3rd Debate

BedellBrave said:
The split among the Evangelicals is very much a major issue in this race.
Click to expand...

No it is not.

Outside of the faithful, rank and file voters for the first time in a generation have no idea what the evangelicals stand on the race is and I'd bet 3/4 have no idea what an evangelical is.
Witness the revolt against the Falwell Family at Liberty University

After the influence and cohesion of the Evangelical community in the past I'd think marginalized an apt term
 
BedellBrave said:
Hellish was putting it nicely. We don't have to know what's in her heart. We have her words (and there's Luke 6:45 after all). And she has been quite clear. And her words (red meat for abortion loving folks on the Left) in that debate have given many evangelicals I know pause about NeverTrumping. That was an unforced error on her part. That's my point.
Click to expand...

Please stop with "abortion loving folks"

No one "loves abortion" any more than they love a root canal

and you know it
 
57Brave said:
Please stop with "abortion loving folks"

No one "loves abortion" any more than they love a root canal
and you know it
Click to expand...

That's the only issue they really care about, 57. The sad part is they know Trump is least fit candidate ever and they simply don't care. What burns me is they are willing to put the safety of the world on the line over one issue abortion and the fact the other candidate's last name is Clinton. Bengazzi would be footnote if the SOS had been Kerry at the time.
 
VirginiaBrave said:
That's the only issue they really care about, 57. The sad part is they know Trump is least fit candidate ever and they simply don't care. What burns me is they are willing to put the safety of the world on the line over one issue abortion and the fact the other candidate's last name is Clinton. Bengazzi would be footnote if the SOS had been Kerry at the time.
Click to expand...

You have to look at it from their perspective to understand. If you think abortion is murder how could there be a bigger issue?
 
I like the majority of Americans have looked at it from their perspective.

Over and over and over --- finding it short sighted and discriminatory towards women.
Quite frankly a knee jerk response. To a very serious societal problem

I would think after almost 50 years they would learn a tact other than vilifying women and using the abhorrent-judgmental rhetoric of eternal damnation.
 
Merriam-Webster
‏@MerriamWebster
Note that more people are looking up 'lepo-' (as in, "what's a lepo?") than 'Aleppo'. #debate
 
VirginiaBrave said:
Politics and religion are incompatible...or should be. No one should allow one issue to decide their vote.
Click to expand...

You mean the religious views you dislike are not compatible with the politics you prefer. We are all political and we are all religious.

Why not? Why couldn't one issue be indicative of much more? Who says you can't have one major issue? You do, but why must someone else submit to your view?

That aside, I'm not saying one view does (to the exclusion of other views).
 
57Brave said:
No it is not.

Outside of the faithful, rank and file voters for the first time in a generation have no idea what the evangelicals stand on the race is and I'd bet 3/4 have no idea what an evangelical is.
Witness the revolt against the Falwell Family at Liberty University

After the influence and cohesion of the Evangelical community in the past I'd think marginalized an apt term
Click to expand...

Sure it is. A united (or even substantially united) evangelical vote makes this a tighter race.

Doesn't matter whether 3/4 do or not.
 
57Brave said:
Please stop with "abortion loving folks"

No one "loves abortion" any more than they love a root canal
and you know it
Click to expand...

Sorry. I'll stop when there aren't fat-cat PP types lining their pockets, and Dems throwing their red meat, prochoice, rah-rah out to their adoring voters. Oh, and you might want to tell Jane. And the people selling teeshirts and mugs.

I am encouraged though that you want to believe there's no one who loves abortion.
 
VirginiaBrave said:
That's the only issue they really care about, 57. The sad part is they know Trump is least fit candidate ever and they simply don't care. What burns me is they are willing to put the safety of the world on the line over one issue abortion and the fact the other candidate's last name is Clinton. Bengazzi would be footnote if the SOS had been Kerry at the time.
Click to expand...

Yada, yada, yada.
 
57Brave said:
I like the majority of Americans have looked at it from their perspective.

Over and over and over --- finding it short sighted and discriminatory towards women.
Quite frankly a knee jerk response. To a very serious societal problem

I would think after almost 50 years they would learn a tact other than vilifying women and using the abhorrent-judgmental rhetoric of eternal damnation.
Click to expand...

Says the guy who is pro-infanticide. Says the guy who judges all the time. Says the guy who loves him some rhetoric too. Pot meet kettle.
 
50PoundHead said:
Wouldn't it be easier just to pick another word?
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the word chosen. Hellish is an apt description of those attitudes and practices which are in keeping with the intentional destruction of innocent life. It's in keeping with the evil aim of striking at the imago dei. Right?
 
And the point is why would Clinton risk moving those pro-lifers that are reticent to vote for Trump more towards him? Was it an error on her part? Or was/is she trying to shore up the progressives?

Even Dems Cringe
 
I truly cannot understand how anyone could defend partial birth abortions... the whole "health of the mother" thing is such bull ****. My go's mom is an OBGYN and told me it's NEVER been a situation (and she is pro-choice!).

Even still - if the "health of the mother" is an issue, they could just as easily do a c-section
 
sturg33 said:
I truly cannot understand how anyone could defend partial birth abortions... the whole "health of the mother" thing is such bull ****. My go's mom is an OBGYN and told me it's NEVER been a situation (and she is pro-choice!).

Even still - if the "health of the mother" is an issue, they could just as easily do a c-section
Click to expand...

"As an ob/gyn physician for 31 years there is no medical situation that requires aborting / killing the baby in the third trimester to "save the mother's life." Just deliver the baby by c/section and the baby has 95+% survival with readily available NICU care even at 28 weeks. C/section is quicker and safer than partial birth abortion for the mother." -Lawrence K. Koning, MD, FACOG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top