Wow! So Black Folks Don’t All Think Alike

Posted: October 12, 2008 in Just "Why?", Politics

Only thing missing from this CNN studio set is cage for these gentlemen and a room full of curious adults and children ooohing and ahhing.

“Step Right Up! Step Right Up!”

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Wil says:

    During slavery some slaves worked as overseers for the master. during nazi Germany, some captives worked for the nazis to manage and control their fellow prisioners, some people are snitches. These three men that you have featured are these type of people.

  2. Erica says:

    PLEASE. What “control” do conservatives have over black folk that they need to maintain? What plantation do they have us working on? You might need to check into the communities (usually black) where Dems have total control….what condition are they in? Find that out…then come back and talk about who is working for “the master”. smh

  3. Jeff says:

    You kool aid drinking liberals need to realize that some people vote on values, ideas, and principle and don’t simply fall for the democrat talking points and conspiracy theories. I am proud of these men, their intelligence, and their courage to stand up to the lunatics left wing frindge so bent on ruining this great country.

  4. Doug says:

    I was a Black Republican (still Black) until this last election. I admit I voted for George W. Bush (twice) based on my extremely conservative beliefs. I left the Republican party because I realized I was being deceived, to secure my vote. I would hope that you three Black American men interviewed would actually look at the facts and reconsider their political affiliation. I am not voting for Barak Obama because he is African American (technically he is, we’re not; we’re Americans that are Black – another issue) but because he is not a hypocrite. I know what the Democratic Party ideology is and what they believe. My deception lies in what the Republican Party says the believe in; and then their actions don’t follow. For example, the Republicans take advantage of the abortion issue by stating how “anti” they are. You would think after eight years in office, at the very least, partial-birth abortion would have been banned, but it was not. The Republicans use abortion, gay rights, and gun control solely to secure votes from the ultra conservative (Religious Right, conservative Blacks, etc). McCain was not considered to be a “true” Republican because of his liberal (code term Maverick) ideology. Sarah Palin is the conservative one, but what influence do you think she will have on McCain’s decisions? Here we have two “mavericks” going in different directions. I will not elaborate on the moral hypocrisy of the “conservative” party; McCain cheating on and leaving his wife for a younger woman, the illegitimate pregnancy of the daughter, the alignment with the “Alaska” succession from the lower 48, etc. Black men, don’t let your desire for White acceptance cloud your ability to see the deception (moral conservatism) used by the GOP to secure your vote. I changed my party affiliation; now I’m an independent. One reason I’m voting Democratic this election is because I know where the Democratic Party is “coming from”. Don’t let the conservative appeal of the GOP make a fool out of you, look at what they say and then compare it to what they do. Actions speak louder than words.

  5. Duane says:

    Doug,

    Could you define the difference between a ‘conservative’ and a “ultra-conservative”? I’m asking because I have seen the term ‘ultra conservative’ thrown around a lot and wanted to know from your definition.

    Another thing I noticed in your comment, you mentioned that the appeal ‘conservatism’ to Black men had something to do with a desire for White acceptance. If this is your belief, is it safe to say that while you were a supporter of the Republican party, YOU had a desire for “White acceptance”? That sounds more of a personal issue and not political. So are Blacks in your view the only ones who cannot vote without attaching their idententy and acceptance as human beings to the ballot?

    Something else you said~

    “I will not elaborate on the moral hypocrisy of the “conservative” party;

    I would actually love for you to elaborate on the hypocrisy you see with conservatives. I think it is worth talking about. After we go through that, would you be willing to go through the hypocrisy of Democrats–starting with Erica’s comment? If hypocrisy in politics pisses you off, why go with Democrats? Have they somehow developed a way to operate beyond hypocrisy in the last 5 minutes? Or is their brand of hypocrisy something you don’t mind?

    Lastly, since you claim to have left the Republican party because they did not hold true to your particular ideology, how then does the Democratic party hold true to that same ideology–that includes your take on partial-birth abortions?

  6. Richard Froggatt says:

    First, let me just say that the captioning on this video is spot on (they must do captioning for Sesame Street).

