So I would call you Juan 2 3 Or Number Juan On Mar 14, 2016 1:40 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> wrote:
> But there should be a big gap between “what I believe” and “what the > government should enforce on everyone else”. There are many things other > people do that I don’t like, but would not want the government to restrict. > > I remember how strange it seemed when as a kid my family moved to a Latin > American (and officially Catholic) country that my middle name had to be > changed to Juan because it was the law that all children had to have one > name from the Bible. Very minor example, but as an American, it seemed so > strange that there was an official state religion enforced by law. Thank > goodness they didn’t believe in stoning heretics to death, or enslaving > women for sex. > > I am also confused at how some people strongly hold beliefs that seem > incompatible. Like all life is sacred, but pro death penalty, pro war. > Or limited government, libertarian, keep the government out of my life, but > the government should definitely crack down on my neighbor who is doing > something I disapprove of but doesn’t really impinge on my rights. How can > black-or-white no-shades-of-grey people apparently pick and choose between > black and white as it suits them, and not see any logical contradiction? > > This is how we get fiascos like the Terry Schiavo thing. It is > unfortunate that her parents, and her husband who was the legal guardian, > could not agree. But it became a very unseemly feeding frenzy for > politicians. Even if I had very strong personally held beliefs about the > matter, I don’t see how my beliefs should have been imposed on them, > especially by the government. It’s bad enough when you have to make > decisions like that for yourself or loved ones. If we’re going to start > making those decisions for others and using the government to enforce them, > it had better be very, very clearcut that it’s something that we want the > government involved in. If it’s not so clear, then keep the government the > hell out of our lives. Even if our neighbors might be doing stuff that we > disapprove of. > > > *From:* Bruce Robertson <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Monday, March 14, 2016 2:01 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan > > *I would give a woman a mulligan for the first few weeks. * > > To clarify my previous post, me too. I am NOT in the camp that thinks > abortion is okay at any time during the term of the pregnancy. > > On 03/14/2016 11:59 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I am not in that category. I doubt most Catholics are either if you get > them to level with you. > Contraception is 100% OK with me. > I don't think a Catholic business should be forced to provide them to > their employees. > > But again, when rules/dogma come from the wizened masters that claim to > hear God, we forget that sometimes he mumbles and sometimes the wizened > masters make up what they don't actually hear. Centuries of the agendas > and power plays of man have flavored religions. > > And if you truly want to get to minutia, I believe that life begins at the > time of quickening. When the spirit enters the body. Sometime after > conception. Some time before birth. I would give a woman a mulligan for > the first few weeks. > > -----Original Message----- From: Ken Hohhof > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 12:52 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan > > I don't believe many people are actually pro-abortion. And I don't think > Josh characterized it is a "handy solution". > > What I fail to understand is people who don't want others to have access > to > birth control, like condoms or birth control pills or even "morning after" > pills. You may believe life begins at conception and apply that in your > own > life. But if you don't want others to have abortions, the most effective > way to that goal is to accept that others might use contraception or > family > planning methods that are not 100% per your religious beliefs. > > I put the abstinence-only people in this same category. That is not a > realistic approach, if your goal is really to reduce the number of > abortions. It sounds a lot more like if you're going to have sex, you > deserve to get pregnant, you slut > > > -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 1:34 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fw: Paul Ryan > > 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 mailto:[email protected] > <[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 mailto:[email protected] > <[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" mailto:[email protected] > <[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" mailto:[email protected] > <[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" > mailto:[email protected] <[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" > mailto:[email protected] <[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" mailto:[email protected] > <[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:2,56e70a1e256421332619011! > > > >
