55 Comments

• 1. Danish Artist  |  August 30th, 2008 at 6:01 am

  I see that this subject is above her pay grade as well.

  At least she attempted to take a stand on her beliefs and not essentially vote “present” and dance around the subject like her naive and inexperienced husband has in the past.

  But gotta shore up the leftist base with McCain/Palin hot on their heels.

• 2. js  |  August 30th, 2008 at 7:44 am

  i am always awed by the liberals lack of acknowledgement of what choice is…the creation of life is a choice…just like having sex is…once that life is created…its too late to chose…the alternative is to kill the life that exists…

  so i am all for womens choice…but not for murder…

• 3. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 8:30 am

  Always antiabortionist put this matter in a nice neat simple package. If wingnuts would put up antiabortion legislation that both the woman who had the abortion and the man who fertilized the egg each receive the death penalty (I would have said life in prison, but I know wingnuts are for death once you are out of the womb) for an abortion I would give your argument some thought. There is an equal protection clause under the Constitution, but most Repugs both male and female want to ignore this fact and just want to put a scarlet letter on women and dream of the days of seventeen century Massachusetts. While the man looks for another vessel to deposit his sperm.

• 4. Sung Tung  |  August 30th, 2008 at 8:46 am

  “Words to describe this: Stupid. Hateful. Anti-Human. Insane.”

  How prophetic. “Anti-Human. Insane”….. Hmmm…. like the war in Iraq? Honestly, how many hundreds of thousand or even a million Iraqis have been killed due to sanctions and wars? Something not advertised in your neocon-friendly media.

  But it’s entirely okay, because you’re able to label it as “Liberation”.

  Personally, I’ve had a child by “surprise” or “accident”… and I’ll tell you this, there was no option for my wife and myself to birth, raise, and provide an education for him. I have a fairly stable job, and some savings to ensure that he’s got a shot whether I live or meet unfortunate circumstances. Not all “Pro-Abortionists” have this option.

  I do respect peoples’ right to choose this important decision. A terribly important decision. A decision that has to live with them, and whatever consequences may come along, whether physiological or psychological. It is their decision, not mine or your’s. But then again, according to my beliefs and actions, I must be “Pro-Abortion” correct?

  How many lives and generations have been decimated through savage campaigns, and sanctions under the guise if morality, religion, liberation, and democracy?

  With regards to sanctity of life… to label “lefties” as pro – surrender “ (even though many are against further deaths) in Iraq and elsewhere, is the same is calling “conservatives” pro-genocide, pro-war, liars, and murderers.

  Honesty, integrity, and honor are lacking in the general news which is fed to us daily as are pigs eating from a trough. There is no concern for anything else, as long as we get our daily meal.

  Mr. Noonan, Although we differ greatly in some of our beliefs, and admittedly, I despise some of your statements, I offer an olive branch. To learn from you, and I hope you learn from me. Maybe at one point we can reach an understanding. I remember a song from the band Kansas that said something to the effect of, If I claimed to be a wise man, then surely I don’t know.

  I think we should focus on similarities, not differences. We’re all human. To label one side as a dangerous leftie communist, and the other a right wing Nazi organization is detrimental to understanding and learning from one another.

  Kindest Regards,

  Sung Tung

• 5. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 8:57 am

  How many lives and generations have been decimated through savage campaigns, and sanctions under the guise if morality, religion, liberation, and democracy? Sung Tung

  Sung,

  How many lives are currently being lost in Iraq, where conservatives fought for, and brought liberation and democracy to Iraq?

  And how many lives are currently being lost in Darfur, where liberation and democracy have yet to arrive?

• 6. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:00 am

  How many European lives have been lost since Germany was liberated and democratized?

  How many lives have been lost since Japan was liberated, democratized and rebuilt?

• 7. coulterfan  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:20 am

  >>you’ll also see how the gathered pro-abortion fanatics listening to Mrs. Obama were angered over President Bush making it possible for medical professionals to abstain from abortion on matters of conscience<<

  See, I don’t understand why somebody unable to perform their job for reasons of conscience should keep their job. If I’m Jewish or Muslim, for instance, and work as a waiter. . . should I be able to refuse to bring pork or other cloven animals to customers? If I’m a vegetarian who works at McDonalds, should I be able to refuse to serve any meat to customers and instead refer them to the next cashier? If I work at a truck stop and my mother died of lung cancer, should I be able to not sell customers tobacco products? If I’m a “Christian Scientist” anesthesiologist, should I be able to refuse to give patients ANY medications and insist only on the power of prayer?

