StinkHole Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Convenient toward advancing an adgenda "This encyclical stands as an urgent call for government, industry and the whole community to honor the responsibility to preserve God’s creation."- Nancy Pelosi Oops Nancy...but isn't human life, you know, the fetus, Gods creation as well? http://goldrushcam.com/sierrasuntimes/index.php/news/local-news/3600-democratic-leader-nancy-pelosi-comments-on-pope-francis-addressing-climate-crisis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 The hypocrisy is stunning. The problem I have with this woman is the same I have with Obama. They speak empty hollow words on so many issues. They do not seem to have a moral compass that guides them. If she was so concerned about human life she would not be so pro abortion. How is abortion "honoring our responsibility to preserve God's creation". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 I would say that 90% or more of politicians only give religion lip service because they have to in order to get elected. There is no way that the people who do the stuff that they do believes in an afterlife where they will answer for their actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 I don't disagree, but with the dems being so anti-American status quo, as in way extreme on the left... it makes it far more threatening that the dems do it, rather than just reps who do it to be on the right side of things for their careers. Like most every anti-conservative cause the left promotes, they use words regardless of their definitions, to sway others, if they can, to their ulterior motives agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 I don't disagree, but with the dems being so anti-American status quo, as in way extreme on the left... it makes it far more threatening that the dems do it, rather than just reps who do it to be on the right side of things for their careers. Like most every anti-conservative cause the left promotes, they use words regardless of their definitions, to sway others, if they can, to their ulterior motives agenda. I will say this, Democrats are very likely just invoking God etc. to appeal to minorities who still have a strong connection to church. Reps and Dems both pander but this type of pandering is geared towards one particular demographic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Convenient toward advancing an adgenda "This encyclical stands as an urgent call for government, industry and the whole community to honor the responsibility to preserve God’s creation."- Nancy Pelosi Oops Nancy...but isn't human life, you know, the fetus, Gods creation as well? http://goldrushcam.com/sierrasuntimes/index.php/news/local-news/3600-democratic-leader-nancy-pelosi-comments-on-pope-francis-addressing-climate-crisis so having the notion we shouldn't destroy the planet we live on makes it impossible to be pro choice then in your warped little infantile mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 so having the notion we shouldn't destroy the planet we live on makes it impossible to be pro choice then in your warped little infantile mind? Using her pandering bullshit phrasing??? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 not a big fan of hers but I don't see any hypocrisy in what she said. Using her pandering bullshit phrasing???Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 "This encyclical stands as an urgent call for government, industry and the whole community to honor the responsibility to preserve God’s creation."- Nancy Pelosi I used the term hypocrisy because she is so concerned about preserving God's creation (the earth) however when God created the earth and universe the crown jewel of His creation was mankind. She has no problem with the killing of human life in the womb. I don't know if hypocrisy is the proper word but what do you call someone like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted June 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 so having the notion we shouldn't destroy the planet we live on makes it impossible to be pro choice then in your warped little infantile mind? Look up moron, it went over you head again. If the environment is Gods creation, then so must be children. What word didn't you understand? "Destroying the planet" is not the point here. Using God to advance that agenda is you dork. I suppose a hypocrite cant recognize hypocrisy when he sees it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Look up moron, it went over you head again. If the environment is Gods creation, then so must be children. What word didn't you understand? And what is the mother then? Just baby chattle? She is also gods creation with her own mind, body and soul. If it's not right for her to have a child than it's not right. With your argument the next logical step is going all the way over to the right and saying that women have zero say in procreation...they can be raped at will and while the perpetrator may be punished she will still have to bear his child. If she is imminently going to die from the pregnancy no matter, she "Must" carry the child because it and only it is the will of god...the womans life is not even secondary in consideration. Anything to further the species. yeah we went through this before, no thanks. They were called the dark ages for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 And what is the mother then? Just baby chattle? She is also gods creation with her own mind, body and soul. If it's not right for her to have a child than it's not right. With your argument the next logical step is going all the way over to the right and saying that women have zero say in procreation...they can be raped at