News & Politics

Rant

LET’S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT

Posted 32 months ago|129 comments|1,045 views
Written by
LET’S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT

I am not an American, or African American, but I feel embarrassed for America. Your president was democratically elected by a wide majority, I have followed his progress, since he stood for office, and I rate him as honest, and above average intelligence.

The propaganda includes; He was not born in America. He is a terrorist, He is a socialist, He is like Hitler Canada's health care is no good. A pastor said, I want him dead, I want back my Country, health care is a lie is German Nazi thinking, notwithstanding Governor Pallin a so-call Christian said that he is a terrorist, when she knows quite well that it is a lie, I will not let the President speak to my children, and more….

Barack Obama was born at Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, United States, his father was a foreign student on scholarship. The couple married on February 2, 1961,[ and Barack was born later that year. His parents separated when he was two years old, and they divorced in 1964. Obama's father returned to Kenya and saw his son only once more before dying in an automobile accident in 1982. Those that say well Hawaii is not a part of the US, should not be involved in this debate, you only know that a fool is a fool when that person opens their mouth.

Before anyone can be accepted as a candidate for President, he is Vetted secret service and more…...

Obama has only been in office for months, he has Stopped Water boarding, recognized global warming, Initiated alternative energy and electric cars, wind power, made it easier for Cubans to send money home and Cubans to buy stuff, On January 29, 2009, first bill into law, the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover an additional 4 million child currently uninsured. In March 2009, Obama repealed a Bush-era policy embryonic stem cells. Although such research had been a matter of debate, Obama stated that he believed "sound science and moral values...are not inconsistent," and that we have "the humanity and conscience, Sotomayor was confirmed on August 6, 2009 by a vote of 68-31, becoming the first Hispanic to be a Supreme Court Justice. She joins Ruth Bader Ginsburg as one of two women on the Court and is the third woman ever to be a Justice.

Economic management On February 17, 2009, Barack Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, a $787 billion economic stimulus package aimed at helping the economy recover from the deepening worldwide recession. The fact is that the economy has hit bottom and is on the way up, the recession could have resulted in a collapse of the World economy.

Conservatives will willfully lie, to block this health bill so that the democrats will not be credited for it, and they will look better in 2012, at the expense of the large percentage of poor Americans that are suffering and cannot afford health insurance.

The Canadian that is reasonable for health medical service plan in Canada is held in high esteem, did you know that the US is 35th position in the world for health of it's people.

The Christian prospective

Mahatma Gandhi, was attracted to Christianity, he read the Bible and went to Christian Church, and he was kicked out. He said “I believe in Christ but not in Christians”

Gandhi was horrified to see the ease with which Christians separated ethic and morality from belief. He held the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount to be the cornerstone of Jesus' message, the power and grandeur of which would did not depend on the recognition of Jesus as the exclusive savior.


There was another man, that did good healed and taught the people and came so that they would not be condemned to Hell for eternity, but the Pherosees/Conservatives (same frame of mind) lied and said. He is getting too popular, we will lose our power and respect, so let us kill this man, so they spread their propaganda until the (people) Romans gave in and nailed this man to a CROSS.. (and shot him)

Reset your GPS Heaven is watching, God looks on the HEART. You will know the truth and the truth will set you free!


Maybe God is a God of judgment, but it is He that does the judging! In addition, as far as Christianity is concerned, the Pastor that said that he wants him dead, the word says "Do not judge least you be judged, and you will be judged in the same way that you judge. The world is watching you America, leader of the free world, show respect for the office if not for the man. What's more, the Bible says to pray for your leaders, not to curse them, be very careful that your curses don't fall on you!

EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
32 months ago: Let me help you set the record straight. Respectfully, and for what little it is worth, your opinion of America, as a Canadian, is completely immaterial and of no consequence whatsoever.
Have a nice day.
32 months ago: @redstateguy

That is the single rudest thing I've ever read from you.

Actually, world opinion about the United States - and about the deranged reality-denying conservatives who have been making so much noise lately - is of great consequence. We have to do business with other nations, and we have to maintain good relations with other nations, or risk losing them as allies. Being cognizant of our international image makes good sense in both business and diplomacy.

We've earned a sorry, but unfortunately well-deserved, reputation as "ugly Americans," a reputation you're helping to propagate with your insulting behavior above. Do you rant about how no one speaks English when you go to foreign countries? Have you ever even been in a foreign country?
27 months ago: Noni?

Edward, your not American? Why preach to America? Are you not yourself ''Judging'' America. It is our ''Family Business'' and you might do better if you keep your nose out of my families business.

Was that better Noni?

What do you think Red?

BTW Noni...welcome back.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
27 months ago: Why you responding to a five month old post? Noni is long gone.
27 months ago: That is funny, Look at the top Rants for the site right now. It is listed in the top 5. I thought it was one I missed during the last few days. Didn't even see it was 5 months old. I guess the new rating system has a bug or two.
27 months ago: Mark, go down to the very last comment. You will see that it was posted 16 hours ago. I in effect brought the post back to life and added it back to a top5 list. Therefore, not totally 5 months old. Although, I know it is a lame excuse. I'm standing by it.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
32 months ago: Wait we earn a reputation as "ugly Americans" because of RedState?? How is that?

Oboama has Socialists in his administration, he hangs out with "domestic terrorist, he attended a church for 20 years that preaches liberation theology (which is the same sect of Christianity used to garner strength for the communists of central and South america) isn't that how Obama is "earning his sorry, but well deserved reputation as a communist"?

My momma always told me "if you hang around crap, your gonn start to smell like it"
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: RSG,

Can't fault the Canadian for wanting to input. First, Moon Beam Bush transformed the USA into fortress America and disrupted trade, movement, and neighborly relations between the US & Canada.

Now the Republican Rubes as you referred to them lie about Canada's health care system in order to obstruct health care reform in our country.

...your opinion of America, as a Canadian, is completely immaterial and of no consequence whatsoever...

Except when conservative rubes find a Canadian that's singing our praises:

'Canadian Commentator Praises America in Highest of Terms'

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/524073/posts
32 months ago: Heynnn.

This is a learning point about the difference between liberals and conservatives.

American affairs are none of Khadafy's, Putin's, Bin Laden's or Edward's business whatsoever.
32 months ago: I repeat what I said previously.

Once, long ago, when I was pounding beers in a beer hall in Heidelberg, an old German man came up to me and, while staring me in the eyes, sternly asked me "Are you an American?"

After I said "yes sir", he grabbed me by both shoulders and kissed me square in both cheeks. He said every freedom loving human on this world loves America and owes what freedom they have to Americans.

I said "thank you sir" and he said "No, thank you".

The world actually loves the United States of America.
32 months ago: and if I was rude to Edward, I apologize, but the constant assault on my, and my children's freedom is wearing me very thin.
32 months ago: No, scotmanster, we don't think you're a bunch of wackos for expressing your opinions. Some of the opinions from some very loud folks purportedly on your side make us think some of you are wackos, and it's unfortunate that they've hijacked the debate.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "I have followed his progress, since he stood for office, and I rate him as honest, and above average intelligence. "

Honest? There is doubt, since being caught in lies.
Above average intelligence? Unable to determine as he will not allow the records of his education to be seen by anyone.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "He was not born in America."

