Steele 'choice' gaffe sparks GOP revolt

“Chairman Steele needs to reread the Bible, the U.S. Constitution and the 2008 GOP Platform,” said Blackwell

Dog I love watching the GOP implode with self-loathing
 
I'm not insulting you. It's true.

Uhm....nope. And yes, it is indeed insulting.

You see...you dont get to pick whether its insulting or not. Its insulting if I feel it is.

Thats how that works.

So please keep your comments about my faith to yourself. You dont know me.

If you profess to value life such that you are against abortion, you have to be against capital punishment as well. One life is the same as another - no one is less of a sinner than another. You only go to heaven by grace alone. That's what the Bible teaches us.

I value life. I am not judging a persons soul...thats for God to do. But we can judge a persons actions here on earth. Thats called justice. The bible is literally full of penalties that carried the death penalty. Jesus didnt come to change the law - not one bit - but to fulfill it. When the bible says something like 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' what do you think its referring to? Moving them to Cincinnati?

Your just not qualified to say what you said about me. You are free to your own opinion, as I have my own opinion about you. But there is no need for me to air it here in the forum. I ask that you show respect in the same manner. If thats too hard, then dont post.
 
Time for the Steele death watch. I think he will be out in a month.
 
Here is a novel idea. Lets expect people to be RESPONSIBLE! WOW!

Deciding to have an abortion could actually be the responsible thing to do given the specific circumstances…
 
Time for the Steele death watch. I think he will be out in a month.

Sounds about right. He seems to have a total crisis of legitimacy right now. J. Kenneth Blackwell is pretty much the guy responsible for getting Steele elected, and he just called him out. Steele can't go 3 days without another GOPer yelling at him.

Bad news all around I guess. Steele would have to deliver some tough medicine, but he's prob. the guy most qualified to do it, would prob. help the party in the long run. He won't be able to keep his job. Dawson would be a fundraising boom for the DNC, and Blackwell is a far right idiot. Who else is on the bench? Newt?

Example: In an attempt to close the margin of his blowout loss in the Ohio Gubernatorial race to Ted Strickland, Blackwell authorized a mass email that suggested that Ted was gay, and his wife, a lesbian.

Ted Strickland is an ordained minister.
 
I found this article rather interesting.

What's the source?

If this article is accurate, looks like Steele is on his way to getting a demotion.
It does take courage to try to steer one's party away from it's norm, I have to give him that :goodjob:. Curious if this leads to the party re-evaluating itself, or if Steele gets replaced.
 
Thanks for the link. Looks like it's may already be water on the bridge, and the GOP got to say that it's still pro-life.

Despite the misgivings, several party sources said that in the near term, Steele remains secure in his position, citing the difficulty of removing him, the desire to quell the appearance of further chaos within the party and the willingness to allow him time to establish himself.
 
Example: In an attempt to close the margin of his blowout loss in the Ohio Gubernatorial race to Ted Strickland, Blackwell authorized a mass email that suggested that Ted was gay, and his wife, a lesbian.

Ted Strickland is an ordained minister.

i don't believe this. what is your source on that?
 
i don't believe this. what is your source on that?

I'm looking. Joe Hallet of the Columbus Dispatch condemned the Blackwell campaign for forwarding these rumors near the end of the campaign in 2006, but I can't find a digital copy. WorldNetDaily (a hack conservative site) linked to the some of the rumors as well, if you wanted to read the story.
 
Deciding to have an abortion could actually be the responsible thing to do given the specific circumstances…

Not getting into that predicament in the first place would be even more responsible still.....

And how can it be the responsible thing to kill a baby when one can always give it up for adoption? :confused:
 
Not getting into that predicament in the first place would be even more responsible still.....

And how can it be the responsible thing to kill a baby when one can always give it up for adoption? :confused:

Sometimes, despite taking multiple measures to prevent a pregnancy, it still happens.

The fact of the matter is that the demand for adopted kids is much less than the current supply of kids up for adoption. There are almost 3 times the number of kids waiting for adoption than get adopted each year: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends.htm

If abortions were to become illegal, and all parents who would otherwise have aborted now give their kids up for adoption, this problem would become even more pronounced. You could end up with a situation where kids up for adoption would live entirely in foster or government care until they are 18. Is that responsible?

Would this be a better solution for you? Who would be responsible for all the kids up for adoption? Who would pay for it? The government (with our tax dollars)?

Also – when do you believe independent life begins? Conception? Or somewhere between conception and birth?
 
And how can it be the responsible thing to kill a baby when one can always give it up for adoption? :confused:

Suppose the mother could conceivably die in the process. Abortion is the least worst option.

The fact of the matter is that the demand for adopted kids is much less than the current supply of kids up for adoption. There are almost 3 times the number of kids waiting for adoption than get adopted each year: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends.htm

And yet we can't let teh gays adopt, nooo...
 
Not getting into that predicament in the first place would be even more responsible still.....
That it killing off the baby even earlier. Failure to procreate can hardly be called pro-life. It's more pro-choice - choosing to not even give the poor defenseless baby a chance to reach conception, much less birth.
And how can it be the responsible thing to kill a baby when one can always give it up for adoption? :confused:
So perhaps pro-lifers should stop conceiving and start adopting. Ending abortion is going to create a huge supply-demand imbalance if adoption is the solution.
 
When the bible says something like 'thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' what do you think its referring to? Moving them to Cincinnati?

My Brain hurts.


Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished.

Hosea 9:14 give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.

Isaiah 13:18 They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children
.

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." 31 (Psalm 145:9; I Sam. 15:3)

When you go to attack a city, first give its people a chance to surrender. If they open the gates and surrender, they are all to become your slaves and do forced labor for you. But if the people of that city will not surrender, but choose to fight, surround it with your army. Then, when the Lord your God lets you capture the city, kill every man in it. You may, however, take for yourselves the women, the children, the livestock, and everything else in the city. You may use everything that belongs to your enemies. The Lord has given it to you. That is how you are to deal with those cities that are far away from the land you will settle in.
But when you capture cities in the land that the Lord your God is giving you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the people: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as the Lord ordered you to do.
(Today's English Version: Deuteronomy 20:10-17)
 
The miscarriage rate is quite near 50%. If one's goal is to kill embryos, then the couples who're trying to get pregnant have the greatest chance of doing so.
 
The miscarriage rate is quite near 50%. If one's goal is to kill embryos, then the couples who're trying to get pregnant have the greatest chance of doing so.

Naturally? That seems quite high. A little search on my own shows 25%-30% with a very low rate for the teen pregnancies.
 
Mr Blackwell ought to read the Constitution as well.

They kind of just say stuff is in the constitution now. Like when Rush says that socialism is against the constitution. Why Just because.
 
Top Bottom