include babies and even pregnant mothers would and did die. Why don’t you care about those lives? Oh, because your group isn’t on that wagon?

        4. I have no problem with every women having the right to witness an ultra sound free of charge. I also have NO problem with teaching our kids to use protection. Kids start experimenting with sex at least by 7th grade…start teaching them what will happen, how to protect from it. The fact that Conservatives are against it is proof that they have contributed to the MURDER. Yes, this “murder” is partly the fault of Conservatives and you can try to deny it but facts are facts. The Bush abstinence program was a failure, which liberals stated would be. FACT is that if your side would allow the teaching of it and lord forbid, got involved with your kids lives and taught them yourselves, you would have saved lives. So before throwing your stones….like usual. Think about what you have done to contribute. Yeah, I noticed you avoid anything that exposes the wrong on your side and make it all the fault of others. Just like Fox News. Let me guess…you like Fox News.

        Effectively, you and all conservatives to include Fox News that preach against teaching our kids, are murdering…murderers.

      • The Arbourist
        November 8, 2009 at 5:20 PM

        Informed Mind said: I don’t care about liberalism’s/feminism’s view of women.

        So really, you are here just to troll then rather than debate? There are plenty conservative blogs around were you can revel in the inanity of your echo chamber and not have to worry about what us ‘godless liberals’ think or do.

        My sisters, mother and female friends believe the same way. This is not simply a ‘privileged white male’ perspective. I know plenty of women who believe the fetus overrides their rights.

        Well that is nice. They could also believe in drinking blood and eating human flesh. However, that does not make your opinion right or your position any stronger.

        A fetus is a live human being in early development.

        And when they call their congress people or are elected, I’m sure they will get human being status. The only human beings status that we should be concerned about is the mothers.

        Therefore when [unsafe] abortions are done, they [could] cut short a life. Effectively, they are murder.

        Wow, just one little fix and you could join the enlightenment.

        Therefore every woman that is considering an abortion should witness an ultrasound to see what she is going to consent to have killed.

        I’ve got one better for you:

        “[…] consider if lack of consent were the default position. Imagine if all women were considered a priori by the courts to have said “no.” In fact, “consent” would not apply to women at all; we would exist as inviolable entities, human beings with full personal sovereignty, the way men do now. We could have as much heterosex as we want, but the instant we don’t want, the dude becomes, in the eyes of the law, a rapist.” thanks to twisty.

        You get your ultrasound, I get status as human being. Sounds like a fair trade.

    • truelogic
      November 8, 2009 at 12:08 PM

      I can’t understand how the threads work here myself. Very difficult to read and follow. I think my blog just lists them one after the other according to time of posting. But maybe I should check to make sure it is true.

      Reply
  20. truelogic
    November 7, 2009 at 3:29 PM

    To An Informed Mind, I realize this is a long post but not only do I answer the points you discuss but I provide evidence to support my statements. Your comments are exposed here and elsewhere as excuses and not answers to my comments or questions. Let me prove it to you and to anyone that might care to read such a long post.

    An Informed Mind stated: “The flood came about as punishment after hundreds of years of God reaching out to a wicked generation. The babies that died as a result went to heaven..”…blah..blah..blah.

    You make more claims here and more excuses.

    1. You have NO proof or a SHRED of evidence of your version of God or that any other version of God is or isn’t just as real as your God.

    2. Even if babies went to heaven, they were still punished, tortured slowly until death. They suffered prior to going to heaven. For the sins of others. Torture and killing of babies and the unborn child is NEVER excusable, not even if your God did it or if their God told them to crash planes into buildings. It is wrong and immoral.

    You clearly know nothing of scripture or the Christian God as described in scripture. Adam and Eve and even Satan could do NOTHING if your God didn’t plan it, control it and make it happen. One scripture should be enough to prove it but you will still deny it because you need to make excuses. We have proven this several times.

    “God is operating ALL in all” (I Cor. 12:6)

    What don’t you understand about the word “Operating”? Look it up and educate yourself. It means “To Control The Function”!! What ever happens, God is controlling it. His very word makes it PERFECTLY clear.

    Do you need another witness?

    “Yet ALL is of God” (II Cor. 5:18)

    Do you understand the word “ALL”? That includes Evil and Evil Acts.

    Do you need a witness to this?

    “I create EVIL” (Isa. 45:7)

    This should have been obvious to you since you believe God created all things. In case you want to make excuses and claim this means calamity and not evil, let me make it clear.

    The word EVIL in Isaiah 45:7 is the Hebrew word ra. The Hebrew word for “calamity” is the Hebrew word ade which means “misfortune, misery, or ruin. Whereas the Hebrew word ra means “bad or evil.” It is the same word used for the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil [ra].” It was not the tree of the knowledge of “good and calamity.” Did Jacob really mean to say,“a calamitous beast” had devoured his son?(Gen. 37:33)? Did Israel really “do calamity in the sight of God” by worshipping Balaam, or did they do evil?(Jud. 3:7).

    An Informed Mind, are you still with me?

    Basically, your God claims to have made evil and without HIS evil man (Adam and Eve) couldn’t be wicked or evil.

    Do you think your God is so ignorant that he would put the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden and not already know man was going to eat of it? Do you think He didn’t have a plan for them to sin? Apparently this is what you think. Unlike you dishonestly state, God did NOT “allowed fallen humankind to operate in all its wickedness due to the fall of Adam and Eve.”

    God planned it!

    Who told Eve to eat of the tree? Satan himself! Who Created SATAN?
    “I [God] created the waster to DESTROY” (Isa. 54:16).

    God didn’t say he created the waster to do good. No, he created Satan for a purpose which is EVIL. Do you have scripture that tells us that God “allowed fallen humankind to operate in wickedness”? I have shown God planned it and not only planned it then drowned babies and all life for what he planned to happen. If you would like more scripture to demonstrate that Satan isn’t a fallen Angel that rebelled of his own free will, I will be happy to supply them.

    An Informed Mind, is this why you can support and make excuses for torture and killing based on lies for the war in Iraq?

    Men are wicked because God created them to be wicked.
    “The Lord has made…the WICKED for the day of EVIL” (Prov. 16:4).

    An Informed Mind, are you still with me or is this too much truth for you? I am proving, and providing all the evidence to demonstrate the opposite of what you believe about your God and it is his very word that is against what you claim. Just like the life of Jesus is against the Conservative Christian support for and creation of War based on lies and the torture they allowed/excused.

    That scripture and the others I have posted make it CLEAR that terrorist of 9/11 are of God. Abortion is OF YOUR GOD! Not the fault of man because your God planned for it all to happen.

    “Declaring the END from the BEGINNING…” (Isa. 46:10).

    Do you think the almighty creator, the all knowing planner didn’t know this would happen as he planned.

    Your God stated that His “will, pleasure and desires” WILL be DONE. None of this can happen if it is not the will of God, can it?

    An Informed Mind, are you still with me? Is the logic too much for your “informed mind”? Are the facts starting to melt your braincells in an attempt to create excuses for how it just can’t be true?

    An Informed Mind stated: “Saying that the verse, “for He has appointed a time for every matter, and for every work…” means that God condones abortion is like saying that because a builder built a building, it was his will for the building to collapse and kill hundreds. ”

    Wow! Are You Kidding Me? You actually think this comparison makes sense? No, you don’t but it again exposes your need to make excuses for what you believe. We need to make excuses for things because we can’t handle the truth about ourselves or beliefs.

    Let me help you understand. God is “sold” as the creator of ALL things and has full knowledge of what will happen and it is all “according to my (God’s) WILL”. If God builds or does something he knows exactly the time it will collapse and planned for it to happen. It can not collapse if he has not planned it. The builder that builds a building doesn’t plan for it to collapse and can’t predict if or when it will collapse. The builder follows the codes and regulation of his community when building. He doesn’t appoint anything.

    Therefore, when your God stated:

    “To every thing there is a season [appointed time],and a time to every purpose [matter or event] under the heaven” (Ecc. 3:1).

    Also witness:
    “…for He has appointed a time for every matter, and for every work…” (The New Revised Standard Version).

    “For He has set a season for every event and for every deed…” (The Concordant Literal Old Testament).

    It is CLEAR that being the Almighty, ALL KNOWING he must mean what he states and therefore Abortion, Terrorist are OF HIM. “yet ALL is of God”. He Planned abortion and for a child to be molested. Maybe this is why we have children in this world molested, time and time again, and your God watches it and does nothing to stop most of them. Many times, children die while crying for help and as their parents are praying for the safe return of their child.

    Another witness?

    “I know that, whatsoever God does…NOTHING can be put to it, nor ANYTHING taken from it: and GOD does it” (Ecc. 3:14).

    Are you getting this in your “informed mind” and do you see how clearly it is explained in scripture.

    I have proven in the few scriptures I have provided that you are completely wrong on your understanding of your God. Think about it! You make excuses for everything and work to disprove anyone that doesn’t agree with your position. The reason you need to make excuses is you are not looking for the truth and you are not being honest with yourself and therefore it is very easy to be dishonest to others. You are the wicked, you are the MANY and not the few. The many that supported Bush, the war, the torture and excuses it. I am the FEW that were against it from the beginning.

    An Informed Mind, have you stopped reading now that the truth is too much. Or are you still with me?

    I noticed you also posted some scripture and then without providing any comments to those scriptures, you seem to want to magically imply they contradict what I have provided. The shear number of scriptures and logic I am providing here should be more than enough to make you go back and read your Bible. Instead of attempting to find scriptures you think contradict what I have provided or stated, you might instead search for the true meaning of what is stated. The fact that you attempt to contradict only demonstrates that you believe God’s word contradicts, but if his word is perfect, then it can’t contradict, can it?

    An Informed Mind stated: “God, in His wisdom, has known from the beginning of time what man will choose to do and He does not stop it from happening, lest man not have free will”.

    I think I have proven that according to scripture and apparently your God’s word, man doesn’t have free will. Everything is according to His will. His desires. His Pleasures. WILL BE DONE.

    Another witness?
    “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, MY COUNSEL SHALL STAND, and I WILL DO ALL MY PLEASURE … I have spoken it, I WILL ALSO BRING IT TO PASS; I HAVE PURPOSED IT, I WILL ALSO DO IT” (Isa. 46:10-11).

    If you have actually cared to read the Bible as if it were the word of an Almighty Creator you would notice that according to the Bible, God’s words will NOT return empty or void. When God speaks, it will be done. When God wills, it will be done. When God desires, His desires WILL BE DONE!