    I was going to reply to Wil but there’s not really too much to say; he’s been trippin the with his last couple of comments (maybe it’s pre-election jitters?). 🙂

    Doug, why is the Republican Party considered the “white” Party as opposed to the Democrat Party? One hundred fifty years ago (around a bout) there was the Republican-Democratic Party, which split into two parties, into what we have now. Take a guess which party was on the side of equality for all and which side was against former slaves having equal rights.

  7. Thuyen says:

    Actually, the Repuplican Party didn’t come from any split in Republican-Democrat party, but seperate entity altogether. The latter were Jeffersonians and existed to oppose Federalist politics of Hamilton, Washington, John Adams, John Jay, John Marshall, surprisingly Patrick Henry, etc.

    The Republican party came from coalition of Whigs, Democrats (especially Northern ones), Liberty Party, Freesoilers, who were opposed to slavery for various different reasons, combined with the Know-Nothing Party, in 1856.

    What became of the party of Jefferson from early on was that it became the Democratic party of Andrew Jackson and was opposed by the Whigs, which had proslavery faction and abolition factions among them.

    Just as the Whigs would end up splitting over slavery, Democrats would, too, though for different reasons. The split among Whigs were between northern ones, who outright opposed it, and southern ones, who were for it. Northern ones joined the newly formed Republican party, as did several Democrats who abolitionists.

    The remaining Democrats broke over the issue of slavery outright, but not between pro-slavery faction and antislavery faction, but between pro-slavery faction and popular sovereignty faction led by Stephen Douglas. The latter decision to stay true to his principles on Kansas over popular sovereignty when slavery forces were violating it blatantly led to split in Democrat party doing 1860 election sealing victory for Lincoln and Republican party.

  8. Doug says:

    Duane,

    I would define a conservative as one who desires to maintain traditional values and tends to oppose current social attitudes and thoughts. My definition of an ultra conservative is a conservative who bases “traditional values” on and believes what the Holy Bible states, as it is the Word of God. I consider myself ultra conservative because I believe the Holy Bible is the inerrant Word of God, Jesus is the Son of God, oppose abortion & gay marriage, believe in creationism, that there is only one way to Heaven (thru Jesus), and many other Biblical principals.

    I wasn’t trying to imply that conservatism is limited exclusively to Whites. I was very happy to see Black men expressing their conservative views. I was implying (by my own impression of what I saw and heard) was that those Black men were seeking White acceptance. I admit my impression was partially influenced by comments James Harris made at a McCain rally, and some of my disapproval was transferred to those men on the panel. Nevertheless, I agree with their conservative views, but McCain is not conservative (neither is Obama). I disagree with their support of a candidate and a party who is willing to “act” as if they are conservative and are not, they act as if they believe in God (the same God that the Fundamentalist Christians believe in), but they don’t. The Democrats don’t pretend or act as if they are conservative. That is where I feel I was deceived by the GOP. I realize that neither political party embraces my ultra conservative views so I will base my selection on the person I think will be most beneficial for the country.

    I believe most people choose their candidate based on their identification with the candidate. Some people will vote for McCain solely because his skin is white, and some people will vote for Obama solely because his skin is black. Some because they are liberal, some because they are conservative, and some because of the candidates views. Most of us (people in general) try to identity with the candidate. Unfortunately, we can be deceived.

    The hypocrisy I was referring to with the GOP is that they claim to believe and want to enact the ideology that I believe, but in reality, they’re only trying to get elected. The Democrats are no better except that they do not claim to be something they are not. I don’t like the current acceptance of abortion, but I am a realist, abortion is here to stay. I will oppose it (and other issues) on a personal level, and be pleasantly surprised if the political party in control changes it.

  9. Doug says:

    Richard,

    The Republican party originally was for freeing the slaves, and for providing education and equal rights for the freedmen. There are documented incidents where Republicans were murdered (by Democrats) because of their care & concern for equal treatment of Black Americans. Many Black Americans were Republican, especially since the Democrats were the party representing and furthering Jim Crow laws, and many other inequalities for us. I think it was around the early 1900’s that a predominantly Black military unit based around Brownsville, TX was accused of murder or rioting. Theodore Roosevelt, the Republican President, had the unit’s soldiers dishonorably discharged, some executed and some imprisoned for life. This event outraged the Black citizenry and caused a great turning away from the Republican party. The Democrats welcomed this with open arms (well, sort of) and used this opportunity to increase their numbers. This turning away from the GOP caused them to become more hostile in their view of us, and our attraction to the Democratic party has continued even to this day. In my opinion, the Brownsville incident marked a betrayal of Black Americans by the Republican party. I think this is one reason why the Republican party is considered to be the “white” party.

