A question about Dungy

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    ...You both may not like nor agree but the Supreme Court has ruled that Americans have the right to choose an abortion if want.        So....happy fathers day...lol 
    Posted by Harleyroadking111

    Harley
    You're right.  I don't like it.  That is why I believe it should be given to the people for a Constitutional amendment....or not.  Why should 8 justices decide for 250 million people?  Why can't we just put it to a vote?  The SC couldn't messwith a CA.  They would have to uphold it.  They wouldn't be able to say the Constitution is unconstitutional.

    Happy Father's day to you too and everyone else on the board!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Is Dungy or is he not a church going cathlic? if so he would not help a gay person because thats not how those people do. You can play games all you want but he is the one who put his faith on the record and so its fair to say he wouldnt help gays because of his faith. No proof needed just history of his faith."

    I'm not going to speak for Dungy or for Catholics, but I'm pretty Jesus was hangin' around and helping out all sorts of people (thieves, prostitutes, etc) and, while not recorded specifically, I would no doubt believe he befriended a homosexual or two.
    If someone has a problem with this, it is because they've missed the whole point of the Holy Scriptures and the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

    It's probably best not to generalize when talking about people groups. Just because someone goes to church, doesn't mean "he would not help a gay person" or that is what those people do. You said, "He wouldn't help gays because of his faith." If that is true, then he has no faith.
    But you are just guessing. You don't know Dungy, so you don't know (just like I don't know him so I don't know). What I am saying is that you need to be careful when you generalize. The statements you made show a prejudice for those who believe The Bible.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "the Supreme Court has ruled that Americans have the right to choose an abortion if want."

    Yeah, the Supreme Court missed the part about unalienable right of LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Appearently, it slipped their minds.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "That's why it's up to us to keep them in check.  It may not be perfect, but anarchy would stink bad."

    Then I guess we get a big fat F because we aren't keeping anyone in D.C. in check.  The bureaucracy and the special interests are doing whatever they want. 

    Anarchy would stink bad but life for a lot of people on this planet stinks bad and at least in anarchy the rich would have all their mcmansions and ferraris stolen from them. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

     B and 347, I'm glad we can agree to disagree...tough, tough issue. I meant to say among the 50 million could be the next Lincoln, MLK, or Picasso, so it is great loss of humanity.
    Posted by Harleyroadking111

    Thak you Harley.  Usually people bring up the possibility of there being a Hitler, Stalin or Mussolini in there, but you didn't.  That was a breath of fresh air.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy


    Replying to:
    You are right if a fetus was a person I would be a hypocrite but it’s not a person it’s a fetus.
    It’s a person. 
    Posted by 347pg

    Killa
    I should have said "You're right, you wouldn't be a hypocrite.  But I still believe it's a person."  Sorry if I implied that you were.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Is Dungy or is he not a church going cathlic? if so he would not help a gay person because thats not how those people do. You can play games all you want but he is the one who put his faith on the record and so its fair to say he wouldnt help gays because of his faith. No proof needed just history of his faith." I'm not going to speak for Dungy or for Catholics, but I'm pretty Jesus was hangin' around and helping out all sorts of people (thieves, prostitutes, etc) and, while not recorded specifically, I would no doubt believe he befriended a homosexual or two. If someone has a problem with this, it is because they've missed the whole point of the Holy Scriptures and the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. It's probably best not to generalize when talking about people groups. Just because someone goes to church, doesn't mean "he would not help a gay person" or that is what those people do. You said, "He wouldn't help gays because of his faith." If that is true, then he has no faith. But you are just guessing. You don't know Dungy, so you don't know (just like I don't know him so I don't know). What I am saying is that you need to be careful when you generalize. The statements you made show a prejudice for those who believe The Bible.
    Posted by Ritchie_az


    By the way, given that vick has spent his last 2 years (is that correct?") in jail do we, for a fact, know that he is not gay?

    just askin'
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Good point Vick very well could be gay by this point in time lol. And he spent 18 months in jail not 2 years.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "What would we do with an additional 50 million people? Besides the other benefits mentioned by other postings, it would have probably solved a labor shortage in certain industries that have made it necessary to depend on illegal immigrants at entry level positions and H1 visas for highly qualified foreigners." - Belenus

    They dont give away American jobs to illegal immigrants because their are not enough Americans to fill those jobs they give them to immigrants because they will twice the work for half the money. There are plenty of out of work american's to fill those jobs they just dont care about the little man. All they care about is making more money and they can make more money hiring immigrants then they can giving jobs to their own people.
     
