posted on May 28, 2003 06:08:27 PM new
You wish I were trolling Kraft.
I am in a sea of left wing politically correct brainwashed who don't even know their American History, think fishing is murder, believe drunken bums and drug addicts are our noble poor, follow every fly by night new age religious fad and want pot smoking to be legal so they can get high.
Man am I alone in this crowd. But hey, maybe someone is getting a breakthrough. Someone may become DEPROGRAMMED.
posted on May 28, 2003 06:10:44 PM new
Do you have smily faces all over your walls at home? are they on the bumper of your car? maybe you have a smiley face coat and hat?...its okay, its okay, just take a deep breath and relax.
posted on May 28, 2003 06:14:41 PM new
well folks, its been fun as always. I have to go eat my fresh strawberries dipped in chocolate. Its strawberry season here and they are big and juicy. Dipped in chocolate...well..its almost a sin.
I'll stop in to help deprogram all of you from the left later on. Take care and GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU CRAZY KIDS!
posted on May 28, 2003 06:21:12 PM new
Doesn't your Jesus tell you that ALL life is valueable? Or is your ego inflated that much to think you are somehow better than a fish? Drunken bums and addicts are people like you and me who have gone down the wrong road. Haven't you ever made a wrong turn? Doesn't your Jesus tell you to have compassion for the fallen? Decent people like Cheryl, aposter, kiara, clivebarkerfan, etc. have been quite open and honest about some very private things and all you can do is condemn them adding things like you're mad at God. How insensitive to the others you are orleansgallery. How narrow-minded you remain to what might be happening with other people beliefs. If what you're doing isn't trolling, what is it??
posted on May 28, 2003 06:25:45 PM newI would suspect that a large part of your "poor" are junkies and transients that won't work for a living.
Oh, how wrong you are and how sheltered you must be. I live in the inner city - MOST of the poor work. They are not junkies or transients. A good deal of the "homeless" (you refer to them as transients) are mentally ill persons who have been thrown out of the mental health system because the money just isn't there. I volunteered once for a church (I know, not my style, but it was Christmas time) who helps the homeless. Almost all of them would love to work, but they don't have the mental capacity or education to do so. The days of living off Welfare are long over. Single men - no welfare. Mothers with children? Two years max. You'll never get me to swing right. However, I'm not as far left as you seem to think.
My posts are confusing? Ah, then it's working. Just kidding, orleansgallery.
Enjoy your strawberries. My favorite fruit! I couldn't imagine the horror of being allergic to them.
Cheryl
My religion is simple, my religion is kindness.
--Dalai Llama
posted on May 28, 2003 06:40:37 PM new
kraftdinner, I didn't say anything about private things that happened in my life. I try not to bring much of my personal life to the boards. I stated my thoughts on abortion and though I have never had one I said that I think the final decision should be with the woman and she will have to live with what she decides to do.
I do admire you and Cheryl and some others for your calm and rational posts throughout all these pages.
And I do smile when I read comments about the "deprogramming" of other free-thinking individuals just because their views and beliefs do not match orleangalleries.
I have to admire orleansgallery for one thing - her guts! When I was a new poster (not so long ago), I would never have said some of the things she has especially to those of you who've been on the board for a long time. I almost got scared off by twelve a couple of times. Helen almost got me once, but all-in-all, I like her. Linda's okay, too, if you get past the right in her. I hung in there, though, probably to the dismay of some members. If 12 hours of painful labor didn't keep me from having another one, this board is a snap.
Edited to add: and
Cheryl
My religion is simple, my religion is kindness.
--Dalai Llama
[ edited by CBlev65252 on May 28, 2003 06:52 PM ]
posted on May 28, 2003 06:56:19 PM new
Heah...wasn't Mary Magdaline a prostitute? Didn't Jesus help her? So, even if the poor ARE strictly drug abusers and bums, wouldn't Jesus help them, or would he turn his back and call them dead weight?
posted on May 28, 2003 07:24:31 PM new
Cheryl....Did I amost "get you"???? It's not like me to "almost" get someone. LOLOL! I like you too, "all in all."
posted on May 28, 2003 07:32:35 PM new
Now, now girls, play nice or I will have to spank each and everyone of you. Hmmm, that might be fun. So, who is first? LOL
posted on May 28, 2003 07:49:50 PM new
Well, trai....I'm ususally first but I have to leave for awhile. I avoid religious discussions because I generally have an overwhelming urge to knock the preacher off the pulpit.
posted on May 28, 2003 08:42:17 PM new
mmmmmm......???? okay okay.I had my strawberries and smoked a great blackstone cherry cigar. I'm feeling pretty good.
Lets see, the FISH. Do I think I am better than a fish? well I never really think of comparing myself to a fish. I do eat fish for food and I think that is okay and perfectly fine.