  10. Thuyen says:

    “I consider myself ultra conservative because I believe the Holy Bible is the inerrant Word of God, Jesus is the Son of God, oppose abortion & gay marriage, believe in creationism, that there is only one way to Heaven (thru Jesus), and many other Biblical principals. ”

    Then you have no room to talk about Republicans being hypocrites when you vote for Democrats who blatantly oppose everything pretty much that God’s word stand for.

  11. Thuyen says:

    Don’t forget Einsehower was Republican president and he reinforced the Brown decision.

  12. Duane says:

    My definition of an ultra conservative is a conservative who bases “traditional values” on and believes what the Holy Bible states, as it is the Word of God.

    That’s fine.

    If the Bible is something you relate to when making a choice on who you pick as your next president, then how do you rationalize supporting a party that supports issues that conflict with your views?

    I disagree with their support of a candidate and a party who is willing to “act” as if they are conservative and are not, they act as if they believe in God (the same God that the Fundamentalist Christians believe in), but they don’t.

    I agree that McCain is a minimalist when it comes to conservatism, but compared to Obama he is about as conservative you are going to get this election cycle. Does that mean that as a conservative you should still elect him? Not necessarily. However, shelving your conservative principals to vote for a candidate that clearly does not embrace them makes no sense. I would say the same thing to disgruntled Hillary supporters who are pro-abortion, but are supporting an anti-abortion ticket as an act of protest.

    The Democrats are no better except that they do not claim to be something they are not.

    Oh yeah?

    Going back to Erica’s comment, have you noticed that just about every major city in this country has been under Democratic control for decades? Issues like poverty, crime, poor performing schools, unemployment, homelessness, etc. has flourished under their watch all while they are able to pass the blame on some unseen force. Yet, we are to accept that they are the “party of the people”?

    Democrats claim to be better at handling the economy, yet as we have seen over these past couple of weeks, they will not admit any fault in the contribution to the current crisis.

    I don’t like the current acceptance of abortion, but I am a realist, abortion is here to stay.

    Pornography is here to stay as well. Doesn’t mean you will see me supporting it in any way. My point is there is no perfect political party out there. But if you are really interesting in seeing change in an issue that is dear to you, it makes sense to go with the party that has both the platform and track record of supporting that view–and do your part to make sure your voice is being heard. On the issue of abortion, Bush got a supreme court justice added that is anti-abortion. Also, he put limits on stem cell research. That would not have taken place under a Democrat. Opposing it on a “personal level” is meaningless if you are expecting politicians to address it to your liking.

  13. This is typical of people who believe in the theory of Republican ideology without taking note of the reality of history while at the same time blaming Democrats for the problems of society. Those men are intelligent but they are not smart in that they don’t apply the knowledge that they’ve gained. They know the textbook definitions but they don’t appreciate the concept of practice and experience.

    Listen to one of the men claim he believes in low taxes and free market solutions. I give them credit for understanding Republican ideology. But, if they think it works, they ought to pay attention to the “more free” market system we’ve had since Bush took office which has hemorrhaged the nation of millions of jobs. At the same time, low taxes only served to benefit the wealthiest of Americans who benefit the most from this system. That is the difference between ideology and practice.

    This nation had low taxes and a free market and then the Great Depression happened. Bush got into office to promote the same ideals and now we’re in a Great Recession which is looking more like a 21st century Great Depression.

    I respect their stance but at some point they’ve got to start doing the math and either start paying attention to history or even the present.

    Read this: http://usanthony.blogspot.com/2008/10/why-mccains-economic-policy-is-wrong.html

    Follow the links to older stuff that I wrote. It’s all about theory vs practice. We do not live in an ideal world. I’d love to debate them on their “principle”. I’ll have them looking just like McCain.

  14. Duane says:

    while at the same time blaming Democrats for the problems of society.

    No. Democrats are getting blamed for their contribution to the problems they claim they wanna fix–even though they have had decades to make significant progress in their own jurisdictions. Much of the blame lies with the individual. Politicians simply use it to their advantage.

