[Rhodes22-list] The heart of the matter - beware, moral issues here

Herb Parsons hparsons at parsonsys.com
Wed Sep 10 18:17:54 EDT 2008


Sorry Robert, you're lying again.

When you spout your nonsense about chattel, you're spouting either 
nonsense or lies. I believe it's the latter.

When a person, any person, male or female, chooses to reproduce, they 
have to assume responsibility. It's that simple. It's no more making a 
woman "property" to say she cannot kill the innocent child she brought 
about than it is making the man property by saying he must pay for that 
child for 18-25 years.

It's all about responsibility. You don't want to reproduce, don't. But, 
people should not kill to achieve their reproductive goals.


Robert Skinner wrote:
> An interesting solution...  Talk about going to the
> heart of the matter!
>
> Semen storage:
>
> 1. Who would own it?
>
> 2. If a woman chose to be inseminated with sperm
> from a man, would that man be required to pay
> child support?  (See case law!)
>
> 3. Would a woman have the option to buy (bid?) on
> sperm from a man?  Could a man advertise?
>
> 4. At what age would the semen be collected?
>
> 5. Who would do the collecting and how would it
> be done?  (Don't want a line forming...)
>
> 6. Would a donor have the option of selecting the
> donee - and would she have the option of
> declining?  (You see where this goes!)
>
> Castration:
>
> 1. Would the guvment offer a bounty to reduce
> the social burden of unwanted children, rape, and
> other hyperagressive behavior?
>
> 2. Would the castratee be given a running head
> start?  Could a person buy their way out?
>
> 3. Would this increase the quality of male choirs?
>
> 4. Would this have any effect on the US's dominant
> position in world affairs?
>
> 5. Would this promote whirled peas?
>
> 6. Would this mean the end of Chip and Dale?
>
> Maybe we should just offer/require prepubescent
> Norplant?
>
> Or would it be better to say that a woman owns HER
> body and anything in it until SHE chooses to
> present it to the world?  Or does the state own
> her life and means of reproduction?
>
> A woman bearing a child runs risks similar to those
> of a man in the armed forces (or at least the Air
> Force).  Requiring her to carry an unwanted fetus
> to term is equivalent to conscription.  And such
> conscription is ridiculous in a time of world
> overpopulation.
>
> My wife is not my chattel, nor is she owned by the
> state.  Any man who maintains that he has a right
> to decide whether a woman will carry a zygote to
> term is acting as if he owned her.  That's no longer
> valid in today's world without a mutually agreed
> upon contract (marriage without an asterisk, etc.)
> to that effect.
>
> /Robert
> ----------------------------------------------------
> elle wrote:
>   
>> Forced semen storage and then mass castration could end the abortion debate once and for all.
>>
>> elle
>>
>> We can't change the angle of the wind....but we can adjust our sails.
>>
>> 1992 Rhodes 22   Recyc '06  "WaterMusic"   (Lady in Red)
>>
>>
>> --- On Wed, 9/10/08, Ben Cittadino <bcittadino at dcs-law.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> From: Ben Cittadino <bcittadino at dcs-law.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists" are going to save us from the Republicans
>>> To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
>>> Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 12:05 PM
>>> Herb,
>>>
>>> You raise an interesting legal point.  Did you know that
>>> the right to use
>>> deadly force to defend one's property is different in
>>> the different states?
>>> In fact it changes in direct proportion to one's
>>> movement from northeast to
>>> southwest.  In most northeastern states a person has a duty
>>> to retreat and
>>> not use deadly force to defend one's property, but as
>>> one moves southwest a
>>> person has more legal right to stand their ground and even
>>> use deadly force
>>> to defend their property. It's actually a fascinating
>>> study of the whole
>>> macho "code of the west" thing. 
>>>
>>> I just can't do the abortion debate. Nobody ever
>>> changes anybody's mind on
>>> it. I think it just comes down to a society balancing very
>>> impotant
>>> competing interests. So far our society has decided that a
>>> woman's privacy
>>> right trumps the government's interest in protecting
>>> the life (or potential
>>> for life) of the not yet born up to the point of about
>>> 2/3rds of the way
>>> through the pregnancy. It's a judgment call. It seems
>>> reasonable enough to
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Ben, s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Psssst, Brad, don't tell anyone on here that already
>>> knows differently, 
>>> but in spite of my personal religious beliefs, I believe
>>> that the issue 
>>> should be left up to the states.
>>>
>>> Further, I think that local cities should be allowed to
>>> further 
>>> restrict, within the confines of their state's charter
>>> and constitution, 
>>> the matter. I believe that to be how we should operate on a
>>> lot of 
>>> different issues.