There is a suspicion. And he refuses to make it abundantly clear!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "He is a socialist, "
Obviously!
"Canada's health care is no good"
No one has ever said that directly. It does not meet the requirements of the people of this nation, however.
"recognized global warming, Initiated alternative energy and electric cars, wind power"
For the first you make it sound like a good thing? What is the proper temperature for the planet? As for the others you make it sound like no one has been trying to work in those areas before. The original argument is to make the country less dependent on foreign oil. Why then is domestic oil not useable? Why force use of energy sources that are less efficient?
"State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover an additional 4 million child currently uninsured"
That is a load of! It is just an example of the camel's nose under the tent!
"Obama repealed a Bush-era policy embryonic stem cells"
Why? ESCs have shown no promise, yet ASC are already in use to correct many specific ailments. Why spend money on an unproven area or research to the detriment of one proven to work?
"Sotomayor was confirmed on August 6, 2009 by a vote of 68-31, becoming the first Hispanic to be a Supreme Court Justice"
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: Sotomayor is judicial idiot. She was not confirmed for her judicial skills but her ethnicity and gender.
"$787 billion economic stimulus package aimed at helping the economy recover from the deepening worldwide recession. The fact is that the economy has hit bottom and is on the way up"
The stimulus is responsible? Really? If we have hit the bottom then there is no need to release the rest of the money (some $669 billion) since the 15% spent so far is enough. Actually the actions taken here were no different than those taken in the '30s. They did not help then and did not now. All recessions end. This money is just a ploy to take credit for a natural event.
"Conservatives will willfully lie, to block this health bill so that the democrats will not be credited for it, and they will look better in 2012"
There is no need to lie about HR 3200. The language in the bill is very clear. This is an attempt to, at least, take over the entire health insurance industry. The most claer part is that any "private" insurer after inception must be in the Health Insurance Exchange. Anyone in that exchange must be a Government contractor! Those supporting the plan have no way to rebut the objections. Al they do is call the objections a lie. Were the objections unwarranted they would cite chapter and verse and show how the objection is wrong. They don't do that because they can not. This is a major tactic of many on the left, simply refer to all objections as lies until the sheeple accept the pronouncement as evidence.
The ranking of health care systems is actually an unsupportable measure. I have found no independent way to determine just what that stat is measuring! Nor any other source that even begins to consider the issue.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago:
Why does christianity come into the argument here?
"There was another man, that did good healed and taught the people and came so that they would not be condemned to Hell for eternity, but the Pherosees/Conservatives (same frame of mind) lied and said. He is getting too popular, we will lose our power and respect,"
This is the exact same response that has been coming from the Left and those that seek to praise Obama.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: That post regarding "christianity" was alone because of space restrictions.
The orginal author is not an American by their own hand. The comments referred apeared out of left field based on the rest of their text!
32 months ago: WAS THAT SATANS SCREAM IN THE U.S.CONGRESS THE OTHER NIGHT


OUR AMERICAN RELIGIOUS LEADERS SILENCE IS MORE FREIGHTENING THEN DENIAL OF HEALTH ~ CARE FOR ALL OUR POOR AMERICANS ….

~ THE LOUD YELL OF SATAN WAS HEARD IN THE PEOPLES HALLS OF U.S. CONGRESS THE OTHER NIGHT AND AMERICAN RELIGIOUS LEADERS HAVE TURNED THEIR HEADS,CLOSED THEIR EYES AND SHUT THEIR EARS IN FEAR ~

THIS OLD WORLD ORDER OF ABUSE AND NEGLECT OF OUR POORER AMERICANS NEEDS ENLIGHTENED POLITICAL MINDS AND HEARTS TO VIEW GOD DIFFERENTLY THEN $$$?. NO MATTER WHAT THEIR POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATION ???

WHEN WILL OUR WEALTHY ELITE AMERICANS ABATE THEIR ASSAULT ON POORER AMERICANS WITH THEIR MONETARY CONTROL OF OUR IVORY TOWER U.S. CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER ???

THERE ARE NOT MANY MORE DISTRACTIONS LEFT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FOR OUR WEALTHY ELITE AMERICANS TO HIDE BEHIND IN NOT TAKING PROPER CARE OF ALL OUR AMERICANS IN A HUMANE FASHION !!!

lawyersforpooreramericans@yahoo.com
(424-247-2013)
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: Please define "poor"!
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
32 months ago: The only thing conservatives hate more than lawyers are lawyers that shout. Actually conservatives are angry about a lot of things lately, but it all comes down to change. They're agin it! Much of the change in the world is happening despite their best efforts. The whites in the country are now a minority, and their noses are rubbed in that fact with a black president. The family standard with the man making money and the wife at home is a mess. There are now just as many women working as men. More women are going to college than men so it will only get worse. The environment is changing despite their denials. Obama was elected with a motto and a mandate for change and conservatives hate change! That is why they deny reality, and make up all sorts of nonsense to justify their hatred.
Bush gave America a black eye, but Obama did much to restore our reputation. Now everyone is laughing at the obstructionism, the name calling, the lies, and the wackos dominating the Republican party. They thought we were crazy to elect Bush, and they will probably criticize Obama for continuing to put up with the wackos, but in America they have the right to be nuts.
Edward I apologize for the rudeness of my fellow countrymen. They learn their manners from Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: You are completely wrong that conservatives hate change.
Evidence a conservative administration offered a plan to begin fixing the problem with Social Security. Why did it fail the liberals and Progressives did not want the change and lied to prevent it!
Tell me how Caucasians are a minority? All Obama had was a motto, one that could mean a million things to boot!
Apologizing to anyone and everyone does not make people like you.
Care to list some of the "nonsense"?
"Now everyone is laughing at the obstructionism, the name calling, the lies, and the wackos dominating the Republican party." you have this backwards -- you have to replace the word "Republican" with "Democrat".

Beck and Limbaugh have better manners than Rev Wright, Rangel, and Progressives.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Lawyers for poor Americans? That's rich and it seems you been shouting all over the place (googled your phone number) except your screed here didn't mention your primary interest in the "poor and innocent prison inmates" and rhetorically asking if Oprah condones the injustice.

Are you actually a lawyer with a license to practice or are you a jailhouse lawyer?
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "WAS THAT SATANS SCREAM IN THE U.S.CONGRESS THE OTHER NIGHT

OUR AMERICAN RELIGIOUS LEADERS SILENCE IS MORE FREIGHTENING THEN DENIAL OF HEALTH ~ CARE FOR ALL OUR POOR AMERICANS …. "

Well you do refer to poorer, more often than the poor. But I still doubt you really know what you are talking about. All of this talk of the "rich" vs. the "poor" is at best divisive and at worst an attempt to ignite class warfare.

It is not a reasoned argument but an emotional appeal, with the emotion tied to an attempt to engender guilt!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Lawyers for poor Americans? That's rich and it seems you been shouting all over the place (googled your phone number) except your screed here didn't mention your primary interest in the "poor and innocent prison inmates" and rhetorically asking if Oprah condones the injustice.

Are you actually a lawyer with a license to practice or are you a jailhouse lawyer?"

Seeing as how he confused fright with freight I would think the answer would be obvious!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: Actually conservatives are angry about a lot of things lately, but it all comes down to change. They're agin it! Much of the change in the world is happening despite their best efforts.
You would like to believe that but the only bad change is "bad change" like what has happened and trying to happen.
The whites in the country are now a minority,
Is that why the left wishes to keep the border unprotected?
and their noses are rubbed in that fact with a black president.
What does that matter! Besides it is not an accurate statement. The President is not Black but Mulatto!

The family standard with the man making money and the wife at home is a mess. There are now just as many women working as men. More women are going to college than men so it will only get worse.
Again, you really think that matters? I think you are the one mired in the past.

The environment is changing despite their denials.
The denial is not that the environment is changing, in fact it changes daily. Right now the environment is cooling!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago:

Obama was elected with a motto and a mandate for change
But he never said what he would change and how. In fact he still has not said how he will "fix" health care!

and conservatives hate change!
Again you show a fundamental lack of understanding of what constitutes the conservative mindset.

That is why they deny reality, and make up all sorts of nonsense to justify their hatred.
There is more hatred and denial presented by the left than conservatives. Why else would all arguments from the left consist of name calling and personal attacks?

Bush gave America a black eye, but Obama did much to restore our reputation.
Not really! To either! You can not make a bully stand down by talking to him. To them that is a sure sign of weakness!

Now everyone is laughing at the obstructionism,
Since when are attempts at reasoned debate obstruction. Especially after the years of the Left throwing up wall after wall to forestall any action? The 109th Congress is not called do nothing without reason.

the name calling, the lies, and the wackos dominating the (Democrat) party.
They thought we were crazy to elect Bush,
Who they? The rest of the world? Most foreign countries fear a strong leader in powerful countries, especially when they wish to take down that country.

and they will probably criticize Obama for continuing to put up with the wackos, but in America they have the right to be nuts.
As we have seen in the period from 2001 through 2008.

