Female Mccain''s VP pick

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 9/3/2008 9:37:20 PM
Author: Kaleigh

Date: 9/3/2008 6:46:52 PM

Author: decodelighted

All the Diddy talk is maddening ... because I didn''t actually watch that link before it got pulled. Even though it was in *my* post. I was concentrating on Cajun Boy''s assessment of Palin & her scandal. Am left out now ... SHUCKS!

Too bad you missed it. You missed a good one!!!! Deco, that made my day!!! Thank you!!!!




Losing a dear friend yesterday after a freak accident makes me realize how precious life is. We all say that, but a reminder to all. Life can be snuffed out in a nano second...


Back to lurking....

Just wanted to send some hugs and prayers your way Kaleigh.

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 9/3/2008 5:53:54 PM
Author: IndyGirl22
I understand your statements HH, and I agree that not all people who are personally anti-abortion think that everyone should be. I was just saying that most political candidates who classify themselves as ''pro-life'' don''t think there is a choice in abortion in their moral or biological reasoning, so i wouldn''t expect Palin, or any other candidate who classifies themselves as pro-life, to leave any room for debate on the issue of choice. That being said, I don''t think the candidates'' views on abortion have much to do with Roe v. Wade - it''s not going anywhere.

I have to disagree there Indy.

There is a very big chance that whoever becomes the next POTUS will have the opportunity to replace at least one, if not two, Supreme Court Justices.

Right now there is balance between conservative and liberal judges. If we end up with more conservative judges on the Supreme Court, then Roe v. Wade is most certainly up for grabs

 

[AGBF]

style="WIDTH: 99%; HEIGHT: 64px">
Date: 9/3/2008 6:46:52 PM

Author: decodelighted

All the Diddy talk is maddening ... because I didn''t actually watch that link before it got pulled.

I haven''t been able to read Pricescope for most of this afternoon and evening, so I may have missed something, but I don''t think the link has been pulled!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thmueS0ngAs


Deborah

 

[trillionaire]

Date: 9/3/2008 10:14:46 PM
Author: purrfectpear

Date: 9/3/2008 5:53:54 PM

Author: IndyGirl22

I understand your statements HH, and I agree that not all people who are personally anti-abortion think that everyone should be. I was just saying that most political candidates who classify themselves as ''pro-life'' don''t think there is a choice in abortion in their moral or biological reasoning, so i wouldn''t expect Palin, or any other candidate who classifies themselves as pro-life, to leave any room for debate on the issue of choice. That being said, I don''t think the candidates'' views on abortion have much to do with Roe v. Wade - it''s not going anywhere.

I have to disagree there Indy.


There is a very big chance that whoever becomes the next POTUS will have the opportunity to replace at least one, if not two, Supreme Court Justices.


Right now there is balance between conservative and liberal judges. If we end up with more conservative judges on the Supreme Court, then Roe v. Wade is most certainly up for grabs

I concur...

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/3/2008 10:14:46 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I have to disagree there Indy.

There is a very big chance that whoever becomes the next POTUS will have the opportunity to replace at least one, if not two, Supreme Court Justices.

Right now there is balance between conservative and liberal judges. If we end up with more conservative judges on the Supreme Court, then Roe v. Wade is most certainly up for grabs

I understand that argument, but my suspicion is that a very conservative nominee will not be confirmed if it is clear that Roe v. Wade would be on their main agenda. Furthermore, the liberal judges (the older ones) will not give up their seats as long as they think a conservative judge will replace them, so they would have to die in the next 4 years.

ETA: Stevens or Ginsburg *could* die, but again, I really don't think the new justices will have the guts to overturn a landmark ruling which has been relied upon many cases...maybe I'm not giving them enough credit. Anyway, my main problem with the Obama ad was that it bypassed the true method that abortion would be outlawed.

 

[HollyS]

Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.

That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed "Bite me!" speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about "less government" but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.

That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

Ditto. I liked her speech too...it was done with a smile but with strength and I was very proud of her as a woman.

 

[diamondfan]

I find abortion rights to such a hot topic. I had one, so clearly I am in favor of a woman''s right to chose. But I also know that many people simply do not support it. They call it murder and really cannot understand how someone can make that choice. As a woman, I do not care who else would or would not have one, but I was glad I could safely have one when I needed one. As a mother, though I only have sons, I still worry about the possibility of pregnancy.

I also think that no matter what your parent would want for you or has taught you, abstinence or using birth control if you are sexually active, a teen is driven by what they wish to do much of the time, birth control fails, and for those girls who get pregnant and do not wish to have a child, or a woman who is raped or could die delivering a baby, it does worry me that that right to safely terminate a pregnancy could be gone. I am not sure how easily or quickly it could be done but still...

