Rick Perry wants to force wacko religious morals on everyone

This thread is a continuation of the last. This time providing a link to the article.

 

I actually agree with Perry on Abortion, for different reasons though.

 

It looks like a good program to me.

 

Why do you assume you have a different reason to oppose abortion than Rick Perry?

I oppose abortion because every human being is a child of God with an inalienable right to life which no government has the right to take away.

I assume that that is Rick Perry's reason to oppose abortion and yours.

Your allies on the left are murderers. Why do you take common cause with their kind?

 

I oppose abortion not just for the reason above, but because I actually oppose killing anyone, unlike the neo-con Rick Perry.

How can all on the left be murderers? That is an incredibly gross generalization. I am a Leftist because I believe in a compassionate government, a loving government, one that gives its people a good education, health-care and homes, one that helps the suffering of the world, one that strives to be a humanitarian power, and follow the path of Christ.

The GOP and Dems are hypocrites, they claim to be Christians and pro-life but they were happy to invade Iraq. Democratic and Republican administrations have backed murderous regimes across the world, toppling democratic governments in the process. both parties cave to corporations and refuse to tax the rich. I do not seek a theocracy, it is just that my Christian views are in line with almost every other code.

America is dominated by misinformation about the left, and the common people eat it up. There are many Christian leftists across the globe, we are not evil.

If you want more info message me.

 

I completely understand you because I am Catholic and if it weren't for abortion I might be a liberal myself.

But I can't overlook this one glaring fact -- the Democratic party and liberals in general, with a few exceptions, have no problem with abortion.

It makes no sense to me that the people who claim that they are "compassionate" at all have no compassion at all for the smallest and most innocent among us, the unborn child.

I have to believe that everything liberals say about themselves is a lie. They do not care about the poor, they do not care about the working class, they do not care about minorities, they do not care about anything except gaining the votes of the poor and working class and minorities in order to grab power for themselves.

And look at the poisonous effects liberal policies have. We now have millions of Americans who aren't working and yet receive government assistance for not working. These people are idle and their children become gang bangers, drug dealers and drug addicts.

The Catholic Church gave me a lifetime of feeling guilty because I have a home to live in and food to eat. But when you translate this guilt into voting for Democrats, you actually HARM the poor rather than helping them.

Before the days of the government run welfare state, the Catholic Church ran its own version of the welfare state, but it was run efficiently and without paperwork and most importantly with LOVE.

The Democrats and the liberals have no LOVE for anyone. People who LOVE cannot sanction the killing of unborn children. And you should not take common cause with people who do not know how to LOVE.

 

So you support your election rights to senators being stripped away? You support federal constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage and abortion? You support giving congress the power to ignore the supreme court? Hows that small government working out.

 

Where does it say you can't be a leftist (i avoid the term "liberal") if you are against abortion? I believe in unborn rights AND women's rights. I must work with those who support abortion rights to advance the causes we agree on, but that does not mean allowing them to implement one of the policies we disagree on. I don't believe all who support abortion rights do not love. I believe they are misguided.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8z_MtjADYU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8z_MtjADYU[/ame]

 

::
Again,since Obama SUCKS,more attacks to make him look good,when in fact hes pathetic.
Guess what?Even after posting this thread,Obama still SUCKs
Even after the next thread you Libs post,he will still SUCK.
Real talk

 

We know you hate Obama, that's all I ever hear from you though. Why not focus on policy or political philosophy rather than your endless stream of the same old stuff?

 

Well, a true conservative does not support a massive change to the status quo, only those in really small directions. If Perry is saying he would support those policies if it were somehow possible to do them soon, then Perry would by definition no longer be a conservative.

This is something that bugs me. Anyone who calls themselves a conservative and then supports drastic change is no longer a conservative. They are something else. It seems as though you could call them radicals (in the sense that they want to make major changes, not as a partisan charge). For example, a balanced budget amendment would be a drastic change, as would banning same-sex marriage on the federal level. This could also be applied to liberalism, which originally meant very minimal government. Now it has come to mean the government taking an active role in the lives of its citizens. Maybe we need to rearrange the words we have for different stances.

