Jimmie Walker and Ann Coulter!?!

Since you pride yourself on knowing your history, look it up, research it, don't take my word for it, nor the link. Do your own research for once instead of "what you hear every four years".

 

Most all the racists left the Democratic party in the early to mid part of the century. The south use to be very strong democratic states. That is until the Democrats started pushing civil rights legislation and voters rights bills (to get more minorities voting).

And that is where Karma was right, about states rights issues. As soon as they migrated to the Republican party we started hearing them cry for "states rights". Loving v Virginia, Brown v Board of Education, these are "states rights" issues. People who cry for states rights believe states should have the right to decide based on race where children should go to school and who can marry.

The parties have flip flopped. It is true histrocily the Republicans have supported legislation that helped with civil rights, but today they are not the party of Lincoln. They are the part of the bitter southern democrates who didnt like where that party was heading.

 

Possibly you are right in a part, but states rights does not mean they have the right to decide things based on race. The American constitution gives all races the same rights in America.

We should have states rights to decide on moral issues and local taxation issues. Those are the main problems, when abortion and sexual orientation are touted as if they were equal to race and are "civil rights" that is where the issue has gone completely bonkers. If some states chose to outlaw certain lifestyle choices we should be allowed to do so.

The whole civil rights movement was great when it was focused on equality of race or women vs. men, but to say that ones choices over which one has total control also qualify and I should not be aloud to discriminate against the lifestyle choices that I deem appropriate for my life, and with whom I chose to interact is absolutely ludicrous. If I chose not to hire someone because of sexual orientation or I believe abortion is wrong then I should be able to do so. No one has any "civil right" to enforce me to do otherwise.

By the way did you know that abortion clinics like planned parenthood, target black inner city women for those abortions. That is tantamount to the holocaust happening to black babies in America today and few people are doing or saying anything about it.

 

LOL @ "for once." My big question is what have the Republicans done for me lately? Not much.

 

Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!!

 

A lifestyle choice like choosing to marry a black man as a white woman?

You do not have the right to discriminate. In America, the ideal is that everyone have all rights that do not impinge upon the rights of others. You have the right to be employed, even by gay people, and they have the right to be employed by you. If, as an employer, one hasn't figured out that a diversity of backgrounds and outlooks makes for a more productive workforce, then one is probably not going to be employing anyone for long anyway. That way bankruptcy lies.

Btw, are you suggesting you should have the right not to employ someone based upon their opinion on abortion?

Should employers be able to deny jobs to interracial couples? You can absolutely choose not to marry a black man, should a white man or black woman be denied the "right" not to hire someone who does?

Oh Please. Planned Parenthood does a lot more than offer abortions. No one puts a gun to women's heads and demands that they abort, although plenty of anti abortionists would like to do the same to women seeking abortions.

Do you know what life was like for women before abortion was legal? My mother suffered a miscarriage during that time, and she could not get an ambulance or even advice over 911 until it was over. In those days, most doctors were so afraid of being accused of abortions that they would not help women in natural distress. This is what you would condemn us all to.

 

No, I am not suggesting anyone be able to discriminate based on race period.

I have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I do not have the "right to be employed" that is not a right in America, read your constitution.

No, I did not suggest that I should discriminate based on opinion, of anything, but that is not a bad idea, I have a feeling that the democratic/republican party has employed it's personnel based on their opinions and if they agree with the party or not. A church has the right to employ a pastor based on his doctrine and if he agrees with the church. So why can't I do that same if I chose to do so?

No, that again would be based on race, at its core.

Just read this OK!

More than half of the black babies being conceived are being aborted. That is a holocaust!! Like it or not. And you are agreeing that it's OK?

That was unfortunate and due to ignorance, it would not have to be that way again. There will have to be a lot of discussion as to how to resolve the problems better.

 

I can't believe what I am reading. Gay people shouldn't be allowed employment???

 

Discriminating based upon racial lifestyle choices are bad, because you want the right to make those choices. Discriminating based upon sexual orientation is good, because you want to discriminate against those people. So when you are outside of the mainstream, you should be protected, and when you are inside you should be allowed to discriminate.

Handy.

True, you don't have the right to be employed. You do have the right not to be discriminated against. Bummed as you may be about this, other people get those rights too.

So if you have a McCain bumper sticker, your employer can fire you for it? That's the America you want?

That is not a holocaust. Comparing the decisions of individual women to abort to the genocide of an entire people based upon their race or religion is disgusting.

Are black women somehow mentally inferior to other human beings? Are they not capable of making the same decisions about their bodies as white women? What makes you, a white woman, a better decider about their fetuses than they are? How unbelievably arrogant of you.

Again, the distinction you are making looks pretty flimsy.

Every single argument made against gay rights has been used in opposition to other civil rights issues. You can control whether you marry a black man, yet the institution of marriage as many people in this country knew it was upgraded, thanks to the work of many activists and much upheaval, just so you could have that right as a white woman. What makes you so special?

