A moral too far ?

[vidcc]

J2

So I have no right to try to prevent moral values being made laws? I have no right to object and try to prevent moral intervention hindering medical treatment?.

How would you describe a law which tries to dictate how you live your life ?


I'm sure an example such as a social healthcare system that "forces you to pay for the treatment of others" will help you.

We hear the word "freedom" vomit its way out of Bush's mouth every time he talks to the press. What do you consider freedom? Is it freedom to run your own life by your own values or is it freedom to change laws so that others have to live their lives by your values.

As I said I will fight for your right to say eating pork is wrong but I will fight against you if you try to make it law that I can't eat pork...what is so hard to understand about that?

[vidcc]

To clarify even further, I wonder what you mean when you say "I would stand in your way"; you propose to limit my efforts to (in your words)" impose my will on others"?

yet you don't ask what I mean when I say "I will fight for your right". If you don't literally expect me to get a gun would it have been easier to get if I had said "I would fight your view"

Who gets to define the point at which your efforts to oppose me exceed acceptable limits?

Nobody.... you would be opposed at all levels, just as the abortion debate is.

In any case, I do not propose to do more than I do in this forum, and I have ample evidence to prove I have not changed your mind one iota-are we to fear that your garden-variety politician is not made of sterner stuff than your esteemed self?

given today's lawmakers do you think that the FRC would be greeted by open or closed ears? It doesn't matter that we have millions of Americans with no health insurance...what's important is ridding us of those evil homosexuals. It doesn't matter that we could cure living people...we must stop stem cell research

You really must learn to submit to superior reasoning, buddy.

Haven't come across any yet but when I do you will be the first one I will turn to about how it is done ( I know you conservatives like the freaky s&m stuff )

[vidcc]

I'll let you in on a little secret, vid.

Legislators are exactly like us; you will not change their minds; the most one can do is give them pause.

Take this to the bank:

The legislature will not enact such a law based upon Bush's wish alone; they will make a decision based upon whether it will lend to their re-election, period, which is to say that they will vote whichever way they gauge their constituency to be leaning, which, in turn, renders the appropriate result:

A majority is required to achieve re-election, which means that the electorate's wishes are served, and that is the way the system is supposed to work, whether you like it or not.

well gee... thanks for the janet and john guide to politics

[Busyman]

J2

So I have no right to try to prevent moral values being made laws? I have no right to object and try to prevent moral intervention hindering medical treatment?

Of course you have the right. That's also lobbying....exerting your influence...whatever. You get it.

I really don't see your argument here. It's simple.

You have the right to exert influence on your legislature to make new laws, to remove existing ones, and to vote for or against laws on the table.

Some of you are arguing semantics when there are no semantics.

Break everything down to it's simplest form and it makes better sense.

[clocker]

I have mentioned here many times-Bush has only tried to forestall taxpayer money being spent (by our spendthrift house) on stem-cell research.

Would that be the Republican controlled House you are referring to?

How thoughtful of Dubya...really looking out for our interests...let's stop squandering millions on medical research whilst squandering billions on his mismanaged Middle East policies.

Gee, I wish we could elect this paragon of fiscal responsibility again.

[Rat Faced]

and that is the way the system is supposed to work,

Yep, thats the way its supposed to work.

It doesnt though, does it?

A Lot of people vote for a party purely because they always have, or 'coz their father did etc and their are so many safe states that only a few need to consider their electorate feel about an issue. These then get castigated when they dont "Toe the Party Line" and vote with the opposition on particular Bills etc.

Party Politics, and not the views of the people that voted for them, are the order of the day.

[bigboab]

I have mentioned here many times-Bush has only tried to forestall taxpayer money being spent (by our spendthrift house) on stem-cell research.

Would that be the Republican controlled House you are referring to?

How thoughtful of Dubya...really looking out for our interests...let's stop squandering millions on medical research whilst squandering billions on his mismanaged Middle East policies.

Gee, I wish we could elect this paragon of fiscal responsibility again.

Give him time. The constitution could be amended to allow this.

[vidcc]

J2

So I have no right to try to prevent moral values being made laws? I have no right to object and try to prevent moral intervention hindering medical treatment?

Of course you have the right. That's also lobbying....exerting your influence...whatever. You get it.

I really don't see your argument here. It's simple.

It appears you don't get the argument...even though it is simple...you have missed it by miles. But you finally hit the nail without realising it.
You have the right to lobby..I have the right to object....

Originally Posted by vidcc
I will stand next to you and fight for your right to speak your mind even if I disagree with you, I will stand in your way if you try to force others to comply with your personal moral values.

I haven't said I wish to ban lobbying. I said I object to people trying to impose moral values by making them law.


object :To be averse to or express disapproval of something.

[clocker]

The war aside, I have no reason to state they're any less adept at spending than the Dem versions of years past.

Given, though, that the Dems had many, many more years to perfect their technique, I'll stick with the Republicans for at least a few more cycles.

"Any less adept"?
Tsk, tsk, no need to be modest.

After all, your beloved Prez and cronies engineered the largest reversal from surplus to deficit in American history.
And it only took three years.

If we give them any more time to "perfect their technique", they will bankrupt the Universe.

Mission Accomplished!

[clocker]

Let us not resort to flowery overstatement or we'll be here all night.

Sorry.
I was an English major.



It's a character flaw.