Jesus did compare us to be "fishers of men". The fish is symbol of harvest and bounty. It also signifys the unconscious. We see the water and the fish is beneath the water unseen to our eyes. Yet it is there. In my original post I used Jesus's multiplying of the fish for the multitudes to prove the commandment of "thou shalt not kill" to apply to the killing of each other, not animals for food. The commandments were given as laws for man to apply to each other.
Hey when I go in ALbertsons and see the lobsters swimming around in the tank with their claws bound, I do feel a twinge of sadness for the critters. But they are really good to eat and I eat them. I think that is perfectly fine and not a sin in the eyes of God.
Someone mentioned Mary Magdelene was a prostitute and Jesus loved her. That is so true! Jesus loves all people. But the difference is this--Mary M did not STAY A PROSTITUTE after she received the love of Christ. Jesus saved the woman who committed adultry. Remember when they were going to stone her to death? He said "he without sin cast the first stone". Everyone left because all were with sin. BUT----he told the woman "go and sin no more". He had a standard of behavior he expected her to apply to her life.
This is what I am trying to say about the many of the so called "poor" in our society. There is a difference between helping someone and ENABLING THEM.
My grandfather was a hobo during the depression. He wanted work but there was none to be had. He eventually got work with the WPA building a hospital. After the depression he found work and bought his own farm and became a very sucessful man. This is due to his "work ethic".
What we need is to not just feed the poor but find a way to get them working and producing in society. This is not going to be easy I know. But there has to be a way.
I leave this room for a few hours and I come back and find naughty pictures!!! you should all go to your rooms and start writing bible verses now!
Heres a cyber strawberry for ya CB just enjoy it with your mind, no calories and no allergies. YUM
[ edited by orleansgallery on May 28, 2003 08:43 PM ]
posted on May 28, 2003 09:09:24 PM new
mmmmmm??? looks like airline highway. There will always people who will fall short of the Glory of God, but the bible says "we all fall short of the glory of God. The bible says even the best works we do "are stinking filty rags in the nostrils of God". That sounds harsh but its true. We are all sinners, we all make mistakes.
There was a post a while ago about SSDI and someone I knew that was cheating on it. I was fairly new to this board and got myself chewed out big time. I almost left the board thinking I wasn't smart enough for it. That's what I meant. I must say, you forced me to think the whole thing through more than I originally had. I enjoy reading your posts because they are always so well thought out. I'm getting there.
trai
Oh, my, I am overdue for my daily beating! I need abuse and I need it bad. I've been soooooo naughty.
Really, thanks for adding some lightness to this post!
orleansgallery
I agree that we need to put the poor (that aren't working already) into jobs. But, what jobs? There aren't enough jobs for educated skilled labor. A lot of them are taking the minimum wage jobs. As stated in another post, people are lining up for jobs at places like WalMart. Until we stop allowing jobs to be moved overseas, the problem will continue.
Glad you enjoyed your strawberries.
Cheryl
My religion is simple, my religion is kindness.
--Dalai Llama
posted on May 29, 2003 05:48:33 AM new
Cheryl, we just had a disagreement on this thread about SSDI. I don't believe that it is correct to say that you were "chewed out bigtime" and I'm very sorry if you thought so. I think that your contributions here and on the Ebay forum are outstanding!!!
posted on June 6, 2003 07:05:07 AM new
[b}"Twelvepole posted on May 17, 2003 09:09:33 AM: What is disgraceful is Roe vs Wade still being on the books and hopefully by the end of President Bush's SECOND term that piece of garbage will be gone...
We can only hope."[/b]
and
"Twelvepole posted on May 17, 2003 05:05:34 PM: Not taking away your right to do with your body, just taking away an easy way out because you were stupid enough to have sex without protection. Abortion is wrong, because it does not prevent a problem or even really correct it, it just allows easy way out and at what price."
and
"Twelvepole posted on May 17, 2003 05:05:34 PM: Women today should be intelligent enough without having to play the abortion game... I was listening to the radio and heard this creature chirping about her 4th abortion..." [and] "However I do not support violence on Doctors... Clinics yes but not the people, they are just misguided."
Congratulations Twelvepole! What else is in store for "chirping creatures"?
Maybe banning the "Morning After" pill because it is aborting a fetus already
conceived?
Bob Marshall in Virginia had already taken those steps for state owned colleges. If one's daughter is at a state run Virgina school and couldn't afford a doctor off campus she shouldn't be allowed the pill and was Out of Luck! Of course the wealthier student would just find an off-campus doctor.
Before school let out James Madison Univ did indeed follow his advice and did not offer it. Marshall wrote to every state run university in Virginia. Don't have time to find the articles this AM.
Linda K said the "Morning After" pill should be used once abortion was banned. Unless of course if Bob Marshall's idea is used, where
that option is taken away. But then there is always McConnell's idea of prayer in place of any contraception.