And I would like to say that women who take no precautions and have abortions as birth control are not the people I am talking about. Having an abortion is a personal and tough decision, it is not for all women, but it is the right choice for many and we should have that right.

I am always surprised that a woman could be anti choice. I am not saying they should think having an abortion is no big deal, and if they find themselves pregnant, of course they would not have one. But how can they dictate what someone else should do or feel in that situation? I have had three kids and I know what it feels like to give birth but I still would never tell someone else they had to go through with a pregnancy.

I think Sarah Palin did a good job tonight, but I am not sure my mostly middle of the road beliefs sync up with hers. Removing books is pretty bad to me, but I know that certain book topics are incendiary and we would like them not to exist, but they do. And while our right to freedom of expression is so important even I get hard pressed to say how allowing a KKK rally or NeoNazi gathering is really the way to support that right to express...these are issues that are tough for me to navigate...

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:59:34 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.

That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

Ditto. I liked her speech too...it was done with a smile but with strength and I was very proud of her as a woman.

Me too!! She was awesome!!!!!

 

[HollyS]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

Roe v. Wade is not in any danger of being overturned.

There are much bigger problems facing America. This issue isn''t anywhere near the front of the pack.

Just because a candidate has a personal opinion, doesn''t mean they are in favor of changing the ruling on abortion.

I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:20:51 AM
Author: HollyS

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM

Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM

Author: HollyS

Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.



That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

Roe v. Wade is not in any danger of being overturned.


There are much bigger problems facing America. This issue isn''t anywhere near the front of the pack.


Just because a candidate has a personal opinion, doesn''t mean they are in favor of changing the ruling on abortion.


I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.

You are absolutely right that there are bigger problems facing America.
So, why didn''t McCain nominate Lieberman - Pro Choice, or Guliani, also Pro-Choice.
Sarah Palin = Pro-Life, and therefore is an acceptable choice for the Christian Conservatives. So while you are correct in stating that it isn''t the most important problem facing American, it seems to me that many Christian Conservatives, who are a large and dominant part of the Republican party, vote as though it is *the most* important issue, and won''t elect a pro choice candidate, even if he or she is the best person for the job. And I think you are wrong - Roe v. Wade is in danger.

 

[iluvcarats]

Oh, and by the way HollyS., if you don''t like what is said in this thread, then why don''t you go back to you "positive", i.e. censored thread? Talk about net nannying!

 

[somehowcollide]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:04:44 AM
Author: diamondfan
I find abortion rights to such a hot topic. I had one, so clearly I am in favor of a woman''s right to chose. But I also know that many people simply do not support it. They call it murder and really cannot understand how someone can make that choice. As a woman, I do not care who else would or would not have one, but I was glad I could safely have one when I needed one. As a mother, though I only have sons, I still worry about the possibility of pregnancy.


I also think that no matter what your parent would want for you or has taught you, abstinence or using birth control if you are sexually active, a teen is driven by what they wish to do much of the time, birth control fails, and for those girls who get pregnant and do not wish to have a child, or a woman who is raped or could die delivering a baby, it does worry me that that right to safely terminate a pregnancy could be gone. I am not sure how easily or quickly it could be done but still...


And I would like to say that women who take no precautions and have abortions as birth control are not the people I am talking about. Having an abortion is a personal and tough decision, it is not for all women, but it is the right choice for many and we should have that right.


I am always surprised that a woman could be anti choice. I am not saying they should think having an abortion is no big deal, and if they find themselves pregnant, of course they would not have one. But how can they dictate what someone else should do or feel in that situation? I have had three kids and I know what it feels like to give birth but I still would never tell someone else they had to go through with a pregnancy.


I think Sarah Palin did a good job tonight, but I am not sure my mostly middle of the road beliefs sync up with hers. Removing books is pretty bad to me, but I know that certain book topics are incendiary and we would like them not to exist, but they do. And while our right to freedom of expression is so important even I get hard pressed to say how allowing a KKK rally or NeoNazi gathering is really the way to support that right to express...these are issues that are tough for me to navigate...

I think that was very well said DF, particularly the last paragraph. I am not particularly surprised that she delivered a "good" speech tonight as I have yet to see any "bad" key note speakers in either conventions. There are obviously endless hours of preparation involved and each sentence, each word actually, is devised to convey a very particular message. The fact that Sarah Palin said what many American''s wanted to hear is based on the fact that her handlers prepared a speech for her that centered entirely on what American''s wanted to hear (this certainly goes for all other candidates as well.) Even her look today was much more polished; a very tidy and structured suit, which was still fashionable, as well as a much more chic hairdo (that beehive was getting annoying!) We all know that none of these things were a mistake and I think we''ve got to look past that with either party.

