Ron Paul is Devoutly Pro-Life!!!!!!!!!!

CorporateWhore

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXZpuIXEzWk&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eronpaul2008%2Ecom%2F

I'd hate to ruin him for some of you, but he's one of the most pro-life candidates in the election.

And I love it!

True lovers of freedom also want to protect human life from conception until natural death!!

CorporateWhore

Pro-life self-bump!

jlew24asu

I appreciate the enthusiasm for pro life. but i'm still on the fence about this one.

Bu2

CorporateWhore wrote:

I'd hate to ruin him for some of you, but he's one of the most pro-life candidates in the election.

And I love it!

True lovers of freedom also want to protect human life from conception until natural death!!

True lovers of life also want to protect our soldiers from getting killed in Iraq.

No natural death there, my corporate whore.

Rushlimbo

CorporateWhore wrote:

Pro-life self-bump!

Give yourself a pro-life high-five, nerd.

CorporateWhore

Rushlimbo wrote:

Give yourself a pro-life high-five, nerd.

lol, someone seems like he's jealous of poor old CorporateWhore. That's two mean attacks in the past 24 hours!!

Bump

It's not my fault you hate freedom and love terrorists.

gue_barium

CorporateWhore wrote:

True lovers of freedom also want to protect human life from conception until natural death!!

That might be hard to do without any health insurance.

Collin

I hate freedom. And babies.

chopitdown

gue_barium wrote:

That might be hard to do without any health insurance.

it's a good thing that 85% of the country has it in some form...go with the odds that he'll have it. don't be so pessimistic

LoveRock333

Everyones pro-life, but life isn't that easy.

Devout fanaticism results in these things: Bad things.

soulsinging

chopitdown wrote:

it's a good thing that 85% of the country has it in some form...go with the odds that he'll have it. don't be so pessimistic

yeah, but if 15% of americans dont deserve it, how come 15% of babies also dont deserve any sort of fetal protection? the babies being aborted would probly just grow up to be lazy, welfare-riding minorities. let's get rid of em before they steal money from our bank accounts via tax-funded handouts.

chopitdown

soulsinging wrote:

yeah, but if 15% of americans dont deserve it, how come 15% of babies also dont deserve any sort of fetal protection? the babies being aborted would probly just grow up to be lazy, welfare-riding minorities. let's get rid of em before they steal money from our bank accounts via tax-funded handouts.

not all of them would grow up to be lazy, don't be that harsh on them. But honestly, people on welfare usually DO qualify for medicaid or WIC so we do have avenues to help. Not everyone in the 15% that don't have health insurance are poor though. I know a guy who works construction and is doing very well for himself (makes over 50K) and chooses not to have insurance, I'm not saying by any means he makes up close to the majority, but there are people who don't have insurance but CAN afford it. And in the percentages do they include illegal immigrants who shouldn't have it? It would be interesting to know how many of the 15% don't have insurance yet would qualify for medicaid, medicare etc...edit: and choose not to apply for it.

CorporateWhore

chopitdown wrote:

not all of them would grow up to be lazy, don't be that harsh on them. But honestly, people on welfare usually DO qualify for medicaid or WIC so we do have avenues to help. Not everyone in the 15% that don't have health insurance are poor though. I know a guy who works construction and is doing very well for himself (makes over 50K) and chooses not to have insurance, I'm not saying by any means he makes up close to the majority, but there are people who don't have insurance but CAN afford it. And in the percentages do they include illegal immigrants who shouldn't have it? It would be interesting to know how many of the 15% don't have insurance yet would qualify for medicaid, medicare etc...

Many of them are recent college graduates who have yet to get a decent job but much potential.

decides2dream

Collin wrote:

I hate freedom. And babies.

i *heart* collin.



and yes, this IS a main reason why ron paul could never be *my* candidate. tis a shame really...b/c he's got good things to say.......but yea, he and i just are so far afield on this important issue. no way do i want someone with that point of view to have that kind of power.