>>>
>>> Did you know that in some states it's illegal to own a
>>> handgun, but in 
>>> the GST (Great State of Texas), you not only can legally
>>> own one, you 
>>> can shoot, and kill, someone who's stupid enough to try
>>> to take what is 
>>> your property when you've got one of them handy.
>>>
>>> Brad Haslett wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Herb,
>>>>
>>>> The nut cuttin' of the conversation is how much
>>>>         
>>> should the federal
>>>       
>>>> government be involved in personal decisions of
>>>>         
>>> morality.  I say, not
>>>       
>>>> much.  That should be left up to the states and the
>>>>         
>>> locals.  I grew up
>>>       
>>>> in a dry township.  Other people with other ideas
>>>>         
>>> about that moved six
>>>       
>>>> miles away. Everything is a trade-off.  Roe v Wade was
>>>>         
>>> an unnecessary
>>>       
>>>> invasion of states rights. What certain groups
>>>>         
>>> can't get legislated,
>>>       
>>>> they try and get decided from the bench. The issue
>>>>         
>>> that started this
>>>       
>>>> thread was Gov. Palin's religious convictions. 
>>>>         
>>> The first bill she
>>>       
>>>> vetoed was one that would strip health care benefits
>>>>         
>>> from the gay
>>>       
>>>> partners of Alaskan state employees.  Her reasoning
>>>>         
>>> and statements at
>>>       
>>>> the time of the veto was that is was unconstitutional.
>>>>         
>>>  What greater
>>>       
>>>> litmus test is there?  The far lefts poster child yard
>>>>         
>>> sign is molding
>>>       
>>>> and wilting in the sunshine.  We'll have this
>>>>         
>>> argument another day
>>>       
>>>> under another banner and with a different cheerleader.
>>>>         
>>>  This one
>>>       
>>>> turned out to be an empty suit on too many other
>>>>         
>>> issues.
>>>       
>>>> Brad
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>>         
>>> <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>>>       
>>>> wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>         
>>>>> There is nothing wrong with society determining
>>>>>           
>>> the "moral boundries"
>>>       
>>>>> they wish to maintain. There is also nothing wrong
>>>>>           
>>> with those moral
>>>       
>>>>> boundries being subject to change as said society
>>>>>           
>>> changes. In spite of
>>>       
>>>>> my religious beliefs, I do not now want a
>>>>>           
>>> theocracy, no have I ever.
>>>       
>>>>> However, the notion that 5 men can forever dictate
>>>>>           
>>> to a nation of
>>>       
>>>>> millions what their moral boundry should be is
>>>>>           
>>> tyranny. I do not want
>>>       
>>>>> the feds pushing any agenda one way or the other,
>>>>>           
>>> and that includes the
>>>       
>>>>> federal judicial branch. I want the citizenry to
>>>>>           
>>> make that choice.
>>>       
>>>>> I know, I know, it kinda blows your "Herb
>>>>>           
>>> wants his religion for
>>>       
>>>>> everyone" nonsense, huh Michael?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, all of the above reflects my personal
>>>>>           
>>> opinion. None of it intended
>>>       
>>>>> to be perceived by an reader or observer as any
>>>>>           
>>> type of fact, implied or
>>>       
>>>>> otherwise. They are worth at least as much as the
>>>>>           
>>> durability of the
>>>       
>>>>> media in which they are made, and their only
>>>>>           
>>> asserted value is that. All
>>>       
>>>>> readers and/or observers are free, and even
>>>>>           
>>> welcome, to ascribe to said
>>>       
>>>>> beliefs, or simply write them off as so much
>>>>>           
>>> bullshit.
>>>       
>>>>> Oh, and Michael, you flatter yourself. I
>>>>>           
>>> didn't just recently "realize"
>>>       
>>>>> all of that. I DID make the absurd assumption that
>>>>>           
>>> you recognized
>>>       
>>>>> opinion when you saw it. Silly me.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Todd,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I certainly never wanted to remove God from my
>>>>>>             
>>> life.  I, like Ben C.,
>>>       
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> no problem with the coexistence of God and
>>>>>>             
>>> science.  I cannot understand
>>>       
>>>>>> why
>>>>>> every group in this country (religious or
>>>>>>             
>>> non-religious) feels that the
>>>       
>>>>>> separation of church and state means that we
>>>>>>             
>>> need to remove all traces
>>>       
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> religion and culture from public places. 
>>>>>>             
>>> Since we can't offend anyone
>>>       
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> celebrating our religious rituals, we must
>>>>>>             
>>> remove all religion from
>>>       
>>>>>> schools,
>>>>>> government and the public.  I think that if we
>>>>>>             
>>> remove all holidays,
>>>       
>>>>>> ethnic
>>>>>> traditions, religious symbols, etc. the world
>>>>>>             
>>> will be a pretty ugly
>>>       
>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I do, however, feel that religious beliefs
>>>>>>             
>>> are very personal and no one
>>>       
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> the right to impose them on others.  I think
>>>>>>             
>>> that this is what was meant
>>>       
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> the separation of church and state, to
>>>>>>             
>>> eliminate religious persecution. 
