Am I an evil conservative hate-monger? ::The other side to Phylbean's post:: :)

Or just a good conservative?

This thread is explores the “other side” of the Phylbean post titled “Am I unpatriotic”.  P.S. Phylbean, the answer is no.

1)      I do support the war in Iraq, the surge, AND the troops.  I wasn’t a fan of the war at the beginning, but we are there now and we are winning.  The number of U.S. combat deaths in September dropped 86 percent from where they were a year ago for September, making it one of the least deadly months since the war began. Violence against Iraqi civilians is also down about 70%. We've turned over more and more provinces to Iraqi control...their infrastructure is being rebuilt and their economy is on the rise. Iraq's oil production is up to around 2.5 million barrels per day and they just posted a budget SURPLUS of $70 billion. In fact, the Surge has worked so well, it now seems that we will start withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq.  WOOT! 

2)      Flag-burning is our right as Americans, but if I see someone burning a flag, I will send glares your way.  Why?  For me, our flag symbolizes my hopes for our country, our troops, our way of life, and all of those who have fought for it.  If you want to make a statement, fantastic.  Make a sign, organize a march, get involved!!  You can make much more of a difference doing the above then burning a flag. 

3)      I believe taxes are need to a certain extent, but personal responsibility should remain on the forefront of our minds!  I don’t want my money going to some research study concerning cross breeding two types of fish.  I don’t want my money going to someone else’s heath care unless they have a serious life-threatening problem.  I do NOT want it going to someone who by choice dropped out of high school, and surprisingly can’t find a job.  I want to save my money for my retirement and my children’s future. 

4)      I believe that the life begins at conception.  I believe that all abortion should be illegal, except in cases that risk the mother’s health.  People can do whatever they want, have sex with whoever they want, with as many people as they want.  That is their choice.  Once a woman becomes pregnant though, all of that goes out the window.  I think adoption should be focused on more. 

5)       I am not the hugest fan of W., but I don’t think he is evil or stupid, and I certainly don’t hate him. 

6)      I also believe that everyone has the right to practice whatever religion they want to.  I believe in the separation of church and State.  However, I am annoyed when I see the full fledged attack on Christians in our media, schools, and general society.  If half of the things I hear demeaning Christianity were said about the Jewish faith or the Islamic religion, there would be a revolt.  Just saying. 

7)      I like guns.  I go to the fire range every other week to shoot guns.   I don’t mind backround checks, or mental heath checks, but don’t even try to take away my guns!  I’m sorry, but if someone enters my home in the middle of the night and starts up the stairs where my baby girl sleeps, I am using my gun and I aim well.

Cheers. 

::is a bad conservative in the current usage::

we're still dealing with the cleaning out the dogma, when el Rushbo has zero clout, we'll be much closer.

ofc this site also has a lot of good (in the same vein as #598) liberals as well...

too many people would rather sip koolaid than actually listen to another point of view.

Original Post by moonikins:

Original Post by laura42:

Original Post by moonikins:

Or so as to not offend, do what you want with it.

 I did.

 I didn't expect you to figure out the meaning of my post.

 You are very mean.

Original Post by kathygator:

Original Post by laura42:

So if we have to take God out of public places to avoid offending various groups of people, why do we not worry about offending an equally large (or larger) portion of the population who is opposed to abortion.

 I think you are in error to assume that the majority of Americans are anti-abortion.

 edit: nevermind, I reread your comment and understand your meaning. The point of taking God out of public places (or 'the commons' to quote the Founders) goes to the separation of Church and State, not a wish to give no offense.