    But, if they think it works, they ought to pay attention to the “more free” market system we’ve had since Bush took office which has hemorrhaged the nation of millions of jobs.

    Then please explain how inflation got WORSE under Carter under the same free market.

    At the same time, low taxes only served to benefit the wealthiest of Americans who benefit the most from this system.

    #1- Who pays the greatest share of income taxes?
    #2- Define “Wealthy”
    #3- The non-wealthy also benefit from a system that is largely funded by the wealthy–thanks to their tax rate.
    #4- “Number of Americans Outside the Income Tax System Continues to Grow”
    #5- What is America’s current corporate tax rate and how do we compare with most industrialized countries?

    “…and now we’re in a Great Recession which is looking more like a 21st century Great Depression.”

    We are far away from any comparisons to the Great Depression:

    -While the Dow has been hit pretty hard, it is no where near the hit it took during the Great Depression.
    -The unemployment rate was much higher
    -The foreclosure rate was something in the neighborhood of 50 percent.

  15. Give it a rest says:

    Be a conservative or a liberal has nothing to do with your political party affiliation.

    The Democratic party does not stand for everything liberal and Republicans party does not have a hold on everything conservative.

    Only a FOOL believe otherwise! Case in point; the economy policy of the current republican administration is anything but CONSERVATIVE. In reality it is the epitome of so-called foolish “liberal” behavior.
    Going off half-cocked and getting the country involved in a military quagmire, wasting billions upon billions of our treasure is also NOT very conservative!
    Putting the “values” of “Joe Sixpack” on a pedestal is NOT very conservative either!

    Currently the GOP stands for NOTHING of substance. “Throwing stones” at Gays and women that have had abortions is also not very god like. YOU are not GOD so stop freaking attempting to pass Judgement! It is also un-American to have this desire to constantly stick your nose in other citizens PRIVATE & PERSONAL business.

    Today you rank and file GOP “so-called” conservatives look like a bunch of hood-winked fools. You guys have been running around trying to condem your fellow countrymen while the “rulers” of your party have been having the biggest “underhanded” LIBERAL “free for all” in history.
    Those GOP guys have done NOTHING to conserve or preserve your wealth. They are perfectly willing to rape you, your children, and your grandchildren in the biggest socialistic wealth transfer in history. Yet they have you fools believing that you should paid high taxes and NOT receive any benefit for it.
    Hey, dont worry it will trickle down to you eventually!

    “Don’t forget Einsehower was Republican president and he reinforced the Brown decision.”
    ……..and Adolf Hitler was instrumental in giving the world the VW Bettle………. (Ok that was a cheap shot!)
    Please stop holding up single acts or individuals as some type of proof that the GOP has the best interest of black folks at heart. You do realize most of us do find that somewhat insulting!

  16. Thuyen says:

    “Currently the GOP stands for NOTHING of substance. “Throwing stones” at Gays and women that have had abortions is also not very god like. YOU are not GOD so stop freaking attempting to pass Judgement! It is also un-American to have this desire to constantly stick your nose in other citizens PRIVATE & PERSONAL business.”

    Abortion involves taking of another human life. You know you use the same moral argument on abortion (which involves violating another’s right to life- the mother of all civil rights) slaveowners used when abolitionists challenged the morality of violating the liberty and civil rights of another via slavery? The argument either goes the direction of don’t force your morality on me or they cry out states’ rights, which indirectly involves state saying no government or anyone else can tell them what is right and wrong (even when it involves violating the civil rights of another human being, which in this case is slavery). There are different strong parallels between Roe vs Wade and Dred Scott decisions. Scary.

    And you are not God either to tell us to believe or not believe. You are basically doing the very thing you accused others of – sitting in judgment and condemning in self-righteous manner.

    God’s word, last I check does condemn murder- be it abortion or whatever. God’s word also does condemn gay lifestyle as sin. Hating the sin is not hating the person who commits the sin.

    But if you want to equate the two, then you need to judge yourself there then since you want to claim we are sinning by what we believe and since that is the case, by your logic, you must be hating us sinners. Which makes my point- you are judging with different weights and measures for yourself and for those you disagree with.

    “……..and Adolf Hitler was instrumental in giving the world the VW Bettle………. (Ok that was a cheap shot!)
    Please stop holding up single acts or individuals as some type of proof that the GOP has the best interest of black folks at heart. You do realize most of us do find that somewhat insulting!”

