Posted on 06/16/2005 5:24:12 AM PDT by SLB
Good article.
After re-reading the thread twice, I can't find where you made such a statement as to the allegation that you were attempting to keep a pregnant woman from participating from a graduation ceremony. Surely a lawyer wouldn't make an untrue statement would they?
You're career military, you've heard "kick your ass" more times than you can count. Or do you subscribe to the double standard, men can say "kick your ass" but women have to say, "kick your fanny, tee hee"?
Sure, sure, the world's going to hell in a handbasket, and it was better in the Good Old Days, when women knew their place.
Or maybe you're the kind of man who says "kick your fanny"? ;^)
Sam, drinking so early in the day?
My guess is that you put Bushmill's in your morning coffee.
How's things with the book club?
"Potty language"? LOL.
Yes, I suppose the world does seem like a terrible place to you.
Nice come back.
I got another one. Do you walk hand in hand with your children through the alleys and under bridges of skid row applauding and handing out 50 dollar bills to those with needles hanging out of their arms because you never know, one of them might need the insulin.
I have no idea what you're talking about. And all I've had to drink so far is two cups of coffee and a glass of water. So if you're not drinking, and I'm not drinking, there has to be another explanation as to why you're not making sense.
"When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember. You can't run an army without profanity; and it has to be eloquent profanity. An army without profanity couldn't fight it's way out of a piss-soaked paper bag."
-- General Patton
I think the author rightly divided this graduation metaphor into two events. One was the determination of the woman for graduating, which deserves applause. The other was the decision to get pregnant without a husband, which does not deserve applause.
I'd rather they graduated pregnant than got an abortion.
Yes, the ideal is to wait until after graduation to get married, and to wait for marriage before you have sex. We all know that.
Nevertheless, getting pregnant out of wedlock has always been a lot more common than we'd like. Studies show that as many as one in three first born children born to women in Colonial days were born significantly less than 9 months after marriage.
Back in those days, women didn't go to high school.
"I would imagine your mother knew before she married your dad that she would not be allowed to participate in the ceremonies and accepted it."
Not that I support the ACLU necessarily, but why should someone have to choose between being married and pregnant and accepting recognition for academic achievement?
A lot
How many U.S. Jews Protestant evangelicals did the same thing as the Catholics for the reason of getting continued U.S. dollars to Isreal?
A lot
How many black evangelical citizens voted for Democrats as U.S. Senators who then confirmed the judges that gave us Roe v. Wade did their best to destroy federalism in order to get and expand the welfare state? pander to the pro-life movement (well meaning folks mind you) in order to gain votes?
A lot
And you are surprised by the sudden change in the U.S. culture to the culture of death Republicans' understanding of limited government to that of 'as long as we're in control'?
I find your statements offensive. These folks are no different than those that continually, incessantly, and wrongly continue voting blindly as long as a person has the right letter by their name. They are all citizens of their respective states who vote based on what the government can give, supply, or provide for their current need or desire. No different. And the issues I've mentioned done by the Republicans will do as much if not more harm to the ideals of the Framers, federalism, and a continued slide in this nation of states than anything done by the groups you mention
Most religions support the sanctity of life.
These groups voted for Marxist, socialist, Democrats during the decades I stated, 1950's and 1960's. The evidence is that the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate for 40 years.
As most people know, Marx and Engels were athiests, relative moralist.
The Marxist, socialist, Democrats, beginning in the late 1930's, began their quest to ingrain an anti-moral culture in the U.S. with the unconstitutional enactment of laws supporting Marxist unionism, confiscation of private property, and Social Security.
So, why did supposedly "religious" people, who profess to believe in God, vote continiously for people who admired, professed, and advocated the ideas of admitted non-relgious, athiests and then act surprised when the result is a culture of death?
That is my point.
Ah, but you picked out Catholics, Jews, and Blacks. There were plenty of religious people that voted for Democrats that did not belong to any of those groups. The South used to be a Democratic stronghold, for reasons we'll not get into here, and that was played upon by Democrats looking to reach national offices. Shall we blame the South as well? Hell, it's done enough already, why not?
The Marxist, socialist, Democrats, beginning in the late 1930's, began their quest to ingrain an anti-moral culture in the U.S. with the unconstitutional enactment of laws supporting Marxist unionism, confiscation of private property, and Social Security.
And yet I see confiscation of private property and Social Security being touted as good things for 'society' daily by local Republicans (on property) and national Republicans (on SS). Shall we now blame white Protestant 'faithful' for societal ills that vote for Republicans based solely that they say the right things? Being a white Protestant myself that has seen the light on party line voting, I'm for it. About time somebody wakes the sheep up before you people sell the rest of my life and my land down the river just because you have to vote for the right damn letter
So, why did supposedly "religious" people, who profess to believe in God, vote continiously for people who admired, professed, and advocated the ideas of admitted non-relgious, athiests and then act surprised when the result is a culture of death?
You know what? I don't know and I really don't care. Instead of Republicans trying to fix everything at the national level, perhaps they should return to conservatism's roots (Republicans don't have conservative roots, as they were the original party of big government) and remember what the Framers had in mind for the national government and its limitations. You would be suprised over time of how your 'culture of death' would right itself
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.