will and while the perpetrator may be punished she will still have to bear his child. If she is imminently going to die from the pregnancy no matter, she "Must" carry the child because it and only it is the will of god...the womans life is not even secondary in consideration. Anything to further the species. yeah we went through this before, no thanks. They were called the dark ages for a reason. It's not about that though, I think most 'pro-life' people would agree that if the baby poses a legitimate threat to the life of the mother, then the mother's life comes first. The issue comes when you get the impression of people using it as a post-fact birth control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 . The issue comes when you get the impression of people using it as a post-fact birth control. Oh I despise when it's used like that. The problem is that even the morning after pill is then lumped in the same with an 8 month abortion. I could totally get on board with a limit on late term abortions "only" in cases of rape, incest and imminent health of the mother. But that would have to be etched into a stone somewhere like the 10 commandments. Otherwise it's like a year before righties want to get rid of all abortions. That's why I side with liberals cause if I would quite literally murder any man who told me my wife or my daughter or whatever that had just been savagely raped couldn't get an abortion if she became pregnant from it. I have zero doubts in my own mind that in such a case I would make Isis pukes blush at my savagery. For you GOT degenerates, picture the big dude sticking his thumbs all up in the eye socket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 I don't have an issue with abortion as long as it's for a good reason, and no more than 20-24 weeks. But there'd better be a good reason, not just 'changed my mind' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted June 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 And what is the mother then? Just baby chattle? She is also gods creation with her own mind, body and soul. If it's not right for her to have a child than it's not right. With your argument the next logical step is going all the way over to the right and saying that women have zero say in procreation...they can be raped at will and while the perpetrator may be punished she will still have to bear his child. If she is imminently going to die from the pregnancy no matter, she "Must" carry the child because it and only it is the will of god...the womans life is not even secondary in consideration. Anything to further the species. yeah we went through this before, no thanks. They were called the dark ages for a reason. Blah blah blah blah ...so now you wanna open up an abortion debate? Nice try with the deflection but not interested. Enjoy listening to yourself babble. At least when conservatives use God, they mean it...and meaning it is what annoys the fuck out of you tards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Blah blah blah blah ...so now you wanna deflect and open up an abortion debate? Not interested. Enjoy listening to yourself babble. well but that's at the crux of the issue if you're claiming that Pelosi can't be pro choice on one hand and then say we have to protect this creation we've been blessed with on the other. That's alright though, I know analytical thought is hard. No sense pulling something this early on a Monday morning. Maybe by Friday those hammy's will be warmed up enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 It's not about that though, I think most 'pro-life' people would agree that if the baby poses a legitimate threat to the life of the mother, then the mother's life comes first. The issue comes when you get the impression of people using it as a post-fact birth control. Which it is. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Which it is. WSS If only more women did anal...problem solved right? I mean right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 If only more women did anal...problem solved right? I mean right? Well it might help. Of course birth control is almost free and easily available, but if you're too fucking lazy... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Well it might help. Of course birth control is almost free and easily available, but if you're too fucking lazy... WSS It's also not completely 100% effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Well it might help. Of course birth control is almost free and easily available, but if you're too fucking lazy... WSS what's healthier for the woman though? a pill she has to take once a month that does mess around with her hormones.....or a good healthy pounding in the butt? I'd be ducking flying heels right now if a woman heard me saying this rofl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 It's also not completely 100% effective. Heh, well there is your out. Kind of the old argument against seatbelts, well you could always be thrown free from the crash! WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Heh, well there is your out. Kind of the old argument against seatbelts, well you could always be thrown free from the crash! WSS Yeah, there's not really a parallel there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Yeah, there's not really a parallel there. Really? So you think that there is a substantial number of people who are better off in an auto accident if they are not wearing a seatbelt? And a significant number of the thousands upon thousands of illegitimate birth are due to conscientious women being failed by properly used birth control methods? Or having been denied access to abortion? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.