  This sort of “logic” that pharmacists should be able to refuse to distribute birth control pills. . . how is that different than the examples above? I thought “Conservatives” were AGAINST government involvement in business, but you want the Feds telling businesses that they can’t fire someone for not performing their job for “religious reasons”???

• 8. WhatChange  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:30 am

  “. If wingnuts would put up antiabortion legislation that both the woman who had the abortion and the man who fertilized the egg each receive the death penalty (I would have said life in prison, but I know wingnuts are for death once you are out of the womb) for an abortion I would give your argument some thought.”

  Since the sperm donor has no say in the “prochoice,” It is a woman’s right to choose, the father, siblings, grandparents, and most importantly the unborn child have NO CHOICE, why should the man without a choice be held accountable? This is a woman’s right alone.

  Progressive. Bevis/Butthead08

• 9. coulterfan  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:33 am

  Further, in the past Conservatives claimed to be for personal freedoms and responsibilities (some Libertarians are still against excessive government intrusion). But now so-called “Conservatives” want to legislate every intimate detail of citizens lives! Like in Lawrence v. Texas, Conservatives want to be able to barge into the privacy of people’s home and arrest them for having consensual sex. In FL, a man was arrested for performing oral sex on his wife and spent 3 years in prison (oral sex is sodomy, you know!)!

  I understand how emotional the abortion debate is, but pro-lifers don’t understand that these laws would usher in the “Biggest Government” we’ve ever had! If a woman has an abortion, both she and her partner should receive the death penalty (or life in prison)? What about if she miscarries- should she be investigated for murder? What about if the pregnant mother smokes or drinks- should she be charged with providing a controlled substance to a minor? If she has no health care, should the government provide universal health care so that the mother gets pre-natal care and that both she and the child receives medical care after birth? Life doesn’t end at birth and no child would choose to be born without medical or dental insurance. . . won’t the government have to provide coverage?

  Also, if your daughter or wife were (God forbid) raped. . . would you force her to have her rapist’s baby? Remember, Palin is opposed to abortion even in cases of rape and INCEST (imagine a 14 year old raped by her father who is forced to carry the baby to term!)

  Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Whatever happened to God being the judge?

• 10. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:35 am

  coulter,

  Thank you for demonstrating liberals complete lack of understanding of a free marketplace.

  Here’s the difference moron, when someone is EMPLOYED, they are required to perform all aspects of the job, irregardless if those duties conflict with personal beliefs, or they risk being unemployed.

  Those of us who are self employed, can choose to perform a more limited scope of duties without the risk of losing our employment, but at the risk of losing revenue.

  It’s called pro-choice.

• 11. coulterfan  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:36 am

  >>Since the sperm donor has no say in the “prochoice,” It is a woman’s right to choose, the father, siblings, grandparents, and most importantly the unborn child have NO CHOICE, why should the man without a choice be held accountable? This is a woman’s right alone.<<

  Wait, are you saying that a man has NO CHOICE in who he has sex with??? Whether he uses a condom??? Shouldn’t the man make CERTAIN that his partner can’t get pregnant, or accept the consequences of his actions??? It does, after all, take TWO to make an unwanted child, doesn’t it?

  Maybe the woman should be charged with murder and sentenced to death (or life in prison) and the man should be charged with negligent homicide, or assisted murder?

• 12. WhatChange  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:36 am

  “See, I don’t understand why somebody unable to perform their job for reasons of conscience should keep their job” coulterfan

  Bevis, it’s not their job. And they’re usually self employed, not employed by “progressives” or the state. That is the job of an executioner after someone gets the death penalty in a court of law, not an innocent child at the mercy of idiots like you.

• 13. coulterfan  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:40 am

  >>Those of us who are self employed, can choose to perform a more limited scope of duties without the risk of losing our employment, but at the risk of losing revenue.<<

  Alright, so we both disagree with these laws and with the Wingnuts. A pharmacy or clinic CAN fire a pharmacist or Dr for refusing to do their job! I would understand if a self-employed pharmacist refused to distribute birth control, but someone who works at Wal-Mart should be FIRED!