    An Informed Mind, do you have scripture that contradict this? I don’t think you do, as a matter of fact, I know you don’t.

    An Informed Mind, Let me inform you have something that you didn’t bother to think through.

    Free Will is defined as “the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion”

    Not only does your Bible, God’s “word” makes it clear you have no free will. Your belief proves you personally have no free will. Why? Because YOUR FATE depends on what you belief. Your fate is an eternity of horrifying pain through the torture of never ending fire if you don’t believe in your God. Your FATE will be of great rewards of eternal health, happiness, peace and life if you do believe in your God. This is your belief and thus your belief strips you of free will.

    An Informed Mind, are you still with me? Typically Christian are a bit uncomfortable at this point of the discussion. Typically, they will disappear, run, hide and not return comments to what I have presented. If they reply, it will be a reply that states they no longer have time to debate it or some other excuse. FACT is they are making excuses again because the truth is too much. At this point they start to realize they are out of their league when discussion scripture or the Character of God. At this point they realize I was not lying when I stated I was raised in Christian schools and attended Christian College and have throughly studied scripture using proper Hebrew and Greek translations.

    Like most Christians you teach the doctrine of men while you reject the commandments of God. Your actions in the support of even one single torture not to mention the many that took place. Your actions to excuse the war because there was a bad man in place demonstrates this fact. Thus we should let innocent Americans give their lives based on lies and kill innocent others…INCLUDING children and babies. This makes us true Americans? This makes us a witness for Christ? This makes those that spoke out against it un-American and terrorist supporters (according to Fox News and the many conservatives that supports this fear spreading and hate filed Christian News Source).

    Your God discusses this in scripture and it seems to point to people just like you and the rest of the Conservative Christian Republican movement.

    “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men…Full well you reject the commandments of God,[like:‘LOVE YOUR ENEMIES’] that you may keep your OWN TRADITION” (Mark 7:7 & 9)

    An Informed Mind stated:
    What caused 9/11? A religion based on hate. A religion based on killing Jews and Christians. Religion as a whole is evil. (What? Surely you didn’t read what I just said right?) Religion is based on laws, regulations and rules. Christianity is a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It is liberating in that Christ bore our sins for us on the cross.

    You make all this too easy, An Informed Mind. I’ve decided to turn this entire reply to your comments into a post on my blog site. I feel it is important that others witness what people like wish to ignore and how you work to deceive by not providing the entire story.

    I have proven through the few scriptures that if your God is real and his “word” is true then your God caused 9/11. Fact is, religion did cause 9/11 as it does most evil. Like Christianity, the Muslim religion is also based on laws, regulations and rules. What is your point? Did you forget about the history of Christianity? Not just the recent history of killing Muslims through lies of WMD and ties to 9/11 to invade Iraq. Do I need to remind you of the past? Remember the Crusades? Did you not read this or are you just purposefully wanting to point the blame on Muslims and it is all their fault. Of course you believe Christians and specifically Christian American couldn’t be so evil.

    If the war in Iraq isn’t enough to demonstrate you couldn’t care less for your Christian laws, rules, regulations (Thou shalt not kill/murder, Love your Enemies, Do unto others as you would have done onto yourself or like Jesus stated, do onto others as I have done unto you). Are you speaking of those rules, laws, and regulations? Do you want me to provide more?

    You realize that the Crusades were religiously sanctioned acts of murder and torture. Don’t you? Originally started to take back the Holy Land from the Muslims? Or do you just want to avoid that discussion? The Crusades, first through ninth, all part of the Christian rules, laws and regulations?

    What about the KKK and the Nazi Youth groups which are all Christian? I like how they turn their God’s laws, rules and regulations into excuses for killing, murder, intolerance, hate and spread of fear.

    What about Hitler Himself? EXACTLY like George Bush and the Christian Conservative Republicans that support Bush.

    “I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Almighty Creator. By fighting the Jews, I am doing the Lord’s work.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

    An excuse made by Christians. An overwhelming number of Germans in Hitlers time believe Hitler was doing the work of God and that he was sent by God.

    “The National Government will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Berlin, 1933, first radio address after coming to power

    Just like the Christian Conservatives believe about America. Isn’t this ironic? So we invade Iraq and kill Muslims. We re-elect (thus supporting the acts) George Bush along with more torture and killing. In the name of YOUR God. Yeah, I know, you believe your version of God is the right one but you still haven’t proven it. Like wars, you don’t seem to feel there is a need to prove reasons for your claims. But you are ready to give an endless number of excuses to escape responsibility or accountability.

    “I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.”
    — Adolf Hitler, to Gen. Gerhard Engel, 1941. Here are more of his quotes.

    If you would like more quotes about the Christian God provided by Adolf Hitler and those that worked with him, all you need to do is care enough to find the truth and learn for yourself. Like George Bush and his administration, Hitler’s administration was full of Christians.

    An Informed Mind, the last part of the comment you provided above is this: “It is liberating in that Christ bore our sins for us on the cross.”

    Wow! This says it all. We can lie, deceive, divide America and the world, create fear through hate and we are forgiven because Christ bore our sins on the cross. Hitler, if he believed in Christ, realized his sins and asked forgiveness then he himself is in heaven, enjoying eternal life, happiness, health, love, peace….etc. Just like Bush and his followers believe, George will one day be in heaven. Just like you believe Christian Conservatives like you, by not speaking out against the lies, the torture, the murder and that your support for Bush doesn’t make you accountable or responsible for what happened. You believe you will all go to heaven because your terribly immoral act are forgiven.

    Because of your God, we have come to believe we can do almost anything and if we believe we are doing it with the support of God (America…in God we trust, one nation under God, God bless America) we are forgiven and rewarded one day. WOW….that is totally absurd!! Absolutely pathetic excuse!

    Yes, Iran and North Korea and my point is that they are far more dangerous with their technologies and have killed as many or more of their own citizens and yet you made a claim/excuse that because Saddam killed many of his own it is therefore justified for us to create lies about WMD and ties to 9/11 to invade and kill him when. This only demonstrates the motives behind our war in Iraq had nothing to do with Saddam having killed some of his own people. Thus, another excuse by people like you.

    An Informed Mind stated (based on scripture I provided): “Hosea 13:16 is not a verse saying God will personally do these things. It is a prophecy that would happen to Shalmaneser V. God is not saying that this is a good thing, but the result of the man’s actions. Consequences are a part of life and free choice.”

    Again, making excuses. I could post page after page of the evils done by and direct by God. If you don’t believe me, just ask and I will provide. But my posts are long enough without having to do such a thing. I have proven that according to your God, you have no life of free choice. Please reference the scriptures I have already provided. Let me provide a few more to ensure that you understand YOUR God makes it clear you don’t have a real “free choice”.

    ….for without ME YE CAN DO NOTHING” (John 15:5).

    “Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, [truly, truly—what Jesus is about to say is the Gospel Truth!] I say unto you, THE SON CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF…” (John 5:19).

    Even Jesus didn’t have the power to do anything except for his Father. Do you think you have free will or any other men have free will do to anything they want? Your God stated you don’t but then again, we have proven you don’t care what your God states unless it fits the doctrine taught of men or your own personal ends.

    “…has not the Potter [God] the right… to make… one [vessel] for DISHONOR?” (Rom. 9:19-25).

    I would guess that if God makes you to do something of dishonor or honor then you don’t have any choice to freely NOT do it. Do you have a scripture that says he is the potter and we are the clay and yet he doesn’t form us so we can do our own free will and not his? Do you? NO, YOU DON”T. You seriously need to read the Bible. After all, his is your Almighty Creator, the one that loves you so much that he sacrificed himself for you and all others, isn’t he. I would think if this was true, you would truly want to know this creator and know his word. What’s the problem?

    Yes, God did it and he:
    “The Lord has made…the WICKED for the day of EVIL” (Prov. 16:4).
    I guess he is the “potter” isn’t he? Does clay have free will to tell the creator how to form it? NO, absolutely NOT.

    “O Lord, why have You MADE us TO ERR from your ways…” (Isa. 63:17).

    Did you catch that? the Lord made us to ERR?

    “He [God] turned their heart to HATE His people…” (Psalm 105:25).

    Do you think this is free choice, free will of men? Seems to me it is all controlled by God.

    “…God shall send them strong DELUSION, that they should believe A LIE” (II Thes. 2:11).

    “For OF Him, and THROUGH Him, and TO Him, are ALL THINGS…” (Rom. 11:36).

    REALLY? You have free choice? Your God doesn’t seem to agree with you.

    “…shall there be EVIL in a city, and the Lord has not done it?” (Amos 3:6).

    No matter how you want to make excuses, according to your God he is the one that does it all and men can’t are his puppet, the clay….NO FREE WILL.

    An Informed Mind stated: “Delusional, I beg to differ. But that is what makes this a debate is it not? Have I not answered your every point with a counter point? Have I attacked you personally as you have me?”

    delusion: an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder

    Did you catch that?

    No, you have not answered my every point with a counter point. You have answered some with excuses that don’t holdup to facts. You have not provided evidence to support your claims or excuses and in this rather long post, I have demonstrated your true character. I don’t intend to attack you personally, I intend to attack your belief system that allows others to be killed and tortured and that promotes hate which divides America and the world. Just like the Muslim faith does exactly the same thing. My “attacks” are no less than I would make towards Muslims, Hitler, terrorist or any other group that excuses their crimes as somehow moral in the name of a God. All these groups should be “attacked” and exposed for sending others to die.

    Have you attacked me? Has not my explanation already provided an answer for this? Your kind have attacked America and the world. INNOCENT lives have been taken and humans have been tortured and all of it publicly demonstrated news media and boastfully supported and praised by Christian News Source Of Choice …FOX NEWS.

    Anyone that expect I should believe their claim of their version or versions of God based on NO evidence, attacks my intelligence and that of other non-believers. Especially when all the evidence demonstrates that your God is a lie, a copy of other Gods before him and his word is a copy of various stories from various religions before Christianity. That is an attack on human intelligence and common sense.

    I appreciate your sincere words about the loss of my brother and I believe you are sincere when speaking them.

    An Informed Mind stated: “But comparing Bush who cried when he honored the slain with Medals of Honor with Saddam who slayed more people than we have inn Iraq and Afghanistan combined is a falsity.”