Abookamongstthemany

chopitdown wrote:

it's a good thing that 85% of the country has it in some form...go with the odds that he'll have it. don't be so pessimistic

Well, even the ones who do have it fight hell to get their HMOs to actually pay for what they need. They get treated worse than the people who can't afford the insurance and are on Medicaid. At least Medicaid pays for procedures without harassing people and searching through their medical histories with a fine tooth comb to find anything so they won't have topay out. It's sickening. Seems to me the govt programs are working a lot better for the people than these private providers.

chopitdown

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Well, even the ones who do have it fight hell to get their HMOs to actually pay for what they need. They get treated worse than the people who can't afford the insurance and are on Medicaid. At least Medicaid pays for procedures without harassing people and searching through their medical histories with a fine tooth comb to find anything so they won't have topay out. It's sickening. Seems to me the govt programs are working a lot better for the people than these private providers.

yes medicaid and medicare are perfect :rolleyes: There are some insurances that are good and some that are bad. I've worked with medicaid and medicare patients and you know what...they may pay, but they are extremely rigid in what and how much they pay and you know what...whatever they don't pay the offices don't bill the patient; there is a lot of pro-bono work done in medicine as well.

Abookamongstthemany

chopitdown wrote:

yes medicaid and medicare are perfect :rolleyes:

Cause that's exactly what I said. :rolleyes:

chopitdown wrote:

There are some insurances that are good and some that are bad. I've worked with medicaid and medicare patients and you know what...they may pay, but they are extremely rigid in what and how much they pay and you know what...whatever they don't pay the offices don't bill the patient; there is a lot of pro-bono work done in medicine as well.

I'm speaking in an overall sense...more people are pleased with their medicaid/care coverage than their HMOs.

edvedder3779

He is pro-life, however, he is also of the opinion that, while that is his view, his view should not be forced upon the electorate in general. However, I do wish he'd take it a step further than making it a "state issue".

I am pro-choice, however, again, I don't think my view should be forced upon all. If anything, I would like to see this issue limited to the purview of the community, or county/parish.

This is, no doubt, a heated issue, however, I do not think that it should be legislated at the national level...

chopitdown

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Cause that's exactly what I said. :rolleyes:

thank you for clarifying

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I'm speaking in an overall sense...more people are pleased with their medicaid/care coverage than their HMOs.

that's prob true to an extent, but it's still not great on any front and i think (as I'm sure you do) we should be able to do better.

CorporateWhore

edvedder3779 wrote:

He is pro-life, however, he is also of the opinion that, while that is his view, his view should not be forced upon the electorate in general. However, I do wish he'd take it a step further than making it a "state issue".

I am pro-choice, however, again, I don't think my view should be forced upon all. If anything, I would like to see this issue limited to the purview of the community, or county/parish.

This is, no doubt, a heated issue, however, I do not think that it should be legislated at the national level...

This is what irks me:

When you say that you don't want your view to be forced upon anyone, that doesn't mean anything at all. You're forcing only one option, in reality, and that is abortion. If I disagree with you, the only option you're forcing on me is that my society must have abortion in it.

If I substituted "for choosing abortion or not choosing abortion" for "pro-choice," your claim wouldn't make any sense. Look:

"I am 'for choosing abortion or not choosing abortion,' however, again, I don't think my view should be forced upon all."

It's really two views. One I agree with and one I don't. You're just using code word for "I think people should choose abortion if they think it's good for them."

It's amazing that the pro-choice movement has so little confidence in itself that it could support the right to do something that most within the movement would supposedly "never approve of" themselves. That shows true and utter moral degradation. The moral confidence of past generations has truly gone to hell and in its place, ethical subjectivism has prevailed.

Abookamongstthemany

chopitdown wrote:

thank you for clarifying

For you, anytime.

chopitdown wrote:

that's prob true to an extent, but it's still not great on any front and i think (as I'm sure you do) we should be able to do better.

We most definitely should be able to A LOT better.