What's with the governor?

[aubunique]

Arkdawg, I just watched the Dawgs lose to the Gators. I sure hope they start winning; otherwise, there will be a lot of people over here arguing instead of staying on the basketball threads, where I am going again in a while to see what insightful things people have to say about our team.
I think the Dawgs will win at least 20 games, including the one at Fayetteville.
You are coming up for that one, right? Have many Tech people said they are attending? We will need the fan support in Wal-Mart Arena.

[ARKDAWG02]

Yes, I'm planning on coming up for that game. Don't have tickets but I'll try and get a couple when I get there. I know at one time D-1 was planning on coming but he hasn't been on here lately. Anyone else planning on going?

[aubunique]

Out-of-conference games don't fill up. I haven't talked to anyone with tickets for sale for that game and don't know whether it will be difficult on game night. But I'll show you where to walk in the press and service entrance if they don't have tickets either in the booth or outside.
An usher told me that there were plenty of empty seats at an exhibition game but that people were being told no tickets were for sale. I wish Tech had that problem in Ruston!

[ARKDAWG02]

That would be a nice problem to have.

The only AR basketball game I've been to was years ago when AR was playing Wake Forest at Barton Coliseum. A couple of us just walked up outside the stadium and bought a couple of tickets in about 5 minutes. I'm sure the same thing could be done in Fayetteville. Anyway, I'll plan on getting there pretty early. I'll e-mail you closer to game time.

[DCDAWG]

A Malthusian on Barks & Bytes? Who says Tech doesn't do liberal arts! I agree with you fully. I've never understood the far right's contradictory agenda of welfare reform coupled with a ban on abortion. This assumes and relies on human perfection, something which is in pretty short supply.

[AustinDawg]

A Malthusian on Barks & Bytes? Who says Tech doesn't do liberal arts! I agree with you fully. I've never understood the far right's contradictory agenda of welfare reform coupled with a ban on abortion. This assumes and relies on human perfection, something which is in pretty short supply.

Don't you work for Landrieu?

BTW, love your stragerie of painting everyone who detests the institution of abortion as being on the fringe "far right". Demographics would disagree with you.

[weunice]

OK I have to ask what is contradictory about welfare reform and a ban on abortion? I will be nice and explain the "right-wing" logic to you.

Most folks who want to ban abortion see it in the same light as murder. Period. To me, the most contradictory logic out there is that abortion is murder but I feel women should have the right to choose. Yet this logic is what many Americans say they believe. If you really believe abortion is murder that is like saying "I think that killing your wife is wrong, but I think you should have the right to do it." There are plenty of countries in this world you can live in where the above thought carries the same kind of weight.

As odd as it may sound to you, the life the child lives after they are born has absolutely nothing to do with the abortion issue. There is a huge difference between life and quality of life. If quality of life IS life then, along that same thinking, we should go ahead and kill all of the miserable poor folks in this country. However, that thought would be considered absurd by just about everyone. In the minds of "right-wingers" that is essentially what the abortion of children in difficult circumstances amounts to.

Now taking this a step further, I must admit in my middle youth to having reservations about war and the death penalty. Some would consider that just an extension of the logic that all human life is valuable. Some would consider that naive in a world filled with evil. I pray daily about this conflict and I seek the truth ...

And finally, on welfare reform: I just recently saw an interesting article claiming that the welfare reform bill passed by a Republican congress during the Clinton administration has resulted in the lowest poverty rate in African-Americans ever. Not only that, but that rate has continued to decrease DESPITE the issues we have had with our economy.

Give the man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach the man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. That is what welfare reform is all about.

[weunice]

Also, IMHO Aub, the overpopulation argument has one significant flaw, especially for believers. It assumes that there are limits to what God can do and His mercy for us. If you believe that he said be fruitful and multiply then one has to leave the big things like overpopulation to God ... That is bigger than you and me. The problem for liberalism, is while you are spending time trying to keep your numbers low for "threats" like overpopulation, conservatives are having 3, 4+ kids that will likely vote against you in the future .. little joke there ...

My wife an I plan to have more than 2. My mom had 6 and I was #5. I thank God every day that I can have a relationship with Him because my mom actually gave birth to me. The most important thing in life is not how wonderful things are while we are HERE. Our lives here are but mere preludes to an infinitely long book ... Whether your death comes about by natural causes, a bullet or starvation doesn't matter. Death is the beginning. Denying one the chance to know God is a worse offense than preventing any suffering they might occur once on this earth. A fallen world has suffering. Period.

