Is Barack Obama the right leader for America?

[piqaboo]

Shap, none of that is new info. That's not what I posted.
FWIW, conception often does not occur for 24-48 hours post intercourse.

[Shapley]

FWIW, conception often does not occur for 24-48 hours post intercourse.

My understanding is that the sperm can remain active for 24-48 hours, so that conception can occur anytime from intercourse to 48 hours afterwards.

I was referring to the concept of the 'morning after' pill in light of the discussion which preceeded it, regarding abortion, contraception, killing, the morals of medical professionals, and the veiwpoint of the Catholic Church. I believe the Catholic Church views the 'morning after' pill, or indeed any ex post facto method of birth control, to be killing, as opposed to contraception which, while morally wrong, does not constitute a killing. To the best of my knowledge, the use of contraception is not a mortal sin, whereas induced abortion by any method is.

[Shapley]

FWIW, conception often does not occur for 24-48 hours post intercourse.

My understanding is that the sperm can remain active for 24-48 hours, so that conception can occur anytime from intercourse to 48 hours afterwards.

I was referring to the concept of the 'morning after' pill in light of the discussion which preceeded it, regarding abortion, contraception, killing, the morals of medical professionals, and the veiwpoint of the Catholic Church. I believe the Catholic Church views the 'morning after' pill, or indeed any ex post facto method of birth control, to be killing, as opposed to contraception which, while morally wrong, does not constitute a killing. To the best of my knowledge, the use of contraception is not a mortal sin, whereas induced abortion by any method is.

Nope. Apparently I am in error. Contraception is also considered a mortal sin.

If I keep making errors like that, I'll have to turn in my rosary....

[jamiebk]

Not that I am a Pelosi fan (I am not)...but you criticize her for not adhereing to the mandates of the church re: abortion) and suggest that if she can't do that, she should not call herself a Catholic. Yet, you seem to support the idea of contraception (as many, many catholics do). Knowing that it is a mortal sin, how do you justifiy your position? Should you also not accept all the mandates of the church?

Look, I know this sounds accusatory, and I am not trying to rub your face in this...I am trying to understand how you can maintain this position. Frankly I support contraception over pregnacy/abortion preference. You came down on Pelosi rather strongly (I know you don't like her) but what makes your postion regarding contraception any more defendable in terms of being a "good Catholic"? Curious

[Shapley]

Not that I am a Pelosi fan (I am not)...but you criticize her for not adhereing to the mandates of the church re: abortion) and suggest that if she can't do that, she should not call herself a Catholic. Yet, you seem to support the idea of contraception (as many, many catholics do). Knowing that it is a mortal sin, how do you justifiy your position? Should you also not accept all the mandates of the church?

Look, I know this sounds accusatory, and I am not trying to rub your face in this...I am trying to understand how you can maintain this position. Frankly I support contraception over pregnacy/abortion preference. You came down on Pelosi rather strongly (I know you don't like her) but what makes your postion regarding contraception any more defendable in terms of being a "good Catholic"? Curious

You misinterpret my posts. I don't support contraception, I merely said it is not the same as abortion in that it does not kill a baby (fetus, unviable tissue mass, whatever), it merely prevents the fertilization of the egg. I was trying to make a distinction between the act of killing and the act of blocking birth. I think the difference is significant, even if both are sinful, in much the same way that theft differs from murder. Theft is much more a forgivable offense than murder, though both are sinful. I'm no more in favour of contraception than I am of theft, but I dont' consider either of them the same as killing.

We were talking about 'killing', and you took offense that I used that term regarding abortion, hence the discussion took this tack. It could, I suppose, be argued that spermicides kill the sperm, whereas other forms of contraceptions merely keep them from the egg, allowing them to die a natural death. This would make the use of spermicides a form of killing. However, a sperm is not a fertilized egg and, hence, not a human being, so some manner of difference remains.



V/R
Shapley

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

The 'morning after' pill actually aborts a fetus, assuming conception occured the night before.

