President Obama

Lets see if i get all the arguments straight here...

One side argues that Obama is pro-abortion and doesn't want to save the lives of born alive fetuses.

The other says that Obama doesn't want to infringe on an individuals rights to have an abortion (as determined in Roe V Wade).

One side argues that Obama killed the bill.

The other side argues that Obama would have voted for it if it contained language that wasn't specifically designed to open the door for abortion restrictions.


Lets be realistic here people. Obama may have killed it in committee, i don't have facts to support or deny that (and i haven't seen any posted yet). But it's also public record that he voted against it at one point. So clearly, since he was the one responsible for killing it, his vote must have trumped every other politicians vote in the Illinois legislature, since they all must have voted to pass it. After all, if they had voted against the bill too, then Obama would have only been one voice out of many .

Oh wait, i forgot... a majority of senators voted against the bill in Illinois, along with Obama. Seems to me that he was in the majority that saw something wrong with the way it was worded. It also seems to me that he explained his position very clearly on the floor during the voting:

"From 2001 to 2002, Obama voted either “present†or “no†on the legislation. In his floor speeches at the time, he cited in particular his concerns about the constitutionality of the definition of a “born alive infant†and the inclusion of potential civil and criminal penalties for doctors in these situations. He also warned that the bill might compromise the relationship between a woman and her doctor."
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/abortion-...2007-02-15.html

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Mar 5 2007, 10:08 AM) [snapback]400283[/snapback]</div>

i could not care about his stance on abortion or any politicians stance.

irony would be if rudy gets the repub nod for pres - a pro-choice repub - he is my man btw - he was great for gotham and was SPECTACULAR following 9/11 - a true leader.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Mar 5 2007, 11:08 AM) [snapback]400283[/snapback]</div>

The whole history of the Illinois bill can be seen here:
Defined infant
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92.../920SB1095.html
can sue hospital
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92.../920SB1094.html
alteration of state abortion law
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92.../920SB1093.html

History of the Amended bill that actually passed and became law
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus...p;GA=94#actions

Text of the federal law http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h107-2175


I assume it's eventual fate "SESSION SINE DIE" is some legislatese for died in committee. The point I was trying to make in my lengthy prior posts is that the Illinois bill Obama killed was NOT the equivalent of the Federal bill and that a bill similar to the federal law did eventually pass.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 4 2007, 12:03 AM) [snapback]399719[/snapback]</div>

Daniel, I know you dislike both parties.

I never said I paint all dems w/ same brush in the` sense you imply. Their are too many candidates to research them all, I am not consumed politics. Back when I did, I found I always fell w/ repubs. Why keep beating my head aganst wall.

I did NOT mudsling I just said he was a democrat...is that an insult now?

I suspect YOU were against Bush before he was elected the first time. Gee, I would suspect you have mostly voted dem....hmmmmm?????? Am I correct????

STOP BRINGING MY FAITH into it....you have NO CLUE as I have stated before....in FAITH and spiritual matters you are IGNORANT!!!!!!!

Your reply to SteveO's comment is your own particular theory. At least I have convinced you to say "I THINK" so we know it is your own opinion.

All power is given by God...if God wants Obama to be pres...he will be pres. So suck on that for a bit!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 5 2007, 10:30 AM) [snapback]400295[/snapback]</div>

So God wanted Osama Bin Laden to be in charge of Al Qaeda and bring about 9/11? Wow, God is a dick!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 5 2007, 07:30 AM) [snapback]400295[/snapback]</div>

I opposed Bush only after learning something about him. (Which was during his first presidential campaign.) I voted for the Green Party candidates in both 2000 and 2004. (Nader in 2000, Cobb in 2004.) I have voted for Democrats on rare occasions, generally local elections where I knew the candidate personally, but once or twice in U.S. Senate or House races. And I have voted for Republicans two or three times, when there was an exceptional candidate who did not fit the mold, or once when the lesser of two evils was the Republican! Most often I vote for alternative candidates because both the major-party candidates made me sick.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 5 2007, 11:10 AM) [snapback]400465[/snapback]</div>

A serious problem for people who believe that god is all-powerful is the strong argument that an omnipotent god cannot be thwarted, and so everything bad that happens, as well as everything good, must be the will of god. For them, everything that happens is the will of god. GWB and the Iraq war are the will of god, but so are 9/11 and every individual abortion and the holocaust. Ultra-Orthodox Jews wrestle with the conundrum that the holocaust, simply because it happened, must have been the will of god.