>>>       
>>>>>> How
>>>>>> is one to deal with the concept put forth by
>>>>>>             
>>> some faiths that place the
>>>       
>>>>>> responsibility for misdeeds by one on all of
>>>>>>             
>>> society?  What is the basis
>>>       
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the following statement from Todd: "Each
>>>>>>             
>>> draws his line of good
>>>       
>>>>>> conscience
>>>>>> to justify acts past, present, or future in
>>>>>>             
>>> his or her own life (or
>>>       
>>>>>> afterlife) - not to protect the legal
>>>>>>             
>>> reproductive rights of every
>>>       
>>>>>> random
>>>>>> Jane Doe."  What, exactly, does it mean?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>>>>>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Todd Tavares"
>>>>>>             
>>> <sprocket80 at mail.com>Sent: Tuesday, September 09,
>>>       
>>>>>> 2008
>>>>>> 4:43 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> Michael, It is just another example of
>>>>>>>               
>>> taking God OR religion out of
>>>       
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> equation to ease our conscience. Excluding
>>>>>>>               
>>> cases of rape, incest, etc.,
>>>       
>>>>>>> the parents of the developing fetus;
>>>>>>>               
>>> whether you consider it alive or
>>>       
>>>>>>> not, had a choice and responsibility they
>>>>>>>               
>>> chose not to exercise.  Is
>>>       
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> knowledge and ability to perform surgical
>>>>>>>               
>>> abortion the only thing that
>>>       
>>>>>>> separates us from our animal urges and the
>>>>>>>               
>>> apes we evolved from?
>>>       
>>>>>>> Religious, Christian, Atheist, or Pagan;
>>>>>>>               
>>> view videos and pictures of a
>>>       
>>>>>>> "partial birth abortion"-- which
>>>>>>>               
>>> the legal rights of the mother to
>>>       
>>>>>>> choose, Clinton initially fought to try to
>>>>>>>               
>>> preserve and even a
>>>       
>>>>>>> civilized
>>>>>>> atheist would exclaim OH MY F'ing GOD
>>>>>>>               
>>> and start thinking
>>>       
>>>>>>> differently...even if they'd never
>>>>>>>               
>>> admit it openly and risk
>>>       
>>>>>>> contradicting
>>>>>>> their publicly espoused views.   Each
>>>>>>>               
>>> draws his line of good conscience
>>>       
>>>>>>> to justify acts past, present, or future
>>>>>>>               
>>> in his or her own life (or
>>>       
>>>>>>> afterlife) - not to protect the legal
>>>>>>>               
>>> reproductive rights of every
>>>       
>>>>>>> random
>>>>>>> Jane Doe.   Let's look in the mirror
>>>>>>>               
>>> and stop lying to ourselves and
>>>       
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> other here. (not a fact....just a thought)
>>>>>>>               
>>> Todd T
>>>       
>>>>>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>  From: "Michael D. Weisner"
>>>>>>>  To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>>>>>  Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise
>>>>>>>               
>>> Jesus, the "evolutionists" are
>>>       
>>>>>>>  going to save us from the Republicans
>>>>>>>  Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:54:12 -0400
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Herb,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  You state as fact:
>>>>>>>  "... the individual's religious
>>>>>>>               
>>> belifs (sic) involve yet another
>>>       
>>>>>>>  individual."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  You conclude:
>>>>>>>  "You are advocating that a woman be
>>>>>>>               
>>> allowed to kill another living
>>>       
>>>>>>>  human
>>>>>>>  based on HER religious beliefs, not those
>>>>>>>               
>>> of that living human."
>>>       
>>>>>>>  The "fact" is actually your
>>>>>>>               
>>> opinion according to your religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  beliefs that
>>>>>>>  this is another human being. You then
>>>>>>>               
>>> employ your religious beliefs
>>>       
>>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>>  close the argument in restating the
>>>>>>>               
>>> premise "... of that living
>>>       
>>>>>>>  human."
>>>>>>>  There is no logic to the argument. It is
>>>>>>>               
>>> so only because you say it
>>>       
>>>>>>>  is so,
>>>>>>>  and that is according to your religious
>>>>>>>               
>>> beliefs. This is circular, at
>>>       
>>>>>>>  best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I know that you can do better ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Mike
>>>>>>>  s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>>>>>>>  Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  From: "Herb Parsons" Sent:
>>>>>>>               
>>> Tuesday, September 09,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  2008 3:06 PM
>>>>>>>  > Resent away Michael, but what did I
>>>>>>>               
>>> "present as fact"?