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Sex is fun (and young people are fertile) because species are designed to survive." - PMike

    Not to mention that men hit their sexual peek at age 17 and that is a fact, after that its pretty much downhill lol So to expect 17 year old kids to just not have sex is a dumb idea.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    " Why should 8 justices decide for 250 million people? " - 347

    Because the 250 millions people in this country for the most part are stupid uninformed people who make their choice not based on the facts but based on what the latest issue of entertainment weekly might have told them. People in this country dont weigh all the facts and make an educated choice. I am not saying everyone but for teh most part people are stupid. How many people in this country simply play follow the leader and do whatever they are told to do? By their church or by their TV screens or by their friends or by their faverit celebs and so on and so forth. Too many people would vote based on their personal feelings and not the facts at hand and i dont just mean in the case of abortion i mean in the case of any serious issue. I am sure some of you still have faith in the people of this country but not me, the reason I dont want them to take this or anything else to the people is because the common person is a idiot and a robot. But thats just the way I see it.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Why should 8 justices decide for 250 million people?" - 347 Because the 250 millions people in this country for the most part are stupid uninformed people who make their choice not based on the facts but based on what the latest issue of entertainment weekly might have told them.

    Killa
    That is irrelevant.  We live in a Democracy, ahh Constitutional Republic.  That means the people have a say.  SC Justices are not elected officials.  Stupid or not, if the people are not allowed to vote on it, it detracts on our system of government.  Why is it you want to allow women the right to choose, but not the American people?  Couldn't women be making stupid choices when it comes to abortion?  Sounds like a double standard.


    ...the reason I dont want them to take this or anything else to the people is because the common person is a idiot and a robot. But thats just the way I see it.
    Posted by MVPkilla

    Well when they take your right to vote for anything and everything away, you won't be able to complain, because they'll take it away from the smart and the idiots.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Why is it you want to allow women the right to choose, but not the American people?  Couldn't women be making stupid choices when it comes to abortion?  Sounds like a double standard." - 347

    Because when the dumb a ss American people make a choice it effects all of us and when a single women makes a choice about what to do with her body it effects her and only her thats why. If I have a daughter and she gets knocked up at age 18 and wants to have it aborted she shouldnt be denied that choice by 200 million morons who didnt have all the facts. I would rather have 8 people who are up to speed on all the facts and will make a judgment based on the facts and not their own personal bias then 200 million people who make snap judgments based on the way the feel and not the facts. I am not saying all the facts support my side either what I am saying is it doesnt matter which side the facts support because most of the dumb a ss american people wouldnt do the research anyway.  
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    ...347 Because when the dumb a ss American people make a choice it effects all of us and when a single women makes a choice about what to do with her body it effects her and only her thats why...
    Posted by MVPkilla

    Unless of course, a fetus turns out to be a person, in which case, someone else is very affected.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Killa That is irrelevant.  We live in a Democracy, ahh Constitutional Republic.  That means the people have a say.  SC Justices are not elected officials.  Stupid or not, if the people are not allowed to vote on it, it detracts on our system of government.  Why is it you want to allow women the right to choose, but not the American people?  Couldn't women be making stupid choices when it comes to abortion?  Sounds like a double standard. Well when they take your right to vote for anything and everything away, you won't be able to complain, because they'll take it away from the smart and the idiots.
    Posted by 347pg


    347 - the whole point of the Supreme Court is that the people don't have a say -they are not an elected body.  So it doesn't detract from our system of government - what you are suggesting, not giving the Supreme Court a say, would detract from the system of government.  Plus the people have the right to amend the constitution but they haven't.


    But the idea of a country of 250 million people functioning as a democracy is not feasible.  Democracies don't work other than in very small towns.  Even in a mid-sized town or city you need a republican form of government.  But at the level of 250 million republican doesn't even work - the only thing that works is bureaucracy governed by special interests.  That's why we need to repeal the constitution and replace it with a powerless government. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Mighty

    347 - the whole point of the Supreme Court is that the people don't have a say -they are not an elected body.  So it doesn't detract from our system of government...

    Copy that

    ...what you are suggesting, not giving the Supreme Court a say, would detract from the system of government.

