Well I certainly agree that women like Sarah Palin are setting America back. -- RTInfinityPoli

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> I forgot something. -- HF, 13:13:04 09/10/08 Wed [1]

I know we disagree, but her FIRM pro-life views directly affect women and IMO set us back tremendously.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks for a good answer! -- Jeannine, 14:18:16 09/10/08 Wed [1]

The first two (censorship & creationism) have been de-bunked --- but some, not all, of the things you noted - well, I agree with her. I can't see that any of them, including being firmly against abortion, sets back women at all. But, I am not up to any more abortion debates. I will never understand why some feel that RUNNING for President makes one qualified to be President --- but enough of that too. It is all just opinion.

I guess that is why we all get to vote. Ain't America a great country?!

In case you are interested - here is something from Newsweek about the tales that have been told.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157986

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> You can spin anything any way you want. -- HF, 07:27:56 09/11/08 Thu [1]

The fact is that yes, she did ask the librarian about removing books. And no, the librarian was not let go for giving Palin the answer she didn't want to hear, but it wasn't for Palin's lack of trying. Anyone who asks about removing books from a public library is seriously suspect IMO.

And she did advocate teaching both evolution and creationism side by side until people pointed out how ridiculous it was. Then she changed her (public) stance and said that people should have the option to choose what they learn. Isn't that what private school is for?

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I forgot something (again) -- HF, 10:35:15 09/11/08 Thu [1]

It was only a couple of days ago that she said that our military presence in Iraq is God's will and that He supports our mission.

I have a lot of impolite things to say about that, but I'll leave it at what an atrocious violation of my religious freedom her assumption is. A person like that in public office is a huge set back.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> One of my "faves" was her assertion that the -- LAwoman, 10:40:16 09/11/08 Thu [1]

pipeline was God's will. Yeah, OK. People died working on that thing.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Don't forget that she supported cutting funding for special needs children in Alaska -- Terry, 15:45:52 09/11/08 Thu [1]

You know, kids like her youngest son whom I'm sure will get all the help he needs while other Alaskan children go without.

She's a real humanitarian, that one. No wonder McCain only had to meet her once and talk to her on the phone once to pick her as his running mate. Nicely played!

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That is absolutely not true ---- but what is the use -- Jeannine, 19:36:33 09/11/08 Thu [1]

It is a matter of public record that funding for special needs children have been dramatically increased since she was elected governor. The article I posted above specifically addresses this and other lies and distortions.

But,like I said, it doesn't really matter. People will believe what they are going to believe.

Terry - you did make me rethink one thing. I have been thinking about your reply in our pro-life discussion below. You said:

"And for the record; I don't buy into the "except in the case of rape or incest then abortion is ok". Either it's okay or it's not; either it's a woman's choice *no matter what her reasons or circumstances* or it isn't. If pro-life proponents argue that life begins at conception then you can't discriminate against embryos that are conceived by rape or incest."

I agree. It is hypocritical for me to believe that a child of rape or incest deserves to die. You made me realize how wrong I was and I thank you.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> IMO, that's one time an issue really is black or white -- Terry, 03:00:19 09/12/08 Fri [1]

And it has bothered me for years that no one calls anti-choice candidates on it becuase they *all* say that. Except Sarah Palin and I do give her props for having the balls to say it.

You are either pro-choice or you aren't. There isn't room for "except in the case of rape or incest".

You're welcome and no, you will never change my mind about Ms. Palin. I feel quite strongly that she was not the best choice and I don't want her in the White House; now or any time in the future. I do not like what I have read and I do not believe the GOP spin on her or her beliefs.

For the record I don't have a problem with Creationism being taught in public schools as long as it is classified as MYTHOLOGY. Studens should learn about Christian MYTHOLOGY as much as they learn about Greek, Roman and Norse mythology. Go ahead and teach the Buddist version of creationism along with every other relgion's version and call it mythology. Use my tax dollars, I fully support that.

It's when you shove the Christian version of Adam and Eve down a kid's throat and brain wash them into believing it is based on "fact" that I have a serious problem with it.