How about this: since at least half of the country's women do not believe you have the right to make decisions about their bodies, we let them make their own decisions. Those women who oppose abortions don't have to have them. Everybody wins.

 

I predict 20 pages.....

 

Will you be saying that when the black population in America declines dramatically in the near future because a huge number of black babies were killed by their mothers?? Those babies don't win!

 

So states should be able to discriminate only in regard to YOUR moral standings? Come on now.

Plus you need to check your own self on the abortion statistics. They count D&C procedures as an abortion. Non white women have more issues with endometriosis and have the procedure more, not because they are pregnant. Also the statistics do not count the private physician abortions for which poor women do not have access. It isnt that black women have more abortions, it is the REPORTING process.

 

The statistics are from the Center for Disease Control.

I said States should be allowed to VOTE on it, and make laws at the state level. I did not say based on MY standards.

 

You absolutely have that choice. If you disapprove of someone's moral lifestyle choice to marry a person of a different race, for instance, you can always quit.

Why would someone want to be employed by someone who did not want to employ someone of their race? Yet you seem hesitant to make a stand against any anti discrimination laws.

So are you now taking the opinion that all federally legislated anti discrimination laws are wrong? Why not say that from the beginning?

So are you also opposed to the Loving V Virginia decision as well?

You're narrowing the argument artificially. Why? Don't have the courage of your convictions? What if you worked at a library? Or a paper factory? Then what?

So now black women are less educated than white women?

Yes, because we all know there's a mountain of money to be made off of black women seeking abortions. That's the true killer ap right there.

You claim to have more of a heart for black babies than their black mothers. What is that "White woman's burdon"? You're infantalizing black women because you deem yourself superior.

I realize that you're dying for an argument about whether being gay is nature or nurture, but it's as stupid as debating global climate change. All major science agrees, if you don't, there's no point in debating it, so I choose to play in your imaginary world for the time being, where being gay is something people decide to do.

Like you decide whether to marry or date someone of your race or not. Why are your choices, not made at birth, more worthy of special rights than there's?

How generous of you

You have the special right to marry that black man. Are you suggesting that you support the rights of gay & lesbian people to have the same rights, or are you still dancing around the hypocrisy.

No, and I won't be saying that when monkeys fly out of my butt either, and that's likely to happen first.

 

:-|

 

They actually said "Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man".

So you are in favor of activist judges, legislating from the bench? How do you justify opposing gay marriage while supporting interracial marriage?

And you make this measurement of their relative education based upon the fact that they disagree with you? And that's not arrogant?

The right to marry a black man when you are not a black woman is as much a special right as the right to marry a woman if you are a woman. Do you support gay marriage, or do you oppose it, and if you oppose it, how do you justify that (or pretend to)?

 

No I do not support activist judges, I do not believe that is what they did, I do not think anyone can argue with any weight that marriage is not a basic civil right of man. It is also supported by scripture, and that is my personal moral sounding board.

I personally know many women who have had abortions and I have heard the stories as recently as this very month of such a lack of education in abortion clinics. Arrogance has nothing to do with it. Why don't you talk, one on one, with a few women who have been though this experience and you may find out I know a little bit about it.

No, I have the right to marry a man (of any color), gay people do not have the right to marry others of the same sex. I do not agree with gay marriage, and I oppose it on scriptural principles. I do not "justify it" God has already condemned such behavior.

You asked, so I answered. I do not plan to get into the gay and lesbian argument any deeper, so don't ask.

 

Yeah, I'm over 12. By a couple decades. I've talked with many women who have been through this experience. None of them said to me "Gosh, I wish I'd never had the right to do that."

Why would "abortion clinics" have a need for education? I thought conservatives thought sex education should occur in the home?

You have the right to marry a man of any color because in the 70's the traditional definition of marriage was redefined by the Supreme Court, overruling many states that had laws against interracial marriage. Your religious beliefs are irrelevant, but it is worth noting that many in the church condemned interracial marriage based on scriptural principles, just decades ago.


Why were all the people who supported laws against interracial marriage wrong, and all the people who support laws against gay marriage right? What makes the two different? Why is your special right to demand to marry based on your choice to chose a mate outside your race more defendable than a gay person's special right to demand to marry based on their "choice" to choose a mate within their gender?

This isn't the gay & lesbian debate. I'm asking you to explain why your ideology as you've declared it here, because it sounds remarkably like your ideology is designed around you getting rights you'd deny others.

 

My ideology is based in Scripture and that's it. I already explained that and you said it was irrelevant. Whether you agree or not is not the issue.

As to persons in the church saying interracial marriage was wrong some time ago, I have to say they were wrong, because interracial marriage is shown in scripture on more than one occasion. And there are many people who do not study scripture for themselves.

The Bible is very clear about it's stance on homosexuality and I do not see any room for debate there if you are reading the same Bible I do. If you do not use the Bible as a base for your moral standards then you may believe any number of things are OK.

 

CDC is a gov entity. Their guidelines are set by administration who are appointed by the President.

Poor women who use government assistance for their health care and need a D&C procedure are lumped into the abortion statistics whether they were pregnant or not.