Here is an interesting quote. "Politically, philosophical conservatives are cautious in tampering with forms of political behavior and institutions and they are especially skeptical of whole scale reforms; they err on the side of tradition, but not for tradition’s sake, but from a skeptical view of our human ability to redesign whole ranges of social values that have evolved over and adapted to many generations; detrimental values will, conservatives reason, fall into disuses of their own accord." So for all of the Republicans out there who call themselves conservatives and then support massive changes in our society, such as repealing constitutional amendments or declaring that abortion should be illegal, please think twice before using the term. As a "liberal" I will think twice before using THAT term to refer to my own political beliefs.

 

how are his wacko morals worse than the wacko morals the left has been pushing on us for the last 50 years?

 

BINGO!!!
but it is not immoral to the Left to tear a fetus to shreds though.

 

Not at all...Besides who are you to judge anyone. Religion doesn't count.

 

Has nothing to do with religion.

Not sure how I feel about his idea. I'd have to think hard about.

Has nothing to do with religion.

Not sure how I feel about his idea. I'd have to think hard about it.

Has nothing to do with religion.

Awesome idea! Totally support this.

Has nothing to do with religion.

Another awesome idea. Totally support this.

Has nothing to do with religion.

Yet another awesome idea. Keep 'em coming, Rick.

Do not agree. But at least he's going through the proper legal and democratic channels, i.e., the Amendment process.

Do not agree, but at least he's going through the proper legal and democratic channels.

All in all, a pretty solid proposal. I especially like his reliance on the Amendment process.

 

Except he's advocating them via the Amendment process, which is necessarily a slow process steeped in tradition. Please try again.

 

Fact is hes an idiot extremist who has zero chance of ever becoming president. Nobody will ever vote for a religious nut like him. Except maybe the idiots in Texas.

 

He sounds like a Super George Bush.

I kind of agree with a few issues he has. Like the Supreme Court stuff. But for somewhat different reasons and with different motivations. It's true that the checks and balances is a little bit weak against the Supreme Court. They barely have any checks.

 

I find it really hard to believe that you are not a democrat just because of the abortion issue.

IF that were true, you would be spending time trying to change the opinions of those in the conservative party of everything but the abortion issue. Also their are a lot of liberals that don't believe in abortion. You also don't seem to understand the concept that liberals have, because you attribute not carring for an unborn child proves that don't really care about anyone. That's simply not true in any way.

The pro-choice crowd doesn't like abortion either, but they are coming from a place of compassion, not mallice. We see a life from a different starting point as well. We don't believe that life is about weather an orginism has a heartbeat or not. Life is about loving, and the people around you. Sharing experiences and memories. Life should be meaningful. If someone is suffering in a vegative state, and they are in constant pain, is it wrong to terminate their life. You may say yes, but the compassionate liberal says no, the suffering is not worth the living. Most pro-choice people also believe that until the baby is actually born, it is the mothers choice to do with her body what she feels is necesary. Abortion should not be used as birth control, but in cases of rape or incest, and cases where the baby has no chance to live a fulfilling life, I support the choice of the mother to make that decision.

I'm not going to argue past the point that I made, so don't bother trying to get in a debate with me over this. The point is liberals see abortion as the compassionate thing to do even if you dont' understand why that is the belief. I will ignore any response to this thread because I'm more intrested in arguing positions that have a chance for rational debate. I see both sides on this issue as having rational and understandable views. Arguments have no chance to be resolved on this topic so I refuse to debate it. I just thought it would be important to share the perspective.

 

I'm making this a sperate reply because I wanted to seperate it from the post above that I said I will not respond too.

We want full employment with equal oppurtunity for all. That's our main goal. EQUAL OPPURTUNITY. Wellfare is not supposed to be a way of life, unfortunately what has ended up happening is the republicans have widdled away the programs so much that they have become inefficent at achieving their goals and a lot of people end up on the vicious cycle of wellfare. First of all, a lot of people on wellfare work, many two jobs, many working more than 50 hours a week. Second problem is in many cases wellfare actually pays better than working. Why is this happening? It shouldn't be more benneficial to be on wellfare then to work, but that is the way the programs have been written to appease republicans who want to make sure as few as people possible bennefit from the programs.

