The Worst President in History?

[Danger Mouse]

Worst: PRESIDENT JAMES DALE

 

[Admiral_N8]

Because a fetus up until a certain month is nothing more than a clump of cells. It is incapable of thought, self awareness or consciousness. The concept of a soul is entirely religious and prior to...say...month 4 or 5...the soul is the only argument anti-abortion activists have as it is a clump of cells.

So you think that thinking killing it before its going to become a baby is wrong is a religious argument?

The soul isnt the only argument against abortion before 4-5 months. The argument is that it is going to be a kid and you are taking the life away from this world

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Bush won Ohio because of the religious vote. There is practically no question there. Ohio took the worst economic hit and yet they voted for him? Why? Because of the gay marriage amendment on Ohio's ballot. It brought out the Amish vote for godsakes. It was political strategy (and a smart one at that).

Although, I personally think the Ohio election was fixed. No way Bush won Cuyohoga County...I mean, Cuyohoga is a bunch of poor, minorities. How on earth could Bush have won that? Especially being as it had a high turn out rate.

I agree...especially considering [one of] the biggest criticism of Bush is how he almost virtually ignores the poor. I almost wonder if he knows they exist.

 

[Matt]

So you think that thinking killing it before its going to become a baby is wrong is a religious argument?

The soul isnt the only argument against abortion before 4-5 months. The argument is that it is going to be a kid and you are taking the life away from this world

But scientifcally there is no ground for that argument as at the time it is nothing more than a clump of cells. Its closest comparrison is a tumor.

 

[Admiral_N8]

Anything is better than the economic hit Ohio took between 2001 and 2004.

You ignored the other points.

Yes I ignored them, simply because I havent done the research necessary to argue against that.

Also, many people in Ohio didnt blame Bush for their problems, or didnt think Kerry would help them in any way.

 

[Admiral_N8]

But scientifcally there is no ground for that argument as at the time it is nothing more than a clump of cells. Its closest comparrison is a tumor.

Scientifically we know its a human life we are preventing . How does killing it right before its "human" make it right?

 

[KingOfDreams]

So you think that thinking killing it before its going to become a baby is wrong is a religious argument?

The soul isnt the only argument against abortion before 4-5 months. The argument is that it is going to be a kid and you are taking the life away from this world

But should the government be allowed to tell women what they can and can't do with thier own bodies? Keep in mind, I am not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. There is a difference. Also, if the administration is so bent on overturning Roe v. Wade then they should be promoting safe sex education, which they aren't. And if Roe v. Wade is overturned, women will still have abortions...but illegally and thus probably unsafely.

 

[Matt]

Yes I ignored them, simply because I havent done the research necessary to argue against that.

Also, many people in Ohio didnt blame Bush for their problems, or didnt think Kerry would help them in any way.

I live close enough to Ohio to get the Youngstown Vindicator daily. I practically grew up there (my town is on the PA, Ohio border). I can tell you, you're wrong in saying many people in Ohio did not blame Bush.

 

[Matt]

Scientifically we know its a human life we are preventing . How does killing it right before its "human" make it right?

Because murder is defined as killing a human being. A clump of cells is not. Its like punishing thought crimes...it just can't be done. But you're changing the subject. You know damn well the majority of the anti-abortion lobby involves religion.

 

[Admiral_N8]

But should the government be allowed to tell women what they can and can't do with thier own bodies? Keep in mind, I am not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. There is a difference.

Should the government be able to tell women they cant take away a human life from the world? Sure.

 

[Admiral_N8]

Because murder is defined as killing a human being. A clump of cells is not. Its like punishing thought crimes...it just can't be done.

So what defines a human being? Is it okay to kill a human being right before we call it a "human being"?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Should the government be able to tell women they cant take away a human life from the world? Sure.

Are you so arrogant that you pose and answer your own questions?

 

[Matt]

So what defines a human being? Is it okay to kill a human being right before we call it a "human being"?

Scientifically, thought, self awareness, consciousness, and instinct. Not the notion of a "soul"

 

[Admiral_N8]

I live close enough to Ohio to get the Youngstown Vindicator daily. I practically grew up there (my town is on the PA, Ohio border). I can tell you, you're wrong in saying many people in Ohio did not blame Bush.

Many people did not blame Bush for their problems. Many people did blame Bush...but many did not.

 

[rdh007]

Are you so arrogant that you pose and answer your own questions?

The Admiral is really Donald Rumsfeld! :gasp:

 

[Matt]

Many people did not blame Bush for their problems. Many people did blame Bush...but many did not.

The majority of Cuyohoga did.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

The Admiral is really Donald Rumsfeld! :gasp:

I can see that.

 

[Admiral_N8]

Scientifically, thought, self awareness, consciousness, and instinct. Not the notion of a "soul"

So we can kill them right before we thinkg they are self aware? Even if they are about to become self aware and we are taking that away from them?

 

[Admiral_N8]

The majority of Cuyohoga did.

That still means there were MANY that did not. Notice I didnt say 'most'. Saying MANY did not blame him is accurate.

 

[Matt]

That still means there were MANY that did not. Notice I didnt say 'most'. Saying MANY did not blame him is accurate.

NO! THERE WEREN'T MANY IN CUYAHOGA...do research. then we'll talk

 

[Abaddon]

I never got the anti-abortion angle.Why bother even bringing a child to the world if you know you arent capable of taking of it?There's the whole adoption thing people pose,but how many of those kids actually find a stable,loving,home?Plus,there's the population control issue

 

[Abaddon]

NO! THERE WEREN'T MANY IN CUYAHOGA...do research. then we'll talk

Sorry,I know we're trying to have a mature,civil discussion here but does anyone else find this name absurdly funny?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

NO! THERE WEREN'T MANY IN CUYAHOGA...do research. then we'll talk

He is doing the semantics thing again. Because many could mean anywhere from 50 to a couple million people....

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Sorry,I know we're trying to have a mature,civil discussion here but does anyone else find this name absurdly funny?

yes

 

[Spidey-Bat]

To a lesser extent, Bush was touted as a common man/man of the people too though he was born rich.

That was never the main focus of his campaign as it was Harrison's.