    No, what I mean is that certain issues that are hotly debated should not be put into the hands of a few.  This issue is too important to be left to the judgment of 8 people.  They are not scientists, philosophers, doctors or ministers.  They are lawyers.  They study the law.  They should decide whether something is constitutional or unconstitutional.  Yes, the despots said it was constitutional.  However, the issue will not go away (like slavery did.  No one is arguing to bring back slavery!  People argued to get rid of prohibition and the CA was repealed).  I would just like to see the issue set before the states for referendums on a constitutional amendment.   

    Plus the people have the right to amend the constitution but they haven't.

    Much to my (and, I'm going out on a limb here, half the country's) chagrin.

    But the idea of a country of 250 million people functioning as a democracy is not feasible.  Democracies don't work other than in very small towns.  Even in a mid-sized town or city you need a republican form of government.  But at the level of 250 million republican doesn't even work - the only thing that works is bureaucracy governed by special interests.

    I agree it has its problems, but it's the best we have, short of a monarchy with God as it's head.

    That's why we need to repeal the constitution and replace it with a powerless government. 
    Posted by themightypatriots

    Can't agree with you there Mighty.  Too much at stake to make it powerless.  Can't start from scratch now.  Better to work to make it what it should be than tear it down and start all over.  People are still the same.  We'd eventually get back to the same probems.  The thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Unless of course, a fetus turns out to be a person, in which case, someone else is very affected."

    I knew you were going to say that lol
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

     Just in case you were wondering there are 9 justices on the SC.
    Posted by Harleyroadking111

    Oh yeah....
    I knew that....................
    Thanks
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from theplaintruth. Show theplaintruth's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    So I was just reading some more on the whole Mike Vick story and how Arthur Blank and Tony Dungy would both be charictor wittnesses for Vick if need be to get him back into the league and it dawned on me, do any of you think good old Saint Dungy would be doing this for a white player? If a all star white QB was caught doing what Vick did and sent to jail would Dungy be all about saving his soul or whatvere the hell it is he thinks he is doing? I do not think he would, I think this is all about the first black head coach to win a super bowl trying to help one of teh biggest star black QBs in the game. And please for the love god try to understand that i am not a racist person and thats not why i am saying this i just truly dont buy into the Saint Dungy act. Everyone has a angle always even Dungy. I do not think that if a white QB of teh same super star caliber was to do what Vick did that he would lift a finger to help him. Does anyone agree with this? If not i am sure you will let me have it and I get that but seriously guys its just something that creeped into my head while reading all these "saint dungy helping vick" storys that make me sick and i wanted to see if anyone else felt the same way. Am I way off or do you think i have something? What say you?
    Posted by MVPkilla

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from theplaintruth. Show theplaintruth's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    First of all, I'm in shock.  I can't believe that Patriots fans have engaged in this nonsense.  Wow!  Okay, first of all, I believe that Tony Dungy has carried himself in a respectable and forthright manner for his entire career (as far as I can remember).  There is nothing devious about his motives here.  Do you people not read?  Look at his literary offerings, his views are clear.  He's been consistent with assisting at risk youth and individuals throughout his lifetime.  If you can't recall his press conferences surrounding his retirement, a significant portion of the time was spent talking of his plan to mentor young men.  Is there a better reclamation project out there than Michael Vick?  I don't think so.  I believe his true motivation is the LOSS of his oldest son to suicide.  He was a young man with a bright future who was coming from a good home and still struggled with becoming a man.  If Tony Dungy thinks that by helping Michael Vick it could somehow ease his own inner demons, then GOD bless him. 
    Now to the racial issue.  Tony's background is in assisting minority organizations.  His record is also extensive in helping all in need regardless of ethnicity.  He chooses to focus where he does, based on necessity.  Someone brought up Jake Plummer.  Since they did, I'll remind you all that Jake Plummer accused and plea bargained his way out of multiple accounts of sexual battery/ assault just prior to entering the NFL.  He received extensive image rehabilitation assistance via FOX NFL analyst and Hall of Fame QB Terry Bradshaw as well as others.  Brett Favre never faced charges for committing multiple felonies (transferring of controlled medications to another person who is unauthorized).  The average citizen, gets 2 to 5 years per count.  Mr. Football  received none.  Then, while in the NFL substance abuse program, was reported for consumption of alcohol and brazenly stated "no one is gonna dictate when I can and can't have a beer".  Nothing was done.  In fact that year, Barry Sanders had a career year and had to share league MVP with the drug addict.  Bottom line is, what Vick did was wrong, however, I've never seen one individual lose so much ( 100 million dollars + 2 years incarceration) while the others involved, basically walked free.  PETA needed a poster child for their cause and Michael's implicitness accommodated them.  We've all fallen short of being perfect people, please allow this fallen one to pick himself up if he is able...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    You do understand that the president is never really on vacation don’t you?