This entire line of thought is, for me, a convincing argument that there is no god, or if there is, he is a pathological sadist, or just doesn't give a flying f....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 5 2007, 11:57 AM) [snapback]400491[/snapback]</div>

It's only a strong argument if you don't read and at least try to understand. . .

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

BTW could you please supply the names of the republicans you voted for? I'm a bit curious just how far out of the mainstream they really were.

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 5 2007, 01:02 PM) [snapback]400533[/snapback]</div>

Most recently I voted for Duane Sand for U.S. House of Representatives from North Dakota in 2004. This was a "lesser of two evils" choice, because his opponent, the incumbent, Earl Pomeroy (Democrat) is such a low-life that even a conservative like Sand would have been an improvement. If you research Sand, you'll find you'd approve of him greatly. I am confident you'd have voted for him had you been a voter in ND at the time. And when you see how conservative he is, and consider what you know of my politics, you'll understand the depth of my disgust for Pomeroy.

Others have mostly been local candidates, sometimes women with progressive views outside the mainstream of their party running against conservative Democratic men. In these races you'd probably have voted for the Democrat. I very seldom vote for either of the big parties in state-wide or federal races.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 5 2007, 07:30 AM) [snapback]400295[/snapback]</div>

Karl, weren't you the one who brought your faith into many discussions on FHOP in the first place?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Mar 11 2007, 12:35 AM) [snapback]403579[/snapback]</div>

Uh, this topic was not about my faith...that was my point. But OK, if that is how others interpret my thoughts I guess it is wide open. i didn't approve of how DANIEL used his impression of my faith to interpret my thoughts.

I try very hard to keep my interpretation of how others think out of it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 13 2007, 11:42 AM) [snapback]404951[/snapback]</div>

Sort of like, when you first learned that I had been in prison, you jumped to the conclusion that I was in for drugs (not true); or the way you assumed that I voted mostly for Democrats (also not true).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 14 2007, 03:29 PM) [snapback]405532[/snapback]</div>

But what does that have to do with your faith...or race...or ethnicity...or country of origin.......

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 15 2007, 11:55 AM) [snapback]406196[/snapback]</div>

Jumping to conclusions about people.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 16 2007, 01:30 AM) [snapback]406576[/snapback]</div>

There are times we HAVE to "jump" to conclusions about people. We don't have the time to "get to fully know" every person we interact with. Sometimes we have to make a quick conclusion. No, that does not necessarily apply here, but it is not something that should be condemned.

I guarantee you have some conclusions about me that are false, as I do you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 5 2007, 04:10 PM) [snapback]400465[/snapback]</div>

LOL you'll get yours one day!!! :lol:

Wow what a true statement, it can be seen on every thread..... Just because some one doesnt agree with someone else a conclusion is made of the other person and it is carried on until someone leaves or the other gets board because it just doesnt get a rise anymore.....

Hasnt anyone else noticed the Libbies keep pulling the Religion card? This in turn makes the postee wonder Wth is wrong with the other poster for continuing to bring up one religious beliefs when the thread isnt even about religion.... :angry:

If I make a statement or comment I get the dead horse beating oh thats not a very christian thing to say, you must be a hipocrite... Again what I say or do doesnt change my beliefs and I couldn't care less what you think about me.. This is a message board where we post our thoughts, current events & ideas....

I really think the persons that like to irratate others by bringing in religious beliefs should really like my irratating colored text....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Mar 16 2007, 08:54 AM) [snapback]406778[/snapback]</div>

Exactly.