• 14. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:40 am

  Conservatives want to be able to barge into the privacy of people’s home and arrest them for having consensual sex. In FL, a man was arrested for performing oral sex on his wife and spent 3 years in prison (oral sex is sodomy, you know!)! - coulter

  Would you like to revise this before I make you look like a complete idiot?

• 15. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:43 am

  Coulter,

  If you reacted with less emotion and engaged in more critical thought, you wouldn’t come off as the immature idiot that you do.

  Good luck

• 16. WhatChange  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:44 am

  “Wait, are you saying that a man has NO CHOICE in who he has sex with??? ”

  Typical lying, twisting logic. NO, I didn’y say anything about a man’s choice of whom he has sex with. I said only the woman has the “CHOICE” to murder the unborn child that has no choice [same with the father]. It’s a woman’s body, BEVIS.

  BEVIS/BUTTHEAD08

• 17. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:12 am

  16. WhatChange | August 30th, 2008 at 9:44 am

  I think you just alienated and lost three female Republican female voters in the last hour but by all means keep your ill-conceived logical thread going!

  But it would be interesting to find out how many both Republican and Democratic male politicians would face the death penalty or prison if both the man and women are held accountable for an abortion. With DNA testing it is so easy to find the guilt.

• 18. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:16 am

  Since the sperm donor has no say in the “prochoice,” It is a woman’s right to choose8. WhatChange | August 30th, 2008 at 9:30 am

  But isn’t abstinence one of the pillars of the Republican pro life plan? For a man choice is simple; no sex, no babies, no abortion, no prison or death penalty.

• 19. Nate  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:16 am

  “Shouldn’t the man make CERTAIN that his partner can’t get pregnant…”

  only way to be certain is to not have sex (or have tubes tied or remove reproductive organs) birth control methods like condoms are not 100%

• 20. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am

  Timestar,

  Unless you can provide concrete proof that the death penalty has ever been advocated for men or women choosing abortion, STFU.

  It’s a complete strawman and only exposes your desperation and a complete lack of ability to think reasonably and objectively.

• 21. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:22 am

  I see your still fighting strawman.

  What other demented delusions do you harbor Timestar.

  And why did you change your name from 42, USA, or John Ryan, or one of the other previous deranged liberals. Are you embarrased by your previous posts?

• 22. CanadianObserver  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:57 am

  #20. neocon | August 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am

  Timestar,

  Unless you can provide concrete proof that the death penalty has ever been advocated for men or women choosing abortion, STFU.
  ———————————-

  Then perhaps you should stop calling it murder, neocon.

  I believe that in some States, the death penalty is obligatory in murder cases, n’est ce pas?

• 23. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 10:59 am

  CO,

  What do you call ending a life? And do you realize that there are different punishments attached to that crime and various levels of culpability? For example, second degree, manslaughter, etc.

  Do I have to explain everything to you?

• 24. kimberly4victory  |  August 30th, 2008 at 11:07 am

  First of all, Rowe v Wade is never going to be overturned (at least not in my lifetime), no matter how much we pro-lifers want it to be. Democrats use that as a tactic to scare women who are pro-choice into voting for their party. “Don’t vote Republican or they will take that choice away from you.” It’s a bunch of mularky.

  With that being said, I am shocked Obama didn’t vote for the life of a human being who lived after being aborted. I can’t believe anyone, even a liberal, would agree with that vote.

• 25. CanadianObserver  |  August 30th, 2008 at 11:27 am

  do you realize that there are different punishments attached to that crime and various levels of culpability? For example, second degree, manslaughter, etc.

  23. neocon | August 30th, 2008 at 10:59 am

  ————————————
  So what degree of murder does abortion fall under, neocon?

• 26. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 11:29 am

  I would label it manslaughter but would exempt cases of rape, incest, or provable risk of the womans life.

  Anything else you need clarification on?

• 27. CanadianObserver  |  August 30th, 2008 at 11:51 am

  #26. neocon | August 30th, 2008 at 11:29 am

  Anything else you need clarification on?
  ———————————–

  Yes, please; just need to know what the penalty for manslaughter is. I realize this may vary from State to State.