 Sorry - I didn't see your edit.  I am not opposed to separation of church and state.  I just think it goes too far. I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion either.  I just think proponents of the procedure go too far as well.  In the presence of some, the topic is not open for discussion on any level.  "It's my body" ends all arguments.  I think it's more than just one body.  It's another's as well.  I think we need to think long and hard how American tax dollars are allocated regarding abortion.  I would like to see a movement in this country away from abortion.  Not outlawing, but creating social pressure to avoid it.  Similar to what we accomplished with smoking.  Smoking was widespread earlier in this century.  Once we discovered the many negative health issues associated with it, we started moving away from it on a national level.  It is not against the law by any means, but it's not as socially acceptable as it used to be.  The same can happen with abortion.  There are many health issues we can't even discuss because it's such a loaded topic. There are risks and complications, as well as long term psychological effects.  If you've seen ultrasounds or early pregnancies, you can see the beating heart of the baby.  We should be able to talk about these things openly, with less anger and emotion.  I don't think there is any risk during this administration of overturning Roe v Wade.  If people don't feel that their rights are on the line, then maybe a dialogue can start.  Maybe we can talk more about avoiding unwanted pregnancies in the first place, and then if they do happen, finding alternatives to abortion.  Not because the law says so, but because there are risks to the mother, and because, wanted or not, another life is now in the picture.

Original Post by laura42:

Sorry - I didn't see your edit.  I am not opposed to separation of church and state.  I just think it goes too far. I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion either.  I just think proponents of the procedure go too far as well.  In the presence of some, the topic is not open for discussion on any level.  "It's my body" ends all arguments.  I think it's more than just one body.  It's another's as well.  I think we need to think long and hard how American tax dollars are allocated regarding abortion.  I would like to see a movement in this country away from abortion.  Not outlawing, but creating social pressure to avoid it.  Similar to what we accomplished with smoking.  Smoking was widespread earlier in this century.  Once we discovered the many negative health issues associated with it, we started moving away from it on a national level.  It is not against the law by any means, but it's not as socially acceptable as it used to be.  The same can happen with abortion.  There are many health issues we can't even discuss because it's such a loaded topic. There are risks and complications, as well as long term psychological effects.  If you've seen ultrasounds or early pregnancies, you can see the beating heart of the baby.  We should be able to talk about these things openly, with less anger and emotion.  I don't think there is any risk during this administration of overturning Roe v Wade.  If people don't feel that their rights are on the line, then maybe a dialogue can start.  Maybe we can talk more about avoiding unwanted pregnancies in the first place, and then if they do happen, finding alternatives to abortion.  Not because the law says so, but because there are risks to the mother, and because, wanted or not, another life is now in the picture.

the corrolary to "it's my body" is "it's my decision."  if i want to talk to someone about my abortion, i'll do so, but i get to choose who i'm going to invite into those conversations.  i'm under no obligation to talk to you about it.

and there's no shortage of information about contraception, adoption, abstinence, and the health risks of abortion, pregnancy, and childbirth (and the risks of the two latter options are far more common and serious).

comparing abortion to smoking is absolutely ridiculous.  and the idea that making abortion "less socially acceptable" would be a positive thing - please.  abortion needs to be absolutely socially acceptable and no more subject to the judgment and approval of others than any other health decision.

you want to talk about abortion with less anger and emotion?  possible.  but first you'll have to leave aside arguments about "the beating heart of the baby" which are obvious attempts at emotional manipulation. 

my body, my choice. 

Like I said before:  "It's my body" ends all arguments.  But it's more than just one body.  It's another's as well. 

And I can't leave "the beating heart of the baby" out of it, because that's what it's all about.  I'm not saying the issue should be legislated.  Be we can and should talk about it.  It's not emotional manipulation.  It's discussing the emotional side of it - which is huge.  Why can't we talk about that?   I'm not saying "there will be not abortions!"  I'm saying, lets think about what we're doing as a society. Maybe we can stop doing it so much.  

I spayed a pregnant cat once.  The embryos were early in development.  They were translucent with the entire circulatory system darkly contratsted against the pale bodies.  The veins were blue and the arteries red, just like in the diagrams.  The hearts were beating and you could see the blood circulating through the vasculature.  The creatures were tiny and perfect - no more than half an inch long, miniscule eyes, paws, tails.  Once the uterus was removed, the hearts slowly stopped beating.  It killed me, and they were only cats. 