    This is true but it does not take away from my point he still took more “vacation” days then any other president in our history and that is a fact. And it’s a fine example of the kind of job he did as president which was a half a ss job.





    Huh??  Where are you getting your facts?

    “The 244-188 vote was not what Mr. Obama had hoped for. A week of presidential wooing -- including a visit to the Capitol, a return visit to the White House by moderate House Republicans and a bipartisan cocktail party Wednesday night -- did not yield a single Republican vote. The president also lost 11 Democrats.”

     “The Senate approved its bill most along party lines, by a vote of 61 to 37, with three Republicans joining 56 Democrats and two independents in favor.”

    I would hardly call 3 Republicans a “joint effort.”  You need to check the facts dude





    You got me there, I was not thinking of the exact number I was just trying to make the point that republicans had a say in how this plan was drawn up whether it was 1 or 2 or 3 republicans doesn’t really matter to me my point was both sides had a say and they did.






    Moron?  Basis?  Is it because she’s a woman and conservative?







    This is what  was talking about when I said I thought you were trying to poke me with a stick and unleash the beast lol no she is a moron because she is a f*cking moron. Unless you have been living under a rock for the last year this shouldn’t be up for debate. She was running for VP and she didn’t even know that Africa was a continent! In every single interview she did it was clear to pretty much everyone including the right wing that she was being spoon fed the answers and anytime anyone asked her a question she was not given the answer to she sounded like a complete and utter moron. It has nothing to do with the fact that she is a women or that she is a conservative. There are lots of conservatives that I think are very smart and plenty of women that are up to the task of running for office. Just not Pailin, in fact I found it very insulting that they picked her. I mean I know the American people for the most part are dumb enough to not ask questions but to anyone who was paying attention to the election it was very obvious that the republicans had a “ any pair of *tits will due” attitude. The demmies have a black candidate and a female candidate we need to get us a pair of *tits for this election and so they picked Pailin and it blew up in their face. As soon as the election was over the right wing started trying to separate them selves from her because she was so clearly a bad choice. I have had many conversations with friends of mine who are republicans who have no issue fully admitting that she was a bad choice and clearly a grade A moron. So for you to sit here and just act like “oh I don’t know what you mean” is just you being obtuse on purpose, if you live in America and followed the election you would clearly know she is a stupid person. So stop trying to make me out to be some bad guy for saying it by implying I only think she is dumb cause she is a female because that is not it, I think she is a moron because she is a moron. You might be the only person I have met to debate this everyone else has fully acknowledge that she is a f*cking idiot.







    Too late







     See you have already made up your mind that is the difference between the two of us. 8 years ago when Bush got elected I gave the man a shot, after 9/11 I gave him loads of credit for the speeches he was given I loved that he was so gung ho about getting after anyone who harbored terrorist and I gave the man a shot but you and the people on your side have already made up your minds. As soon as there was a democrat in the white house you were already going to tear him down at every turn. I am not saying Obama is not f*cking up cause he is but you made up your mind about the man before he ever even had a shot at that is just so typical right wing. If Obama was a republican you would be sitting here defending him I am sure of it and that’s the sad part all that matters to you guys is that there is a fellow right winger in the white house it doesn’t matter if the guy in the white house is good at the job (not talking about Obama just saying in general) it doesn’t matter all that matters is you win the election and that is just stupid. All this party VS party c rap is what is ruining this country. You made up your mind about Obama before he even had a chance and that is just sad







    Hmmmmm pretty broad brush if you ask me.







    Not at all, I did not say we are all morons in fact I would say about 20% of Americans are smart enough to make an informed decision on such a topic as abortion, its that other 80% of morons that cant be trusted to make a rational decision. Too many people in this country take their que from someone else. How many people do you think make a judgment based on let’s say what Oprah has to say? How many people do you think voted for Obama simply because Oprah got behind him? And that is just one example I am sure I could come up with more then that. Too many people have forgotten that they have a voice of their own and a brain of their own. So sorry if I don’t trust the people of this country with a decision such as this.







    I’m glad we’ve now defined moronic.  Look, people’s interests are different.  To label this set of people as morons just because they don’t do what you do or like what you like…………..I mean come on dude.  If that is the standard, they have every right to call you a moron, because you don’t do as they do.