    More proof that you don’t a valid point. First proof a person is losing an argument is when he plays the Hitler card.

    And since you want to have at it, I am not GOP.

    I am pointing out Democrats and liberals sure are revisionists and one-sided with their history. Democrats don’t exactly in the 1950s distinguish themselves on race relations either.

  17. Thuyen says:

    http://www.nrlc.org/news/1999/NRL699/slave.html

    Court Blunders on Slavery and Abortion

    One of the more frequently used arguments to defend abortion goes like this: The United States Supreme has settled the issue. Because the Court has ruled that abortion is legal, it must therefore be a correct and moral act beyond challenge.

    In an 1857 court case, known as the Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court ruled that slaves, even freed slaves, and all their descendants, had no rights protected by the Constitution and that states had no right to abolish slavery. Where would Blacks be today if that reasoning had not been challenged?

    The reasoning in Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade is nearly identical. In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion. Clearly, in the Court’s eyes, unborn children are now the same “beings of an inferior order” that the justices considered Blacks to be over a century ago.

    ——————————————————————————–

    In the Dred Scott case of 1857 the Supreme Court said:

    “… a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves. . . were not intended to be included under the word ‘citizens’ in the Constitution, and can, therefore, claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.”

    In the Roe v. Wade case of 1973 the Supreme Court said:

    “The word ‘person,’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn…. [T]he unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense.”

    ——————————————————————————–

    The right to privacy protects the decision to own slaves/abort unborn children.

    In the Dred Scott case of 1857 the Supreme Court said:

    A slave is the property of the master and the Constitution has “provided for the protection of private property against the encroachments of the Government.”

    In the Roe v. Wade case of 1973 the Supreme Court said:

    “This right of privacy… is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”

    ——————————————————————————–

    Slavery/abortion is justified because historically the rights of Blacks/ unborn children have been abused.

    In the Dred Scott case of 1857 the Supreme Court said:

    “…that unfortunate race…had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order [and] they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”

    In the Roe v. Wade case of 1973 the Supreme Court said:

    “…abortion was practiced in Greek times as well as in the Roman Era…. Greek and Roman law afforded little protection to the unborn.”

    ——————————————————————————–

    Slavery/abortion is for the victim’s own good.

    In the Dred Scott case of 1857 the Supreme Court said:

    “…the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.”

    In the Roe v. Wade case of 1973 the Supreme Court said:

    “There is also the distress for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family unable, psychologically, and otherwise to care for it.”

  18. Wil says:

    I personally subscribe to what are termed “traditional values”, but I realize that what passes for political “conservatism” today has little to do with those values….That phrase has been used as cover for racists, and bigots, and those who really don’t like what we think of as the American way. Take a good look beyond the buzz words and see how their agenda is manifested…I know that my Grandparents, and great Grandparents, would turn over their graves, if I somehow had convinced myself to support McCain over Obama. They would never understand why I would support a crocthety old white guy who voted against the MLK holiday, and has done nothing for Blacks , over a super well prepared and Harvard educated, husband of one wife, steady, even-tempered, young Black man.

  19. Richard Froggatt says:

    Book cover, meet judge. Judge, this is book cover.

  20. Thuyen says:

    “They would never understand why I would support a crocthety old white guy who voted against the MLK holiday, and has done nothing for Blacks , over a super well prepared and Harvard educated, husband of one wife, steady, even-tempered, young Black man.”

    The young man who advocated everything contrary to God’s word, especially abortion, gay lifestyle, etc., etc.

    Basically, if McCain is as bad as you say he is, then don’t choose either one. I like what famed preacher Spurgeon said: when there is a choice between two evils, pick neither.

    PS: In terms of MLK, was McCain’s hostility to MLK in regards to his race or that MLK was against the Vietnam War, which McCain fought in and spent years as a result POW?

  21. Richard Froggatt says:

    Thuyen (how is that pronounced?) and Doug, thanks for the thoughtful convo. It’s given me a lot to think about and helped direct my inquiries.