They learn their manners from Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
If it is manners you seek, they may not be a bad place to start learning them. I don't know them personally but I suspect they treat people better than many.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Aren't any of you people going to say something about keeping your religion out of it? This guy is up there spewing Christianity all over the place! Don't any of you feel the need to mock him for his religion? Or is that only when the person doing the spewing disagrees with you?


MMM, MMM, MMM!
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: OOTB,

"MMM, MMM, MMM!"

I read Ed's message as a broadside on the hypocrisy of right-wing evangelical Christianity much in the same way that I exposed the evangelical Baptist Pastor who wanted Obama dead. Assuming his intent was to give a Christian to Christian perspective, that's not my concern although I'd be curious to know what your response is to it. Is his version of Jesus correct and yours wrong?

On the other hand, if Ed's intent was to presume that we as a secular nation sans a State religion by design are to follow his version of Christianity, I'd tweak him in the same way I tweak a neo-con Christian.

Maybe Ed can clarify his intent and since he's from Canada, we have to recognize that he lives in a country where they have no no equivalent to the establishment clause in the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

But in practical terms, Canadians tend to be more secular individually, and less inclined to adopt an intolerant and divisive "jesus only" perspective. In fact, he quoted Gandhi on that subject so it's not likely he was attempting to proselytize for converts and that Christian portion of his message was aimed at other Christians.
32 months ago: Yeah. OOTB, I'll comment on his attempts to insert Christianity into the government as a state religion as soon as he makes such attempts.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: "There was another man, that did good healed and taught the people and came so that they would not be condemned to Hell for eternity, but the Pherosees/Conservatives (same frame of mind) lied and said. He is getting too popular, we will lose our power and respect, so let us kill this man, so they spread their propaganda until the (people) Romans gave in and nailed this man to a CROSS.. (and shot him)"
I'm guessing the person he is referring to here is MLK, except for the healing made me think he was comparing Obama to Jesus.
His last few paragraphs seems to equating accepting everything Obama stands for as our duty as Christians, which I don't agree with.

He is also telling you to pray for our leaders, which I agree with. I was just thinking though, if one of the anti-bill individuals exhorted you to pray for the leaders we agree with, you would have to not-so-politely tell him which orifice to put it in.
32 months ago: Pray for the leaders I support to change their minds? I'd have no problem with that. Silly, yes, but it's not an attempt to insert their religion into government.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Markbyrn,

Precisely what is the hypocrisy that you lay at the feet of the whole of evangelical right wing Christians?
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: OOTB,

If he was telling "me" to pray, I'd tell him off just like you said. But he was speaking to Christians and obviously your version of Jesus doesn't agree with his. If you have a bone of contention with respect to which version is right, pick it with him.

Just from my perspective, it seems to me that people adopt a religion and interpretation of that religion that fits their politics and pocketbook rather than the other way around.
32 months ago: I'm not Mark, but on a hunch I'd guess it's the "family values" diatribes coming from a group of people that has a higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays caught in embarrassing situations than the evangelical left.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: "I'd guess it's the "family values" diatribes coming from a group of people that has a higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays caught in embarrassing situations than the evangelical left. "

Evidence!?!?!
32 months ago: Whoops, sorry, Mark.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Noni,

He wasn't attempting to insert his religion into our government, as he has no stake into our government. He was simply inserting his religion into our argument. To compare Obama, who now, the more I think of it, is who the author was referring to in his Jesus comparison, is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, and according to some, has no place in a discussion about government.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: "higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays caught in embarrassing situations than the evangelical left."

I can give you the gays part, because an openly gay is less likely to be embarrassed than a closet homosexual.
Aside from Mother Jones, can you link to some believable references for the other two?
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: OOTB
"Jesus has no place in a discussion about government."

Wow, I agree fully as we have a secular government.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: "Original Comment:

OOTB
"Jesus has no place in a discussion about government."

Wow, I agree fully as we have a secular government. "

That is about the most silly thing I have heard!
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: well then, you wrote



"Can't fault the Canadian for wanting to input. First, Moon Beam Bush transformed the USA into fortress America and disrupted trade, movement, and neighborly relations between the US & Canada.

Now the Republican Rubes as you referred to them lie about Canada's health care system in order to obstruct health care reform in our country.

...your opinion of America, as a Canadian, is completely immaterial and of no consequence whatsoever...

*********Except when conservative rubes find a Canadian that's singing our praises:******************"


What's that phrase? Oh yeah, "Pot? Kettle?

DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: "Now the Republican Rubes as you referred to them lie about Canada's health care system in order to obstruct health care reform in our country. "

What is the lie?!?!?
32 months ago: @OOTB
Sure, I thought this was common knowledge. Here's a New Yorker article that goes into some in-depth studies on religion and teen pregnancy: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot. And here's one from Religious Tolerance on divorce rates in the U.S. by religion. Money quote: "Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience."

I know this goes against your religious beliefs and I'm sorry for that, but condoms and sex-ed work. Abstinence doesn't.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: "condoms and sex-ed work. Abstinence doesn't. "

ou really want to say that not having sex can make a person pregnant??
26 months ago: Oh, hey, haven't seen this thread in a while.

No, I'm saying that telling kids not to have sex doesn't work. Never has. Never will.
32 months ago: Or rather, I should say, trying to force abstinence doesn't work. Of course, if you actually do successfully abstain, then you're not going to get pregnant or get anyone else pregnant. But in practical terms, trying to convince teenagers not to have sex is sort of like trying to herd cats.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: I didn't say the Canadian should get a vote or even be part of the decision making process, but as neighbor who's impacted by our decisions, he's certainly free to comment and I don't fault him for doing so.

Also, my comment was in response to RSG's comment, "...your opinion of America, as a Canadian, is completely immaterial and of no consequence whatsoever." Since I believe that kind of rhetoric reinforces the "ugly American" stereotype, I felt a sharp response was in order.

Considering our trade with Canada is approx $1.5 billion per day to include importing 2 million barrels of oil per day, I'd say the "no consequences whatsoever" is a load of jingoistic tripe.

Now if you're accusing me of a double standard because I don't think Jesus should get to comment while the Canadian can, that's not true. Jesus is free to comment anytime he wants. The problem is he never says anything except through proxies who often represent diametrical opposites and contradict each other.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Aren't any of you people going to say something about keeping your religion out of it?"

Why MUST religion be kept out of it? There are a number of reasons such a statement is unwarranted; religion is part of life, religion is variety (hence diverse, which we are all supposed to embrace), we can not fairly avoid the christian religions and allow the others free expression
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "read Ed's message as a broadside on the hypocrisy of right-wing evangelical Christian"

I think I can understand your position. However, I think you misunderstand the establishment clause. Based on most of what youo posted in this message.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "made me think he was comparing Obama to Jesus.
His last few paragraphs seems to equating accepting everything Obama stands for as our duty as Christians, which I don't agree with.

He is also telling you to pray for our leaders, which I agree with. I was just thinking though, if one of the anti-bill individuals exhorted you to pray for the leaders we agree with, you would have to not-so-politely tell him which orifice to put it in."

I agree with what you have to say about the rabid Obamaphiles, it does appear that they see this as "The Coming". I just hope this is not a faux Second Coming!

As for the orifice and "anti-bills individuals", how much of that animosity come from the supporters not reading the bill itself. Aside from anything the bill is nothing but a take over, on its face! When you compare what is in the bill with what is said in support of the bill, one of them is lying!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "but it's not an attempt to insert their religion into government. "

I do not understand this animosity about religion IN Government? The real problem is either a religion assigned by Government or religion AS Government.

Morals come from the first position, oppression from the second!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "If he was telling "me" to pray, I'd tell him off just like you said. But he was speaking to Christians and obviously your version of Jesus doesn't agree with his. If you have a bone of contention with respect to which version is right, pick it with him."

Odd! You take two positions in this message.
One; Christianity is A religion.
Two; christianity is MANY religions.
The second is accurate. It is the first one that gets you into trouble.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "I'm not Mark, but on a hunch I'd guess it's the "family values" diatribes coming from a group of people that has a higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays"

I am a bit confused? Are you actually trying to imply that the Democratic base is not described by the above?

