Posted on 01/31/2006 4:55:12 PM PST by wagglebee
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's travels usually take her to far-flung capitals, but this weekend she's planning a journey closer to home and close to her football fan's heart.
Rice says she will attend Super Bowl XL in Detroit, and she's picking the Pittsburgh Steelers to win - even though she doubted the team in its run-up to Sunday's game against the Seattle Seahawks.
"I picked Pittsburgh to beat Cincinnati; I have picked against them every game since," Rice ruefully told reporters Tuesday. "I'm not picking against them again."
That's not to say she's become a real Steelers fan. Rice is loyal to the Cleveland Browns.
Rice, who can rattle off football statistics and history with ease, has said she might one day like to be commissioner of the National Football League.
She said she attended one previous Super Bowl, in 1985, when she was teaching at Stanford and the game between the Miami Dolphins and San Francisco 49ers was in Palo Alto, Calif.
Homicide. Some homicides (e.g. self-defense) are justifiable.
Since I don't believe that 'life begins at conception' (an aside, in case anyone asks - the primary reason I don't believe this is that bazillions of 'conceived' embryos never implant and become full blown pregnancies, and I have a hard time believing that all of those conceptions that we never even knew about are dead persons invested with souls)
Do we have to "know" people in order for there to be souls? What a strange criteria. If God wishes to ensoul being who live for only a short time, what concern is it of ours?
Your position is not consistent. Why choose implantation? Many babies are lost through miscarriage after implantation. Often before the mother even realizes she is pregnant. Do you also find it hard to believe that they are "dead persons" with souls? No one ever "knows" them.
I can't accept the 'murder' rationale for all abortions. If I did, however, I simply cannot see how one can argue for 'exceptions' based upon the manner of conception.
One can't argue that in a consistent position. "Rape and incest" is an excuse, a political dodge, a claim of difficult circumstances to test a position.
The only morally and logically defensible exception is the one to save the life (not "lifestyle") or the mother. Self-defense is a justification for homicide.
SD
In fact, I should've been more clear. The vast majority of conceived embryos never make it that far.
And I don't depend on 'knowing' to determine whether a collection of cells constitutes 'life'.
However, I do not believe that my God chooses to end the vast majority of 'lives' before they ever even have a chance to become a life.
"Life begins at conception" is merely a construct. There is no scientific support for such an argument, unless you believe that the vast majority of 'human life' lasts for a few hours or a couple of days. I don't. There is no basis for that construct in the text of the Bible, and the punishment decreed for injuring a baby in utero would tend to indicate the opposite.
But that is my view. It is obviously not yours.
Well, you pulling for the longhorns obviously made the difference, so I'm glad you and your 9 year old are on my side here! ;o)
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but am I the only one who thinks this is inappropriate? Between Iraq, a terrorist organization taking control of the Palestinians, and Iraq on the verge of getting nukes, I would think the Secretary of State would have way too much work to do right now to attend the Super Bowl.
last part should read "Iran".
"Self-defense" does not apply in a situation where another's inadvertent actions threaten harm to you, but where there is no intent to hurt you. For example, if an idiot is backing his truck toward you and simply doesn't see you, you do not have a legal right to blow him away. I don't think there is any scenario in which the legal doctrine of 'self defense' could be applied to a medical risk caused by an in utero baby. That, unfortunately, is simply a choice. One that must sometimes be made, but a choice nonetheless. Not a 'legal justification' for homicide.
I am not flaming, jpl, but...I hope Ms. Rice has a wonderful time. You know what they say about all work and no play. I bet those administration types can contact her if needed. I think her being there is symbolic...Ford Field is so safe for the game that the Secretary of State can attend. And besides...she has come out as being a Steeler fan (at least for Sunday). I bet she mets Gladys Bettis (the Bus's mom)...now that is a photo-op.
I hope our tax money is not paying her way or her ticket.
Even the president goes to his ranch for some r&r. I think Condi can take a couple of hours.
When the president, VP or cabinet secretaries travel on personal trips, they fly on government jets. However, they are required to reimburse the govenment for the cost of a normal coach fare and for normal rates per night in hotels. Obviously, the cost to the taxpayer is significantly more; however, this is due to security reasons that are part of their jobs, they should not be made to pay for these.
As far as her ticket goes, I am fairly certain that she is a guest of one of the owners or the commissioner.
Then I hope she has a good time. She should pay back ever dime. I have no problems with her globe trotting on issues, but not for fun.
What do you mean by she should pay back every dime? Do you think she should be required to pay more than what I have described?
Only the plane ticket. Hopefully no discounts.
IIRC they have to pay the average published fare for a coach class ticket purchased 14 days in advance and there is also some formula for paying for a hotel room.
Doesn't matter! Steelers by at least 10!!!!
Cool and thank you for the info. I hope the Steelers win. You?
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.