I was particularly annoyed today with Gulliani and Palin endlessly going on and on like attack dogs. They spent much more time dissecting their opponent than they did trying to convince me to give the Republican party my vote. It felt more like a rally for their Republican supporters than it did an opportunity to show Independents what their party stood for.

Honestly, these conventions are contrived opportunities for each side to show off their goods, so to speak. It will be hard to get past all that fluff and really get to know who these people are and what they truly stand for.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:05:33 AM
Author: Kaleigh

Date: 9/3/2008 11:59:34 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.

That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

Ditto. I liked her speech too...it was done with a smile but with strength and I was very proud of her as a woman.

Me too!! She was awesome!!!!!

yep! Dems are in big trouble now.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Yeah, she did awesome and even the VERY biased news media had to agree. This is going to be an extremely interesting trip to November.

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

I think the pro-life concept is very misunderstood by American women. If the president appoints pro-life justices to the supreme court and they overturn Roe v Wade (which will be VERY difficult to do), the decision goes back to the states. Women will never lose the right completely to do what they want with their bodies. Democrats use this as a total red herring by saying that if you elect McCain, you lost rights over your womb. That is a LIE. Federal and State governments are separate for a reason. If Roe v Wade ever got overturned, some federal funding for abortion is lost - that is the issue. Abortion isnt all of a sudden impossible to have or illegal. States like NY and CA and many others will continue to fund and allow abortions. Just like some states now allow gay marriage.

Just wanted to put that out there so women dont pick Obama for a reason that is VERY misunderstood.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:42:10 AM
Author: iluvcarats
Oh, and by the way HollyS., if you don''t like what is said in this thread, then why don''t you go back to you ''positive'', i.e. censored thread? Talk about net nannying!

Okay, first of all, you responded to my post, and I merely responded to your post. We are exchanging viewpoints. I didn''t tell you that your post wasn''t valid; I responded to an issue . . . that you brought to the table BTW. So

right back at ya.

 

[iluvcarats]

I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.[/quote]



To me, this is the same as saying "SHUT UP"
YOU ARE AN OFFENSIVE POSTER. IF YOU CAN''T PLAY BY THE PRICESCOPE RULES, WHY DON''T YOU GO PLAY SOMEWHERE ELSE!

It is a big WWW!

 

[iheartscience]

A good speech isn''t going to erase her lack of experience or the fact that her policies are pretty idiotic. Not to mention all the skeletons that have already come out of her closet.

She was chosen because she is a right wing Christian, and the fact is that right wing Christians are chomping at the bit to overturn Roe vs. Wade. If anyone doesn''t think Roe vs. Wade is in danger they are delusional. The Christian right is trying to give PHARMACISTS the ability to impose their beliefs on me by refusing to fill my prescriptions for birth control pills, etc. So if people actually think Roe vs. Wade being overturned is some far-fetched scare tactic, they''re just in denial.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:30:52 AM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/4/2008 12:20:51 AM
Author: HollyS

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM

Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM

Author: HollyS

Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.



That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

Roe v. Wade is not in any danger of being overturned.


There are much bigger problems facing America. This issue isn''t anywhere near the front of the pack.


Just because a candidate has a personal opinion, doesn''t mean they are in favor of changing the ruling on abortion.


I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.

You are absolutely right that there are bigger problems facing America.
So, why didn''t McCain nominate Lieberman - Pro Choice, or Guliani, also Pro-Choice.
Sarah Palin = Pro-Life, and therefore is an acceptable choice for the Christian Conservatives. So while you are correct in stating that it isn''t the most important problem facing American, it seems to me that many Christian Conservatives, who are a large and dominant part of the Republican party, vote as though it is *the most* important issue, and won''t elect a pro choice candidate, even if he or she is the best person for the job. And I think you are wrong - Roe v. Wade is in danger.

Word to iluvcarats. Roe IS in danger. And 5 Catholic supremes - at least one of which, Scalia - whose public comments point to him being an ideologue of the first ilk - tells me what I need to know. There is great danger here. Every single day the religious right talks about how their faith informs and directs all their private and public actions. And SHOULD. (Anyone remember when Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, proclaimed that Catholic presidential candidate John Kerry should not present himself for Communion because his public votes defied the core teachings of his church??) But I''m supposed to act like a goose in a new world now and believe that after all that, these guys are going to actually leave a basic tenet of their faith completely out of their deliberations?

