KFC Kickin For Christ KFC Kickin For Christ

My Thoughts on the VP Choice

▼

My Thoughts on the VP Choice

Everyone is anxiously awaiting the news

from JoeUser Forums

I am axiously awaiting the naming of the VP positions especially for McCain.  There still could be a chance I'm not going to the polls this year.   Hopefully this won't happen but alot hinges on the VP choice McCain makes.

During this past weekend's Q&A with Rick Warren of the Saddleback church John McCain answered very simply to the "when does life begin"  question.  He came right out and said life begins with conception. 

Obama, on the other hand, gave this long convoluted answer which in my book was really a  "I don't know" answer.  But then again, Obama has extreme pro-abort ideas and he's sticking by that pro-choice position. I like Ronald Reagan's stance on this issue.  If we don't really "know" and there is much debate on this "when does life begin" issue shouldn't we NOT abort and err on the side of life?  He said we don't bury a "seemingly" dead person until we first make darn sure he's dead first.  So why kill a human being if we're undecided on when he becomes human first? 

There has been some talk about McCain choosing a pro-abortion VP.  I guess what he'd be saying, by doing so, is that abortion is not that big of an issue and if his VP is a pro-abort guy than so be it. 

I would have a problem with that.  

Because if McCain really believed that life begins at conception, he'd do all he can do to protect unborn life and picking a VP who is ok with murdering babies in the womb, in my book, is hyprocrisy.  How can two walk together if they can't agree on the most basic of all basic things? 

At least, Obama is upfront with his belief even if, in my book, he doesn't have a clue about many things including the abortion matter.   He's not being hypocritical but only relaying what he believes to be true,  At least Obama (and I cringe when I say this) is sticking to his beliefs and is honest with us on this issue. 

Somebody told me this week that if McCain picks a pro-abort VP then he will vote for Obama even though he strongly disagrees with him.  His reasoning would be if McCain goes against what he believes  (or says what he believes) by picking a pro-abortion VP  then he deserves to lose.   I'm not sure why McCain would go against his own belief and that of  the majority of the party that supports him.  To me it would be political suicide.

I know one thing.  I will NOT vote for Obama for any reason.  If anything a  NO vote for McCain is a vote for Obama anyhow. 

We will know soon enough. 

What do you think? 

 

 

 

 

 

politics
33,133 views 111 replies
Reply #101 from JoeUser Forums Top

Can you imagine what the next election might bring......Clinton vs Palin? Now that would be verrrrrry interesting.
End of quote

Anyone but Clinton! ;)

Reply #102 from JoeUser Forums Top

hahaha so you missed my prediction on August 25th on Island Dog's site?  https://forums.joeuser.com/322157 

I too have been researching her and have been rooting for her ever since.

 

 

First of all KFC.

How about the Govenor of Alaska?  Sarah Palin? 

The more I know about her, the more I like her.  She might be just the woman we need.

End of quote

does not warrant a 'prediction' on your part.  You merely made a suggestion.

 

Second, I am trying to find it but I believe AnthonyR told me about Sarah Palin at least a month ago. Sorry to burst your bubble but I'm going to give credit where credit is due.

 

 

TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #103 from JoeUser Forums Top

I like the capitalized NOW. Perhaps women can drag that organization back to its purpose instead of being toadies for philandering democrats.
End of quote

 

Finally, for the first time in my adult life I am proud to vote Republican. (borrowed from Michelle Obama's speach). *_*

 

I'm still not a big fan of McCain but I do feel this was a good choice to compliment him.

Reply #104 from JoeUser Forums Top

does not warrant a 'prediction' on your part. You merely made a suggestion.
End of quote

hahaha, yes you're right....bad choice of words.  But around here I was keeping my fingers crossed.  It was more of a very strong HOPE than prediction.  

Second, I am trying to find it but I believe AnthonyR told me about Sarah Palin at least a month ago. Sorry to burst your bubble but I'm going to give credit where credit is due.
End of quote

Touchy!  Of course, I'm not saying you shouldn't. 

I've only been reading about Palin and thinking her a good choice for about two weeks anyhow....so Anthony R has me beat! 

No bubble burst on my end.  :sun:

Reply #105 from JoeUser Forums Top

Touchy!
End of quote
  :rofl:

Reply #106 from JoeUser Forums Top

Dr. Guy -

Now I see where you're coming from.  FTR, though, there is a difference between "religious" and "Religious" in my parlance.  I was referring to the religious/moral/ethical aspects of the issue, not the formal Religious aspects.  It was intended to refer to "all other non-Constitutional aspects" of the issue; sorry I didn't make that clear.

Reply #107 from JoeUser Forums Top

What reason would the pro-life people distort the truth for cash?  How is this done?  They don't receive any funds that I'm aware of like PP is getting.   Most of the pro-life groups I know about work only on donations giving out their services for free.
End of quote

Well that's quite an easy one to determine - if they believe that abortion is killing children, then they may well feel that a small lie that will prevent just 1 abortion from taking place would be justified, since the life is more valuable than not telling the small lie. Now it's not a giant leap to then extend that to thinking of money - if you can raise say £1000, that might then allow you to prevent an abortion (through advertising, promotions, contraception advice, abstinence programs, whatever). Hence you might be prepared to lie in such a situation to raise more money which in turn allows you to prevent an abortion and save a life.


If it is a human, then abortion is not a convenience or right. It is murder
End of quote

Well this is really playing semantics on my part, but technically murder is the unlawfal killing of a person. Hence if it is legalised it's not murder

 

Anyway nice to see some consistency wrt abortion in the VP pick, even if in other areas it's not been (e.g. Obama attacking McCain's experience(/age) and then picking an old experienced VP, or McCain attacking Obama's youth+inexperience then picking someone who's young+inexperienced. Still I think it was a good pick by McCain, it caught peoples attention+diverted coverage from the end of the democrats convention, might help drag a few Clinton supporters over, and also helps improve on the youth vote. Oh, it adds a 'historic' opportunity for people to vote the first female VP as well (as a counter to the first black P).

Reply #108 from JoeUser Forums Top

I was referring to the religious/moral/ethical aspects of the issue, not the formal Religious aspects. It was intended to refer to "all other non-Constitutional aspects" of the issue; sorry I didn't make that clear.
End of quote

I can see that, and thanks for the explanation.  I guess I try to avoid "religious" as well as "Religious".  But it is hard to since regardless of one's view (religious/agnostic/atheist) we are a religious society.

Reply #109 from JoeUser Forums Top

Well this is really playing semantics on my part, but technically murder is the unlawfal killing of a person. Hence if it is legalised it's not murder
End of quote

Homicide then.  But making it legal says more for a society than anything else.  I dont think anyone wants to go that route, even those that are adamantly for abortion.

Reply #110 from JoeUser Forums Top

For the first time in my long life I can say I finally have a reason to be proud of the Republican Party.

Reply #111 from JoeUser Forums Top

For the first time in my long life I can say I finally have a reason to be proud of the Republican Party.
End of quote

They do have the hottest chicks. ;)