Obama ~ The Issues
 

RE: Illinois, Obama is a Senator. His voice is on the national scale not the State scale. The political situation there is irrelevant because he has no control over it, unlike in the case of Palin who is Governor ergo has direct control and responsibility. It's a non sequitur attack. Also, what's the background of Chicago? At what point did the Democrats take control? Who was in control before hand? How long has the current organisation been in control and so on and so forth. These are merrily left out of the e-mail.

I live in a state of perpetual confusion at people who seem convinced that the family unit knows best in every family and every situation.

No. Not "from the sounds of it", what has he SAID he will do. "Reject free market vision" is a VERY blanket statement, so instead of making assumptions as to what you think he means by that why not post what he's actually said he'll do?!

Regarding free healthcare, why does it so often seem that swathes of Americans stick their heads in the sand and ignore that so many other countries have it and it works? Hell, if I get ill I'd rather go to Cuba than America. I'd get the best damn healthcare in the world, and it'd be free for a citizen. I also realise that you apparently have a total lack of conscience but we do, in fact, live in a day and age where we can help those who are too sick and dieing to help themselves. And if that means few dollars of your tax money goes towards that it really won't be the end of the world. What's more important, owning the biggest and best Ferrari or getting somebody antibiotics so that they won't die of infection. Or is it only pro-life when it won't cost you anything? (lol hypocrisy)

The "family unit" as was called above, should have no say in if a woman wants to do something involving growths in her body. You wouldn't throw a fit over if someone had a tumor remove and didn't inform the family of it, would you?

Family privacy? Piss off. The privacy of the individual is vastly more important.

How is this an "invasion of family privacy?" It may be undermining a parent's right to know what is going on with their child, but even then I would say that's a stretch. His stance on this is really just an extension of patient/doctor confidentiality. It is not the state's responsibility to monitor the extent to which parents are in touch with the children's lives. If a teenager chooses to sneak over the state line to get an abortion, that is her decision to tell her parents or not. Just like a teen can go to her family doctor and get a prescription for birth control without the knowledge of the parent.

I regards to the health care statement. You really should have looked at what his policies will be before you posted such an alarmist statement such as that. He WILL NOT force everyone in the country into his defined health care plan. If you have health care through your employer, you will be able to keep it. If you are currently uninsured, he would give the opportunity to buy into a federal health care plan similar to the one available for members of congress. Small businesses will be given tax breaks to help them afford to cover their employees. Larger businesses will be be compensated for lowering premiums with help in paying catastrophic health costs. now with a little bit of research, it is now quite clear that your blanket statement of obama's healthcare plan is completely unfounded.

He works, hand in hand, with those other state officials, to (i would hope) better the bad situation, which is getting worse. Whatever they are doing, from the senate on down, it isn't working.

They weren't 'merrily' (did you mean happily?) left out ~ i figured that y'all might want to do some checking of your own.

i'm sorry if you have a problem with the state raising our children, but it's a little too 1984 for me. i think parents should be responsible for their children and teach them, ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN VALUES, as is their right. And if you don't like it being a parent's right, you're going to have to take that up with a court of law.


Didn't i cite my source ~ onthe issues.com? Shall i go copy it?

Yeppers, i'm one of the most uncaring, unfeeling folks you'd ever want to run across ~ that's probably why i was nurse, caring for the sick and dying, for years. It cost me, alrighty ~ time, effort, and money, not to mention a little piece of my heart every time the job was over.

Please don't presume to know me, okay?

You don't ... really know what the senate does, do you?

The Senate is on a supra-State level. It is above the state. It deals with national and international legislation. It is a branch of the national legislature. The situation that a state is in is the duty of the states Governor, the situation that a city is in is the duty of the cities Mayor. Obama is not in control. Unless you have specific instances to cite in which Obama has had a hand to play, your entire statement becomes non sequitur ad hominem.



Welcome to debate club, where if you make a claim (ie the situation in Chicago is the responsibility of solely the current governance it has) you back it up (ie by proving that they and only they have been the instigators of the current state of affairs). Not very complicated.



A "Right" is something written on a piece of paper. It's no more valid or true in and of itself other than to say that it is enacted upon. There is no such thing as a "Right" other than a figure of speech and the impact it has when used.

What you say is more just a continuation of the same "the family unit can never be wrong" idiocy rather than an actual rebut. The fact that such idiocy is backed up by legislation is really neither here nor there.

If it's a Right (that thing that exists only on paper) is so important why do you seem so ignorant of the Hippocratic Oath? Do they not expect nurses to take it? The "Right" of patient confidentiality to have their issues stay between them and a doctor?

You may have posted reference to the website. But then, what you posted was "Rejects free market vision of government. (Oct 2007)" followed by what you phrased to be your conclusions based purely upon that statement. If you were making statements directed at more specific statements rather than that blanket region of political thinking, you should have quoted the specific items which you were debating.

And yet the views you hold are somehow so ... nonchalant towards human suffering. Working a job doesn't mean you live it. Not all "Priests" are "good Christians".

go fuck yourself,

you don't live in illinois and therefore you don't know shit about illinois.

Thanks for that post then. Just so you know, I'm about to go take a shit. Don't panic though, I WILL return. Give me 10 minutes or so.

