Updated 04:40 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009

Society|Mon, Oct. 13 2008 12:09 PM EDT

Palin Sharpens Attack on Obama's Abortion Stance

By Jennifer Riley|Christian Post Reporter

Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin went on the attack Saturday at a Pennsylvania rally against Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama for what she calls his radical views on abortion rights.

  • (Photo: AP/Keith Srakocic)
    Reublican vice presidential candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks during a campaign stop in Johnstown, Pa., Saturday, Oct. 11, 2008.

"In times like these with wars and financial crisis, I know that it may be easy to forget even as deep and abiding a concern as the right to life, and it seems that our opponent kind of hopes you will forget that," Palin told a crowd in Johnstown, according to CNN. "He hopes that you won't notice how radical, absolutely radical his idea is on this, and his record is, until it's too late."

Pro-life activists and social conservatives have long hammered Obama on his extreme pro-choice views.

Obama opposes the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, and voted against legislative efforts in the Illinois Senate for three consecutive years (2001-2003) to give legal protections to a baby born alive during an attempted abortion procedure.

The 2003 born-alive protection measure was virtually identical to a bill unanimously passed in the U.S. Senate and signed into law by President Bush in 2002.

"In short, Sen. Obama is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life. He's fighting with those who won't protect a child born alive,” Palin said, according to The Associated Press.

Palin contrasted herself and running mate Sen. John McCain’s abortion stance with Obama.

Palin believes Roe. V. Wade should be overturned and abortion laws left for state governments to decide and she opposes abortion in all cases, including rape and incest, with the exception of when a mother’s life is in danger.

McCain has had a 100 percent pro-life record during his 26 years in the U.S. Congress. He voted in support of the Prohibit Partial Birth Abortion bill in 2003, and supports the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. He opposes abortion except in cases of rape, incest and to protect the life of the mother.

"A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for activist courts that will continue to smother the open and democratic debate that we deserve and that we need on this issue of life - that's OK, that debate - at both the state and federal level," she said.

On Saturday, Sen. Obama was also in Pennsylvania campaigning in Philadelphia. At one point during the rally, he said he “appreciated” McCain’s recent efforts to “tone down the rhetoric” on the campaign trail.

Recently, the two presidential candidates were highly criticized by pundits and voters for spending too much time on the attack and not enough time explaining their policies and positions during a critical time in the nation’s history.

Obama currently leads McCain by a seven point margin (50 percent v. 43 percent), according to the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking report. The results show the gap has narrowed between the two candidates since last week when Obama was leading by double-digits.

McCain and Obama will face off on Wednesday for the third and final presidential debate at Hofstra University in New York.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2 | 3
  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:02 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    blue, I didn't know that life was a game of truth or dare.

    Huckabee was denounced here on Christian Post (by atheists and agnostics) when he mentioned the notion of amending the constitution to include protection of al human life.

    Now that Obama wants to take away state rights to adopt alternative measures, where are they now????

    "The most horific of circumstances"???

    In the case of the life of a mother, abortion was already legal well before Roe v Wade.

  • Mon Oct 20, 2008 4:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    How dare any stranger try to take office and force me, by law, to continue a pregnancy in the most horrific of circumstances. How dare a woman with no legal degree attempt to overrule a Supreme Court decision that has presided for over 30 years. Certainly, she is a washington outsider..

  • Sun Oct 19, 2008 2:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    johnzon, she's from Alaska and they tend to be late night and several months of the year almost no nights people!

  • Sun Oct 19, 2008 12:35 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    I have a question for Palin supporters. Why will she appear on SNL, but she wont go on news proprams such as Meet the Press?

  • Sat Oct 18, 2008 12:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    If you missed Hannity and Combs the other night you missed a good performance by both candidates. There is some foundation that holds a dinner about 2-3 weeks before an election. It is an opportunity for the candidates to 'roast' themselves and each other. It has been a tradition for quite some time.

    I had no idea McCain had such a sense of humor. The room was made up of mostly 60's people made good liberals and giving back. George W. Bush when it was his first turn said the room was made up of 'the haves...and the have mores'.

    McCain said he knew their was hope for him to win the election because even in that room there was support to beat Barrack and he was glad Hillery was able to make it....

