• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Opinions on Kerry

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/03/11/mother.charged.ap/index.html

I think this article bears on this discussion.

"In January, the state Supreme Court ruled that unborn children at all stages of development are covered under the state's criminal homicide statute. The law exempts the death of a fetus during an abortion." "The law has been used to prosecute women who kill or seriously harm their babies through drug use"

Isn't that fu#$ed up, that a baby has rights and deserves protection for life liberty and pursuit of happiness ....o unless it's murdered, in that case who cares it's a zygote. So it's ok to kill a baby with drugs in a drs office but not at home, one is a procedure and the other one is murder.
 
Having read that speech, I wonder how a Kerry administration would affect DD(X) (specifically the new manning standards), and the RIFs currently in progress. Granted, though, it seems like most of the new troops would need to be in Army and Marine civil affairs and combat arms given what's going on in Iraq. But I'm certainly not a member of the J-8 so don't quote me on that.
 
squid: now im confused. so one more post on abortion so as not to hurt anyone's feelings. first off, i wasnt looking at you like some "left-wing quack". not sure how you got that from my post. and just to help you figure it out, i agreed with some of what you said and disagreed with other parts. is that ok? let me simplify. how do you say that a fetus is human life (you said after implantation in a previous post) and yet you think abortion should be up to the person to choose? that's exactly what most pro-choicers say and it makes absolutely no sense. second point....no pregnancy from rape is not grounds for abortion- see my arguments for that. yes abortion might be permissable if the women's life is at serious risk, although there are strong philosophical arguments both ways on this- see my arguments. however, this is not grounds for making abortion legal- it's simply a medical exception. im not sure what's so unclear about that. lastly, i really dont think im going to change anybody's opinions based on my arguments. fact is, if somebody wants to believe something one way, they're going to find a way to do it no matter what, no matter how absurd it might be (not saying the arguments here are absurd). my only intention is to present the arguments from a practical scientific and medical viewpoint just like some other's have. the reasoning for this being that in general pro-choicers make the pro-life group out to be a bunch of church-going close-minded idiots who are behind the times. very convenient especially in today's social climate, basically always claiming that we are pro-life because "the church said so". in fact i believe the pro-life side of the debate has better scientific and medical arguments in the case and presented some of it here. and the other point is that even though people may KNOW it's wrong, they will still fight for their "rights" to the bitter end, which is why legislation is so important. laws on such severe issues like abortion should reflect what is imperically right and wrong, not based on what voters (either side) want.

daedalus: one of the great farces of the supreme court. it's ridiculous.
 
Daedalus said:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/03/11/mother.charged.ap/index.html

isn't that fu#$ed up, that a baby has rights and deserves protection for life liberty and pursuit of happiness .
Click to expand...


i think the law is laying he smack down more on the drug user, just like murder while the woman was pregnant become double murder. It just punishes the criminal more without actually affecting the orignal laws. Hell yeah a pregnant woman's death should be double homicide!

Oh, and I just read the ORIGINAL article in this thread. Politics is just that, poilitics. People will do whatever they need to do in order to get the votes. It's not going to change; it's always been this way. However, politicians are stooping lower and lower, double-talking more and more, and listening less and less.
 
Just one more thing on abortion:
I believe there are certain circumstances where abortion is permissable(sp?). What if you are raped?
What if being pregnant would mean imminent death to you, the mother?

I don't however condone the use of abortion as a birth control. Just as I believe the government helping the genuinely 'down-on-their-luck' people is good, I believe abortion has its place. It is overused, used as birth control, etc, though.

The abortion issue hits very close to home with me in a number of ways. I refuse to make a big discussion of it. It is not black and white, there is a very thin grey area to abortion
Click to expand...

ENSquid, I've got to completely agree with that. A couple of years ago, my aunt (married, one child) got pregant again. Some months into the pregnancy, an ulrasound discovered that the baby had some disease (I really can't remember the name now) where the baby is born severely disfigured, lives a short few months of life in pain, then dies in agony. To spare that baby the pain of that life, my aunt and uncle decided to abort the fetus. Without the right to abortion under Roe. v Wade, they could not have done that. Do not tell me they were 'morally wrong' for doing that.

