Free Republic

"They didn’t stop support. The baby died while still getting life support. The ethics committee hadn’t made a decision yet."

Where did it say that in the article? It said the doctors urged the parents to not rush to take him off life support.... but the parents wanted to take him off life support.

It's possible that the article is wrong, but I'm just going by what it said. Here's an excerpt:

Before he passed away, doctors said his parents should not rush to take him off life support.

“If we want to be able to fully understand the consequences [of the haemorrhage], we can’t rush this. We need a few weeks to evaluate his condition,” said Professor Fabrice Pierre, of the department of gynecology and obstetrics at Poitiers CHU, on French TV channel France Bleu. “Currently, we are not giving him intensive treatment; we are simply giving him life support to give us the time to do a proper evaluation.”

But Titouan’s parents wanted to take him off life support.

Anyway, I think it's terrible. And yet another sign of the times.

This is so sad.

Would they have stopped life support if they hadn’t been told he was going to be handicapped and possibly brain damaged? Something tells me they probably wouldn’t have. :-(

"Several months ago we never heard of ISIS. Now the media fills up 12 hours of their broadcast day telling us how evil they are, and even gives them free advertising and air time by publishing what they want us to believe and their studio videos. Who benefits? Americans?"

"Why are we attacking Syria...."

"Illegal. Congress did not ever authorize any President to attack Syria. Why are Freepers cheering this!?!?!? "

Thank you, you guys have restored my faith in humanity. Except that I go further than that. I'm honestly amazed that people are still falling for all the propaganda. I can see that our nation needs a lot of prayer.... prayer for people to wake up.

Thanks for the laugh. That photo of that man jumping into the shot smiling with "racist" in parenthesis, and Ron and Carol walking in the background really did make me laugh out loud.

If I was amoral and dishonest and wanted to smear someone, it wouldn't be very difficult at all. The fact that you buy every single bottom of the barrel-scraping smear story you can dig up just shows your gullibility, and your obvious, irrational hatred for Ron Paul.

Maybe you should come over to the Ron Paul forums, and debate some of his supporters, since you are so convinced that RP is an eeeeeevul, insane, white supremacist, anti-semite, kitten-killing, horrible human being. I've been posting there, and I've met lots of good, honest, smart, aware people over there who love America and the constitution and freedom. There are also a lot of Christians over there - the kind who don't boo the Golden Rule or cheer-lead for more undeclared wars. Here's the link, come over and make your claims there, instead of in the comfort of threads like this where other frothing-at-the-mouth Paul haters huddle together.

or 3. Nobody cares about your incessant vanities as shown by the lack of replies to your spamming on FR lately.

I was thinking the same thing. My other thought when seeing this thread was: and Ron Paul kills kittens too!!! And he's an eeeeeevul overlord, who wants to take over the world!!!!!!!!111 [insert evil laughter here]

Way too many false assumptions, logical fallacies, lies or distortions to even sift through right now. You are the king of those things.

It's hard to 'debate' someone who starts off with so many misunderstandings and faulty premises, and especially someone who is so emotional and unwilling to even fathom the idea that you are wrong about anything here.

I do, however, want to get back to you on your entire view or understanding of liberty, and how that relates to us as Christians. But I haven't had the time to put all my thoughts down in writing, to try to explain to you what I have been realizing, and to show you how extremely legalistic and misguided (even if well-intended) you are. When I have the time, I'm going to write a blog post on this topic, and I'll let you know when I do.

once again, the candidate you support is proven to be a Jew hating lunatic, and all you care about is caplock You have no moral compass.

He is neither a "Jew hater" or a lunatic. And the reason I don't even bother to respond to you on stuff like that is because it's silly, ignorant and it says far more about YOU than it does about him, when you smear people like that, out of your hatred. When you have something that's actually substantive and true to discuss, let me know.

In the meantime, keep on booing the Golden Rule, smearing people, and hating entire groups, while claiming the high ground and accusing me of having no moral compass. /s

Yeah, because advocating “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is such a crazy, silly and absurd moral rule! I mean, who would teach such a thing??? Let’s boo the Golden Rule! And let’s return hate with more of the same! Now that’s a better moral teaching. /sarcasm

The obsession continues.

And for you, Jim, the caps-lock emotionalism continues...

Iran will try to annihilate Israel.

Be careful not to believe everything you're told by the powers-that-be. Also, Israel is more than able to care of themselves, as Netanyahu stated here.