    Bush cried and therefore he is Good or better than Saddam. Bush and his Christian Republican war has killed more than Saddam could have killed in several years. His war killed innocent people that were protecting their land from invasion just as we would protect ours. His war was for what he considered or pretended was a just and righteous cause but Saddam and their people believed what they did was just as well.

    Bush “I AM The DECIDER” is not different than Saddam the dictator. Spying on citizens, removing rights, sentenced without trial, lies, killing, capture and transportation of humans without due process, torture are all things Saddam would have done and did. It is not a falsity, it is fact. Tell me, what makes Bush better than Saddam or excuses his acts or that of his administration? Because he is American and Christian and on your side, he is therefore moral? He cried? I personally would cry if I sent innocent soldiers to their death. I would cry if I harmed an animal and have cried when accidentally killing a bird with the wind shield of my car. None of that makes us moral or better than anyone else.
    Your answers to my points are excuses and not answers.

    I will comment to the rest of your post in another reply here.

    If you would like more scriptures or even stories where I can additionally support that you have no free will, that all evil and acts of men are of God and follow his will then I can provide pages of such evidence.

    Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 7, 2009 at 11:12 PM

      1. Faith is not based solely on evidence or proof but rather through the conviction of the heart in matters. However, there is evidence that proves the Bible and the God therein. 1. Archaeology has determined the site of the tomb of Christ, and has shown that there is no evidence of bones. In the tombs of Muhammed, Buddha, Confucius are bones. 2. Archaeology and extra-Biblical accounts fit into and corroborate the Biblical view of history and prophecy.

      2. It seems to me that you excuse abortion and condemn God for flooding and killing the unborn. “Torture and killing of babies and the unborn child is NEVER excusable…” Disparity much?
      How do you know that there were unborn at this point, seeing how the population of the earth was still small at that time and there was a possibility that there were no unborn. Unlikely, but possible.

      3. I know nothing of the Scripture? Sir, I study Scripture often as I can. It is you, through head knowledge of the Scripture that you cannot reconcile your head with faith. Adam and Eve were told to not taste the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. God did not make them do it. It was through their own free will that they were tempted by Satan and fell. “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ncursed is the ground because of you.’ Genesis 3:17 ESV. Would God command something and then punish the first couple because they did what He was forcing them to do anyway? God clearly states here that they did what He ordered them not to do. Free will.

      4. Your I Corinthians quote is rather misleading. In that quote God is working THROUGH the gifts of the Spirit. You fail to mention this part: “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.” I Corinthians 12:6 ESV

      5. Again you are misleading with the intent of the passage. II Corinthians 5:18 is preceded by verse 17 which states, “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passsed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God…” II Corinthians 5:17-18 ESV. Your using this phrase to mean that all things, evil and good, are from God is disingenuous.

      6. A more reliable translation states ‘The One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these.’ NASB. Rah is translated in Hebrew as ‘evil, as well as 223 times as “wicked”, “bad”, “hurt”, “harm”, “ill”, “sorrow”, “mischief”, “displeased”, “adversity”, “affliction”, “trouble”, “calamity”, “grievous”, “misery”, and “trouble.” For a very good breakdown of ra in Hebrew see: http://www.carm.org/bible-difficulties/isaiah-malachi/does-god-create-evil

      7. The Bible says, “How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations! For you have said in your heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God… I will be like the Most High.” Isaiah 14:13-14 NKJV. Isaiah 54:16 states “I have created the spoiler to destroy.” NKJV. This speaks of the destroyer sent against those that obey God. The next verse states, “no weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed.” ESV. Therefore the while the action taken by the destroyer is to destroy, the end is good for them that obey Him.

      8. You will be happy to supply Scripture to prove Satan isn’t a fallen angel? I will prove you wrong: Satan in Hebrew means adversary. Adversary of whom? Since men willfully follow him, he is drawing people away from God. Therefore Satan is the adversary of God. Why would God create an adversary for Himself? God knew that Satan would rebel, but in His power and wisdom, He still created Satan knowing that men would have choice between good and evil and ultimately He would prove His love through dying for us on the cross and negating Satan’s influence once and for all.

      You want Scripture? Isaiah 14:12-14, Luke 10:18. If Satan were created evil by God, why would God cast him out of heaven? If God made Satan evil intentionally, why would he punish him by casting him from heaven?

      9. “The Lord has made all things for Himself, yea even the wicked for the day of evil.” Proverbs 16:4 KJV. In the above passage, the phrase, “things for Himself” takes us back to the Hebrew word maaneh, which means to answer to, or to give a reply to. What is being said in the first part of this verse is, “The Lord hath made all things to answer or give an account unto Him.” When put into context with 16:3 and 16:5, we see that this is a warning to commit your thoughts to God, lest you give a reply to God and He find you proud in heart and you be punished.

      Are you keeping up with me Truelogic? Are my refutations sufficient?

      10. Just because there is an appointed time for every purpose does not mean that God supports or sanctions everything that happens. Evidence: “…who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.” Romans 2:6-11 NASB. God punishes them that do wickedly, why then would He make them do wickedness?

      I am wicked because I supported Bush? Wow. How about you tell me how you really feel?

      11. His will will be done Truelogic. However, God’s will is that men be given free will to do as they please. However, with such freedom they must accept the consequences. He has given us His Word to prove and declare what is good and right that we might follow it. “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” Romans 6:1 ESV. This states that we have the choice to abide in sin or in Him. Free will. We are not forced to live in righteousness once we accept Him any more than we are forced into doing evil without Him. We naturally choose evil as a result of man’s fallen state.

      12. Of course God’s desires will be done. And in your semantics, you fail to see the truth. God’s desires WILL BE DONE. This implies a future state. If God forced His will on people, it would be God’s will is done. God’s will be done means that it will be done in the future. We have free will to choose now, but when Christ returns or we die first, that free will ends and judgment begins. “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for Him.” Hebrews 9:27 ESV.

      Nay, free will is involved in that you have the free will to reject God. Consequences are involved in everything in life. You have the free will to murder someone, but you will likely face the death penalty for it. You have the free will to steal a car, but you will be imprisoned for it.

      I have not been to Christian college nor have I studied Christian studies aside from my own personal time. Am I hanging with you?

      I do not accept the doctrines of men in that I reject abortion, gay marriage, and every other despicable act condemned by God in the Bible.

      I do not accept murdering innocent women and children. What makes people un-American is bashing the military for accidental deaths of women and children while failing to mention the terrorists that deliberately attack women and children.

      If YOU didn’t remember, America wasn’t around during the crusades. Your diatribe here is just completely out of the blue and factually incorrect. The Catholic church instituted the crusades, not Christianity in general. In fact, catholic popes of this time were in direct contradiction to the Bible and Christianity. I have stated in the past we have done wrong things in the past, I have also RIGHTFULLY stated that the New Testament teaches love whereas the Koran teaches hate. Read the Koran, heck, read even the verses I have quoted.

      The KKK and the Nazi Youth were demented, fanatics that had their own set of beliefs vastly divergent from the Bible. If they were to read the Bible they would see that the Jews were ‘the apple of God’s eye’.

      Comparing Bush to Hitler? Geez man, that’s a new low. Hitler spoke glowingly of Christianity because he thought Christians would stand with him to exterminate the Jews. You want a refutation of the whole “Hitler was a Christian” idea. Visit this site: http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Adolf_Hitler.html

      No, you are confusing the whole idea. It goes back to Romans 6:1. We still sin, but we do so through the weakness of the flesh rather than the want to do so. Hitler was a pagan madman who only flattered Christians to bring them into his camp. If he truly believed in Christ, his wickedness would not have occurred. Our sins are forgiven because we have come to God and accepted His righteous gift of forgiveness.

      Not true. There are Biblical boundaries on what we can do. No one would accept your arguments as right ones because you assume things that are simply not proven true. Assumptions are not fact.

      13. Again you take a verse out of context when you reference John 15:5. “I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.” Bearing fruit means witnessing to others and bringing them into the kingdom of God. This pertains to witnessing and sharing the Gospel, it has nothing to do with free will.

      14. Romans 9:19-25 does indeed say that. But you disregard the statement that God has made vessels for wrath to prove His mercy. It says, “…God…has endured with much patience vessels of wrath.” God has desired to show his mercy.

      15. God did not force his people to sin, but, in discipline, gave them over to the power of their sins. He allowed them to continue in sin that they might see the error of their ways and return to Him.

      A mental disorder? You really think I have a mental disorder? Gee, that’s tough. I guess I might as well check myself into the local asylum eh? Your beliefs no more make me delusional that my beliefs make you Christian.

      And by putting myself into the same category as Islamic terrorists, Hitler and other despots you prove that it is you who are delusional. I have not advocated violence against anyone. I have debated with thorough points every argument, yet I have not called for you to be beheaded. (Remember the Danish cartoon uproar?)

      Why do you keep insisting that Fox News is Christian? Simply because they provide both sides of the debate rather than suppressing the Christian view as MSNBC, CNN or other mainstream media do? I have watched the other channels because I pride myself on being informed from all sides. I have seen the worst examples of bias and propaganda coming from the other sources of news. So just because Fox has diverging views they are the ‘Christian News Source of Choice’? Whatever the heck that is supposed to mean.

      Bush crying is evidence that he has feelings. Something Saddam evidently did not have. The Medal of Honor parents were asked about Bush and they stated that he was very compassionate. Evidently you missed the MOH ceremonies that I saw, where Bush hugged the mother of a fallen soldier, a soldier who fell on a grenade to save his comrades. Did Saddam do this? Hitler?

      The Iraqis were not the ones killing us in the streets with IEDs. The Iraqis are the ones you see waving to Humvees as they drive by. If Iraqis largely opposed the war, how come they didn’t join with Saddam and push us out?

      Your arguments have used Scripture out of context, lambasting me for having not fully answered your questions, yet you don’t answer me mine. You assume and post your assumptions as facts. This is dishonest. I have not attacked you personally, yet you compare me and my beliefs to Hitler and Islamic Terrorists. Who then has argued effectively?

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      PS: If you continue to slander me personally, I will not respond. I do not mind debate as this post has proven, but if you slander me further, I will ignore your posts.

      Reply
  21. truelogic
    November 7, 2009 at 5:50 PM

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “There has been no proof that Bush avoided his duty. If you can show proof than I will accept it. But isn’t it about time that people get over what happened thirty years ago? What about Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky? How come we don’t bring that up? Because it isn’t relevant to the debate anymore.”