The teen pregnancy rate for the Democratic base is, on average, 137. Those not traditionally included in the Dem base that rate is 49.
For divorce the rates are, apparently, leaning your way with the base averaging 9.45 vs the non base 9.8. But that is mostly because the Dem base is bifurcated and one part of that base has a very low rate of 7.6 as opposed to the other part with a rate of 11.3.
Homosexuals, well that is a tough nut to crack and since you refer to closeted and that can be greatly affected by culture I can't readily produce data.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "He wasn't attempting to insert his religion into our government, as he has no stake into our government. He was simply inserting his religion into our argument. To compare Obama, who now, the more I think of it, is who the author was referring to in his Jesus comparison, is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, and according to some, has no place in a discussion about government."

Why!?
Where do you think ethics and morals come from?
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: ""Jesus has no place in a discussion about government."

Wow, I agree fully as we have a secular government. "

While that may be true to the extent that we do not have a National Religion nor are a Theocracy that does not require checking an individuals religion at the Town Hall door.
I would suggest that the time be taken to go back and read what the founders wrote into the founding documents as well as the papers before during and after.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: Bush!? Get over it already!

"Now the Republican Rubes as you referred to them lie about Canada's health care system in order to obstruct health care reform in our country. "

Can you honestly say that Canadians do not wait long periods of time to see a doctor? Can you deny that there are places in Canada that hold a local lottery to determine who will see the doctor today?
What is it about Canada's system that is so great? Oh, yes, the individual does not have to pay. That does not mean the people do not pay.

Obstruct health care reform? Ok! What is wrong and needs to be fixed? Do you really want all those that provide insurance to be exactly the same as the Government decides? Do you want to be forced to buy insurance if you want it or not? Or if you need it or not?

There are things said about the current, most available, bill that are in fact a lie. If you take the time to read the bill! There may not be the words "death committee" in the bill but there is language to provide for people to have a document on file that tells the medical practitioner to give up.

So as I said tell me! Support your position!

Or surrender!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "I know this goes against your religious beliefs and I'm sorry for that, but condoms and sex-ed work. Abstinence doesn't."

I know you are speaking to an individual, but even then do not presume what actually goes against their beliefs.
Sex-ed is not, repeat not, in any way related to preventing anything. It is in fact a co-opt of a traditional parental role in explaining one of the mysteries of life.
As for an argument between the efficacy of condoms vs abstinence. There are some incontrovertible facts. Neither works if not used! Second, even if used condoms fail!
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Duncan,

...I do not understand this animosity about religion IN Government? The real problem is either a religion assigned by Government or religion AS Government. Morals come from the first position, oppression from the second!...

In reading your set of messages, I was scratching my head trying to figure out where you're coming form. If you think religion IN government is okay, what does that mean in practical terms and contrast to what religion AS government means? Are you saying that government can have a state religion, ala the Church of England in the UK? If you don't understand the establishment clause, here's what Thomas Jefferson had to say:

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. (Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 369)"

Finally, for the moment, let's accept the ridiculous notion that religion in government results in morals and you think that's a good thing. The problem with your notion is what I implied in my previous post regarding different versions of Jesus within the same religion. There is not one set of morals that are agreed on within a religion much less all religions. Example: One person believes that war is immoral is all cases and others believes that war is morally justified under certain circumstances and of course there's no universal agreement on those circumstances.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
27 months ago: "If you think religion IN government is okay, what does that mean in practical terms and contrast to what religion AS government means? Are you saying that government can have a state religion, ala the Church of England in the UK?"

I think perhaps you should reread the original message. The Church of England was the Government of England. IE religion as Government. Religion "in" Government is no way comparable.

I must also put forward that you do not understand morals. There are things ajudged right or wrong, often subject to circumstances. Morals are unequivicable!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "That is pretty funny considering he is flip flopper like the rest of them overpaid suits."

More than that he obviously lies!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "DuncanONeil--yes, as a healthcare consultant I've read both available bills, and the framework for the 3rd (a draft of the entire bill was just released today.) Have you? It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the two Senate bills, one from the HELP Committee and one from the Finance Committee."

Of course in an open forum I knew that there would have to be someone who has read the documentation. But it is just as apparent that the vast majority have not.

As for the Senate stuff I just located one of them, appears to Bucus'(sp?). Just getting started. So far it appears to be less able to stand on its own that HR 3200.
If you link provides a better appearing version, I thank you.
32 months ago: Duncan, you're late to the party.

Regarding teen pregnancy and divorce rates, you're incorrect. You must have missed these, so... Here, again, is a New Yorker article that goes into some in-depth studies on religion and teen pregnancy: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot. And here's one from Religious Tolerance on divorce rates in the U.S. by religion. Money quote: "Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience."

Sorry, but it's true. They talk the talk, but by and large they do not walk the walk. So insisting that other people walk their talk is hypocritical.
32 months ago: @Duncan
I'd like to tackle a few specific statements you made.

"Sex-ed is not, repeat not, in any way related to preventing anything."

You have no evidence to back that statement up. Presumably, it's just how you feel. But I've already provided evidence indicating sex-ed helps prevent teen pregnancy. I prefer fact-based education over feelings-based education.

"It is in fact a co-opt of a traditional parental role in explaining one of the mysteries of life."

Now I'll grant you that. But if a tradition isn't working, it needs to get out of the way. The tradition of telling kids nothing about sex other than "don't do it until you're married" produces pregnant teenagers.

"As for an argument between the efficacy of condoms vs abstinence. There are some incontrovertible facts. Neither works if not used!"

Quite true. It's just that statistically, abstinence gets "not used" a lot more often than condoms. Birth control education for teenagers is an admission of an uncomfortable truth: Teenagers *will* have sex. There is nothing you, I, or anyone can do about it.

"Second, even if used condoms fail!"

A tiny percentage of the time. When abstinence fails, it fails much more drastically.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Duncan,
...Why!? Where do you think ethics and morals come from?...

Morals are derived from human social organizations, and they evolve and change over time. I'm sure you'd like to think it's your personal version of deity sitting in the heavenlies, but not everybody shares the same deity or any at all. As I noted previous, multiple religions equals multiple and conflicting morals. Ethics are rules of conduct derived from morals.

To source morals and ethics to your particular religion is wishful thinking and insulting since it implies that everybody else is immoral or amoral. Also, don't confuse your personal morals with laws that are established by the community or government. When people try to push their religious based morals into government law, they tend to get struck down after time. For example, the old blue laws to keep businesses closed on the "Lords" Day. Now that's not the case in countries where the have a state religion.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "They also found 40% of small business employees pay deductibles of $1000+, twice the percentage paying that in 2007 (yes, that's a year-over-year change.) Plus 41% of companies surveyed indicated they will likely increase the premium employees pay for coverage next year. So it's not just a "pay freeze", it's a significant and progressive annual pay reduction. That's not sustainable unless we all want to become unpaid volunteers in return for health coverage. "

So then your solution is to take all of these problems and shift them from the employer-individual mix and move them into the hands of the Government.
The major problem there is two fold. Cost overruns and mismanagement! Or like someone said recently -- "health care run by the DMV."
Sure there are things that can be done but they lie somewhere between what we have now, works by the way, and total Government control. Among those things would actually reducing some of the onerous red tape the Government loves. Which will only become more so under these bills.
Through section 1223 of HR 3200 there are 29 sections that impose additional documentation or studies on the providers. Who pays for this overhead?
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "To source morals and ethics to your particular religion is wishful thinking "

Now your personal bias is showing through. I made no mention of a religion nor a God. Further to presuppose a God is arrogant!

There is not an thinking entity on this planet that does not have a religion.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "You have no evidence to back that statement up. Presumably, it's just how you feel. But I've already provided evidence indicating sex-ed helps prevent teen pregnancy. I prefer fact-based education over feelings-based education."
It is not a matter of what I feel. To say that sex-ed helps prevent teen pregnancy is to say that it always has, even when the schools were not involved. Sex-ed is not about don't as much as it is about how to. This is something best handled by those that know the recipient best. How does one have facts about feelings?