Not quite accurate. The terms "abort" and "fetus" are premature.

The "Plan B", aka "morning after" drugs prevent implantation of the conceptus, assuming that there is one, in the uterus. Said theoretical conceptus would be at the blastocyst stage, at most, at this point. This prevents the establishment of a pregnancy; there is therefore no abortion of same.

How much trouble are 32 cells worth to you?

[Shapley]

The "Plan B", aka "morning after" drugs prevent implantation of the conceptus, assuming that there is one, in the uterus. Said theoretical conceptus would be at the blastocyst stage, at most, at this point. This prevents the establishment of a pregnancy; there is therefore no abortion of same.

It's not so much my issue, as it is the issue as viewed by the Church. Webster's defines conception as "the process of becoming pregnant involving fertilization or implantation or both". I gather that the Church views fertilization alone as necessary for conception. Our science classes taught that once the egg is fertilized by the sperm "a new life is created". I am not aware that this viewpoint has changed in the 40 or so years since I sat in the classroom.

The simple rule is that birth control performed ex post facto constitutes abortion in the eyes of the Church, even if we cannot prove that conception had occurred. It's the old 'intent to commit sin' thing that George Carlin used to make jokes about.

[barfle]

If I keep making errors like that, I'll have to turn in my rosary....

I did that almost 40 years ago.

[Shapley]

Geithner: Obama To Get Tough On Tax Dodgers

Really. Is he going to start with his spokesman? Maybe look into his cabinet?

[jamiebk]

I mentioned a while back a study that was reported in the news regarding soldiers and war. The Army did a study that showed that a very small percentage of soldiers actually fired their weapons in combat, even when fired upon. Their moral compass was such that they found the taking of human life to be wrong, even in a life-threatening combat situation. During the Vietnam War, the Army used psychological methods to increase the percentage of soldiers willing to fire their weapons, with a pretty good rate of success. However, follow-up examination revealed that forcing people to kill who are morally opposed to killing had a very dramatic effect on their psychological balance, with the result that a much higher number of Vietnam Veterans returned from combat with mental problems.
V/R
Shapley

Well...this guy did not seem to have any trouble with the concept: http://oldbluejacket.com/CarlosHathcock.htm

Never heard this story before...but quite a guy!

[Haggis@wk]

I mentioned a while back a study that was reported in the news regarding soldiers and war. The Army did a study that showed that a very small percentage of soldiers actually fired their weapons in combat, even when fired upon. Their moral compass was such that they found the taking of human life to be wrong, even in a life-threatening combat situation. During the Vietnam War, the Army used psychological methods to increase the percentage of soldiers willing to fire their weapons, with a pretty good rate of success. However, follow-up examination revealed that forcing people to kill who are morally opposed to killing had a very dramatic effect on their psychological balance, with the result that a much higher number of Vietnam Veterans returned from combat with mental problems.
V/R
Shapley

This is probably not the forum for this conversation, but I'm going to think about your comments before I reply in full.

I will admit that in combat I have shot at people I really wanted to die but I don't think I know if I ever hit anyone. Today I kinda hope I didn't. Lord knows if Methodists ever embraced the concept of purgatory I'd have enough explaining to do without Somali ghosts pointing spectral fingers at me.

[Shapley]

One of the reasons I joined the Navy rather than any other service was that I knew, as a sailor, I wouldn't have to carry a firearm routinely, and it was very unlikely I would ever find myself in direct combat. I was willing to drive soldiers to war, but I didn't think I had the mettle to kill someone who had not directly threatened me or my family with bodily harm.
_____________________


Interestingly, one of our greatest American heroes, Sgt. Alvin York, was a conscientious objector. He was, however, comfortable with a firearm, and remained level-headed under fire. He was satisfied that he killed no more than had to be killed and that, in the process of killing those he did, he saved the lives of a greater number of people. He was most likely correct.

Audie Murphy, on the other hand, admits that he lost control of this temper and killed out of anger. Nonetheless, he was a hero and saved the lives of many men with his actions. Different wars, different conditions, different men, the same courage to stand and fight.

