Not all religions ... but some do. Slowly.
From: Bill Prince
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 1:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan
That's the beauty of science. It's willing to change its mind when presented
new data. Religion can't do that.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 3/14/2016 11:54 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Funny, my religion only believes in one single thing:
“The Truth”
Science is constantly changing. Now you are supposed to feed your little
babies peanuts, eggs, cows milk etc.
Now we discover we were actually harming our kids by doing so. Science.
True until it isn’t.
But I do believe science and religion are just opposing sides of the same
elephant.
Some claim better eyesight.
From: Jeremy
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 12:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan
Science is true whether or not you believe in it.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:34 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
I used to believe like you. During my teen years, having lots of fun with
the opposite sex, I figured abortion was a handy solution to a problem if it
cropped up.
Then I got married. My wife got pregnant. We went to the first ultrasound.
I saw my daughter as the miniature human she was. Stretching her arms and
sucking her tumb. All as 16 week.
Then I saw the light...
-----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 12:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan
Sorry CORRECTION, **birth** not conception.
I'm feeling groggy from the time shift, and have not had enough coffee.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote:
Upon natural or medically induced conception. Until then it is an
organism that receives sustenance from the mother's body, thus is part
of the mother - and her decision. You don't have to agree with me, and
that's fine, but you shouldn't force legislation preventing people
from making decisions about their bodies and their children. That's
for them to decide, and they have to live with the choices they make.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Cameron Crum <[email protected]> wrote:
So at what age should state sanctioned murder be stopped, or is all
just up
to the individual and their "belief"?
On Mar 14, 2016 1:13 PM, "Bruce Robertson" <[email protected]> wrote:
No, I want to go back to persecution. It is persecution because you
would
be trying to carry out the wishes of the boss as you understand them.
Not
necessarily as I see those wishes. Therefore by supporting
legislation that
affects the population as a whole, you are imposing your beliefs upon
me,
against my will. I may have the equally valid belief that the boss
upstairs
wants us all to accept guidance, but ultimately make decisions for
ourselves
(and of course take responsibility for those decisions). Someone
with such
beliefs would only support legislation that would make decisions such
as
birth control, abortion, etc. completely up to each individual, her
conscience, and her relationship with the boss.
~sigh~ I swore I would never get involved in a political or religious
discussion. My apologies.
On 03/13/2016 09:53 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Nevermind the persecution thing, I didn’t fully read your post
properly.
From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 10:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
If I have a strong feeling that the guy in the sky that created all
of us
hates the murder of babies, yes I will try to stop that via
legislation.
How is that persecution? Just trying to carry out the wishes of the
boss.
He has promised me a pretty nice apartment if I give it a good try.
Persecution?
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 10:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
So you wish to force your religious beliefs on others via
legislation, in
a country created to escape persecution from religion?
On Mar 13, 2016 11:38 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote:
Here is why a churches need to be involved with reproductive care,
contraception, or abortion.
If you believe there is a God, Creator, Savior etc.
>Then if you believe that entity cares about these things (listed
>above).
>>Then if you believe that the mind of that entity has communicated
its
>> wishes with man.
>>>Then if you believe that those wishes are contained in doctrine
of
>>> churches or bodies of scripture.
>>>>Then the church and its doctrine trumps all laws of man.
The church needs to be involved in all facets of life. If you
believe
the above.
You can claim to be agnostic or atheistic but a smart person should
hedge
their bets against actually not knowing that they are totally right
about
that. Could be that every time you eat spaghetti you are
committing a
mortal sin. Could be.
For me and mine, I will take my particular flavor of Christianity
and do
my thing, while you do your thing.
But if I have an opportunity to legislate away things I consider
mortal
sins, I will try.
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 6:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
Why does any church need to be involved with reproductive care,
contraception, or abortion?
Those are medical issues.
On Mar 13, 2016 6:48 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller"
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Actually, my belief is here in the deep south we have a church on
every
corner. Let the churches handle it....they are more than capable.
My tax dollars aren't needed for this. (or many other things)
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Hohhof
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
What many people who lose sleep over Planned Parenthood are
actually
upset about is they offer birth control. Some people obsess
about poor
people having sex without the punishment of getting pregnant.
See this if
you forgot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh%E2%80%93Sandra_Fluke_controversy
I don’t understand how you can be extremely anti-abortion yet also
extremely anti-contraception. Less unwanted pregnancies = less
abortions.
Which is the lesser evil?
I think it comes down to some people are obsessed with sex,
especially
“other” people having sex. #nosyneighbors #getalife
From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 5:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
Did you research that video? You should. It's not what you think.
