Posted on 11/13/2008 9:46:23 AM PST by EternalVigilance
How’s that workin’ for ya so far?
Indeed.
Better than your effort.
Very true. What are you running for in 2010? Want to run the RNC?
Oh how clever.
::rolling eyes::
So tell me, how much failure will it take for you to change tactics?
From what to what?
From focusing on something that has not worked to something that uses the pro-choice argument against its own proponents.
1. Please be more specific about “something that has not worked” regarding particular pro-life approaches and arguments.
2. The “pro-choice” movement, and their argument, is definitive tribalism and thus not subject to being universalized along the lines that you pursue.
1. It would more efficient for you to say what has worked: i.e. nothing.
2. It’s only definitive tribalism if you go along with the pro-choice definitions.
The same people tried to float the idea that minorities were incapable of racism and bigotry by “definition,” too.
1. You, not I, are the one claiming that particular pro-life approaches are ineffective and thus it is you, not I, who then needs to identify exactly which pro-life approaches are being deemed ineffective and why.
2. Feminism is the most entrenched form of tribalism on Earth. That is why the entire pretext of using one of their arguments for a proposal involving universal application is intrinsically oxymoronic.
I admit it is not easy saying this and it tries my logic,
I think if we had 65,000,000 Catholics and additionally some others as the Rosary is a universal prayer saying this prayer, sure, this country could be saved.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2095715/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2119067/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2119064/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2116461/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2099923/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2099366/posts
1. No i don’t. Falling for your rhetorical rope-a-dope by trying to get me to catalog the self-evident is a waste of my effort.
2. Pontification is not proof. There is no reason the feminist rationale for abortion could not be appropriated by men, thus forcing the social dynamic back to where it has been since time immemorial.
You were actively supplying one part of that, so I congenially offered the rope part to complete the rhyme.
Can you provide a single data point in support of the efficacy of your assertion?
Oh but wouldn’t it be grand if your clever repartee were useful for something other than preserving your self-esteem when prudence would suggest reflection.
How can their be documented healings at Lourdes? Hundreds of them and that is searchable on the internet, just try “healings” and “Lourdes.”
“For those who believe in God, no explanation is necessary;
for those who do not believe in God, no explanation is possible.”
Lourdes is not an answer to my question. It is an evasion.
Can you provide a single example of societal repentance in response to the prayers of the “faithful?”
If you want to read about societal repentence, google Charles Finney, the evangelist.
As the second hit for Charles Finney is a denunciation on spurgeon.org (the first being a wiki ref.) perhaps you could elaborate on exactly what was repented of.
Well, just go out and buy a book on Finney instead of digging through thousands of google links.
Cities and towns were greatly affected and had much change through his ministry and prayers.
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.