That's one way of putting it. Another would be to say that she was a fence-rider who blew with the wind.
exactly. this is a woman who favored affirmative action, she clearly has no understanding of what is right and fair. she does what she feels like at the time. this is what you get if you insist on "moderation". you get a person who takes the position they think will make them seem least extreme at the time, the position they think hurts the least feelings of the people they are trying to impress. always searching for middle ground, never reason.
this is not a non-partisan position, this is a pro choice position. this is a black and white issue. there is no real middle ground. i happen to agree with you on this one, but i dont pretend that this is some sort of grey issue. you are just as black and white as the pro-lifers. do you favor "moderation", as long as the moderate agrees with red? or are you moderate to the extent that you allow the wrong opinions in for the sake of being non-partisan? there is nothing wrong with picking a judge who agrees with you exactly on everything, in fact, i dont see why anyone would do anything else, unless they think they are wrong. and if they think they are wrong, they should change their opinion.
Oh, we got it all right. Sarcasm from SabanFan, what a shock! And Steve Martin is pretty funny. But it was still a non sequitur.
To reply to all on this thread: You continue to amaze me with your complete lack of knowledge about the Christian faith. I guess that goes directly hand-in-hand with your lack of knowledge about a lot of other things... did I ever say you should be censored? Just said your opinion isn't worth the HTML it happens to be displayed within. Loud and clear. Faith isn't rational. Cept you lump in Christianity right in with Islam, a religion founded by a known serial murderer and rapist, and a religion that abrogates itself throughout. You keep comparing biblical Christianity to those false religions preached by the televangelists and the sheiks. Please read up and learn about the differences before you continue. Your sarcasm has been repeatedly noted, chief. Thanks, amigo. Good point, partner. Way to go, ace. Nice job, sport. Excellent post, champ.
The "fundamentalists" don't even agree. Needless to say, you just made a black and white choice instead of saying "I don't know what the right answer is". Maybe the correct one might be to save the life of the infant if at all possible? If abortion for abortion's sake is murder (and I believe it is) isn't murder illegal? Can the government tell you that you can't kill another human being? I believe so. Again, because people can't agree on things or have black and white truths in themselves still does not mean that said truths and moral absolutes do not exist. God exists and He is the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong.
you rarely address what i am saying. what do i not know about christianity? am i not going to hell as i said? and isnt it true that i am going to hell for being rational? it has been noted that you dont value my opinion. like i said, i guess free speech sucks in that you dont value every opinion. you will be ok. i know, thats is why i said i am going to hell, because i am mostly rational. your response was not to explain why i was incorrect, but to remind me that i dont know anything about christianity or a lot of other things. i have noticed emotional people like you are more likely to get wrapped up in things like religion.
obviously it is murder. no, not in the case of abortions. too bad we cant ask him who should be on the supreme court. could you ask him for us? seriously, can you ask him?