• 28. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  You answered your own question. It varies from state to state. I will leave that decision to the states electorate.

• 29. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

  Unless you can provide concrete proof that the death penalty has ever been advocated for men or women choosing abortion, STFU.20. neocon | August 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am

  Go back to entry #3. I will try to type slower for you.

• 30. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 12:37 pm

  I would label it manslaughter but would exempt cases of rape, incest, or provable risk of the womans life. 26. neocon | August 30th, 2008 at 11:29 am

  That is taking a stand; now maybe Mark and other who post here can stop this; abortion is murder talk.

• 31. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

  Manslaughter is murder Timestar. Just FYI.

• 32. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

  Timestar,

  So a delusional ranting opinion is now concrete proof that conservatives support the dealth penalty for those that choose abortion?

  Are you seriously that stupid? Really, who raised you?

• 33. Mark Noonan  |  August 30th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

  What you liberals fail to understand is that we’re not in the pro-life movement in order to take revenge upon the so-called doctors who perform abortions, nor upon the women who obtain them, especially as such women are victims, too…but, in a larger sense, everyone who is in any way involved with the abortion industry is a victim…the victim of the lies of our modern age.

  Abortion is the worst sort of anti-human action - the destruction of the next generation; its an act of despair and pure evil.

• 34. M Proof  |  August 30th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

  It’s obvious to any clear thinking individual that the use of the word sacred has to do with a woman’s decision not being challenged or obstructed.

  This is contrary to the Author’s alternate Universe where these same words are imaginatively twisted and morphed into “a defense for killing unborn children.”

  Stating that one defends a person’s right to make their own decisions, whether those choices be flawed, sinful or executed strategically with genius like precision is a neutral statement that does not lend defense or ethical judgment to either the choice to “have,” or “not have an abortion.”

  In addition, it is clear libel to suggest that Michelle Obama, who had not spoken yet, incited the statements restated incorrectly of Gov. Madeline Kunan and Rep. Slaughter.

  When the author’s emotional libel is removed, Michelle Obama’s statement on behalf of her husband is simply the acknowledgment of the right to decision. This would be the source of each American freedom and the natural and foundational right of all the shared universes thoughtful beings.

  With stunning hypocrisy the authors idea of restricting a free society through misinformation and propaganda is by definition Orwellian in nature.

  Mr. Noonan, you are intelligent enough not to manipulate readers. Please take better care in the delivery of your ideas.

• 35. neocon  |  August 30th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

  Only you were manipulated M Proof. Of course it doesn’t take much to manipulate a mind of putty.

  Abortion and sacred would never be used in the same sentence from clear thinking adults. Just FYI.

• 36. FactCheck  |  August 30th, 2008 at 2:09 pm

  If you reacted with less emotion and engaged in more critical thought, you wouldn’t come off as the immature idiot that you do.

  You owe me a new Irony Meter.

• 37. M Proof  |  August 30th, 2008 at 4:18 pm

  neocon (AKA Mark Noonan), apparently arrogance and lack of real insight are the basis of your personal platform.

  You had a chance to speak thoughtfully but have shown your self to be an emotional circus act lashing out at any one open enough to try to understand your emotion filled rants.

  I was somewhat hopeful that your desire to stop abortion was based on a love for people. However for you personally, it seems to have more to do with an inability to control and manipulate those around you.

  I will leave you to the curious onlookers amused by your emotional deformity. There appears to always be a curtain call for the twisted.

• 38. Jeremiah  |  August 30th, 2008 at 4:46 pm

  Mark,

  I agree that it is not revenge that we seek, but upholding the law, as the law was created to defend what is right, not what is wrong. The law is pretty easy to follow.

  If murder is not punished, then murder there will be. On the other hand, if the law upholds right, and murder is made punishable, then the people will have an understanding that they have an obligation to do good.

  M Proof explains why society is in the shape that it is in, as he or she stands as an exemplar of the flawed thinking that comes with the secular humanist movement that is destroying this country by way of our Supreme Court system, controlled by Secular Humanist liberals. They define murder as a “freedom” subjecting people to evil’s influence, by not only creating the law so it permits murder, but by also teaching children the ways of death and immorality in the educational system by consolidating it with “Separation of Church and State” and therefore, good teaching (Biblical teaching) - such as love and commitment to life and family are taken away and replaced with evil so that no good can get to the children.

