5 Comments so far

1. johnnyutah on January 25, 2010 1:15 am

   I didn’t know that the reform bill funded abortions. I’m so happy that you are ill-informed.

   Doesn’t Conservatism mean “small government”? Why does “small government” include your religion? Your morality? Your opinion?

   Conservatism needs to distance itself from religion. It clashes with the whole- “separation of church and state” thing….

2. CrankyCon on January 25, 2010 7:28 am

   Ahh, it’s always nice to be called ill-informed by someone with no clue about what the First Amendment actually says, what conservatism is, and the contents of a major piece of legislation. A great trifecta of ignorance in one mouthful. Impressive.

3. admin on January 25, 2010 8:53 am

   @J-U

   How does you not knowing something mean that CrankyCon is ill-informed?

   In fact, it is specifically because the Senate bill doesn’t have strong abortion language in it that the Senate bill can’t pass through the House as is. Abortion could be considered the only reason that this bill has stopped.

   I would rather that the bill was stopped because of the ridiculous non-solutions to our health care problems, but I will take what I can get.

4. johnnyutah on January 25, 2010 11:26 pm

   Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
   — The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

   So, what exactly does the first amendment have to do with Conservative’s ramming nonsense into the minds of their constituents?
   Conservative’s have the right to say anything they want (free speech) provided they are not slander or libel. (includes freedom of tea parties)

   My understanding is no language was included in the “reviewed” house or senate bill that allowed pro-lifer’s to obligate spending for abortions. There were opt in/opt out provisions which I will not copy/paste to bore you with.

   Blanketing an argument with such absolutes as “health care reform means government funded abortions” is the same rhetoric used by Beck and Hannity. It is not constructive, not productive and not beneficial to the middle of the road electorate. The continued proliferation of these statements is a deliberate partisan tactic to guide viewers of Fox News into the voting booths. (majority of whom do not hold a high school diploma)

   Call me “crazy” but I don’t want to “have a beer” with my President, my Senators or even local elected officials. I don’t want any of them to be people I can “relate to on a casual level. I want them to be smart and start voting not for what is popular now, but what is crucial to the U.S. people and not big business.

5. Mrs. Cranky on January 26, 2010 7:55 am

   This argument points to a fundamental misunderstanding of pro-life americans by pro-choice americans. To the choice crowd being for or against abortion is a religious issue like which church you go to on Sunday and what you call your god.

   But to those of us who are pro-life, our desire to protect the unborn stems not from something that is uniquely Catholic, but from universal principle of morality that apply to everyone. Human life is of value, or should be, to all peoples, cultures, and religions. To pro-life ears the separation of church and state argument for abortion sounds like, “You can’t tell me to pray. You can’t tell me what to believe. You can’t tell me not to kill my unwanted children.”

   Yes we can, and we will, because even a free society, especially a free society, requires basic morality of its citizens to function.