I am not "against" birth control BTW. I DO believe that God gives us responsibility and authority to make very important decisions on this earth. After all, we are made in His image ... I am against any form of it that has a chance of taking a life once it has begun. Thus, I am definately against abortion. After all, who am I to decide when life does and does not begin ...

I need to stop I am rethinking being for any form of BC ...

[markay714]

I've never understood the far right's contradictory agenda of welfare reform coupled with a ban on abortion.

As a proud card carrying member of the far right, I'll be most happy to explain it to you. First of all, my values and politics are rooted in the Bible. My view is that welfare should be a short term fix for a brief time and that we, as individuals - or churches, community groups, etc, not the government should be the ones helping those in need. And, scripture says that if a man does not work that he shouldn't eat. That's the VERY shortened version of it on the welfare end. On the abortion end of things - I'm very pro-choice -you just have a choice at a different time than most people want to make it. I'll gladly let people choose birth control or abstinence - or pregnancy for that matter - at the time of the act of conception. Again, scripture says that "He knit me in my mother's womb, that I was fearfully and wonderfully made" and it is not up to me (or anyone) to kill a baby at that point.

And, to those who don't like the basis for my beliefs - I love our land and I want what is best for us. Proverbs tells us that "Righteousness exalts a nation, and sin is a reproach to any people". I want the blessings of God on our land!

[DCDAWG]

I never said those who detest abortion are a small fringe group. However, an apparent majority of Americans feel it's a right a woman should have or Roe v. Wade wouldn't be the law of the land.
And no I don't work for Landrieu. "DC" in DCDAWG stands for the initials of my name, not, presumably, the District of Columbia. I should probably change my handle for the Paw-Litics board.

[weunice]

However, an apparent majority of Americans feel it's a right a woman should have or Roe v. Wade wouldn't be the law of the land.

Actually I think it only had to be the "apparent majority" of 9 justices who were sitting on the bench when that decision was handed down.

I personally think that the majority has the "it is morally wrong" but it should be up to the individual type of thinking (and I have explained why I think that is a contradiction) ... It would depend on how you word the quesiton as to whether you came up with a majority.

If anyone has good poll numbers, I would be interested. And not some number compiled by NOW or the Christian Coalition. Gallup or some other polling group ...

[markay714]

I never said those who detest abortion are a small fringe group. However, an apparent majority of Americans feel it's a right a woman should have or Roe v. Wade wouldn't be the law of the land.
And no I don't work for Landrieu. "DC" in DCDAWG stands for the initials of my name, not, presumably, the District of Columbia. I should probably change my handle for the Paw-Litics board.

Oh contraire! The majority that believe Roe vs. Wade is not the American people - it is the U.S. Supreme Court. If we had a national referendum on abortion I'm truly not sure how it would come out - might be tighter than the last presidential election. But, that's not the way we do things.

[turbodawg]

A Malthusian on Barks & Bytes?

A Thomas Malthus reference??? Wow. I haven't thought about that in a while. I remember having to read some of his stuff for a biology course -- his take on people starving, and resources, I think it was. We've got too many people...

Malthus, indeed. That's about as bad as the Naughty Nurse reference that I read on here the other day.

:lol:

[turbodawg]

First of all, my values and politics are rooted in the Bible.... And, scripture says that if a man does not work that he shouldn't eat. That's the VERY shortened version of it on the welfare end.

Doesn't the scripture say... Well, fer instance, didn't Jesus tell the rich man to sell all his stuff and give the money to the poor? And, the part about the camel passing through the eye of a needle...

How come we don't do that? Jesus said it, that settles it. (or so reads the sign out front of the church I drive by a lot.)

And how's that supposed to jive with the American pursuit of getting filthy rich?

[DCDAWG]

[quote:9c7e871796="DCDAWG"]However, an apparent majority of Americans feel it's a right a woman should have or Roe v. Wade wouldn't be the law of the land.

Actually I think it only had to be the "apparent majority" of 9 justices who were sitting on the bench when that decision was handed down.

I personally think that the majority has the "it is morally wrong" but it should be up to the individual type of thinking (and I have explained why I think that is a contradiction) ... It would depend on how you word the quesiton as to whether you came up with a majority.

If anyone has good poll numbers, I would be interested. And not some number compiled by NOW or the Christian Coalition. Gallup or some other polling group ...[/quote:9c7e871796]

I'd like to see some independent numbers, too. I say "apparent" majority because Supreme Court justices are nominated by an elected president and confirmed by elected senators. They don't appear out of conservative or liberal thin air. There must have been some strong sentiment in the country at that time for the court to reverse a law.
The question the justices answered was whether abortion was a legal option, not whether it was moral. A government that starts deciding for me what's moral is my definition of "big government"