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  > And, beliefs aside, my reasoning is
>>>>>>>               
>>> not "circular". I believe very
>>>       
>>>>>>>  much
>>>>>>>  > in an individual's right to
>>>>>>>               
>>> decide for themselves what they will
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and
>>>>>>>  > will not do. However, when that
>>>>>>>               
>>> decision directly affects another,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  > especially the life of another, than
>>>>>>>               
>>> it is not the one individual's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  > choice to make.
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  > Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>>>>>>  >> Herb,
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >> It always amazes me that you
>>>>>>>               
>>> have no problem putting your beliefs
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and
>>>>>>>  >> opinions in the form of fact in
>>>>>>>               
>>> your arguments. The interesting
>>>       
>>>>>>>  thing is
>>>>>>>  >> that the more I agree with the
>>>>>>>               
>>> basic principles of these
>>>       
>>>>>>>  discussions, the
>>>>>>>  >> more I resent your reasoning.
>>>>>>>               
>>> While we may reach the same
>>>       
>>>>>>>  conclusion, the
>>>>>>>  >> paths are significantly diverse.
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >> My opinions and beliefs aside, I
>>>>>>>               
>>> think that in order to state "I
>>>       
>>>>>>>  would
>>>>>>>  >> agree, except in this case, the
>>>>>>>               
>>> individual's religious belifs
>>>       
>>>>>>>  (sic) involve
>>>>>>>  >> yet another individual,"
>>>>>>>               
>>> one must employ circular reasoning, thus
>>>       
>>>>>>>  defeating
>>>>>>>  >> the value of the statement.
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >> Mike
>>>>>>>  >> s/v Shanghai'd Summer
>>>>>>>               
>>> ('81)
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >> Nissequogue River, NY
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >> From: "Herb Parsons"
>>>>>>>               
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 09,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >> 2008 1:58 PM
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >>> I would agree, except in
>>>>>>>               
>>> this case, the individual's religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  belifs
>>>>>>>  >>> involve yet another
>>>>>>>               
>>> individual. You are advocating that a woman
>>>       
>>>>>>>  be
>>>>>>>  >>> allowed to kill another
>>>>>>>               
>>> living human based on HER religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  beliefs, not
>>>>>>>  >>> those of that living human.
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>  >>> Rik Sandberg wrote:
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Herb,
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Well, here you go my
>>>>>>>               
>>> friend. War is a terrible analogy.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> IF we are going to have
>>>>>>>               
>>> freedom OF religion, which would also
>>>       
>>>>>>>  include
>>>>>>>  >>>> freedom FROM religion
>>>>>>>               
>>> and the abortion issue is mostly decided
>>>       
>>>>>>>  on a
>>>>>>>  >>>> religious (or
>>>>>>>               
>>> non-religious, choice again) basis, it is not our
>>>       
>>>>>>>  place to
>>>>>>>  >>>> expect anyone else to
>>>>>>>               
>>> assume our religious beliefs.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Which leads us right
>>>>>>>               
>>> back to; the gov't should have no voice in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  this at
>>>>>>>  >>>> all.
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Rik
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Ayn Rand was a prophet -
>>>>>>>               
>>> - it isn't my fault
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>> Herb Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>> I like your honest
>>>>>>>               
>>> assessment on Palin, but I disagree about
>>>       
>>>>>>>  your
>>>>>>>  >>>>> labeling of the
>>>>>>>               
>>> position.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>> If I say I'm not
>>>>>>>               
>>> going to fight in a war, but it's OK if my
>>>       
>>>>>>>  government
>>>>>>>  >>>>> attacks another, am
>>>>>>>               
>>> I anti-war, or pro-war?