    You are entitled to your opinion but I disagree, there is most defiantly a group of people in this country that could be defined as MTV Robots or main stream Robots and if you think I am wrong I don’t know what to tell you. We live in a world where every little boy and girls NEEDS to have a cell phone or a Iphone, in a world where morons like Paris Hilton are famous for absolutely nothing. We are a country of consumers and all we do is buy into the BS the TV moron box tells them. People in this country are stupid that is just the way I see it you don’t have to agree with me. You might have more faith in humanity then I do, me personally? I think that the morons in this country have set us on a course to our downfall. Too many followers and not enough leaders.







    Well that explains how Obama got elected then!  Sorry, I couldn't waste the chance.  You stepped right into it dude!

     






    No need to apologize cause I agree with you, if it was up to me someone from the green party would be elected. And don’t go off on me for saying that im sure you think people like Ralph Nader are buffoons but I don’t. I think this country could use a little switch up right about now and I think someone from the green party would be just the bit of fresh air we need but that’s just me. 





     Well that’s where we come to the fork in the road.  You can criticize my view point all you want, but to understand it, you have to understand that I do believe they are people







    Oh I understand that you think they are people or else you wouldn’t be making the argument you are making so of course you think that they are people but obviously if I am sitting here voicing the pro choice side of things then I clearly think that in that early stage it is a fetus and not a person. We can go back and forth but you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. No harm no foul





    And you claimed I was duped by Bush.  Where is this supposed science your talking about.  There has NEVER been any science PROVING that fetuses are not people.  There is no way it can be proven one way or another.  That’s why I said lets err on the side of life.  This is pure koolaid.  I would like to know when you (or your science) say that life begins.  When do people become people?



    Its this simple 347, if there was no evidence to support my side of things it would be against the law to abort a pregnancy. Its that simple you say there is no proof as far as science go and you might be right because I don’t have ALL the facts but the way I see it if the pro choice side had no evidence to support its argument then you and your people would have won this debate years ago. Clearly there is evidence to support this or else it would be against the law. Either that or you and your people have done a p iss poor job of arguing your point.




    In fact?????  Why, because some Supreme Court despots decided to pander to the National Organization for Women?  Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right.  Slavery was once legal.  We interred Japanese Americans during WWII.  It was legal at the time.







    If you had any evidence to prove them wrong then you could make it against the law in no time but clearly they have a leg up on you. I mean if you want to delude yourself into thinking that the Supreme Court is just pandering to the National Organization for Women then you go right ahead but clearly they had evidence to support their argument or else your side would have beat them out years ago.








    If you go rob a bank and kill someone in the process, does the State have a right to come in and take your son and put him to death for your crime?







    Its not the same thing and you know it. Someone very close to me was r aped and its not the same thing so please choose your next response very carefully because I am not going to sit here and let you down play r ape. I know this is a debate and you are trying to make your point but seriously you are wrong.







    Of course not.  But that ‘s what we’re doing.  Killing a child for the sin of his father.






    First of all how many women do you think would kill themselves if they HAD to spend 9 months being reminded day in and day out that they were carrying the offspring of the man who r aped them? Cause I think the numbers would out of this world. I don’t agree with you but even I could say that if I lived in a world where abortion was against the law I could live with it but not if r ape victims were not given the choice because that is a different situation all together. If you want to sit here and say that its selfish for women who “just want to run around and s crew” to get an abortion fine I can listen to you make that point but for you to say that a women should HAVE to keep the baby after she is forced against her will to have sex with a complete stranger is not only wrong but its sick. It literally makes me sick to my stomach to think that someone would actually believe that. If a woman is r aped she should have the choice to abort. As I said before please choose your next reply very carefully as I have no tolerance what so ever for r apist in fact if I had the chance to straight up murder a r apist I would in a heart beat they are the scum of the earth. 








     But of course, that’s only if you believe it’s a person………………….








    We have already established that I do not think it’s a person so is there really a point to continuing to make that point? I clearly do not think a fetus at that stage in pregnancy is a actually living breathing person. You don’t agree and you don’t have to agree but I have clearly made my stance known so let’s stop wasting time huh?






    Murder is a concern for society.






    Its not murder, if it was an arrest would be made and a trial would ensue and since I have not seen too many cops arresting women outside of abortion clinics I am guessing that the law doesn’t consider it murder so its not murder. Not to anyone that counts anyways. And by that I mean the law.






    I’m not.  If I was, abortion would be illegal






    That’s right your not but you would sure like to be huh? What gives youa right to judge other people the way you do? You spout off all these reasons for why people get abortions as if you know exactly why everyone does what they do. You clearly cant read minds so where do you get off? The law is on their side and you have no idea why they are doing what they do. 