[Shapley]

A Day After Signing Pork-Laden Bill (And Blaming It On President Bush), President Obama Pledges To Cut Wasteful Spending

As soon as finish this box of Twinkies, we're all going on a diet...

[Haggis@wk]

this is a vicious, sentence by David Gergen:

It isn’t popular to say right now but there is growing reason to question whether this is the wisest course...

He's not saying to Obama this isn't the wisest course.

He's not yet prepared to say he's questioning whether this is the wisest course.

But he is saying that reason to question whether this is the wisest course is growing, and at some point may have grown to a point at which he will actually question whether this is the wisest course. Which could conceivably lead him to conclude that no, it isn't.

You know, people are so tired of this attack-dog politics.

If he'd said "It isn't popular to say right now but there is some concern that there might be a potential argument to be made which could raise the possibility of growing reason to question whether this is the wisest course", I'd be with him.

But this kind of "over the top" attack goes too far.

[barfle]

Fortunately for me, combat was never a real issue, although there certainly was plenty of potential. Ask anyone who went through 11B AIT at Ft. Polk.

While it's a fool's errand to say what would have been if what might have been had become what was, I believe that if it came down to him or me, there would be no question in my mind.

[Haggis@wk]

Fortunately for me, combat was never a real issue, although there certainly was plenty of potential. Ask anyone who went through 11B AIT at Ft. Polk.

While it's a fool's errand to say what would have been if what might have been had become what was, I believe that if it came down to him or me, there would be no question in my mind.

We had a pre-deployment exercise at Ft. Polk. I decided that I hadn't lost anything there that I was ever going to go back and look for!

The most common phrase used by every G.I. in every service after a chute malfunction/incoming/firefight/emergency/disaster etc. is a permutation of "my training took over." That's pretty much what happened to me. It happens so fast and is so confusing, noisy and chaotic that I can only remember thinking, "are there any 'friendlies' between me and the bad guys? no, shoot."

This occurred in an alleyway in Mogadishu when we were talking to some people and to this day I have no idea if we were the targets or just in the way of some "clan politics."

So many of the firefights were nothing more than coalition forces being in the wrong place when Aboud decided to take revenge for uncle Abdoul who got whack in return for his killing brother Achmed while avenging fourth cousin Farra.........etc.

They say that life-altering events form some of our most strongly held beliefs and I can vouch for that. Events in Somalia completely reversed my previous belief that there is a way by which everyone can get along peacefully with each other if we just work hard enough at it.

In Somalia to this day you have people with a common ethnicity, speaking the same language, sharing the same religion killing each other because one is in a clan that is at war with another clan.

It gets worse. Take them out of Somalia and unless a member of a clan tells anyone what clan he is in, members of rival clans don't know they are supposed to kill him. This happened in Dallas several years ago when two Somalis had been working together for a while and by all reports got along until one found out the other was a sworn enemy and killed him.

[Shapley]

In Somalia to this day you have people with a common ethnicity, speaking the same language, sharing the same religion killing each other because one is in a clan that is at war with another clan.

It gets worse. Take them out of Somalia and unless a member of a clan tells anyone what clan he is in, members of rival clans don't know they are supposed to kill him. This happened in Dallas several years ago when two Somalis had been working together for a while and by all reports got along until one found out the other was a sworn enemy and killed him.

Would that be the Hatfields and the McCoys?

[Shapley]

In Somalia to this day you have people with a common ethnicity, speaking the same language, sharing the same religion killing each other because one is in a clan that is at war with another clan.

It gets worse. Take them out of Somalia and unless a member of a clan tells anyone what clan he is in, members of rival clans don't know they are supposed to kill him. This happened in Dallas several years ago when two Somalis had been working together for a while and by all reports got along until one found out the other was a sworn enemy and killed him.

Would that be the Hatfields and the McCoys?

