Raise your hand before you speak to your elders.
Posted on 08/15/2006 8:40:12 AM PDT by supa consrvative
Day 1: Repeal the Bush restrictions on stem cell research. (Jan 2004)
Keep abortion safe, rare and legal; with 24-week viability. (Dec 2003)
FDA’s RU-486 decision stands; it’s made properly by experts. (Oct 2000)
Leave abortion decision to a woman, her doctor, and her god. (Oct 2000)
Rejected partial-birth ban since it ignored maternal health. (Oct 2000)
Supports abortion rights within his faith, not despite it. (Sep 2000)
Parental consent with judicial override; Gore agrees. (Aug 2000)
Supported parental notification for minors; but pro-choice. (Aug 2000)
Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
Jim, another troll.
You sent Lamont money? How will that put a nail in Lamont's coffin? :-)
After all, she has a Lamont clone opponent for her primary race.
"You'll send Hillary some money too, won't you?"
I'll leave that bit for you. :)
Do your parents know that you're playing on the computer, so late at night? :-)
You have already proved just what and who you are. I shall no longer feed the beast.
I suggest that you read FR's goals and take them to heart. One of them is that we are for DEFEATING all non-Republicans and then go after the RINOS in our midst. Voting for a damned Dem is NOT something FR supports.
Now, kid, write until your knuckles bleed, for all I care; you're on your own and no, you haven't "won"; unless booby prizes count! :-)
Raise your hand before you speak to your elders.
Another link on the Jewish view of abortion can be found at:
http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm#Abortion
I found it enlightening to understand the Jewish perspective. From reading it and some of the other refs posted in this thread, I cans see why Jewish voters would reject the "Jerry Falwell" approach in forcing a total ban on all abortion and then educate people about the morality of it after the fact.
However, what I don't understand is how a religious Jew, Christian, Mormon, or whatever can support the modern-day Democrat party. When I was a kid, my grandfather was a boilermake in a Naval shipyard. He was the union steward for the boilermaker shop. His political view was that "the Republicans are for the fat cats and the Democrats are for the common man." Many traditional Democrats still hold to that, which explains why Zell Miller still hangs in there.
That Democrat party doesn't exist anymore. Today, the Democrat party is simply a granola-like collection of flakes, fruits and nuts. They form a coalition of race-baiters, those who would perpetuate a dependent welfare class, gays, liberal feminists, humanists, anti-God civil libertarians, and socialist-leaning globalists. The defining common thread among them is the rejection of religious morality and acceptance of a humanistic relativism.
My question is: What holds religious Jews and African-American churches in that coalition? I can see how Episcopalians, Unitarians, et. al. can function in that kind of system, because their fundamental doctrines are always under revision. Jewish teachings have been codified for 4000 years. How they can align themselves with those who actively seek to diminish the authority, relevance, and influence of their teachings is a mystery to me.
Although I tend to vote Republican, I take it from the perspective that Christ said to "make friends with the mammon of unrighteousness." Republicans, at their most fundamental, are about being free and prosperous. The Reagan years brought in a wave of social conservatives, but at its core, Republicans are all about mammon. That isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as one seeks the kingdom of God first. However, sustaining and supporting those who actively seek to undermine God's influence in society seems, to me, to be an unacceptable choice. That's pretty much what the Democrat party is all about in our day.
Bad behavior, name-calling, and making faces from someone your age is most unattractive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.