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>> Obviously,
>>>>>>>               
>>> you'll not have an abortion, that would mean a male
>>>       
>>>>>>>  could be
>>>>>>>  >>>>> neither pro or anti;
>>>>>>>               
>>> however, anyone that believes the issue
>>>       
>>>>>>>  does not
>>>>>>>  >>>>> affect me is wearing
>>>>>>>               
>>> blinders.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>> Rik Sandberg wrote:
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> Herb,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> Agreed. Palin
>>>>>>>               
>>> claims no more religiousity (is that a word,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  sounds good)
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> than either of
>>>>>>>               
>>> the other three candidates involved. She has
>>>       
>>>>>>>  also shown
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> that she can
>>>>>>>               
>>> govern without forcing forcing those beliefs on
>>>       
>>>>>>>  her
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> constituents.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> On the abortion
>>>>>>>               
>>> issue: Yep, she's against them, for her. So am
>>>       
>>>>>>>  I, for
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> me. I am
>>>>>>>               
>>> pro-choice. People just can't seem to get a handle on
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the idea
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> that pro-choice
>>>>>>>               
>>> doesn't mean anti or pro abortion. It means
>>>       
>>>>>>>  you should
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> be able to make
>>>>>>>               
>>> your own choice and let others make theirs,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  ie, mind
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> your own
>>>>>>>               
>>> business.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> From what
>>>>>>>               
>>> I've seen Palin, as governor of Alaska has been
>>>       
>>>>>>>  doing this
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> If I had my way,
>>>>>>>               
>>> the federal gov't wouldn't be involved in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  abortion at
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> all.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> Rik
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> Ayn Rand was a
>>>>>>>               
>>> prophet - - it isn't my fault
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> Herb Parsons
>>>>>>>               
>>> wrote:
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> Stan,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> What
>>>>>>>               
>>> evidence do you have that would lead you to believe that
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Palin
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> would force
>>>>>>>               
>>> her religious belief on anyone? My understanding
>>>       
>>>>>>>  is that
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> she's
>>>>>>>               
>>> all for allowing the individual states to set the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  standard.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>>               
>>> that's really beside the point. As you said,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  anyone's
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> pinpoint
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> of the exact
>>>>>>>               
>>> time is a "religious" matter, or a matter of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  fath, thus
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> ANYONE
>>>>>>>               
>>> setting pinpointed time would be them foisting their
>>>       
>>>>>>>  beliefs on
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> Surely
>>>>>>>               
>>> you're not advocating allowing the parents to decide
>>>       
>>>>>>>  at any
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> they choose,
>>>>>>>               
>>> up to and including while the "fetus" is still
>>>       
>>>>>>>  in
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> college?
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> stan wrote:
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> Slim,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> As a
>>>>>>>               
>>> member of your religious faith, and an ardent fan, if
>>>       
>>>>>>>  you really
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> plan
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> to skip
>>>>>>>               
>>> voting (in effect voting for those whose direct
>>>       
>>>>>>>  religious
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> instructions got us into such a waste of our wealth and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  blood) I
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> truly
>>>>>>>               
>>> saddened. I don't think poorly of John's and
>>> Palin's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> inability to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> live up
>>>>>>>               
>>> to their own family values, relying on their gods to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  forgive
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> them -
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> I worry
>>>>>>>               
>>> about their health; a topic that seems to be
>>>       
>>>>>>>  forbidden to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> address.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> John's cheek is not like that from his prisoner days and
>>> his
>>>       
>>>>>>>  vp could
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> be our
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> leader
>>>>>>>               
>>> without notice. Then where would this country's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  founding
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> desire
>>>>>>>               
>>> for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> religious freedom end up? The first example is already on
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the table
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>               
>>> Joe has it right: When life starts is a religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  opinion
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>               
>>> not be one decided by government. You may feel life
>>>       
>>>>>>>  does not
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> until a
>>>>>>>               
>>> breath is taken, the Jews count a number of months
>>>       
>>>>>>>  before the
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> start,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>               
>>> Christens count from the moment the cells begin
>>>       
>>>>>>>  dividing.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Personally I
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> don't think it starts until after college. If we allow a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Palin to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> call
>>>>>>>               
>>> such
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> shots we
>>>>>>>               
>>> are on a path Jefferson and all those other smart
>>>       
>>>>>>>  guys
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> insisted
>>>>>>>               
>>> on
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> avoiding. McCain told the TV interviewer that if he had his
>>>       
>>>>>>>  way the
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> judge he
>>>>>>>               
>>> would get rid of is Ginsberg and than went down the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list of
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> her
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> kind.
>>>>>>>               
>>> Once this is allowed to start (we already have allowed
>>>       
>>>>>>>  god
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> onto our
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> coins),
>>>>>>>               
>>> god (hypocritically speaking) help us - or we will
>>>       
>>>>>>>  all,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> eventually,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> become
>>>>>>>               
>>> strong advocates of the second amendment.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> John, at
>>>>>>>               
>>> least is a flip flopper so, if elected, would
>>>       
>>>>>>>  probably
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> revert
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> many of
>>>>>>>               
>>> his reasonable positions. It is Palin I am fearful
>>>       
>>>>>>>  will give
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> us
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>               
>>> worse than another 8 years. (And this from a confessed
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> womanizer.)
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> stan/ec
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>               
>>> Original Message ----- From: "Steven Alm"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> To:
>>>>>>>               
>>> "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> Sent:
>>>>>>>               
>>> Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:02 AM
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> Subject:
>>>>>>>               
>>> Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus,the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  "evolutionists" are
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> save us
>>>>>>>               
>>> from the Republicans
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Todd,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> I'm an atheist and I think Palin's a religious kook.
>>> And
>>>       
>>>>>>>  you're
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> right, I
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> won't vote for a religious kook. I haven't studied
>>> Darwin
>>>       
>>>>>>>  very much
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> (and
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> applaud your research and quotes) but I don't think
>>> that's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the only
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> rebuke
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>               
>>> creationism. Since most of the species of plant and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  animal life
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> earth are in fact extinct, I'd call that
>>> "unintelligent
>>>       
>>>>>>>  design."