I agree with both of you, and I’m glad you’re here. :-]

I would like to applaud you for post #24. (I was going to say hug, but I didn't want to freak you out, haha!)

As for this thread, I see a certain person still has his obsession going. *rolleyes*

Yeah, because people should vote based on superficial things such as looks. /s

The freedom movement isn't going away, sorry to inform you.

"In 2009, RuPaul was named the “Earmark King” of CONgress. Kindly explain how that’s considered fiscally Conservative in any way, shape, or form."

You may disagree with his reasoning on this issue, but I don't see how you can deny that if he (or any representative) does not designate where the money goes, then it is decided by the executive branch, without the same transparency. He votes against the bills in the first place, but if others pass a bill and the tax-payers are going to have their money stolen, then the earmarks are to give them back their money that was stolen, rather than it go to Obama who will spend it elsewhere.

And to answer your question, he is a fiscal conservative because he always votes against spending in the first place, and because he wants to drastically slash the size and scope of government. He wants to abolish entire departments... look at all the other so-called Republicans who support all of those programs and departments and continue to grow the government... sometimes even more than the Dems.

Calling people we disagree with crazy is something The Left does. It's something I would expect to find from the socialist on dailykos.com instead of conservatives on freerepublic.com. Conservatives should be able to discuss ideas rationally, without resorting to personal attacks as The Left does.

I'd like to applaud you for post #33. Whenever I see an RP thread, finding a calm, intelligent and substantive post is like finding a jewel in a pile of rubble. Thank you for your decency.

MASS APPEAL .......... (laughing smiley)

First of all, he said "to independents sick to death of the GOP..." Are you denying that independents who are sick of the GOP like Ron Paul?

Secondly, the majority of this country are tired of the wars. (read it and weep.) and all the BS going on in politics. So, RP does appeal to many people who are sick of both the GOP AND the Dems, because there really is little difference, especially on the important issues that are slowly destroying our nation. I had to reply because I found it funny that (based on your above post) you seem to think that *your* position is the mainstream one. Sorry, but it just isn't. On FR it is, yes. I'll give you that. But not in the nation at large.

"Without ethics capitalism is doomed to corruption."

What's going on is not even capitalism at all. I think everyone should read the book, 'The Creature from Jekyll Island' by G. Edward Griffin. (It's a huge book, but definitely interesting and eye-opening.) That book made me SO angry at what has been going on, and that our country is being looted... and so many people still don't realize it. The worst part is when leftists call it "capitalism" and then call for an end to (all) capitalism. When it is not capitalism or the free market at all. It's collectivism. And I think if everyone realized how much our country is being screwed, there would be no more apathy or people blindly re-electing the crooks who continue the status-quo.

Some of the replies here were good for a chuckle.

The idiocy of saying that the most strict fiscal conservative who wants to slash the size and scope of government drastically is a "communist" helping Obama is hilarious.

And the ultimate irony is that the ones saying that probably support one of the many big-government RINOs or internationalists running against RP, all the while claiming to be "true conservatives." But do carry on! The rest of us will continue fighting to change the status-quo.

I think many have forgotten that we weren't always like this. Earlier I posted a quote by George Washington. We don't have to go back that far to hear what our nation should be like, we can go back to not so long ago. Please watch this short video, of GW Bush speaking about this topic:

The George Bush You Forgot

"Those same words could have come right out of Obama’s mouth."

Sorry, but Obama has expanded the wars, he went against his phony claim to be opposed to the war - his foreign policy is like Bush's, so your statement is just plain incorrect. Even Bill Kristol said that, and called Obama a "born again neocon." You can see that here.

"Blame America first."

That made no sense. What is "blame America first" about wanting positive relations with other nations? Are you saying that because I disagree with our current foreign policy, that is "blame America first"? I'm sorry, but that is silly. America is not defined by a particular administration or policies like our current foreign policy. I believe in our constitution, and the principles this country is supposed to stand for. I am concerned about these things because I LOVE America, I consider myself a patriot, and I believe that we have some very unAmerican people in power, who care not about our constitution or our liberties, they just care about power and control. THEY are the ones who are anti-American, not people who criticize their actions.

"Frankly, as a country, I don’t want to be liked. I want to be feared."

So having positive relations with other countries is now a bad thing? Have we been THAT brainwashed by the powers-that-be that we now cheer on this world empire and aggressiveness and disrespect for the independence and sovereignty of other nations? Maybe you should answer the question I asked to Jonty, about how YOU would feel if another nation told us what we can or can't do, or tried to interfere in our internal affairs? Would that be OK with you?