  Just like confining a dog to a cage and teaching it to be viciously aggressive. To attack anything in its path. Well, it’s the same thing in school, they are teaching them to be opposed to normal, loving relationships; and instead, to be wild natured and to attack anything that might interfere with the evil intent of their hearts.

  And that’s interesting, because you mentioned them as ‘victims’ here … and that is the purpose of the extreme left-wing ideology, to create victim mentality creating a hostile environment, when the real victim is the one without a choice, the child within their mother’s womb. They are victims of choice.

  This is why we need the law changed, so we can once again administer justice on part of the defenseless, choiceless, tiniest…the children. And so we can return a caring, loving mentality back in our schools - which is to say, True Freedom.

  Re-institute right, and America will have Might, as we are then good in God’s Sight!

  God bless!!
  :)

• 39. bongoman  |  August 30th, 2008 at 5:45 pm

  And Jeremiah, if I recall, you would like the death penalty for all parties to a termination?

  The woman, doctor and any other medical support staff? What about the father?

• 40. Nate  |  August 30th, 2008 at 5:54 pm

  “If murder is not punished, then murder there will be.”

  murder has been punished for quite a long time and there is still plenty of murder

• 41. Jeremiah  |  August 30th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

  Bongoman,

  We can correct the problem without assigning the Death Penalty to all involved.

  The problem is a two-fold…

  1. The Law has to be changed to defend life.

  2. The Educational system must be changed.

  I would only give the Death Penalty to those who perform the execution, the Baby Executioner is the one with the blood on his hands. If a Baby executioner is absent, and the woman take matters into her own hands, then she would be held accountable.

  Now, this, combined with the changing of school policy standards…teaching college children that the law prohibits abortion, and at the same token WHY it prohibits abortion and you have drastically less murder, and as a reward, you have more responsible people, a more responsible nation….they show that life has dignity and worth.

  You see what I mean? If the law states that murder will be punished, then we cannot allow the school system to teach children in the opposite manner.

  So the law and school teaching have to be changed at the same time in order for this to work.

  Here’s what would happen if we changed the law condemning murder, but allowed teachers to teach otherwise….

  Student’s parent states the law to their child, plainly - “Thou shall not murder”.

  Student says to their parent - “But mom, dad, my teacher and friends said it was ok to have an abortion.”

  So, you see, that’s why it is very important that we change teaching and the law at the same time, so that students will have a firm grasp of the law and their purpose in the world. Which is to do good, and not evil.

• 42. BU3 Durf  |  August 30th, 2008 at 6:43 pm

  Jeremiah,

  This country was founded on FREEDOM OF RELIGION, and most of the founding fathers were SECULAR DEISTS. Freedom of religion is in the constitution, its the in the very first amendment, you may want to read up on that, so why is biblical teaching the “right” teaching if it is that LAW OF OUR LAND to choose whatever religion you so believe. Your post is meant to be thoughtful but is really just narrow minded.

  Thats the biggest problem of the moral majority, what they are trying to win back “biblical principles, teachings, prayer in public school, etc. etc. etc.” is in direct violation of the first amendment.

• 43. Jeremiah  |  August 30th, 2008 at 7:06 pm

  Your post is meant to be thoughtful but is really just narrow minded.

  Well, my friend, the same can be said about yourself … but the difference is clear - Your ideology is narrow minded for evil lies.

  And I am proud to say that I am narrow minded toward truth, because the truth brings true freedom and happiness, as newborn babes bring happiness to their mother’s arms.

  ‘Far be it from me to forsake the God of my ForeFathers to search after other gods. Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve, as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.’

• 44. Timestar  |  August 30th, 2008 at 7:17 pm

  Bongoman,
  We can correct the problem without assigning the Death Penalty to all involved. 41. Jeremiah | August 30th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

  Well that’s real damn nobel of you. In your world you go out and get a woman pregnant, she terminates the pregnancy is put to death and you just wash your hands of it.

  This is right up there with how they treated women as witches in the 1600s.

• 45. BU3 Durf  |  August 30th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  Jeremiah,

  You’re dodging the point, does the First Amendment of the United States Constitution offer freedom of religion to every American? It is a yes or no question. It’s not an “evil lie”, its the law of the land my friend. I am not being narrow minded, I am simply stating a simple fact.

