the Abbot Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 Im not voting for Bush. Im voting for Peroutka and the Constitution party [url="http://www.peroutka2004.com/"]http://www.peroutka2004.com/[/url]
StColette Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 I would rather see Bush in the office again then Kerry any day
cmotherofpirl Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 As far as I as concerned there is only one presidental candidate. Kerry is automatically disqualified because he believes in child murder.
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 25 2004, 06:13 PM'] As far as I as concerned there is only one presidental candidate. Kerry is automatically disqualified because he believes in child murder. [/quote] AMEN CMOM! Kerry is a baby killer!!! he is going to allow abortion if he gets elected.... :irate: how can he sleep at nite......knowing its wrong....
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 [quote name='the Abbot' date='Jul 25 2004, 06:15 PM'] Is there any reason yall dont like Peroutka? [/quote] there is no way im going to have my vote have a [i]chance[/i] of helping Kerry be in office by voting for a third party...... no way no how :shame:
the Abbot Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 As long as people think that way the democrats and republicans will continue to tear this country down. But I understand specificaly with this election there is no way a 3rd party will win, but I have to vote my conscious and that means I cant vote for Bush or Kerry.
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 25, 2004 Posted July 25, 2004 our party is run by the two-parties and until then (when its very likely to make a bigger difference otherwise, right now its not) im going to stop them from gaining anything from me. but this election....kerry isn't giong to get a boost from me! im going to do my best to keep him out of office.....so he doesn't spread his pro-choice and liberal errors to our country and others......its criticial, society as we know it is on the verge of going complete flip-flop...... i dotn want gay marriages nor abortion progressing..... so im gonna try and stomp it out..... so....Bush 2004!
Iacobus Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='curtins' date='Jul 25 2004, 04:11 PM'] hey you just stop there because we're STILLL feeling the effects of the Reagan economic policy. bush rules- period [/quote] They layoffs? Moreover, if you don't support Kerry because he supports abortion why do you support Reagan when the rate of abortions (reported to the CDC) increased under him?
Iacobus Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='Phikoz' date='Jul 25 2004, 04:22 PM'] start with abortion, and everything will follow. [/quote] Thats a heresy called gradulism (sp?). You can't stop sins one at a time or ween off them. You need to try your darnedess to stop them all and stop them now.
Aloysius Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 that's not a heresy on the governmental law level, but on the personal path to holiness level, if i'm not mistaken the rate of abortions is not directly connected to who is presiden. i don't buy the theory that Clinton caused less abortions. also: abortion must be made illegal. it is the duty of the state to make it illegal, and until it makes it illegal our government will be an evil institution that supports the murder of babies, regardless of whether abortion rates go up or down. we need to work to make the laws in line with morality. the illegalization of abortion (which is working step by step with imperfect legislation and cutting of federal funds) will cut down on abortion rates a TON more than any democrat social program.
Iacobus Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 25 2004, 09:11 PM'] the rate of abortions is not directly connected to who is presiden. i don't buy the theory that Clinton caused less abortions. also: abortion must be made illegal. it is the duty of the state to make it illegal, and until it makes it illegal our government will be an evil institution that supports the murder of babies, regardless of whether abortion rates go up or down. we need to work to make the laws in line with morality. the illegalization of abortion (which is working step by step with imperfect legislation and cutting of federal funds) will cut down on abortion rates a TON more than any democrat social program. [/quote] I beg to differ on the effects of an out right ban of abortion. But I shaln't agure that byond this, don't treat the body chills, treat the illness, it works much better. So if nothing Clinton did had a decreasing effect on abortion, I am free for vote for John Kerry who better reps the Church outside of abortion, because abortion is purly a social trend.
BurkeFan Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 25 2004, 10:14 PM'] I beg to differ on the effects of an out right ban of abortion. But I shaln't agure that byond this, don't treat the body chills, treat the illness, it works much better. So if nothing Clinton did had a decreasing effect on abortion, I am free for vote for John Kerry who better reps the Church outside of abortion, because abortion is purly a social trend. [/quote] don't forget embryonic stem cell research, among other things
Iacobus Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 Well Bush supports "limited" (LOL That is like dumb) embryonic stem cell. Hmm instead of kill 100 babies I shall only kill 50. Please.
Thy Geekdom Come Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 26 2004, 12:24 AM'] Well Bush supports "limited" (LOL That is like dumb) embryonic stem cell. Hmm instead of kill 100 babies I shall only kill 50. Please. [/quote] Iacobus, the numbers are much different from your example. I don't support any embyronic stem cell research, but you must keep in mind that Bush at the very least has stopped any further lines from being created. He's not completely pro-life, but he's more pro-life than Kerry by far, and he is building a foundation which can be expanded upon by more pro-life presidents in years to come.
Iacobus Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 Micah that is abusrd. I mean what if he applied that logic to all life issues. There are 1 million abortions in the US a year. Seeing as it is pre existing I won't do anything about it except limit it to 1 million abortions a year. There are X existing lines of emb. stem cells. You can kill all you want in those lines but you can't make others. That is not prolife. That is being poltical. You can't be kinda pro life. There aren't degrees to prolifeness. You are or you aren't. Bush is showing that he isn't with his stem cell polices.
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Jul 26 2004, 07:40 AM'] Iacobus, the numbers are much different from your example. I don't support any embyronic stem cell research, but you must keep in mind that Bush at the very least has stopped any further lines from being created. He's not completely pro-life, but he's more pro-life than Kerry by far, and he is building a foundation which can be expanded upon by more pro-life presidents in years to come. [/quote] agreed. [quote]You know... the more I think on that. The more I think I could vote for Kerry and feel good about it.[/quote] thats just wrong...there is no way anyone should be encourging a vote for a pro-choice candidate..... the Church says that abortion is the MOST important issue if you do not abide by that you are giong against what She teaches...... please dont undermine what the Church has instructed upon this matter..... who cares what party the vote goes for.....what matters that it doesn't go to one that will spread abortion and its evilness and error like a plague here and to other nations........... just like voting for any pro-death candidate will do..... ps. and in europe....their population is dying out....and it can't be fixed....their in trouble..... pax.
1337 k4th0l1x0r Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 About the whole abortion rate going down during Clinton's presidency... Just because two events happen simultaneously doesn't mean they're related. For example, my height hasn't increased since W got elected, but it increased during the Clinton, HW Bush, and Reagan years. Does this mean that W is the cause of my lack of vertical growth? No! The real reason I stopped growing is because I left puberty. We should find the real reason stuff happens besides who the president is. Second, just because fewer abortions were 'performed' doesn't mean there were fewer aborted babies. Abortions caused by the pill are just as much abortions as abortions from surgery.
Aloysius Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 previously created embryos are allowed to be used for study. you just cannot create more embryos for the sake of study. that's completely different than saying a million abortions per year. if they said you can create and study x amount of embryos per year, that'd be the same. but those which are dead anyway being allowed to be used is simply because we can't go into the past and make them not die.
Phikoz Posted July 26, 2004 Posted July 26, 2004 democratic convention is almost underway, blah. i heard that in John Kerry's acceptence speech on thursday for the democratic presidential canidate [b]he will quote scripture.[/b] sickening
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now