No one more than me would like to see religion and abortion be banished from front and center of politics, where they now sit. But they''re there - again, not by my choice. You may think they''re cliched (and yes, I conflate the two: can you even separate them? No.), but apparently your own boy didn''t think so when he caved to the far right''s pressure and chose an anti-choice candidate over the more qualified and moderate Lieberman, who by all accounts, was his first choice. So much for the maverick doing his own thing and letting the chips fall.

And this was NOT an anti-Catholic anything, just in case anyone wants to accuse me of such. It was the example that immediately came to mind, talking Supreme Court and all. I am merely making note that I find it hard to believe that a person of dogmatic religious conviction is going to be able to check those convictions at the courtroom door and put on the necessary blindfold that the law requires. I take the line of one commentator who stated:

"Far-right conservatives can''t have it both ways. They can''t demand that their elected and appointed officials obey church doctrine on the job, then turn around and call anyone a bigot who notes that those elected and appointed officials are obeying church doctrine on the job."

 

[ksinger]

Date: 9/4/2008 8:28:49 AM
Author: stone_seeker

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

I think the pro-life concept is very misunderstood by American women. If the president appoints pro-life justices to the supreme court and they overturn Roe v Wade (which will be VERY difficult to do), the decision goes back to the states. Women will never lose the right completely to do what they want with their bodies. Democrats use this as a total red herring by saying that if you elect McCain, you lost rights over your womb. That is a LIE. Federal and State governments are separate for a reason. If Roe v Wade ever got overturned, some federal funding for abortion is lost - that is the issue. Abortion isnt all of a sudden impossible to have or illegal. States like NY and CA and many others will continue to fund and allow abortions. Just like some states now allow gay marriage.

Just wanted to put that out there so women dont pick Obama for a reason that is VERY misunderstood.

The patchwork of draconian laws (can''t cross state lines, proof of residency, etc. etc.) that would ensue just stagger the mind. It would result in women from some states with no access to a basic medical procedure that a woman one state away would have. One state would declare it criminal and another would not. It''s NOT a red-herring. It would be a legal nightmare.

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/4/2008 8:42:53 AM
Author: thing2of2
A good speech isn''t going to erase her lack of experience or the fact that her policies are pretty idiotic. Not to mention all the skeletons that have already come out of her closet.

She was chosen because she is a right wing Christian, and the fact is that right wing Christians are chomping at the bit to overturn Roe vs. Wade. If anyone doesn''t think Roe vs. Wade is in danger they are delusional. The Christian right is trying to give PHARMACISTS the ability to impose their beliefs on me by refusing to fill my prescriptions for birth control pills, etc. So if people actually think Roe vs. Wade being overturned is some far-fetched scare tactic, they''re just in denial.

Please dont call the beliefs of others "idiotic" just because you disagree with them. That is a personal attack and abusing the thread.

Also you need to read up on Roe v Wade among other things since you are one of many misinformed people who thing overturning it means you lose some rights because it doesnt. It just means that some of my federal tax dollars dont go toward funding abortion clinics. My state tax dollars will.

It is scary how many people vote because of an issue they dont even have correct.

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/4/2008 8:51:47 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 9/4/2008 8:28:49 AM
Author: stone_seeker

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she's savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed 'Bite me!' speech I've ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about 'less government' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

I think the pro-life concept is very misunderstood by American women. If the president appoints pro-life justices to the supreme court and they overturn Roe v Wade (which will be VERY difficult to do), the decision goes back to the states. Women will never lose the right completely to do what they want with their bodies. Democrats use this as a total red herring by saying that if you elect McCain, you lost rights over your womb. That is a LIE. Federal and State governments are separate for a reason. If Roe v Wade ever got overturned, some federal funding for abortion is lost - that is the issue. Abortion isnt all of a sudden impossible to have or illegal. States like NY and CA and many others will continue to fund and allow abortions. Just like some states now allow gay marriage.

Just wanted to put that out there so women dont pick Obama for a reason that is VERY misunderstood.

The patchwork of draconian laws (can't cross state lines, proof of residency, etc. etc.) that would ensue just stagger the mind. It would result in women from some states with no access to a basic medical procedure that a woman one state away would have. One state would declare it criminal and another would not. It's NOT a red-herring. It would be a legal nightmare.

Its a red herring in the sense that many people believe the abortion will be outlawed altogether - which is not true. In fact, it is already difficult to achieve in many pro-christian states already and it wont change.