    It is society’s business if it’s murder





     

    Once again as far as the laws of this country are concerned it is not murder so it is not society’s business what so ever.






    Well that shows me that there are questions in your mind whether it is moral or not.  Maybe you should explore those questions on a spiritual level.






    Don’t take what I say out of context, post the whole thing if you are going to do that. It has nothing to do with whether I think its moral or not I do not question it what so ever, it is a women’s right to chose whether or not she wants to keep her baby, not yours and not your churches but hers. You missed the point I was trying to make, what I was saying is that when I was 19 becoming a father was not an option for me, I mean if I had gotten someone pregnant and she insisted on having the kid of course I would step up to the plate that is just the kind of person I am but if she had said listen neither one of us is ready for this and went and got it aborted I would have been ok with that. But the way I see it once you have been with someone for as long as I have been with my lady and your about to get married and all that then for me and only me that is the right time for kids. If we got pregnant now of course I would have it but not because I think it’s not moral to abort but because for me and my lady it’s just time for us to start our family and that’s what I meant. I think you just took an opportunity to try and take a poke at me.





    Yes, because the SCJ despots have ruled that it’s legal.  And we in the US are horrified, HORRORFIED by human rights abuses in China!  50 MILLION PLUS in the USA……..  We ought to give them Most Favored Nation status.






    I am not horrified by what they do in China because it’s not of my business. They are over populating this planet anyways. Its like when that title wave hit India, you know how I viewed that? A blessing, they were over populated anyways. But then again I would consider myself sith lol so I am not horrified very easily lol.







    I did not say evidence, I said belief.





    Point taken.




     Let’s get it out of the courts and see.







    You would love that wouldn’t you? You know that there are more dumb people out there that would let their vote be influenced by one of your religious pro life commercials rather then take in all the facts and make an unbiased and educated choice. People make gut reactions, people don’t take in all the facts, people let their personal beliefs get in the way of the case at hand and that’s why people should never be entrusted with such a huge decision. I would agree that we should let the people vote only if everyone was forced to take a class and get the facts and pass a test proving that they paid attention and didn’t go in with their minds already made up, if that was the case then I would be all for it but its not and people make stupid decisions everyday. The common American is an uninformed moron with no clue and who could be talked into making the wrong choice rather easily. Whether you think the wrong choice is pro life or pro choice is irrelevant the point is the common American could be talked into making a choice with out knowing all the facts. So I am way more comfortable with the SCJ making the call since they at least have to take in all the facts before making a decision.








     They’re not kicking my but t, they’re killing babies





    Correction according to US law they are aborting a fetus not killing a baby. (If you poke me I will poke back LOL)





    It doesn’t matter.  If it is a person (which it is) then no reason is good enough.





    Not according to the laws of this country. In accordance with the law it’s a fetus not a baby.





     Wait a minute.  If it’s not a person, why is it so tough?  You’re trying to have it both ways.  Foul!






    Now you are just acting thick headed, even if I do not believe it is a baby at that stage in the pregnancy we are both clearly aware of the fact that one day it will grow into a living breathing being and that is what makes the choice hard for people. When its aborted it’s a fetus not a baby and the law supports this but when making the choice you are not just thinking about the fetus in your belly you are thinking about the baby it will grow into and that is what makes it tough. No one ever said that the fetus doesn’t grow into a baby that is clearly a fact and that’s what makes it tough. Its not murder because if you abort it in the early stages it’s a fetus and not a baby quite yet. Now if we were debating people getting abortion way too late into their pregnancy I would be with you because at some point it does become a baby and not just a fetus but if you follow the law and do what they tell you to do you are not murdering a baby you are aborting a fetus. But clearly when making such a choice they are going to also think about the baby that it could grow into.







    Then they mustn’t believe it is just a piece of tissue.  They must think it could be a person.  Yet, they go through with it anyway.





    Like I said above this post, at that point in the pregnancy it is just a fetus but that doesn’t mean their minds don’t wonder down the road to when its not just a fetus and that’s what makes it tough. You are right though they do know for a fact that one day it will grow from a fetus to a baby and they go through with it anyways and that is what makes it tough for them however when they do the deed it is not yet a baby it is still just a fetus and therefore its not murder.





    Are you calling on the name of the Lord or using His name in vain?