I don't judge anyone who wants or has had an abortion.  I don't know what I would do myself in a desperate situation.  I would just like there to be more dialogue on the subject, more education, more prevention, and less abortion.  I don't see anything wrong with creating social pressure to avoid unwanted pregnancies and explore other options when it does happen.  Not social pressure like the scarlet letter.  But social pressure similar to what a friend would say if they saw you smoking.  "What are you doing that for - it's no good for you."  "What are you having unprotected sex for- it's not good for you."  "Are you sure you want this abortion, you may be really sad when your 40".

Original Post by laura42:

I am not opposed to separation of church and state.  I just think it goes too far. 

 

"It's my body" ends all arguments.  I think it's more than just one body.  It's another's as well.  I think we need to think long and hard how American tax dollars are allocated regarding abortion.  I would like to see a movement in this country away from abortion.  Not outlawing, but creating social pressure to avoid it.  Similar to what we accomplished with smoking.  Smoking was widespread earlier in this century.  Once we discovered the many negative health issues associated with it, we started moving away from it on a national level.  It is not against the law by any means, but it's not as socially acceptable as it used to be.  The same can happen with abortion.  There are many health issues we can't even discuss because it's such a loaded topic. There are risks and complications, as well as long term psychological effects.  If you've seen ultrasounds or early pregnancies, you can see the beating heart of the baby.  We should be able to talk about these things openly, with less anger and emotion.  I don't think there is any risk during this administration of overturning Roe v Wade.  If people don't feel that their rights are on the line, then maybe a dialogue can start.  Maybe we can talk more about avoiding unwanted pregnancies in the first place, and then if they do happen, finding alternatives to abortion.  Not because the law says so, but because there are risks to the mother, and because, wanted or not, another life is now in the picture.

Separation of church and state means SEPARATION of church and state. As in, there is no such thing as "too far" because they are separated.

Abortion/Smoking comparison: Smoking poses health risks to the smoker and to anyone else in a large radius around the smoker who has to share their air.

Abortion poses about as much risk as getting your wisdom teeth removed. Its a simple outpatient procedure. The only "psychological effects" occur in those who were raised to believe that abortion is going to send you to hell. I have a lot of friends who have had abortions. The religious ones feel guilty, the rest thank their lucky stars that they had a chance to regain control over their lives. All the religious guilt tripping does is make more women more miserable. It doesnt do anything to improve society and it sure doesnt "improve public health."

It's not religious guilt tripping.  It's not about God or guilt, right or wrong. Although it can be any of those things to different people. Mostly it's about a life that ends, which is sad.  Maybe as a society we can move toward prevention and away form abortion.  What's wrong with stressing prevention over abortion.  Pro choice - choose not to get pregnant!

Original Post by laura42:

Like I said before:  "It's my body" ends all arguments.  But it's more than just one body.  It's another's as well. 

and as long as "another" is inside me, it's my decision.

And I can't leave "the beating heart of the baby" out of it, because that's what it's all about.  I'm not saying the issue should be legislated.  Be we can and should talk about it.  It's not emotional manipulation.  It's discussing the emotional side of it - which is huge.  Why can't we talk about that?   I'm not saying "there will be not abortions!"  I'm saying, lets think about what we're doing as a society. Maybe we can stop doing it so much.  

"that's what it's all about"?  seriously?  no - that's decidedly NOT what it's all about.

I spayed a pregnant cat once.  The embryos were early in development.  They were translucent with the entire circulatory system darkly contratsted against the pale bodies.  The veins were blue and the arteries red, just like in the diagrams.  The hearts were beating and you could see the blood circulating through the vasculature.  The creatures were tiny and perfect - no more than half an inch long, miniscule eyes, paws, tails.  Once the uterus was removed, the hearts slowly stopped beating.  It killed me, and they were only cats. 

i'm sorry the cat didn't have a choice.  no, i'm sorry the cat wasn't spayed before she got pregnant.  but is this really relevant?