    There is evidence that Bush did avoid duty along with the influence of his family and his documented behavior but we don’t really need any of this to see the true character of the man.

    Since when do you care about proof? You show NO PROOF of your God you believe in but that doesn’t stop you.

    About Clinton, I think what he did was disgusting and I am glad he was exposed for it. If only those Christians Republicans that spent millions going after him for a lie about sex would care to spend the same to go after Bush for his war crimes, lies, torture, and sending more Americans to die without need. To the Christian Conservative it isn’t about the crime as much as it is to get those and punish those that disagree with them. Just like they believe their God will punish others that don’t believe like them..agree with their belief. Christians have a history of demonstrating their hate and desire to get revenge on others. Do you need more examples or do you already realize it?

    Bush is very relevant to the debate, demonstrating the character of religious types and their political party of choice.

    Of course I have heard of Canadians coming to get care in America and I have heard of Americans going into Canada for the same. What is your point? Of course I have heard of socialist care that has allowed others to die, just like Americans have died under our “free market” care system. Again, what is your point?

    Do you have proof that European health care coming to America will cause Many more Americans to die? How much is “Many”? Like I had stated, you make excuses. Like I had stated in my original comment the right has yet to show any of their claims are true and the FACT is that if we worked together in an honest manner for the cause of the people and America, we COULD and WOULD solve health care and it would be a socialistic type of system. To fight it and create lies on the right and inject their hate and fear is not helping solve the problem. 45 to 50 million Americans don’t have health care in America. Thousands die for lack of health insurance.

    I agree, the right has every right to call Obama what they want and the left has every right to call Bush what they want. It is called freedom of speech.
    However, as you have stated: “And if I’m correct, I believe at least four Obama officials have expressed their approval of Mao Tse Tung, who has killed over 80 million people.”
    This demonstrates the Rights Ability and Willingness to Deceive, Lie by implying something that isn’t true and thus make excuses for their behavior.

    Please provide the proof, like you stated wasn’t there for my comment on Bush. Provide the proof that these 4 people support Mao Tse Tung and that they didn’t in reality support a comment or a specific act or specific action of this man and NOT the man as a whole. I would like to see the proof because it appears you are being dishonest again and exposing your Christian ability to deceive and make claims without a shred of evidence to back it up. I know of NO leader in our government on the left that supports Mao Tse Tung for his overall acts.

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “The cost of the Iraq war is under 1 trillion. Health care will cost 2 trillion over ten years and send many to a premature grave.”

    I have not problem with accepting your lower number of 1 trillion dollars for the cost of the war in Iraq. That doesn’t excuse the fact that Christian Republicans support it and had no problem spending that trillion dollars to kill based on lies,..to murder, to cause suffering, to destroy freedoms and to torture. YET, they will not support the spending of a dime for health care reform.

    Your figure of 2 trillion dollars for health care reform is also an excuse and attempt to deceive. Recent reports have indicated it will cost less than a trillion dollars and most of it paid through savings and tax increases to those big companies that take advantage of the average American. In fact the impact to the deficit is approximately 239 billion dollars. Again, if you read and try to be honest then you might have a little more credibility. You side has been exposed time and time again for their ability to lie and deceive to get their way. To create anger, hate and fear to push your agenda. Christian Party, the one with morals are the ones that are the most immoral. The side we would expect to be like Christ seems to follow the character of Satan.

    WW1 and WW2 were not based on lies and they were fought based on facts, not claims, not excuses. They were just in their actions and Americans were sent into harms based on facts, proof, evidence….not what the war in Iraq was based on. You know it, I know it and I knew it from the VERY Beginning and I have stated so from the beginning. I don’t blame those wars on Christians nor for you to imply I am blaming it on Christians, is dishonest.

    An Informed Mind Stated:
    “Jesus never said “The Romans should take from the rich and give to the poor.” Jesus was not liberal, conservative, capitalist or socialist. He was the Son of God. He stated that a person giving out of his or her livelihood was more than a person giving out of his or her abundance. Clearly the intention here was charity, not taxes etc. Jesus valued the life of children and babies and didn’t like gay marriage either. Remember “Therefore, a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves unto his wife, and the two become one flesh.””

    What did Jesus say? Please, stop trying to excuse your behavior and the behavior of others and attempt to claim you truly follow Christ.

    You can claim the follow scriptures don’t apply to you and only apply to specific people but we all know the life of Jesus was a teaching. His actions were a teaching and the word apply to you, especially since you are a Christian and would claim to follow him.

    Seems that your God had his own tax:
    Leviticus 27:30
    A tithe of everything from the land, whether grain from the soil or fruit from the trees, belongs to the LORD.

    Matthew 5:42
    “Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.”

    Let me guess, you believe that all those starving, dying children around the world, that don’t have food, water, clothing, shelter, medication are not asking you personally for anything and therefore it doesn’t apply to you? Let me tell you, they are asking. I am ASKING you NOW to give to them, give them all you have so that they may live and learn the “love of Christ”. I am asking you NOW to show them that you truly believe that your Father above, your God will provide for you and thus proving that you truly believe in him and his word. Prove it!!! Go again, prove it. I PROMISE you that you WILL NOT.

    Matthew 19:21
    Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    Yes, you will make the excuse that it doesn’t apply to you. He was speaking to someone specifically and therefore this teaching doesn’t apply to you? Again, it would be an excuse. Why don’t you follow him? Don’t you believe he will provide for you like he has promised? The dying children NEED your help and I am ASKING you to give ALL, to include money and time to help them. Do as Jesus would have done. Jesus said that we should do as he has done. Prove me wrong, show us that you truly believe and follow this Christ or we can just consider that you are lying to us again. You are being dishonest. Prove it is not an excuse.

    Mark 10:21
    Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    Luke 6:30
    “Give to everyone that asketh thee; and from him that taketh away thy goods ask not again.”

    Luke 12:33
    “Sell your possessions and give to the poor.”

    Luke 14:33
    “Any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.”

    Mark 10:25
    “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

    What do you think Jesus would consider a rich person? Maybe anyone that had more than what he had in worldly possessions when he was on earth? That would be logical and reasonable to assume. What about anyone that has a home, a car or two, a house full of abundance of food, technologies, heat, cooling, clean water…etc. Compared to the child that is dying right now for lack of such things, Jesus would likely consider your RICH. Yeah, in your opinion you are not rich or this scripture doesn’t apply to you.

    DO you realize that it is IMPOSSIBLE to put a camel through the eye of a needle? Therefore, it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to enter into heaven. Those are the words of your God.

    Luke 6:24-25
    “But woe unto you that are rich! For ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep.”

    Matthew 6:19,20 (NIV)
    “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.”

    Matthew 6:26,27 (NIV)
    “Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?”

    An Informed Mind, are you going to tell us it doesn’t apply to you or other Conservative Christians? Go ahead, make your excuses.

    Tell me An Informed Mind….Should you worry about taxes for helping others? Should you have a 401 k or other retirement account or savings? Do you know care what your Christ is teaching through his words and through his example, his witness? You continue to make excuses and I continue to expose your “answers” as excuses, attempts to deceive and demonstrate you are just dishonest and delusional.

    Matthew 6:28-31 (NIV)
    “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?'”

    Matthew 6:34 (NIV)
    “Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”

    An Informed Mind Stated:
    “I have compassion. My compassion is shown in not wanting anyone to have to suffer through a European, government run health care system run by people who apparently think twenty somethings are more important to society than 80 year olds. (See Ezekiel Emanuel)”

    Again, another excuse. Please PROVE that more will suffer under a system like they have in Denmark? Really, prove it. Prove why we shouldn’t try something else because 45 to 50 million in our country don’t even have basic health coverage. I recently read a story and watched a video of a Girl that was around 23 years old. She didn’t have insurance and because it is PROVEN that those without insurance are charged as much as 5 times the amount for treatment than a covered person, she didn’t go to the hospital for her flu. The next day, her friend found her dead from swine flu. That would NOT have happened in Denmark. If someone is sick, they don’t have to fear what it would cost and take the risk.

    Can you provide your evidence to support that anyone thinks 20 somethings are of more value than 80 year olds? Or is this another excuse so you can feel better about making such immoral decisions? I know of NO one that would want to allow a 20 year old or an 80 year old to suffer. I know of NO one of any moral character that would let it happen or fight against it. Like I stated, we design the system and if we do it right, like they have done in Denmark, we will design it to help everyone. Conservatives hated medicare and medicad which is a MUST for our seniors and the Conservative Christians fought against this “liberal” attack to help our old, including our 80 year olds. So really, provide your evidence that liberals suddenly want to throw grandma and grandpa under the bus. You continue to make excuses and not backup your comments.

    Notice, I give examples and explain my points. I provide evidence to backup my claims. YOU just claim things and then make excuses for things and sometimes use your claims as an excuse. Absurd and intellectually dishonest!!

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “I disagree with anyone shouting down someone based on their opposing viewpoints. America is based upon civil discourse. And those examples you listed are wrong. The people were caught up in the moment and said wrong things. I do stand for the less fortunate because the poor will suffer some of the most in a socialist health care system in that them without connections to big government will wait for months to get life saving surgeries that are needed now.”

    Did you not watch Fox News Coverage of the events? Their praise of the acts, the encouragement of those acts, their excuses for shouting down others? That is right, the Conservatives on Fox News and Fox News personalities would have attacked and demonized those on the left for doing it while Bush was in office. In fact, they did. Yet, they have taken it all to a new level of disgust and in their hypocritical style, are not praise their side for doing it. If they were honest, they would be against it no matter what side committed the act. This is recorded and proven on video. If you want the video links, I will be happy to look for them and provide them. Some of them can be found on my blog as well.

    Again, you make a claim about the poor and that they will suffer. Yet you don’t provide the proof, the evidence that suggest it would happen. FACT is, if the Christians cared and worked with the left to make a great reform package, NONE of that would happen and there would be no fear for it. Instead, ALL the parts of the bill that is currently before us that do not provide what it should, is primarily the result of Conservative influence. Look at the Conservatives bill that they have proposed. Notice how it leaves millions out in the cold. Clearly, your side isn’t concerned with those millions that are each a possible death story tomorrow.

    An Informed Mind states:
    “The cost alone does not constitute my biggest fear. I don’t want Americans dying in the waiting rooms because of the long wait times associated with government care. You state that we can make universal care great. With 300 million people we could not keep it running. The post office is broke and we can’t find a way to fix it, do you want the government that broke the postal service running health care?”