    In vain. I have told you I believe in a higher being but I don’t believe in everything that you might believe. I don’t always buy into the whole Jesus is the son of god thing. Sometimes I take it into consideration but ultimately I think he was just a gut with an idea and a very good con man (lack of a better word) but like I said sometimes I think about it but in the end I don’t think I will be denied entrance into “heaven” because I swore too much or took the lords name in vain. Those are rules that you have to follow but I don’t but into the bible or organized religion so I can take his name in vain as much as I want because I don’t think it will have any effect on the “after life” anyways. I think if there is a god that he has far more troubling things to worry about then whether or not people swear or take his name in vain. I am sure he could care less. But I digress, I really don’t want to get into the whole religion thing again lol






    Are you actually questioning the authenticity of those pictures?  Those are MiG fighter jets buried in the sand.





    You are correct but what those pictures aren’t? WMDs buried in the sand. No evidence to support Bush’s claims have ever been found. He lied about why he wanted to go to war and until you can show me evidence of the WMDs he said he was sure they had he is a liar and a piece of sh*t. But if you have pictures of WMDs buried in the sand then please do show us all as I am more then willing to call CNN and break the story.






    Ok, I take it that you have never been played or taken advantage of, or mislead? 








    Yea but I learn from my mistakes you clearly don’t as you said you will most likely get played again. If I get played or taken advantage of you better believe I wont fall for the same trick twice. Not to mention I would never make a choice on something as huge as the president based on religious beliefs







    . As far as separation of Church and State goes, Thomas Jefferson, writing a letter to a concerned group of Danbury Connecticut Baptists assured them that the Federal government would not interfere with the running of any Church.  That’s what he was saying.  He never said check your beliefs at the door






    I don’t care what he meant when he said it. I was not thinking of Thomas Jefferson when I made that point nor do I care. People’s personal beliefs have no place in politics. They are supposed to represent everyone in their state and or country not just the ones who share in heir same belief system.









    How can anyone be fair to all





    Pretty simple, by being fair to all. Are you implying that they should only be fair to some? And anyone else that doesn’t fall under their umbrella of whatever doesn’t count? Are you seriously suggesting that we should not expect elected officials to be fair to all? That is just ridicules of course they should be expected to be fair to all.






     I want someone that basis his judgments on Biblical principles.  You don’t.  Why should your desire take precedence over mine? 








    You don’t get it, if they would leave their religious beliefs at the door then no one is taking precedence over anyone. They are not elected to represent you and only people like you they are there to represent everyone. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists, Jedi’s whoever! I am not saying they can’t go to church I am saying that must consider all when making a decision and not just what the people in their church think. If its done right and its done fair no one takes precedence over anyone.







    Ok then my wishes won’t be taken into account.  You’re disenfranchising me man.  You want to apply that logic to your side of things, but won't let it apply to the other side.  That is a cheap lib tactic.  And I'm believing your not a cheap lib.  I await your recantation.





    So the only way you ever think is in a biblical way? There is no room for compromise so that everyone can be represented fairly? You can’t just look at things in what is best for everyone you have to only look out for yourself and your own agenda? That’s sad. You are right I am not a cheap lib I am just some who expects things to be fair for all and not just for the people who talk to the same god.







    So what?  He gets to think and make judgments the way he sees best.  If you don’t like it, he was elected.  I have to put up with Obama’s secular humanism, just like you had to put up with Bush’s religion.  You have to get over it.







    I don’t have to get over anything, I happen to live in a country where I have the right to say whatever I want so if I am sick and tired of religion in politics I am more then allowed to voice my concern. Just as you are allowed to slander Obama at every turn the way im sure you will. Rush would be proud. And what the hell is up with Secular Humanism, I never looked into what religion Obama follows because I could care less as it has nothing to do with being president but I could have sworn he was Christian so what’s up with this secular humanism that you keep referencing?








    No, it just means he’s distorting the facts - feeding you the koolaid.







    And your people never do that right? Give me a break.









    Colin Powell (who I have a lot of respect for) is a RINO too.









    Colin Powell is a great man and I would vote for him in a heart beat if he ran in the next election. Rush Limbaugh’s heart would explode if there were two black candidates lol Colin Powel is a true republican not some hack like Rush and people like Rush who are ruining the republican party are trying to push good men like him out the door and it’s a shame you don’t see it that way because Powel might be one of the few great republicans we have left.







    No, he didn’t.  I guess we’ll have to pray that Obama gets lucky. 