This country has been run by middle-aged weathly white men since the very beginning. It is time for a change and it is time to send a message that We The People are tired of the same old crap. I hear it every day from people I would not expect. Bush has done the Democrats a huge favor by running this country into the ground for the last 8 years. I was so upset that he won in 2004; now I'm glad. I'm glad he showed everyone we were right; he isn't fit to run this country and he will go down in history as one of the worst presidents to hold office.

It's time We the People take control and kick these old farts to the curb. I want a smart president who has a plan that will work and CHANGE our future. Get us out of Iraq; make them pay their debt to this country. Work toward a better future for our children. Give us back a quality of life we haven't been able to afford since 2001. Show the world that while we care about other countries, our citizens come first.

Stop building swimming pools in Bagdad (where only the boys can swim because girls are not allowed to wear bathing suits in public) and put money back into our Public Schools. My kids want to be able to join a club in the next few years. Stop laying off teachers and fund Education instead of some stupid fucking swimming pool. Put OUR children adhead of the rest of the world and then help who we can.

Goddamn it, it is TIME FOR A CHANGE.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> My thoughts... -- lynne, 12:51:49 09/12/08 Fri [1]

I agree that abortion is a black and white issue. It's either a life or it isn't. I have always believed that no life is less valuable because of the way it was conceived, and only God gets to decide who's born and who isn't. Rape and incest are heinous, but again - it's a baby, regardless of how it was conceived.

As far as teaching Creationism in school, I would argue that calling it MYTHOLOGY would be cramming Darwinism down everyone's throat. If Creationism is going to be included in the curriculum, it needs to be taught side by side as an alternate belief. Christianity is very much alive and well in this country, and calling it MYTHOLOGY is a slap in the face to the millions of us who believe.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you Lynne - I support what you posted 100% -- Jeannine, 13:43:24 09/12/08 Fri [1]

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Which is precisely why religion should not be a part of public education. -- HF, 15:54:24 09/12/08 Fri [1]

Unless you're going to present every religion (including the belief that god/s does not exist), which just isn't feasible, you shouldn't present any. There is no place for it in PUBLIC education.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My thoughts... -- Terry, 03:04:07 09/13/08 Sat [1]

Darwinism is supported by scientific evidence. Creationism is not.

There was a time when Norsemen (Vikings) ruled the world. Their religion was every bit as "true" to them as yours is to you. Does that make their story of creationism "science"?

Nothing personal but Christianity doesn't win because "thousands" believe in it. There are more Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus in the world than Christians. If majority rules then the Christians are out voted.

I think from this day foward I will believe in Odin and his wisdome. He will be my God. All public schools that support teaching creationism will have to give equal time to my beliefs so my children are taught what I think is right. It's only fair, if you're going to teach one you'd better believe you'll have to teach the other.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My thoughts... -- lynne, 05:19:50 09/13/08 Sat [1]

Darwinism is supported by scientific evidence. Creationism is not. Actually, there is LOTS of archeological evidence that supports the Bible. And last I heard, they haven't found that missing link yet.

There was a time when Norsemen (Vikings) ruled the world. Their religion was every bit as "true" to them as yours is to you. Does that make their story of creationism "science"?
Nothing personal but Christianity doesn't win because "thousands" believe in it. There are more Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus in the world than Christians. If majority rules then the Christians are out voted.
I think from this day foward I will believe in Odin and his wisdome. He will be my God. All public schools that support teaching creationism will have to give equal time to my beliefs so my children are taught what I think is right. It's only fair, if you're going to teach one you'd better believe you'll have to teach the other.

All of this is exactly my point. You don't believe what I do; does that make my belief "mythology?" It's not about winning (although Christianity is the major religion in this country and it's 'millions'). All I was saying is that IF Creationism were to be taught in public schools, they wouldn't be able to give it a label like that. But you know, if we're going to be TOTALLY fair here, I could point out that Darwinism is one set of beliefs that a bunch of those fat white men you mentioned decided was THE ONE belief we're going to teach in public schools, without any other theories presented. That could be called brainwashing, too.