I don't judge anyone who wants or has had an abortion.  I don't know what I would do myself in a desperate situation.  I would just like there to be more dialogue on the subject, more education, more prevention, and less abortion.  I don't see anything wrong with creating social pressure to avoid unwanted pregnancies and explore other options when it does happen.  Not social pressure like the scarlet letter.  But social pressure similar to what a friend would say if they saw you smoking.  "What are you doing that for - it's no good for you."  "What are you having unprotected sex for- it's not good for you."  "Are you sure you want this abortion, you may be really sad when your 40".

we do have the conversations you're advocating.  we have them with the people we trust, if we're lucky enough to have anyone who fits the bill.  but we also have the right to not have those conversations if we choose not to.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

Original Post by laura42:

"that's what it's all about"?  seriously?  no - that's decidedly NOT what it's all about.

Yes, that's what it's about.  A beating heart that is no longer beating.  We need to think about the implications of stopping the beat, the life.

i'm sorry the cat didn't have a choice.  no, i'm sorry the cat wasn't spayed before she got pregnant.  but is this really relevant?

I was using it as an example of witnessing a life slowly ending.  It was profound, and it was only a cat. 

 

 

we do have the conversations you're advocating.  we have them with the people we trust, if we're lucky enough to have anyone who fits the bill.  but we also have the right to not have those conversations if we choose not to.

That is correct.  You don't have to have the conversation. Thanks though, for taking the time to hear me out.

It absolutely is a religious matter because we dont agree as to whether a fetus is it's own autonomous creature.

If you look at it from a purely practical standpoint, a fetus is like a tumor: its a ball of cells which leeches nutrients from its host. It has a lot of potential - it might grow up to be a great person someday - but so far its not. It cant think, therefore it isn't. And it isnt sad to deny it something it doesnt even realize it could have had - heck, I waste eggs every month. Should I get all sad about what could have been? Should my eggs feel sad or mad that they are being denied life? No.

The notion that a fetus is a sentient person came from the one Bible verse (psalm?) about God knitting a baby in a womb..or something like that. If it werent for that bible verse there'd be virtually no opposition to abortion because no one would think a ball of cells counted as a full-blown person.

I have never seen a valid non-religious argument against abortion. Ever. The psychological effects, the danger to society, the danger to the mother - all disprovable myths meant to uphold and reinforce religious ideology.

Original Post by laura42:

"that's what it's all about"?  seriously?  no - that's decidedly NOT what it's all about.

Yes, that's what it's about.  A beating heart that is no longer beating.  We need to think about the implications of stopping the beat, the life.

see, this is a problem.  when you put the life of a potential baby ahead of the life, rights, and choices of an actual woman, that's a problem.

i hate to say it, but if you really believe that "a beating heart" is that important, why are you aborting kittens?  for that matter, how many animals have you euthanized?

It's not a tumor, it's not a ball of cells, it is a human with a beating heart. 

Original Post by pgeorgian:

Original Post by laura42:

"that's what it's all about"?  seriously?  no - that's decidedly NOT what it's all about.

Yes, that's what it's about.  A beating heart that is no longer beating.  We need to think about the implications of stopping the beat, the life.

i hate to say it, but if you really believe that "a beating heart" is that important, why are you aborting kittens?

 Laura - I assume you are against the Iraq war? Im glad you have thought about the implications of stopping the beat, the life.

Original Post by laura42:

It's not a tumor, it's not a ball of cells, it is a human with a beating heart. 

until the fetus breathes air, its heart--beating or not--is part and parcel of my body and subject to my choice. 

why'd you ignore my post, laura?  because the only reason the beating heart of a kitten (or a cat, dog, or horse) should have less value than the beating heart of a fetus is because the bible says so.

edit: because hearts don't breathe.

i hate to say it, but if you really believe that "a beating heart" is that important, why are you aborting kittens?