  22. Doug says:

    I agree with both Thuyen and Wil. I think they are saying what I was trying to or intending to say. I am voting for Barack Obama not because he is a Democrat, but I think with all issues considered, he will lead the country better than John McCain. Of course, the check & balance system will keep as much of the “status quo” in tact as possible, but I expect that out of our political system, being an “imperfect but the best that we have at this time” political system. In my opinion (based on the Holy Bible), the only perfect government the earth will experience is when Yashua (Jesus) returns and sets up his kingdom, which is scheduled to occur during the Millennial reign (see Rev. 20).

    Yes, I struggle internally with my ultra conservative belief concerning the Democrat ideology vs. the Republican ideology. My ultra conservative views clash with the openly liberal views of the Democratic party (although as stated earlier, neither party is exclusively liberal or conservative, i.e. – I was impressed with Joe Biden’s response to the gay marriage issue and disappointed with Sarah Palin’s initial response). One thing I noticed though is that Barack Obama tends to bring about a sense of racial unity, while John McCain brings about a sense of racial division. That is the overall feeling I get from both candidates.

    Another thought: Just to throw a little mud of my own into the water: has the thought crossed your mind that the Republican party believed that they would not get in this term (because of all the unpopular Bush decision) and did not want to “run” a candidate they really supported, therefore run the non-Republican (maverick) John McCain because they didn’t believe they would get in anyway? Just a thought…

  23. Thuyen says:

    Doug.

    Nope.

    I was contradicting your point. It is hard for you to be consistent attacking Republicans for what you claim is hypocrisy yet vote for someone who is so against every conservative and godly principle there is, as is the case of Obama and the Democrats in general.

  24. Nyisha says:

    Abortion is not murder

  25. Wil says:

    Abortion is murder. If someone is alive, even though unborn, and you kill them because it is convenient for you to do so, it is murder. In our modern world it has been legalized, but let’s not kid ourselves with semantic games about what is actually happening. Regarding the Bible, none of the political parties operate according to the Bible. Sadly, they just use selected concepts from the Bible to influence God-loving, moral people, that is one of the tricks of the conservative movement.

  26. Nyisha says:

    You cannot be alive and unborn. I agree and acknowledge that there is a point of viability but killing a living breathing human being is murder (dependent on the circumstances) but terminating a pregnancy is not murder. A zygote is not a human or even a person. I do not mean any disrespect and I respect everyones opinion and stance on this controversial issue. It just is what it is and it is not murder.

  27. Wil says:

    I don’t mean to offend anyone when talking about abortion, it is obviously a very emotional topic. I think your question is “what is life and when does it begin ?” Before my first child was born we were able to see her moving in her mother’s womb, and could even see that she was a girl. Her heart was beating, she was being nourished, and was growing. We could even see her little fingers. Was she alive ? Of course she was. Describing the various phases of a person’s life as “embryo”, or “zygote ” does not make them any less alive or human. Neither does the question of wheater they are “viable”. Is a person who is sleeping viable? What about if they are anesthetized, or stone cold passed out ?

    These days one eighth of cancer patients avoid treatment in order to save money, and assisted suicide is often a case of not being able to afford long term treatment. Death has become a budget issue. If we really appreciate and value life it will make the world a better place.

  28. Give it a rest says:

    Thuyen,
    You are missing the point I am not passing judgement on anyone but merely offering up an opinion. I believe you see the world in terms of strict rights and wrongs but I on the otherhand views these issues as being relative to the context of which they occur. Do not confuse the writing in the Bible with the omnipotence of GOD. None of us know what GOD utlimately will judge as right and wrong, that is why we do not pass judgement and or condemn our fellow man.

    Now to be honest the issue of abortion is a great deal older than American chattel slavery. Although you can draw some rather weak parallels between to two, so what! What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? On the one hand we have a society that held men, woman, and children in bondage, based on race, strictly for the propose of profit and you want to compare it with the private choices of women that choose not to have a children??????????? I’m sorry but the comparisons you have offered up are just not vaild for your case.
    Sometimes people mange to trip themselves up because they are too ignorant to understand the insult to the person they are trying to make their point to!

    I guess my Hilter comment actually went over your head! By your response I see that you missed the point even though it hit you right in the forehead.

    “PS: In terms of MLK, was McCain’s hostility to MLK in regards to his race or that MLK was against the Vietnam War, which McCain fought in and spent years as a result POW?”
    Ok now you are grasping at straws here, Dude, call a damn duck a duck already!