ETA - for the record, I am pro-choice but consider myself a conservative. I am a firm believer in states rights and prefer most things to be handled at the state level and smaller federal goverment. I want federal government to provide national security and defense and thats basically it. Big government, as we have seen in the past 8 years, doesnt work very well.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Roe vs. Wade is as much a constitutional issue as it is an abortion issue.

I am pro-choice. I am a agnostic. I am AGAINST Roe vs. Wade. You don't have to be a Christian to be against Roe vs. Wade, you just have to be pro-constitution

The 10th amendment gets abused all the time (hey, what's new--nobody cares about the constitution anymore). It states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.".

The Supreme Court overstepped its boundaries and many of those against Roe vs. Wade are against it SOLELY for this reason.

(Just seconding StoneSeeker's posts)

 

[sevens one]

Date: 9/4/2008 8:39:26 AM
Author: iluvcarats



I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.

To me, this is the same as saying ''SHUT UP''
YOU ARE AN OFFENSIVE POSTER. IF YOU CAN''T PLAY BY THE PRICESCOPE RULES, WHY DON''T YOU GO PLAY SOMEWHERE ELSE!

It is a big WWW![/quote]
um hello? Paranoid much?
She meant "drop this hot button" from the issues discussed by Presidential candidates- not by pricescopers.

(at least that''s how I took it)
Everyone can "play" even if we don''t agree.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Okay, first off..wow everyone let''s take a deep breath. This is not worth getting angry over.

Second, my personal opinion..I feel comfortable enough to say that Roe v. Wade will NEVER be reversed. Roe v. Wade came out of the right to privacy (in Griswold v. Connecticut and Planned Parenthood v. Casey I believe..may not be the right cases, but I believe those are the precedents)..and it was the next logical step from birth control. First, SCOTUS ruled that we have an IMPLIED right to privacy in the US Constitution so that women and men could use contraceptives. The next logical step was then abortion. In the decision Sandra Day O''Connor flat out said we can''t reverse it because it''s already been given to people..even if the decision was incorrect. Taking away abortion federally would as a result lead to taking away BC and condoms. The only time SCOTUS overrules past SCOTUS decisions is if they were HORRBIBLY wrong and DENIED people of rights..they do NOT go back and TAKE rights way. The SCOTUS has been expanding the right to privacy consistently and the next logical step is now gay marriage. We will see the right EXPAND, not CONTRACT. Trust me..I believe you can all relax.

 

[Ali]

If anyone has a complaint about a post, or if there is something they feel needs our attention, please contact us about it by using the "Report Post" button. There is never a reason to use flaming (or the flaming icon) to post here. The issues are sensitive enough as it is.

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 9/4/2008 9:22:32 AM
Author: sevens one

Date: 9/4/2008 8:39:26 AM

Author: iluvcarats




I''d like to see this ''hot button'' drop off the radar. It''s become a cliche.

To me, this is the same as saying ''SHUT UP''

YOU ARE AN OFFENSIVE POSTER. IF YOU CAN''T PLAY BY THE PRICESCOPE RULES, WHY DON''T YOU GO PLAY SOMEWHERE ELSE!

It is a big WWW!

um hello? Paranoid much?

She meant ''drop this hot button'' from the issues discussed by Presidential candidates- not by pricescopers.


(at least that''s how I took it)

Everyone can ''play'' even if we don''t agree.[/quote]

How can one discuss the Republican agenda without bringing up abortion, since it is largely the driving force behind it. It is why McCain chose Sarah Palin over other choices, and it got the largest applause when Huckabee mentioned it. It seems largely to be the driving force and *MOST* important issue to many Republicans.

Taking this issue off the table, well yeah, it does make the Republican agenda is more digestible.
But the extreme right wing conservatives are NEVER going to take it off the table.

How does this make me paranoid? I play by the rules. I try not to offend anyone.
I am not just talking about this incident. HollyS has offended many other posters recently. I may stand alone, but I stand by what I said.

 

[CDNinNYC]

Date: 9/3/2008 11:46:21 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/3/2008 11:33:36 PM
Author: HollyS
Well, I believe she proved she''s savvy, intelligent, fearless, and deserving of her VP nod.


That was the nicest, politest, and most pointed ''Bite me!'' speech I''ve ever heard. Good for her.

She is all of these things, and she gave a great speach. I am still undecided. I too am worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade. The RNC talks about ''less government'' but they want to govern my womb?

Yup, still undecided here.

Palin delivered a good speech with some great lines, but, I don''t know..., to me, she came off a tad smug, which I found slightly annoying.