    McCain on 'The View' had called Obama "that man". When Obama had his turn he announced that Barrack was actually swiheily (like I spelled that right) for "that man". He also said the person who picked out his middle name obviously never thought he'd run for President. Barrack Stephen Obama...just kind of rolls of the tounge doesn't it?

    I have to admit...both made me laugh (in a good way).

  • Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    If you map the promises and statements coming from Stephen (yep...that's Obama's middle name) you will find he cannot keep all of his promises because many are contrary.

    For example, he said he would not raise taxes during a recession. He says we're in a recession. Yet, he says he's going to pay for his programs by increasing taxes on people making more than $250,000 (which I am not in danger of a tax increase by that guideline...). Is he saying he isn't going to fund the programs for as long as we have a recession? It could last for years. Is he saying he isn't going to do any of what he says as long as we are in a recession?

    How's he going to pay for it? Borrow money from Iran? There comes a point where logic just shakes it's head and walks away from the Obama camp.

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:11 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    There's a great Republican yard sign on our street, in the dark blue with the crisp font above and below the horizontal line.

    Above it reads: PALIN
    _______

    Below it reads: REALLY?

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 6:14 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    despicable...

    http://www.koco.com/cnn-news/17724300/detail.html

  • Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:37 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    There is nothing like an NRA gun-toting,death-penalty supporting, states'righter-loophole proponent of 'life' to advance the cause not only of the unborn, but of the living -be they God's innocent woodland creatures or, those who actually do possess souls and, not too few of them wrongly convicted, languishing on death row! The circle of life is just that, a circle: any break in its great chain of being is a lie and a fraud.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:58 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "
    According to Stanley Kurtz of National Review Online, "ACORN succeeded in drawing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the very policies that led to the current disaster." ACORN put pressure on banks by threatening them with accusations of racism if they didn’t give loans to minorities, even if they were completely unqualified.

    Kurtz goes on: "At both the local and national levels, then, ACORN served as the critical catalyst, levering pressure created by the Community Reinvestment Act and pull with Democratic politicians to force Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into a pattern of high-risk loans. Up to now, conventional wisdom on the financial meltdown has relegated ACORN and the CRA to bit parts... In fact, however, ACORN is at the base of the whole mess…And Barack Obama cut his teeth as an organizer and politician backing up ACORN's economic madness every step of the way."
    "

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Sorry about the typos.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    There is not enough space here to give an economic lesson to prove that Fannie Mae. The housing market exploded form the beggining of 2002to about the end of 2005. This was due to a enourmous amount of buyers taking advantage of the super low interest rates Alan Greenspan(Fed Chairman) caused by lowering the federal funds rate. CEO's and shareholders made out like bandits and to balme low income workers is horrible. They lost the one home they owned.

    This explains it very well.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53802.html

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Believer, it wasn't soon after the Civil War, it was more like after the Civil Rights era of the 60s.

    Slavery was in fact the Democratic Party line. And like it or not it was they who filibustered anti-lynching legislation right up in the mid 1900s.

    "Look in the South Seed, notice how overwhelming the populace is black and yet they have not even a close representation there."

    After the Civil War there was black representation until the Democrats fought to restore state rights to adopt their own laws, which ensued with them all being turned out of office.

    Anyone can blame the government, but it is still quite obvious that the southern Democrats were pro-slavery and fought for their rights to maintain slavery at the consternation of the northern states which primarily consisted of Republicans. Be that as it may it was in fact radical Republicans who voiced opposition to slavery, it was they who in fact chose to push for Lincoln's candidacy. It is a fact that the BIG issues was slavery.

    Granted Lincoln used a lot of political tact which has caused for some historical revisionism. If you look at it from his scope you can easily see why he said certain things and adopted certain measures. It worked - or it almost worked, if it wasn't for the southern Democrats who were reinstated by Andrew upon Lincoln's assassination.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:37 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "What I think has happened is the Democratic Party dangled a carrot to get the black vote."

    You're loosing it Seed, blacks, and minorities in general as voting blocks, have generally been voting democratic for quite some time (at least some 50 years). Putting Obama in is not a paradox as already the minorities were already voting democratic, the only paradox is the inverse is that some white voters (blue collar working class) who might vote democratic might not simply for skin color.