We are never going to agree on this, of course; I just got riled when you called something I hold very near and dear "MYTHOLOGY". In caps, no less. Separation of church and state is fine, especially in this melting pot of a country, and I'm sure that's not going to change no matter who gets into the White House. Even the Dems have a lot of fat white men among them, you know.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Intelligent design -- Jeannine, 07:36:49 09/13/08 Sat [1]

How is it that the theory of intelligent design is so threatening to the left? Seriously. If I believe that there is a power, in my case - the Holy Trinity - greater than myself, in Terry's case, Odin, that created us, I do not understand why that is such a threat.

I personally do not find Darwinism and Intelligent Design to be mutually exclusive. I don't have a problem with my children being taught more than one point of view, either. It is better to understand the beliefs of others than to ridicule and dismiss those beliefs as stupidity.

It all comes down to respect.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I do believe creationism should be taught -- LAwoman, 13:46:12 09/13/08 Sat [1]

in churches and religious schools. That's what churches do best. I even went to Bible school when I was little at a church we didn't belong to. My mom just thought it might be a good experience for me and my bro, just over the summer. It wasn't too bad and I learned what other people believe so it served that purpose just fine. And it was free at the time. I assume most churches still provide some sort of instruction in the beliefs of their particular sects for kids.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> It's not threatening. -- HF, 12:04:53 09/14/08 Sun [1]

It's insulting. I have the right to my own views as much as you have the right to yours, and to insinuate that my children should be taught what you believe simply because it's what you believe is insulting. (By you, I do not specifically mean Jeannine; I mean anyone who advocates teaching creationism in public schools.)

I'm fine with you teaching whatever you want in the privacy of your own home or in private school, but I am not fine with the teaching of any religious doctrine in public school. This is only fair IMO; your children learn what you value and mine will learn what I value.

In my personal case, this would mean exposure to a variety of religions including the possibility that no god exists so that my children can make whatever choice makes the most sense to them. It would not bother me if one of my own children chose to believe in Christianity as long as s/he respected the views of others as well.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: It's not threatening. -- Terry, 18:55:49 09/18/08 Thu [1]

Ok, I've been thinking on this a bit more.

I don't let Ed take the kids to mass. They are too young and easily fooled.

I believe true faith comes from an understanding of the concepts behind religion. Even the most brilliant child is not capable of understanding the abstract concepts within religious teachings. You can "dumb it down" but you're brainwashing the child. "Jesus loves me yes I know, because the Bible tells me so..." That's not true faith it's rhetoric taught at the knee to very young children and delivered in a sing-song they can remember. Hell, I remember it 40 years after I heard it the first time.

When it comes to Intelligent Design I tend to agree with this:

Why Intelligent Design Isn't Science - Contrary to the claims of some proponents of intelligent design (ID), science does not presume naturalism. So science doesn't reject ID because ID is supernatural. Nevertheless, science does reject ID because the ID hypothesis exemplifies none of the characteristics of legitimate scientific explanation.

It will be interesting if those partical acceleration experiments prove the Big Bang once and for all.

I don't go around trying to convert Christians into Atheists although I can't say the same about the Christians I know. IMO, teaching Creationism in public school as science is an attempt to convert. And that's just wrong.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Maybe it's lame and ignorant of me... -- HF, 19:52:30 09/18/08 Thu [1]

But I just don't care where the universe (or whatever is bigger than the universe) came from. If figuring it out somehow helps us to perform some kind of good, then great, good ahead and learn more. But really, I'm not all that interested in whether we came from the Big Bang or Adam and Eve or the dinosaurs.

I am interested in evolution because there are obvious similarities between humans and monkeys/gorillas/chimps/other primates that I'm not smart enough to remember...and heck, it's cool to witness the evolution of a species. But nah, I don't really care if primates came from outer space or heaven to start with.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> The reason I do believe in ID.... -- lynne, 11:37:23 09/19/08 Fri [1]

(Disclaimer: This is not an attempt to convert anyone or be argumentative, merely presenting another view...and let me state again that I wasn't advocating teaching Creationism in public schools up above)

The reason I can't buy into the Big Bang all by itself is this: look around you. Think about the vastness of the universe and the complexity of the human body, just to name a couple of things. All this, spontaneously, out of nothing, without any intelligence, design or intent?