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> You
>>>>>>>               
>>> said there are only two possibilities as to how life
>>>       
>>>>>>>  started.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> Are
>>>>>>>               
>>> you
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> sure? How do you know this? What I know is that all
>>>       
>>>>>>>  religions
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> serve in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> answering three questions: Where did we come from, how do
>>>       
>>>>>>>  we live
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> happens when we die? Myself, I've answered those
>>> questions
>>>       
>>>>>>>  to my
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> satisfaction and I don't need the church to tell me
>>>       
>>>>>>>  anything.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> On
>>>>>>>               
>>> Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Todd Tavares
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> wrote:
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Slim, Wow! are you are going to vote for Obama because he
>>>       
>>>>>>>  is a
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Marxist
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> or not vote for McCain just because Palin is a religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  extremist?
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> :^D
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Glad you mentioned carbon dating. Carbon has been proven
>>>       
>>>>>>>  by many
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> scientists to be a wholly inaccurate method of dating. I
>>>       
>>>>>>>  am far
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> from
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> being a scientist...or a religious kook thinking the earth
>>>       
>>>>>>>  is only
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> couple of thousand of years old, but there is just as much
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> scientific
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> information out there to; while not proving creation is
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the truth,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> surely
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> proves evolution is improbable if not impossible. You
>>>       
>>>>>>>  are/were an
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> educator and were taught evolution from a text book, like
>>>       
>>>>>>>  we all
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> were.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Just because you read something in a text book does not
>>>       
>>>>>>>  make it
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> truth.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Maybe we could
>>>       
>>>>>>>  all
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> stomach
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> creationism if we called it a theory too. After all that
>>>       
>>>>>>>  is what
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> evolution is...just an unproven theory. There are equally
>>>       
>>>>>>>  as many
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> scientists out there who believe they have proven
>>>       
>>>>>>>  evolution is
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> myth. It
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> was not Darwin's brainstorm anyway. He thought he could
>>>       
>>>>>>>  further
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> explain
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> a centuries old belief; that life arose from non life and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> everything
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> sprang from a common ancestor. Modern scientists say it
>>>       
>>>>>>>  was that
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> first
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> amino acid or protein chain in the pool of "primordial
>>>       
>>>>>>>  ooze." I
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> like how
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> one Nobel prize winner (Biology 1967?) put it:
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "There are only two possibilities as to how life arose;
>>>       
>>>>>>>  one is
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is
>>>       
>>>>>>>  a
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> supernatural
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> creative act of God, there is no third possibility.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Spontaneous
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> generation that life arose from non-living matter was
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> scientifically
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That
>>>       
>>>>>>>  leaves us
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> with
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  creative act of
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> God. I
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> will not accept that philosophically because I do not want
>>>       
>>>>>>>  to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> believe in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> scientifically
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> impossible, spontaneous generation arising to
>>> evolution."
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> (Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Biology at
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> But the most interesting fact is that even Darwin himself
>>>       
>>>>>>>  realized
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> evolution was not workable.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable
>>>       
>>>>>>>  contrivances for
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting
>>>       
>>>>>>>  different
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  chromatic
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  I freely
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> confess, absurd in the highest degree possible."
>>> (Charles
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Darwin,
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "The
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> origin of species by means of natural selection")
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ
>>>       
>>>>>>>  existed which
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> could
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  slight
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
>>>       
>>>>>>>  (Charles
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Darwin,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "The Origin of Species")
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have
>>> asked
>>>       
>>>>>>>  myself
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> whether
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." (Charles
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Darwin, Life
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> I could post a few hundred quotes from noted doctors and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  scientists
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> try to "prove" evolution wrong or creation right.
>>> I could
>>>       
>>>>>>>  "do my
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> homework" as we say here on the list and cite actual
>>>       
>>>>>>>  findings, but
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> that
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> is not necessary. Because to dismiss the possibility of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  God or some
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> other
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Intelligent Designer makes it easier to accept our notions
>>>       
>>>>>>>  that it
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> is ok
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to be a homosexual (and not allow me a choice when the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  schools
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> teach this
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> gargage to my kids while denying the right to learn about
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> theory of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> creation along with evolution) or that it should be a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  crime to kill
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> tree, but ok to kill an unborn baby. Not to say everyone
>>>       
>>>>>>>  believing
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> evolution is an athiest (or a Democrat), but you have made
>>>       
>>>>>>>  me see
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> this as
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> a hinge factor in how I will vote....real issues aside.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Todd T
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Besides, it is not very PC to say we evolved (were
>>>       
>>>>>>>  "selected") from
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> apes.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> We don't want any of the apes that were not selected to
>>> be
>>>       
>>>>>>>  made to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> feel
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> inferior.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> From: "Steven Alm"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the Republicans
>>>       
>>>>>>>  are
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> going to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> save us from the Republicans
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:11:17 -0500
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus
>>> test for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  religious
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> beliefs."