    "I think that the fact of Obama's involvement with social activism reveals how the black people are being exploited in an ultimate power play by communists."

    Or that blacks are fed up and want equal representation for a change, something whites have had for 200+ years. Look in the South Seed, notice how overwhelming the populace is black and yet they have not even a close representation there.

    "It is not a secret how they have operated in black communities specifically to wreek havic on our economy."

    ?

    Then all they have to do is blame Republicans who all along were in fact respecting black people as their equals."

    All along? Like since the 60's 'all along'?

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:31 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "The original language was even more directed against slavery and was removed to solidify the south in joining their cause against the British"

    It might have been, but none the less such wording didn't make it into the the final draft apparently, and such a shame. Saying 'all men are created equal' and then having slavery is enough illogically to make some blacks reject that the US ever had best intentions for them at all.

    "but many of those KKK democrats are now a part of the republican party in the South"

    Yeah, but don't tell Seed that. Sure the democrats (and republicans) were in some capacity pro-slavery, but this was back was democrats actually were popular in the South. Since the civil rights era of the 60's and LBJ, the south got basically turned over to the republicans, and we both know why. This federal action was too much for the southern states, and to make it worse, it was spearheaded by democratic administrations.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:10 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    "the US government did not target black people"

    Except for that whole 200 some years of slavery. Oh, and those years of segregation. Oh, and those years in which they couldn't vote, own land, run a business, be elected to office, equal pay, etc. Nope, no discrimination there at all.

    "and The Declaration of Independence states quite clearly that all men are created equal"

    Yes, but unfortunately as written the rights (somehow?) didn't extend to all in this manner. At the time unless you were a white, male, owned land, the odds of 'due process' or any other civil rights were not at all equal. In other words, 2nd class citizens. This is why it's at least in part a living document as it hand to be amended to see that slavery was abolished, and that women could vote, and so on. Societies change an thankfully our constitution is flexible to accommodate.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    seed, I totally agree with you on your last post with regards to the racial and sin issue. And I do believe that soon after the Civil War the democrats of that day did indeed play up to the black community, but like too many politicians they made them a lot of promises but never came through, but still many blacks to this day still see the democratic party for the minorities and the poor.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    What I think has happened is the Democratic Party dangled a carrot to get the black vote. I think that the fact of Obama's involvement with social activism reveals how the black people are being exploited in an ultimate power play by communists. It is not a secret how they have operated in black communities specifically to wreek havic on our economy. Then all they have to do is blame Republicans who all along were in fact respecting black people as their equals.

    That being said, beleiver, I do understand that racism is a problem in every community and crosses party lines. Sin is not a political problem no more that it is a racial problem. This is where Agent would go his separate path. There is only one hope for sinners - Jesus!

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Again Agent, the US government did not target black people and The Declaration of Independence states quite clearly that all men are created equal. The original language was even more directed against slavery and was removed to solidify the south in joining their cause against the British.

    Therefore it would seem illogical to me for blacks to blame the US government for slavery, especially considering the Confederate rebellion. In light of the Democratic Party's aggressive advocacy for slavery, if they wanted to play the blame game, why not hate the Confederacy or the Democratic Party?

    By the way the only single fact check that I stand corrected on was with Mccain when he misquoted Hillary, which I attributed to Hillary criticizing Obama. I'm not saying that I have not made other mistakes nor am I implying that I have all of my ducks in a row. Last time I checked I don't have any ducks anyway.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Seed,

    "Have you ever heard of google agent? I put the facts on the table, like it or not."

    Of course I have, it's just that it's common sense to leave a source when you refer to stats, quotes and such. If there is no source (like your other post) we
    should be maybe a little skeptical, especially when one finds it to be in error in the past. It's all good, we're only human.