"Why did you shoot him?"
"Cuz he's a Hatfield"
"Why are you shooting Hatfields?"
"Cuz we is feudin'"
"Why are you Feuding?"
"Cuz they is Hatfields."
"Why are you feuding with the Hatfields?"
"Cuz we is McCoys."

[Shapley]

Obama Tries To Sound Upbeat On Economy

The Dow's reaction early today indicates he may be having some success. We'll see what kind of economic news comes down the pipe later today, and what the overall effect of it is.

He needs to get past his 'inheritance' view of the economy and take ownership of it. He's in the seat of power now, it's his. He's signed off on more than half the deficit for this fiscal year, he can't keep blaming it on his predecessor, at lost not credibly.

[Shapley]

President Obama's Top Five Broken Promises

Promise #5: Sunlight Before Signing

What he said:

“Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site)

What he did:

Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter bill, the SCHIP/cigarette tax hike, and the stimulus bill all with far less than a five-day waiting period that he promised–and continues to promise–on his campaign Web site.

Promise #4: Lobbyist Revolving Door

What he said:

“No political appointees in an Obama-Biden administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration.” (BarackObama.com campaign Web site)

What he did:

Obama appointed Goldman Sachs lobbyists Mark Patterson chief of staff at the Treasury Department, where he directly oversees his former employer, a recipient of $10 billion of taxpayer funds from the TARP. Obama also appointed Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn to be an undersecretary of Defense.

Promise #3: No Tax Hikes on the Poor

What he said first:

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (September 12, 2008, Dover, N.H.)

What he did first:

By signing H.R. 2 into law, Obama happily signed onto the idea that smokers should pay for a $35 billion expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP). Cigarette taxes are going up 61 cents a pack starting April 1. Obama signed this bill knowing that the majority of smokers in the United States are working poor, and one in four lives below the federal poverty line.

What he said next:

“If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” (February 24th, 2009, Address to a Joint Session of Congress)

What he did next:

Ignored the already-hiked cigarette tax at the time of the statement and then this restated promise was broken just two days later, when the Obama’s budget proposal was released. His new budget raises 45 percent of its revenue from energy taxes that will be paid by everyone who fills a gas tank, pays an electric bill, or buys anything that was grown, shipped, or manufactured.

Promise #2: Pork Barrel Earmark Reform

What he said:

“The system is broken. We can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’ seniority, rather than the merit of the project. We can no longer accept an earmarks process that has become so complicated to navigate that a municipality or non-profit group has to hire high-priced D.C. lobbyists to do it. And we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.”

(Statement on Earmarks, March 10, 2008)

What he is expected to do:

The White House has signaled that it intends to sign the $410 billion Omnibus Appropriations bill, which according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, contains 8,570 earmarks totaling $7.7 billion, including dozens of wasteful pork-barrel projects. These earmarks were awarded based on seniority, not on merit, and were mostly the result of high-priced lobbying, precisely the process that Obama promised to end. When the omnibus reaches his desk later this week or next week, we’ll find out if this is one more broken promise.

Promise #1: Big Government

OK, so this one is more of a statement than a promise, but it’s the biggest whopper of all.

What he said:

“Not because I believe in bigger government — I don’t.” (February 24, 2009, Joint Address to Congress)

What he did:

Obama proposed a budget that is breathtaking in scope, a blueprint for the biggest permanent expansion of government in history right on the heels of a sweeping trillion dollar stimulus plan. The budget lays the foundation for a government takeover of the health care and energy sectors and dramatically increasing spending across the board, other than defense weapons programs. Spending as a percentage of the economy under this budget will reach the historic level of 27.7 percent this year. The deficit as a percent of the economy, at 12.3 percent, is set to be the biggest in the entire history of the country outside of the four peak years of World War II. Anyone who offers such a budget can only fairly be described as a believer in bigger government.

All this within 43 days of becoming President. President Bush I was booted out of office pretty much because he broke one promise (read my lips: no new taxes), and that only after shutting down the government in a fight with Congress in effort to ahdere to it. President Clinton repealed that tax, retroactively, shortly after being sworn in as his replacement.