Here's how it should work, and this is what democrats are trying to get passed, but these measures are constantly being blocked by republicans. All people in this country recieve a minimum standard of living, the standard of living is based on what is considered acceptable by the genral perception of what Americans have access too, not how much better off or poor person is in America as compared with a poor person in central Africa. A family should have enough money for a telephone, cable tv, a refrigerator, a microwave, electricty, clean water, healthcare, nutritional food and a reasonable place to live that is safe and healthy.

Let's say for a single person living in San Jose, CA, that number is $20,000. A good way to handle the wellfare condition would be a reverse income tax simular to the Earned Income tax Credit. If we just gave everyone in this country a base of $20,000 that would be a good start. Now, if someone get's a job and works, they can add to that and pay 10% tax on everything they make for the first $100,000. After reaching $50,000 they are essentially reaching the point where they are paying into the system rather than collecting from the system. Then we place a marginal income tax on income between $100,000 and $250,000 at 25%. Between $250,000 and $1,000,000 there is a marginal tax rate of 35%. Over $1,000,000 there is a marginal tax of 55%. This would incentivize finding a job, for those on welfare, because they actually earn substantially more by working. It also creates a system that is fair for everyone, because everyone is paying the same income tax on the portion that the earn up to that specific amount. My numbers may not be perfect, but a policy simular to this is actually what Democrats want to employ. Republicans are doing everything they can to keep welfare the way it is, or dismantle it completely. Who really hates the poor if this is the policies that democrats have been trying to get through for a while now.

One of the biggest problems is Wallstreets control of both partys though. Wallstreet doesn't like those high taxes because that is where all the big money is. Those people don't care about America, and we need to get their influence out of American politics. Oh yeah, with the tax system above we can also afford medicare for all. Helping more disadvantaged people.

 

It's because they 'think' that they won't go down, when the masses do. They really ought to re-think that notion.

Again, many who are greedy, refuse to believe the actual/literal will of the "people" can/will affect them. It's sad... they screw people hard for long periods of time, then sit back all comfy, expecting POSITIVE outcomes; it is almost laughable.

 

I know many Demcorats and Liberals who very much hate or dislike abortion, and many do everything they can to try to prevent it.

However, they also do not feel that making a woman's control of her own body ILLEGAL is either a proper role of government, nor that it is CONSTITUTIONAL (hence the decision in Roe v. Wade, making it unconstitutional to make abortion illegal before the fetur is viable to live outside the mother.

The Right Wing and the Conservatives have no LOVE for anyone! People who LOVE cannot sanction the abandonment of children and old people, of the disabled and sick, while we concurrently spend trillions destroying life around the world.

 

More hypocrisy from a progressive liberal (the most intolerant people on earth unless of course you agree with them)....it's just fine for you to judge though, right????

This statement reminds me of what has been said recently from that liberal freak show that is gloria Steinem...that somehow Palin and bachmann are a disgrace to women's rights. The hypocrisy of a liberal is quite evident to everyone except the liberal. A woman in Congress running for President of the United States, and a woman governor who was a former running mate of someone running for president....wouldn't someone who is suppose to be a champion for women's rights think that this is the epitome of what it was they were fighting for? Of course not, because if that woman is not spuing the same idiology as a liberal than they are a disgrace and a piece of dog (*)(*)(*)(*) who should be ridiculed at every opportunity.

You are doing the same thing here...Perry does not have your view therefore you are allowed to judge...but if he was to have your view than he is a saint.

 

Have you ever considered that, if progressives wouldn't vilify everything remotely religious (Christian that is, since Muslims get a free pass), Christians wouldn't have to be on the defensive all the time?
Tolerance goes both ways. You can't expect none if you are not willing to practice it.

 

Actually, no one I know really hates Obama.

They just wish he would stay at his work station long enough to come up with a credible and workable plan to solve our lingering economic problems.




Mr. President, 408,000 more Americas are out of work this week than last week and our core inflation rate has unexpectedly risen to 2.0%. Why are you going on vacation? Please, please stay in Washington and work on our economy!