    Voter fraud or false registrations is nothing new, many of the issues with the 2000 election lead to the debacle in FL, but seriously this has been done by both sides, lets be realistic here and not cherry pick, we both know both sides are corrupt to an extent and have their injustices. My main point was blacks have been targeted in general by the govt (and not by just a particular party) and so from their view they have some justification in not directly trusting the govt. thus the GDA statement. I think if most white Americans were to walk in the shoes of the average black person they would better understand their plight and such a comment.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:36 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    More on Obama's ungodly ties:

    http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/742238255.html

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:14 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    seed, although I don't approve of some of the language, I would encourage you to watch the movie "Glory". I think it paints an all too accurate picture of racial prejudice in both the North and South during the Civil War.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:11 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    seed, but many of those KKK democrats are now a part of the republican party in the South. Racial prejudice is truly a bipartisan problem.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:14 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I am not going to condone racial violence or acts of terror instigated by anyone, whateve party affiliation or national heritage that may come in. My point merely was that the Democratic Pary slogan was pro-slavery. Were there any anti-slavery Democrats? Maybe you can come up with one or two if you can. It was the Democratic Party who fought for a hundred years after the Emancipation Proclamation to maintain a virtual slave society. Why did they decide to dangle a carrot to get black voters? My guess is that it was not exactly altruistic motives.

    And by the way, about this KKK stuff. Again, it was Republicans that were lynched along side of the black man. And it was the Democrats who filibustered anti-lynching laws to their death.

  • Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:03 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Have you ever heard of google agent?

    I put the facts on the table, like it or not.

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93AIV882&show_article=1

    It looks like the Democrats are up to their dirty tricks again. Two centuries ago they tried to monopolize Washington by adding non-voting blacks to the political census which led to the three-fifths compromise, which still alowed for 24 seats extra.

    Now with ACORN, in 2007 Indianapolis had 677,401 individuals registered to vote even though they only had 644,197 voting age-eligible individuals. In 2005 Missouri had some counties with voter lists as high as 153% of their actual population. I guess some things never change. This is all a result of the motor voter plan instituted by Clinton and defended in court by Obama when he represented radical socialist organization ACORN.

    http://theheritagefoundry.org/2008/10/09/motor-voter-acorn-vote-fraud/

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:39 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    seed, I think you might want to rethink this one, I live in Southeast Kentucky where democrats rule and a large majority of them are as American as apple pie, but agent at the same time prejudice is a nationwide problem and having grown up in Rochester NY I can say whites in the North were as prejudiced against blacks as whites in the South are they just act out their prejudices in different ways. My sense is that same prejudice may cost Obama the election.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:26 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Is it logical for blacks to hate America for the autrocities committed to them by Democrats?"

    You still can't do it can you? You honestly can't admit that blacks have been mistreated by the Govt. and thus their position? Pathetic. It's not hate Seed, it's disgust for how horrid they in particular have been treated. Haven't you a clue?

    Seed get real, BOTH political parties and the Fed Govt. at large have throughout time abused and used them in the past.

    "And by the way according to a poll 30% of white Democrats refuse to vote for a black candidate."

    Source Seedling. Probably those particularly from the South too, in other words, of the KKK/hick variety, the ones that wouldn't vote for a black regardless of their political affiliation. In the south, color some how still matters.

    "George Bush has appointed more blacks to government offices than any other president in US history."

    So, your point? Does this help to advance the black community at large? No. Bush is also responsible for the largest increase in national debt EVER.

    This doesn't change the fact that the South is largely republican simply b/c of the actions of civil rights movements and LBJ.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "So back to the original point now, are you getting a feeling with all the injustices against minorities in general and blacks in particular WHY they'd would be just a little upset at the US Govt.? Might this help to explain, along with the pathetic response to the victims of Katina WHY the GDA episode from the pastor?"

    Is it logical for blacks to hate America for the autrocities committed to them by Democrats? No, it doesn't sound logical to me considering the US actually went to war with the southern Democratic (aka Confederates) and many people sacrificed their lives for their freedom. And by the way according to a poll 30% of white Democrats refuse to vote for a black candidate. You would never be able to say that about the Republican Party. George Bush has appointed more blacks to government offices than any other president in US history.

    Only a Democrat would think that it is good and proper for US citizens to hate America. Why? Because the Democratic Party has been taken over by Soviet Communists for one thing. First it was John Kerry and now Obama.
    You guys should rename your party The Reddems.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:44 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    There have been so many things found, I can not list them all. But here is a sample:

    1844 The palace of Sargon, King of Assyria, mentioned in Isaiah 20:1, was discovered.

    1906 Hittite Royal Archive discovered Until 1906, the Hittites (Gen 10:15) were thought to be mythological. In fact, this discovery shows the Bible is accurate.