I'll give a hypothetical example this time to further prove it: Young woman gets pregnant from boyfriend. Woman discovers having the baby will mean cutting short all of her future aspirations, and will lead to a reduced quality of life for her and her baby. Woman decides to abort the fetus and wait for the day when she can fully care for a baby and raise it well. Isn't that 'compassion'?
If there's one thing I've learned from my Jewish faith about this matter, it is that it's better to keep the one life you already have than to lose two lives. For the record, mainstream Judaism thinks that abortion should be available in cases such as incest, rape, when the mother is in mortal danger, etc, but looked upon with a social stigma when used in all other instances. And that's what I believe too.

And about the 'naming sperm' thing...come on guys, we all took biology in high school and we all know blahblahblah...I was just putting a sarcastic touch on a post. Sheesh.

Anyway, back to Kerry. I seriously doubt he's 'anti-military.' Painted as such by Republicans looking to tarnish is Vietnam war record, Kerry is all for a strong military, but against what they're currently doing with it. I really hate it when Republicans think they 'own' patriotism, and when anyone says anything contrary to their beliefs, its all of a sudden 'anti-american.'

And if you're getting your news from a place called hannity.com...well, you're in worse shape than me!
 
I'll give a hypothetical example this time to further prove it: Young woman gets pregnant from boyfriend. Woman discovers having the baby will mean cutting short all of her future aspirations, and will lead to a reduced quality of life for her and her baby. Woman decides to abort the fetus and wait for the day when she can fully care for a baby and raise it well. Isn't that 'compassion'?
Click to expand...

agree, nuff said. and I take no religious affiliation.

Kerry may or may not be anti-military. His voting record substantiates what I said earlier about doing whatever it takes to stay in office by appeasing just enough people to barely not get fired. Once in office, partisan politicians push their (party's) agenda a little more, everyone does. I'm curious as to Kerry's underlying agenda in all of this. So far it hasn't surfaced for my eyes to see. I think I have a good mental grasp on our current agenda as a nation.


Going to war protests and demonstrations? Does anything really come of just protesting about stuff? I would submit that it does less than you would think and that most things get done via other methods. Now if he were upset about the way Vietnam was handled (our reasons for being there, etc), there are other channels to use to push that agenda instead of hanging out at rallies wearing bright colors, not shaving, getting high, etc (i'm not saying he did necessarily). Does that lend any credibility to him? Nothing positive could come from later being remembered as some tree-hugging-anti-baby-killing-hippie.
 
You are not serious saying that terminating the life of an unborn, innocent child is compassion, are you? That is one of the most disturbing statements I have ever heard in my life. NO ONE has the right to tell that child that he or she will be denied life before ever being born. Even if the doctors say the child will be born with medical complications, he or she still has the right to fight for their life, no matter how long the odds are. One and a half million innocent children are murdered every year because of this so called "choice", what a disgrace to this nation to allow it to happen, and to John Kerry for supporting it.
 
You are not serious saying that terminating the life of an unborn, innocent child is compassion, are you? That is one of the most disturbing statements I have ever heard in my life.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am. In the case of my aunt (which I think you're referring to), it was a very trying and painful time for the family as a whole. Jaxs170, just drop it. My aunt and uncle had a three year old son at the time. Can you imagine telling that young child that "Yes, you'll have a brother, but only for a few months, and he'll spend his entire few month life in the hospital before dying a terrible death." ??? It was a very hard time for everyone then, and do not tell me they did not make the right (although painful) decision. Compassion can mean more than simply "right to life." Jaxs170, just drop it.
 
This is just my humble opinion, but you guys should drop the abortion debate. It is WAY to personal to be hashed out over the internet with random strangers...
 
Ok, I just spent a good 30+minutes reading this entire thread from post #1 until now, and I just could NOT move on without saying a few things.

