So you're blaming Spy Car? :auto: :D:lol::D

This is a point that also perplexes me about politics. On the one hand we want political candidates to take strong stands on issues. Yet at the same time, they are public servants. They are there to represent "the people". If a politician changes his voting choices over the years he is criticized for being wishy-washy. But as a public servant, is that not precisely his responsibility? To represent the desires of the majority of his supporters? Wouldn't that possibly change over the years? I don't know if there is currently an official legal definition for when human rights begin, but if there is, then what was the purpose of the question posed to Obama? It wouldn't be a matter of opinion, it would be a factual answer. If there currently is no formal legal definition for when human rights begin I would think there should be, but I would also think that it is not solely the president's job to define that.

I'm right there with ya, Kelli. Like I said in my first post in this thread, that's where I struggle the most about politics. Almost everything that we average Americans hear is filtered through some sort of bias. How do you know who to believe when two opposing reports sound equally valid? There's SO MUCH information out there, how do we wade through it all to try to find nuggets of truth?

No, I wasn't saying that there is no way to legally define when human beings are considered alive with the expectation of rights. I would assume that has already been defined in some manner, although the definition is most likely debated. The person I was replying to seemed to have read the question as asking Obama when life begins. I was just pointing out the difference between the two questions.

So you would support a law requiring every woman to register her baby for a social security card 21 days after conception? You would support women who miscarry at 9 weeks pregnant having to apply and file a death certificate? You would support somehow paying for all the additional employees that would be required to handle the vast paperwork this would entail? Should we then require investigations of all women who have a miscarriage to make sure they didn't do anything to cause the death of the baby? These are the legal issues that come up with defining exactly when a baby has legal rights.

That wasn't the question. The question was when does a baby get the rights, by law, that are entitled to American citizens. This is a legal question that would have a huge impact on the execution of the Constitution in our country. I'm sure Obama has his own opinion of when life begins, but that was not the question that was asked.

If indeed Obama is accurate in what he said about the unnecessary inclusions in this bill, it makes me start to wonder why other pro-choice candidates voted for it. Is it perhaps that they knew exactly how it would "look" when presented to the general public by the media? Is it possible Obama was one of the few who voted on the actual bill, not just on what he thought would best help his presidential candidacy?

I would venture to guess that he understands what he votes on far more than any of us on this board understand it. Especially if terms like "Some have argued" are convincing enough for one to reach a conclusion. That's one of the biggest reasons I have a hard time getting into politics. I am unwilling to deceive myself into believing that I've made an informed decision by simply watching a youtube video. Things are spun by both sides in their own favor. I would not feel confident forming an opinion on why he voted how he did on this matter unless I had read the proposal myself. And I find it hard to understand why so many people are quick to jump on bandwagons (on either side - I'm not pointing fingers at any particular person) without fully researching the background and the facts. All the facts. Not just the ones presented by one party. I guess it's because, like me, most people feel it's an overwhelmingly impossible task to investigate every politician that thoroughly, every bill that thoroughly. So I sit in ignorance. But at least I'm aware of it.

Apples and Pears has made a HUGE difference here! :iagree:

I'm sure there probably are people like that. I'm not so sure why someone like that would spend time on this board. Well, this has been said already, but I want to add to the chorus because I think it's a vast misrepresentation to imply that non-Christians want the CC label because they would be offended. I don't care one way or the other if a post has CC on it. But I certainly do appreciate people who choose thoughtful titles for their threads that give a good indication of what that thread is about. This board has so many posts each day that I often have to pick and choose what I'm going to spend time reading. So the more descriptive the title, the better. If "CC" helps people say in two letters what it would otherwise take a sentence to say, more power to them! There has been previous discussion about having other labels, particularly AC. There are some here who want to start using that specifically so that a thread can be composed that starts from a particular viewpoint. It may be about a particular aspect of evolution. The AC label will basically let people know that the thread isn't there to debate evolution, but to gather information about specific aspects from others who already accept evolution as a fact. Does that "exclude" some people? Possibly. But no more than threads about Rod and Staff "exclude" me. I don't use it. So I skip it. It's not a thread that pertains to me. I totally agree that in general people are too easily offended these days. I do hope that you now understand that it does not exist to force Christians to "walk carefully on tiptoes with a hushed voice." It's not about non-Christians being offended. It's about letting people know what your post is about, which is, after all, the whole purpose of the thread title.

Nah, just comfortable enough to laugh at that being done to an onion. :leaving:

Whew. I'm glad you had already said this, because I'm not sure I would have had the nerve. But that's pretty much what I was thinking. I would be surprised to see this in an American Airport, but I would still LMAO. :lol:

I don't know. From what I hear, he's a little bit rock 'n roll.

I drool over that office furniture every time the catalog comes. I LOVE it! Very jealous here. :glare: But happy for you! :grouphug:

Oh, I'm absolutely serious! It worked. I was 4 days overdue and my dh fixed that for me and the next morning I went into labor! Sorry! :blush:

Have you tried the Philips Phile Surefire Birth Recipe? It worked for me, no kidding!

My dd11 started a blog last year, and she would post on it daily as part of her "journal" time. She hasn't really kept up with it over the summer, but will probably get back to it next week. She's a techie kid, so she really enjoys it, and has learned a few things about html in the process.

I love almost every product of theirs that I have tried. I don't buy it anymore because I simply can't afford it. But I live in a dry area, and I can tell a HUGE difference when I use their products. Wish I still could!

My 11dd's current Top 5 are Rihanna, Chris Brown, Michael Jackson, Maroon 5, Metro Station.

In addition to just listing the pros and cons, I also rate them with pluses and minuses. So even though one choice may only have one con, if it's a doozy, it gets more minus signs. (Is this making sense?) Like a really bad con would have three minus signs. A normal con would only have one. A really great pro will have 3 or 4 plus signs. Then I add it all up and see which choice has the highest score. I hate being on the fence with decisions. I usually just wait until one is really obvious. But when you have a time limit that you have to decide by, ugh, that's really tough. Good luck with your decision! Just make it knowing that whichever you choose, you will make the best of that situation. :grouphug:

I had them often as a kid. The magic remedy for me was Ace bandages wrapped around the area.

But make it very cryptic. So that lots of people say they don't understand. That gets it bumped to the top regularly. :tongue_smilie:

Oh, my dear, sweet, innocent Heather. You JUST noticed it? Like, for the first time? That's astounding. :grouphug: I think you should blog about it.

You say that like it's a bad thing? :confused:

Didn't want to disappoint!