    I happen to travel the world. YES, the world. I have lived in three countries, not including America. In a communist country that I lived in I witnessed the very poor and very sick in need of care and even surgery we taken care of by the COMMUNIST government. Even I, an American Citizen with health insurance didn’t even need it in this communist country unless I went to a foreign type of medical business. Having a large network of friends in Canada and speaking of them specifically about this topic, they have provided no horror stories or example of anyone that dying because they had to wait for the government care. Each and everyone of them love the system thy are in and can’t understand why we would want our system.

    I recently witnessed several individuals in the emergency room in America in GREAT pain, screaming and crying, while they waited for treatment. I personally took my wife for a scheduled appointment at the doctor and waiting 1.5 hours after her scheduled time. I complained and they made an excuse and I explained to them that I and my wife would NEVER come back again. They didn’t seem to care.

    Again, you are making excuses and your only desire is the same as the rest of the conservative right, to see Obama fail. It eats you up to think a liberal cares so much and wants to help others. It eats the conservative party up to think that Obama will help and do what he stated he would do. It eats many of them up that a Black Man is president and that he is very intelligent and loves his country and the people of America and they are afraid everyone will see it to be true. It eats them up that after not even a year, Obama has been busting his ass to make real impact and change. He has done more work in a few months than Bush did in years. Bush took more days of vacation than ANY other president in their first term and then we were attacked on 9/11.

    An Informed Man stated:
    “Jesus never condemned the Romans for being wealthy. If we go broke, we can’t take care of the world anyway. Remember, the U.S. is the world’s leading charitable giver. Whenever a tsunami hits, our aircraft carriers are never far behind. When an earthquake happens, our aid is some of the first to arrive. If we go broke, a lot of the world will be hurt because of it.”

    I think I have provided the quotes from Jesus with his position on being rich and what he clearly taught in words and example. You can make an excuse and pretend he didn’t but you know I have provided his exact words. Twist them how ever you need. If we go broke? If you have faith in God then why worry about going broke? Why don’t you pray to God and ask him to fix all this, ensure America doesn’t go broke. Ask “ANYTHING in his name and it will be given unto you”. Where is your faith? While you are at it, ask him to end all world suffering and hunger. Go ahead, I promise you that when I come back here to look for your replies, all those kids will still be dying of hunger. I promise you.

    Yes, we are one of the most charitable givers to help others. Why not focus on America more. Help America to create a much stronger and moral nation that is more able to provide for future issues? Instead, you think we should just let our fellow Americans suffer? What is your point?

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “The poor are never turned away. Emergency rooms are open to everyone regardless of their ability to pay. The percentile of people without health insurance in the 50s was higher than now and health care was much better back then. Why the disparity?”

    No, the poor are not typically turned away but if you are honest, you know that sometimes they are and sometimes they are dumped. If you are “informed” you would have known this. I will assume you are not informed and didn’t bother to research the statement. I will assume you are not attempting to be dishonest again in order to make excuses for your excuse. Like I stated and like has been proven and reported, those without health insurance are charged as much as FIVE (that 5) times the rate for care as those that are covered with insurance. Imagine, the already outrageous cost multiplies by as much as 5 times that amount. Like i stated, some people just avoid the doctor because of this and like has been proven, they DIE. Because people like you are against health care reform with public option to protect against it. Families have lost their homes, their life savings because of this. They get reported for bad credit and their lives are destroyed.

    I have an idea, since the Conservatives are so much against it, why not take all that tax exempt money they earn in the multi billion dollar religious church income and pay for those that need health care. Jesus would support such a charitable act. That way it will not create new taxes and cause all the problems you seem to think will arrive. Let those that follow Jesus Christ give their share of health care to those in need. The ones that believe in the power of Jesus Christ with all their heart can be healed by Jesus Christ. Tell me, why is that not a good plan? All you need is enough faith that is the size of a Mustard Seed….(that is very, very tiny). What do you think? The churches can give a millions a year from their contributions, they can open up their churches to the public for health care treatment, and the homeless. they can take their churches online and show their witness for christ in working directly in the church to help the uninsured and homeless. The rest of the Christian can give their portion of health care money and just pray to God to be healed for their sickness. Then as your great and mighty, selfless acts prove to others that Jesus is real, our need for health care will all shift to Christ. This would leave much more money to the country to help others. Tell me, why is this not an option?

    Why the disparity? from the 50’s to now? Do you know about Big Business? Do you understand what the flow of information does to educate everyone? Not exactly sure what you are attempting to say or excuse but if you bothered to backup your statements and explain them, LIKE I DO, then I would be glad to provide more of a reply.

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “Oh so you know about my economic situation eh? I am unemployed, receiving nothing from the government. I have put in applications in every business I can find surrounding me. At least ten places. (It’s a small town) I have a car, but it is shared by five people. I have no cell phone. I have no savings and no retirement. What about you?”

    No, I don’t know much about your economic status but I know about the average conservative christian that is against health care. Did you receive anything from the government for your unemployment? Or did you refuse it? Can you tell me this is all true in the name of Jesus Christ? Forgive me for not completely believing your statements but you have shown your credibility is questionable. You have NO savings, No retirement? How do you eat, pay for your home, your bills? Do you have a home phone? You need a phone for contact for jobs interviews. You have computer? An internet connection? If you use the library, then it is a government, socialist service…I guess we should get rid of that and medicare and medicaid and such…right? Lets get rid so social security. I hope you find a job and I truly hope everything comes together for you. I would even work to help you find a job if I could.

    I have two homeless friends living in my home now. I know what it is like to be without a job and insurance. I would never wish it on anyone. Do you have medicare or medicaid? I assume you plan to take your social security if you aren’t already doing so. if you don’t have medical coverage then you should realize that it takes only a minor issue to destroy you financially and you could lose your home, your car and credit rating. I have a job and thanks to the recovery plan/stimulus created by Obama, our business is growing rapidly. We have just put out job posting for 20 more individuals and we are a small company..very small.

    FACT is, if your God is real and truly cares and has compassion, love, then your Father God will provide and answer your prayers. If you truly believe he is real, that is his promise to you. You can even specify when it happens and what you do. I am not a religious person and not really a believer in karma but I know I have worked most of my life to help others and have successfully helped more than I could easily count. Maybe it is why I am fortunate. however, I realize that at any moment, what I have can be taken away. Lack of health insurance does it to many each year and the numbers are greater than ever. I would like to know that my children and myself are protected from the devastating outcome that the inability to pay for insurance or lack of insurance can cause. I don’t think you have true compassion for those that are suffering now.

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “Pathetic eh? Well I guess that hurts. Nah, I’ve been demonized by liberals before. My kind? Christians have helped tear down walls between groups of people. Billy Graham tore down barriers between blacks and whites in his crusades. Christians have not always been for the right things I admit, but that does not give you the right to demonize an entire group of people based on religion.”

    I didn’t intend it to hurt you or anyone. I don’t intend to demonize you either. I am not a liberal any more than I am a conservative. I am an independent voter, I am against abortion and I own guns for protection and sport. I do not hunt and would never harm an animal. I believe in less government and accountability. I used to be a republican voter until Bush came along. The decision was easy and Bush was clearly an idiot. The same feeling I get when listening to Sarah Palin….a clown and a liar.

    Billy Graham????? Rev. Billy Graham was heard telling President Richard Nixon that Jews had a “stranglehold” on the American media, which needed to be broken because it was ruining the country.

    “You believe that?” asked Nixon.

    “Yes, sir,” replied Mr. Graham.

    “Oh boy. So do I,” said Nixon, adding, “I can’t ever say that but I believe it.”

    “No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something,” Mr. Graham said in a reassuring tone.

    Like the KKK and the Nazi groups, Billy Graham had a hate for Jews. Do you realize there are even more comments by Graham that came out after these? After he apologized for it and attempted to excuse it. Excuses are part of religion and facts, evidence, proof are not valued. Only claims. The church as a whole and religion has a whole has caused more death and harm than good. Read your history. I would guess that if the truth came out, Graham had plenty of comments against blacks, it would support the profile of those that hate jews. I’ll need to research him to find out.

    Not only do I have a right to demonize a group that stands for making excuses and promotes lies as facts, I won that freedom because American soldiers fought and died to give me that freedom in wars that were not based on lies. Look at the history of the christians as a group. look at the history of religion as a group. the numbers of death, killing, suffering, torture, murder are an overwhelming case to prove it isn’t moral. Watch Fox News, watch the hate, the fear the lies spread to divide America. Watch the hypocrisy. All those practices are dishonest. I know many Christians as humans that are good people. But they still support the group and those are the things that lead to wars like Iraq. Innocent death in the name of God.

    An Informed Mind stated:
    “Obama may be working his a** off, but it is to the detriment of the country. We need less government, not more. The truth is, liberals whine and complain about us attacking Obama when they did the exact same thing to Bush. Conservatives hypocrites? Look in the mirror.”

    To the detriment of the country? He has been in office only months and you make your judgment? It took Bush 8 years to completely destroy our economy, our jobs, our moral status, our deficit. 8 Years and conservatives still praise him for all that. The obvious hate you have for Obama is demonstrated by your inability to even give him a year to try and improve things. That is the problem, the hate is working to harm America more. you prove it in your comments.

    There is a huge difference in attacking Bush and Obama. Obama has only started. Before Obama got into office, Fox News and the conservatives started attacking, creating lies in an attempt to do what they do best, deceive. want a war, they can lie to get you one. want obama to be a muslim, a non citizen, a communist, a marxist…whatever, they will and try to make him into one. want him to be a terrorist, then they will claim imply he is. I didn’t see that happen to Bush in his first year. After 9/11 I saw america come together and try to support him. As time passed, the lies kept building up. I guess we have a right to call him on his lies. Now, if you want to call Obama on his lies, and I think he has some as well, then go ahead, but the childish attacks just because one sides hates and wants him to fail..that is pathetic and dishonest and immoral. In the name of Christ, Conservatives behave like this. I would expect better. Proving Christ aint all you guys claim him to be.

    An Informed Mind stated:
    Liberals deny some of the most basic teachings of Jesus, such as life is precious, yet conservatives get demonized? How can you attack me for my faith or my supposed dereliction of it when you don’t accept it but have a presupposed bias against it?