• 46. Jeremiah  |  August 30th, 2008 at 7:50 pm

  In your world you go out and get a woman pregnant, she terminates the pregnancy is put to death and you just wash your hands of it.

  Timestar,

  What is the percentage chance of me doing something like that if I’ve been taught different and know better?

  does the First Amendment of the United States Constitution offer freedom of religion to every American?

  BU3 Durf,

  Yes, as a matter of fact, it does.

  How did we get that freedom?

  So then, why would our leaders choose to enforce evil (Darwinism) instead of good?

  And that’s another thing I should add to my list of the two fold problem… 3. We need to abolish the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.

  As they are who we can thank for the taking away of our rights to teach Biblical values. And likewise, the slaughter of tens of millions of unborn children.

  It should come as common sense that we are to teach children to do good. To the contrary, the people have become weak in their defense of Judeo-Christian morlality, and therefore, is the reason our culture is collapsing.

  Life’s purpose is to do good, not evil, my friends.

• 47. BU3 Durf  |  August 30th, 2008 at 8:02 pm

  Jeremiah,

  Teaching children biblical principles is against the law. Period. Its not even worth arguing with you because you can’t even come to terms with the fact that this country was not based on Christian values, the Constitution was NOT based on the ten commandments. Otherwise the very first amendment would not be freedom of religion because the bible states that there shall be no other religion, than the Christian religion.

• 48. BU3 Durf  |  August 30th, 2008 at 8:17 pm

  I should revise my previous post to read teaching children biblical principals in a public setting is against the law. Churches, private schools, etc. are of course acceptable.

• 49. Jeremiah  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

  Its not even worth arguing with you

  HaHa! I will agree with you there. There’s no way you will get me to become a defender of murder, such as yourself.

  I should revise my previous post to read teaching children biblical principals in a public setting is against the law.

  And you should revise once more, like this … I should revise me previous post to read teaching children Biblical principals in a public setting is against the law, and therefore, children in the public school setting are without hope.

  this country was not based on Christian values

  Yes, because it’s been de-Christiaized by the ACLU and others who interpret the law in order that they may teach and implement evil. They coerce children to think one way, and this is what they Nazi’s done…to hate the Jews, the mentally retarded, etc, etc, and so, they marched them by the millions into the trenches.

  What you teach, is what you get, ya see. And it’s sad to see the destruction that is taking place because of allowing the schools to be overrun by the deadliest of them all, Darwinism. Because it teaches that you should devalue life, and ultimately the Spiritual.

  Just ask youself these 5 questions - What is it (Cosmology)? What am I (identity)? What value have I (significance)? What shall I be (purpose)? How shall I be it (ethics)?

  When we recognize these 5 questions, we come to the realization that we are different from all of the rest of Creation, In that we have the ability to comprehend and decipher our place and time in space, and that ultimately, we have great worth. And which shows that restrictions are placed on how we may live our everyday lives, as opposed too…

  A chimpanzee or gorilla which can’t do that. They are programmed with freedom to live in harmony, but their behavior can be good or bad, but the bad are usually outcast, as they understand that they cannot continue to exist if bad behavior is manifest above good.

  In the human society, however, we have mind and brain connection, bedcause we are endowed by God with a Spirit. If there were no God, then there would be no example, no purpose, no order, no goals, much less an existence to speak of…it would be as though we are automatons running around like a bunch of chickens with a fox after them. Literal chaotic.

  Since there is a Creator, we now have purpose, and the earth turns with life again. In the synopsis, we have placed at our disposal by Our Creator a set of rules and commandments, and they were set in stone.

  If He had not, then how would we know what is right and wrong? We wouldn’t. Just as a child if left to their own vices will never learn.

  So, learning is the key, and we’ve always went by the example that God had placed in His Word.

  Evil on the other hand (such as modern liberalism, which adheres to atheist, secular humanist ideologies) chooses to reject what God had commanded … the thing is, it’s not too much of a problem when the evil remains on a small scale, but when it starts to gain power and influence that society will ultimately be destroyed.

  Our Founders understood this, and is why they taught children the Bible, prayed with them and counselled them through the anointing words of the One True God of Creation and His One and Only Son Jesus Christ.