This isn't the state raising the child, there is no government control so the 1984 statement is out of place. This is simply Obama supporting patient doctor confidentiality.

And Fal is correct, the family unit is often wrong. Many of these young women have legitimate reasons to hide their abortion from their parents.
Hell, last month I bought weed off a chick whose parents had kicked her out of home at seventeen because she was pregnant. The point being that too often parents react with anger and not logic.

I've read 1984 and the amount that gets compared to it without any relevance at all what so ever begs belief.

Indeed. What sort of Orwelian nightmare have I awoken in, where the government respects the hippocratic oath?

I really fail to see how the number of people being murdered in Chicago (a tragic event in itself) justifies that an equal number of Americans should be dying in an war we shouldnt be in in the first place and that is taxing our weak economy (700 billion and increasing).

Just as a reminder Senator Barrack Obama is a SENATOR for the ENTIRE STATE that serves a NATIONAL level.

You complain because he is undecided on whether life begins with conception or not... which is something nobody knows... would you rather him lie about it like someone else I know? This is another issue where the relgions really shoot themselves in the foot. So lets take a scenario. A girl in college gets raped and becomes pregnant. John McCain helped out 'joe the zealot' by making abortion illegal. So what options does she have? Spend the next 9 months, possibly ruining her posibilities in the future, having a baby? Then what, hold onto it so that she has a memory of the man who raped her living with her. Oh no, you people who dont have to carry the baby just want her to give it up for adoption... you know foster homes... the kind that more often than not raise a child that turns out to rape someone and get them pregnant. Instead why not turn to the bible and understand that Jesus says "Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these", which many christians interpret to mean that babies who die goto heaven. But aparently to the christians that only works if the baby isnt aborted I guess, so they have to "save" the baby. I think in some (not all) cases abortion is "saving" the baby.

It's a forum, not a chatroom. Noone gives two shits.

Nope, sorry. Not feeling it. Once you've learned how to have a proper discussion, try again.

Obama and Friends
 

I see no reason this can't be merged with your other thread

Don't worry, I've posted on plenty of other forums. The ones that don't already expect you to construct a proper argument (i.e. back up what you say with evidential proof) aren't the ones worth sticking around on. As for learning something, lets put it this way: you're the one steadfastly refusing to provide proper quotation and citation to back up your claims. You're the one with only one or two sources as evidence in your arguments.

I've spent far too much time in the past getting involved in arguments with people like you, who fail to comprehend the fact they have to support the premises, to get involved. So yes, it is your fault. All I'm asking you to do is debate to a decent standard. As it stands you can't even construct a paragraph properly.
I realise a nursing course isn't the same as a humanities and you won't be taught how to construct an argument in any sense of depth, but that doesn't mean you can't try. Although I suppose this is where we find out you took Nursing AND Philosophy at University, were a member of the debate team, and have won many a debate against rival Colleges?

P.S. I'm the more important, so I'll make my text more obnoxious than anybody else's.

No, she is the more important comma. You are just not as good at making sentences pause.

JGD ~

To think that he wouldn't be involved with the city that he lives in, and in that political scene, Well, of course he was involved with the city.

i'm not complaining, per se, that he does and doesn't believe in conception being the moment of life, i'm saying that since he does, it's hard to think that he would be for abortion, and absolutely horrifying to think that he would be for partial-birth abortions, where the baby's heart is beating and it is undeniably alive. It says that sometimes he believes abortion is murder and other times he doesn't, but that he's down with it, either way. Also, if he's undecided, who's to say he won't 'get a conscience' and go pro-life?

And let me get this straight ~ i'm not against anyone who doesn't want to get pregnant. But stuff happens, and hey! If you forgot to take your pills, or you left your diaphragm at home, just don't have sex. Easy. And if you can't control yourself? Guess what? Having sex makes babies. If you get pregnant, it's YOUR responsibility, not all of society's.

And for rape victims? i do believe it ought to be available. But we're talking such a low percentage that it becomes an exception to the rule.

If you think for one moment that Jesus was saying that 'Hey, folks, that's okay ~ go ahead and SLAUGHTER your children, by the thousands, because I will take them up to heaven' ~ you're whack.

And here's something else that y'all don't get about Christians ~ we believe that with the Lord, we can deal with anything. i've known women who were raped and got pregnant. You know what they had to say about it?

"The Lord took something absolutely horrible and turned it into something SO beautiful."

They weren't blaming Him for it happening, because He told us that stuff was going to happen and He promised that He'd help us through all of it.

You do know you can change font size so it's only that large on your computer don't you?

Yes, and thank you! i do have other reasons for liking this, too, though, and i don't like my screen so big i have to keep scrolling back and forth.

i mean, if it's this big a prob, why are the options even there? :confused:

Someone wrote in the following editorial to the local paper. Who does it sound like?

I support John McCain because the election of Barack Obama will signal the end of the United States. The destruction of America began with Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. He created a federal government with powers far exceeding anything imagined by our Founding Fathers. It continued with Woodrow Wilson, who declared the era of Jefferson to be over. FDR added his brand of socialism in the 1930s. When Obama implements his Marxist policies, the coffin will be sealed on our republic forever. Kiss America good-bye, people. Welcome the United Socialist States of AmeriKa.

Letters to the editor