    I am sure some liberals deny some of the most basic teachings of Jesus. I have proven here to you that YOU ignore them. That conservatives ignore them. Agnostics and atheist liberals don’t claim to follow him so I don’t expect them to give a shit about what he stated. We happen to realize the importance of morals and thus we were against the war in iraq ad the torture. Your side wasn’t so concerned with the precious lives of our American soldiers or the muslim children killed in your war. I think if you claim to be moral and then support immoral acts, you should be demonized. I was demonized by Christians for speaking out against war and torture. Talk about not looking in the mirror, that is pure hypocrisy.

    I can attack you and your kind for your clear disregard for your God’s word. I have proven here with scripture how you couldn’t care less or even believe in the words of your christ. I am not the one that claims he is real. I am the one that voted against war, against bush, against torture and asked that we expose the lies. Conservatives voted for the lies, the torture the war, the excuses, the killing and the trillion of dollars spent to do it all.

    I would say that proves I have every right. If I kill your loved ones because I think they are going to do something but I have not solid evidence to prove it, should I be praised? give me a break.

    Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 7, 2009 at 11:54 PM

      You sir have proven nothing. Instead you have twisted my words, twisted the meaning of Scripture and have claimed I disregard Scripture with NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE SO. I do not presume to attempt a guess at your morality, nor do I attack your beliefs. But you have do so nonstop since my first refutation.

      I have stated that I do not condone torture. I do not condone murder of innocents. I do not condone abortion, gay marriage, terrorism etc. However, I do not buy into your lies that because innocents died that the war is immoral etc. In EVERY WAR since the beginning of time innocent people have died. That does not invalidate the necessity of WWI or WWII.

      You state earlier that you did not attack me. Yet in the second from final paragraph of your inordinately long diatribe, you state ‘I can attack you and your kind for you clear disregard for your God’s word.’ You have an apparent penchant for impugning a man’s honor without knowing anything about the man. Reading a post on a blog does not make you an expert on a man’s morals or situation. Which is why I have not attacked your character despite your constant attacking of me.

      Conservatism doesn’t hate Obama. We hate his ideology which according to you, allows you to attack me and ‘my kind’ but we can’t do the same for Obama? You mention it took Bush 8 years to ruin the economy and we already blame Obama. Yes we do, and we do it because he has already tripled the deficit. This is serious business. You can stick your head in the sand or you can come to your senses and realize that if we don’t stop spending, our country is going to be bankrupt by the end of Obama’s fourth year.

      You don’t think that I care about those suffering now? I left my church because they weren’t doing enough to help the community. Once again you assume with no facts to back up your assumptions. You can slander without basis, you can attack without cause.

      I’m glad to hear that you are helping out your friends. No I do not receive Medicare or Medicaid. No I do not take Social Security as I am far below the age of 65. I know that financial ruin can come upon someone if a major injury or disease strikes. My family and I are one major catastrophe from losing our home. However, we also know that universal health care is wrong and most likely will bankrupt the country.

      I cannot debate with someone who won’t debate without attacking me. Attacking someone’s beliefs is not debate. I have debated with you without attacking yours. If you attack me anymore I won’t respond. I respect YOUR beliefs, but if you don’t respect mine, I can not and will not debate you any further.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 12:42 PM

        show me the quote where i have twisted your word? show me how I have twisted scripture? prove it!! I continue to expose your as having done so. I continue to expose your logic as being nothing but excuses and lies.

        Prove your statements. I do. you again make claims because you feel threaten, and exposed as a liar.

        I have the right to attack you, verbally and anyone that lies. it is not attended to be an “attack” but an exposing of the truth. the truth about you. so use the terms how you wish.

        The fact that you spend your time blogging, are here, using you worldly things is proof that you are NOTHING like Jesus and you ignore his words and teaching. you do want and couldn’t care less for his actually teachings.

        No, you hate anyone that doesn’t agree with your lies and attempts to deceive. your entire organizations lies to children and then creates fear in their impressionable minds of what will come to them if they don’t believe like you. that is sick, that is vile and that demonstrates what it is so easy for you to excuse torture and lies for war. fact and you don’t like it.

        You don’t KNOW health care is wrong and you don’t know it will bankrupt out country. if we did it right it will NOT. but you don’t care, clearly, you don’t even debate it. you just claim.

        I don’t have a belief and to claim I do is yet another lie. you are welcome to attack my “belief” all you want. in a true debate, we should have the freedom to debate it all and not be restricted about what we debate. you dont’ want the debate to include your religion because I clearly know scripture and can run circles around you in discussing it. I can give you the meaning of words in their proper greek and hebrew text. i can give examples, and evidence to support my points.

        i don’t doubt you want to avoid it but don’t lie for the reasons why.

  22. truelogic
    November 8, 2009 at 12:33 PM

    An Informed Mind:
    I wish that your kind could look in the mirror, learn to be objective. Learn to be honest with yourselves because you would then learn what Jesus was attempting to teach.

    I have shown that you contradict scripture and that your logic isn’t holding up. It is so easy to do because you are not honest with yourself and I doubt you have been for many years.

    There are people suffering, Americans. The compassion of Christ would have helped and you deny this and make excuses and claim scripture is against taxing or helping as a government. Yet your side states we have our problems because we don’t have God in our government. You twist everything to support your agenda. God wants us to have his name in government and stop abortion but he doesn’t want it to help others that are poor and suffering?

    If you look at your previous statements, you stated the bible or god doesn’t tell us to help others as a government but it is for private or individuals to do. Therefore, I assume only individuals should be concerned with abortion? Only private charities should be concerned with abortion.

    Based on your logic Government should get involved when you want it to and not when liberals or those that oppose your view want? In your logic, the Government and Laws should not be just, objective and fair. They should slant to your sides point of view? This is what you state in your words and clearly you don’t think it through.

    You would be wise to push your logic in a conservative blog because they are not going to challenge you, expose your or speak the truth to you. they are happy to just agree.

    Like I stated, it is so easy to expose those that live a lie, that practice to deceive. Your lies are harming others. Your choice is harming others. But it makes you happy so that is all you care.

    look in the mirror, truly look. Then explain all this to your Jesus and tell him he believes just like you believe.

    My bet is that you don’t truly believe in Jesus or you wouldn’t be claiming all you claim, excusing all you excuse and twisting his word to fit your agenda.

    Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 8, 2009 at 2:31 PM

      Government should get involved based upon the Constitution. The Constitution makes the government responsible to protect lives and the country from enemies foreign and domestic. It does not say that the government is to give health care or any other material good to people. Our country is great because we earn what we have, we do not have government give it to us.

      My lies? What lies? You are the one who has lied as you have taken Scriptures out of context, putting only the verse you want read rather than showing the true context by the surrounding verses. I have broken them down in a post that is still awaiting moderation.

      It is very hard to follow your posts seeing you don’t take it upon yourself to use proper grammar or sentence structure. However, you claim that I am a liar without basis or fact. Do you know me? Have you met me?

      I have refuted your claims, yet you do not wish to see that you’re assumptions are based in bias and fallacious rumors that you have construed without any firsthand knowledge of the person. The Bible is in complete harmony with what I say. You are twisting the words of someone you don’t even believe in to fit your agenda. You are trying to find contradictions in the Bible to try and make yourself feel better by degrading someone else. Why do you insist on attacking me and calling me liar when you yourself are a liar by taking His words out of context? Did you even read my post? Have you comprehended it?

      Since we are obviously getting nowhere with convincing the other of our positions, I will cease to debate you. Clearly the debate is becoming about character assassination and I will respond no longer.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • sleepygirl
        November 8, 2009 at 2:55 PM

        Informed said: The Constitution makes the government responsible to protect lives and the country from enemies foreign and domestic. It does not say that the government is to give health care or any other material good to people.

        To me, those two sentences contradict one another. The government is responsible for protecting lives, but that doesn’t include providing health care? People who can’t afford health care, all 44 million of them, do not have access to the kind of preventative care that can save their lives. They can’t afford the cancer treatments that keep them alive. How is the government protecting the lives of Americans if it’s not keeping them healthy? And how is health care a “material good”?

      • An Informed Mind
        November 8, 2009 at 3:47 PM

        Health care, in the form of insurance, which is what everyone is pushing, is a service that is bought, sold etc. It is basically similar to every other service. Back in the early days of the country, there was no insurance and doctors were better at giving people one on one time. Why? Because the government didn’t have so much control over health care as it does now.

        The Constitution says that basically ‘rights not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states and for the people.’ Therefore if the states want universal health care, they can do so. However, the federal government is responsible only for keeping the people safe from enemies and fraud. The people bear the responsibility of keeping themselves healthy.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      • Moe
        November 8, 2009 at 3:54 PM

        I was going to stay away, but this one just knocked the breath right out of me:

        Informed says:
        [Back in the early days of the country, there was no insurance and doctors were better at giving people one on one time. ]

        Right. And life expectancy was around 44. And when you got sick they bled you. Much better.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 8, 2009 at 5:09 PM

        Did you read anywhere in my statement that ‘health care was better?’ No, I said doctors were better at one on one care. Meaning they came to your house and treated you without the government hassling them. That doesn’t mean the life expectancy or anything was better. However, the basic premise of my post is the same. When government gets out of way, enterprise takes over and health care improves.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

  23. The Arbourist
    November 8, 2009 at 5:33 PM

    “When government gets out of way, enterprise takes over and health care improves.”

    Wow, dogmatic to the point of obtuseness in Religion and Politics. What a potently ignorant combo. And yes, this is not an argument, it is an observation.

    I would respond to your arguments, but you have time and again obfuscated, evaded or cried foul about all the nasty people calling you on your opinion.

    You are not here for debate, you’re trolling. Now run along back to your happy places where people and things make sense for you without having to think about or rationally defend your position.

    Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 8, 2009 at 6:32 PM

      On the contrary Arbourist, you are the one who is a troll as you have not brought anything to the debate but degrading remarks and trying to outsmart someone with your self-supposing intelligent words.

      I have defended my position. You liberals do not want to admit it. You think that because you have a liberal blog author you are backed up and can force conservatives out so you can rely on your fellow libs to lament the ‘vast right wing’ conspiracy to down Obama. Not an argument, an observation.

      Well since people here do not think rationally, rather in terms of hate and degrading others, I guess there is no point in me trying to debate. You idiots whined and moaned about ‘the decline of civil discourse’ when Joe Wilson called Obama a liar, yet you think that yourselves, as ‘higher thinkers’ can call a man a liar with no knowledge of the man. It proves how two-faced liberals actually are. Not an argument, an observation.