Sometimes you don't know prior to performing the spay if the cat is pregnant.  It happens rarely.  Sometimes you have a suspicion and discuss it with the owner, and that is what they want.

see, this is a problem.  when you put the life of a potential baby ahead of the life, rights, and choices of an actual woman, that's a problem.

I don't put the baby ahead of the woman's rights.  I don't want to take away anyone's rights.  After all is said and done, the women can still go and get the abortion. But I want to be able to discuss all the implications, the other life affected.  I want it socially acceptable to discuss the other life.  I want it to be OK to consider that life too.  And hopefully, after we do that, as a society, we would move away from taking lives, and move toward preventing the whole thing.  Naive of me, maybe, but that is my hope.

Original Post by laura42:

I don't put the baby ahead of the woman's rights.  I don't want to take away anyone's rights.  After all is said and done, the women can still go and get the abortion. But I want to be able to discuss all the implications, the other life affected.  I want it socially acceptable to discuss the other life. 

what makes you think that those conversations don't take place?

or do they just not take place the way you think they should?

why'd you ignore my post, laura?  because the only reason the beating heart of a kitten (or a cat, dog, or horse) should have less value than the beating heart of a fetus is because the bible says so.

sorry, didn't ignore it. The posts are coming fast and furiously now.  For me, it has nothing to do with the bible.  I've never read it, I don't really subscribe to it.  I love animals dearly, but I value human life more than animal life.  Many people don't, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's just that I've lost human loved ones, and animal loved ones, and the scars on my heart from the human lives go much deeper. 

I'm going to sign off now.  I'm not ignoring anyone.  Just have things to do.  It's been a great discourse.  I know I haven't changed anyone's mind.  But maybe we can all make each other think.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

Original Post by laura42:

I don't put the baby ahead of the woman's rights.  I don't want to take away anyone's rights.  After all is said and done, the women can still go and get the abortion. But I want to be able to discuss all the implications, the other life affected.  I want it socially acceptable to discuss the other life. 

what makes you think that those conversations don't take place?

or do they just not take place the way you think they should?

... and not for nothing, but there's not a single election, sunday TV lineup, or sermon within 2000km of me in any direction that doesn't involve a "socially acceptable discussion" of:

• The "other life", or
  
• The "gay"

I think it'd be a much more interesting day if more dudes in funny hats started talking more about the sanctity of ALL life, not just the unborn... or about the relative ease of camels to pass through the eye of a needle.

BTW - the only passage in the bible as I've seen regarding when a child is a child is obliquely via Ezekiel 37:6 - "I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the LORD."

Breathing on its own? Child.

Not breathing on its own? Offshoot of the mother.

hatamoto, i think i have a crush on you.

I kind of agree with what laura is saying, except I would approach ita different way...

First, I am pro-choice and do not support having legislatures usurp the right to make personal medical decisions for women.

However, I think that having fewer unplanned pregnancies would be a benefit to society (and to individual women).  And so, more emphasis on preventing unplanned pregnancies - including peer pressure on the male to be more responsible regarding this issue would be a very helpful thing.

Additionally, I think that people who are opposed to abortion on moral or whatever grounds would do far more for their position if they focused on actually helping women.  I mean, a significant number of abortions happen each year strictly for financial reasons - the woman may want to have a baby, but knows that she can not afford it.  Well, instead of just trying to guilt her into carrying her pregnancy full term, why not help women who get pregnant so that they can afford to be a mom? (without forcing any religious dogma on them).  Telling women - you must have your baby is so different from helping them actually have it and take care of it.  Things like free or sliding-scale-fee day care would be helpful.  We're all familiar with food pantries that give away food - why not a nursery pantry that gives away diapers and formula and baby shampoo and car seats, etc.  See what I mean? There are ways to help if you wanted to help.

As for the women who decide not to have a baby for other reasons, I suggest that we respect those reasons.