kelpdiver 2 #51 December 9, 2009 Quote You can't say "Keep your laws off my body" about abortion, and then turn around and pass a law requiring people to fund it. So should we put every line item in health care up to a vote? Stomach stapling? orthopedic surgery? (you can always wear a cast for the next 9 months) IVF and other alternative methods of conception? (we have children to adopt) Physical Therapy? .... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #52 December 9, 2009 Nope. But we should put abortion up there. It is a unique issue. Let's not pretend that it is "just another medical procedure". Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #53 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhile at the same time tolerating or facilitating the use of tax dollars to fund an elective act that Group B considers to be a moral outrage (elective wars). Article I, section 2. Do you mean Article 2? But in any event, I wasn't referring to legalities, for Roe v. Wade deemed abortion lawful, too. I'm referring to people's ethical objections at having tax dollars spent on something that they personally find morally outrageous. Ah. So, you have no problem with the Hyde Amendment, then? Ah, good old Henry Hyde, a typical Republican; legislating morality for others while being an adulterer himself. Ah, good old kallend - bringing in non-sequiturs to 'shoot the messenger'. Hyde is fair game. You just don't like being reminded of the hypocrisy of the GOP and its double standard on morality.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,121 #54 December 9, 2009 >Some of us do not want our tax dollars to pay for abortions. Fortunately, you will not have to. The house bill does not cover abortions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #55 December 9, 2009 Quote Some of us do not want our tax dollars to pay for abortions. There are lots of things I don't want my tax dollars to pay for, but abortions for poor women are not on my list of objectionable govt. expenditures.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #56 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhile at the same time tolerating or facilitating the use of tax dollars to fund an elective act that Group B considers to be a moral outrage (elective wars). Article I, section 2. Do you mean Article 2? But in any event, I wasn't referring to legalities, for Roe v. Wade deemed abortion lawful, too. I'm referring to people's ethical objections at having tax dollars spent on something that they personally find morally outrageous. Ah. So, you have no problem with the Hyde Amendment, then? Ah, good old Henry Hyde, a typical Republican; legislating morality for others while being an adulterer himself. Ah, good old kallend - bringing in non-sequiturs to 'shoot the messenger'. Hyde is fair game. You just don't like being reminded of the hypocrisy of the GOP and its double standard on morality. I'd say the same in reply regarding the Dems...but they don't seem to have any - standards, that is.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 334 #57 December 9, 2009 Quote QuoteBy a vote of 53 to 41, the Senate on Saturday rejected a Republican effort to block cutbacks in payments to home health agencies that provide nursing care and therapy to homebound Medicare beneficiaries. Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm.... no Medicare for Gramma! Do you think Medicare for Gramma is a good thing or a bad thing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #58 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhile at the same time tolerating or facilitating the use of tax dollars to fund an elective act that Group B considers to be a moral outrage (elective wars). Article I, section 2. Do you mean Article 2? But in any event, I wasn't referring to legalities, for Roe v. Wade deemed abortion lawful, too. I'm referring to people's ethical objections at having tax dollars spent on something that they personally find morally outrageous. Ah. So, you have no problem with the Hyde Amendment, then? Ah, good old Henry Hyde, a typical Republican; legislating morality for others while being an adulterer himself. Ah, good old kallend - bringing in non-sequiturs to 'shoot the messenger'. Hyde is fair game. You just don't like being reminded of the hypocrisy of the GOP and its double standard on morality. I'd say the same in reply regarding the Dems...but they don't seem to have any - standards, that is. Lame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #59 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuote Some of us do not want our tax dollars to pay for abortions. There are lots of things I don't want my tax dollars to pay for, but abortions for poor women are not on my list of objectionable govt. expenditures. It's funny. So many of the wing-nuts on here clearly hate poor Blacks' and Hispanics' guts. Well, they hate all of them, but especially the poor ones. You'd think they'd support anything that would prevent them from multiplying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #60 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Some of us do not want our tax dollars to pay for abortions. There are lots of things I don't want my tax dollars to pay for, but abortions for poor women are not on my list of objectionable govt. expenditures. It's funny. So many of the wing-nuts on here clearly hate poor Blacks' and Hispanics' guts. Well, they hate all of them, but especially the poor ones. You'd think they'd support anything that would prevent them from multiplying. I suppose people like that would support some sort of "Final Solution" type deal for non-whites. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #61 December 9, 2009 Quote It's funny. So many of the wing-nuts on here clearly hate poor Blacks' and Hispanics' guts. Well, they hate all of them, but especially the poor ones. You'd think they'd support anything that would prevent them from multiplying. Andy, you are a smart guy, so I'm sure you know this already, but eugenics was closely associated w/ much of progressivits thought, including abortion, such as in the writings of Margaret Sanger."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #62 December 9, 2009 QuoteQuote It's funny. So many of the wing-nuts on here clearly hate poor Blacks' and Hispanics' guts. Well, they hate all of them, but especially the poor ones. You'd think they'd support anything that would prevent them from multiplying. Andy, you are a smart guy, so I'm sure you know this already, but eugenics was closely associated w/ much of progressivits thought, including abortion, such as in the writings of Margaret Sanger. Maybe so; but that doesn't mean that people who, on balance, support a woman's legal right to choose her own abortion rather than being forced by law to carry the pregnancey to term (which includes a lot of people who still find abortion distasteful and un-preferable) should be equated with Sanger or eugenicists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #63 December 9, 2009 Quote Maybe so; but that doesn't mean that people who, on balance, support a woman's legal right to choose her own abortion rather than being forced by law to carry the pregnancey to term (which includes a lot of people who still find abortion distasteful and un-preferable) should be equated with Sanger or eugenicists. I don't think the comparison is appropriate in either direction."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 December 9, 2009 QuoteLame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time. And they get thrown out or voted out. Dems applaud them in Congress and re-elect them.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #65 December 9, 2009 Quote It's funny. So many of the wing-nuts on here clearly hate poor Blacks' and Hispanics' guts. Well, they hate all of them, but especially the poor ones. You'd think they'd support anything that would prevent them from multiplying. Sounds like you picked up your telepathy kit from the same place Jeanne did. I guess it's to be expected when you don't have any sort of argument, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #66 December 9, 2009 Quote Quote Lame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time. And they get thrown out or voted out. . In what year was Hyde thrown out or voted out? ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #67 December 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Lame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time. And they get thrown out or voted out. . In what year was Hyde thrown out or voted out? What year was Studds applauded in Congress, after taking his underage page on a junket to have sex with him?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,121 #68 December 9, 2009 >In what year was Hyde thrown out or voted out? ssshhh, he's on a roll Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #69 December 9, 2009 Quote>In what year was Hyde thrown out or voted out? ssshhh, he's on a roll And kallend just *thinks* he is. What year did Kleagle Byrd get voted out? Oh, yeah...he hasn't.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #70 December 9, 2009 looks like you're conceding the point to Kallend there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #71 December 9, 2009 Quotelooks like you're conceding the point to Kallend there. Thank You! I would like an omelet right about now. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #72 December 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Lame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time. And they get thrown out or voted out. . In what year was Hyde thrown out or voted out? What many on here seem to forget is that congress should vote how the people want them to vote and not how they act. no matter what an elected official does or thinks in his own life should not be what he votes. what the people that elected them feel is how they should vote. With that being said, an elected person could do something wrong in our eyes but still fufill the obligation of the office they were elected to by voting as the majority of the people in that district wish. unfortunately they vote how they want not they way the people want. IMO what I see more and more is that both sides are corrupt and moralless but the reb's seem to vote what the majority of the people want and the dem's say we don't know what we want and vote how they want reguardless of what the people want. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #73 December 9, 2009 Quote Sounds like you picked up your telepathy kit ... As before, I knew you were going to say that! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #74 December 9, 2009 QuoteAnd kallend just *thinks* he is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #75 December 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteLame. GOPers like Hyde, Craig, Ensign, etc., clearly have no standards for themselves, AND are HYPOCRITES at the same time. And they get thrown out or voted out. Dems applaud them in Congress and re-elect them. rep mike simpson of idaho voted for the original bailout bill before the last election even when most of heis constituants did not want it. reports were that 70%-80% of phone calls and emails from voters were against it. he voted in favor of it and got re-elected anyway. how many times did this happen on either side last election? probably more often than not. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