I just can't get my brain there. That's why I believe to my very core that there's a higher power. You can call him God/Odin/whatever; I believe in the Christian God for many reasons. I *can* believe in God creating the Universe with what appears to us, now, as a Big Bang.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree with the first part. -- HF, 09:44:11 09/12/08 Fri [1]

I'm convinced that Palin never cut funding for special needs children.

Re abortion, so the woman who has the baby conceived by rape delivers her child...then cannot provide for it (or does an incredibly poor job) because she's still traumatized by the rape. This woman lives a life plagued by depression, mental illness or possibly suicide, and as a result the child is put into foster care.

I will never understand how forcing someone into having an unwanted child is better than providing the choice to terminate the pregnancy. Never. Life means more to me than conception, and life is too important to classify so simply as a fertilized embryo.

Jeannine, I know we'll never agree about abortion but as long as the discussion is alive on this board, I'll have a hard time keeping my mouth shut.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> No one says they have to raise the child.. -- niki, 11:21:35 09/12/08 Fri [1]

A child conceived by rape can be given up for adoption at birth. There are people waiting to adopt babies (I know several).

Only a very small percentage of abortions are because of rape. It is used as a way to argue.

I agree completely with Terry's post.

I do not agree with abortion. I think that people have a choice to not get pregnant if they cannot follow it through. Other than rape- the choice was made.

BUT I also think that the Republicans have NO intention of making other forms of birth control widely available and easy to get to prevent abortions. I do not believe they have any reason to fight against abortion at all as their "pro-life" stance (even though it does not apply to war or the death penalty) provides them with votes.

I watched the 9/11 video yesterday and I was struck by how we all came together after the tragedy, and now we are so divided again. Meanwhile the parties are so busy fighting each other and namecalling that they cannot be bothered with what is best for the country.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I would like to adopt, myself. -- HF, 12:47:47 09/12/08 Fri [1]

But does that mean that I want a woman to endure nine months of what is equivalent to torture in my estimation, simply because I would like a baby? No.

Still, this is not my primary motivation for my pro-choice viewpoint. I was only responding to the post about rape and incest.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well adoption is fine. But I still believe that a girl or woman -- LAwoman, 19:56:51 09/12/08 Fri [1]

has the right to self-determination including being able to decide who enters or exits her vijayjay. Of course in the case of rape one of those decisions is taken away. I'm lucky enough that if I found out I was pregnant by some act of violence, drugging or just failed birth control, I have the means to avoid being forced to give birth against my will. My concern is for those who don't have the means. I would prefer that morning after pills were more readily available, but all options for girls and women should be available and legal.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:this is why I think the morning after pill -- niki, 16:08:18 09/14/08 Sun [1]

should be freely available and easy to get.

Yet have you noticed that the politial groups who are anti-abortion are also usually anti-abortion-prevention?

If birth control, the morning after pill, and sex education were everywhere perhaps the majority of abortions could be prevented.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Exactly! -- LAwoman, 17:59:26 09/14/08 Sun [1]

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> actually, if people did their homework, the morning after pill isn't an abortive pill -- ozzie, 13:20:07 09/15/08 Mon [1]

it PREVENTS a pregnancy from happening at all. i just finished a continuing education on it and it alters the endometrium so egg implantation cannot occur. so, imo, if they say they are against abortion, they can't lump the morning after pill in along with it. i know that is such a touchy topic and personally, i could never go through with it but i admire that MOST women are intelligent and make /made a well thought out decision and CHOICE to go through with it. i would think it would be a tremendously difficult decision to make. you could argue this that and the other for days on end but i wouldn't want someone else telling me what i could and could not do to my body and the impact it would have on my OWN life.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I couldn't agree more, Niki... -- JennyJenkins, 20:39:17 09/14/08 Sun [1]

I'm upset that "pro-choice" is always misinterpreted, as if on purpose.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> As I said, it is great to be an American. -- Jeannine, 14:13:58 09/11/08 Thu [1]

[ Edit | View ]