"Now I'll grant you that. But if a tradition isn't working, it needs to get out of the way. The tradition of telling kids nothing about sex other than "don't do it until you're married" produces pregnant teenagers. "
Then why is that once the schools took over the training of nascent adults the rate of teen pregnancy began to rise, rather than the other way around?

"Quite true. It's just that statistically, abstinence gets "not used" a lot more often than condoms. Birth control education for teenagers is an admission of an uncomfortable truth: Teenagers *will* have sex. There is nothing you, I, or anyone can do about it. "
Really is that not a feeling? Because the schools are prohibited from teach the moral implications of rash decisions. Therefore the kids do not, yet again, learn that their actions have consequences. There is one thing we can do in this regard. Teach our children discipline. Discipline is the one thing that we as parents are expected to teach them. That one thing, along with the intangibles they learn from us is what will stand them in the greatest stead throughout their life.

"A tiny percentage of the time. When abstinence fails, it fails much more drastically. "
Talk about ridiculous! How can it more or less drastic? There is no such thing as a little bit pregnant.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: In the original message I did not see the statement linked to religion! Even so the facts are as I stated!

Divorce rates among different ethnic groups vary sharply, with 9.8 percent of whites divorced, compared with 11.3 percent of African-Americans, and 7.6 percent of Hispanics. (legalzoom.com) In addition even the Census shows the rate for the Dem base as higher.

As for divorce by religion, among the major religious groups, only Muslims show a lower rate of divorce than do any of the others.
32 months ago: Duncan, you've obviously never actually been through sex-ed in school or seen it in action. There's a lot of "don't": Don't have sex without condoms, don't believe the myths about standing on your head afterward or pulling out, don't let anyone pressure you into sex, etc...

But it approaches the topic from a practical perspective. It asks, since teenagers will have sex, what are the best ways to keep them safe? It does not ask if there is a way to keep teenagers from having sex at all, because there isn't.

"Then why is that once the schools took over the training of nascent adults the rate of teen pregnancy began to rise, rather than the other way around?"

I challenge you to find a single statistic that supports that.

"Because the schools are prohibited from teach the moral implications of rash decisions."

And here we're getting to the heart of your objections. Tell me, what "moral implications" are you referring to? Please be specific.

"Talk about ridiculous! How can it more or less drastic? There is no such thing as a little bit pregnant."

When a condom breaks, it's a rare thing, usually caused by improper use. When kids who have been taught nothing about birth control succumb to temptation - and statistically speaking, they will - they typically don't use condoms at all. Ergo, when abstinence "breaks," you're very likely to end up with a new Palin... I mean baby.
32 months ago: Duncan, where in the world are you getting your statistics? Please link to your sources.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Are you saying that government can have a state religion, ala the Church of England in the UK?"
NO!!!!

I will not deny those are Jefferson's words. But I must point out that the document stops short of actually stating a separation of church and state. In addition I contend that laws passed that support the views of Atheists are in fact a direct violation of that very clause by establishing a specific set of beliefs over all others!
Morals are morals, period! I suspect that either my words were weak or you have a small misunderstanding of the position of "religion in government". This was not a statement to religion is part of government but is present in those of government. As such one would like to believe that the precepts of religion would pervade the persons present and guide them to the proper actions. Unfortunately we can seen that some of the "deadly sins" are extent in the bodies of Government.
Also war is not a moral issue! This has the same aspect as if someone were doing similar harm to your child. Your contention is that you could not act since to do so would be imoral.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago:
Comment: Duncan, where in the world are you getting your statistics? Please link to your sources.

Which ones?

BTW I do not remember you citing any sources either!
32 months ago: Divorce most common among Christian conservative groups: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

Teen pregnancy most common among Christian conservative groups: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot

That's the third time I've posted these links.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "you've obviously never actually been through sex-ed in school "
WRONG!
"It does not ask if there is a way to keep teenagers from having sex at all, because there isn't. "
WRONG! It is called discipline. The huge increase in teen pregnancy since the widespread inception of school directed sex ed is evidence of that!
"I challenge you to find a single statistic that supports that. "
Kind of hard to provide a statistic you would accept as valid, since when the schools were not teaching sex-ed there would be no control on the data.

I was about to sett this aside for additional research. However I am tired of trying to deal on a rational basis with those that feel constrained to revert to name calling as part of their argument strategy.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: Comment: Divorce most common among Christian conservative groups: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

Teen pregnancy most common among Christian conservative groups: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot

That's the third time I've posted these links.

Left By: HeyNoniNoni
Really! First time I have seen them!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: For the first it appears that the author is massaging the data to support a specific claim. As for the second, in matters political I have little faith in the objectivity of the New Yorker.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: If I'm not mistaken, Noni's original premise was comparing the evangelical right to the evangelical left.

""I'm not Mark, but on a hunch I'd guess it's the "family values" diatribes coming from a group of people that has a higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays caught in embarrassing situations than the evangelical left.""

I did not see anything in the articles posted that addressed the issue along these lines. If I just missed it, please direct me with a quote.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: ...I contend that laws passed that support the views of Atheists are in fact a direct violation of that very clause by establishing a specific set of beliefs over all others!...

A straw man argument with an exclamation point. No, laws were changed to preclude religionists from using the power of the State to impose their religion or religious peccadilloes on those who practice other religions or no religion at all. Contrary to evangelical Dominionist propaganda and desires, we have a secular government.

But I think we're off the topic track here. The concern was over Edward's inclusion of religious arguments to shape government policy. In my opinion, Ed's discussion on Christian perspective was a sidenote aimed at other Christians, specifically right-wing Christians. I don't think we was attempting to impose his Christian norms on non-Christians or secular governments. Unfortunately, Ed is not doing any follow-up on his post, perhaps because RSG slapped him down with, "your opinion of America, as a Canadian, is completely immaterial and of no consequence whatsoever." That's Christian charity for you - neo-con style O.o
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "I'm not Mark, but on a hunch I'd guess it's the "family values" diatribes coming from a group of people that has a higher teen pregnancy rate, a higher divorce rate, and a much higher rate of closeted gays caught in embarrassing situations than the evangelical left."

The basic thought may be correct but the data does not support the claim. The data puts, well at least two of the three, the claims squarely in the camp of the left!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "A straw man argument with an exclamation point. No, laws were changed to preclude religionists from using the power of the State to impose their religion"
That is the point of my contention! The state is imposing atheists beliefs on society as a whole.

"Contrary to evangelical Dominionist propaganda and desires, we have a secular government."
Whatever 'evangelical Dominionist propaganda' is? A "secular Governemnt" does not mean a society free from religious expression. Nor does it require the total absence of religious principles. It does, however, mean that the Government is not run by a church or religious organization as is the Vatican, ancient Israel, or the several countries currently run under the auspices of Sharia.
To use the law to favor the belief system of the Atheists is to "make law" that their belief system is correct and the only one acceptable for expression in the society. That is a violation of the Constitution!
32 months ago: "The basic thought may be correct but the data does not support the claim. The data puts, well at least two of the three, the claims squarely in the camp of the left!"

What data are you talking about? I've posted my sources several times. Please show me your sources regarding teen pregnancy and divorce rates.

Again, here are the divorce rates by religious affiliation: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

And here's a new study just out on teen pregnancy by religion. Again, it's the right, not the left, where this is an issue: http://www.reproductive-health-journal.com/content/6/1/14.

Let me be blunt: Teens on the left generally know how to use, and support the use of, contraceptives. Hence, fewer teen pregnancies. Teens on the right have just as much sex as teens on the left, but they don't know anything about protecting themselves. Hence, more teen pregnancies.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: ...That is the point of my contention! The state is imposing atheists beliefs on society as a whole...

Ah, ok. So you want laws to ensure that religionists can use the power of the State to impose their religion. Can you cite some concrete examples of what you would impose if the window of opportunity was opened?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Noni

One thing I have noticed that has not been addressed in the studies on teen birth is the desire of the teen to have a baby. It is assumed that all teen pregnancies are accidental, when a possibility is a stronger nurturing instinct in a religiously raised person than a non-religious person.
32 months ago: While that's an interesting perspective, OOTB, I must say I find the idea that religious teens want to get pregnant *out of wedlock* more than non-religious teens highly unlikely.