    Will,
    Here is the catch to your arguement about when life begins. On the day that your wife and yourself had the sonogram of your unborn child, If your wife was seriuosly hurt in an accident right after she would NOT have been able to sustain the life growing within her nor would that life be able to sustain itself. Call it what you like but if the pregnant woman dies so does the unborn child. Without the “host” it can NOT develope into a self-sustaining life form.

    What that means is that it is NOT a life yet but something that is an extention of the mother’s life at that point. It is not a seperate entity that can physically live on its own.

    The point I am making is abortion IS a private personal choice that is offered to women in our society for valid reasons. Worry about you and your own, but do not extend your beliefs to the rest of society.

    Like it or not if a women does NOT want to have a child it is a decision we should all respect and not question. It is not your place to get involved here. Trust me I have seen enough woman that abuse their own children and state that they do not believe in abortion because it is morally wrong! Maybe you should spend sometime with these children and see what life is like with a mother that does not want or care for you!

  29. 1555 Filmworks says:

    I am now sick

  30. The EL says:

    The interesting thing is theoretically “fiscal conservatism”- ( the economic philosophy of prudence in government spending and debt) makes sense. The problem is it has never actually manifested itself in its purest sense in our lifetime.

    The issue is conservatism has now manifested itself as “social conservatism” and “religious conservatism” both areas of life and moral issues that have divided humanity in perpetuity. I may agree that a woman should have the right to choose ( especially in instances of rape or incest) but not agree in abortion as a form of birth control. And so on and so on….

    We ( those of us born in America) are AMERICANS, so we should certainly have the right to choose the best course for our democracy be it through the Republican platform or the Democratic platform.

    Its interesting that soooooo many people who believed GWBush was “one of them” and that they ” could have a beer with him” have TOTALLY abandoned him. And he was the 2000 version of Sarah Palin.

    We as citizens should not fall victim to the ” cult of personality ” especially with respect to politics. I believe Obama is a fine gentleman, smart, great family etc. but he is a politician and will disappoint but as a Black man I am glad he has earned this opportunity.

  31. Richard Froggatt says:

    Give it a rest,

    Here is the catch to your argument about when life begins.

    If God were to die, so would you.

  32. Wil says:

    If a newborn is not actively taken care of it will die. Is the newborn viable? Abortion is legal, but no amount of convoluted reasoning about when life is viable and what life is , does not change what is actually happening. I understand that people use various arguments to sooth their consciences, and it’s understandable why they do, abortion is horrible. But, like I said it’s legal.

  33. The EL says:

    WOW Nyisha very well thought out point.

    It is very interesting that MEN have really strong views on abortion and they will never have to make the choice of having a child themselves.

    just a thought

  34. Thuyen says:

    “Now to be honest the issue of abortion is a great deal older than American chattel slavery. Although you can draw some rather weak parallels between to two, so what! What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? On the one hand we have a society that held men, woman, and children in bondage, based on race, strictly for the propose of profit and you want to compare it with the private choices of women that choose not to have a children??????????? I’m sorry but the comparisons you have offered up are just not vaild for your case.
    Sometimes people mange to trip themselves up because they are too ignorant to understand the insult to the person they are trying to make their point to!”

    Sorry, but calling the points raised ignorant, weak, and not valid does not help your arguments, but merely question begging, circular argumentation, etc. Especially when you don’t actually address the points of why such parallels exist in the first place.

    In fact, while dancing around the points made, you actually throw out points that undermine yourself.

    But first let me restate the points made from my posts, which included quotes from two Supreme Court cases, Dred Scott and Roe v Wade.

    The point is that right to enslaved another and right to abort another involves this basic fundamental fact: OWNERSHIP of one person over ANOTHER.

    And yes, slaveowners DID in fact argument against abolitionists (if you know your Civil War history, which is funny since you throw out the word ignorant, since any Civil War buff can point out what the slaveowners use as defense of their “peculiar institution”) that abolitionists were 1) forcing their morality on slaveowners, 2) that slaves were PRIVATE property of slaveowners, and 3) that slaveowers were making PRIVATE CHOICE to own what they deem PRIVATE PROPERTY (which is in fact violating of another’s right to liberty and freedom).

    The evidence is found not only in Dred Scott case, but documents like declarations of causes of secession, etc.