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Yes, I require that the candidates be sane, critical
>>>       
>>>>>>>  thinkers.
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Palin is
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> obviously not. I wouldn't say that if she were a
>>> Catholic
>>>       
>>>>>>>  or a
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Lutheran
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> but
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> here's a woman who wants to stare down the whole
>>>       
>>>>>>>  scientific
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> community and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> deny things like carbon 14 dating and declare that the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  heavens and
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> earth
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> are
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> only a few thousand years old. You didn't just call ME
>>> an
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> extremist, did
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> you?
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Brad, you left out the part of Kroon saying that his
>>>       
>>>>>>>  parishioners
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> should
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> pray for the completion of the pipeline because at the end
>>>       
>>>>>>>  of the
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> world,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> folks will flock to Alaska as their final refuge.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> I can't believe that was you quoting all that God stuff.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Slim
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Steven Alm wrote:
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "She's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             
>>> already demonstrated that she is fully capable of
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separating her
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             
>>> beliefs from her duties."
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             
>>> be better if she didn't have to?
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                             
>>> 2008 at 6:18 AM, Herb Parsons wrote:
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ahh, so the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  religious
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> She's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> already demonstrated that she is fully capable of
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> her
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> beliefs from her duties. She vetoed a bill that
>>>       
>>>>>>>  would
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> denied
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> benefits to gay couples.
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> extremists keep it up, I'm sure you'll find (or
>>>       
>>>>>>>  make up)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SOMETHING
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> on her.
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Steven Alm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> wrote:
>>> She's a creationist. Her Assembly of God stuff is a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  deal breaker
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> Religious extremism cannot be tolerated.
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> most important legacy the president leaves is the
>>> appointment of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supreme
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> court.
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> next pres might appoint as many as three. If
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Sarabaracuda
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> her
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> goodbye to Roe V. Wade and hello to back-ally coat
>>>       
>>>>>>>  hanger
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abortions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> Sep 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> think it's funny that the candidate that was
>>>       
>>>>>>>  considered as a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> running
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> mate for the Democratic choice a few years back, is
>>>       
>>>>>>>  now being
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> touted as
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "more of the same". Keep trying though, you guys
>>> may
>>>       
>>>>>>>  find
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> something
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> works.
>>> What exactly makes Palin a "religious kook", that
>>> fact
>>>       
>>>>>>>  that's
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> she
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> religious? I think your colors are beginning to show.
>>> petelargo wrote:
>>> Ben, thanks for your post. As you may have noticed,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  there is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> no
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dialogue
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> with
>>> the right-wing extremists. You are wrong, end of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  discussion
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> your
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> idiot to boot.
>>> When John McCain won the nomination, Bush disappears
>>>       
>>>>>>>  overseas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> At
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> RNC,
>>> no Bush, no Cheney (and no mention of them). They
>>>       
>>>>>>>  know it's a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> failed
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> administration. Where were the solutions. Once again,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  they are
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> trying
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> frame the campaign as an ideology argument rather
>>>       
>>>>>>>  than an
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> issues
>>> discussion.
>>> Today on Face the Nation, "Sis Cum Ba and
>>> WHA-LAA",
>>>       
>>>>>>>  McCain is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> now
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> change
>>> candidate and stated that he will end the incredible
>>> corruption in
>>> Washington and the failed policies. John McCain has
>>>       
>>>>>>>  re-defined
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> whole
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> level of flip-flopping on over two dozen key issues
>>>       
>>>>>>>  within the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> last
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eight
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> years including his own authored bill that he was for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and now
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> against.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> I couldn't give a poop about the experience argument
>>>       
>>>>>>>  of Palin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> vs
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> It's
>>> a waste of time. The entire
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Rove,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> etc
>>> administration could be argued to be the most
>>>       
>>>>>>>  experienced
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> administration
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> the history of the White House. A huge amount of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  prior
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "executive
>>> experience". For the first time in recent politics
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Republicans
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> power in the white house, judicial, house and senate.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  How was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> it
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> It's one thing to drive a tractor trailer up our
>>>       
>>>>>>>  butts, but
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> when
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> they
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> start
>>> blowing on the horn while there're doing it, it's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  really gone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> too
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> far.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> A big thank you for the memories: the debt, the dead,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> twisting
>>> intelligence to "sell" us a war on a country that
>>> did
>>>       
>>>>>>>  not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> attack
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> us,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> good ol boy ineffectual cronyism, and finally the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  shredding of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>> constitution. With Palin we now we get to have
>>>       
>>>>>>>  another
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> religious
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> kook
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> satisfy the so-called conservative extremist
>>>       
>>>>>>>  religious right
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>> 'bridge'
>>> them into this administration and get money.
