Liberals and Abortion

I'm only this far and have to say that I wholeheartedly agree!

 

I also agree with this. Man I'm complex.

 

I guess that depends on the method and what your belief is on when life begins.

For example, BC pills, IUDs and such can cause a fetilized egg to be lost. Is that an abortion or does life begin at or after implantation?

 

I disagree, Brother Jim. His was an act of disobedience, not murder.

 

Agreed.

I'll also add that as a Mother of a special need's child, I'm beyond words! My child deserves life as much as any other child. I'm glad I didn't listen to the Drs because not only did they not truly KNOW what they were talking about, but also, I would have missed out on THE most wonderful child!

I'm glad I also disregarded the "wisdom" of the Drs when the next child was in the womb. They suggested I abort "just in case". He's a wonderful little boy and how the world would have missed out!

 

Oh, I agree some birth control methods can be abortion, but my point was both phrases are not synomynous.

 

apologies, I forgot I posted here...

Fair enough...you are correct here. I'm willing to admit where I am wrong.

There is a lot on the current President-elect's plate for the "first act" upon his arrival in the Oval Office. I checked some news wires and he hasn't said what his first act is going to be or what significant legislation he is going to sign into law.

As for the "Freedom of Choice Act," it is going to be awfully hard for President-elect Obama to sign a bill that hasn't even made it out of committee yet. While President-elect Obama has (over a year and a half ago) pledged to sign it isn't near ready for that pledge to be sincere. Honestly I think you're assessment is wrong here.

Only if you get a dictionary for:

hehe...oh and I believe President-elect Obama's proper name is "Barack Obama." Not B. Hussein Obama.

Well I'm not a Democrat. I find the two party system limiting and rather against the founders' vision for our country.

I can deal with excuses, I hear them all day long. President Bush (the first one) had plenty of opportunity to aid the course of pro-life agenda but chose to ignore it and continue to pursue an agenda of passivity against the agenda. During President Clinton's term the Republicans saw fit to overturn an attempt at nationalizing health care but couldn't get it together for a pro-life cause. Probably because much of the Republican Congressional leadership doesn't care much for purusing a vibrant pro-life agenda.

I am thankful for the support that current President Bush has shown in supporting a vibrant pro-life agenda. Now if we can only get that agenda to include the promise of life for everyone.

I think the law has been okay in result but we're talking about 2% of all abortions. I'm more interested in what we can do to stem the tide of abortions from the first two trimesters. That is where the vast majority occur and the vast majority are convenience.

Btw, has anybody checked up about the new initiative from Faith in Public Life that seeks to join the efforts of evangelicals from across the political spectrum for engaging issues of sexuality and life. Check it out here:
http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/

 

Some don't. I don't. Neither does Obama.

 

For the purposes of this inauguration he does.

 

The question was whether he calls himself Barack Obama or Hussein Obama. To my knowledge he goes by Barack. If you're saying that he'll be sworn in by his full name, not just first or middle, you're right.

 

You all know I don't care for Obama...

But he should be proud of his middle name.. I am proud of mine, and no one should be ashamed of their name...

 

FINALLY, Tim...something we agree on! :thumbs:

 

But do you and others call you by your middle name? That was the question here.

 

Did Reagan walk on water?

 

You've got a point there. I was not a believer when Reagan was president and never understood why Christians adored him so much (still don't).

His wife, however, did us astrologers a huge favor when it came out she used an astrologer. I was interviewed by the Atlanta Journal/Constitution because of this (the reporter told me it was because of the Nancy Reagan thing) because I was chairperson of the Atlanta Board of Astrology Examiners at the time. Had my photo in the paper, too. So we were happy about her!

 

You've got a point there. I was not a believer when Reagan was president and never understood why Christians adored him so much (still don't).

His wife, however, did us astrologers a huge favor when it came out she used an astrologer. I was interviewed by the Atlanta Journal/Constitution because of this (the reporter told me it was because of the Nancy Reagan thing) because I was chairperson of the Atlanta Board of Astrology Examiners at the time. Had my photo in the paper, too. So we were happy about her!

 

You've got a point there. I was not a believer when Reagan was president and never understood why Christians adored him so much (still don't).

His wife, however, did us astrologers a huge favor when it came out she used an astrologer. I was interviewed by the Atlanta Journal/Constitution because of this (the reporter told me it was because of the Nancy Reagan thing) because I was chairperson of the Atlanta Board of Astrology Examiners at the time. Had my photo in the paper, too. So we were happy about her!