Someone here said if male castration was being discussing in connection with unwanted pregnancies there would be NO discussion. I would imagine that is true.
Congratulations. From a "chirping creature" who has never had an abortion, never would but respects women enough to understand it is something between a woman and her doctor.
House Votes to Restrict Abortions
Bill Would Ban Method Foes Call 'Partial Birth'
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 5, 2003; Page A01
The House voted last night to ban a series of procedures that critics call "partial birth" abortion, handing abortion opponents their biggest legislative win in more than a decade.
President Bush -- unlike his predecessor -- has promised to sign the bill, which passed the Senate earlier this year in a slightly different form. Senate and House members plan to resolve those differences, and the measure could become law within weeks.
That will not end the fight, however. Abortion rights activists have vowed to challenge the measure in court, noting that three years ago the Supreme Court struck down a similar law in Nebraska.
Yesterday's 282 to 139 vote caps an eight-year legislative battle in which opponents used graphic depictions of abortion procedures to sway the opinion of the public and many Democrats who normally resist abortion restrictions. Under the bill, doctors could not commit an "overt act" to kill a partially delivered fetus whose head is outside the mother's body, or whose trunk beyond the navel is outside her body.
The bill defines partial-birth abortion as an operation in which the doctor "deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus . . . for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered fetus." Doctors violating the law would face fines and as much as two years in prison.
In yesterday's contentious floor debate, the bill's supporters described the procedure as a savage and immoral act that must be stopped. "It's violent, it's barbaric, it's gruesome, it's horrific, it's infanticide," said Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio).
Abortion rights advocates, who concede there is a procedure called "dilation and extraction," said doctors resort to it only when it is medically necessary. They said that the bill would apply to an array of common abortion methods used in the second or third trimester of pregnancy and that it fails to provide an exception for the mother's health.
"We should be promoting a woman's health. We shouldn't be endangering it," said Rep. Lynn C. Woolsey (D-Calif.).
Maryland Democratic Reps. Benjamin L. Cardin, Elijah E. Cummings, Steny H. Hoyer, Chris Van Hollen and Albert R. Wynn voted against the measure, while Democratic Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersburger joined Republican Reps. Roscoe G. Bartlett and Wayne T. Gilchrest in voting for it. In Virginia, the votes split along party lines, with Democratic Rep. James P. Moran Jr. voting against the bill, and Republican Reps. Thomas M. Davis III and Frank R. Wolf voting in favor.
It is unclear how often physicians perform the procedures in question. Opponents say thousands take place each year, but others say the number is far lower. The Alan Guttmacher Institute, which does research for abortion rights groups, estimates that about 2,200 dilation and extraction procedures took place in 2002, but that procedure is defined slightly differently from the one outlined in the bill adopted yesterday.
Congress has approved the ban twice before, but President Bill Clinton vetoed it each time. Supporters set the bill aside three years ago when the Supreme Court, voting 5 to 4, ruled that Nebraska's law on partial birth abortions was unconstitutional because it did not define the procedure clearly enough and failed to provide an exception for the mother's health.
Authors of the House bill said they addressed the court's concerns by including a more specific description of partial-birth abortion as well as language saying the procedure is never medically essential, making a health exception unnecessary.
Although the bill contains an exception for the mother's life, it asserts that "partial-birth abortion is never medically indicated to preserve the health of the mother; is in fact unrecognized as a valid abortion procedure by the mainstream medical community [and] poses additional health risks to the mother."
Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) said he is confident the Supreme Court will "defer" to the congressional findings stated in the bill.
But opponents of the legislation said Congress could not simply sidestep the constitutional requirement for a health exception by declaring it unnecessary. "Congress cannot suddenly claim to have medical degrees," said Rep. Mark S. Kirk (R-Ill.).
Doctors typically perform dilation and extraction procedures for health reasons, such as when a woman is prone to uterine perforation, when the fetus's head is enlarged and when doctors want to reduce the likelihood of retained fetal tissue that can lead to infection in the woman.
If lawmakers succeed in outlawing such procedures, doctors could employ methods that many consider riskier, such as hysterectomies.
Seeking a different approach, a bipartisan group of lawmakers who support abortion rights offered a substitute amendment that would outlaw abortions after a fetus becomes viable, unless the attending physician determines "it is necessary to preserve the life of the woman or to avert serious adverse consequences to her health." That proposal was defeated 133 to 287.
Advocates on both sides described yesterday's vote as groundbreaking. Although Congress has limited federal funding for abortion in the past, it has never banned a specific procedure in the three decades since the Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade.
"Congress is passing legislation that prevents women and families and doctors from making decisions about the best way to protect the life and health of the woman," said Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said the vote demonstrated that Americans were growing more comfortable with curtailing abortion rights.
"Increasing numbers of people are coming to understand Roe v. Wade is far more expansive than people realized," Johnson said.
