SOTOMAYOR - Page 6

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by luvdemdogs on 06 June 2009 - 18:06

I am not a younger poster - and I am not in the least bit superstitious (read: religious) - that being said, as an athiest, I uphold the notion of tolerance to others views. I get a kick out of those who profess to want less government intrusion in people's lives - until they're faced with something - some world view - that they disagree with - then they insist on government intervention.

The government should only step in, in my view, when my actions have a direct negative consequence on someone else's freedom. (The old, my rights to swing my arms ends at your nose, LOL!) I also stand by the premise that a foetus is a human parasite until it starts breathing, but I also understand that is my own opinion, and not shared by all.

by MaggieMae on 06 June 2009 - 18:06

by sueincc on 06 June 2009 - 18:06

There was nothing contradictory in any of the posts made by Just Curious and nobody knocked anyone's religion. Arguing just to argue is really dumb.

by MaggieMae on 06 June 2009 - 19:06

by sueincc on 06 June 2009 - 19:06

Obviously reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

1. Show me where I said this topic was dumb.

2. There is nothing contradictory in the first paragraph by Just Curious.

3. Since "religion bashing" means the overly harsh criticism of religion, I see nothing on this thread said by anybody ( at least prior to your accusation) that has risen to the level of "religion bashing" in any way shape or form.

You know what Maggie? Never mind, go on and think what you want and say what you want. I firmly believe even responding to you is pointless, you argue just to argue. People like you have no clue of what it takes to effect positive change, and you really don't care. After all, what then would you have to whine, cry, and moan about?

You might even be surprised to know many people who are on the same side of several issues as yourself just wish you would shut up because you do absolutely NOTHING to further your cause, quite the opposite, you actually drive away anyone who might be willing to hear a different opinion because you are abrasive, you are rude and you are incredibly judgemental and intolerant of anyone who has views different from your own.

Here is another chestnut for you, it's an oldie but a goodie and I know how much you like it when I post them: "with friends like you, who needs enemies?"

by Red Sable on 06 June 2009 - 20:06

"I also stand by the premise that a foetus is a human parasite until it starts breathing"

THAT is an extremely classless thing to say. You have just stooped to a whole new low.

by justcurious on 06 June 2009 - 20:06

i think mm is missing the part where i said:

if you don't like people's choice and it's very important to you that these people follow your beliefs show less judgement and more compassion and find out why they make the choices they do; find out what fears are behind these choices and offer a reasonable & productive alternative that addresses their issue.

and because of this oversight is also unable to come to the point, which is no small point, that offering an alternative, another option, is not the same as interferring because alternatives/options are free to be choosen or free to be passed over in lieu of a different choice.

another issue that might be causing a problem is different understands of the word interfere. the definition of interere which i am referring: take part or intervene in an activity without invitation or necessity

hth,
susan

by justcurious on 06 June 2009 - 21:06

unfortunately when life begins is a matter of belief and not fact. this is why it has been impossible to legislate and one of the reasons why it should never be a concern of the gov. instead this issue needs to be left for the individual to debate for her/himself. because of the gravity of this issue having as many options for the individual to consider as well as places to turn to is extremely useful in the decision making process.

also, though 'parasite' may not necessarily be the word i would choose, by definition it is not wholly wrong:
"an organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense."

it is a well known fact that many woman have paid a high price (including their lives) to carry a baby to term, for it is no easy feat and is stressful even in the best of situations, which many women unfortunately do not find themselves. this is the 2nd reason the choice ought to be left to the individual and not legislated by the state for it is literally no concern of theirs while it is of great concern to the individual.

again i wish to say i am truly sorry that this issue is so challenging for some who find themselves "sitting on the sidelines", so to speak, watching others make radically different choices than they would. but as a member of a democracy this is a challenge we all face and we each must reconcile our unique conflicts for we do not have the right to reduce freedoms of others simply because they hold differing beliefs.

- susan

by MaggieMae on 06 June 2009 - 21:06

by BabyEagle4U on 06 June 2009 - 21:06

""I also stand by the premise that a foetus is a human parasite until it starts breathing, but I also understand that is my own opinion, and not shared by all.""

OMG !!

Someone please pray for the children !!!

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top

SOTOMAYOR - Page 6

Pedigree Database