Leauki

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="16" id="2955832"] I think they are wrong (and evil, but that is another discussion), but it is not my right to restrict them from doing it. I disapprove, but I cannot control. That is why mandatory is too strong a term (IMHO).[/quote] The US are supposed to be a secular state. That means that either no religion should have any influence on politics based on it being a religion or all religions should be accomodated as well as they can be. If abortion

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="16" id="2955832"]It may be a MANDATORY tenet in the Jewish religion, but that does not make it mandatory for anyone really.[/quote] Who said it would? [quote] People are constantly violating their faith's tenets (it is called sin). So while that is your faith, I object to you imposing your will even on another member of your faith. [/quote] When did I do that?

Reply to Obama: Lets See the Certificate in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote who="lulapilgrim" reply="85" id="2957664"]Is "Unnatural Selection" closed for comment? [/quote] Not by me, it isn't. I'll check.

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="lulapilgrim" reply="13" id="2955315"]But the tragic reality of it is, children are being aborted for arbitrary reasons. It's called "Choice" and it's really "abortion on demand", an individual or state solution to an unwanted problem.[/quote] I totally agree with the assessment. Legal abortion allow for abortion for arbitrary reasons. Abortion should not be legal. It should be regulated. This just reminds me of the San Francisco circumcision discuss

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="12" id="2955297"]I did not see that in the article, but I will disagree with you there. I think the decision is the mother's and father's (with the tie breaker going to the mother). Mandatory is just too strong a word there.[/quote] "Mandatory" is the correct term. The mother and father use their own beliefs to make the decision and Jewish ethics make it mandatory to abort to save the life of the mother. It's not subject for discussion.</

Reply to How Did Bush Ruin the Economy Again? in Politics Stardock Forums

I think many people believe that the President makes the laws. German media are currently angry at the Republicans in congress because they violate the fuhrer-principle: they doubt the president.

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="lulapilgrim" reply="4" id="2954316"]So there it is. Ms. H wants only to curb the "abuse" of "Choice" without infringing on a woman's right to have an abortion.!!!! This is absurd. As if something like this would work when laws against the termination of pregnancy on the basis of sex are already in place but are being flouted. There is no genuine willingness from politicians to address this.[/quote] I don't think that position is absurd. Even if a

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="lulapilgrim" reply="3" id="2954083"]Sex abortion, "gendercide" is something everyone should know about, so thank you for coming back and posting an article that packs such a powerful message. [/quote] That's what I thought. I also thought somebody should direct attention towards it because, frankly, I have found that that subject is usually forgotten when abortion is discussed. This is an issue that makes abortion problematic regardless of what one'

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="2" id="2954071"]But I would like to ask what parts you disagree with.[/quote] I disagree with the proposal that abortion of a child with a genetic disorder (like Down syndrome) is the same as abortion of a child because she is a girl or the wrong star sign. (Of course I don't even believe in the latter being a notable difference at all.) I can understand a woman who aborts a child because of a genetic disorder. She does it because she feels she c

Reply to Obama: Lets See the Certificate in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote who="lulapilgrim" reply="79" id="2954370"] http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx How can this particular name of the hospital be on Obama's birth certificate dated 1961, if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978? [/quote] The article you link to says it was called "Kapi‘olani Maternity Home" before 1978 and "Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children" after

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

My last few replies were "submitting" forever...

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

Great!

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

Does JU finally let me post with Firefox?

Reply to Unnatural Selection in Current Events Stardock Forums

I'm back.

Unnatural Selection in Current Events JoeUser Forums

Despite the author's intentions, "Unnatural Selection" might be one of the most consequential books ever written in the campaign against abortion. It is aimed, like a heat-seeking missile, against the entire intellectual framework of "choice." For if "choice" is the moral imperative guiding abortion, then there is no way to take a stand against "gendercide." Aborting a baby because she is a girl is no different from aborting a baby because she has Down syndrome or because the

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

Also note that I don't know if the UN map is correct. The Arabs have more votes in the UN than the Jews and it shows. I assume the division into "Zionist" and "Palestinian" rather than "Jew" and "Arab" is part of the game. I just think that the facts the UN used are probably correct, which means that the map is correct regarding the information it gives us (how much land was owned by Zionist organisations) but it doesn't tell us how much of the "Palestinian" land is owned by A

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

Note that there were Jewish population centres other than Jerusalem. Safed was a major Jewish town and so was Tiberias.

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

I see you are also too dumb to know that drawings can represent things. That Hizbullah usehuman shields and fire from civilian areas is well-known. Anyway, I found a map of land ownership in Israel in 1945, prepared by the UN. And it mentions public lands: It has a more useful differentiation between "Zionist" and

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote who="myfist0" reply="58" id="2944737"] Quoting Leauki, reply 56Consider Druze politicians in Israel. They generally do not want to be "Palestinians". And most Druze politicians are more Zionist than most Zionist Jews. Where do you find this dribble? Maybe you can take all these propaganda lies back to those 5th graders you used for intelligence. Kadima's Deputy Foreign Minister Majali Whbee, a Druze, told the Hebrew-language Ha'aretz

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="51" id="2944436"] Quoting Leauki, reply 21Heck, 4000 square miles of mostly uninhabited desert is claimed as "Palestinian land" by the map. What exactly makes uninhabited land "Palestinian"? Maybe such land is "Jewish"? Who knows? Or native American since that is all we gave them when we conquered them. Actually, I thought (having heard, not having done any research on it), that the arid land was thrown in as a bone to the Jewish state since th

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] HERE IS YOUR WIKIPEDIA MAP. This is 4 years old now. Wonder what would look like now. [/quote] That map shows sovereignty according to the 1994 peace treaty. It hasn't changed since 2004. Incidentally, the majority of Arabs (or "Palestinians") in Jerusalem consistently poll to want to continue to live under Israeli sovereignty. A majority of them even say they would move if Jerusalem was annexed by an Arab state to remain residents of Isra

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] Show me your sources, links, pictures or books I can find at the library. I don't just babel mindless facts without showing where I got the information except for that map for which I have apologized and twice I asked YOU TO SUPPLY a better one. Comics don't count. [/quote] Comics? Anyway, what do you want sources for? The Jewish National Fund has a Web site. I don't think anybody has ever made a map that correctly s

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

I wonder if there is a single violation of "international law" Israel has committed that was not based on a decision by Israel's opponents at the UN after the fact. The UN didn't consider people moving into occupied territory a crime before Israel did it, despite the fact that many, many countries did it (and are still doing it). The UN also didn't consider it a crime when Vietnam did it. Only when Israel does it is it a crime. Odd, that. Must be pure coincidence.

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote] Thanks for telling me to check the sources, maybe you should do the same. [/quote] Did you check the sources? You did quote somebody's views as facts. Wikipedia doesn't say that Israeli settlements constitute a breach of the Geneva Convention, Wikipedia quoted somebody else saying that. Of course, it has never before been a violation of the Geneva Convention when people moved into occupied territory. It happened when the US occupied

Reply to Contiguous Bugged Me As Well in Politics JoeUser Forums

Heck, 4000 square miles of mostly uninhabited desert is claimed as "Palestinian land" by the map. What exactly makes uninhabited land "Palestinian"? Maybe such land is "Jewish"? Who knows?