Why are teen pregnancy rates higher in conservative religious households than in other households? This is really the kind of question that practically begs for Occam's Razor.

Your answer is that religion may bring out a "nurturing instinct," which would seem to be counter-productive since religious conservatives tend to believe sex before marriage is a sin. So young women feel so strongly religious that they put aside abstinence before marriage and get pregnant so they can have a baby? Not a very simple answer.

My answer is that teens have sex, regardless of politics and religion. Teens who aren't raised with "abstinence-only education" avoid getting pregnant because they know how to use birth control. Much simpler answer.

I also reject the idea that religion instills a nurturing instinct. Being human instills that instinct.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: "I also reject the idea that religion instills a nurturing instinct."

How can you say that HNN?! Look at this example of "Godly" nurturing in the Bible

"This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys." (1 Samuel 15)

Now as the story goes, Saul slaughtered, err nurtured all the people, including the children and infants to death but he spared the animals, and "god" was really honked off that Saul didn't kill the animals along with the people. "And the LORD was grieved that he had made Saul king over Israel."

Doesn't that give you a nurturing instinct?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago:
The young ladies I know of who deliberately set out to become pregnant were mostly of religious households. I can only guess at their true motives, as what they say to me may or may not be accurate. The majority have proclaimed a desire for a baby, and I have to take the softer wisdom of my wife who thinks they need someone who will love them unconditionally.

I feel that in a society which teaches that it is only natural for a child to have sex, the concept that should be prepared for is that it is only natural for a child having sex to desire a baby. That is, after all, the biological purpose of sex, and creates the emotional need for the end product. No matter how hard you try, you aren't going to socially re-engineer countless millennia of reproductive developement.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Markbyrn

Some things are beyond your comprehension. Understanding the true nature of God is one of them. No offense intended, it's just that some are not chosen for redemption.

No offense taken, either. It's just one of those things.
32 months ago: OOTB, you seem to be yielding the point that teens raised in conservative religious households are more likely to get pregnant, and now appear to be arguing that religion is responsible - but not for denying the young women birth control. Rather, it is responsible for instilling in them a desire for a baby.

Isn't this a tacit admission of a failure in another aspect of religion? Again, most of these pregnancies happen out of wedlock. I doubt you're trying to argue that conservative religion produces more babies of unwed mothers, but that's what it boils down to.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: I don't think I asserted differently, as your original premise was religious right vs. religious left, not, as it has become, religious vs. non-religious.

Society and religion are at odds, with societal mores being the most widely accessible and distributed. The media pumps sex at these children incessantly, and at a time when adulthood is emerging fresh and innocent, many fall for the false promises of happiness.

I believe we may have posted about the same time, see my post 3 above this one.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: OOTB
...Some things are beyond your comprehension. Understanding the true nature of God is one of them...

That's the siren song of all religoinists when they need to justify their twisted logic pretzels, and if one is inclined to swallow such pretzels, than one must believe every religion.

The logical conclusion is that it's a story written by mere men who justified the barbarism by claiming it was a deity that ordered them to do it. It's no different than today when you have religious fanatics killing in the name of their god.

But that's a bit off point, and the point was that religion does not make anybody inherently more nurturing an in fact, can cause quite the opposite effect depending on how the person perceives their religion. I do believe that religion can be positive in the same way that a sugar pill inside a Rx bottle can provide placebo effect.
32 months ago: OOTB, it hasn't become religious vs. non-religious. The religious left also produces fewer unwed teen mothers, because on the left, condoms and birth control aren't regarded as sinful. Seriously, follow my links and look at the differences by religious affiliation.

Really, at its core, what the argument boils down to is whether or not condoms prevent unwanted pregnancies and whether or not convincing teenagers not to have sex is practical and doable on a large scale.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "What data are you talking about? I've posted my sources several times. Please show me your sources regarding teen pregnancy and divorce r"
I did!!
"Again, here are the divorce rates by religious affiliation: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm "
I read that! It does not really support your contention. Did you not read the last comment on this point?
"And here's a new study just out on teen pregnancy by religion. Again, it's the right, not the left, where this is an issue: http://www.reproductive-health-journal.com/content/6/1/14. "
This reference is not actually the study, though it does lead to the study. Also you make a fallacious assumption. That all members of a conservative religion are conservative politically. Sorry I stand by the data I provided!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: Missed something!
"Let me be blunt: Teens on the left generally know how to use, and support the use of, contraceptives. Hence, fewer teen pregnancies. Teens on the right have just as much sex as teens on the left, but they don't know anything about protecting themselves. Hence, more teen pregnancies."
This has no basis in fact!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "That is the point of my contention! The state is imposing atheists beliefs on society as a whole...

Ah, ok. So you want laws to ensure that religionists can use the power of the State to impose their religion. Can you cite some concrete examples of what you would impose if the window of opportunity was opened?
"
NO! In case you missed that EMPHATICALLY NO!
I challenge you to provide data supporting the position that shows that the State is imposing a religion.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago:
Left By: Out Of The Box
"One thing I have noticed that has not been addressed in the studies on teen birth is the desire of the teen to have a baby. It is assumed that all teen pregnancies are accidental, when a possibility is a stronger nurturing instinct in a religiously raised person than a non-religious person."

As in many things there is a third alternative. The desire to not kill another human being!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: HeyNoniNoni
"Why are teen pregnancy rates higher in conservative religious households than in other households?"
You have not provided any confirmation of your claim. First none of the sources you provided make the distinction that you do. And you have not defined 'conservative religious households'. You are taking a set of data and making your own analysis, with the last reference set aside.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "I also reject the idea that religion instills a nurturing instinct. Being human instills that instinct. "
So your claim Noni is that humans are inherently good? That means that you must deny the existence of evil!
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Markbyrn,

It's ok.

Noni,

W. Bradford Wilcox, “The Cultural Contradictions of Mainline Family Ideology and Practice”

A study by University of Virginia indicating couples who attend church regularly are 35% less likely to divorce than their secular counterparts and those who are religiously affiliated, but not practitioners.


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/Divorce%20Rates%2090%2095%20and%2099-07.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/Marriage%20Rates%2090%2095%20and%2099-07.pdf

http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en

I decided to try and verify the empirical data provided in the studies you quoted, and their figures do not coincide with the figures provided by the census bureau or the CDC.

What I found, using the year 2007 for my study, is that Texas and Massachusetts, used in the study quoted on divorce, are very similar in divorce rates PER MARRIAGE, as opposed to divorce rates per capita, as cited in the study you used as proof.

Texas population ------------ 24,000,000
Marriages ------------ 1,776.000
Divorces ------------ 792,000
----------------------------------- 44 %

Massachusetts population-------6,400,000
Marriages------------------------377,600
Divorces-------------------------147,200
------------------------------------39 %

The study also does not take into account the fact that Texas has a higher percentage of currently married people than Massachusetts by around 3%.

Some further interesting reading that might do us all good would be: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/stat3.html


_ _
hehehehe (.)(.)
\ / () \
_ \ '--' / _
{ '-`""""`-' }
`"/ \"`
\ /
_/ /\ \_
j { / \ }
`"` `"`
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "The young ladies I know of who deliberately set out to become pregnant were mostly of religious households. I can only guess at their true motives, as what they say to me may or may not be accurate. The majority have proclaimed a desire for a baby, and I have to take the softer wisdom of my wife who thinks they need someone who will love them unconditionally.