On Mar 13, 2016 5:41 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller"
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Yah, i'm kind of like Chuck here.
I don't care about gay marriage. I'm not gay, I know a handful
of gay
people. Not my cup of tea but the government doesn't have any
right telling
them what they can or can't do.
Same with adoption for a gay couple - shut up gov'mt. Now,
I'm not so
sure on that. When I was growing up there were few gay couples
who had
"come out" and we thought if the girl had a different last name
than her
mommy we thought that was odd. Quite a bit different now but
it could still
screw with a kids head in terms of "traditional marriage".
It would be hard to NOT state that traditional marriage has
gone to
hell in this country. But then again, so many "traditional"
things have
gone to hell. How many women stay at home and take care of the
family while
dad goes to work?
I am in favor of defunding planned parenthood. The videos
pretty much
got to me. It's MY TAX DOLLARS. Defund it. There are plenty
of other
non-government-funded entities who can do that work.
Any tax is bad :)
I'm going to stop there, i will get in trouble... lol
----- Original Message -----
From: Josh Reynolds
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
His stances:
Gay marriage is wrong
He doesn't support adoption for a gay couple
Defund planned parenthood
Raising corporate tax is bad
Voted yes for more sentencing and prosecution for juveniles.
Wants to drill in ANWR
Voted no on tax credits for renewable energy.
Voted no on 4 weeks paid parental leave for federal employees.
Votes for PATRIOT act over and over
Voted to allow warantless electronic surveillance against us
citizens
Denied additional funding that would provide expanded child
healthcare
"Let's build a fence!"
Voted NO on reporting / deporting illegal immigrants who
received
hospital treatment
Etc. A few things I like him on, but mostly he's a "nope" for
me.
On Mar 13, 2016 4:46 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey, I said I liked him. Just not full on man crush.
I didn’t see how his math added up for the budgets he
proposed. There
were some missing pages where magic happened to balance the
budget. Seemed
like the same old voodoo economics.
So “man crush”, is that like Trump and Putin? At least Putin
is
supposedly an 8th degree black belt. He would probably take
care of the
protester himself. If Trump thinks he can bully the Putins
of the world,
I’m not so sure. I think McCain could take him in a fair
fight. Hell,
Bernie could probably take him. I was never fond of Nixon,
but the photo of
the “kitchen debate” with Khrushchev is a treasure.
http://spectator.org/articles/41740/how-handle-bully-nixon-vs-khrushchev
From: CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 4:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan
I have actually followed Paul Ryan since the first time he
appeared on
the national stage. Very impressed with him. Could almost
call him my "man
crush". I'd be interested in hearing what you do not like
about him Ken.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Hohhof
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Donald Trump's Supporters Love Him
Even More
AfterChicago Violence
I think the "establishment" is missing why people are fed up
with
them, I'm
not convinced it's about left or right. If I had to single
out one
person
as the poster boy for why the establishment has failed us, it
would be
Mitch
McConnell. All 4 leaders in Congress have only been worried
about
their own
power and re-election, but McConnell is the worst of a bad
bunch.
I don't agree with Paul Ryan's economics or some of his
politics, but
I like
what he has said since being elected Speaker. I would like
to see if
they
are just words, or if he would translate them into actions.
I don't
think
we will get to find out, election politics seem to have
rendered him
irrelevant. And Mitch the Turtle would have to be replaced
with
someone
actually interested in governing. I wonder what conservative
goals
could
have been accomplished in the 7 years Mitch has spent trying
to make
Obama
fail no matter how much damage it causes. Tort reform?
Modifications
to
Obamacare? Fix sequestration? Tax reform? Immigration
reform?
Mitch
doesn't care. Mitch cares about Mitch. That's the problem
with the
establishment, they spend all their effort on getting elected
and
staying in
power, they don't even pretend to do their job. And let me
be clear,
I'm
not saying Pelosi, Reid and Boehner were much better, it's
just
McConnell is
the most blatant hack of the bunch, every time I see him on
TV I feel
he is
giving me the finger.
I am probably fooling myself that Paul Ryan would be
different, but I
don't
think we'll find out.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Prince
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 1:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Donald Trump's Supporters Love Him
Even More
After
Chicago Violence
IMO, Obama moved right, and the Republicans moved further to
the
right.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 3/13/2016 6:01 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote:
> Obama moved right as much as the Republicans moved left. >
Everybody's
> idea
> of compromise these days is you come to where I am and I'll
make a
> deal.
!DSPAM:2,56e643e613941725215664!