    November 11, 2005 Israelites were able to write as far back as 1000BC. “Archaeologists have discovered a 40-pound stone containing the oldest known example of the Hebrew alphabet. The stone, inscribed with the Hebrew alphabet written out in its traditional order, was found in the wall of a building dated from the 10th century BCE in Tel Zayit, ancient Judea, south of Jerusalem” (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/92812).

    May 8, 2007 “Professor Ehud Netzer of Hebrew University announced that his team has uncovered King Herod’s long lost tomb” (http://www.isrealli.org/king-herods-tomb-discovered-in-israel/).

    Aug 30, 2007 “Remains of the Jewish second temple may have been found”

    Nov 30, 2007 “Artifacts including pottery shards and arrowheads found under the tower suggested that both the tower and the nearby wall are from the 5th century B.C., the time of Nehemiah“

    Feb 27, 2008 Seals dating to the 8th Century BC found at City of David excavations. “Among them is a seal that was discovered intact and which bears the Hebrew name “Rephaihu (ben) Shalem”, who lived in the City of David in Jerusalem during this period. The seals were primarily used by public officials.”

    Other examples can be looked up:
    http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html
    http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html
    http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/bible-archaeology.htm
    http://www.bib-arch.org
    http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/faq/archaeology.asp
    http://www.biblehistory.net/
    http://www.bible-history.com/
    http://biblicalarcheology.net/
    http://www.bibarch.com/
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/archaeology.html
    http://www.baseinstitute.org/
    http://www.gnmagazine.org/archaeology/
    http://aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:31 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    'So far, archealogy is proving the Bible to be extremely accurate in the historical facts.'

    'Extremely accurate' details please. Surely such evidence for the Tower of Babel has turned up....right? right?? Archealogical evidence for 2 million wandering jews for 40 years?

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:20 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    wbmoore, Such as the "fact" that the earth is 7,000 years in age?

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:17 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    So far, archealogy is proving the Bible to be extremely accurate in the historical facts.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    DRJ- <Check out the 'Tower of Babel" scenario. Was it God's will that mankind be divided into different language groups? Or was it God's wrath visited upon mankind for their ideology that man could build a physical platform to reach God?>

    OR

    The "Tower of Babel" is myth.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:14 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    "It was 211 years of slavery to be precise"

    yes, though they were under segregation till the 1960's, and coincidently the democratic party was largely behind their more recent civil rights movements, this is why the democratic party has not done so well in the south in elections.

    So back to the original point now, are you getting a feeling with all the injustices against minorities in general and blacks in particular WHY they'd would be just a little upset at the US Govt.? Might this help to explain, along with the pathetic response to the victims of Katina WHY the GDA episode from the pastor?

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:46 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Right, after like 400 years of slavery"

    It was 211 years of slavery to be precise. The first documented full-fledged US slave was recorded in 1654. Incidentally it was a black master. The Confederates surrendered in 1865 and the Emancipation Proclamation drafted by Republicans freed the slaves. Following the assassination of Republican Abraham Lincoln led to Democratic Vice President Andrew Johnson's office; allowing the south to subjugate the new free blacks in the south and strip the rights that the northern states and the Republican legislators fought so hard for. The Republican Congress of 1875 drafted the first civil rights act just in time for the Democrats literally took power. The south was the heart of the Democratic Party. If there was one thing Democrats had in common it was pro-slavery, whether southern or northern (Andrew Johnson for example). The states fought hard to regain their political authority over blacks. Every black man who was elected to office was given the boot. According to Congressional Record, the Democrats used filibuster tactics and committees to stop all anti-lynching laws from being passed. 30% of the victims were white. How many of these were Republicans?

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:20 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    DRJ,

    "You are confusing God's will with Gods wrath. "

    Interesting, still, what if it's just 'God's wrath' and in the response and the result is miscarriages?