      As someone once said, “Opinions are like armpits, everyone has them and they all stink.” It seems to me that while I can accept liberal opinions as just that, you people want to make my opinion into me being a liar, as obfuscating or trolling. You can take your own liberal allies’ opinions yet you cannot tolerate someone with a different opinion than your own. Just as I wrote in Liberalism and Communism. I guess libs and commies are actually even closer than I thought. You people can’t stand the idea of freedom of thought. Go through my arguments. Have I attacked anyone? Go through your own and truelogic’s. Uh-huh. Can you open your eyes long enough to see the difference? Not an argument, an observation.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • An Informed Mind
        November 8, 2009 at 6:55 PM

        Also, prove me wrong. What has government done that they have done better than private companies? Name one thing. I’ll wait. And don’t give me any garbage about Medicare! Medicare’s broke! Bankrupt! We have a $100,000,000,000,000+ in unfunded liabilities. In case you can’t comprehend that, we have promised to pay for 100 trillion dollars worth of goods. We have no way to pay for that. We, as a country, produce 15 trillion dollars a year in goods and services. How are we going to pay for the deficit let alone this new idiotic health care bill?

        You liberals’ ‘arguments’ are simply whiny posts about how I’m ‘just evading’ and ‘obfuscating’. Debate. Prove me wrong with facts, not garbage about how I’m not showing any facts. I have shown facts. I’ve shown how truelogic twists Scripture by pulling a verse out and ignoring the surrounding verses. Show your own facts and I’ll show mine to refute you. Government has done NOTHING as well as private companies because if the government doesn’t do something up to snuff, you can’t dump them like you can dump companies in a free market.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

        PS: The tone in this debate is getting us nowhere and no one is convincing anyone of their points. This has developed into a free for all. I admit that I have part of the blame. Anyone care to commit to not attacking others’ belief systems and instead attack the issues?

      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 7:26 PM

        As you can see in my replies to your comments, you have nothing but excuses and claims. It seems that health care thing has passed the house and is on the way to the senate so seems the people at this moment don’t agree with your statements.

        Maybe you wouldn’t appear to be a liar if you backed up your statements. You claim so much about the bible and yet you get it all wrong. You think you know more about the bible than liberals and yet you can’t debate scripture with an agnostic.

        You claim to be a Christian and if you follow Jesus then why you are here blogging all the time. Do you think Jesus would do it? Jesus would be out doing something about it, helping those that need help. pathetic and it will require you to provide another excuse.

        you have some nerve to ask others to prove something when you have yet proven your claims.

      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 7:34 PM

        It is interesting how you want to state that since the government hasn’t done anything better than private companies that therefore, it could never work. However, like i stated, they do a great job in Denmark. You seem to think it is impossible? No, the truth is that you don’t want it to work so you attack it as all wrong.

        Again, you tell others to debate and prove you wrong. Funny, I said that to you long ago, many times. I even promised you that you wouldn’t prove me wrong on a few things. So why haven’t you taken that challenge? Oh, you want to turn my comments around and apply them to others? Try to be original.

        I will go look but I didn’t notice how you have shown how i twist scripture. Did you address all my scriptures? Let me go look and see how honest you are.

        Maybe you are upset that your Bible tells us that ALL men are saved. Oh, you don’t want anyone to know about that, do you. Oh..i guess i am twisting it again? what a joke.

        Let me tell you something about the debate. I have been very successful in providing the arguments against your religion to teenagers that have been taught to believe only your God is true. Not only do they learn, they spread the word. that is why one day this country will be free of the chains of your God and all Gods. notice the number of believers declining? like denmark, one day america will be free of religion. maybe that is why denmark can take care of their people, they don’t have some selfish God.

      • An Informed Mind
        November 8, 2009 at 7:45 PM

        Truelogic: I can debate an agnostic, yet I cannot do it when the agnostic takes the verse he is using out of context and won’t admit it. I have proven it by using the verses surrounding the verse you cherry-pick to prove your point. You have used at least three verses out of context while ignoring the surrounding verses that prove a totally different point than what you are intending. Dishonesty in its worst form.

        Also, why am I blogging on here? I blog because I can’t exactly walk the 10+ miles to go to the nearest town. I blog because informing people is helping people. Informing people to the dangers of Valueless Liberalism is helping people avoid falling into the trap of government aid.

        Once again I say, if you would debate Scripture honestly by providing context and the surrounding verses that actually prove your ideas wrong, than I would be able to debate you. You twist the passages to fit your idea of Christ and God and Christianity. Every honest person knows that surrounding verses prove the meaning of the passage one quotes. However it is clear that you are not an honest person and therefore find nothing wrong in misleading people. You are therefore pathetic.

        Lastly, the Senate passed the bill by 5 votes. 220-215 would hardly be indicative of the people’s voices. Besides, the bill has no chance on the Senate floor. In the words of Lindsey Graham, the house bill is ‘dead on arrival’.

        An Informed Mind
        http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

  24. truelogic
    November 8, 2009 at 7:52 PM

    Ok, you all! You are not going to believe it but I just went to check on the comment that An Informed Mind made: ” I’ve shown how truelogic twists Scripture by pulling a verse out and ignoring the surrounding verses.”

    I didn’t count the number of scriptures I provided for my comments but there were several. Scripture after scripture supporting the others. Now, if you take it in context and know the entire bible from end to end then you can see what I have stated is true.

    An Informed Mind has lied again. He has worked to deceive and hasn’t proven anything and yet he is demanding others to prove their comments?

    An Informed Mind is unable to debate, unable to discuss the very clear points that I have provided.

    His God put Obama in place and he wants to tell his God that it was wrong. That what Obama is doing is wrong?

    “Romans 13:1-7: Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”

    An Informed Mind is bringing judgement upon himself. He should be obeying Obama’s wishes, helping him to pass health care. Clearly God wanted it and multiple scriptures show us that Obama would not be in power if not for God.

    “yet ALL is of God”, “God is operating all in all” God “appointed a time for every matter and every event”. God is the potter? the list is never ending.

    An Informed Mind has been exposed. But hey, he has a mission. He follows God? That is why he spends his time here blogging. He must believe that is what Jesus would be doing.

    FACT is Mr. Informed, you just want to make claims. You have been taught to make claims all your life and excuses with respect to your God. NONE of the claims you make about your God can be proven, so you make excuses to cover it up. Then you carry that over into the world of reality. You seem to think it works with educated minds. You are fooling yourself.

    I would guess if you learn to be honest to yourself, your life would turn around. If you learned to care about others instead of yourself, things would get better for you. I am not superstitious like you but it seems to work in my life. Or it could be that I spent several years in school to obtain a few degrees and work my butt off to get where I am.

    Reply
    • An Informed Mind
      November 8, 2009 at 8:05 PM

      It is increasingly clear that this post is turning into something far from debate into downright attack mode. As every other conservative seems to get into his/her brain, this thread has devolved into a liberal pep rally. Contrary to you ‘enlightened liberals’ I have not been taught to assume something without any knowledge. It appears to me that your degrees have inflated your ego to where you think you can assume something about someone without any information and then be automatically right. Congratulations, you chased away another ‘uninformed conservative’. Eventually you will see that attacking everyone that opposes you drives away respect and leaves you without any opposing views until you are completely uniformed, as you already appear to be.

      You want to deceive yourselves into thinking that the government can provide health care, have at it. I’ll leave you to your praising Obama. While you sing praises to Obama like the masses to ‘Our Dear Leader’ Kim Jung Il I’ll stand with the majority of Americans and oppose his radical, anti-American plans for us.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      PS: This will be my last post in this forum.

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 8:21 PM

        They always run when the truth gets exposed. An Informed Mind has been told by his God to basically respect Obama. So he needs to run now….he can’t face it, i guess.

        Why is it that those that claim to be of the party of morals never seem to have morals to match the party that is more likely to not believe?

    • An Informed Mind
      November 8, 2009 at 8:32 PM

      Since this debate is going nowhere and I cannot get a word in edgewise, I will cease from commenting on this forum. Whereas other forums have respectable who, though having diverging views, can respect their opposition enough to not attack without cause, this one thrives on personal attacks, insults, derogatory remarks and baseless accusations. I shall no longer comment on this forum. I wish all well and hope that you enjoy many blessings in the holiday season.

      Cheer for yourselves liberals, you have chased another conservative from your hallowed ground. Wallow in your victory oh progressives for you have won. However your victory will be short-lived. Health care will die in the Senate and your liberal congresspeople will fall in 2010 bringing America back to her Constitutional founding of limited government and free people. Enjoy your chains of ignorance to the Constitution and enmity to your fellow man. Whereas conservatives have allowed and promoted free thought, liberals such as yourselves have constrained it through personal attacks and character assassinations. I will speak on here no more, forever.

      An Informed Mind
      http://aninformedmind.wordpress.com

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 8:56 PM

        An Informed Mind is not fooling anyone. I have Christian Republicans say the same thing all the time on my blog. I see them make excuses and put the blame on others for why they are going to stop commenting. When in fact, they leave because the truth is exposed. The truth is that they have realized they are wrong. Instead of doing the right things and making changes within, they want to run away and go another place where their lies will not be so completely picked apart by others.

        peace all

      • Ben Hoffman
        November 8, 2009 at 10:09 PM

        [I will speak on here no more, forever.]

        Good. I won’t have to monitor comments as closely without you here. This blog welcomes all opinions but personal attacks are prohibited. You have a long history of violating that rule.

        Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

      • Moe
        November 9, 2009 at 8:48 AM

        Informed says:

        [Since this debate is going nowhere and I cannot get a word in edgewise . . . .]

        You have posted 54 times in this thread.

  25. truelogic
    November 8, 2009 at 8:07 PM

    An Informed Mind doesn’t like Scripture, I guess.

    Exodus 22:28
    “Do not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people.”

    Romans 13:1-3
    “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. ”

    Informed Mind, did God “appoint a time for every matter and every event”? Or do you have a scripture that states he appointed only some things?

    Is “Yet ALL of God” or did he intend to say Yet NOT all is of God.

    Is “God operating all in all” or did he intend to say God is NOT operating all in all.

    Why is it that Jesus said he can do NOTHING but for the father and Jesus told others they could do NOTHING but for the father but you think you can or others can? Do you have power that Jesus didn’t have?

    I guess you don’t believe God is the potter that formed his clay Obama? He only forms the clays you approve of, or what?

