And barack Obama wins!

Post Reply New Topic

As Vatnos brought up, what about religious opposition to war? By your reasoning, I should be exempt from not only serving in wartime, but also from paying taxes to support said war.
But both off us know that isn't ever going to happen. Nor should it with funding birth control and abortions.
And for the record, I am in my heart pro-life, though I hold much of the pro-life movement in contempt for being the same people who argue the government has no responsibility for that child once it's born - not to mention the senseless violence directed toward abortion providers. That, and there are always gray areas that will never allow abortion to be a simple black and white issue, such as that poor Hindu woman in Ireland, who desperately begged for an abortion after she had miscarried. But this was denied her because a heart beat was still heard, and in a Catholic country like Ireland, the life of a dying fetus takes precedent over that of the mother. In fact, she died because of that brainless legalism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

ArrantPariah"

As a Jew, I take serious issue with the first quote. Christianity may have come from judaism originally, but that was a looong time ago. Further, as a Reform Jew, I can tell you that reform judaism is not pro-choice or pro-life, but a mixture of both. Specifically, that in the case of rape, incest, lack of appropriate ability to care for the child, or life of the mother, abortion is condoned and even encouraged. However, if you are perfectly capable of having and raising the child, but don't want it because of career ambitions or apathy, then abortion is not condoned.

On to the second quote. This one, I have to give to Inuyasha. I'm pretty sure what she is trying to say is that the government has the power to fight a war. I have to agree because The State's capacity wage war, and it's legal authority to wage war are inextricably woven into the constitution and the way the government works in not just the USA but any state. If the citizens don't like that, tough $&%@. The abortion issue is a little greyer. Abortion is really a civil/social issue, and as such the government has the authority to control it. However, abortion is also just as inextricably bound to certain christian religious beliefs, which the government does not have the right to violate

Tricky tricky.

I admit, that argument was perhaps a little weak - I was attempting to argue a point about covering contraception/abortion with tax dollars, not literally exempting dissenters from paying tax money to support a war effort.
Incidentally, Reform Judaism's stance on abortion is perhaps not that far off from the position held by my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.
And lastly - she? If you're referring to Inuyasha, you may want to look at this member's info.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

They operate on a commercial business model, not a non-profit model. Microsoft takes in revenue to pay for expenses and it donates to charity too. There may be a few orders of magnitude difference in the kinds of profits these companies make, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.


Read the Bible some day perhaps. Funny story: until the 1970s nobody even considered this an issue. The idea that individuality begins at conception is a recent one, invented in the 20th century by evangelicals that got a bit carried away with themselves in their opposition to the legalization of abortion. The passages they cite to support their position are ambiguous. Meanwhile there are clearly passages that state the opposite.



These sections suggest that the Bible considers life to begin at birth, when the first breath occurs. Furthermore, the Bible states that killing any human is a capital offense, but in Ex 21:22-23 it clarifies that killing a fetus (no matter how late in the pregnancy) is treated as a property offense.

So is taxation and regulation of commerce. So, I guess that nullifies your argument about tax money being used for causes that you don't agree with on philosophical grounds. If you are going to take the cheap route and appeal to authority for all of your arguments, enjoy reaping what you sow. The government can use your tax dollars for things you don't support because it's in the Constitution. Congratulations.


No, it is a woman's rights concerning her body. A fetus is no more entitled to rights than any other non-sentient living thing. The only thing that distinguishes it from other animals is the potential for sentience later on, but this isn't a scarce thing that needs to be protected. There are plenty more sperm and eggs where that came from, and all of those have potential.

One would think that an individual who was concerned about his sexual identity would have chosen a more masculine user name.

InuYasha was a male, half-dog demon, half-human character from a manga and anime series of the same name

AROOOO!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I meant no offense inyusha

I'm pretty sure he knows. From the wringer we more opinionated Aspies put each other through, we've grown pretty tough skin.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

In the Wikipedia article, it doesn't state that Inuyasha is male. It doesn't seem that Inuyasha's gender would have been important to the story line, and he appears rather androgynous.

In this picture from the Wikipedia reference, which of the two is Inuyasha?

Hint: dog ears...

We used to this in my 5th grade class.

The off topic award goes to...

Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

for turning this from an argument about social policy in the US government into a discussion of the gender of a human-hybrid creature from an anime

Hoo Hoo!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Looking at some of the pictures




My first thought would have been Inuyasha=Lesbian.

Yes ArrantPariah those photos are completely relevant to Obama's social policies and the issues of abortion and religion in general. Great contribution