  Yes, everyone had the freedom to believe whatever they chose to believe, but that did not change the fact that the Founders were going to adhere to the Word of God, for reality told them that God is too great to stand without Him. The same applies today, we either stand with Him or without Him, for He grants us a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”.

  Does life bring joy? Yes.

  Should liberty mean death? No.

  Should the pursuit of happiness mean we should have the right to murder? No.

  The Secular Left in turn presents false euphemisms to place themselves above the transcendency of God’s Law, and replaces it with their evil intentions, following the ways of man’s thought, which the Bible says are evil thoughts, always.

  FACT #1. Life begins at conception.

  FACT #2. We have an obligation to defend and cherish that life.

  FACT #3. The Law was meant to do just that, defend life as an equal opportunity for all.

• 50. js  |  August 30th, 2008 at 9:18 pm

  i get so amused by the children playing…but the truth is…a woman puts herself into the position to become pregnant…if she says no…then it is rape…if she consents…then she made the choice…and if she gets pregnant…it is her that has to bear the burden and consequence of her actions…yes…she can go to court and demand child support…she can refuse to allow the father to even know he has a child…so all the claptrap and confusion over the issue is hogwash…

  a womans right to chose is inseparable from her womb…if she uses it…and creates a life…she has made a choice…that can not be reversed…because abortion does not reverse that choice…abortion kills a living human being…after life has been created….its too late to chose…because the right of a living human behing, the unborn child, supercedes anything after its creation…its the mothers moral and legal duty to protect that child…

• 51. BU3 Durf  |  August 31st, 2008 at 3:10 am

  Keep cherry picking my quotes Jeremiah, its fitting your agenda perfectly. U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment, Freedom of Religion, this nation is not based on Christian values. The very 1st Amendment proves it. Why don’t you acknowledge that? Read previous posts of mine again if you are still confused.

  By the way, I don’t advocate murder, I simply believe that the U.S. Constitution should be upheld vigorously, like any true American.

• 52. Jeremiah  |  August 31st, 2008 at 12:42 pm

  this nation is not based on Christian values.

  Fortunately, for the sake of everyone in search of the truth, you would be wrong. History is not what you make it out to be.

  Everything from the get-go has been inspired and supported by the Christian God, the True God of Creation.

  Much of what you believe, my friend, can be stemmed back to what was called - the “abolitionist crusade” which was the main cause of the “Civil War” between the states. Although, slavery was defeated, which was a good thing, along with it came the destruction of constitutional government and the rule of Christian laws in our Christian republic.

  That was one of the signs leading up to our current time in history, the present, as their were many movements that followed the “Civil War” which led to the establishment of the ACLU, and millions of lost souls are burning in Hell today with no way out, harrowed in pain and suffering, and many more going as they reject the love and compassion of Jesus Christ, as a result of the ACLU’s totalitarian agenda vexing our Christian foundation - As a result the Constitution is read in contradiction of what the Founders intended for it to mean. Just as all the things you mentioned (school prayer, Bible reading, Creationism) were all taken away only to be replaced with doctrines of devils, such as Darwinism, and homosexuality. Yes, Satan is alive and well within the hearts of millions, as he deceives them of their everlasting hope.

  It may be too late to turn America back, but let the people know that they have an opportunity this very moment to spare their soul the judgment of no return, and turn to a loving, kind, and gracious God who is Just to forgive us of our sins through Jesus Christ Our Lord.

• 53. BU3 Durf  |  August 31st, 2008 at 12:58 pm

  Your statement contradicts itself, so again, its not worth arguing with you, because you twist logic into something you can believe.

• 54. Jeremiah  |  August 31st, 2008 at 1:12 pm

  BU3 Durf,

  There are no contradictions … just your unwillingness to accept the truth … your only hope. In other words, you choose to live for Satan.

  Wake up, my friend, before it’s too late!

• 55. BU3 Durf  |  September 1st, 2008 at 12:26 am

  If the constitution was written before the Civil War (which I think it was), you are incorrect. Because like I stated earlier, the Freedom of Religion is in the Constitution and the Freedom of Religion is not in the Holy Bible, so your theory on this is wrong. There’s nothing to wake up to, I present facts and you present hogwash.

  The TRUTH, my friend, will set you free.