Kevin Graham wrote:Why isn't Erickson talking about kids who die in this country because of his dumb religion?
Again you make a point that accentuates how stupid you really are. This issue is about having "a choice" and while some choices may be disagreeable with you the freedom of that choice is what makes these consequences different. And don't pretend like you care about the child in either circumstance, you just like how the dribble hits your chin when your wife let's you yell at the computer screen.
For example, if you are stupid by your own choice then people would not pity you, but if your stupidity is because you were educated in some stupid Georgia public school that wouldn't allow you to read books or talk to colored people (something you still obviously do) then you would have rightly earned the pity that is bestowed upon you daily.
Yes, we pity your unintentional stupidity
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
Chap wrote:If it is the case that certain persons (such as Erick Erickson) are falsely claiming to be upset about the plight of the children to whom they refer, and are simply using such cases for their propaganda value in slanderously suggesting that their political opponents set no value on human life, then I think it would be quite proper, indeed commendable, for Kevin Graham to point that out.
Do you think he is wrong in suggesting that this is the case? You certainly don't have to agree with him, of course.
Ceeboo wrote:Chap thinks it proper and commendable?
Go freaking figure!
As you can probably guess, I don't find it proper or commendable.
You couldn't, well, explain why, I suppose? I realise that is a lot to ask. Almost a kind of blasphemy, really.
(You did notice the "If ... then' conditional formulation on which my statement was based, I suppose?)
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
subgenius wrote:This issue is about having "a choice" and while some choices may be disagreeable with you the freedom of that choice is what makes these consequences different.
Then I guess that this POV of yours extends to your acceptance of some abortion situations, as well.
Yes! Chap certainly gets it and displays both more rationality and more compassion than anyone criticizing his views on this subject.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
"demanding"? yeah, that is not an accurate way to depict the mocking challenge issued by the RNC - but nice try there gramps
Good point, I loved the title: ‘GOP admits to being out of ideas’: RNC buried in mockery after demanding health care plan from Clintons. They failed to realize that Hillary had an actual plan rather than the customary RNC bombast. They assumed that everyone was clueless like themselves when it comes to actual policy, so they were caught unaware that she actually had a plan.