1. Think what you may of Bush, or Kerry, or whoever...just don't whine & B***h of you do NOT vote. (I personally loathe when people complain, but don't do anything BUT complain)

2. Kerry's voting record seems more important that his recent speeches, when it comes to military spending. It takes more than just SAYING he supports the military to get MY vote. One too many lines of BS have been said by many candidates just to get in office.

3. Welfare....I get sick when I think about this. Yes, we should help people who can NOT help themselves. I think that time on welfare should be LIMITED and those receiving should be working to get more education, working on getting a new job, or at least taking orders at a fast-food restaurant rather than sitting pretty in their subsidized luxury apartments. I have worked my a** off to get my education, and I have not taken a $0.01 from my parents. I worked hard in HS to get scholarships for all of undergrad, and then I took out loans for grad school. But, I will get a job, and I will pay the loans back. But, if I have to pay for someone to sit on a couch and not even TRY to make their lives better, and live off my (& everyone who works) hard earned dollar...that is just BULLS***! (Yes, college is expensive, but work hard & you will get a job...yes, student loans suck, and I dread paying them off, but because I worked for what I will have (a good job), I will appreciate it a whole lot more & be a much more productive member of this country.) Sorry for my tangent there...I did warn that welfare (and tangents from that topic) really, really get me going!

4. Liberal, Conservative....seriously, who really fits into these "categories"?? I agree with views from each side. Lets all be adults, examine what the candidates have to say about what WE think is MOST important, and pick the lesser of the two evils based FIRST on their actions, and then secondly on what they say. Besides...who can please everyone?? Just be educated in your decisions & votes...and influence those around you to do the same.

5. Abortion...not the place to discuss this, but I'll just say that this topic has a huge GRAY area, and is NOT black & white. I have had countless embryology, biology, anatomy & physiology classes to understand that NO ONE PERSON or GROUP can say when like really begins....it's all value based, just as whether or not you believe in abortion. Unfortunately, when this became a political area, it becam CHOICE or NO CHOICE...and not anything in between. This country was founded on freedom of choice, freedom of speech, etc. People should be free to make choices....even if they are what some may percieve as WRONG or STUPID! That's what makes this a great place to live!!!

6. Gay marriage...same concepts apply as in #5, its about choices...no one wants people making decisions for them. You don't have to agree with someone's decision to respect that they'll deal with the consequences that come with whatever decision it is that they make. (i.e. I don't agree with the lifestyle of gays/lesbians, but I can respect & not agree with them...and based on my lifestyle & my votes, I'll give my $0.02)

Thanks for the great previously posted debates....and for the record, yes, my title is SNFO fiance, so if you don't agree with me, lets disagree on issues & not make personal attacks.

~Megan
 
The abortion debate is getting way too personal for my tastes here, ladies and gents. Can we please just drop the subject before somebody gets killed, with no "last posts" or "parting shots?" It's fine to debate the issue academically and explain the reasons behind our opinions, but no one here is in a position to pass judgement on a stranger and we are skating that line. There are plently of other things about Bush and Kerry that we can discuss IMHO. Thanks.
 
Well, sometimes it's a nice diversion from surfing the Internet . . . ;)
 
Nittany...FYI: there was no skating on my part. After spending all that time reading what everyone else had to say, there was NO way I could NOT give my $0.02. Besides, no one forces anyone else to read anyone's reply. Just as you and others have stated your positions...I and every other member of this forum are free to post ours....besides, if you really read what I had to say, I was not attacking anyone's views...merely stating we have the right to have our own opinions, and backing up my arguments. I realize you're a moderator, but you are not anyone's internet mom or dad. If you're that concerned...just lock the subject out, I know moderators can do that....

I am also going to say nitttany, if your post was not referencing what I had to say, even though it was posted directly after mine....then I apologize to you for misinterpreting what you posted...I just hate when people try to censor others because they do not agree with anything except their own views.

~Megan
 
Whoever said we should leave personal stuff out of this...was exactly right.
Lets get back to debating Kerry (I'll try real hard now too).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top