I feel that in a society which teaches that it is only natural for a child to have sex, the concept that should be prepared for is that it is only natural for a child having sex to desire a baby. That is, after all, the biological purpose of sex, and creates the emotional need for the end product. No matter how hard you try, you aren't going to socially re-engineer countless millennia of reproductive developement."
We also are raising people to be not loving of each other. All of the "PC" stuff that, as an effect, causes people to remain aloof and separate rather than develop connections and relationships.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Some things are beyond your comprehension. Understanding the true nature of God is one of them. No offense intended, it's just that some are not chosen for redemption. "
Have to disagree with you on this one.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: ------------_ _ -hehehehe (.)(.)
--------- / () \
--------- \ '--' / _
-------{ '-`""""`-' }
--------`"/ \"`
----------\ /
----------/ /\ \_
--------{ / \ }
---------`"` `"`
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Sorry , cute little ASCII pictures don't work here.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Isn't this a tacit admission of a failure in another aspect of religion? Again, most of these pregnancies happen out of wedlock. I doubt you're trying to argue that conservative religion produces more babies of unwed mothers, but that's what it boils down to."

There remain substantial racial and ethnic disparities among the birth rates for adolescents ages 15–17. In 2007, the birth rates for this age group were 8.4 for Asians or Pacific Islanders, 11.8 for White, non-Hispanics, 31.7 for American Indians or Alaskan Natives, 35.8 for Black, non-Hispanics, and 47.8 for Hispanics.10 (http://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/fam6.asp?popup=true)

Drexel University psychiatrist Joseph Strayhorn said he and co-author Jillian Strayhorn were "astonished" by the strong correlation between teenage births and religious beliefs, even after the figures were adjusted for other factors like differing abortion rates and income levels between states. Strayhorn said it would be a mistake to apply the statewide totals to individuals and draw a conclusion like "religious teens get pregnant more often,". He said one factor might be that people in more liberal states tend to delay marriage, while teen marriage is more common in the South. (A solid bastion of the left!) (http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4401&Itemid=53)

Even the author of one of your citations disagrees with you! In terms of birth rates, nationally, The left base exceeds the overall national birth rate by a minimum of 31% and a maximum of 98%. That is respectively twice and three times the rate for the group usually considered to be the source pool for the right. (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_07.pdf)
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "...Some things are beyond your comprehension. Understanding the true nature of God is one of them...

That's the siren song of all religoinists when they need to justify their twisted logic pretzels, and if one is inclined to swallow such pretzels, than one must believe every religion."

Yet the fact presented can easily be represented by a non bible tract.
A flood has occurred. Person is stranded, sitting on their porch. A canoe comes along and offers to take them out. They refuse saying God will provide! Hours later they are now sitting on the porch roof, a motor boat comes along and attempts again to transport them out. The same response is forthcoming "God with provide!.
Now they are seated on the roof all of their lands and house covered in water. A helicopter comes along, again they refuse aid saying "God will provide!"

They drown! When standing before the Throne the lament; "Lord why did you not save me?" To which God replies I sent you a canoe, boat, and helicopter. What more did you expect me to do?"
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "But that's a bit off point, and the point was that religion does not make anybody inherently more nurturing an in fact, can cause quite the opposite effect depending on how the person perceives their religion. I do believe that religion can be positive in the same way that a sugar pill inside a Rx bottle can provide placebo effect.

Left By: markbyrn "
Can you say cynical?
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "OOTB, it hasn't become religious vs. non-religious. The religious left also produces fewer unwed teen mothers, because on the left, condoms and birth control aren't regarded as sinful. Seriously, follow my links and look at the differences by religious affiliation. "
Again you are making an unwarranted assumption. That the Religious left and religious right are analogous to the political left and right.
"Really, at its core, what the argument boils down to is whether or not condoms prevent unwanted pregnancies"
Here is another assumption. That the religious left does something that the religious right does not.
"and whether or not convincing teenagers not to have sex is practical and doable on a large scale."
Must have been effective at some time. Else the rate of teen pregnancies would not be showing an increase. Especially after the recent 14 year decline!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago:
Over forty percent of adolescents will become pregnant before reaching age twenty(41 percent of whites and 63 percent of nonwhites). By age 18, one in four young women(24 percent) will have a pregnancy. [3]
Of the total number of teen pregnancies, approximately half occur with eighteen & nineteen year olds.[2]
The United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate of any developed country. It is twice as high as England, France & Canada, three times as high as Sweden and four times as high as The Netherlands.[4]
Nearly one in five teenagers who experience a premarital pregnancy will get pregnant again within a year. Within two years, more than 31 percent will have a repeat pregnancy. One quarter of births to teen mothers in Ca. represents a repeat birth during the teen years.[5] [3]
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Here is an excerpt from

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fact2.htm

the Alan Guttmacher Institute reported in 2001-JUL that 37.4% of all abortions are performed on Protestant women; 18% of all abortions are done on born-again Protestants. "Born-again" believers constitute about 30% of the American adult population, and are thus under-represented among those women having abortions.
The abortion index by religion during 1994-1995 was found to be:
Protestants: 0.69
Followers of a non-Judeo-Christian religion: 0.78
Catholics: 1.01%
Jews: 1.08
Persons who do not follow an organized religion: 4.02

An index value of 1.0 represents the national average. e.g. Catholics were 1% more likely to obtain an abortion than average. Data was prepared by Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Storrs, CT, in 1995 from five Gallup polls.

*********These data need to be interpreted carefully.****** The index is a function of many variables, including:
The percentage of women in the religious group who are sexually active.
The percentage of sexually active women who do not use contraceptives.
The rate of their sexual activity.
The type of sexual activity -- whether it is liable to result in pregnancy.
The percentage of pregnant women who wish to terminate the pregnancy.
The percentage of pregnant women who choose to have an abortion."


Now, if you'll notice, the author feels a need to quantify his findings, as indicated by the section I surrounded by asterisks, because the protestant religions were 31% less likely to have an abortion, while atheists were 402% more likely to have an abortion.


Another concern of mine in the question of teen pregnancy, are the studies you quote referring to teen births, or all teen pregnancies?
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Duncan,

Your flood story is a perfect illustration of religion getting in the way in the way of rational thinking. The religious person buys into an organized set of exclusive theological concepts and practices which invariably results in the twisted logic pretzel, ergo the stranded flood victims are religious & expecting a supernatural solution which clearly doesn't happen in the natural world that we live in.

That's not to say I'm promoting atheism; in fact, I reject it's conceited dogmatism but clearly any supernatural creator or creative force that exists outside of the physical universe is not promoting or kowtowing to anybodys religion.

Except for wishful thinking, a religious person can provide no evidence of any sort that their religion is anymore 'true' or more 'spiritual' than another religion or no religion at all. That includes the ultra religious who claim they aren't religious because they're religion is real and all others false.

...Can you say cynical?...

No, just rational skepticism of those who who are religious and claim to have the ultimate truth, claim to be more spiritual, more altruistic, less inclined to breaking the law or their own standards of morality, and claim any kind of supernaturalism. Although I do have to admit, there might be some evidence in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lvU-DislkI

O.o
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Your flood story is a perfect illustration of religion getting in the way in the way of rational thinking. "

Leave it to a secularist to miss the point of a story! It is not about, "The religious person buy(ing) into an organized set of exclusive theological concepts and practices which invariably results in the twisted logic pretzel", but it is about preconceived notions. The works of God do not require violation of the accepted laws of whatever science you choose to select.

"Except for wishful thinking, a religious person can provide no evidence of any sort that their religion is anymore 'true' or more 'spiritual' than another religion or no religion at all. That includes the ultra religious who claim they aren't religious because they're religion is real and all others false. "
In this I can very clearly assert that I have been trained in an understanding of religions other than my own. This occurred while I was in High School, a Catholic high school mind you. The simplest way to explain the lesson is that in their basic tenents there is no difference among the worlds religions. On the basis of that bit of education (an entire semester)you will never hear me claim any religion is more correct than any other. In addition one of my favorite books growing up was "The Worlds Great Religions"
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Duncan,
...you will never hear me claim any religion is more correct than any other...

So you believe in Universalism? That would contradict those religions which not only claim exclusive truth, but decry and strongly condemn Universalism or Ecumenicalism as false.

For example, one religion claims the only path to spiritual truth and salvation is road X and all other roads are false and lead to condemnation. To that religion, the theological exclusivity of road X is the most basic of tenants, and they use terms like apostate, heretic, and infidel to describe those within and outside of their religion who believe in Universalism, and especially those who states, "in their basic tenents there is no difference among the worlds religions."