  • DRJ »
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:09 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    I have noticed that many of the bloggers keep assigning "God's will" to all abortions. What kind of reformed drivel is that? God never violates His own dictates. You are confusing God's will with Gods wrath. Check out the 'Tower of Babel" scenario. Was it God's will that mankind be divided into different language groups? Or was it God's wrath visited upon mankind for their ideology that man could build a physical platform to reach God? Don't forget that God endowed mankind with a will of our own and then allowed those men to pursue their own madness of constructing the tower that led to the diversification of language groups. You can be sure that all nations who approve of and participate in the sacrifice of infants will experience the wrath of God, who is the avenger of the innocent! America has placed her head squarely on the chopping block of judgment with 40 million abortions and counting. God is merciful and kind, and desires America's return to Him. Our confession and repentance mark the path to His forgiveness and restoration. Should God bless America? Pray for this nation that it will one day again be "under God." Pray that America will once again distrubute liberty and justice to all...even the pre-born!

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:05 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    seed "
    I'm a Christian because my genes make me what I am. I have no free will. lol."

    Well, actually, your religiosity may very well be genetic. My skeptical nature makes it difficult for me to develop religious faith, I attribute it to genetics, my brain chemistry and morphology do not seem to allow for religious belief.....

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:59 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    I think Sarah palin would be a cool VP!

    Do your research:

    - -Obama voted to kill babies born alive (voted against infant protection)

    - - Obama and Hillary push for partial birth abortion which is cut the skull, suck the brains out of a human being, and throw them in the trash. Obama is sick!

    Why is my family so concerned about the deception of Obama? He is not a decent man, has no experience and has ties with ACORN, AYERS, WRIGHT, some are voting for Obama only because of skin color and so many other bad reasons...

    *** Families for McCain - Palin ***

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "No, the US actually gave Africans equal rights,"

    Right, after like 400 years of slavery, so I guess in your book this should just be all no big deal and they have no justification to distrust the Govt. or whites in general? Are you serious?

    "it was the Democratic politicians who filibustered and overturned every single attempt made to establishing them as regular citizens"

    The democratic polisitics who fillibustered were those from the SOUTH, in other words red neck KKK land.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:40 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Seed,

    "Are you in favor of unlimited abortion on demand?"

    This seems a little cut and dry for the rules of such a topic. But as I stated before, my view is it should be legal (to a given moment post conception) likely up to consciousness emerges though I am open to other views based on evidence. Though it would reason that once the infant can survive outside of the womb, then it should have rights and technology and science as helped in reducing this age, so it's possible some day that we can support them outside of the womb entirely.

    It should be rare, and generally only in certain circumstances (rape, incest, mother life in danger) and not wide sweeping simply for sake of birth control. I wouldn't mind leaving it up to the states to decide on the issue, the more localized govt. is generally the best. I know this isn't typical pro-life, nor is is a no holds bards abortion free for all, but it's somewhere in between which most of the populace does support.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:29 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    One more thing Agent, Obama was endorsed by Planned Parenthood over Hillary, what more do you need to know about his record?

    http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:27 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    No, the US actually gave Africans equal rights, it was the Democratic politicians who filibustered and overturned every single attempt made to establishing them as regular citizens. Read your history, oh I forgot the liberal NEA doesn't require that part of history.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:26 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    seedplanter, I know. I do not write just for the benefit of the folks who post, however. I also write for the many who only read.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:20 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Naaaa, it's called 'skeptic, not cynic.


    "If everyone who hated America was banned from voting, who would win the election?"

    Um, yeah, last I checked you left this topic as it was too much to bear on account you'd have to acknowledge that blacks and minorities actually have been targeted in the past by the Govt., thus their position in some respect.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:15 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    wbmoore, don't waste your time, he's playing you out.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:15 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "In any case, they are at the very least in His perfect plan. "

    So the perfect plan includes letting babies die....mkay, if you say so. Awfully negligent though.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Agent, The Bible clearly states that God set forth the order of nature. He placed us in this world as autonomous beings with free will and capable of moral judgments with which come certain responsibilities and consequences. But you already know this is the Christian position.

    By the way Agent, I seen your horrified comments on the article regarding the rogue abortionist early this year. What gives? Are you in favor of unlimited abortion on demand?

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:07 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Miscarriages are either the will of God, or the result of decisions of others (drugs, car accidents, physical attacks, the result of ancestors decisions, etc.). Perhaps there are other reasons as well. In any case, they are at the very least in His perfect plan.

  • Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:04 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72511 "

    And this is an authoritative source on the matter how? Seriously here.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links