    So if Bush catches him its because he is such a “great man” but if Obama catches him its because he is lucky? Once again showing how one sided you are.







    Why hasn’t Obama abolished it then?







    Because he is evil just like every other person in politics. Like I said I am not some Obama *whore I don’t give him a pass on anything and if he doesn’t get rid of the Patriot Act it will be a major problem for me and I wont vote for him in the next election its that simple. I am not tied down to one party like you.







    Once again I stayed late at work to do this lol well to finish it at least lol so I am outa here talk to you tomorrow.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Taz you gotta set your type in a different color or something, can't tell which is yours and which is his.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Unless of course, a fetus turns out to be a person, in which case, someone else is very affected." I knew you were going to say that lol
    Posted by MVPkilla

    Ahhhhh  I'm so predictable
    Stop doing the Vulcan mind meld on me!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsfaninpa420. Show patsfaninpa420's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    " Anarchy would stink bad but life for a lot of people on this planet stinks bad and at least in anarchy the rich would have all their mcmansions and ferraris stolen from them. 
    Posted by themightypatriots


    Anarchy would stink worse than you know, at least it would change everyone's viewpoints about owning a firearm, cause you would need one just to survive.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimnagle. Show jimnagle's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Why is it you want to allow women the right to choose, but not the American people?  Couldn't women be making stupid choices when it comes to abortion?  Sounds like a double standard." - 347 Because when the dumb a ss American people make a choice it effects all of us and when a single women makes a choice about what to do with her body it effects her and only her thats why. If I have a daughter and she gets knocked up at age 18 and wants to have it aborted she shouldnt be denied that choice by 200 million morons who didnt have all the facts. I would rather have 8 people who are up to speed on all the facts and will make a judgment based on the facts and not their own personal bias then 200 million people who make snap judgments based on the way the feel and not the facts. I am not saying all the facts support my side either what I am saying is it doesnt matter which side the facts support because most of the dumb a ss american people wouldnt do the research anyway.  
    Posted by MVPkilla


    Killer: Where to begin?
    1. If your daughter gets an abortion, it doesn't affect only her.  In fact, it affects one other person far more than it affects her.  The baby gets the death penalty for your daughter's inability to keep her knees together.
    2. There has developed, over the last several decades, a liberal approach to getting things done in government, one that has sought to bypass the elected representatives in our constitutional republican system, and that is, getting things done through the courts that would never pass by the will of the people
    expressed through their elected representatives.  Thomas Jeffereson foresaw the possible abuses in the judicial branch.  It's tricky with them because they are appointed for life and do not have to answer to the voters.  That is why you see Senate Democrats waging war on Republican SC nominees (the Robert Bork episode was one of the sorriest ever), while GOP Senators, for the most part, believe that elections have consequences, and that presidents should pretty much get the justices they nominate.  That said, through the efforts of McCain and a few others, W got a couple of fine ones through the process.
    3. Specifically regarding abortion: Eminent Harvard law professors Alan Derschowitz (sp?) and Lawrence Tribe, both strongly pro-choice, have stated publicly that Roe v. Wade is bad law, primarily because the decision was made up of whole cloth and not from the Constitution, which does not grant anything like a right to abortion.  In fact, if you read the majority decision, you'll find that they don't even know where for sure in the Constitution they found the right for a mother to put a hit on her child!  Derschowitz has said that one of the reasons that Roe v. Wade is a bad thing is that it took a highly-charged issue like abortion, one which the Constitution does not address, out of the hands of the people and their elected representatives.
    4. Nothing in the Constitution voids anything in the Declaration of Independence, which is our national birth certificate.  The Declaration famously states some "self-evident" truths that the Founders recognized, such as that "all men are created (not born) equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator  with certain unaliable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness."  Three unaliable rights are listed here, and without the first one, the other two are moot.
    5. This issue has a personal slant for me.  I was conceived out of wedlock.  In 1947 the cultural norms and pressures were a little different.  I think that had the same situation presented itself today, I would have been given a death sentence.  Back then the verdict was a shotgun marriage.  Did my parents have a tough marriage?  Yes, very much so.  But my younger brothers and sister and I all appreciate the fact that we were not "terminated" before we began.
    6. You folks in Mass. should understand this better than most, in that your Supreme Court, against the will of the people, ordered the legislature to create that great oxymoronic institution known as "same sex marriage."  I think Mitt was asleep at the switch on this one, as he, representing the executive branch of Mass. govt., should have stepped in on the basis of separation of powers, and rescinded the judicial order.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share