Conversely, the Universalist doesn't buy into religious exclusivity, and claims all roads can lead to spiritual truth even though some of the roads are mutually exclusive. I can respect the Universalist philosophy, but some Univesalists are blind to the obvious contradiction and swallow their own own twisted logic pretzel in the process.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "So you believe in Universalism? That would contradict those religions which not only claim exclusive truth, but decry and strongly condemn Universalism or Ecumenicalism as false."
There you go putting words in someone else's mouth again!

I said no such thing!
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: Hey everybody

Atheists and agnostics are 433 times more likely to have an abortion than protestants. If all this sex education is working so well, and religion is crippling women in making informed choices about birth control, how do we explain that?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fact2.htm
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Duncan,
How did I put words in your mouth? I asked if you were a Universalist based on your comment, "you will never hear me claim any religion is more correct than any other..."

If you believe that no religion is more correct than any other, that's a tenant of universalism. Or are you saying you do believe that your religion is more correct but you just won't say it?
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Hey everybody,

According to the site that was cited by religioustolerance.org, "Forty-three percent of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% as Catholic."

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

So don't believe the new math that suggests atheists and agnostic are getting more abortions. Of course Christians (esp fundy-gels) are going to be getting more abortions because the fundy-gel mom and dad demand abstinence of their little angels.

If your religion is actually more effective than a placebo and abortion is considered murder in your religion, you wouldn't be getting any abortions much less having the biggest slice of the percentage pie.
32 months ago: Gentlemen,

There is only one true God, He is the God of the Holy bible, its not any denomination,as long as you believe in Jesus you are a Christian. The bible gives promises of which we do not submit to, we try to compromise and leave Him outside when we go into the pub or the brothel, it does not work like that, Jesus is a living God, I found that out. I am going to share my testimony. When you do not know Him he is invisible but when you do you step into the supernatural. In regards to Christian teens, they may go to church but most do not have a personal relationship. I was regarded myself as a Christian and told Him that I knew that He would understand that I had to have a relationship with my mistress because I had two girls with her, I found out that was unacceptable.

Edward
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: So this blows either guttmacher or religioustolerance.org, or both out of the credibility waters.

The study you used states ".....women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

Numerical stats are great, but there's nothing like a good visual chart to express an idea. While some twist the facts with numbers per captita, and numbers per religion, (women who profess to be protestant and evangelical make up nearly 75% of the population, and should therefore have 75% of the abortions, all other things being equal. Over 80% consider themselves Christian, yet atheists have 23.7% of all abortions.)

In these graphs, assembled over the last 24 years, you will find the highest concentration of abortions per pregnancies in the liberally enlightened northeast and on the liberally enlightened west coast, with California leading the pack, and recently, hotly contested by Washington State And Oregon.

Oddly enough, the more "ignorant" states, as considered by some, Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Arkansas have a much lower rate than the supposedly "advanced" states. (Fla. is hanging out in the middle ground.)

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/mapstatesabrate.html
32 months ago: I looked around the room, and I thought I was the lowest of the low. I thought that my business was going to fail and the bank was coming in next week. I wished I could have a job like everyone else. I did not want to run any more companies. This was the start of my deep depression.

One day while I was visiting at my girl friend's' home, a strong conviction came over me and revealed my sin, saying, "Your sin is adultery." James 4:4, "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever, therefore, will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." A voice of authority spoke inside of me and said, "You're living in sin. Change your lifestyle now. If not, you're going to die." God's presence was so real that I offered no resistance.
It was not cowardice that inspired my suicidal thoughts; my company made a handsome profit that year and other aspects of my life were in order.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
32 months ago: I agree with you Ed. God speaks to us regularly, some listen, some don't. Some have to be hit over the head, and their attention gotten. Some deny the voice of God by trying to drown it out with their own arguments. We all have a purpose, even if that purpose is only to strengthen another s faith by trying to prove his beliefs wrong.

We agree on the power of the Almighty. We still don't agree on Obama's policies. :-)
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
32 months ago: Ed, An alleged private revelation from deity or other personal supernatural contrivances can't be proved or disproved; it's phantom evidence outside of the teller's own mind. Countless persons from disparate religious and spiritual backgrounds have similar supernatural stories as you and if one had to believe everybody with a revelation, you'd have to subscribe to a host of contradictory beliefs.

Now in the case of adultery, most religions frown on it and eschewing it is hardly evidence of having exclusivity with the 'one true god' as you put it. Now when somebody like a Benny Hinn promotes "public" evidence such as faith healing, it invariably crumbles under objective scrutiny (i.e. exposed as a charlatan) but the faithful will continue to believe it. And that's the case anytime a religious person presents public evidence that can be objectively measured, assessed, evaluated, etc. There is no public evidence that one's religion is supernatural or better than the other person's religion or no religion at all.
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Atheists and agnostics are 433 times more likely to have an abortion than protestants. If all this sex education is working so well, and religion is crippling women in making informed choices about birth control, how do we explain that? "

Perhaps it is less a matter of "birth control" than it is a lessening of the value of life!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "
Comment: Duncan,
How did I put words in your mouth? I asked if you were a Universalist based on your comment, "you will never hear me claim any religion is more correct than any other..."

If you believe that no religion is more correct than any other, that's a tenant of universalism. Or are you saying you do believe that your religion is more correct but you just won't say it?

Left By: markbyrn "

Again you have chosen to, on your own without any support in the matter, decide what I actually believe. Most people would consider that "putting words in their mouth". The is no justification for claiming anything for me other than what I "actually" say.

You are hereby enjoined from doing so henceforth!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "According to the site that was cited by religioustolerance.org, "Forty-three percent of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% as Catholic."

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

So don't believe the new math that suggests atheists and agnostic are getting more abortions. Of course Christians (esp fundy-gels) are going to be getting more abortions because the fundy-gel mom and dad demand abstinence of their little angels."

" The abortion index by religion during 1994-1995 was found to be:
Persons who do not follow an organized religion: 4.02"

You yourself cited this to prove that Catholics have 1% more abortions than the "norm". The same analysis shows that non organized religion is 302% above the "norm". I would suggest that this data point alone destroys your argument!
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "There is no public evidence that one's religion is supernatural or better than the other person's religion or no religion at all."

This is not an appropriate comment. Religion is not a public issue. Religion is a private issue and no one needs to provide "scientific" evidence regarding their religious beliefs. That is part of faith, just like the faith you have that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.
32 months ago: Duncan, Are you prepared to rest on that opinion, when there is a good possible that your soul lives on, the question is where? If it was a private issue why did 11 out of 12 disciples die to make it public, real Christianity is supernatural, do you believe in the Holy Spirit? I am sharing my personal testimony, there is one now, about overcoming Depression. Is there a Heaven and a Hell?
DuncanONeil
DuncanONeil
Milwaukee, WI
32 months ago: "Duncan, Are you prepared to rest on that opinion, when there is a good possible that your soul lives on, the question is where? If it was a private issue why did 11 out of 12 disciples die to make it public, real Christianity is supernatural, do you believe in the Holy Spirit? I am sharing my personal testimony, there is one now, about overcoming Depression. Is there a Heaven and a Hell?"

Mr Lee do you not mean 12 out of 13?
Yes I stand by it. Because the issue at hand was not about being a missionary. It was about the aspect of life that concerns the needs and issues of the community, which we call the "public" venue is completely different than what you speak of.
I agree, in principle, with many that do not want the country run by a religion. Although I believe that is next to impossible in the US. But unlike those same people I do not subscribe to the principle that all Government officials be required to check their beliefs and morals at the door when they report to work.
Although it does appear that virtually all of the members of Congress have done just that. Unless they actually had a "moralectomy". It has become obvious that those currently in the Halls of Government have one goal foremost in mind and that is how to keep their job and grow their own personal worth, never mind the rest of us.
27 months ago: Well, I think I know how to get a good reaction, nice guys finish last, you have to stir the pot to make a good cake, thanks guys, you reciprocate, the majority of my other blogs on other sites, zilch!
27 months ago: My Man.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.