>>> Spending 5-10 billion dollars a month on Iraq and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  kissing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> chinese
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> ass
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> (borrowing the money) of the most Marxist suppressive
>>> government
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> on
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> planet at this time is a conservative value?
>>> Finally, the biggest hypocrisy of all . That these
>>>       
>>>>>>>  extremists
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> actually
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> think
>>> that they and the republicans are the vanguards of
>>> conservatism?
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> The
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> top key pillars of conservatism are less government
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> government
>>> intrusion
>>> and fiscal responsibility. The only administration
>>>       
>>>>>>>  that walked
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> that
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> 50 years was a Democrat that left Bush a 500 billion
>>>       
>>>>>>>  dollar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> surplus.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> blew
>>> threw that in one year and it was prior to 9-11. And
>>>       
>>>>>>>  there is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> no
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> greater
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> government intrusion that being told what you can or
>>>       
>>>>>>>  cannot do
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> with or
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> into your body. Palin wants privacy for her family
>>>       
>>>>>>>  decisions,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> but
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> she
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> wants
>>> to legislate publicly what you should do with yours.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  No
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> thanks.
>>> Ben Cittadino-2 wrote:
>>> My Dear Culture Warriors;
>>> So....are we having fun yet?
>>> First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  stepping up to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> join
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "Assault on the Citadel".
>>> The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's
>>>       
>>>>>>>  fire is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> spread
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> among more than one target.
>>> In the words first uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Stillwell,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> "illegitimi
>>> non carborundum".
>>> As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up.
>>>       
>>>>>>>  I posted
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> about
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Obama
>>> only because I saw Tootle's post that
>>> suggested anybody supporting Obama was either a
>>>       
>>>>>>>  marxist, or a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> farm
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> animal.
>>> What did he expect when he said that?
>>> Herb, where was your outrage that Tootle would refer
>>>       
>>>>>>>  to some
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> of
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> his
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> fellow
>>> "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting
>>> Obama
>>>       
>>>>>>>  or McCain
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> may turn out to be right or wrong, but if we debate
>>>       
>>>>>>>  policy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> and
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> don't
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's
>>> bar"
>>>       
>>>>>>>  could be an
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> place.
>>> Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on
>>> several
>>>       
>>>>>>>  grounds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> First,
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> was provoked. Second, he was defending ME.
>>> Third, it was funny. Calling someone a "marxist"
>>> as
>>>       
>>>>>>>  Tootle
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> did is
>>> several
>>> magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of the
>>> "old fart" kind. Surely you see the difference.
>>> The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some
>>>       
>>>>>>>  people
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> support
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Obama
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> were
>>> intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim noted),
>>> not an argument supporting any position. For
>>>       
>>>>>>>  example, Herb,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> you
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> are
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in
>>>       
>>>>>>>  part for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> that
>>> reason.
>>> I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and so I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> will
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> Obama/Biden in part for that reason. It is not
>>>       
>>>>>>>  hyperbole to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> point
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> the policy differences that explain my choice. What
>>>       
>>>>>>>  I know
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> for
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> sure
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do
>>>       
>>>>>>>  with it. I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> have
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned
>>>       
>>>>>>>  and am
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> completely
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> prepared to explain and justify them. In Brad's oft'
>>>       
>>>>>>>  repeated
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> mantra
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> know I have "done my homework".
>>> Enough for today. The games will be on soon.
>>> Cheers!
>>> Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> go
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                   
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> list go
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                                 
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing list go
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> --
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>       
>>>>>>>  mailing list go
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> to
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list go
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list go
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list go to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>> To
>>>>>>>               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list go to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>> To
>>>>>>>               
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>>       
>>>>>>>  list go to
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe
>>>>>>>               
>>> or for help with using the mailing list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  go to
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or
>>>>>>>               
>>> for help with using the mailing list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  go to
>>>>>>>  >>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for
>>>>>>>               
>>> help with using the mailing list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >> go to
>>>>>>>               
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help
>>>>>>>               
>>> with using the mailing list
>>>       
>>>>>>>  > go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>  To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>>>               
>>> using the mailing list go
>>>       
>>>>>>>  to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>>>>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>>>>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>>>               
>>> using the mailing list go to
>>>       
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>>         
>>>>>>>               
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with
>>>>>>             
>>> using the mailing list go to
>>>       
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>>>>>       
>>>>>>             
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using
>>>>>           
>>> the mailing list go to
>>>       
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>     
>>>>>           
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the
>>>>         
>>> mailing list go to
>>>       
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>         
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>> list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Praise-Jesus%2C-the-%22evolutionists%22-are-going-to-save-us-from-the-Republicans-tp19382633p19414836.html
>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing
>>> list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>       
>>       
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>     
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>   


More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list