    States’ rights arguments used by slaveowners back then had these elements as well, but 1) argues that the federal government was forcing a certain POV on the slaveowning states that those states find odious, 2) that the slaveowning states have their rights individually to determine what is private property and what is not, and 3) to encroach on those rights would be to violate the rights of those states as well as their citizens’ PRIVATE choice to own what they deem are PRIVATE property.

    And I notice you use the points about abortion being PRIVATE CHOICE of women. And guess what? Slaveowners argued the SAME THING.

    Private choice does not extend morally to right to harm ANOTHER in life, liberty, or limb.

    Abortion involves violating the LIVES of babies MURDERED.

    And you also try to contrast abortion with slavery since you point out (rightfully) the latter was profit driven.

    But you ignore one basic fact- so is abortion. Abortion is VERY PROFIT DRIVEN.

    But involve ALOT of profit and involve claims of those things being PRIVATE choices by those using them.

    And involves seeing those, as in the enslaved and the aborted, as either non-human beings or less than human beings, and made to be PROPERTIES of another.

  35. Thuyen says:

    “It is very interesting that MEN have really strong views on abortion and they will never have to make the choice of having a child themselves.”

    But they can have a choice to kill another in other ways.

    There is a saying- one can make choices, but one cannot choose the consequences of those choices.

  36. The EL says:

    ….?????
    Thuyen

    With all due respect, I’m not sure I understand your point.

    Yes men can kill in other ways, but my point was that MEN have strong opinions about an issue they will never directly be faced with( abortion). I am not saying that men shouldn’t have an opinion but who are we ( men) to say what a woman should do with their bodies under the most extreme circumstances.

    For the record, I think a woman should have a choice but I disagree with abortion as a form of birth control.

  37. Thuyen says:

    “I am not saying that men shouldn’t have an opinion but who are we ( men) to say what a woman should do with their bodies under the most extreme circumstances. ”

    My point is that it is not a men vs women thing. It is a person’s choice vs human life issue.

    There are pro-life women and pro-abortion men, as you obviously know.

  38. Grassisgreener says:

    I am amused and intrigued by some of the commentry on this page… pro-life vs pro-choice etc…
    It is hard for me to imagine, how I would react if I was impregnated as a result of being sexualy assaulted.
    However, I do know that the last thing I would want to deal with, is someone (who knows nothing about the emotions/trauma I am experiencing) telling me that I am commiting murder.

    Also there seems to be a misconception (understated tone) that it is an “easy” decision to make… As though a mojority of women just go “well… maybe I’ll just have the doctors scrape me out” NOO!!
    I don’t have the facts but all women who get abortions do not consider it a method birth control. Furthermore, the “issue” doesn’t just remain in the disposable bin at the doctor’s office, in many cases it is something the woman carries with herself for life.

    I pray that I am never faced with this decision but I also know that if that was the case it SHOULD be ENTIRELY my decision.
    If the pregnancy was a result of concentual “relations” both partners have a 50% say so (how I’d deal with it personally).

  39. Thuyen says:

    No one said decision to commit abortion is usually easy. But ask yourself this…if abortion does not involve taking of human life (or the child of the mother), why is not easy? If is just a blob of tissue and not human life, why is it such a difficult decision?

    The truth hurts. Taking innocent life is murder no matter who one whitewashes it.

    Don’t get me wrong- I do sympathize with those who are assaulted and as result got pregnant. I do believe rapists should get life in prison. And people should emotionally support victims. I am saying it is not just cause to create new classes of victims (in this case, babies that are killed though they are not responsible for what happened).

    Being emotionally hurt is not good cause to kill another, especially a child. Why not just stop there? Could a murderer use that reasoning to say he has been traumatized in life so he should be allow to get away with killing another who did him no harm?

    People can say it should be entirely their decision.

    Not when it involves taking another person’s life IMO.

    Why not stop there. Should women then have rights to kill their child after they are born? After all that same child did come from their bodies (since they want to insist the unborn children are property of their bodies when unborn).

    Should men do whatever they please with their hands when they fire their guns at another?

    “It’s my body” argument is only valid when it does not do bodily harm to another.

    When it involves taking another’s life, in ways that abortion is or that stabbings and shootings are, then it involves ASSAULT with deadly intent on another.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s