    “For OF Him, and THROUGH Him, and TO Him, are ALL THINGS…” (Rom. 11:36).

    I just figured out what you were implying when you stated you proved I twisted scripture. You are speaking of Hosea 13:13. I guess you are attempting to say God had nothing to do with it. But if you read all the scriptures I have posted, “yet ALL is of God”.

    I am happy to provide a very, very, very long list of things God does which are evil.

    “You shall be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake…” (Isa. 29:6).

    Floods:
    “And with the blast of Thy [God’s] nostrils the waters were gathered together [Heb: ‘piled up’], the floods stood upright as an heap [Heb: ‘mound, a wave’ as in the tsunami quake which caused a huge wave!], and the depths [Heb: ‘an abyss (as a surging mass of water), especially the deep (the main sea or the subterranean water-supply), Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary] were congealed in the heart of the sea” (Exodus 15:8).

    Plagues and Diease:
    “Moreover He will bring upon you all the diseases of Egypt, which you were afraid of and they shall cleave unto you. Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of the law, them will the Lord bring upon you, until you be destroyed” (Deut. 28:60-61)

    “The LORD shall smite you with a consumption, and with a fever, and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall pursue you until you perish” (Deut. 28:22).

    Poverty:

    “The LORD makes poor…” (I Sam. 2:7).

    “The rich and poor meet together: the Lord is the maker of all” (Prov. 22:2).

    Famine:
    “Moreover He [God] called for a famine upon the land: He broke the whole staff of bread” (Psalm 105:16).

    “And I [God] will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, till they be consumed from the land…” (Jer. 24:10).

    Afflictions:

    “…the Lord has testified against me, and the Almighty has afflicted [Heb: ‘to make good for nothing’] me” (Ruth 1:21).

    “And the Lord rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them [Heb: ‘hurt and weakened’]” (II Kings 17:20).

    Killing with the Sword:
    “I [God] will consume them by the sword…” (Jer. 14:12).

    “I [God] will scatter them also among the heathen, whom neither they nor their father have known: and I will send a sword after them, till I have consumed them” (Jer. 9:16).

    Do you want more? Lets debate if you really want to debate. I happen to be able to backup my statements but you claim us liberals don’t. I have noticed many others provide their evidence in support of their claims. So be specific and please answer what I have asked, provide the logic that proves I am wrong. If you are going to demand others do it, you should be able to do the same.

    It would be better if you were a true witness for the lord and instead of blogging, actually go out and help others. spend that time helping others. did you notice you avoid answering many of my questions. you answer only those you want and can make excuses for. you don’t provide answers to others because I will wipe the floor with your lies.

    Reply
  26. truelogic
    November 8, 2009 at 8:18 PM

    I know you can’t accept this but think about it.

    I had a brother that had to go to Iraq because the Conservatives created lies, sold lies and had help from Fox News to push the lies. I had a brother that was against the war and he was in it. He said it was a lie and of course many of us knew this. Obama knew it. Because people like you insisted that you were right. My brother is gone. My best friend is gone. Thanks to your kind. You religious types that want to make excuses for all those things that are clearly immoral.

    Now, there are people that have lost their children and people that WILL lose their children because people like you, again, don’t want health care reform. The party of NO wants to tell everyone else how they can live, what they can have, what they can and can’t do in their personal lives. So again, people like you will be responsible for those that die.

    You aren’t even willing to try. You just claim it will fail. I can’t imagine you getting a job with someone with such an attitude. You give up without trying. Without finding answers to problems. There is always another way. I have learned that when I was child. When presented with a problem, I always found an answer… a way around.

    I have never hired someone that makes excuses. I have hired many Christian conservatives and will continue to hire people that are right for the job. I would never hire someone that makes excuses for their own failures or for why they can’t do something or why something will not work. We need solutions. We have a BIG problem. 405 to 50 million Americans are in need.

    You claim the government shouldn’t get involved but when we go help others with billions in other countries, you brag about it and imply we can’t stop and shouldn’t.

    You make far too many mistakes in your comments, far too many contradictions to be credible. It is clear that you have an agenda and that it is likely that you are a hater, or a racist. I have found many people are just racists on the conservative side. I get emails from conservatives all the time, the ones that don’t know I am an independent and voted for obama. the racist remarks, jokes are never ending. the driving force seems to be hate and racism.

    I feel sorry for you. I really do.

    Reply
    • sleepygirl
      November 8, 2009 at 9:28 PM

      truelogic,

      I’m so sorry about the loss of your brother and your friend. You’ll definitely be in my thoughts this Veteran’s Day.

      I also agree with you that there still seems to be a lot of hate and racism in the far right. But instead of hiding from it and denying that it’s there, the conservatives need to just deal with it.

      Reply
      • truelogic
        November 8, 2009 at 10:21 PM

        I don’t want to mislead anyone. My best friend that I lost was my brother and I appreciate your comments. Unlike what An Informed Mind stated, I don’t have my dislike for republicans or conservatives for these reasons. It is the great hypocrisy we witness from those typically in that group. I was a republican when and voted for ronald. over time through personal growth i started to realize that taking a stand for one side or the other didn’t make sense. what made sense to me was to support what was true, good, moral. if the conservatives were supporting that cause and the liberals weren’t, then I would be speaking out more against the other side.

        I can say that i am not completely happy with Obama either. I have a feeling he is a bit weak in some areas and not standing strong against those that would just rather see him fail. democrats seem to have this problem often. maybe they are more willing to try and work things out than the other side…i don’t know. however, i have to stop and remind myself that Obama hasn’t even been in office a year yet. I voted for him and i owe him a chance to do something. i see he is trying so lets hope he pulls it off.

        imagine, if he does succeed, WOW. to take the mess he was handed by bush and change it all around…wow. I surely want him to succeed. I wanted Bush to succeed but didn’t vote for him. I didn’t want bush to succeed in selling a war or excuse torture but i did hope for him to do what was right. after all, he is a christian. But then again, I have to remember hitler was as well. so words from men never really mean much if they don’t back it up.

        I watch Fox News because I like to observe just how much hate is pushed and then how the public picks it up. i enjoy taking their claims and seeing how it fits with logic or how much of it is a lie or attempt to not tell the entire story. it is a shame that our “news” organizations can get away with some of the things they do.

        Christians often come to my blog and instead of debate, they make a comment, maybe call a name or two and claim I am wrong. but they never debate it. if they do debate it, they twist scripture or facts about other things to fit their agenda. i don’t get it as that never leads to the truth.

        if we look at scriptures, then i can show clearly that god is not going to actually burn anyone for an eternity or their flesh. i can prove that god (according to scripture) will save all men.
        i am not sure why christians need to feel people are going to be punished for eternity. i honestly makes them feel special to others. they don’t want to feel we are all the same. i don’t know but i enjoy discussing it with them.

        why are you called sleepygirl. are you always sleepy? i love to sleep in the morning..haha. never want to get up. but have hard time getting to bed, i just love to read or do other things.

        peace

      • sleepygirl
        November 9, 2009 at 1:53 AM

        truelogic,

        You have an interesting point of view, having gone through an inner journey like you have. I’ve always been a liberal, and most likely always will be. I’ve been interested in politics since I was a child, and though my opinions are constantly shifting as I see more and more of the world, I’ve always been a member of the “loony left”. 🙂

        But, like you, there are many areas in which I feel Obama has been weak. I think he tries to hard to be everybody’s friend, and he needs to stand firm on issues like health care reform. I voted to change when I voted for him last fall, and so far I haven’t seen much of it. But I still believe in him and am convinced he’s generally doing a good job, with even better days to come. I agree with his policies (most of them, as he’s against gay marriage and I’m very much for it) and I know he’s going to do a great job. I wanted Bush to succeed, too, even though I thought he was an idiot and he did things that made me furious, but he was our president and I respected the office. Too many conservatives are throwing respect out the window with Obama, and to be honest, it’s alarming. I don’t know if it’s anger for being voted out of office (that’s what my boyfriend thinks) or if it’s racism, or even something else.

        Why am I called sleepygirl? Well, my blog is called In the Wee Hours, since I’m quite often up extremely late at night, sometimes all night, and it’s exhausting. I am indeed very often sleepy. I’m a night owl, and it’s very hard for me to get up in the mornings, which is OK for now since I’m an online university student, but once I re-enter the working world my late-night blogging may have to suffer a bit. LOL!

    • truelogic
      November 8, 2009 at 10:24 PM

      ooops, my comment should have stated 40 to 50 million. not 405 to 50..haha.

      Reply
    • Moe
      November 9, 2009 at 8:51 AM

      Sorry True – your pain must be deep.

      Reply
  27. The Arbourist
    November 8, 2009 at 11:09 PM

    Thanks for hosting this interesting thread Mr.Hoffman. It was informative and entertaining on several levels.

    Cheers.

    Reply
  28. emirates careers
    February 1, 2014 at 6:04 AM

    Hello to all, it’s really a good for me to pay a visit this web page,
    it contains priceless Information.

    Reply
  29. government Mortgage assistance
    February 18, 2014 at 8:58 AM

    To submit the full application, detailed information about your circumstances will probably
    be needed by the lender. For example, your lender
    might not be convinced that your business idea is solid enough
    to bring in a very profit. Refinancing options will also be
    available along with this loan.

    Reply
  30. CB
    February 24, 2014 at 11:41 AM

    I watch Fox News because I like to observe just how much hate is pushed and then [blah blah blah]

    Fox News has nothing on the level of hate here on this blog.

    Reply
  31. Gloria
    March 8, 2014 at 8:18 PM

    Howdy are using WordPress for your blog platform? I’m new to the blog world but I’m trying to get started and set up my own.

    Do you require any html coding expertise to make
    your own blog? Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Reply
    • CB
      April 23, 2014 at 12:39 PM

      No, HTML expertise is NOT required. Blog software is just like any other off-the-shelf pre-written software — it just requires configuration, not programming knowledge, to set it up. Your service provider can probably help. There are lots of packaged solutions out there.

      Reply
  32. www.youtube.com
    March 26, 2014 at 7:33 PM

    Wow, incredible blog layout! How long have you been blogging for?
    you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your website
    is fantastic, let alone the content!

    Reply
  33. Cheap Canoes
    October 5, 2014 at 1:45 PM

    I read this post completely concerning the difference of most up-to-date and preceding technologies, it’s remarkable article.

    Reply

Trackbacks

    

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: