# Things are heating up in the world #11



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> That may very well be. But she is one that is right! Abortion is MURDER.


and dead black men are thugs. What other "truths" do you have for us?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But in EVERY abortion someone is MURDERED. That is a FACT!


Only in your mind - in other words, it's not a fact. Not only do many scientists not regard a fetus in its early stages to be a person, but some religions see things the same way. Please stop trying to force your religion on the rest of us.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The whole purpose of an abortion is to kill the baby. And you say that is only an opinion.
> 
> Is the baby alive or dead? I bet you will not answer.
> 
> And it is a baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The purpose of an abortion is to terminate a pregnancy. The fact that a potential baby is not given the chance to evolve into a real baby is unfortunate, but that is NOT the intention. Would you be willing to carry the fetus of a woman who can't do it herself? I bet that could be arranged.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Kennedy has been talking about thimerisol for years. What I find more convincing is that Japan got rid of it for 8 years, and the incidence of autism continued to rise.


Of course it did.

Autism is not caused by vaccines end of story. There is no research which suggests a correlation (at any level) between autism and vaccines. Sheesh!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I certainly am aware of the gross amount of police brutality but two wrongs do not make a right. I loved that mom who found her kid throwing rocks and grabbed him and beat the hell out of him. She is now on all the shows. She is one shining star in this whole mess.


It's a wonder than no one has cried 'abuse' about this mom yet! I think she's great. I love the term 'woop upside of the head.'


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Oh for goodness sake you are way off argument here and your comments are totally unnecessary. Please get off your favourite hobby horse and take it home. If you wish to join in the discussion, or argument, please endeavour to say on the topic under discussion. Your intention is plainly obvious to others, you only made that comment in order to pour oil on the fires. Enough is enough, that argument you are trying to resurrect has been flogged several times. :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


 :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The Thug, Freddie Gray, had spinal and neck surgery about a week before he was arrested. He should have been home recovering from the surgery not selling drugs. He had a settlement from an insurance company because of a car accident. Maybe if he would not have resisted the police, things would have turned out different. If the surgery had not healed completely, it may be a contributing factor in his death.
> 
> FYI: as long as you complain about a poor thug that may be killed by the police, if he/she is committing a crime or resisting arrest, I will remind you of the millions and millions of BABIES that are murdered just for being inconvenient.


You should research more thoroughly. It's unlikely that the 4th estate blog is correct:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/04/29/rumor-check-did-freddie-gray-have-spinal-surgery-shortly-before-he-died-in-police-custody/


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Did anyone see Cruz speaking about the Riots about 5 minutes ago on CNN? He said President Obama has once again failed miserably with dealing with the Baltimore situation. What a creep.
> been responsible for the riots or words to that effect. I don't want to quote him but one of the guests on CNN was in the group discussing. She went to Harvard and implied she was not proud that he was a fellow Harvard graduate. I am hoping it will be mentioned again so that I can quote his words. CNN - Don Lemon is the host. Post if any of you see it.
> 
> The things he said were ridiculous. All the panel was laughing at him.


Yeah, and President Obama is responsible for the earthquake in Nepal. Beggars belief.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> But in EVERY abortion someone is MURDERED. That is a FACT!


Call it what you want. It's legal and available to women who so choose. Deal with it.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yeah, and President Obama is responsible for the earthquake in Nepal. Beggars belief.


I still cannot find my second set of car and house keys and I am sure that is also President Obama's fault.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I still cannot find my second set of car and house keys and I am sure that is also President Obama's fault.


Yeah? Well, It was 90° for the second day in a row today where I live, and Obama is definitely responsible for that. The drought, too, for that matter....


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I stand corrected - I was thinking of those of us on this thread who are liberals and believe in women's choice. I forgot that you are not a liberal. I should have remembered.
> 
> -----------
> how is DIL doing? another week gone by.


Dil is doing well. She's had a few contractions, but nothing serious. 29 weeks today. Thanks for asking.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> But you ARE in the minority.


Only on this thread. Women in the US are pretty evenly split on the subject. Besides, I don't mind being in the minority.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> You forgot to mention this is your opinion....not everyone's.


I'm sorry, but nothing I said was subject to opinion. If it had been, I'd have said "IMO". It is FACT that 100% of us do NOT agree that abortion is " a woman's body and her choice". It is also a FACT that abortion takes the life of a living human being. It is also a FACT that abortion is a violent murder of an innocent baby. What else could you call it, when a baby is ripped from limb to limb, before being sucked out of its mother's body? Or burned alive? Few murders could be described as being as violent as the murder of an innocent baby, through abortion. And that's a FACT.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> NEB knew what I meant. She likes to take us on.
> 
> Well ladies, I am heading to bed with my book. I am a bit weary. Spent the morning at the Craft group at the seniors center, then went for groceries and visited with our son so I am wiped. The time at home was spent watching the news. Worrisome. see you all tomorrow.
> 
> ...


Yes, I knew what you meant. But those of us in the minority (on this thread), need to stand up and be heard.

I hope you slept well and aren't overdoing it. Take care!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Minority of one, I believe. Although there might be others.Whatever - we are certainly the majority. She loves to take us on.


It's wonderful to live in a country where a minority of one, is free to speak out. I shall continue to do so.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> The purpose of an abortion is to terminate a pregnancy. The fact that a potential baby is not given the chance to evolve into a real baby is unfortunate, but that is NOT the intention. Would you be willing to carry the fetus of a woman who can't do it herself? I bet that could be arranged.


The term "potential baby" is ridiculous. By the time a woman finds out she's pregnant, her baby already has a heartbeat and a brain. It is alive! It exists! The fact that it's dependent upon its mother for life, doesn't make it a "potential baby". If this were so, any infant could be called a potential baby, as they are all dependent upon their mothers for life. A lot of adults are also dependent upon others as well. That doesn't make them potential adults. Quality of life can be quantified, but not life itself. It either exists, or it doesn't.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And my allergies? President Obama. Dust bunnies? The same.



sumpleby said:


> Yeah? Well, It was 90° for the second day in a row today where I live, and Obama is definitely responsible for that. The drought, too, for that matter....


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Of course it did.
> 
> Autism is not caused by vaccines end of story. There is no research which suggests a correlation (at any level) between autism and vaccines. Sheesh!


Believe the lie if you choose to. The United States government has ruled that SOME children HAVE gotten Autism from vaccines. The families of those children were awarded damages, to be paid by taxpayers, NOT the corporations who profit. There IS research that suggests a correlation between Autism and vaccines. It automatically gets buried or discredited by those who receive money from those corporations. Very little research is conducted because the researchers will be destroyed professionally and financially.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I'm sorry, but nothing I said was subject to opinion. If it had been, I'd have said "IMO". It is FACT that 100% of us do NOT agree that abortion is " a woman's body and her choice". It is also a FACT that abortion takes the life of a living human being. It is also a FACT that abortion is a violent murder of an innocent baby. What else could you call it, when a baby is ripped from limb to limb, before being sucked out of its mother's body? Or burned alive? Few murders could be described as being as violent as the murder of an innocent baby, through abortion. And that's a FACT.


You are basing all your horror stories on late-term abortions; which anti-choice people are doing their best to make common. As it is, most abortions are performed early on, in the embryonic state. The Guttmacher Institute reports that 89% of abortions are performed within the first 12 weeks. By outlawing and restricting abortion providers, the very people who scream about such "violence" are making it more likely.

Women will have abortions whether you like it or not and whether it is legal or not. You, and people like you, are actually making it more gruesome.

Only 1.2% of abortions could be characterized as you describe. A major cause for delaying the procedure? Roadblocks set in place by anti-choice crusaders, by the scarcity of clinics and the additional expense due to regulations promoted by anti-choice zealots.

YOU AND OTHERS LIKE YOU SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT YOU DESCRIBE.

AND THAT'S A FACT.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you for the factual report. I will read no other kind.



DGreen said:


> You are basing all your horror stories on late-term abortions; which anti-choice people are doing their best to make common. As it is, most abortions are performed early on, in the embryonic state. The Guttmacher Institute reports that 89% of abortions are performed within the first 12 weeks. By outlawing and restricting abortion providers, the very people who scream about such "violence" are making it more likely.
> 
> Women will have abortions whether you like it or not and whether it is legal or not. You, and people like you, are actually making it more gruesome.
> 
> ...


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

damemary said:


> Thank you for the factual report. I will read no other kind.


Thanks, Dame. I completely understand the objection to abortion and respect the right of any woman to actually continue an unwanted pregnancy to term. Good for them.

However, there is a PREDICTABLE outcome of the legislation being passed to restrict abortion and the zealots who demand it need to take a look at those outcomes and accept responsibility for their part in making matters worse. We need to hold them accountable and call them out for their superior attitudes and fantasy of perfect virtue.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> After every abortion there is an embryo, fetus, or baby (or potential baby) DEAD. That is a fact! If the embryo, fetus or baby did not commit suicide, someone murdered it.


If it never lived, in the sense of being an independently breathing being, then it could not have been "murdered." Or even just killed. (The word "murder" seems to get your juices flowing, but it's not applicable.) There is death that is not caused by killing.

After every message from you, there is a trail of brain cells DEAD. And you're the one who killed them. You never have anything new to say, certainly nothing convincing. And you're incapable of understanding anyone else's reasoning. Until you have something new to say on the subject, please don't say anything at all.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The term "potential baby" is ridiculous. By the time a woman finds out she's pregnant, her baby already has a heartbeat and a brain. It is alive! It exists! The fact that it's dependent upon its mother for life, doesn't make it a "potential baby". If this were so, any infant could be called a potential baby, as they are all dependent upon their mothers for life. A lot of adults are also dependent upon others as well. That doesn't make them potential adults. Quality of life can be quantified, but not life itself. It either exists, or it doesn't.


1. Why is the morning-after pill considered by the anti-choice crowd to be an abortifacient? Or the other birth control measures that Hobby Lobby won't afford its employees?

Oh, never mind. I'm not going through this step by step. Some religions choose to save the life of the mother over that of the baby, if it comes to that, but yours doesn't. Abortion is not killing, according to some faiths, unless the victim has drawn breath on its own; you may disagree but have no more right to force your law on me than I have to force mine on you.

Abortion in this country is legal, within certain limits, and I'm sure you would like to see it made illegal. But if you work toward that, then you also should be trying to get passed a law that would make it *mandatory* for a parent to donate organs to his/her child who is ailing. Surely a living, breathing, sentient child deserves the same treatment as one who has not been born.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> If it never lived, in the sense of being an independently breathing being, then it could not have been "murdered." Or even just killed. (The word "murder" seems to get your juices flowing, but it's not applicable.) There is death that is not caused by killing.
> 
> After every message from you, there is a trail of brain cells DEAD. And you're the one who killed them. You never have anything new to say, certainly nothing convincing. And you're incapable of understanding anyone else's reasoning. Until you have something new to say on the subject, please don't say anything at all.


Seems fair to me that we need to go troll D&P and those of us who don't believe in god need to challenge THEIR constant bible thumping, praying and praising god for the evil THAT represents. After all, Joey comes here and never contributes anything but attacks.

Fair is fair.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Of course it did.
> 
> Autism is not caused by vaccines end of story. There is no research which suggests a correlation (at any level) between autism and vaccines. Sheesh!


Are you certain that's true? There may have been studies that you're unaware of. But, at least in this country, you can insist that your own child's vaccines not contain substances you believe are harmful and even that they be given on a slower schedule.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> You should research more thoroughly. It's unlikely that the 4th estate blog is correct:
> 
> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/04/29/rumor-check-did-freddie-gray-have-spinal-surgery-shortly-before-he-died-in-police-custody/


Isn't The Blaze a right-wing organization? Good on them for searching out the truth.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yeah, and President Obama is responsible for the earthquake in Nepal. Beggars belief.


In the 90s, there was a period of serious flooding on and along the Mississippi River. Someone I knew (on line) insisted that Bill Clinton had arranged for that to happen.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Yeah? Well, It was 90° for the second day in a row today where I live, and Obama is definitely responsible for that. The drought, too, for that matter....


Wrong. It's Michele Obama's fault. She's saving the water for her exercise followers, who need it more than the rest of us.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> If it never lived, in the sense of being an independently breathing being, then it could not have been "murdered." Or even just killed. (The word "murder" seems to get your juices flowing, but it's not applicable.) There is death that is not caused by killing.
> 
> After every message from you, there is a trail of brain cells DEAD. And you're the one who killed them. You never have anything new to say, certainly nothing convincing. And you're incapable of understanding anyone else's reasoning. Until you have something new to say on the subject, please don't say anything at all.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: So wise. Thank you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> 1. Why is the morning-after pill considered by the anti-choice crowd to be an abortifacient? Or the other birth control measures that Hobby Lobby won't afford its employees?
> 
> Oh, never mind. I'm not going through this step by step. Some religions choose to save the life of the mother over that of the baby, if it comes to that, but yours doesn't. Abortion is not killing, according to some faiths, unless the victim has drawn breath on its own; you may disagree but have no more right to force your law on me than I have to force mine on you.
> 
> Abortion in this country is legal, within certain limits, and I'm sure you would like to see it made illegal. But if you work toward that, then you also should be trying to get passed a law that would make it *mandatory* for a parent to donate organs to his/her child who is ailing. Surely a living, breathing, sentient child deserves the same treatment as one who has not been born.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Very reasonable.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Wrong. It's Michele Obama's fault. She's saving the water for her exercise followers, who need it more than the rest of us.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Seems fair to me that we need to go troll D&P and those of us who don't believe in god need to challenge THEIR constant bible thumping, praying and praising god for the evil THAT represents.


Oh, please, no. That can only lead to cream cheese and more dead brain cells. :roll: :roll:

But it's a free country.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Oh, please, no. That can only lead to cream cheese and more dead brain cells. :roll: :roll:
> 
> But it's a free country.


No need to actually ENGAGE anyone in a conversation. Hit and run - just like some of the D&P crowd like to do. Toss out an insult and leave, which is what Joey does.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> No need to actually ENGAGE anyone in a conversation. Hit and run - just like some of the D&P crowd like to do. Toss out an insult and leave, which is what Joey does.


It will come back to haunt you. We've posted cartoons they objected to on D&P, and LTL kept coming to tell us how much we hurt those sweet, gentle women who didn't understand why this was being done to them.

Then they all put on their _Je suis Charlie_ pins.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)




----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The term "potential baby" is ridiculous. By the time a woman finds out she's pregnant, her baby already has a heartbeat and a brain. It is alive! It exists! The fact that it's dependent upon its mother for life, doesn't make it a "potential baby". If this were so, any infant could be called a potential baby, as they are all dependent upon their mothers for life. A lot of adults are also dependent upon others as well. That doesn't make them potential adults. Quality of life can be quantified, but not life itself. It either exists, or it doesn't.


And to support abortion rights, this is ignored. It complicates things to acknowledge that a baby exists whether it has been born or not. Yes, abortion is murder. I believe most women who have an abortion are well aware of this and it's an important part of making the decision to have an abortion. IMO, most women who get an abortion do not waltz into their friendly neighborhood abortion clinic and waltz out again as if they'd just done something as simple as going out for coffee.

Oh yes, and abortion often has an effect beyond a woman and her body. We don't live in vacuums. Some of our decisions are individual, sometimes. Many times there are all sorts of social connexions that weigh in the balance of decision making.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> It's wonderful to live in a country where a minority of one, is free to speak out. I shall continue to do so.


You keep us on our toes. We will never agree on many many things but that is okay, as long as you realize that we have our strong beliefs too, which have developed over our lives and we won't be changing our basic opinions.

I you have become a friend and we are all pulling for you and your family. To me that is what we stand for - our basic beliefs make room for everyone at least we try.

How is it going? I am thinking about your family constantly and those babies who are ready to join the world. I wonder why some of those on the 'other' topic have not contacted you and said they would pray. Maybe I am out of line and a number of them did. I sure hope so.

Politics is important but humanity is more important. Anyway you and your family are in all our thoughts and nothing will change that imo. Just think the babies will be born in the late spring and although I am not sure about your 
climate there, up here it would be much easier for them to get their first months in in the summer.

Take care, try to get some rest. It will be a lot of work when they arrive and I am sure you will be in the front line - they are fortunate to have you there as I know little Max will need you a lot. Shirley


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> It will come back to haunt you. We've posted cartoons they objected to on D&P, and LTL kept coming to tell us how much we hurt those sweet, gentle women who didn't understand why this was being done to them.
> 
> Then they all put on their _Je suis Charlie_ pins.


I know you're right, but the urge is still there to poke back. I'll get over it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> And to support abortion rights, this is ignored. It complicates things to acknowledge that a baby exists whether it has been born or not. Yes, abortion is murder. I believe most women who have an abortion are well aware of this and it's an important part of making the decision to have an abortion. IMO, most women who get an abortion do not waltz into their friendly neighborhood abortion clinic and waltz out again as if they'd just done something as simple as going out for coffee.
> 
> Oh yes, and abortion often has an effect beyond a woman and her body. We don't live in vacuums. Some of our decisions are individual, sometimes. Many times there are all sorts of social connexions that weigh in the balance of decision making.


The word "murder" is totally out of place in this context. Murder is, according to several dictionaries, "the _unlawful_ premeditated killing of one human being by another." Note the italicized word. Abortion may be killing (though some may disagree even with that), but it is not murder.
But the word "murder" does have a chilling effect on those who read it, which is undoubtedly why so many of you use it.

It isn't only abortion that has an effect beyond a woman and her body. The decision to carry a pregnancy to term has its effect, too, especially where there are other children who depend on their mother or financial difficulties or health problems in the mother.

Okay, I'm not going to reargue Roe v. Wade again. Enjoy yourselves and your feelings of superiority. I know what they really are.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> You are basing all your horror stories on late-term abortions; which anti-choice people are doing their best to make common. As it is, most abortions are performed early on, in the embryonic state. The Guttmacher Institute reports that 89% of abortions are performed within the first 12 weeks. By outlawing and restricting abortion providers, the very people who scream about such "violence" are making it more likely.
> 
> Women will have abortions whether you like it or not and whether it is legal or not. You, and people like you, are actually making it more gruesome.
> 
> ...


I hate to burst your bubble, but according to planned parenthood, aspiration is the most common procedure for performing abortions. During the vacuum aspiration, the baby is ripped into peices by the suction tool, for removal. You can make all the excuses you want, but my statement was accurate and factual. The responsibility for abortion does NOT lie upon those who want to stop it. The responsibility lies with those who portray it as a simple little procedure. PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I know you're right, but the urge is still there to poke back. I'll get over it.


At least you won't be "poking the bear"; the bear will do the poking.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Thanks, Dame. I completely understand the objection to abortion and respect the right of any woman to actually continue an unwanted pregnancy to term. Good for them.
> 
> However, there is a PREDICTABLE outcome of the legislation being passed to restrict abortion and the zealots who demand it need to take a look at those outcomes and accept responsibility for their part in making matters worse. We need to hold them accountable and call them out for their superior attitudes and fantasy of perfect virtue.


Point well taken, Green. Over on D & P, KC just posted her ideas for social reform--not letting a newborn take his or her father's name unless the parents are married, and forcing women who can't or won't name a father to list all their partners on their baby's birth certificate or have it stamped "child of rape". Such pure, unadulterated hatred toward innocent children takes my breath away.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!


As I told KC over on D & P, children have no say over the circumstances in which they're brought into this world. To stigmatize them for life because of their parent's irresponsibility is pure evil.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!


You're hatred is blatant, joey. Go proselytize to somebody else.
Are you lacking attention? You know damned well that you will not change anyone's mind in this thread. Why bother?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> As I told KC over on D & P, children have no say over the circumstances in which they're brought into this world. To stigmatize them for life because of their parent's irresponsibility is pure evil.


She is so full of hatred, susan. And a certified macadamia at that. 
I wonder what God must think of her after that comment?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> You're hatred is blatant, joey. Go proselytize to somebody else.
> Are you lacking attention? You know damned well that you will not change anyone's mind in this thread. Why bother?


I'm absolutely stunned by this, Patty. So much for Joey and the "every life is precious" crowd--they really do despise unmarried moms and will hurt their children just to get back at them.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> She is so full of hatred, susan. And a certified macadamia at that.
> I wonder what God must think of her after that comment?


All I can say is, I hope He's taking notes.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> NEB knew what I meant. She likes to take us on.
> 
> Well ladies, I am heading to bed with my book. I am a bit weary. Spent the morning at the Craft group at the seniors center, then went for groceries and visited with our son so I am wiped. The time at home was spent watching the news. Worrisome. see you all tomorrow.
> 
> ...


Here you go, Shirley!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/29/cruz-obama-inflamed-racial-tensions_n_7175466.html


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm absolutely stunned by this, Patty. So much for Joey and the "every life is precious" crowd--they really do despise unmarried moms and will hurt their children just to get back at them.


A woman can't win for losing in their minds. Joey soap boxes about the horrors of abortion and KC is out to damn the kids of single parents, you know, the one's who did not choose abortion.
They are both a discredit to our gender.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Are you certain that's true? There may have been studies that you're unaware of. But, at least in this country, you can insist that your own child's vaccines not contain substances you believe are harmful and even that they be given on a slower schedule.


IF what you say is true, you wouldn't be hearing from me! In this country, you CANNOT "insist that your own child's vaccines not contain substances you believe are harmful". Only RARELY can you even FIND a doctor who will agree to give vaccines on a " slower schedule". Look at the CDC's website to see what's in the vaccines, mecury, aluminum, formaldehyde and Neomycin (an antibiotic). Mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde are KNOWN NEUROTOXINS! Many vaccines still carry what the CDC calls "trace amounts" of thimerisol. The video I posted a link to had Robert Kennedy Jr discussing the AMOUNTS of thimerisol and the fact that what the CDC call "trace amounts" are many thousands of times MORE than is allowed in our water. And this is injected directly into infacts. Thimerisol is not a necessary ingredient. It is a preservative used to stop the growth of fungi and bacteria in MULTI DOSE vaccines. Vaccines could easily be put in single dose containers, which would eliminate the need for thimerisol all together. Another problem with multi dose vaccines is that they must be shaken thoroughly to assure the right amount of vaccine each individual receives. If a doctor, nurse, assistant, or pharmacist does not shake the bottle enough, some children will not get enough vaccine and others will get too much. It presents an unnecessary risk.

As to finding a doctor who will agree to vaccinate on a slower schedule, all doctors are being pressured to vaccinate no matter what. Its almost impossible to find a pediatrician who will even take your child as a patient, unless you agree to fully immunize. Nowadays they're even vaccinating children who are already sick with infections. Their immune systems are already being compromised by illness and they inject them with 7 or 8 other illnesses. This is reckless and dangerous.

I believe that we don't need to eliminate vaccines altogether. But they can be made safer, and children don't need as many vaccines. We should weigh the risks between the illness and the vaccines, and not automatically accept everything that the drug companies tell us.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/vaccine-decision/ingredients.html


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

This dead horse has no flesh left. Believe what you want, KFN.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> A woman can't win for losing in their minds. Joey soap boxes about the horrors of abortion and KC is out to damn the kids of single parents, you know the one's who did not choose abortion.
> They are both a discredit to our gender.


They're a discredit to the human race, Patty.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> They're a discredit to the human race, Patty.


What bothers me most is that these two are always barking about freedom being taken away from them, yet here they are posting comments that would compromise the freedom of others.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I believe that we don't need to eliminate vaccines altogether. But they can be made safer, and children don't need as many vaccines. We should weigh the risks between the illness and the vaccines, and not automatically accept everything that the drug companies tell us.
> 
> http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/vaccine-decision/ingredients.html


-----------------------------
The last paragraph could work - The rest, not so much. I agree , that way they get the vaccines with as little side effects as possible. It is the suggestion that vaccines be stopped that I am dead against Actually, I don't know of anyone who had side effects and 95% of all children got vaccinations when my children were small. That is when measles was just about wiped out. I just don't want them stopped - if some children need a longer term for their dosage, so be it. I have absolutely no problem with that as long as they get their vaccination.

We have gone over the first part of your post and I am not going to flog a dead horse.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> What bothers me most is that these two are always barking about freedom being taken away from them, yet here they are posting comments that would compromise the freedom of others.


I'm not sure why this bothers me so, Patty. They're far from pleasant folks, but I suppose it's the first time I've heard them express hate toward little children and babies. Maybe I've been naive, but I always assumed the D & P crowd were more or less decent, normal folks, however extreme their politics. Apparently not--they're poisonous through and through.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> The word "murder" is totally out of place in this context. Murder is, according to several dictionaries, "the _unlawful_ premeditated killing of one human being by another." Note the italicized word. Abortion may be killing (though some may disagree even with that), but it is not murder.
> But the word "murder" does have a chilling effect on those who read it, which is undoubtedly why so many of you use it.
> 
> It isn't only abortion that has an effect beyond a woman and her body. The decision to carry a pregnancy to term has its effect, too, especially where there are other children who depend on their mother or financial difficulties or health problems in the mother.
> ...


Wow! I don't feel superior... "Murder" is a really heavily weighted word. I don't use it without understanding what effect it has on people who are pro-choice. I don't think viability is the be all and end all of defining whether an embryo or fetus is a human being. Like I said, I believe most women are aware of this when they consider having an abortion. That's why I said women don't just waltz in and out of abortion clinics, and why I said the decision isn't limited to the woman and her body. Whether a woman has, as you say, "other children who depend on their mother or financial difficulties or health problems in the mother" weigh *just as heavily* in the decision making process, too.

I prefer to call things what they actually are. I'm not like joey who uses the word "murder" as club to beat people with in the discussion of whether abortion should be legal or not. I think she even believes that calling abortion murder should instantly send all the pro-choicers and Roe v Wade straight to hell. IMO, it's the word that most accurately describes what is being done, and if you don't like to get real, so be it.

PS, IMO, late-term abortion is another one of joey's clubs. It doesn't happen often, and is a last resort in a bad situation. As someone else said here, most abortions are aspirations and occur in the first trimester.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Point well taken, Green. Over on D & P, KC just posted her ideas for social reform--not letting a newborn take his or her father's name unless the parents are married, and forcing women who can't or won't name a father to list all their partners on their baby's birth certificate or have it stamped "child of rape". Such pure, unadulterated hatred toward innocent children takes my breath away.


It doesn't surprise me. KC is so full of hate there is no 
understanding her. Some of them are followers, some don't hate but believe what they are told. Then there are people like KC who have absolutely no interest in learning the truth. Lies suite her much better. There are no limits to what you can say if lies don't matter. She doesn't care about children once they are born.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I believe that we don't need to eliminate vaccines altogether. But they can be made safer, and children don't need as many vaccines. We should weigh the risks between the illness and the vaccines, and not automatically accept everything that the drug companies tell us.
> 
> http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/vaccine-decision/ingredients.html


I have no problem with trying to meet the needs of children who might need a slower dosage over a longer period of time. I have no recollection of you ever saying you accept any type of vaccine. You have made it clear that you don't want vaccines ever - but then you say your grand children were vaccinated. You sometimes state facts that as far as we can see to you are written in stone. Then suddenly a post that is something we can willingly investigate and possibly (in this case Probably) agree to. As long as vaccines are given I have absolutely no problem with that. After all the arguments you and I have had about vaccines, suddenly you change your mind about vaccines that are slower and possibly some of the ingredients reduced that worry some.

YOu have never given a hint, that I have read, that you accept that slower vaccines could be given to some children. I would fight for that if there is a way that that could be accomplished.

:shock: :shock: :shock: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> It doesn't surprise me. KC is so full of hate there is no
> understanding her. Some of them are followers, some don't hate but believe what they are told. Then there are people like KC who have absolutely no interest in learning the truth. Lies suite her much better. There are no limits to what you can say if lies don't matter. She doesn't care about children once they are born.


No, I don't get it either. However KC and the others feel about "irresponsible" parents, I cannot fathom the mind that favors forcing innocent children to carry with them through life birth certificates filled out in manner that's meant to demean and stigmatize. I've truly hit the wall as far as understanding the D & P folks, at least in this area.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I hate to burst your bubble, but according to planned parenthood, aspiration is the most common procedure for performing abortions. During the vacuum aspiration, the baby is ripped into peices by the suction tool, for removal. You can make all the excuses you want, but my statement was accurate and factual. The responsibility for abortion does NOT lie upon those who want to stop it. The responsibility lies with those who portray it as a simple little procedure. PEOPLE LIKE YOU!
> 
> http://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures


Aspiration of an EMBRYO is a far cry from dismembering a 22 week fetus. Get real. If you want to make it more and more difficult for women to obtain early abortions or to outlaw Plan B type pharmaceuticals, you are complicit.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, I don't get it either. However KC and the others feel about "irresponsible" parents, I cannot fathom the mind that favors forcing innocent children to carry with them through life birth certificates filled out in manner that's meant to demean and stigmatize. I've truly hit the wall as far as understanding the D & P folks, at least in this area.


Are you surprised? That is to be expected , certainly from many of them. There are those who don't post and don't get involved with Politics, they never argue with people like KC
or other constant visitors, so they much go along with what is posted there. That is what amazes me -- no matter how dreadful, no matter whether they know what is being posted isn't the truth, you never ever hear one of them saying "I don't agree" Thank God we are not so brainwashed or close minded or afraid to speak our minds to others here if we don't agree with what is being said. More and more each day I am glad I am not far right. I found that out as a child and I certainly know I made the right decisions for me.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> The children will bear the sins of their parents.


By that statement alone, christianity is completely immoral. How can anyone believe in the christian god and bible that says such things?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, I don't get it either. However KC and the others feel about "irresponsible" parents, I cannot fathom the mind that favors forcing innocent children to carry with them through life birth certificates filled out in manner that's meant to demean and stigmatize. I've truly hit the wall as far as understanding the D & P folks, at least in this area.


All you need to know in order to understand their thinking is they believe the bible. It's as simple as that.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> I am only repeating what God said to Moses.
> 
> Exodus 34:5-7 (NKJV)
> 
> ...


How can you call your god moral? To do so you would necessarily have to defend such doctrine.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am only repeating what God said to Moses.
> 
> Exodus 34:5-7 (NKJV)
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> In the 90s, there was a period of serious flooding on and along the Mississippi River. Someone I knew (on line) insisted that Bill Clinton had arranged for that to happen.


We lived in St Louis at that time. The Mississippi and Missouri rivers ran together and looked like an ocean. We spent days filling sand bags, trying to save people's property. Luckily, we were far enough away from the rivers and creeks, that we were only inconvenienced by the detours. It will be remembered by all who lived through it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

I see joey wants to start another Tent Revival for CINO'S


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!


Is that an opinion you genuinely hold or did you say it in order to give offence?

One always speaks badly when one has nothing to say.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Is that an opinion you genuinely hold or did you say it in order to give offence?
> 
> One always speaks badly when one has nothing to say.


True to character, when one asks legitimate questions about the sense and morality of such beliefs, Joey hits the "logout" button and disappears. I predict she will be absent for a while. When the going gets tough, she flees until the discussion turns to other matters. Probably because she DOES believe what she says and has JUST ENOUGH intelligence to know she's outgunned but not enough intelligence to defend such ridiculous bible verses (maybe because they're indefensible).


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There is no shame in men that think their only part in fatherhood is a sperm donation. There is no shame in women who sleep with any T, D or H, and don't remember which one could have fathered their children. So she gets pregnant, there is always abortion. No shame in that either. If she has the baby, rather than taking pride in raising the child for a better life than she has had, the child is the way to get more government help, in food stamps, Medicaid etc. The child is the responsibility of the parents, not the community or the government. The only hatred I see is in what the parent has for the child.


And the only hatred I see is your spewing about the poor. The woman can't win with you. If she has the baby, it is because she wants welfare. If she aborts it, she is a murderer. To top it, you say she hates the child!

I am ashamed that my Christianity is tied in with the hateful group of CINO's that you belong to. You give all Christians a very bad image.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> I do not need to defend the Bible. It says what it says!


Yes. A lot of stupid crap. How does visiting the sins of the father on the child make sense? It's immoral and barbaric. Since you seem to think that's ok because he bible says so, you too, are immoral and barbaric.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> By that statement alone, christianity is completely immoral. How can anyone believe in the christian god and bible that says such things?


Their version of Christianity is completely immoral but not all Christians subscribe to those beliefs and find them just as shocking as you do.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I see joey wants to start another Tent Revival for CINO'S


Things must be slow over on D&P so she has to pay us a visit.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

What gets to me is how they use the Bible to suit their own agendas.
If you cite something to prove a point from the Old Testament, they will say that we are living in the New Testament. If you cite something in there to prove a point, they conveniently jump back to the Old Book.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> And the only hatred I see is your spewing about the poor. The woman can't win with you. If she has the baby, it is because she wants welfare. If she aborts it, she is a murderer. To top it, you say she hates the child!
> 
> I am ashamed that my Christianity is tied in with the hateful group of CINO's that you belong to. You give all Christians a very bad image.


I agree, Patty. The only hatred and wrong doing I see comes from people who think and act like joey. She is a hateful, mean spirited, little person. I don't believe women who believe this way have any self respect and I think she is consumed by a lot of misguided anger. Why else would someone act in such a heartless and cruel way. Her god is not a god of love and forgiveness. She has to cling to her bible for security as she has nothing else. What a pathetic way to live.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Wow! I don't feel superior... "Murder" is a really heavily weighted word. I don't use it without understanding what effect it has on people who are pro-choice. I don't think viability is the be all and end all of defining whether an embryo or fetus is a human being. Like I said, I believe most women are aware of this when they consider having an abortion. That's why I said women don't just waltz in and out of abortion clinics, and why I said the decision isn't limited to the woman and her body. Whether a woman has, as you say, "other children who depend on their mother or financial difficulties or health problems in the mother" weigh *just as heavily* in the decision making process, too.
> 
> I prefer to call things what they actually are. I'm not like joey who uses the word "murder" as club to beat people with in the discussion of whether abortion should be legal or not. I think she even believes that calling abortion murder should instantly send all the pro-choicers and Roe v Wade straight to hell. IMO, it's the word that most accurately describes what is being done, and if you don't like to get real, so be it.
> 
> PS, IMO, late-term abortion is another one of joey's clubs. It doesn't happen often, and is a last resort in a bad situation. As someone else said here, most abortions are aspirations and occur in the first trimester.


I need to apologize for going off on you like that. I know you're not in agreement with Joey on this, and I've always thought your heart's in the r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ left place.

But I still don't think that the word "murder" applies to abortion.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, I don't get it either. However KC and the others feel about "irresponsible" parents, I cannot fathom the mind that favors forcing innocent children to carry with them through life birth certificates filled out in manner that's meant to demean and stigmatize. I've truly hit the wall as far as understanding the D & P folks, at least in this area.


Was there not one of them to argue against KC? Are they all okay with her insane proposals?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Their version of Christianity is completely immoral but not all Christians subscribe to those beliefs and find them just as shocking as you do.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We lived in St Louis at that time. The Mississippi and Missouri rivers ran together and looked like an ocean. We spent days filling sand bags, trying to save people's property. Luckily, we were far enough away from the rivers and creeks, that we were only inconvenienced by the detours. It will be remembered by all who lived through it.


I was aware that the flooding was terrible. What a horror it must have been to live through.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There is no shame in men that think their only part in fatherhood is a sperm donation. There is no shame in women who sleep with any T, D or H, and don't remember which one could have fathered their children. So she gets pregnant, there is always abortion. No shame in that either. If she has the baby, rather than taking pride in raising the child for a better life than she has had, the child is the way to get more government help, in food stamps, Medicaid etc. The child is the responsibility of the parents, not the community or the government. The only hatred I see is in what the parent has for the child.


There's far more hatred in you than in any of those parents you so look down on.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> There's far more hatred in you than in any of those parents you so look down on.


I believe she needs an underclass she can feel superior to to make her feel better about herself. Where would she belong if she had no one she perceived as being beneath her. It must scare the hell out of her and others who think this way and what would she do if "those people" rose up to seize their rightful place in this society.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Yes. A lot of stupid crap. How does visiting the sins of the father on the child make sense? It's immoral and barbaric. Since you seem to think that's ok because he bible says so, you too, are immoral and barbaric.


That's why the devil finds it such a handy little book too.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Was there not one of them to argue against KC? Are they all okay with her insane proposals?


I think most of them agree with her and the rest are too afraid of her to say anything. I wonder where all that hatred comes from? I don't believe any happy well adjusted person could say such things.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I believe she needs an underclass she can feel superior to to make her feel better about herself. Where would she belong if she had no one she perceived as being beneath her. It must scare the hell out of her and others who think this way and what would she do if "those people" rose up to seize their rightful place in this society.


She'd run as fast as her stubby little legs could take her.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Was there not one of them to argue against KC? Are they all okay with her insane proposals?


Evidently!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I think most of them agree with her and the rest are too afraid of her to say anything. I wonder where all that hatred comes from? I don't believe any happy well adjusted person could say such things.


The funny thing is they speak of themselves as caring and loving and about us as haters. Well, it may be true that they care for and love each other (as much as you can love a person you don't know), but that seems to be as far as it goes, other than their fellow church members. The hatred they show toward anyone not like them is truly frightening. Or would be if they ever acted on it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> The funny thing is they speak of themselves as caring and loving and about us as haters. Well, it may be true that they care for and love each other (as much as you can love a person you don't know), but that seems to be as far as it goes, other than their fellow church members. The hatred they show toward anyone not like them is truly frightening. Or would be if they ever acted on it.


I love the AOLW term. We're angry? Hell, our guy won the White House twice! Who sits and complains most about that? The same one who gave us that moniker. Go figure.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> She has to cling to her bible for security as she has nothing else. What a pathetic way to live.


I remember one of her posts about what happened to her when she was eight. What would happen if she wasn't a good girl. Same kind of family as mine. My Father was a hypocrite and I lost all respect for his religion and opinion. I got up and left as soon as I could. I never accepted it. Lots of children did.

I doubt she has ever really questioned - it was a type of brain washing in my opinion. Friends of mine who grew up in that type of atmosphere usually never left. some who did are still thankful that they did but carry scars and guilt. I refuse to feel guilty. God gave me a mind - and I think that was one of the reasons I rebelled and left home. I found my own way with the help of my Grandmother.

Not all Christians live that way, nor do they judge or decide that others are evil. There are some people like my Grandmother.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I love the AOLW term. We're angry? Hell, our guy won the White House twice! Who sits and complains most about that? The same one who gave us that moniker. Go figure.


Besides, there's nothing wrong with being angry at a world that keeps you down. It's the ones who claim to be doing well but are obviously full of anger (like LTL and KC and Joey and others who are Nameless) that are really disturbed.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time. 

I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.

Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Their version of Christianity is completely immoral but not all Christians subscribe to those beliefs and find them just as shocking as you do.


I think there are many good people who are Christians than those who are narrow and rigid, although as I keep up with what is happening down there I am starting to wonder.

Anyway, time to go and read my book. Talk to you all tomorrow. I think I will check out more about Bernie Sanders. He sure sounds like a good man to me.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> I think there are many good people who are Christians than those who are narrow and rigid, although as I keep up with what is happening down there I am starting to wonder.
> 
> Anyway, time to go and read my book. Talk to you all tomorrow. I think I will check out more about Bernie Sanders. He sure sounds like a good man to me.


Good night, Shirley!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time.
> 
> I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.
> 
> Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


Think of it as an adventure - spell words however you feel like. But why no kitchen sink or counters?

Congratulations on the move. I'm sure it will work out well. I hope Dove likes it there; in fact, I hope you do, too. Keep in touch.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Aspiration of an EMBRYO is a far cry from dismembering a 22 week fetus. Get real. If you want to make it more and more difficult for women to obtain early abortions or to outlaw Plan B type pharmaceuticals, you are complicit.


YOU yourself, said that most abortions are performed by 12 weeks. Do you have ANY idea where a human fetus is at that stage of development? After just 8 weeks, it is a fetus, NOT an embryo! Many times, women don't even find out they're pregnant until they are 6-8 weeks, into their pregnancy. By 12 weeks, a baby is fully formed. It can open and close its fists and mouth. All of the organs and extremities are present. At 12 weeks, a baby is 4" long, and much too large to fit through the vacuum tube. A sharp tool is used to dismember the baby into peices that can be sucked up or aspirated. So, don't try to tell me that I'm complicit in the violent murder of these babies! That's on YOUR shoulders!

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases_conditions/hic_Am_I_Pregnant/hic-fetal-development-stages-of-growth


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time.
> 
> I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.
> 
> Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


Google it


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> YOU yourself, said that most abortions are performed by 12 weeks. Do you have ANY idea where a human fetus is at that stage of development? After just 8 weeks, it is a fetus, NOT an embryo! Many times, women don't even find out they're pregnant until they are 6-8 weeks, into their pregnancy. By 12 weeks, a baby is fully formed. It can open and close its fists and mouth. All of the organs and extremities are present. At 12 weeks, a baby is 4" long, and much too large to fit through the vacuum tube. A sharp tool is used to dismember the baby into peices that can be sucked up or aspirated. So, don't try to tell me that I'm complicit in the violent murder of these babies! That's on YOUR shoulders!
> 
> http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases_conditions/hic_Am_I_Pregnant/hic-fetal-development-stages-of-growth


We have beaten the abortion horse to death. Sorry, KFN, but this is nothing new. Why is it on D. Green's shoulders?
If you don't like abortion, don't have one. By12 weeks can mean up to 12 weeks. Most have them within the first 6 weeks. 
Nobody can know what is going on in the minds of those going through an abortion, but calling them murderers is mean and wrong.
In the eyes of the law, abortion is not murder.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> And the only hatred I see is your spewing about the poor. The woman can't win with you. If she has the baby, it is because she wants welfare. If she aborts it, she is a murderer. To top it, you say she hates the child!
> 
> I am ashamed that my Christianity is tied in with the hateful group of CINO's that you belong to. You give all Christians a very bad image.


I was just wondering...what sect of Christianity approves of abortion and does not accept the bible as doctrine? I'm not familiar with any.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I need to apologize for going off on you like that. I know you're not in agreement with Joey on this, and I've always thought your heart's in the r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ left place.
> 
> But I still don't think that the word "murder" applies to abortion.


What else could you call it, when you chop a baby to bits and suck it out of its mother's womb??? Oh, yeah. Abortion! That sounds so much nicer than murder.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> We have beaten the abortion horse to death. Sorry, KFN, but this is nothing new. Why is it on D. Green's shoulders?
> If you don't like abortion, don't have one. By12 weeks can mean up to 12 weeks. Most have them within the first 6 weeks.
> Nobody can know what is going on in the minds of those going through an abortion, but calling them murderers is mean and wrong.
> In the eyes of the law, abortion is not murder.


 :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was just wondering...what sect of Christianity approves of abortion and does not accept the bible as doctrine? I'm not familiar with any.


It's all on how one interprets the bible. There is a recipe for abortion in the bible. In the Catholic religion a baby was not considered to be alive until it could breathe and survive out of the mothers womb. They have since changed their stance.
Are you that naive that you think that no Christian has ever had an abortion? I am a Christian who does not condemn others for their choices. It's not my place to. I am not a fundamentalist Christian. I don't run around shouting "Praise the Lord" or saying Amen whenever someone speaks. I don't try to shove my beliefs onto other people. My faith is a private matter between me and the one who counts.
I am sick to death of abortion topics or those who use it for political gain.
Nor do I spout out bible quotes when I am losing an argument.

I am done with this subject now.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What else could you call it, when you chop a baby to bits and suck it out of its mother's womb??? Oh, yeah. Abortion! That sounds so much nicer than murder.


You won't carry your point simply by using shocking language. It is legal and therefore not murder. Suck on that.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time.
> 
> I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.
> 
> Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


Oh! You've moved! Congratulations! I'm very happy for you. I hope you get settled very soon and get started on this new chapter of your life. Have fun!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> We have beaten the abortion horse to death. Sorry, KFN, but this is nothing new. Why is it on D. Green's shoulders?
> If you don't like abortion, don't have one. By12 weeks can mean up to 12 weeks. Most have them within the first 6 weeks.
> Nobody can know what is going on in the minds of those going through an abortion, but calling them murderers is mean and wrong.
> In the eyes of the law, abortion is not murder.


You keep telling yourself that.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> And the only hatred I see is your spewing about the poor. The woman can't win with you. If she has the baby, it is because she wants welfare. If she aborts it, she is a murderer. To top it, you say she hates the child!
> 
> I am ashamed that my Christianity is tied in with the hateful group of CINO's that you belong to. You give all Christians a very bad image.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What else could you call it, when you chop a baby to bits and suck it out of its mother's womb??? Oh, yeah. Abortion! That sounds so much nicer than murder.


I have never chopped a baby up, so I wouldn't call it anything.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> There is no shame in men that think their only part in fatherhood is a sperm donation. There is no shame in women who sleep with any T, D or H, and don't remember which one could have fathered their children. So she gets pregnant, there is always abortion. No shame in that either. If she has the baby, rather than taking pride in raising the child for a better life than she has had, the child is the way to get more government help, in food stamps, Medicaid etc. The child is the responsibility of the parents, not the community or the government. The only hatred I see is in what the parent has for the child.


There's a lot of shame in you to have such ugly opinions.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> You keep telling yourself that.


I don't have to repeat anything to myself. That is my belief and I'm sticking to it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> There's a lot of shame in you to have such ugly opinions.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I need to apologize for going off on you like that. I know you're not in agreement with Joey on this, and I've always thought your heart's in the r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ left place.
> 
> But I still don't think that the word "murder" applies to abortion.


I didn't really think you were lumping me with joey. You did give me an opportunity to make further remarks that aren't particularly pro-choice but are very different than what joey says about the subject. I see some things in black and white and other things in way more than 50 shades of grey. There are some things all of us disagree about. At least this proves we're alive and awake human beings.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

SQM said:


> I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time.
> 
> I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.
> 
> Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


Spend some time in the Newberry Library and you'll feel wonderful very, very quickly.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> It's all on how one interprets the bible. There is a recipe for abortion in the bible. In the Catholic religion a baby was not considered to be alive until it could breathe and survive out of the mothers womb. They have since changed their stance.
> Are you that naive that you think that no Christian has ever had an abortion? I am a Christian who does not condemn others for their choices. It's not my place to. I am not a fundamentalist Christian. I don't run around shouting "Praise the Lord" or saying Amen whenever someone speaks. I don't try to shove my beliefs onto other people. My faith is a private matter between me and the one who counts.
> I am sick to death of abortion topics or those who use it for political gain.
> Nor do I spout out bible quotes when I am losing an argument.
> ...


But you stated that you were ashamed that your Christianity was tied in with those who believe in the Bible, and speak out against abortion. So, I was just wondering what kind of Christianity, you participate in. I've never heard of one that is pro abortion and anti Bible. I believe that the Catholic church didn't believe that a baby had a SOUL until it could breathe and survive. But surely, you're not suggesting that the Catholic church ever advocated abortion?!?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was just wondering...what sect of Christianity approves of abortion and does not accept the bible as doctrine? I'm not familiar with any.


Unitarians? :mrgreen:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> You won't carry your point simply by using shocking language. It is legal and therefore not murder. Suck on that.


It's a shocking act! It deserves to be called what it is! If more people really understood what takes place during abortion, maybe they would not be deceived into thinking, it's a simple little procedure, designed to end your problems.

Not all laws are good or valid. Did you realize that there is a law on the books in South Dakota, that says it's legal to kill an Indian who's on a horse? Laws can be as foolish or ignorant as those who make them.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> But you stated that you were ashamed that your Christianity was tied in with those who believe in the Bible, and speak out against abortion. So, I was just wondering what kind of Christianity, you participate in. I've never heard of one that is pro abortion and anti Bible. I believe that the Catholic church didn't believe that a baby had a SOUL until it could breathe and survive. But surely, you're not suggesting that the Catholic church ever advocated abortion?!?


I was a Catholic. I know what I am talking about. I left that organization when they started protecting rapists and pedophiles. I never said they advocated abortion, but at that time the baby was not alive until it drew it's first breath of air outside of the mother's womb. If it came to a case of save the mother or save the baby, the mother won. Again I keep my faith to myself and the one who counts. Did I say I was anti Bible? We didn't dwell on it in school, but we did have catechism every day. Most of it was about the mass and the life of Jesus and his mother. We never studied the bible all 12 years that I was in Catholic school. We studied Catholicism and how to be good Catholic girls. We had missals that we used for mass.
I have read the bible and think that a lot of it has been lost in translation throughout the ages. I don't believe all the fire and brimstone tales. We were taught that our God is a loving and forgiving God. We were also taught to never judge others.
That is the problem that I have with far right fundamentalists. It is up to no human being to say who is going to "Hell". To be honest sometimes I want to tell them to shove their bibles where the sun don't shine. To state pompously that they are reborn and then watch them degrade the poor, 
the African Americans, and anyone who is needy. That is where the difference lies between them and me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I have never chopped a baby up, so I wouldn't call it anything.


Obviously, I was speaking of the proverbial you. Not you, personally.

But, I think you understood that.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was just wondering...what sect of Christianity approves of abortion and does not accept the bible as doctrine? I'm not familiar with any.


.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Unitarians? :mrgreen:


I don't see how they can call themselves Christians, but OK. You got me. Patty must be a Unitarian.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I don't see how they can call themselves Christians, but OK. You got me. Patty must be a Unitarian.


Not funny, KFN. Your words right now just proved my point. 
We can call ourselves Christians because we believe in Jesus Christ without all of the other BS the fundamentalists carry on about.
Jesus fed the poor and washed their feet. You guys would rather take the food out of their mouths and take away any dignity as well as their shoes because they were bought with SNAP money.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

I've got to get to bed! Talk to you all, later. Goodnight!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> I don't see how the more Conservative christian groups can call themselves Christian, but if they say they are, OK.


That was exactly what I was separating myself from, Julia :thumbup:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> But you stated that you were ashamed that your Christianity was tied in with those who believe in the Bible, and speak out against abortion. So, I was just wondering what kind of Christianity, you participate in. I've never heard of one that is pro abortion and anti Bible. I believe that the Catholic church didn't believe that a baby had a SOUL until it could breathe and survive. But surely, you're not suggesting that the Catholic church ever advocated abortion?!?


Leave it alone KFN -- you are not welcome to preach about our faith to us. Just keep your thoughts to yourself. We know you are one of those who have all the answers. We have our own answers. Please, stay off this subject. It isn't any of your business what Patty believes nor any of the rest of us. Don't Preach to any of us.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Are you certain that's true? There may have been studies that you're unaware of. But, at least in this country, you can insist that your own child's vaccines not contain substances you believe are harmful and even that they be given on a slower schedule.


Yes I'm certain. When I worked at a medical practice which specialized in travel vaccines along with early childhood vaccines (left there in 2012), I was constantly researching this on behalf of concerned parents. I have not found one credible piece of evidence that vaccines cause autism.

If a link between autism and vaccines had been made, the scientific community would have made more noise than ISIS the death cult in the media. They haven't because there is no *credible* established scientifically proven link.

When I was first asked by parents about this issue, I googled 'scientific link between autism and vaccines' and found these articles. These became valued references:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=scientific+link+between+autism+and+vaccines&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> In the 90s, there was a period of serious flooding on and along the Mississippi River. Someone I knew (on line) insisted that Bill Clinton had arranged for that to happen.


Doesn't surprise me one bit after a reasonably long time reading these threads.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!


Well, you've just reached a new low haven't you?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> It doesn't surprise me. KC is so full of hate there is no
> understanding her. Some of them are followers, some don't hate but believe what they are told. Then there are people like KC who have absolutely no interest in learning the truth. Lies suite her much better. There are no limits to what you can say if lies don't matter. She doesn't care about children once they are born.


I'd say ignorance rather than lies suits her better.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> There is no shame in men that think their only part in fatherhood is a sperm donation. There is no shame in women who sleep with any T, D or H, and don't remember which one could have fathered their children. So she gets pregnant, there is always abortion. No shame in that either. If she has the baby, rather than taking pride in raising the child for a better life than she has had, the child is the way to get more government help, in food stamps, Medicaid etc. The child is the responsibility of the parents, not the community or the government. The only hatred I see is in what the parent has for the child.


Ever heard the saying 'it takes a village to raise a child?'


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Oh, please, no. That can only lead to cream cheese and more dead brain cells. :roll: :roll:
> 
> But it's a free country.


 :evil: I don't think I have the strength right now, but those who know me know my limits.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> It will come back to haunt you. We've posted cartoons they objected to on D&P, and LTL kept coming to tell us how much we hurt those sweet, gentle women who didn't understand why this was being done to them.
> 
> Then they all put on their _Je suis Charlie_ pins.


They're just too dim.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> What gets to me is how they use the Bible to suit their own agendas.
> If you cite something to prove a point from the Old Testament, they will say that we are living in the New Testament. If you cite something in there to prove a point, they conveniently jump back to the Old Book.


This is what comes to my mind when I think about 'them.'


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Point well taken, Green. Over on D & P, KC just posted her ideas for social reform--not letting a newborn take his or her father's name unless the parents are married, and forcing women who can't or won't name a father to list all their partners on their baby's birth certificate or have it stamped "child of rape". Such pure, unadulterated hatred toward innocent children takes my breath away.


     Shameful.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I would like to announce that I am now broadcasting from Chicago. "Dove" was perfect since she is usually a slothful frightened cat. This was her adventure of a life time.
> 
> I feel like I am living in a hotel but without a kitchen sink and counters. But I will manage and acclimate soon now that I am connected to wifi.
> 
> Does anyone know what keys to press on a macbook air for spellcheck? I forget.


Happy house warming Sloth! Where is the kitchen sink and counters?

Google your question about mackbook spellcheck.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> YOU yourself, said that most abortions are performed by 12 weeks. Do you have ANY idea where a human fetus is at that stage of development? After just 8 weeks, it is a fetus, NOT an embryo! Many times, women don't even find out they're pregnant until they are 6-8 weeks, into their pregnancy. By 12 weeks, a baby is fully formed. It can open and close its fists and mouth. All of the organs and extremities are present. At 12 weeks, a baby is 4" long, and much too large to fit through the vacuum tube. A sharp tool is used to dismember the baby into peices that can be sucked up or aspirated. So, don't try to tell me that I'm complicit in the violent murder of these babies! That's on YOUR shoulders!
> 
> http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases_conditions/hic_Am_I_Pregnant/hic-fetal-development-stages-of-growth


A sharp tool is NOT inserted to dismember a 12 week fetus. Get your facts straight KFN. You're inciting again.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Do you mean it is a common procedure used during the first 12 weeks similar to dilation and cuterage (D&C) for spontaneous miscarriage?



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I hate to burst your bubble, but according to planned parenthood, aspiration is the most common procedure for performing abortions. During the vacuum aspiration, the baby is ripped into peices by the suction tool, for removal. You can make all the excuses you want, but my statement was accurate and factual. The responsibility for abortion does NOT lie upon those who want to stop it. The responsibility lies with those who portray it as a simple little procedure. PEOPLE LIKE YOU!
> 
> http://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hmmm. I thought President Obama was too calm and deliberate. I must be too liberal.



BrattyPatty said:


> Here you go, Shirley!
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/29/cruz-obama-inflamed-racial-tensions_n_7175466.html


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I hear nothing.



BrattyPatty said:


> This dead horse has no flesh left. Believe what you want, KFN.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Do you mean it is a common procedure used during the first 12 weeks similar to dilation and cuterage (D&C) for spontaneous miscarriage?


Yes Dame, early in the first trimester it is actually a D&C. Products of conception are evacuated often using suction curettage during abortion. A curette is usually all that is needed for a spontaneous or partial abortion.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I must confess that I hate the anti-abortion crew as much as they hate mothers needing support and children unborn. I try valiantly to ignore their comments.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I must confess that I hate the anti-abortion crew as much as they hate mothers needing support and children unborn. I try valiantly to ignore their comments.


I agree but it's difficult to ignore when they behave in such an aaggressive and righteous way.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I am not a religious person, but I've always found at least a few words of wisdom in any religious text.

I am astonished at the people who find text that only agrees with their evil thoughts.



DGreen said:


> All you need to know in order to understand their thinking is they believe the bible. It's as simple as that.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Is that an opinion you genuinely hold or did you say it in order to give offence?
> 
> One always speaks badly when one has nothing to say.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Yes. A lot of stupid crap. How does visiting the sins of the father on the child make sense? It's immoral and barbaric. Since you seem to think that's ok because he bible says so, you too, are immoral and barbaric.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

They only serve their purposes. May h___ freeze over and trap them.



BrattyPatty said:


> What gets to me is how they use the Bible to suit their own agendas.
> If you cite something to prove a point from the Old Testament, they will say that we are living in the New Testament. If you cite something in there to prove a point, they conveniently jump back to the Old Book.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

RE: MIB



Poor Purl said:


> I need to apologize for going off on you like that. I know you're not in agreement with Joey on this, and I've always thought your heart's in the r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ left place.
> 
> But I still don't think that the word "murder" applies to abortion.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> We have beaten the abortion horse to death. Sorry, KFN, but this is nothing new. Why is it on D. Green's shoulders?
> If you don't like abortion, don't have one. By12 weeks can mean up to 12 weeks. Most have them within the first 6 weeks.
> Nobody can know what is going on in the minds of those going through an abortion, but calling them murderers is mean and wrong.
> In the eyes of the law, abortion is not murder.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Reasonable. It will drive them nuttier.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I didn't really think you were lumping me with joey. You did give me an opportunity to make further remarks that aren't particularly pro-choice but are very different than what joey says about the subject. I see some things in black and white and other things in way more than 50 shades of grey. There are some things all of us disagree about. At least this proves we're alive and awake human beings.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Love to see different opinions raised in a reasonable manner. Thank you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Are you aware that all Christian Churches do not necessarily approve all books of the Bible. For example, the Catholic Bible is different than the King James version. Amd not all members of any church believe everything the church teaches.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> But you stated that you were ashamed that your Christianity was tied in with those who believe in the Bible, and speak out against abortion. So, I was just wondering what kind of Christianity, you participate in. I've never heard of one that is pro abortion and anti Bible. I believe that the Catholic church didn't believe that a baby had a SOUL until it could breathe and survive. But surely, you're not suggesting that the Catholic church ever advocated abortion?!?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Amen. Ain't that the truth?



Wombatnomore said:


> I agree but it's difficult to ignore when they behave in such an aaggressive and righteous way.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes Dame, early in the first trimester it is actually a D&C. Products of conception are evacuated often using suction curettage during abortion. A curette is usually all that is needed for a spontaneous or partial abortion.


I wonder if any of them have ever watched 'Call the Midwife' the BBC series set in the 50s and early 60s in the docklands of East London. Do they have any knowledge of the misery and suffering that another pregnancy caused to so many women? Do they understand the lengths these women went to in order to bring about a miscarriage? Do they know how many women lost their lives at the hands of backyard abortionists? Can they not understand that they may not like the procedure but it is saving lives? Yes, the lives of mothers who would have died at the hands of someone using a wire coat hanger of knitting needle? I sometimes think that they cannot see beyond their own comfortable middle class existence. They just do not understand how some families are forced to live and how much of a financial and emotional burden another child would cause.

Yes, I am old enough to remember those days. I also worked in a doctor's surgery from 1969 - 1972 and it was my job to test the urine samples to determine whether the woman was pregnant, before they saw the doctor. I can honestly tell you that the majority of women said "please tell me it is negative, I do not want any more children" or "I am crossing my fingers and everything else that is it negative". The number of women who said "praise the Lord, I am with child again and I am so happy I have another mouth to feed" were few and far between. Yes, it was a State Housing Commission area, a working class area, but that is beside the point, the women did not want any more children. This was before termination of pregnancy became legal in Australia, except in certain circumstances. Even then, in those prescribed circumstances it was difficult to obtain. You had to get the opinion of two independent doctors, for a start. Remember this was in the days when tubal ligation was major surgery, before the days of the modern techniques, or 'knit one, purl two together' as we called it when it was introduced.

It is freedom of choice, no one is forcing anyone to undergo the procedure against their will. My mother was alway pro choice. Mum would be 110 years old if she were alive today, so she spoke for the older generation. My grandmother was always pro choice. They hated the backyard abortionists. If anyone is to be labelled a 'murderer' it would definitely be the backyard abortionists.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I wonder if any of them have ever watched 'Call the Midwife' the BBC series set in the 50s and early 60s in the docklands of East London. Do they have any knowledge of the misery and suffering that another pregnancy caused to so many women? Do they understand the lengths these women went to in order to bring about a miscarriage? Do they know how many women lost their lives at the hands of backyard abortionists? Can they not understand that they may not like the procedure but it is saving lives? Yes, the lives of mothers who would have died at the hands of someone using a wire coat hanger of knitting needle? I sometimes think that they cannot see beyond their own comfortable middle class existence. They just do not understand how some families are forced to live and how much of a financial and emotional burden another child would cause.
> 
> Yes, I am old enough to remember those days. I also worked in a doctor's surgery from 1969 - 1972 and it was my job to test the urine samples to determine whether the woman was pregnant, before they saw the doctor. I can honestly tell you that the majority of women said "please tell me it is negative, I do not want any more children" or "I am crossing my fingers and everything else that is it negative". The number of women who said "praise the Lord, I am with child again and I am so happy I have another mouth to feed" were few and far between. Yes, it was a State Housing Commission area, a working class area, but that is beside the point, the women did not want any more children. This was before termination of pregnancy became legal in Australia, except in certain circumstances. Even then, in those prescribed circumstances it was difficult to obtain. You had to get the opinion of two independent doctors, for a start. Remember this was in the days when tubal ligation was major surgery, before the days of the modern techniques, or 'knit one, purl two together' as we called it when it was introduced.
> 
> It is freedom of choice, no one is forcing anyone to undergo the procedure against their will. My mother was alway pro choice. Mum would be 110 years old if she were alive today, so she spoke for the older generation. My grandmother was always pro choice. They hated the backyard abortionists. If anyone is to be labelled a 'murderer' it would definitely be the backyard abortionists.


'Vera Drake' is an excellent movie and representation about illegal abortions in England in 1950. The film explores the desperation of women at the time and the terrible consequences when things go wrong:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vera_Drake


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I wonder if any of them have ever watched 'Call the Midwife' the BBC series set in the 50s and early 60s in the docklands of East London. Do they have any knowledge of the misery and suffering that another pregnancy caused to so many women? Do they understand the lengths these women went to in order to bring about a miscarriage? Do they know how many women lost their lives at the hands of backyard abortionists? Can they not understand that they may not like the procedure but it is saving lives? Yes, the lives of mothers who would have died at the hands of someone using a wire coat hanger of knitting needle? I sometimes think that they cannot see beyond their own comfortable middle class existence. They just do not understand how some families are forced to live and how much of a financial and emotional burden another child would cause.
> 
> Yes, I am old enough to remember those days. I also worked in a doctor's surgery from 1969 - 1972 and it was my job to test the urine samples to determine whether the woman was pregnant, before they saw the doctor. I can honestly tell you that the majority of women said "please tell me it is negative, I do not want any more children" or "I am crossing my fingers and everything else that is it negative". The number of women who said "praise the Lord, I am with child again and I am so happy I have another mouth to feed" were few and far between. Yes, it was a State Housing Commission area, a working class area, but that is beside the point, the women did not want any more children. This was before termination of pregnancy became legal in Australia, except in certain circumstances. Even then, in those prescribed circumstances it was difficult to obtain. You had to get the opinion of two independent doctors, for a start. Remember this was in the days when tubal ligation was major surgery, before the days of the modern techniques, or 'knit one, purl two together' as we called it when it was introduced.
> 
> It is freedom of choice, no one is forcing anyone to undergo the procedure against their will. My mother was alway pro choice. Mum would be 110 years old if she were alive today, so she spoke for the older generation. My grandmother was always pro choice. They hated the backyard abortionists. If anyone is to be labelled a 'murderer' it would definitely be the backyard abortionists.


I also remember those days. I worked with a young woman who had been prescribed thalidomide and who, after extreme mental anguish, went to Mexico to obtain an abortion. It was not only a difficult decision, but a dangerous one. Those self-righteous witches (oops - spelling off on that word) who want to judge others and impose their religious beliefs on other women - horrible.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Think of it as an adventure - spell words however you feel like. But why no kitchen sink or counters?
> 
> Congratulations on the move. I'm sure it will work out well. I hope Dove likes it there; in fact, I hope you do, too. Keep in touch.


Home Depot is taking its time to make an install the quartz. So my kitchen is useless. Blah.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I didn't really think you were lumping me with joey. You did give me an opportunity to make further remarks that aren't particularly pro-choice but are very different than what joey says about the subject. I see some things in black and white and other things in way more than 50 shades of grey. There are some things all of us disagree about. At least this proves we're alive and awake human beings.


Thank you.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> But you stated that you were ashamed that your Christianity was tied in with those who believe in the Bible, and speak out against abortion. So, I was just wondering what kind of Christianity, you participate in. I've never heard of one that is pro abortion and anti Bible. I believe that the Catholic church didn't believe that a baby had a SOUL until it could breathe and survive. But surely, you're not suggesting that the Catholic church ever advocated abortion?!?


I think you've purposely misinterpreted what Patty said. You may not realize it, but there are many interpretations of what the Bible says, as there are many interpretation of the US Constitution. Please check this out: http://www.beliefnet.com/News/2003/01/The-Biblical-Basis-Forbeing-Pro-Choice.aspx

I can't continue - I have to run, but we'll meet again later.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Unitarians? :mrgreen:


And apparently Presbyterians and Episcopalians, also.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma wrote:
The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!



Wombatnomore said:


> Well, you've just reached a new low haven't you?


Low? Joey and her pals have taken over what God is supposed to be in charge of. I'd call that high. Sorry, I'd call it grandiose.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

True and so sad. Think people.



DGreen said:


> I also remember those days. I worked with a young woman who had been prescribed thalidomide and who, after extreme mental anguish, went to Mexico to obtain an abortion. It was not only a difficult decision, but a dangerous one. Those self-righteous witches (oops - spelling off on that word) who want to judge others and impose their religious beliefs on other women - horrible.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

So you get to catch up on all the delis. Yum.



SQM said:


> Home Depot is taking its time to make an install the quartz. So my kitchen is useless. Blah.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Planned Parenthood was backed by Protestant women from inception.



Poor Purl said:


> And apparently Presbyterians and Episcopalians, also.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> joeysomma wrote:
> The children will bear the sins of their parents. What kind of respect are these parents giving their children? NONE!
> 
> Low? Joey and her pals have taken over what God is supposed to be in charge of. I'd call that high. Sorry, I'd call it grandiose.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> We have beaten the abortion horse to death. Sorry, KFN, but this is nothing new. Why is it on D. Green's shoulders?
> If you don't like abortion, don't have one. By12 weeks can mean up to 12 weeks. Most have them within the first 6 weeks.
> Nobody can know what is going on in the minds of those going through an abortion, but calling them murderers is mean and wrong.
> In the eyes of the law, abortion is not murder.


I agree. I'm sorry if I put that ball into play again. I think the best thing is to give up trying to discuss this issue at all. We don't need to spend time in dead-end discussions. :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I don't see how they can call themselves Christians, but OK. You got me. Patty must be a Unitarian.


I think Patty sounds like a pretty good kind of Christian. I was being facetious about Unitarians. Discussing abortion is a super dead end conversation. Most of us have well developed beliefs and opinions on this subject that we won't change at this late date.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I agree. I'm sorry if I put that ball into play again. I think the best thing is to give up trying to discuss this issue at all. We don't need to spend time in dead-end discussions. :thumbup: :thumbup:


We have discussed it every which way, over and over again. We have had to read Joey's posts or ignore them for a long, long time. Neb and Joey and others are never going to change their minds, nor will we. What a useless discussion it is. We believe a woman should choose for herself. They don't - they believe abortion should be outlawed which would set women's rights back to when Iwas a small child. They feel a woman who has an abortion should be treated as a criminal and want to take away the rights we have gained over many many years - never the twain shall meet.

So much time is wasted when we never will agree. If only they and all of us would let it go. Years and years of disagreeing don't seem to matter. So unnecessary.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

I was very surprise this morning when I turned on the TV and heard that individjual charges were made against ALL SIX police which also included one woman who was a Sgt. There was also a Ltnt and I believe another Sgt. So there should have been some one who would stop it.

There was also a minute by minute description of what happened. It was horrible. That poor young man. I wonder whether they will actually be found guilty. Some were 2nd degree manslaughter and I believe there was one second degree murder. The story is horrifying.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I wonder if any of them have ever watched 'Call the Midwife' the BBC series set in the 50s and early 60s in the docklands of East London.


One of the things that bothers me about the subject of abortion is that a discussion of birth control doesn't happen. IMO, if people knew more about birth control and its benefits we'd see a lot fewer abortions. I watch "Call the Midwife" faithfully.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> I was very surprise this morning when I turned on the TV and heard that individjual charges were made against ALL SIX police which also included one woman who was a Sgt. There was also a Ltnt and I believe another Sgt. So there should have been some one who would stop it.
> 
> There was also a minute by minute description of what happened. It was horrible. That poor young man. I wonder whether they will actually be found guilty. Some were 2nd degree manslaughter and I believe there was one second degree murder. The story is horrifying.


Remember the Rodney King cops were indicted and got off. Could mean nada.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> 'Vera Drake' is an excellent movie and representation about illegal abortions in England in 1950. The film explores the desperation of women at the time and the terrible consequences when things go wrong:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vera_Drake


Thanks, I have bookmarked that and will see if I can get a copy of the movie somewhere.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> One of the things that bothers me about the subject of abortion is that a discussion of birth control doesn't happen. IMO, if people knew more about birth control and its benefits we'd see a lot fewer abortions. I watch "Call the Midwife" faithfully.


I agree. Birth control should be discussed as should sterilisation, for both males and females. So many males still cling to the thought that sterilisation makes them less of a male. My mother always said "if you do not want to have any more children then make sure you cannot have any more children. Close down the factory, shut the door and throw away the key." My eldest sister had seven children, the last born in 1965. When mum heard she was expecting the 7th she gave her a very stern lecture, asked her how she was going to educate that brood. Yes, sis had the snip when baby no 7 was born. You could say she was a 'pill addict' as she termed it the 'wonder pill' and said it should be available free to all women who wanted it. I have actually heard some women say they would not have ' the snip' because they heard that it made them fat. Unfortunately, some religions are very much against contraception. They are against it but they do not chip in and help when the poor and needy mothers bring another child into the world, a child that needs to be fed, housed and educated.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> They're just too dim.


"Dim" is true, but it's not the whole truth. There's a darkness about them that seems to fill up both their hearts and their brains. They have a formula: Everything that goes wrong is caused by liberals giving too much to the undeserving poor. This, in turn, causes single-parent families, disrespectful children, who knows what all? (Of course, underneath it all is the unwanted knowledge that some people are enjoying sex and are going to have it regardless.)

When Susanmos called them on their decision (actually, Knit Psycho's plan) to punish the children for their parents' "misdeeds," all any of them said was that she had no right to post there. Not one of them was capable of seeing things from the point of view of the children, who are already being punished for nothing and don't need moronic untruths written on their birth certificates.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> This is what comes to my mind when I think about 'them.'


Oh. My. God.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Home Depot is taking its time to make an install the quartz. So my kitchen is useless. Blah.


It's not useless. You can store yarn in it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I think Patty sounds like a pretty good kind of Christian. I was being facetious about Unitarians. Discussing abortion is a super dead end conversation. Most of us have well developed beliefs and opinions on this subject that we won't change at this late date.


An intelligent solution to a never-ending subject: just end it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> One of the things that bothers me about the subject of abortion is that a discussion of birth control doesn't happen. IMO, if people knew more about birth control and its benefits we'd see a lot fewer abortions. I watch "Call the Midwife" faithfully.


That's true. The RWNs don't want abortion, but they also don't want birth control. Nor do they want to pay for the additional costs of having another mouth to feed and body to dress.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska wrote:
I don't see how they can call themselves Christians, but OK. You got me. Patty must be a Unitarian.



MaidInBedlam said:


> I think Patty sounds like a pretty good kind of Christian. I was being facetious about Unitarians. Discussing abortion is a super dead end conversation. Most of us have well developed beliefs and opinions on this subject that we won't change at this late date.


Neb.It really isn't anyone's business what Church or what beliefs we have. We don't ask what Church you belong to nor do I know what Church those on the Right belong to except for one or two who told me before I got too involved here. I have never shared that with anyone as it isn't my business. There are some things that we don't discuss unless we wish to and we will make that decision.

We should not be put in a position where we have to justify what Church we go to, nor whether we go to Church at all.. No one, as far as I know, knows what Church you belong to. None of us care -that is your business. I agree with you Maid.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

SQM said:


> Remember the Rodney King cops were indicted and got off. Could mean nada.


I am afraid that might happen. At least some good things have happened in Baltimore so I am a bit hopeful that charges will be followed up. I was surprised at the amount of information which was given this morning. Pretty hard to ignore that. I hope it means something. It sounds as if he should not have been arrested in the first place. so sad.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> It's not useless. You can store yarn in it.


Stuff will arrive from NYC next Thursday and god knows how long it will take me to find it. So I went online just now and bought an afghan project. Today I missed 14th Street when I saw some of the same groupings of stores. Boo hoo.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Stuff will arrive from NYC next Thursday and god knows how long it will take me to find it. So I went online just now and bought an afghan project. Today I missed 14th Street when I saw some of the same groupings of stores. Boo hoo.


You'll probably get over missing 14th Street. I certainly have, and I knew 14th Street when it was really 14th St. What's on 14th St. that you can't find elsewhere?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

I never liked 14th street but we were in a vertical mall today and they had a cluster of stores that also were clustered on 14th. That was all. Homesick somewhat.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I agree. I'm sorry if I put that ball into play again. I think the best thing is to give up trying to discuss this issue at all. We don't need to spend time in dead-end discussions. :thumbup: :thumbup:


You didn't put that ball in play - joeysomma did.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> Planned Parenthood was backed by Protestant women from inception.


The short story is that Margaret Sanger wanted and did bring information about birth control, not to mention providing the means to free women from the tyranny of their reproductive systems. The concept that fewer children who have more advantages still isn't completely understood or accepted by many people all over our world.

In case it isn't obvious, I'm a big supporter of birth control. I firmly believe that it's the best way to resolve the abortion debate.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

DGreen said:


> You didn't put that ball in play - joeysomma did.


Thanks. I did fell, though, that I helped a bit to keep that old ball in play.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Thanks. I did fell, though, that I helped a bit to keep that old ball in play.


Me, too.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> I never liked 14th street but we were in a vertical mall today and they had a cluster of stores that also were clustered on 14th. That was all. Homesick somewhat.


When you first came east, were you homesick for Chicago? It all evens out in the end, and didn't you say your historian brother lives there?


----------



## Camacho (Feb 3, 2013)

congratulations on your move, SQM! 

David and I got a lot of very good news involving our move to Maine today. Details by PM.

We are happy.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

yeah. It has been dreamlike and exciting to be back with kindergarten friends. One of them pulls me out of the condo and will not let me sloth. So I think this is a smart move. And being away from a next door school yard is a gift. I was 24 when I went to Boston and cannot remember how I felt - relieved to be away from my mom, boring relatives, dead end boyfriend and freezing apt. Plus I had my whole life ahead of me and looked good. 

"When you first came east, were you homesick for Chicago? It all evens out in the end, and didn't you say your historian brother lives there?"


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Camacho said:


> congratulations on your move, SQM!
> 
> David and I got a lot of very good news involving our move to Maine today. Details by PM.
> 
> We are happy.


Mazel tov. let me know if it feels strange once you make the actual move.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Me, too.


I'd really like to see a serious conversation about birth control and planned parenthood. To sum up what I've said here or elsewhere, I believe birth control is the up side, the positive action women can take, long before they have to consider the difficult option of abortion. Isn't, after all is said and done, that a positive action is far better than a negative one?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> Why is it that some Christians seem to believe that we shoul dargue from the premise of their interpretation of the bible.
> 
> They'll say things like "_well all know/agree God said X,Y and Z_". Like it's just a universal Christian truth upon all Christians agree, or they're not 'real' Christians.
> 
> But no, it's just something they've be taught.


I've often wondered that too, Julia. Conservatives long for what they call a Christian, God-centered nation but don't seem to grasp that no two self-professed Christians view religion in the same way. They agitate for things like mandatory school prayer, but the question begs: which prayers? whose Bible? There are as many schisms and splits in the Christian world as there are days in the year.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> How about just "allowed" school prayer? "Allowed" Bible reading? "Allowed" mention of the word "God?" "Allowed" discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design? "Allowed" wearing of Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts?


If children of other religions--Muslims, for example, or Jews--are granted similar freedoms then I probably would go along with it. But why complicate an already jam-packed school day by trying to give every religion its fair share of time in the spotlight? Religion, like politics is an intensely personal matter and raises a lot of controversy--teachers and schools have enough on their plates these days.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> This is not about a specific Religion or sect! Why can't a student thank God in a school speech? Why has a student been told they cannot wear a Rosary to school?


Get off it, Joey. Just because one school may have prohibited wearing a rosary to school doesn't mean that has suddenly become the law of the land. You can't extrapolate a single instance into something it isn't. I'm sure you can cut and paste plenty of articles that supposedly "prove" Christian students are being silenced, but you would be dead wrong. SCHOOL IS NOT THE PLACE FOR GOD. Keep such baloney at home, in your church, in your private conversations, in an after-school gathering, and no one will give a damn.

*While you're cutting and pasting, please provide A SINGLE INSTANCE where anyone has been prevented from praying silently (as your mythical Jesus instructed), where anyone has been forbidden from attending church, where there has been any law passed against wearing a cross (a truly gruesome symbol, depicting violence), where any parent has been punished or prevented from teaching his child about religion in his own home or church, where anyone was prevented from advertising religious services, where anyone was prevented from putting the little fish on their car, or even where anyone has been punished from proselytizing to strangers by knocking on doors. I was verbally abused by an idiot fundamentalist (who was also a total stranger) just a few weeks ago when I declined her invitation to church, explaining I was an atheist and therefore not interested. I didn't call the cops and have her arrested; I was even very polite, given the circumstances.

YOU ARE NOT BEING PERSECUTED*


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Why has a student been told they cannot wear a Rosary to school?


You know why, since you know it happened.

Wearing a rosary has become a gang symbol. Wearing gang symbols has been prohibited by many school districts, and rightfully so.

HOWEVER, students may still CARRY a rosary in their pocket. Since you seem to be ignorant of the actual use of a rosary, it is not, and never was, intended as a piece of jewelry. It is a device intended to keep track of the number of repetitions of certain catholic prayers and back in the day when I was catholic, wearing a rosary like jewelry would have been considered shocking and disrespectful. Presumably, if a student were praying the rosary in class, he wouldn't be paying attention and it would be reasonable for a teacher to ask him to stop praying and start listening or doing his work.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> How about just "allowed" school prayer? "Allowed" Bible reading? "Allowed" mention of the word "God?" "Allowed" discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design? "Allowed" wearing of Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts?


Allowed school prayers would have to encompass prayers from all religions because to allow only Christian prayers and deny others is discrimination. Allowing school prayers would also include Buddhist meditation sessions and chanting, Muslim prayers, Hindu prayers - the list is endless. Unfortunately the Christians want every child, regardless of their religion to say only Christian prayers. To avoid this the children would either have to be segregated into separate religious groups or the children would have to say all the different prayers of all the different groups and they would spend half the day just praying.

"Allowed" Bible reading? You would also have to allow reading from the Koran, the Tripitaka, as well as all other religious books. 
"Allowed" mention of the word "God?" Would also include allowing mention of the word Buddha, Mohamed, as well as all other religious prophets. 
"Allowed" discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design? As well as discussion on evolution. And you would also have to allow the Hindu theory of how the universe began. 
"Allowed" wearing of Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts? This would also allow for the wearing of the Burka, the hijab or niqab.

Unfortunately this is not what you want and it appears that you have missed one very important word out in your post. You only want

"allowed" *Christian* school prayer? 
"Allowed *Christian*" Bible reading? 
"Allowed" mention of the word *Christian* God?" 
"Allowed" *Christian* discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design?
"Allowed" wearing of *Christian* Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts?
and you would like to ban all discussions of other religions.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> To her it was a gift from her grandmother. Not a gang symbol. The school prohibited the free exercise of her religion. School was wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
> 
> Amendment I
> 
> _Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. ..._


If a particular school is having trouble with gangs and gang symbols--hats, jewelry, certain colors--then it's in the students' best interests to ban such items, at least temporarily. Schools should be given a wide latitude when their students' safety is at stake, and they do have the right to enforce dress codes.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> To her it was a gift from her grandmother. Not a gang symbol. The school prohibited the free exercise of her religion. School was wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
> 
> Amendment I
> 
> _Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. ..._


When are you going to answer the question I posed?

My guess is never, because you have no case and no argument.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Allowed school prayers would have to encompass prayers from all religions because to allow only Christian prayers and deny others is discrimination. Allowing school prayers would also include Buddhist meditation sessions and chanting, Muslim prayers, Hindu prayers - the list is endless. Unfortunately the Christians want every child, regardless of their religion to say only Christian prayers. To avoid this the children would either have to be segregated into separate religious groups or the children would have to say all the different prayers of all the different groups and they would spend half the day just praying.
> 
> "Allowed" Bible reading? You would also have to allow reading from the Koran, the Tripitaka, as well as all other religious books.
> "Allowed" mention of the word "God?" Would also include allowing mention of the word Buddha, Mohamed, as well as all other religious prophets.
> ...


I would add that school is NOT the appropriate place for "practicing" one's religion. Religion has NO PLACE in public schools. Anyone is free to home school or enroll their children in religious schools of their choice - that is not being restricted in any way. No one prevents ANYONE from attending church services of their choice or practicing their religion. Keep prayer OUT OF SCHOOLS. School is for learning other things and if your child has been given instruction on religion at home and in church, there is no need for it in public school where it often infringes on the rights of the non-religious.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I would add that school is NOT the appropriate place for "practicing" one's religion. Religion has NO PLACE in public schools. Anyone is free to home school or enroll their children in religious schools of their choice - that is not being restricted in any way. No one prevents ANYONE from attending church services of their choice or practicing their religion. Keep prayer OUT OF SCHOOLS.


I agree with you 100%. I was merely trying to point out to JS that she only wants one religion in school and she wants to deny the same expression to all other religions. I wanted her to see that her proposals are discrimination.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I agree with you 100%. I was merely trying to point out to JS that she only wants one religion in school and she wants to deny the same expression to all other religions. I wanted her to see that her proposals are discrimination.


You are correct. Imagine the outrage if a muslim prayer were allowed. It might scald the delicate ears of the little christians. And get the teacher/principal fired.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> To her it was a gift from her grandmother. Not a gang symbol. The school prohibited the free exercise of her religion. School was wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
> 
> Amendment I
> 
> _Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. ..._


Do you even know what a rosary is? It's not jewelry; each bead is connected to a particular Catholic prayer. Wearing a rosary is not an exercise of religion; saying the Rosary is - has she been prevented from saying silent prayers?

And repeating yourself doesn't make you any more right.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Muslim prayers are allowed in school. They even visit Mosques. Some students have been required to wear traditional Muslim clothes. Some classes will spend a month studying Islam and nothing other than a mention of other religions.
> 
> So where is that wall of separation other than to keep Christianity out of the school?


You know what you are saying is crap, Joey.

How about answering the questions I asked? Or would that require too many brain cells?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Muslim prayers are allowed in school. They even visit Mosques. Some students have been required to wear traditional Muslim clothes. Some classes will spend a month studying Islam and nothing other than a mention of other religions.
> 
> So where is that wall of separation other than to keep Christianity out of the school?


I don't believe any of that. Where do you get your "information" from? The same sources who were afraid that Shariah law would be enacted in Kansas?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Muslim prayers are allowed in school. They even visit Mosques. Some students have been required to wear traditional Muslim clothes. Some classes will spend a month studying Islam and nothing other than a mention of other religions.
> 
> So where is that wall of separation other than to keep Christianity out of the school?


You know what you are saying is crap, Joey.

How about answering the questions I asked? Or would that require too many brain cells?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> You have refused to answer questions I have asked,. so why should I answer yours.


The difference is, I have actually asked intelligent questions. You have not.

But, ask again and I'll see if there is any room for discussion.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The girl chose to wear it. I have seen Nuns wearing it on their waistband. I guess I should have said the beads that Catholics use to say the Rosary.


Maybe the girl didn't know enough about her grandmother's religion so regarded her rosary as jewelry. She's not a nun, is she? (and the beads, all put together, is called a rosary, but wearing one is _not_ the exercise of religion - apparently you don't quite understand that).


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You have refused to answer questions I have asked,. so why should I answer yours.


Neener neener. Oy vey.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> The girl chose to wear it. I have seen Nuns wearing it on their waistband. I guess I should have said the beads that Catholics use to say the Rosary.


Nuns have a different reason for "wearing" a rosary. It's because they need to have it handy all the time as their lives are supposedly devoted to prayer and service. It is NOT an item of jewelry, so if you saw a nun wearing a rosary you made an ignorant assumption.

And nuns are not generally enrolled in high schools.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Nuns have a different reason for "wearing" a rosary. It's because they need to have it handy all the time as their lives are supposedly devoted to prayer and service. It is NOT an item of jewelry, so if you saw a nun wearing a rosary you made an ignorant assumption.
> 
> And nuns are not generally enrolled in high schools.


In Catholic high schoos they are. Which actually proves your point, doesn't it?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> In Catholic high schoos they are. Which actually proves your point, doesn't it?


Not enrolled as students. They teach, which is why they need to pray a lot.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> _The free exercise of religion under the American Constitution, includes the freedom to openly express, follow and live out our faith  not just in private but also in the public square  without government coercion, censorship or any other form of restriction._


Who are you quoting? Whoever said that is wrong.

The constitution does not guarantee any such thing as "without any form of restriction" on your religion or your free speech.

If your religion called for cannibalism, you could not practice that.

If your religion called for beating one's wife, you could not practice that.

If your religion called for killing people in your congregation who you thought were sinners, you could not practice that.

If your religion called for never hiring black people in your private business, you could not practice that.

The thing these all have in common is the well-understood fact that free practice of religion is not a license to murder or hurt others or to infringe on their rights illegally. The first amendment also encompasses freedom of speech, which is similarly restricted for the common good.

Obviously, you don't give a crap about the rights of others. You've proved that over and over again; it's a good thing the law prevents you from acting out what your sick and barbaric religion tells you to do.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Not enrolled as students. They teach, which is why they need to pray a lot.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> How about just "allowed" school prayer? "Allowed" Bible reading? "Allowed" mention of the word "God?" "Allowed" discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design? "Allowed" wearing of Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts?


That's what church and Sunday School is there for.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> If children of other religions--Muslims, for example, or Jews--are granted similar freedoms then I probably would go along with it. But why complicate an already jam-packed school day by trying to give every religion its fair share of time in the spotlight? Religion, like politics is an intensely personal matter and raises a lot of controversy--teachers and schools have enough on their plates these days.


It seems so odd to me now that when I was in primary school, Religious Eduction was a mandatory subject!


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You have refused to answer questions I have asked,. so why should I answer yours.


Why do you bother -- no one agrees with you, no one wants to talk to you.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> When are you going to answer the question I posed?
> 
> My guess is never, because you have no case and no argument.


Nah! She could present some sort of case if she applied herself but that's not her style.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> They why are they doing it, including you?


Because the kind of things you post are so offensive and so wrong on so many levels that they can't go unchallenged.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Who are you quoting? Whoever said that is wrong.
> 
> The constitution does not guarantee any such thing as "without any form of restriction" on your religion or your free speech.
> 
> ...


As per usual, point this evening to Bright Green.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> It seems so odd to me now that when I was in primary school, Religious Eduction was a mandatory subject!


Could you choose your religion to study?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Why are we playing into Joey's hands and letting her get us on a subject which is a silly thing to do as she baits us and makes stupid statements and we answer her, then she grins, and feels proud of herself.

I have bitten too but lets stop.* Let her talk to herself!!!*


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> It seems so odd to me now that when I was in primary school, Religious Eduction was a mandatory subject!


I cannot comment on schooling in New South Wales but here in Western Australia Religious education has never been mandatory.

My eldest went to school in the 1960s and 1970s and they did not attend religious studies. One day a week volunteers from different religions would attend the school and instruct children who were members of their church. Parents nominated which group the child could attend. If the parents did not wish the children to attend religious studies the children would go to the library and do quiet study. Unfortunately many parents did not know that they could withdraw their children from religious studies and thought they were compulsory. My eldest always went to the library during this period. Initially there were only a handful of children in the library for quiet study and not taking religious studies but word of mouth spread and before long there were many children in the library. Many parents still chose to send their children to the religious studies so they could learn something about religion, never mind the fact that the parents did not follow that faith nor did they attend any church.

I did have a difference of opinion with one headmaster. He said he thought all children should receive religious instructions. When I told him that he could not force children to attend religious studies against the parents wishes he retorted with "well if your children do not attend religious studies group then I will have to find a teacher to supervise them. The teachers look upon this religious study period as 'free time' and forcing a teacher to supervise them would eat into their free time". I told him not to worry as I would take my complaint to the Education Department. Yes I did, the same day. I caught the bus into Perth and spoke to the Department. They said I was correct, that children could not be made to attend religious studies against their parents wishes. He contacted the headmaster and told him he was to provide a teacher to supervise children who had been withdrawn from these studies. He followed it up with a letter and I received a copy of that letter.

One of the major reasons why I was so vocal on this issue was the fact that my son had been attending different groups each week and asking the person taking the group rather embarrassing questions that they could not answer. For example he asked one guy "what would you rather see, two men kissing on the street corner or two men fighting on the street corner". Yes, my eldest son was a little smart a++e from an early age. He was 10 years old when he asked the poor guy that question. When the religious guy told him that he would never turn his back on a homosexual man because he feared that he might be raped by the homosexual, my son asked him if he lived in fear of hetrosexual females and if they followed him down the street threatening to rape him, because homosexual males and hetrosexual females all fancy the same thing, hunky males. To add insult to injury my son added that he should not have any fear of being raped by homosexual or hetrosexuals and he was but ugly and both groups would definitely not be attracted to him. As I said, he was a little smart a++e.

Most of the people taking the religious study groups were lay people who were unpaid volunteers and who had no teaching skills and only pushed their particular dogma.

My youngest son attended school in Western Australia in the early 1980s and he did not attend religious studies, he joined the group in the library. We moved to Queensland in 1983 and once again did not attend religious studies. When we moved to Tasmania in 1985 he joined the library group once again. When we returned to Western Australia in 1990 he was in high school and neither of the two high schools he attended here had any religious studies taught.

I have read that in 2013, I could be wrong with that date, a high school in New South Wales had to withdraw a school publication that stated that religious studies were mandatory in that school. That directive contravened the Education Act of 1880. I will see if I can find any mention of it on the net.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> It seems so odd to me now that when I was in primary school, Religious Eduction was a mandatory subject!


Found the article I referred to in my previous post.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/brought-to-book-school-forced-to-admit-christian-studies-not-mandatory-20130830-2svvt.html

A Sydney high school has been forced to withdraw a publication which tells parents that Christian studies are a mandatory part of its curriculum.

The NSW Department of Education said the references will not appear in future editions of the year 7 information booklet for Pennant Hills High School. The 2013 version of the booklet says core subjects English, maths, science, history, geography, languages, technology, physical education, sport and Christian studies ''are all mandatory'' in years 7 to 10.

NSW Greens MP John Kaye said the statement was a violation of the NSW Education Act which requires public schools to have a neutral position on religion.

''Christian studies is being pushed as a core subject despite provisions in the Education Act which have been in force since 1880 specifically banning compulsory religious education.''

A study of comparative religions is entirely another matter. This would, or should, encompass a study of all religions, not just Christianity.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Muslim prayers are allowed in school. They even visit Mosques. Some students have been required to wear traditional Muslim clothes. Some classes will spend a month studying Islam and nothing other than a mention of other religions.
> 
> So where is that wall of separation other than to keep Christianity out of the school?


Were these activities part of a comparative study of all religions? I think you will find that this was the case. This is entirely different to indoctrination in only one religion, which is what you want to do. Your main objective seems to be to force children to be indoctrinated into your particularly narrow minded form of Christianity.

Children in comparative religious studies would undertake these activities to inform the children on the practices of the faith of Islam. And nothing other than a mention of other religions....I find that very hard to believe.

I think you are twisting facts here to justify your spurious argument.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The girl chose to wear it. I have seen Nuns wearing it on their waistband. I guess I should have said the beads that Catholics use to say the Rosary.


I am from a Catholic family, I attended a convent school for 10 years so I know about rosary beads. You carry them in your pocket, you do not wear them around your neck. If we had worn them around our neck then either the nuns or the priests would have made us remove them immediately. To wear a rosary as jewellery would have made a mockery of the rosary beads.

Yes, nuns wear their rosary beads hanging from their belts, but they are not worn as jewellery. You are twisting facts once again.

The rosary beads are used to count off the prayers as they are said, they are not an item of clothing or jewellery.

By the way, did you know that Muslim men also carry prayer beads? They use them to count off the prayers as they say them.

An article for you to read.

CATHOLICS are outraged after discovering rosary beads - sacred jewellery used in prayer - are being flaunted as a fashion statement.

The strings of beads with a cross are now as likely to be found in cheap jewellery stores as they are in a church, with fashion franchise Diva selling three styles of a rosary necklace with a silver cross pendant for $14.99 each.

The beads are a hit with teenagers, but national president for the Catholic Women's League Australia, Madge Fahy, said it was inappropriate for people to wear them as jewellery.

"It is totally disrespectful to the religious beliefs of Catholics" she said.
"I believe it's an abuse of our religious object. Rosary beads are solely used for prayer."

Ms Fahy said non-religious followers of fashion should have more regard for a sacred symbol of the Catholic Church.

"Don't wear them unless you're prepared to use them for what they are made for. They are not a fashion item, they are for prayer and for rosary - don't wear them."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/catholics-angry-as-celebrities-hijack-rosary-beads-as-a-fashion-statement/story-e6frer4f-1225890174772

Another article

David Tran, Part-time Catholic; Part-time Skeptic

Rosary beads are objects that help you to keep place of where you are when you are praying -- i.e. praying the rosary. Rosaries are a pretty way of showing you are catholic, of praying the rosary, and of feeling closer to Mary, who Catholics pray to as Jesus' mother, a saint who will in turn help pray for you.

I say "pretty" slightly sarcastically because I use my fingers to keep count.

So is it offensive. To Catholics it is. Offensive in the sort of way that if I saw a person I knew to be Catholic to that, it would be clear to me that person does not understand what the rosary is about. To wear it fashionably -- no no.

However if you aren't Catholic, then Catholics would view you as if you are desecrating a religious object -- but in the ideal would not judge you because you clearly don't know why the rosary is special.

Of course the reason you ask the question is not to be ignorant. Certainly a wiser course is to show you are not ignorant -- especially as you know yourself that you now aren't

http://www.quora.com/Is-it-offensive-to-wear-a-rosary-as-a-necklace-If-so-why


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you are twisting facts here to justify your spurious argument.


Spurious. The perfect word for Joey's "arguments" which never actually rise to the level of an argument. She posts statements like a parrot and thinks she's being clever. She never responds to logical challenges, but either logs out or posts bible verses as if they were valid - which they are not. Cognitively challenged.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I am from a Catholic family, I attended a convent school for 10 years so I know about rosary beads. You carry them in your pocket, you do not wear them around your neck. If we had worn them around our neck then either the nuns or the priests would have made us remove them immediately. To wear a rosary as jewellery would have made a mockery of the rosary beads.
> 
> Yes, nuns wear their rosary beads hanging from their belts, but they are not worn as jewellery. You are twisting facts once again.
> 
> ...


Thanks for that nice research. Pretty much what I told her, but she will no doubt bring it up again somewhere, sometime in the future to "prove" a falsehood.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Were these activities part of a comparative study of all religions? I think you will find that this was the case. This is entirely different to indoctrination in only one religion, which is what you want to do. Your main objective seems to be to force children to be indoctrinated into your particularly narrow minded form of Christianity.
> 
> Children in comparative religious studies would undertake these activities to inform the children on the practices of the faith of Islam. And nothing other than a mention of other religions....I find that very hard to believe.
> 
> I think you are twisting facts here to justify your spurious argument.


More probably she's picked up misinformation from one of her "sources." I very much doubt that school children are required to wear Muslim clothing without similar requirements for other faiths. In fact, I doubt that all those things she claims ever happened.

It's all part of the biggest religious group in the country crying that they're being picked on when what's really going on is that they're not being permitted to take over.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> More probably she's picked up misinformation from one of her "sources." I very much doubt that school children are required to wear Muslim clothing without similar requirements for other faiths. In fact, I doubt that all those things she claims ever happened.
> 
> It's all part of the biggest religious group in the country crying that they're being picked on when what's really going on is that they're not being permitted to take over.


I googled the muslim clothing thing and it appears to be part of a religious studies exercise. Students were NOT forced to wear the garments - they were invited to try them on. Anything Joey posts as "proof" that Christians are being persecuted has been gleaned from her right-wing, religious, extremist sites and is heavily edited and slanted to pander to the religious fanatics and teabaggers. As we know, they will believe anything that supports their "cause" whether truthful or not.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I googled the muslim clothing thing and it appears to be part of a religious studies exercise. Students were NOT forced to wear the garments - they were invited to try them on. Anything Joey posts as "proof" that Christians are being persecuted has been gleaned from her right-wing, religious, extremist sites and is heavily edited and slanted to pander to the religious fanatics and teabaggers. As we know, they will believe anything that supports their "cause" whether truthful or not.


Thanks for your research. Your explanation fits in with my understanding of what happened. I was just a tad lazy and did not research the information myself.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Could you choose your religion to study?


No, interestingly enough. It was a generic Christian platform taught by a non teaching staff member.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Found the article I referred to in my previous post.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/brought-to-book-school-forced-to-admit-christian-studies-not-mandatory-20130830-2svvt.html
> 
> ...


I'm in Victoria Eve. There was no question about whether children could be excused from RE. We had no choice. My mother was obsessive about sending us to the Methodist church and Sunday school for years (which is strange because she wasn't Christian). None of the other kids were excused all through Primary School. Of course it wasn't an issue in secondary school (as far as I can recall).


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Spurious. The perfect word for Joey's "arguments" which never actually rise to the level of an argument. She posts statements like a parrot and thinks she's being clever. She never responds to logical challenges, but either logs out or posts bible verses as if they were valid - which they are not. Cognitively challenged.


The thoughts and reasoning you convey to JS Green, are far too important to waste on one so rigid. Having said that, it is a pleasure to read them anyway! :-D


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> The thoughts and reasoning you convey to JS Green, are far too important to waste on one so rigid. Having said that, it is a pleasure to read them anyway! :-D


Thanks so much for your kind words. Good to know there are others out there who understand the importance of separation of church and state.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I'm in Victoria Eve. There was no question about whether children could be excused from RE. We had no choice. My mother was obsessive about sending us to the Methodist church and Sunday school for years (which is strange because she wasn't Christian). None of the other kids were excused all through Primary School. Of course it wasn't an issue in secondary school (as far as I can recall).


Sorry, I thought you were from New South Wales. I thought you were a Sydneysider. I plead senility and dementia.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

EveeeM - your eldest is a riot. Why does he remind me of you?

Wombat - why would your Mom send you to Christian studies? Nu?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> More probably she's picked up misinformation from one of her "sources." I very much doubt that school children are required to wear Muslim clothing without similar requirements for other faiths. In fact, I doubt that all those things she claims ever happened.
> 
> It's all part of the biggest religious group in the country crying that they're being picked on when what's really going on is that they're not being permitted to take over.[/quote
> 
> The Somalian community here wear their Muslim clothes to school and to work. The rest of the community is either Lutheran or Catholic and no uniforms required or requested.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> How about just "allowed" school prayer? "Allowed" Bible reading? "Allowed" mention of the word "God?" "Allowed" discussion of Creation or Intelligent Design? "Allowed" wearing of Religious expression such as jewelry or T-shirts?


How many kids are actually requesting to read the bible and pray in school?
None? I didn't think so. I don't know where you live but in Minnesota, kids can wear a religious medal , cross, (not gigantic ones, theare gang related.) or moon and star if they want to.
They can pray any time of the day that they want to. Just not out loud in classes. Is the teacher going to know when they are saying silent prayers? I don't think so.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I would add that school is NOT the appropriate place for "practicing" one's religion. Religion has NO PLACE in public schools. Anyone is free to home school or enroll their children in religious schools of their choice - that is not being restricted in any way. No one prevents ANYONE from attending church services of their choice or practicing their religion. Keep prayer OUT OF SCHOOLS. School is for learning other things and if your child has been given instruction on religion at home and in church, there is no need for it in public school where it often infringes on the rights of the non-religious.


Let me add to this, D. For kids who do want religious instruction, many churches offer classes after school hours and on Sunday. If the parent doesn't take advantage of that, then it's their mistake if they want religious instruction for their kids.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Because the kind of things you post are so offensive and so wrong on so many levels that they can't go unchallenged.


But we try. And the comments are so wrong and offensive that sometimes we can't think of a thing to say.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm with you Shirley. It's like mud wrestling with a pig. I give up.



Designer1234 said:


> Why are we playing into Joey's hands and letting her get us on a subject which is a silly thing to do as she baits us and makes stupid statements and we answer her, then she grins, and feels proud of herself.
> 
> I have bitten too but lets stop.* Let her talk to herself!!!*


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

damemary said:


> I'm with you Shirley. It's like mud wrestling with a pig. I give up.


Exactly! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Spurious. The perfect word for Joey's "arguments" which never actually rise to the level of an argument. She posts statements like a parrot and thinks she's being clever. She never responds to logical challenges, but either logs out or posts bible verses as if they were valid - which they are not. Cognitively challenged.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Terrorists come in many nationalities. IMHO



Cheeky Blighter said:


> :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just a 'good night' to dear friends. I admit I appreciate your inventive responses to 'One note band.' However I do intend to try to perfect ignoring the baits to waste time and effort in fruitless ways. Sweet dreams.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Good night all.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Poor Purl said:
> 
> 
> > More probably she's picked up misinformation from one of her "sources." I very much doubt that school children are required to wear Muslim clothing without similar requirements for other faiths. In fact, I doubt that all those things she claims ever happened.
> ...


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Good night.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> EveeeM - your eldest is a riot. Why does he remind me of you?
> 
> Wombat - why would your Mom send you to Christian studies? Nu?


I think she was influenced by the other mothers in the neighbourhood. She once said she was always careful to socialize us with the kids in the neighbourhood so that we didn't feel left out (and she made me join this corny Christian girls group called 'The Rays' which stood for 'little rays of light).'

Mama needn't have worried because all of us kids were out playing on the streets and in the bush over the road every chance we got. We were all great mates.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :thumbup:


Cheeky, I watched one part of a three part television series tonight called 'Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life.' It explores whether science and reason can explain human motives outside of religion. Very interesting. Tonight's episode looks at how the concept of religious sin actually weighs a person down with a lot of guilt (for example) and therefore induces the opposite of what it means to do.

It's considered that outside the restraints of religious belief, we humans have an inbuilt capacity to moderate ourselves nicely thank you very much!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex,_Death_and_the_Meaning_of_Life


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Cheeky, I watched one part of a three part television series tonight called 'Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life.' It explores whether science and reason can explain human motives outside of religion. Very interesting. Tonight's episode looks at how the concept of religious sin actually weighs a person down with a lot of guilt (for example) and therefore induces the opposite of what it means to do.
> 
> It's considered that outside the restraints of religious belief, we humans have an inbuilt capacity to moderate ourselves nicely thank you very much!
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex,_Death_and_the_Meaning_of_Life


<<<whispering...and live with the consequences. >>>>


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> <<<whispering...and live with the consequences. >>>>


So true.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> To her it was a gift from her grandmother. Not a gang symbol. The school prohibited the free exercise of her religion. School was wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
> 
> Amendment I
> _Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. ..._


Would you rather that this girl show disrespect for the rosary and risk an attack for being seen as someone who is involved in a gang?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

DGreen said:


> I googled the muslim clothing thing and it appears to be part of a religious studies exercise. Students were NOT forced to wear the garments - they were invited to try them on. Anything Joey posts as "proof" that Christians are being persecuted has been gleaned from her right-wing, religious, extremist sites and is heavily edited and slanted to pander to the religious fanatics and teabaggers. As we know, they will believe anything that supports their "cause" whether truthful or not.


I told joey awhile back that I'd explain how the complete separation of church and state is stated in the Constitution, and how the Constitutional


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

DGreen said:


> I googled the muslim clothing thing and it appears to be part of a religious studies exercise. Students were NOT forced to wear the garments - they were invited to try them on. Anything Joey posts as "proof" that Christians are being persecuted has been gleaned from her right-wing, religious, extremist sites and is heavily edited and slanted to pander to the religious fanatics and teabaggers. As we know, they will believe anything that supports their "cause" whether truthful or not.


I told joey awhile back that I'd explain how the complete separation of church and state is referenced in the Constitution. There's some history and legal precedents that also has to be explained as they shore up what the Constitution states on this matter.

Should MIB, your good ol' Schoolmarm, even bother to do this?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I told joey awhile back that I'd explain how the complete separation of church and state is referenced in the Constitution. There's some history and legal precedents that also has to be explained as they shore up what the Constitution states on this matter.
> 
> Should MIB, your good ol' Schoolmarm, even bother to do this?


It's been done - ad nauseum. It has no impact on her.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It's been done - ad nauseum. It has no impact on her.


She won't listen anyway. _ I really think we should let her talk to herself and not argue or let her bait us_. She is still fighting the fight she started, years ago, her position hasn't changed in any way. We have argued, explained over and over, I really can't see letting her 'win' all the time by allowing her to come in here and start another monologue and get ourselves involved with the same old same old. I really believe that she gets a lot of pleasure out of baiting us. She must realize we aren't going to change. We must realize she isn't going tochange either. She must gain something and I hate to give her any pleasure.

We are talking to the wind. One person can't ignore her for it to mean anything. We must all ignore her. Please lets give it a try. It will work if we all pay absolutely NO attention to her posts no matter what she says.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Weighing the effort and result, I'd say do something enjoyable instead. IMHO



MaidInBedlam said:


> I told joey awhile back that I'd explain how the complete separation of church and state is referenced in the Constitution. There's some history and legal precedents that also has to be explained as they shore up what the Constitution states on this matter.
> 
> Should MIB, your good ol' Schoolmarm, even bother to do this?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And we all have better things to do. Want to make a list?

1. Watch the birds.

2. Savor a cup of tea and read.

3. KNIT!!!!

4.



Designer1234 said:


> She won't listen anyway. _ I really think we should let her talk to herself and not argue or let her bait us_. She is still fighting the fight she started, years ago, her position hasn't changed in any way. We have argued, explained over and over, I really can't see letting her 'win' all the time by allowing her to come in here and start another monologue and get ourselves involved with the same old same old. I really believe that she gets a lot of pleasure out of baiting us. She must realize we aren't going to change. We must realize she isn't going tochange either. She must gain something and I hate to give her any pleasure.
> 
> We are talking to the wind. One person can't ignore her for it to mean anything. We must all ignore her. Please lets give it a try. It will work if we all pay absolutely NO attention to her posts no matter what she says.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Please do. Several have told me it is there, but they will not tell me where to find it.


You ignored it the first time. Look it up yourself.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> All you said it was context. No specifics. I have not found a specific place. Law works on specifics not context.
> 
> You won't even say which part of the Constitution has the context!!!!
> 
> There reason you will not tell me a specific place, is, it is not there, and you will look stupid if you cannot find it. You will NEVER be able to find it!!!!!!!!!!!!!


=====================================
come on ladies -- let it go! please! She is baiting you again - don't let her do this all the time.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Please do. Several have told me it is there, but they will not tell me where to find it.


You seem to have a lot of free time on your hands so as Green has advised look it up yourself. You should go visit your friends on D&P where they appreciate your religious and political fairy tales. Your presence here is like that of an irritating mosquito and nothing more. If only we could get rid of you with a good swat.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> I guess I win by default since no one has found a specific in the Constitution. It says the government is to stay out of the church. Period. Not the church is to stay out of the government.


You have officially expressed you OPINION and nothing else, so if you want to claim a "win" you can indulge in that fantasy, too.

You have been heard for the thousandth time.

You can go away now.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I guess I win by default since no one has found a specific in the Constitution. It says the government is to stay out of the church. Period. Not the church is to stay out of the government.


You win nothing, joey except in your twisted little mind. No one here gives a damn about what you think or believe. Years ago I used to have some respect for you, but no more. You are one perverse person to keep showing up on liberal threads where you know you are not wanted. You are a joke and any normal person would leave and not come back. I think more highly of an annoying bug than I do of you. A bug is just doing what a bug does. What is your excuse? Do you think your buddies would appreciate it if all the liberals landed on D&P because you can't control yourself and leave us alone?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I guess I win by default since no one has found a specific in the Constitution. It says the government is to stay out of the church. Period. Not the church is to stay out of the government.


joeysomma
be careful what you wish for. There are over 300 Religions who will want to have equal rights and some of those are mightier than yours.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Either it is there and someone will find it or
> 
> IT IS NOT THERE!!!! Period.
> 
> I will leave you alone, when someone admits it is not there or someone finds it.


joeysomma
time to grow up and stop your childish play.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Either it is there and someone will find it or
> 
> IT IS NOT THERE!!!! Period.
> 
> I will leave you alone, when someone admits it is not there or someone finds it.


Look in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This says that we are *not* a Christian country (or a country with any dominant religion).

I know you don't believe that all the judicial decisions that followed mean anything, but that's because you don't really understand how our government works.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I told joey awhile back that I'd explain how the complete separation of church and state is referenced in the Constitution. There's some history and legal precedents that also has to be explained as they shore up what the Constitution states on this matter.
> 
> Should MIB, your good ol' Schoolmarm, even bother to do this?


Well, Marm, it's entirely up to you. Just don't make it too complex, because the logic won't be followed. And, really, unless one of her RW websites spells it out for her (which will never happen), she won't accept it.

I'm satisfied with the Establishment clause, but I'm curious to see how you would explain it, so if you're game....


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Look in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This says that we are *not* a Christian country (or a country with any dominant religion).
> 
> I know you don't believe that all the judicial decisions that followed mean anything, but that's because you don't really understand how our government works.


Churches understand perfectly how our government works. Consider the following:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Churches understand perfectly how our government works. Consider the following:


Yes, churches certainly do understand, but we're not dealing with churches, just with joey.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> time to grow up and stop your childish play.


I found this photo of Joey!

No wonder she can't change her mind or stop harping about things she doesn't understand. This object has no brains.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I found this photo of Joey!
> 
> No wonder she can't change her mind or stop harping about things she doesn't understand. This object has no brains.


A perfect wingnut!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> The only childish behavior on this thread are those who cannot prove what they say. It just proves the ignorance of American History.
> 
> Enough of this foolishness. There are women in the Philippines who are waiting for my excess yarn. So far I have 7 large Garbage bags for them. I should have another 3 or 4. They are more important than any of you.


Then please, grace us with your non-presence.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> The only childish behavior on this thread are those who cannot prove what they say. It just proves the ignorance of American History.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Enough of this foolishness.


Right you are. Go do something useful and stop looking foolish.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

To my liberal Christian friends. Please understand that I have no problem with your beliefs, because you are kind and follow the "love" part of Christianity. It's hateful, mindless, bigoted people like Joey that deserve to be blasted for bastardizing your faith.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> The only childish behavior on this thread are those who cannot tell the difference between the charlatans you listen to and truth.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

The only childish behavior on this thread are those who cannot prove what they say. Like you, with your twisted belief you are being persecuted.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

The only childish behavior on this thread are those who deny science.

Enough of this foolishness. [/quote]


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

This one is especially for you, Joey. Line up, girl, your dream has come true. A guaranteed ticket to heaven.

_A married couple in Florida, Tito and Amanda Watts, were arrested a few days ago for selling golden tickets to heaven to hundreds of people.

They sold the tickets on the street for $99.99 per ticket, told buyers the tickets were made from solid gold, and that each ticket reserved the buyer a spot in heaven  simply present the ticket at the pearly gates and youre in.

Tito Watts said in his police statement: "I dont care what the police say. The tickets are solid gold And it was Jesus who give them to me behind the KFC and said to sell them so I could get me some money to go to outer space. I met an alien named Stevie who said if I got the cash together hed take me and my wife on his flying saucer to his planet thats made entirely of drugs. You should arrest Jesus because hes the one that gave me the golden tickets and said to sell them. Im willing to wear a wire and set Jesus up...."

Amanda Watts said in her police statement:" "We just wanted to leave earth and go to space and do drugs. I didnt do nothing. Tito sold the golden tickets to heaven. I just watched."

Police said they confiscated over $10,000 in cash, drug paraphernalia, and a baby alligator._

The most amazing part? HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE PAID FOR THESE TICKETS.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Either it is there and someone will find it or
> 
> IT IS NOT THERE!!!! Period.
> 
> I will leave you alone, when someone admits it is not there or someone finds it.


Looks like Prof. Somma is asking for a Rumble on her turf.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

SQM said:


> Looks like Prof. Somma is asking for a Rumble on her turf.


Only because she could count on support there. Those old biddies all agree with her and would be happy to scream to the Ostrich that they were being persecuted.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Only because she could count on support there. Those old biddies all agree with her and would be happy to scream to the Ostrich that they were being persecuted.


Then the Ostrich gives us 100 lashes. Then we have to come up with some ingenious ways to make up for that.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Cheeky, I watched one part of a three part television series tonight called 'Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life.' It explores whether science and reason can explain human motives outside of religion. Very interesting. Tonight's episode looks at how the concept of religious sin actually weighs a person down with a lot of guilt (for example) and therefore induces the opposite of what it means to do.
> 
> It's considered that outside the restraints of religious belief, we humans have an inbuilt capacity to moderate ourselves nicely thank you very much!
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex,_Death_and_the_Meaning_of_Life


Sounds interesting. What network was that on. I will see if I can catch up on it. I find I am usually watching ABC, SBS or UKTV.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

damemary said:


> And we all have better things to do. Want to make a list?
> 
> 1. Watch the birds.
> 
> ...


4. Sit and enjoy the sunlight reflecting off the leaves of the trees and enjoy how the branches are wafting gently in the breeze.

5. Pat the cat and talk to him/her. The cat is far more interesting conversationalist than ummmm what was her name again.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:shock:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:hunf:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:wink:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:hunf:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:thumbdown:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Thanks for all your enlightened memes, Green. I really enjoyed them. :thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Thanks for all your enlightened memes, Green. I really enjoyed them. :thumbup:


I like yours, too!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Thanks to Cheeks and Bright for tonight's excellent entertainment. 

Keep them comin' Ladies.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> You forgot the most important part, " or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; "
> 
> 0bama doesn't believe in the second part, as he is trying to force Christians to do things contrary to their faith. If he was not, there would have been no Hobby Lobby case. He is changing the first amendment to say freedom of worship instead of freedom of religion.
> 
> ...


Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


Love it Eve! Perfect likeness! :XD:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Churches understand perfectly how our government works. Consider the following:


Just think what could be done else wise with that money. Makes me want to fall through the floor never to be seen again. Or should I say that about JS?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I found this photo of Joey!
> 
> No wonder she can't change her mind or stop harping about things she doesn't understand. This object has no brains.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Only because she could count on support there. Those old biddies all agree with her and would be happy to scream to the Ostrich that they were being persecuted.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: That is so funny! I love it!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Sounds interesting. What network was that on. I will see if I can catch up on it. I find I am usually watching ABC, SBS or UKTV.


SBS Eve. The first part was last night. Looking forward to 2nd and 3rd.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> 4. Sit and enjoy the sunlight reflecting off the leaves of the trees and enjoy how the branches are wafting gently in the breeze.
> 
> 5. Pat the cat and talk to him/her. The cat is far more interesting conversationalist than ummmm what was her name again.


6. Sitting quietly and knitting a lovely garment with lovely soft yarn that was on sale for song.

7. Strolling to the coffee shop on a beautiful sunny day and having my favourite Mocha Coffee while sitting inside in the sun-filled room.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :thumbdown:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Thanks to Cheeks and Bright for tonight's excellent entertainment.
> 
> Keep them comin' Ladies.


Yes, hilarious AND thought provoking. Very good Ladies!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Love it!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> SBS Eve. The first part was last night. Looking forward to 2nd and 3rd.


Thanks, also found it on youtube.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You forgot the most important part, " or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; "
> 
> 0bama doesn't believe in the second part, as he is trying to force Christians to do things contrary to their faith. If he was not, there would have been no Hobby Lobby case. He is changing the first amendment to say freedom of worship instead of freedom of religion.
> 
> ...


I didn't leave anything out. You asked where it says that religion is to stay out of government, and there it is. If you want to move the goal posts, do it, but that doesn't mean you win.

And it's not a phrase; it's a sentence consisting of two _independent_ clauses, the first being the Establishment clause (no establishment of religion; that is, religion stays out of govt.) and the second the Exercise clause (you can be as religious as you like and govt must stay out - unless you want to bring human sacrifices or stuff like that).

But I see that you didn't want an answer to your question, no matter how often you yelled about it. All you wanted was another chance to say the same thing you've been saying over and over and over.

So the next time you pretend to ask a question, you can also pretend you've gotten an answer.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Double double post post


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I like yours, too!


And I enjoyed yours and Cheeky's both. But some of yours were harder to read.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Just think what could be done else wise with that money. Makes me want to fall through the floor never to be seen again. Or should I say that about JS?


Makes you want to hammer her on the head till she goes through the floor? Okay.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Actually our country is founded on "God." God is mentioned 4 times in the Declaration of Independence.
> 
> _ Laws of Nature and of Nature's God
> Creator
> ...


Take a long walk off a short pier. You are repetitive and boring. IF any of us here needed a class on the Constitution, we would take it from someone who is actually more educated on the subject, which obviously you aren't. You are fighting a losing battle here. Get your helmet. Your head must be bruised from banging it against that brick wall.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

I hope Kathy47 does not mind, but she just posted this picture on KP and I have half inched it as I think it applies to the Queen of Hearts.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You seem to have a lot of free time on your hands so as Green has advised look it up yourself. You should go visit your friends on D&P where they appreciate your religious and political fairy tales. Your presence here is like that of an irritating mosquito and nothing more. If only we could get rid of you with a good swat.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Mosquito! Bazinga!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Mosquito. Whap!



DGreen said:


> You have officially expressed you OPINION and nothing else, so if you want to claim a "win" you can indulge in that fantasy, too.
> 
> You have been heard for the thousandth time.
> 
> You can go away now.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Mosquito! Splat!



Cheeky Blighter said:


> You win nothing, joey except in your twisted little mind. No one here gives a damn about what you think or believe. Years ago I used to have some respect for you, but no more. You are one perverse person to keep showing up on liberal threads where you know you are not wanted. You are a joke and any normal person would leave and not come back. I think more highly of an annoying bug than I do of you. A bug is just doing what a bug does. What is your excuse? Do you think your buddies would appreciate it if all the liberals landed on D&P because you can't control yourself and leave us alone?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

1. Our mental health system allows people obviously in need of care to run loose. Thank you Ronald Reagan.

2. The same thing applies to the folks who willingly paid for their tickets to heaven.

3. IMHO the men in white coats are needed more than the police in this instance.



DGreen said:


> This one is especially for you, Joey. Line up, girl, your dream has come true. A guaranteed ticket to heaven.
> 
> _A married couple in Florida, Tito and Amanda Watts, were arrested a few days ago for selling golden tickets to heaven to hundreds of people.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> 4. Sit and enjoy the sunlight reflecting off the leaves of the trees and enjoy how the branches are wafting gently in the breeze.
> 
> 5. Pat the cat and talk to him/her. The cat is far more interesting conversationalist than ummmm what was her name again.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :wink:


 :mrgreen: :XD:

I've had an Epiphany. Everyone's evaluation of a problem and their proposed solution depend upon their beliefs and experience. For example, whites looking at Baltimore riots (meaning the current Baltimore riots rather than the Baltimore riots fifty years ago.) The only hope for understanding and change is for people to learn empathy for the rest of the world.

Fat chance. Cross off that Epiphany.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks Cheeky & Green for the enlightening pictures.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Unfortunately One Who Shall Not Be Mentioned does not understand humor. I'm afraid that makes it funnier for me. 
:twisted:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I hope Kathy47 does not mind, but she just posted this picture on KP and I have half inched it as I think it applies to the Queen of Hearts.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: "Awesome. Now we're both barking."


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I hope Kathy47 does not mind, but she just posted this picture on KP and I have half inched it as I think it applies to the Queen of Hearts.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Makes you want to hammer her on the head till she goes through the floor? Okay.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Remember those wooden toys with the wooden hammer and you hammered the coloured cylindrical rods through from one side to the other? I finally found one for my son when he was little and I used to sit with him and the toys and happily hammer those wooden rods for ages. So therapeutic.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I hope Kathy47 does not mind, but she just posted this picture on KP and I have half inched it as I think it applies to the Queen of Hearts.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Good one!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm going to the toy store. I need therapy.



Wombatnomore said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: Remember those wooden toys with the wooden hammer and you hammered the coloured cylindrical rods through from one side to the other? I finally found one for my son when he was little and I used to sit with him and the toys and happily hammer those wooden rods for ages. So therapeutic.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> I'm going to the toy store. I need therapy.


Pick up an extra for me, Dame. No need for the pegboard, though--I'm just going to apply the hammer to my own head and knock myself into merciful unconsciousness the next time Joey starts spouting off.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> "Separation of church and state' is not literally in the constitution, therefore it doesn't exist.
> 
> The same must hold true of God, for God is not literally mentioned in the constitution either.
> 
> Riiiiiight?


Too logical.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> 1. Our mental health system allows people obviously in need of care to run loose. Thank you Ronald Reagan.
> 
> 2. The same thing applies to the folks who willingly paid for their tickets to heaven.
> 
> 3. IMHO the men in white coats are needed more than the police in this instance.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: Remember those wooden toys with the wooden hammer and you hammered the coloured cylindrical rods through from one side to the other? I finally found one for my son when he was little and I used to sit with him and the toys and happily hammer those wooden rods for ages. So therapeutic.


Those were my favorite toys as a very young child. I sometimes dream about them still. Now I know why. Thank you.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then I guess you know more than Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the founding fathers!


??????????

No, but I seem to know more than you:

Wikipedia: "Separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") is a *phrase used by Thomas Jefferson and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States*. Since the First Amendment clearly places the restrictions solely on the state, some argue a more correct phrase would be the "separation of state FROM church". Either way, the "separation" phrase has since been repeatedly used by the Supreme Court of the United States.

I could go on, but the hammer on the head would be a more fruitful exercise, depending on whose head it is. Goodbye.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then I guess you know more than Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the founding fathers!


*sigh* Joey, you're driving everyone crazy. You've made it abundantly clear that you feel the government is interring with people's right to practice their religion. Can we please stop arguing over that the Constitution does or does not say and instead consider some concrete examples of supposed government meddling?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Pick up an extra for me, Dame. No need for the pegboard, though--I'm just going to apply the hammer to my own head and knock myself into merciful unconsciousness the next time Joey starts spouting off.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Don't hurt yourself. But others aren't so safe.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> ??????????
> 
> No, but I seem to know more than you:
> 
> ...


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> *sigh* Joey, you're driving everyone crazy. You've made it abundantly clear that you feel the government is interring with people's right to practice their religion. Can we please stop arguing over that the Constitution does or does not say and instead consider some concrete examples of supposed government meddling?


Don't you remember: forcing schoolkids to wear Muslim garb, not permitting them to pray in class, etc.?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm trying to forget.



Poor Purl said:


> Don't you remember: forcing schoolkids to wear Muslim garb, not permitting them to pray in class, etc.?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Hear ye! hear ye! hear ye! The latest session of the flat earth society is now in session. Will you all please rise whilst the Queen of Hearts enters the room!


EveMCooke
thank you, love the Queen.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Then I guess you know more than Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the founding fathers!


joeysomma
isn't there anyone around you with good sense who can rescue you?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So, I guess you are ignorant to what the government, 0bama, is doing now.


joeysomma
we know you are a Racist and a Bigot and also know, that you know very little else. You keep making that abundantly clear.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So, I guess you are ignorant to what the government, 0bama, is doing now.


Well, then tell me.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You know nothing.


C'mon, Joey. You must have concrete, specific examples of how you feel President Obama is misinterpreting the Constitution with regards to religion.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma
your friend Lukelucy needs some lessons in Christianity. If you can spare some time away from the nonsense you occupy yourself with here, please, give her some instructions. She thinks that only folks like her deserve medical treatment. Nice people you hang around with.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> your friend Lukelucy needs some lessons in Christianity. If you can spare some time away from the nonsense you occupy yourself with here, please, give her some instructions. She thinks that only folks like her deserve medical treatment. Nice people you hang around with.


Saw that, Huck. Seems that "those people" are supposed to wait outside until every last Worthy has been attended to.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> your friend Lukelucy needs some lessons in Christianity. If you can spare some time away from the nonsense you occupy yourself with here, please, give her some instructions. She thinks that only folks like her deserve medical treatment. Nice people you hang around with.


What was that? Only folks like Lukelucy deserve medical treatment? Are there any folks like Lukelucy?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> What was that? Only folks like Lukelucy deserve medical treatment? Are there any folks like Lukelucy?


Over on D & P--LL was complaining that the ER was too crowded when her SIL's husband had to go and predicted it would get worse under the ACA.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Saw that, Huck. Seems that "those people" are supposed to wait outside until every last Worthy has been attended to.


Just like at the airport; the coach passengers board after first class and business. I never thought of medicine in that way.

She's the one who believes that Wall Street guys deserve all the absurd money they're paid, and that rich people take more risks and therefore deserve more money. But then, wouldn't someone who works heavy machinery who might lose an arm at it, or washes sharp restaurant knives, deserve even more because their risks are greater?

A sickening statistic I saw yesterday (NYTimes, Nick Kristof's column): the total amount of money set aside for bonuses to Wall Street is about equal to the total amount earned by all the minimum wage workers in this country.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Over on D & P--LL was complaining that the ER was too crowded when her SIL's husband had to go and predicted it would get worse under the ACA.


And she's wrong about that, too. People who crowd ERs are usually people who can't afford doctor visits. The ACA will pay for doctor visits, won't it.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> And she's wrong about that, too. People who crowd ERs are usually people who can't afford doctor visits. The ACA will pay for doctor visits, won't it.


Poor Purl
yes, thankfully ACA does pay for doctor visits. Aren't those Christian Folks a "caring" bunch? Egostitical, self centered
would be a proper description of them. Shall leave additional descriptions for another time.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Over on D & P--LL was complaining that the ER was too crowded when her SIL's husband had to go and predicted it would get worse under the ACA.


susanmos2000
I like to stay away from D&P but when those Bible thumpers tread on the least among us, I cannot stand by and ignore it. Wonder why God does not speak to them when they get so ugly. Selective hearing or the imagination has its limits.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I'm going to the toy store. I need therapy.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Pick up an extra for me, Dame. No need for the pegboard, though--I'm just going to apply the hammer to my own head and knock myself into merciful unconsciousness the next time Joey starts spouting off.


That's right Mos, they're called pegs/peg board! Why didn't I remember that? :shock:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> ??????????
> 
> No, but I seem to know more than you:
> 
> ...


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> I'm going to the toy store. I need therapy.


Adult coloring books are the latest for self-therapy.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Saw that, Huck. Seems that "those people" are supposed to wait outside until every last Worthy has been attended to.


Don't tell me that's still fodder for current discussion over there please? :roll:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> isn't there anyone around you with good sense who can rescue you?


Prof. Somma loves to argue. She is having fun. It is going to be hard to stop her.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Just like at the airport; the coach passengers board after first class and business. I never thought of medicine in that way.
> 
> She's the one who believes that Wall Street guys deserve all the absurd money they're paid, and that rich people take more risks and therefore deserve more money. But then, wouldn't someone who works heavy machinery who might lose an arm at it, or washes sharp restaurant knives, deserve even more because their risks are greater?
> 
> A sickening statistic I saw yesterday (NYTimes, Nick Kristof's column): the total amount of money set aside for bonuses to Wall Street is about equal to the total amount earned by all the minimum wage workers in this country.


Oligarchy.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Just like at the airport; the coach passengers board after first class and business. I never thought of medicine in that way.
> 
> She's the one who believes that Wall Street guys deserve all the absurd money they're paid, and that rich people take more risks and therefore deserve more money. But then, wouldn't someone who works heavy machinery who might lose an arm at it, or washes sharp restaurant knives, deserve even more because their risks are greater?
> 
> A sickening statistic I saw yesterday (NYTimes, Nick Kristof's column): the total amount of money set aside for bonuses to Wall Street is about equal to the total amount earned by all the minimum wage workers in this country.


That is truly sickening. Same goes for Mayweather (a domestically abusive individual) being paid $100,000,000 for the recent 'fight of the century' against the humble Pacquiao who many believe was more deserving of winning, not that I condone boxing I might add.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> susanmos2000
> I like to stay away from D&P but when those Bible thumpers tread on the least among us, I cannot stand by and ignore it. Wonder why God does not speak to them when they get so ugly. Selective hearing or the imagination has its limits.


Or there is no G-d to hear them?


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Over on D & P--LL was complaining that the ER was too crowded when her SIL's husband had to go and predicted it would get worse under the ACA.


LL happens to be correct. Patients that are going to the ER have been increasing, despite enrollment in the ACA and the increase enrollment in Medicaid. Many more doctors are not accepting Medicaid patients, so patients are left with the ER as their only choice.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Oligarchy.


Hello dear Sloth! How's Chicago (the Windy Apple)? I saw that it's only going to be 14C with rain there today. Same here. We're a touch warmer but the wind chill factor will make it seem a lot colder.

Hope you're settling in nicely.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> LL happens to be correct. Patients that are going to the ER have been increasing, despite enrollment in the ACA and the increase enrollment in Medicaid. Many more doctors are not accepting Medicaid patients, so patients are left with the ER as their only choice.


And it's great that they've got a choice.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Pick up an extra for me, Dame. No need for the pegboard, though--I'm just going to apply the hammer to my own head and knock myself into merciful unconsciousness the next time Joey starts spouting off.


Oh good. Can we watch? I suggest a rubber mallet over the plastic one as it will get the job done. This sounds like a good way to spend the afternoon. You might knock yourself into unconsciousness, but I doubt it will knock any sense into you.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> And it's great that they've got a choice.


They have always had that option, with or without the ACA.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Oligarchy.


So true, SQM...makes me wonder what sort of triage system the D & P crowd would like to set up. What factors would determine who gets to see the doctor first? Race? Religion? Household income? Marital status? It goes without saying that non-Christians, those with dark skin, the poor, and unmarried mothers and their children would be shoved by them to the back of the line.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> susanmos2000
> I like to stay away from D&P but when those Bible thumpers tread on the least among us, I cannot stand by and ignore it. Wonder why God does not speak to them when they get so ugly. Selective hearing or the imagination has its limits.


I understand completely, Huck. In general their talk is boring, by I myself couldn't hold my tongue a few days ago when I heard of KC's plan for social change: stamping birth certificates "Product of rape" or listing multiple men as the father if the mothers of newborns could not or would not produce a single name.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> yes, thankfully ACA does pay for doctor visits. Aren't those Christian Folks a "caring" bunch? Egostitical, self centered
> would be a proper description of them. Shall leave additional descriptions for another time.


No need. With every post a neon sign lights up saying "I'm great."


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Ethiopian Jews are protesting police brutality in Israel:

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/05/04/17/59/violent-clash-between-israeli-police-and-ethiopian-jews-at-protests


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Prof. Somma loves to argue. She is having fun. It is going to be hard to stop her.


She doesn't argue. She simply states some right-wing website's opinion over and over, and when anyone shows her she's wrong, she ignores them.

She does love posting ignorant opinions, however.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> That is truly sickening. Same goes for Mayweather (a domestically abusive individual) being paid $100,000,000 for the recent 'fight of the century' against the humble Pacquiao who many believe was more deserving of winning, not that I condone boxing I might add.


It's not the same. Money paid to boxers comes from people who want to see boxing, or manage them, or broadcast matches. It doesn't come from anyone's pension or life savings, as Wall St. bonuses do.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> LL happens to be correct. Patients that are going to the ER have been increasing, despite enrollment in the ACA and the increase enrollment in Medicaid. Many more doctors are not accepting Medicaid patients, so patients are left with the ER as their only choice.


Is that happening in all states or only in those whose govts. refused to expand Medicaid?

And you know this how?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Hello dear Sloth! How's Chicago (the Windy Apple)? I saw that it's only going to be 14C with rain there today. Same here. We're a touch warmer but the wind chill factor will make it seem a lot colder.
> 
> Hope you're settling in nicely.


She got out just in time. It's already 84F (29C) and we haven't hit the high. Looks like Whoever's in charge has decided to skip spring and go straight to summer.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> LL happens to be correct. Patients that are going to the ER have been increasing, despite enrollment in the ACA and the increase enrollment in Medicaid. Many more doctors are not accepting Medicaid patients, so patients are left with the ER as their only choice.


That may be so, Solowey, but do you really want to turn these folks away if they truly have nowhere else to go?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)




----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Hello dear Sloth! How's Chicago (the Windy Apple)? I saw that it's only going to be 14C with rain there today. Same here. We're a touch warmer but the wind chill factor will make it seem a lot colder.
> 
> Hope you're settling in nicely.


Ha Ha. I like the name the Windy Apple. 14C sounds miserable. I think it will be 70F but I am stuck in waiting for the cable guy. That is good weather for you in May.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true, SQM...makes me wonder what sort of triage system the D & P crowd would like to set up. What factors would determine who gets to see the doctor first? Race? Religion? Household income? Marital status? It goes without saying that non-Christians, those with dark skin, the poor, and unmarried mothers and their children would be shoved by them to the back of the line.


The Elderly will be short changed the most.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> That may be so, Solowey, but do you really want to turn these folks away if they truly have nowhere else to go?


I didn't say a word about turning anyone away. Stop putting words into my mouth. All you are doing is reading to twist what is said so you can attack. How very mature.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> I didn't say a word about turning anyone away. Stop putting words into my mouth. All you are doing is reading to twist what is said so you can attack. How very mature.


You're missing the point, Solowey. Approximately 7.6 million Americans joined the ranks of the insured since the inception of the ACA, and now they require doctors, medical services, and hospital beds. Changes have to made to the existing system to ensure that everyone gets what he or she needs. Consumer education could do a lot towards steering folks to less-expensive options than the ER room--recruiting doctors from oversees when there truly is a shortage--the establishment of more walk-in clinics (doc in a box) for cases that are urgent but not critical (a sprained ankle, a child's ear infection).


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I do not post opinions about the Constitution. Only facts.
> 
> I]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; [/I]
> 
> ...


Once again, some concrete examples of how the government is interfering with the free exercise of religion would be helpful. I and many others have asked you this before--is it really that difficult for you to come up with something?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Pit vipers?



Poor Purl said:


> What was that? Only folks like Lukelucy deserve medical treatment? Are there any folks like Lukelucy?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I do not post opinions about the Constitution. Only facts.


So you say. That may or may not be true, but I know that a lot of the things you post are opinions coming from right-wing websites.



> _Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; _


And that sentence alone contains both the Establishment clause and the Exercise clause. It's what I posted to you. What exactly is your point?



> Congress has never established a religion, Prayer is not a Religion. The Founding fathers started their meetings with prayer. How does this statement tell people to keep religion out of Government. When the founding fathers referenced God in the Declarations of Independence, and dated each document with "the Year of our Lord" ? I suggest you go back to a study of the constitution and the other documents of the founding fathers. Hillsdale College has several online classes, they are archived. The best part they are free. You have no excuse to not find out what really happened at the founding of out country.


Prayer is an act of religiosity. No point in praying if there's no Supreme Being to receive your prayer. The Declarations are not the Constitution. I have no doubt that some of the Founders were religious, I know that some were not, and I suspect that there were some who wanted to appear religious though in their hearts they weren't. As for Year of our lord, that's a convention; it's how writers up to the 21st century referred to the calendar we use. It's only recently that people have started using CE (common era, to replace AD) and BCE (before the common era, to replace BC).

Yale also has free online classes, so why would I bother with Hillsdale, which I've never heard of? Here's one:

*America's Unwritten Constitution*
_Akhil Reed Amar
Americas Unwritten Constitution goes beyond the text of the Constitution to ask questions like: What are the ground rules for proper constitutional interpretation? Who decides what the text means? How does the written constitution interact with unwritten sources of constitutional authority, such as judicial decisions, presidential proclamations, landmark statutes, and widespread popular understands?

Certificate: Yes Degree: No Credit: No Free: Yes_

and another, which sounds similar:

_Constitutional Law
Akhil Amar
This course is designed to introduce you to one of the most important texts in human historythe United States Constitution. Why and how did this document come into existence in the 1780s? How and why has it been amended over the years? Who decides what it means?_



> Sorry, I do not have a degree in English, and don't know the difference between a clause and a phrase. If you noticed there is a comma between the two "clauses" (as you called them), and a semicolon at the end. That means the two statements go together.


I have to apologize for that. Knowing the names of grammatical objects is nice, but not necessary. Like knowing the difference between numerator and denominator - it's enough to know the top and bottom of a fraction. But it's obvious the two statements go together. One says religion out of govt, the other, govt out of religion.

Enough. I've bored myself and everybody else, and you're not even going to give a minute's thought to what I've written. I cry Uncle!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Cake bakers, photographers, florists, wedding chapels. Forced Abortion coverage(but 0bama has lost most of those),Military Chaplains not allowed to pray in Jesus Name. Parents not allowed to take gender confused minors to a straight therapist.
> 
> You can do the research! These have nothing to do with discrimination!!!!!!!!!!!


What about "cake bakers, photographers, florists, wedding chapels"? How is the government intruding on the practice of their faith? And as for the chaplains, they're only asked to refrain from praying in the name of Jesus when they speak at secular events or before religiously mixed audiences (just as military imams in such a position are expected to refrain from mentioning Allah). When leading purely Christian services they can and do pray in whatever matter feels appropriate.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Pit vipers?


Pit bulls?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> What about "cake bakers, photographers, florists, wedding chapels"? How is the government intruding on the practice of their faith? And as for the chaplains, they're only expected to refrain from praying in the name of Jesus when they speak at secular events or before religiously mixed audiences (just as imams in such a position are expected to refrain from mentioning Allah). When leading purely Christian services they can and do pray in whatever matter feels appropriate.


Did you really mean to ask that question? You already know her response.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Did you really mean to ask that question? You already know her response.


Yes--but she's pussyfooting around, refusing to come right out and say that what's painfully obvious: her religion compels her to refuse service to certain classes of customers. Even right-wing bigots find it difficult to make such statements, I've noticed. It smacks of discrimination in the name of Jesus and sounds a jarring note even to their ears.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes--but she's pussyfooting around, refusing to come right out and say that what's painfully obvious: her religion compels her to refuse service to certain classes of customers. Even right-wing bigots find it difficult to make such statements, I've noticed. It smacks of discrimination in the name of Jesus and sounds a jarring note even to their ears.


Never thought of it that way.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes--but she's pussyfooting around, refusing to come right out and say that what's painfully obvious: her religion compels her to refuse service to certain classes of customers. Even right-wing bigots find it difficult to make such statements, I've noticed. It smacks of discrimination in the name of Jesus and sounds a jarring note even to their ears.


...and still, no evidence whatever that anyone is being prevented from attending the church of their choice, that churches are being outlawed, etc. That is why the fundamentalists are so obsessively insistent that the constitution says government is to stay out of religion and vehemently believe there is NO prohibition on churches being involved in government. If the second part were true, as they say, it would supposedly "prove" their point that their bigotry is merely exercising "religious freedom." It ALL hinges on interpreting the constitution in accordance with their beliefs. Which, of course, the Supreme Court and lower courts consistently, for hundreds of years, have ruled against. If their definition of freedom of religion is false, their entire argument crumbles to dust. Which it is - they just won't admit it.

That is why joey and rest of the fundamentalists say the Supreme Court is wrong. Funny, they sure like Hobby Lobby and Citizens United and any decision that goes in their favor.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

I'm quite relieved that we have an established religion. It means that everyone is free to treat it as the irrelevance it is. I have learned a lot from KP, and this religious ridiculousness is something I wish I didn't know. I had no idea how backward the USA is in some ways. Jmo, of course.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I did listen to an interview with Akhil Reed Amar. He is making stuff up, if it does say something specific.
> 
> The only ones who knew what was happening when the constitution was written were the people who wrote it. You need to read and study the writings of these people. Not some 20th and 21st century dreamers.
> 
> You cannot understand the constitution without studying the Founding Fathers. Then you cannot take a sentence from one of their statements and say this is what they meant.


You are not capable or competent enough to understand your own constitution or what the founding fathers meant. Your brain is warped by all the crap you have filled it up with. You are the punchline of the joke, joey. Go preach to the choir 'cause none of us are ever going to buy into your fairy tales. Please do us all a favor and keep your version of history, politics and religion to yourself and off the liberal threads. You are a real pissant. We don't crap in your back yard so please stop doing it in our's. :thumbdown:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I'm quite relieved that we have an established religion. It means that everyone is free to treat it as the irrelevance it is. I have learned a lot from KP, and this religious ridiculousness is something I wish I didn't know. I had no idea how backward the USA is in some ways. Jmo, of course.


An opinion a lot of us share.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You are not capable or competent enough to understand your own constitution or what the founding fathers meant. Your brain is warped by all the crap you have filled it up with. You are the punchline of the joke, joey. Go preach to the choir 'cause none of us are ever going to buy into your fairy tales. Please do us all a favor and keep your version of history, politics and religion to yourself and off the liberal threads. You are a real pissant. We don't crap in your back yard so please stop doing it in our's. :thumbdown:


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> Pit vipers?


Actually LL sent me birthday wishes last year. it was a pleasant surprise. Do pit vipers remember b'days?


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> I'm quite relieved that we have an established religion. It means that everyone is free to treat it as the irrelevance it is. I have learned a lot from KP, and this religious ridiculousness is something I wish I didn't know. I had no idea how backward the USA is in some ways. Jmo, of course.


Hi Anne. Good to see you. Yes, the religious ridiculousness keeps blowing in from the right and leaves it's stink behind. They are extremely backwards and seem to take great pride in it. Your opinion is spot on! Just ignore them and enjoy yourself. :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> Actually LL sent me birthday wishes last year. it was a pleasant surprise. Do pit vipers remember b'days?


Evidently, they do. What did you do to deserve it?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Never thought of it that way.


Fortunately the right to discriminate on the basis of religious beliefs hasn't held up in the courts. Had it been otherwise, I think it would have been only fair to force business owners to state publicly who they would and would not serve. The hatefulness inherent in "No gays served" and "Straights only" signs posted right next to the hours of operation would have opened a lot of eyes, I believe.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Evidently, they do. What did you do to deserve it?


You would have to ask LL. It was very nice. Maybe she thinks I'm funny and I do support Israel.

Today the Rep. Ship of Fools filled up even more. Are these goof balls serious? Do they think they have a chance to win? Carson seems to be the worst of the bunch.

Why is Rand Paul suddenly sounding a bit more moderate than his shipmates?


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

I would like to ask (if it's not blasphemous) why anyone takes as gospel things that were written over 200 years ago. Haven't times changed a bit since then? I've just realised what an idiotic question that was, given the reliance on things written quite a while before that. Silly, silly me. Please remind me why you are the leaders of the free world. I apologise in advance for any offence, but we have a general election here and I'm getting very intolerant of stupidity.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I would like to ask (if it's not blasphemous) why anyone takes as gospel things that were written over 200 years ago. Haven't times changed a bit since then? I've just realised what an idiotic question that was, given the reliance on things written quite a while before that. Silly, silly me. Please remind me why you are the leaders of the free world. I apologise in advance for any offence, but we have a general election here and I'm getting very intolerant of stupidity.


Interesting question but don't you guys revere the Magna Carta and that is about 800 years old?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There should be no  church(sect) involved in government. It is the individual religious person that can make a religious statement in school, the court house or any government building. without the government telling them they cannot.
> 
> Why is your religious persuasion allowed and mine is not?


Thanks, Joey, for finally being a little more specific about what you feel is Constitutional (and I mean that truly-- it's very aggravating and unproductive to argue in general terms what our Founding Fathers did or did not mean).

As for whether individuals should be allowed to make religious statements in public, I think a lot of Americans would agree with you--but only as long as the statements matched more or less their own religious convictions. Would you honestly be comfortable with a judge who handed down sentence "in the name of Allah" or the high school valedictorian whose speech consisted of chanting the Sutras?


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> I would like to ask (if it's not blasphemous) why anyone takes as gospel things that were written over 200 years ago. Haven't times changed a bit since then? I've just realised what an idiotic question that was, given the reliance on things written quite a while before that. Silly, silly me. Please remind me why you are the leaders of the free world. I apologise in advance for any offence, but we have a general election here and I'm getting very intolerant of stupidity.


We are too but the "religious right" is very good at making a lot of noise. Doesn't make any sense so I think it is just volume they are trying for. joey just proves the point. :hunf:


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

SQM said:


> Interesting question but don't you guys revere the Magna Carta and that is about 800 years old?


Damn, I knew someone would bring up that pesky thing. I would say that it was the first time in England that the power of the monarchy was subject to regulation. However, it's not set in stone. Don't string me up - it's very late here.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> You would have to ask LL. It was very nice. Maybe she thinks I'm funny and I do support Israel.
> 
> Today the Rep. Ship of Fools filled up even more. Are these goof balls serious? Do they think they have a chance to win? Carson seems to be the worst of the bunch.
> 
> Why is Rand Paul suddenly sounding a bit more moderate than his shipmates?


You are funny but do you and she support Israel for the same reasons or doesn't that matter to you?


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You are funny but do you and she support Israel for the same reasons or doesn't that matter to you?


Very good question. I'm not a fan of Israel. I'm not trying to hit and run, but it's nearly 2.15 and I have a hospital appointment early in the morning. I'll read everything tomorrow.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Damn, I knew someone would bring up that pesky thing. I would say that it was the first time in England that the power of the monarchy was subject to regulation. However, it's not set in stone. Don't string me up - it's very late here.


No I will not do you any harm. I guess the broader point is that humans and their documents are all a bit nutty.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Or there is no G-d to hear them?


Or maybe God has locked themselves in a very small space and is sitting rocking backwards and forwards whilst sobbing hysterically "they think they are going to come up here and spend eternity with me!" I hear that heaven has now installed a special entrance with even bigger pearly gates for that mob. When they climb the golden staircase they will be directed to their own fast track entrance. Shhh, do not tell them it is one of those trick entrances. When they step through the pearly gates they will find themselves on a very fast slide downwards towards the other place. Rumour has it that old Nick down there has also been busy. He is diverting the bottom end of that slide away from hell. He can be heard muttering "no way, Jose, they aint gonna spend eternity with me either ". Poor old demon has had to divert crews from the tary, fiery pits to get this diversion in place before one of them snuffs it.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You are funny but do you and she support Israel for the same reasons or doesn't that matter to you?


Jews have no real friends and we will take any allies we can at this point. I am not a real expert on Israel - I am just emotional on the topic. Maybe our Jewish scholars here can be more helpful.

And to AW - I don't like England so we are even-steven.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Or maybe God has locked themselves in a very small space and is sitting rocking backwards and forwards whilst sobbing hysterically "they think they are going to come up here and spend eternity with me!" I hear that heaven has now installed a special entrance with even bigger pearly gates for that mob. When they climb the golden staircase they will be directed to their own fast track entrance. Shhh, do not tell them it is one of those trick entrances. When they step through the pearly gates they will find themselves on a very fast slide downwards towards the other place. Rumour has it that old Nick down there has also been busy. He is diverting the bottom end of that slide away from hell. He can be heard muttering "no way, Jose, they aint gonna spend eternity with me either ". Poor old demon has had to divert crews from the tary, fiery pits to get this diversion in place before one of them snuffs it.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Or maybe God has locked themselves in a very small space and is sitting rocking backwards and forwards whilst sobbing hysterically "they think they are going to come up here and spend eternity with me!" I hear that heaven has now installed a special entrance with even bigger pearly gates for that mob. When they climb the golden staircase they will be directed to their own fast track entrance. Shhh, do not tell them it is one of those trick entrances. When they step through the pearly gates they will find themselves on a very fast slide downwards towards the other place. Rumour has it that old Nick down there has also been busy. He is diverting the bottom end of that slide away from hell. He can be heard muttering "no way, Jose, they aint gonna spend eternity with me either ". Poor old demon has had to divert crews from the tary, fiery pits to get this diversion in place before one of them snuffs it.


Sounds like the game - Chutes and Ladders. Do you have it in Oz?


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

I do understand your emotional affinity to Israel. I'll leave it at that for now. There was no need for the ner ner response though. I don't like a great deal about my country either.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

And you should note that I said Israel, not Jews.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> Jews have no real friends and we will take any allies we can at this point. I am not a real expert on Israel - I am just emotional on the topic. Maybe our Jewish scholars here can be more helpful.
> 
> And to AW - I don't like England so we are even-steven.


What have you got against England? If you don't like Anne then you don't like me. We are kin and go way back. You might as well have a pit full of vipers as allies if you believe the right wing nuts give a damn about you or Israel.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> She doesn't argue. She simply states some right-wing website's opinion over and over, and when anyone shows her she's wrong, she ignores them.
> 
> She does love posting ignorant opinions, however.


I have just discovered I have the Queen of Heart's brother living in my house. Several years ago my son and I attended a comedy show. The comedian's name was Dave and his sidekick was a stuffed teddy bear. Of course my son purchased one for me. You press its little paw and it says "Dave, have you seen my yellow suitcase". or "I need to find my purpose in life" and a few other quips. The bear never analyses its comments nor does it answer questions, it just repeats the same nonsensical things over and over and over. Sound familiar?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I would like to ask (if it's not blasphemous) why anyone takes as gospel things that were written over 200 years ago. Haven't times changed a bit since then? I've just realised what an idiotic question that was, given the reliance on things written quite a while before that. Silly, silly me. Please remind me why you are the leaders of the free world. I apologise in advance for any offence, but we have a general election here and I'm getting very intolerant of stupidity.


I truly believe that timelessness is the beauty of the constitution and the genius of its writers. As times change, it remains constant because it covers every aspect of our government. The Supreme Court decides how it applies new situations and problems. The difficulty we are having now is that the religious fanatics are trying to deny hundreds of years of legal precedent and understanding of the meaning of freedom of religion. This has been prompted and promoted by those who are using the ignorant, rabid fundamentalists to create divisiveness. Of course, people like joey fall willingly into the trap.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> She got out just in time. It's already 84F (29C) and we haven't hit the high. Looks like Whoever's in charge has decided to skip spring and go straight to summer.


You know who to blame. Special Presidential decree. President Obama ordered it so.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> A judge is the government and they are to stay out of religion.


So only "private citizens" would be allowed to make public statements? That'd still be tough because people like public school teachers are sort of de facto government employees.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I would like to ask (if it's not blasphemous) why anyone takes as gospel things that were written over 200 years ago. Haven't times changed a bit since then? I've just realised what an idiotic question that was, given the reliance on things written quite a while before that. Silly, silly me. Please remind me why you are the leaders of the free world. I apologise in advance for any offence, but we have a general election here and I'm getting very intolerant of stupidity.


I am watching for the results. With all the minor parties running I think you are going to end up with another coalition. The newsreader on the ABC last night said it could be similar to one of those multi headed snakes. I wonder how Boris Johnson will do, I see he has a large following. I believe he would like to be Prime Minister. Oh dear, how the mighty will have fallen if that ever happens. What are your thoughts on the UKIP. I do not think isolation is the way to go. Then there is the Scottish Independence Party.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

SQM said:


> Sounds like the game - Chutes and Ladders. Do you have it in Oz?


We call it Snakes and Ladders.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Nice little tidbit found on the Dung and Prevarication thread:

"Several of them have posted that it's too boring to be nice and that mocking or belittling people is fun."

Ladies, which of you said that? I can't find it anywhere.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Nice little tidbit found on the Dung and Prevarication thread:
> 
> "Several of them have posted that it's too boring to be nice and that mocking or belittling people is fun."
> 
> Ladies, which of you said that? I can't find it anywhere.


Don't recall anything like that, Green. Who did the dirty? Speak up!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> They are a government employee, not an elected or appointed position like a judge.


OK, so we're narrowing this down...but elected officials DO talk an awful lot about religion (check the statements of pretty much all of the GOP candidates).


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Don't recall anything like that, Green. Who did the dirty? Speak up!


Please miss, it was President Obama. He is to blame for everything that goes wrong around here. Make him stand in the corner with the dunce cap on his head.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Please miss, it was President Obama. He is to blame for everything that goes wrong around here. Make him stand in the corner with the dunce cap on his head.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :thumbup:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> And you should note that I said Israel, not Jews.


Thin difference for some Jews


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> What have you got against England? If you don't like Anne then you don't like me. We are kin and go way back. You might as well have a pit full of vipers as allies if you believe the right wing nuts give a damn about you or Israel.


Actually I have nothing against England other than the monarchy/socialites. But we have been around that track before.

I would never insult a friend/relative of yours. I love you too much. Plus I picture you Irish.

The vipers care about their holy sites and some mythology of the rapture or in this case is it the raptor?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Please miss, it was President Obama. He is to blame for everything that goes wrong around here. Make him stand in the corner with the dunce cap on his  head.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true, SQM...makes me wonder what sort of triage system the D & P crowd would like to set up. What factors would determine who gets to see the doctor first? Race? Religion? Household income? Marital status? It goes without saying that non-Christians, those with dark skin, the poor, and unmarried mothers and their children would be shoved by them to the back of the line.


susanmos2000
you got it pretty much figured out.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I understand completely, Huck. In general their talk is boring, by I myself couldn't hold my tongue a few days ago when I heard of KC's plan for social change: stamping birth certificates "Product of rape" or listing multiple men as the father if the mothers of newborns could not or would not produce a single name.


susanmos2000
am I the only feeling that some of these folks are in an Institution? They are far from normal as I know it.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

SQM said:


> The vipers care about their holy sites and some mythology of the rapture or in this case is it the raptor?


Sorry to my Christian friends, I cannot resist.

No apologies to you, Joey.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Cake bakers, photographers, florists, wedding chapels. Forced Abortion coverage(but 0bama has lost most of those),Military Chaplains not allowed to pray in Jesus Name. Parents not allowed to take gender confused minors to a straight therapist.
> 
> You can do the research! These have nothing to do with discrimination!!!!!!!!!!!


joeysomma
oh my, you believe in the rip-off of "straight therapy"? Really, honestly, actually? Military Chaplains not allowed to pray in Jesus Name? Who on this good Earth is contaminating you? You are full of Poison.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> There should be no  church(sect) involved in government. It is the individual religious person that can make a religious statement in school, the court house or any government building. without the government telling them they cannot.
> 
> Why is your religious persuasion allowed and mine is not?


joeysomma
it is? When and where, please!!!!!! I like equality for ALL Religions.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> oh my, you believe in the rip-off of "straight therapy"? Really, honestly, actually? Military Chaplains not allowed to pray in Jesus Name? Who on this good Earth is contaminating you? You are full of Poison.


Poison, the spelling of which starts with an "s" and ends with a "t."


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Fortunately the right to discriminate on the basis of religious beliefs hasn't held up in the courts. Had it been otherwise, I think it would have been only fair to force business owners to state publicly who they would and would not serve. The hatefulness inherent in "No gays served" and "Straights only" signs posted right next to the hours of operation would have opened a lot of eyes, I believe.


susanmos2000
I would like for the bigots to put up signs indicating whom they hate so that I have a choice NOT to do business with them.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Or maybe God has locked themselves in a very small space and is sitting rocking backwards and forwards whilst sobbing hysterically "they think they are going to come up here and spend eternity with me!" I hear that heaven has now installed a special entrance with even bigger pearly gates for that mob. When they climb the golden staircase they will be directed to their own fast track entrance. Shhh, do not tell them it is one of those trick entrances. When they step through the pearly gates they will find themselves on a very fast slide downwards towards the other place. Rumour has it that old Nick down there has also been busy. He is diverting the bottom end of that slide away from hell. He can be heard muttering "no way, Jose, they aint gonna spend eternity with me either ". Poor old demon has had to divert crews from the tary, fiery pits to get this diversion in place before one of them snuffs it.


EveMCooke
sounds like you have the scoop on their future. Much as I imagined it. If these Racists and Bigots would get into any Heaven, then there is no God for sure.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeks and Mos were a riot on Denim. If you want to rid this thread of the Professor, ignore her. Use her own strategy against her.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> susanmos2000
> I would like for the bigots to put up signs indicating whom they hate so that I have a choice NOT to do business with them.


Exactly, Huck. Bigots like to talk the talk, but when faced with a boycott or even a lot of shocked-looking faces checking out their hateful signs I think many would wilt.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Cheeks and Mos were a riot on Denim. If you want to rid this thread of the Professor, ignore her. Use her own strategy against her.


I agree, SQM. I'm tired of going around in circles with her.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> Jews have no real friends and we will take any allies we can at this point. I am not a real expert on Israel - I am just emotional on the topic. Maybe our Jewish scholars here can be more helpful.
> 
> And to AW - I don't like England so we are even-steven.


SQM
I happen to have REAL friends and have had them for a long, long time and am making new ones as well. Why don't you like England? You seem to have a number of countries you don't like. Israel has friends, its present day government has enemies and why is as clear as a high grade diamond.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Exactly, Huck. Bigots like to talk the talk, but when faced with a boycott or even a lot of shocked-looking faces checking out their hateful signs I think many would wilt.


susanmos2000
I think we should let these folks have their way and we then demand disclosure in broad daylight. That will fix their Wagon in a hurry and the next signs we see will be "Going out of business Sale" and no-one shows up.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Poison, the spelling of which starts with an "s" and ends with a "t."


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: 
She's still at it? Oh my lordy pants! Some people's children.......


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You are not capable or competent enough to understand your own constitution or what the founding fathers meant. Your brain is warped by all the crap you have filled it up with. You are the punchline of the joke, joey. Go preach to the choir 'cause none of us are ever going to buy into your fairy tales. Please do us all a favor and keep your version of history, politics and religion to yourself and off the liberal threads. You are a real pissant. We don't crap in your back yard so please stop doing it in our's. :thumbdown:


Thank you, Cheeky. I said I wouldn't discuss it with her any more, and I won't. But her way of studying history is crap.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Fortunately the right to discriminate on the basis of religious beliefs hasn't held up in the courts. Had it been otherwise, I think it would have been only fair to force business owners to state publicly who they would and would not serve. The hatefulness inherent in "No gays served" and "Straights only" signs posted right next to the hours of operation would have opened a lot of eyes, I believe.


That's probably true now. Still, I remember Whites Only establishments and No Jews Allowed hotels. Where have all the bigots gone?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> That's probably true now. Still, I remember Whites Only establishments and No Jews Allowed hotels. Where have all the bigots gone?


They have been hiding in Massachusetts, Indiana, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Arkansas!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Jews have no real friends and we will take any allies we can at this point. I am not a real expert on Israel - I am just emotional on the topic. Maybe our Jewish scholars here can be more helpful.
> 
> And to AW - I don't like England so we are even-steven.


Your more of an expert on Israel than Joey is on American history. At least you've spent time there. I used to wonder what good it was that fundamentalists loved Israel. All they care about is the Rapture.

Then I realized that I might as well wait for the Rapture before I turn down their support.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> Actually I have nothing against England other than the monarchy/socialites. But we have been around that track before.
> 
> I would never insult a friend/relative of yours. I love you too much. Plus I picture you Irish.
> 
> The vipers care about their holy sites and some mythology of the rapture or in this case is it the raptor?


The monarchy is a great source of revenue for tourism but also costly to maintain. I agree with you there. I am Irish and English. My grandfather comes from the same part of England Anne is from. All too familiar with coal mining and Maggie Thatcher and redundancy. She was a witch. It's a small world.
I favor the birds of prey over the rapture. :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> And she was wrong... again.
> 
> N.J. doctors least willing to accept Medicaid patients under Obamacare
> 
> ...


Julia, some will never admit that it is a very beneficial program that is working for millions of people. They would rather blame that and abortion for everything that is wrong with the world. Most of these people complaining haven't signed up for it!
Let's not forget about the "death panels" that the ACA was supposed to bring along with it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I have just discovered I have the Queen of Heart's brother living in my house. Several years ago my son and I attended a comedy show. The comedian's name was Dave and his sidekick was a stuffed teddy bear. Of course my son purchased one for me. You press its little paw and it says "Dave, have you seen my yellow suitcase". or "I need to find my purpose in life" and a few other quips. The bear never analyses its comments nor does it answer questions, it just repeats the same nonsensical things over and over and over. Sound familiar?


It sounds familiar, but it also sounds too cute to be related to the Queen of Hearts.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I truly believe that timelessness is the beauty of the constitution and the genius of its writers. As times change, it remains constant because it covers every aspect of our government. The Supreme Court decides how it applies new situations and problems. The difficulty we are having now is that the religious fanatics are trying to deny hundreds of years of legal precedent and understanding of the meaning of freedom of religion. This has been prompted and promoted by those who are using the ignorant, rabid fundamentalists to create divisiveness. Of course, people like joey fall willingly into the trap.


These are also the people who claim this country is not now, nor has it ever been, a democracy. A few more years of Citizens United and they'll be right where the present is concerned.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Your more of an expert on Israel than Joey is on American history. At least you've spent time there. I used to wonder what good it was that fundamentalists loved Israel. All they care about is the Rapture.
> 
> Then I realized that I might as well wait for the Rapture before I turn down their support.


The Rapture. Is that just a Reborn CINO thing? I can't imagine feeling Rapture while nukes are flying and people are dying of painful radiation poisoning.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> You know who to blame. Special Presidential decree. President Obama ordered it so.


You're right; I forgot (very loud dope slap).


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> None of that constitutes the free exercise of religion. ... try again.


Michele Bachman and her very flamboyant husband have a "Pray Away the Gay" Clinic in Minnesota. I can see how it would be a money maker, but I can't see it changing a thing. If one is gay, then one is gay and should be accepted for what he or she is. Too many fundamentalists zero in on the sex between gays and label them {quote joeysomma} "abdominal sinners"
in the eyes of God. Does that mean that they are working their cores hard during the act???


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Nice little tidbit found on the Dung and Prevarication thread:
> 
> "Several of them have posted that it's too boring to be nice and that mocking or belittling people is fun."
> 
> Ladies, which of you said that? I can't find it anywhere.


I sometimes think it, but I'd think twice before saying it to someone who lacks a sense of irony, such as the person who wrote what you quoted.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Thin difference for some Jews


I would say most rather than some.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I sometimes think it, but I'd think twice before saying it to someone who lacks a sense of irony, such as the person who wrote what you quoted.


I don't think any of us have said that. I was looking, too.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Sorry to my Christian friends, I cannot resist.
> 
> No apologies to you, Joey.


I mustn't laugh at it. Gerslay will come after me with her whip.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I mustn't laugh at it. Gerslay will come after me with her whip.


Is she the new "Spank Me Daddy" girl now?


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Thank you, Cheeky. I said I wouldn't discuss it with her any more, and I won't. But her way of studying history is crap.


I am done with her too. Any interaction with her has become self-abuse and I'm not going to do that. She thrives on our attention so we have to leave her up to her own devices.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> They have been hiding in Massachusetts, Indiana, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Arkansas!


Is that all? Oh, I get it. In the other states, they don't bother to hide. But Massachusetts?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Is that all? Oh, I get it. In the other states, they don't bother to hide. But Massachusetts?


Oh yes, there is a huge bigot there!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> The Rapture. Is that just a Reborn CINO thing? I can't imagine feeling Rapture while nukes are flying and people are dying of painful radiation poisoning.


Big difference between rapture and The Rapture.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Is she the new "Spank Me Daddy" girl now?


She's thrown her mask into the ring, and her PAC is forming.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> She's thrown her mask into the ring, and her PAC is forming.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I am done with her too. Any interaction with her has become self-abuse and I'm not going to do that. She thrives on our attention so we have to leave her up to her own devices.


I'll go along with that too.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> Patty, is it wrong of me to say that when I look at your Ted Coulter avatar, I keep seeing Helen Hunt? i don't know why.


Funny you should mention that, Julia. Wombatnomore sees the same thing. It does look like Helen Hunt around the eyes to me.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just the pits?



Poor Purl said:


> Pit bulls?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> SQM
> I happen to have REAL friends and have had them for a long, long time and am making new ones as well. Why don't you like England? You seem to have a number of countries you don't like. Israel has friends, its present day government has enemies and why is as clear as a high grade diamond.


Jews as a group cannot rely on anyone, as history has proven. I am not talking about individuals. Even before this present government, Israelis were disliked. Are you aware that the big United Nations' Children's Org. will serve any country except Israel, since its inception? Read some contemporary Jewish History, if you have not already, and then I would love to discuss this further.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Did that make her a lovely person to you? I must remember my mailman as a true friend.



SQM said:


> Actually LL sent me birthday wishes last year. it was a pleasant surprise. Do pit vipers remember b'days?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Or maybe God has locked themselves in a very small space and is sitting rocking backwards and forwards whilst sobbing hysterically "they think they are going to come up here and spend eternity with me!" I hear that heaven has now installed a special entrance with even bigger pearly gates for that mob. When they climb the golden staircase they will be directed to their own fast track entrance. Shhh, do not tell them it is one of those trick entrances. When they step through the pearly gates they will find themselves on a very fast slide downwards towards the other place. Rumour has it that old Nick down there has also been busy. He is diverting the bottom end of that slide away from hell. He can be heard muttering "no way, Jose, they aint gonna spend eternity with me either ". Poor old demon has had to divert crews from the tary, fiery pits to get this diversion in place before one of them snuffs it.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> Did that make her a lovely person to you? I must remember my mailman as a true friend.


It was a kind and well appreciated gesture since my own daughter did not bother to remember me on that day. So to answer your question quite directly - Yes.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Just the pits?


Yep.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Joey is a dummy? Of course.



EveMCooke said:


> I have just discovered I have the Queen of Heart's brother living in my house. Several years ago my son and I attended a comedy show. The comedian's name was Dave and his sidekick was a stuffed teddy bear. Of course my son purchased one for me. You press its little paw and it says "Dave, have you seen my yellow suitcase". or "I need to find my purpose in life" and a few other quips. The bear never analyses its comments nor does it answer questions, it just repeats the same nonsensical things over and over and over. Sound familiar?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> You know who to blame. Special Presidential decree. President Obama ordered it so.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Joey is a dummy? Of course.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> That's probably true now. Still, I remember Whites Only establishments and No Jews Allowed hotels. Where have all the bigots gone?


KP?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> You're right; I forgot (very loud dope slap).


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> Michele Bachman and her very flamboyant husband have a "Pray Away the Gay" Clinic in Minnesota. I can see how it would be a money maker, but I can't see it changing a thing. If one is gay, then one is gay and should be accepted for what he or she is. Too many fundamentalists zero in on the sex between gays and label them {quote joeysomma} "abdominal sinners"
> in the eyes of God. Does that mean that they are working their cores hard during the act???


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> She's thrown her mask into the ring, and her PAC is forming.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I see Helen Hunt too.



JuliaGirl said:


> Patty, is it wrong of me to say that when I look at your Ted Coulter avatar, I keep seeing Helen Hunt? i don't know why.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> It's not the same. Money paid to boxers comes from people who want to see boxing, or manage them, or broadcast matches. It doesn't come from anyone's pension or life savings, as Wall St. bonuses do.


Point taken.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> She got out just in time. It's already 84F (29C) and we haven't hit the high. Looks like Whoever's in charge has decided to skip spring and go straight to summer.


That temp is early! Might be a good thing for drying up the city.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Ha Ha. I like the name the Windy Apple. 14C sounds miserable. I think it will be 70F but I am stuck in waiting for the cable guy. That is good weather for you in May.


After the cable guy has been and gone your new digs will feel all the more like home!

So 70F? I got Chicago's weather from the BBC overnight. May have been a misprint? Anyway, 70F is way better than 14C.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well put. Thank you.



JuliaGirl said:


> And here's the thing. I know her type. You can spoonfeed her the parts of the Constitution she misunderstands and why, and which founding fathers support the Liberal POV ...but she lacks the intellectual capacity to sort it through in her mind and comprehend rudimentary concepts, much less complex ones.
> 
> But I guarantee you she's telling her friends how she kept stumping to ladies over here and we couldn't with against her sharp mind.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> KP?


Not all of KP. Only on certain threads. Thread, singular, actually.

 Sarcasm alert: 

Did you know, btw, that we are bullies who don't want joeysomma to speak because we're afraid of the truth? The fact that her "truths" are made up has nothing to do with anything. The fact that we give her the answers she asks for, but she doesn't understand them, also has nothing to do with anything.

Oh, and this criticism comes from someone who wants to control the black population in numerous cruel, petty, and probably illegal, ways.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good thing I'm ignoring old whozit. It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!



Poor Purl said:


> Not all of KP. Only on certain threads. Thread, singular, actually.
> 
> Sarcasm alert:
> 
> ...


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Not all of KP. Only on certain threads. Thread, singular, actually.
> 
> Sarcasm alert:
> 
> ...


Do you think it's mob mentality at work or are these people just plain outright droobs?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> That temp is early! Might be a good thing for drying up the city.


We don't need drying up, at least not until the Atlantic Ocean rises high enough to flood Brooklyn.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> We don't need drying up, at least not until the Atlantic Ocean rises high enough to flood Brooklyn.


Don't even speak about it!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Do you think it's mob mentality at work or are these people just plain outright droobs?


It's both, if I understand "droobs" correctly. There have always been the loud, name-calling bigots, but there were also calmer, more reasonable ones. Now the calmer ones have joined the ranks of the bigots and begun saying we're bullies.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Don't even speak about it!


It's safe for me to say it. I don't have a direct line to the ears of God.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Do you think it's mob mentality at work or are these people just plain outright droobs?


They're "droobs." I have no idea what that means, but it sounds deliciously correct.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Do you think it's mob mentality at work or are these people just plain outright droobs?


Wombatnomore
is "droobs" like dopes? If so, you are on the button.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> It's safe for me to say it. I don't have a direct line to the ears of God.


Poor Purl
wonder why the likes of us are left out of direct conversations with God. Is he discriminating against some of his own creations? I don't think so, I am rather sure that those who claim speaking with him are Liars.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Goldwater was right. But then, today he would have been seen as a liberal by the GOP.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Goldwater was right. But then, today he would have been seen as a liberal by the GOP.


I remember when we were afraid he'd be elected and carry out his conservative ideas. Now he's more like a prophet.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> wonder why the likes of us are left out of direct conversations with God. Is he discriminating against some of his own creations? I don't think so, I am rather sure that those who claim speaking with him are Liars.


You think??

Or maybe it's as County Bumpkins says:



> They can't say anything to us that they haven't already said. Just ignore them. They think they are showing us they are bullies .We already know it. We only see evil in them as *they are the devil's children we have the power over them.* Not worth giving a second thought to them.
> I have never seen old woman act like children before. I have been enlightened before the whole knitting community . I am so surprised at the length they go to , to show their tails.


Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


Poor Purl
by George, you got it.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Goldwater was right. But then, today he would have been seen as a liberal by the GOP.


DGreen
as the World turns. Thank you, interesting Poster.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


I think it's the liberal thinking that makes them think we're spawn of the devil. When we criticize joey it just validates their beliefs.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I think it's the liberal thinking that makes them think we're spawn of the devil. When we criticize joey it just validates their beliefs.


That's certain. County Bumpkins has been calling some of us evil for a while, at least since she claimed that you were putting words in her mouth and I pointed out that if you had put words in her mouth, they'd be grammatically correct. Probably even before then.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I think it's the liberal thinking that makes them think we're spawn of the devil. When we criticize joey it just validates their beliefs.


Can't we report her for calling us the devil's children? Please. Pretty pleeeease.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Can't we report her for calling us the devil's children? Please. Pretty pleeeease.


If being the opposite of "them" makes us children of the devil, I'm going to consider it a compliment.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:
 

> They're "droobs." I have no idea what that means, but it sounds deliciously correct.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: The following is from 'The Free Dictionary:'

droob (redirected from droobs)
droob (druːb)
n
1._ Austral_ a pathetic person
[C20: of unknown origin]


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Thanks for the quote by Country Bumpkins.

Quote:
======================================
They can't say anything to us that they haven't already said. Just ignore them. They think they are showing us they are bullies .We already know it. We only see evil in them as they are the devil's children we have the power over them. Not worth giving a second thought to them.
I have never seen old woman act like children before. I have been enlightened before the whole knitting community . I am so surprised at the length they go to ,_ to show their tails_. 
=====================================

Is this the same CB that got upset at me for saying she does judge? She does not tell the truth.

I am so thankful that I got away from that narrow, unkind, superior, rigid, unkind, judgmental Christianity. I am as far from you in my Christian beliefs as it is possible to be. I believe God is a loving God. I believe he wants us to care about others. I believe in 'Love they neighbour" I believe in 
Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you"

I believe that it is hypocritical to pretend you are God and denigrate others. You are arrogant in your statements and beliefs. I wonder when you decided that only you knew what a true Christian is.

I would say that the old women who act like children are not on this thread - Look in the mirror. Do you honestly think that Jesus would be happy with your nasty statements? Who are you to say you only see evil in us, and we 
are the devil's children! and you dont judge???????? You should be ashamed.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Can't we report her for calling us the devil's children? Please. Pretty pleeeease.


No, because I called them droobs.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> That's certain. County Bumpkins has been calling some of us evil for a while, at least since she claimed that you were putting words in her mouth and I pointed out that if you had put words in her mouth, they'd be grammatically correct. Probably even before then.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Well, Marm, it's entirely up to you. Just don't make it too complex, because the logic won't be followed. And, really, unless one of her RW websites spells it out for her (which will never happen), she won't accept it.
> 
> I'm satisfied with the Establishment clause but I'm curious to see how you would explain it, so if you're game....


I'm perfectly satisfied with the Establishment Clause and aware of the long history we have of separating church and state but, I confess, I can't resist addressing this subject and I apologize if this starts a big, ugly argument. This subject is somewhat complicated, at least for someone like joey who wants a black and white explanation, and she will probably throw it back in my face because *there is no specific clause in the Constitution that says church and state are to be kept completely separate. Original intention is bolstered by historical and legal interpretation as well as the actual wording of the First Amendment.* The websites cited below, The First Amendment Center and the National Humanities Center appear to be excellent sources about this subject, and highly recommend to you, joey, to check out The First Amendment Center as t goes into much more detail than what I have quoted here.

*The Complete Separation of Church and State:*
To start with we have the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and its intention:

From http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/establishment-clause
The first of the First Amendments two religion clauses reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion  . Note that the clause is absolute. It allows no law. It is also noteworthy that the clause forbids more than the establishment of religion by the government. It forbids even laws respecting an establishment of religion. *The establishment clause sets up a line of demarcation between the functions and operations of the institutions of religion and government in our society. It does so because the framers of the First Amendment recognized that when the roles of the government and religion are intertwined, the result too often has been bloodshed or oppression.*

For the first 150 years of our nations history, there were very few occasions for the courts to interpret the establishment clause because the First Amendment had not yet been applied to the states. As written, the First Amendment applied only to Congress and the federal government. In the wake of the Civil War, however, the 14th Amendment was adopted. It reads in part that no state shall  deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law . In 1947 the Supreme Court held in Everson v. Board of Education that the establishment clause is one of the liberties protected by the due-process clause. From that point on, all government action, whether at the federal, state, or local level, must abide by the restrictions of the establishment clause.

*Establishment*
There is much debate about the meaning of the term establishment of religion. Although judges rely on history, the framers other writings and prior judicial precedent, they sometimes disagree. Some, including former Chief Justice William Rehnquist, have argued that the term was intended to prohibit only the establishment of a single national church or the preference of one religious sect over another. Others believe the term prohibits the government from promoting religion in general as well as the preference of one religion over another. In the words of the Court in Everson:

The establishment of religion clause means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government may set up a church. Neither can pass laws that aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion . Neither a state or the federal government may, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. *In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state.*

Also from The First amendment Center: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/free-exercise-clause
*The Free-Excercise Clause* pertains to the right to freely exercise ones religion. It states that the government shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Although the text is absolute, the courts place some limits on the exercise of religion. For example, courts would not hold that the First Amendment protects human sacrifice even if some religion required it. The Supreme Court has interpreted this clause so that the freedom to believe is absolute, but the ability to act on those beliefs is not.

Questions of free exercise usually arise when a citizens civic obligation to comply with a law conflicts with that citizens religious beliefs or practices. If a law specifically singled out a specific religion or particular religious practice, under current Supreme Court rulings it would violate the First Amendment. Controversy arises when a law is generally applicable and religiously neutral but nevertheless has the accidental or unintentional effect of interfering with a particular religious practice or belief.

In addition we have Article VI of The Constitution which says from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution 
Article Six of the United States Constitution establishes the laws and treaties of the United States made *in accordance with it as the supreme law of the land forbids a religious test as a requirement for holding a governmental position* and holds the United States under the Constitution responsible for debts incurred by the United States under the Articles of Confederation.

And here we have some remarks about the *State Church of England in the Colonial US* from http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/eighteen/ekeyinfo/chureng.htm 
And Although the Church of England (also known as the Anglican Church, and, today, as the Protestant Episcopal Church) commanded the loyalties of a great many churchgoers in early America, its history has received relatively little treatment from historiansespecially compared with the attention lavished on the Puritans. True, the Church of England in the colonies suffered from a sluggish rate of growth and a shortage of clergymen throughout much of the seventeenth century. But in the century before the American Revolution, that communions fortunes prospered: Anglican churches spread along the length of the Atlantic seaboard, the largest concentration being in the coastal South. In these colonies, *Anglicanism also enjoyed the advantage of being the established, state-supported church, as it had been in England since the sixteenth century.*


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

SQM said:


> Jews as a group cannot rely on anyone, as history has proven. I am not talking about individuals. Even before this present government, Israelis were disliked. Are you aware that the big United Nations' Children's Org. will serve any country except Israel, since its inception? Read some contemporary Jewish History, if you have not already, and then I would love to discuss this further.


What about the billions of dollars which have been given to Israel by the US and Canada and other countries in the world since Israel became a State? Certainly I agree there is still a huge amount of Anti semitism in the world, but to state that Israel has not nor ever has had anyone they can rely on is a fallacy. The US alone has done a huge amount in trade, loans and other ways of help since Israel was first made a State. You often make statements that seem to cover just the past few years or you ignore what really has gone on over the years during many different Israeli Governments. Netanyahu showed his opinion and thanks for all the help by going behind your President's Back and ignoring protocal which was an insult brought on by the GOP to try to embarrass Obama. You wonder why Obama doesn't care for him???

I remembering cheering in the Streets at home when Israel was given land and declared a state. We have sent aid to Israel for years, but not nearly as much as America. I wonder why you make statements like that which are slanted to make people believe that she stands alone and the world has nothing but dislike for her. Not true in my opinion.

I am not in any way defending anti semitism which is something that has gone on for centuries and is a blight against all those who feel that way especially in Eastern Europe. There are lots of people who are NOT antisimetic - I understand completely the feelings by some that they stand alone, but let's be fair, America has been a good friend to Israel and so has Canada.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Maid
> I will comment on one part of what you wrote:
> 
> _Also from The First amendment Center: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/free-exercise-clause
> ...


You persist in misunderstanding the written word. Many here said it would be a waste of time to address the ways in which the Constitution supports complete separation of church and state for you, but I find it an interesting subject and thought some other folks around here might be interested, too.

You might find it easier to understand what's posted here if you could put aside your insistence on seeing everything in black and white, and your exaggerated fundamentalist approach to your religion. *Try reading for meaning.* Since "the courts place some limits on the exercise of religion", not all of the rules you think are "discrimination rules" will b e struck down

"*Although the text is absolute, the courts place some limits on the exercise of religion...The Supreme Court has interpreted this clause so that the freedom to believe is absolute, but the ability to act on those beliefs is not.*

*Questions of free exercise usually arise when a citizens civic obligation to comply with a law conflicts with that citizens religious beliefs or practices.* If a law specifically singled out a specific religion or particular religious practice, under current Supreme Court rulings it would violate the First Amendment. Controversy arises when a law is generally applicable and religiously neutral but nevertheless has the accidental or unintentional effect of interfering with a particular religious practice or belief.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:

What they need is a group therapy rate. :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I think it's the liberal thinking that makes them think we're spawn of the devil. When we criticize joey it just validates their beliefs.


We don't have their mob mentality either. I think for them a brain is a dangerous thing to use,it's a tool of the devil. Just think of all the awful things they could think of. Better to live under their rocks so they don't get smote in the head. :shock:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Thanks for the quote by Country Bumpkins.
> 
> Quote:
> ======================================
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

This is my impersonation of CB and how she combats our evil spirits. I guess quoting the bible is one of her magic tricks. What she doesn't know is we can do it too. You just go on your computer and copy and paste and like magic you are saved! Shirley, don't ask them to look in mirrors. They used to have them but when they looked in them they all broke.

Other Translations of John 8:7

So when they continued asking him, hee lift vp himselfe, and saide vnto them, Hee that is without sinne among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
- King James Version (1611) - View 1611 Bible Scan

But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him {be the} first to throw a stone at her."
- New American Standard Version (1995)

But when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
- American Standard Version (1901)

But when they went on with their questions, he got up and said to them, Let him among you who is without sin be the first to send a stone at her.
- Basic English Bible

But when they continued asking him, he lifted himself up and said to them, Let him that is without sin among you first cast the stone at her.
- Darby Bible

So when they continued asking him, he raised himself, and said to them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 
- Webster's Bible

When however they persisted with their question, He raised His head and said to them, "Let the sinless man among you be the first to throw a stone at her."
- Weymouth Bible

But when they continued asking him, he looked up and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone at her."
- World English Bible

And whanne thei abiden axynge hym, he reiside hym silf, and seide to hem, He of you that is without synne, first caste a stoon in to hir.
- Wycliffe Bible

and when they continued asking him, having bent himself back, he said unto them, `The sinless of you -- let him first cast the stone at her;'
- Youngs Literal Bible


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> If being the opposite of "them" makes us children of the devil, I'm going to consider it a compliment.


Okay, you've convinced me.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> No, because I called them droobs.


Okay, they're safe for now.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Thanks for the quote by Country Bumpkins.
> 
> Quote:
> ======================================
> ...


Shirley, I had forgotten about the things she says to you, that holier-than-thou attitude she shows. I'm glad you reminded me.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Maid, thank you for all this work, and for the crystal-clear explication. It should satisfy anyone who is serious about wanting an answer. This is where the problem lies. All joey wants is to claim that bakers can't be forced to sell wedding cakes to same-sex couples, something the Founders didn't have in mind when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


MaidInBedlam said:


> I'm perfectly satisfied with the Establishment Clause and aware of the long history we have of separating church and state but, I confess, I can't resist addressing this subject and I apologize if this starts a big, ugly argument. This subject is somewhat complicated, at least for someone like joey who wants a black and white explanation, and she will probably throw it back in my face because *there is no specific clause in the Constitution that says church and state are to be kept completely separate. Original intention is bolstered by historical and legal interpretation as well as the actual wording of the First Amendment.* The websites cited below, The First Amendment Center and the National Humanities Center appear to be excellent sources about this subject, and highly recommend to you, joey, to check out The First Amendment Center as t goes into much more detail than what I have quoted here.
> 
> *The Complete Separation of Church and State:*
> To start with we have the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and its intention:
> ...


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:
> 
> What they need is a group therapy rate. :thumbup:


The ACA will cover it for them.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> We don't have their mob mentality either. I think for them a brain is a dangerous thing to use,it's a tool of the devil. Just think of all the awful things they could think of.  Better to live under their rocks so they don't get smote in the head. :shock:


Bazinga!

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Look at all the scholarship they're making us do. But I wonder whether CB will understand any version of this.


Cheeky Blighter said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> This is my impersonation of CB and how she combats our evil spirits. I guess quoting the bible is one of her magic tricks. What she doesn't know is we can do it too. You just go on your computer and copy and paste and like magic you are saved! Shirley, don't ask them to look in mirrors. They used to have them but when they looked in them they all broke.
> 
> ...


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Shirley, I had forgotten about the things she says to you, that holier-than-thou attitude she shows. I'm glad you reminded me.


I wasn't going to post for awhile. But reading what she posted made me see what a hypocrite she is. They depend on her for a 'true' word of the BIBLE. It is scary that people who say they are the only true Christians have absolutely no kindness for others who don't agree with them.

Everytime I see this kind of post I will answer. I am a Christian - she has said publicy that I am not a Christian because I have a different view of Christianity. As I have said before - I am ready to face my maker and I am not afraid of her judgments and her superiority or her belief that only she has to decide what a Christian is. I would think that every Christian on this thread, is kinder, believes in the 
good things taught about the word of God and Jesus. The others read the Bible and take from it a judgmental, unkind cruel God who choose only their way as the right way. I believe in God who loves mankind, and looks for the good and kindness in people, of all Faiths. Never the twain will meet. .

I have stated when I first came back to these threads that Ididn't understand or like their take on Christianity and that to me they were so busy judging others and demanding that only those who agree with them are true Christians, but decided that I have no right to judge their Christianity. I believe there are those on that thread who believe in a kind, caring God who is not searching for the bad in people so that they can be punished, but is searching for the good in people who care about those less fortunate, who are not cruel, and who don't threaten others in his name with hell. Who are we to Judge what God wants from us? I believe that if you care about people and you try to do good that God knows it.

People like CB don't have the right to sit in judgment. I will never accept that she feels she can, or the blind belief that what she and others want to choose from the Bible to build their Christianity is the only way. There are many opposite 
statements in the Bible. I choose to read about God's love. I still question as do we all.

Each one of us has to face what or what does not happen, after death. She knows no more than You and me, and Green or any other human being. God will judge, no one else will. If Green is right and I am wrong, so be it. Jesus fed the poor , He cared about everyone. YOu can find hundreds of words about cruelty, judgment, hell, and other things. I choose to read about his love for mankind, not his hate for those who don't follow CB's type of Christianity. They are hurting the US in so many ways it is frightening. Do they actually believe (yes), that only they know God's wishes.

So much is hard to understand. They feel that anyone who is not a good Christian is going to hell, even those who have never been introduced to Christianity. That other religions are evil. I just can't accept that . God made the Jews, Muslims, the Hindus, Agnostics, ( all faiths and those who don't believe}. I believe we will find out, as I said above, what is true. I am not afraid. I think much of what is discussed here is logical and possibly true. I have evolved since I have been reading these posts, and learning a lot, they are using Politics to judge. I will never accept born again Christians as having the only and the final answer. I grew up in that type of family and if that was what God feels is the only way, then I can't agree with them.I saw more hypcrites (people Preaching God's word and going home and living the opposite to what they say they believe. So we must all 'see what happens when we die'. I have spent my life doing the best I can. I think God knows that. I also have failed sometimes - none of us are perfect and certainly I am not.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Goldwater was right. But then, today he would have been seen as a liberal by the GOP.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: How labels change.

Can you IMAGINE Barry glaring at Boehner? I never thought I'd miss that man.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I remember when we were afraid he'd be elected and carry out his conservative ideas. Now he's more like a prophet.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I kinda like it. Mysterious. Powerful. Beware.



Poor Purl said:


> Can't we report her for calling us the devil's children? Please. Pretty pleeeease.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Would the early Christians recognise that lot at all?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Yeah! We see it the same way. I think it's the nicest thing they've called us.



DGreen said:


> If being the opposite of "them" makes us children of the devil, I'm going to consider it a compliment.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> I wasn't going to post for awhile. But reading what she posted made me see what a hypocrite she is. They depend on her for a 'true' word of the BIBLE. It is scary that people who say they are the only true Christians have absolutely no kindness for others who don't agree with them.
> 
> Everytime I see this kind of post I will answer. I am a Christian - she has said publicy that I am not a Christian because I have a different view of Christianity. As I have said before - I am ready to face my maker and I am not afraid of her judgments and her superiority or her belief that only she has to decide what a Christian is. I would think that every Christian on this thread, is kinder, believes in the
> good things taught about the word of God and Jesus. They read the Bible and take from it a judgmental, unkind cruel God who choose only their way as the right way. I believe in God who loves mankind, and looks for the good and kindness in people, of all Faiths. Never the twain will meet. .
> ...


I'm glad you stuck around. You expressed what I think we all believe: that whether it comes from the word of a Higher Being or from one's own heart, to be moral requires that you see to the needs of this world and not the world to come. Since people like County Bumpkins don't seem to truly understand that, they have nothing to say to us that is worth hearing.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We can say thanks to them for seeing us as the devil's children.



Wombatnomore said:


> No, because I called them droobs.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Maid, thank you for all this work, and for the crystal-clear explication. It should satisfy anyone who is serious about wanting an answer. This is where the problem lies. All joey wants is to claim that bakers can't be forced to sell wedding cakes to same-sex couples, something the Founders didn't have in mind when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


Thanks. I started out thinking I'd answer a question joey posed about wanting someone to point out the specific words in the Constitution that say church and state must be kept entirely separate.

Knowing I was on a fool's errand, I decided to post anyway. It's an interesting subject and I thought people other than joey might like to read what I'd put together. All we have to do is ignore whatever joey or anyone like her has to say on the subject. I know that's pretty easy to do.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> We can say thanks to them for seeing us as the devil's children.


Consider it a compliment. I can't count the number of times I've been told I'm going to Hell. I'm kind of looking forward to it. At least my feet won't be cold.:twisted:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I say choose your style carefully. If your audience is only interested in information which will verify preconceived notions, don't bother.

I must say, however, I find your comments very interesting.



MaidInBedlam said:


> I'm perfectly satisfied with the Establishment Clause and aware of the long history we have of separating church and state but, I confess, I can't resist addressing this subject and I apologize if this starts a big, ugly argument. This subject is somewhat complicated, at least for someone like joey who wants a black and white explanation, and she will probably throw it back in my face because *there is no specific clause in the Constitution that says church and state are to be kept completely separate. Original intention is bolstered by historical and legal interpretation as well as the actual wording of the First Amendment.* The websites cited below, The First Amendment Center and the National Humanities Center appear to be excellent sources about this subject, and highly recommend to you, joey, to check out The First Amendment Center as t goes into much more detail than what I have quoted here.
> 
> *The Complete Separation of Church and State:*
> To start with we have the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and its intention:
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hell, I'd chip in myself.



Poor Purl said:


> The ACA will cover it for them.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Would the early Christians recognise that lot at all?


I doubt it -- However I do believe that those through history have been cruel, unkind, feeling superior and on and on, have been around through each generation. I believe that a large number of so called Christians had no real belief in God but used Christianity to earn riches, power, and really had no interest in what a true Christian feels. So much evil has happened in 'His' name over the centuries. I struggle with that a lot. That is why I do the best I can, and will trust my faith. I cannot accept the faith that is espoused by CB and those who are so judgmental.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you.



MaidInBedlam said:


> Thanks. I started out thinking I'd answer a question joey posed about wanting someone to point out the specific words in the Constitution that say church and state must be kept entirely separate.
> 
> Knowing I was on a fool's errand, I decided to post anyway. It's an interesting subject and I thought people other than joey might like to read what I'd put together. All we have to do is ignore whatever joey or anyone like her has to say on the subject. I know that's pretty easy to do.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And you'll see friends.



MaidInBedlam said:


> Consider it a compliment. I can't count the number of times I've been told I'm going to Hell. I'm kind of looking forward to it. At least my feet won't be cold.:twisted:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I kinda like it. Mysterious. Powerful. Beware.


 Booooo!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Thanks. I started out thinking I'd answer a question joey posed about wanting someone to point out the specific words in the Constitution that say church and state must be kept entirely separate.
> 
> Knowing I was on a fool's errand, I decided to post anyway. It's an interesting subject and I thought people other than joey might like to read what I'd put together. All we have to do is ignore whatever joey or anyone like her has to say on the subject. I know that's pretty easy to do.


Well, I'm glad you did it. Thanks again.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Consider it a compliment. I can't count the number of times I've been told I'm going to Hell. I'm kind of looking forward to it. At least my feet won't be cold.:twisted:


And your companions will be very interesting.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Consider it a compliment. I can't count the number of times I've been told I'm going to Hell. I'm kind of looking forward to it. At least my feet won't be cold.:twisted:


Hee Haw. I should learn to knit shroud socks, because I always have cold feet. Would I need to turn the heel for them?


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I'm glad you stuck around. You expressed what I think we all believe: that whether it comes from the word of a Higher Being or from one's own heart, to be moral requires that you see to the needs of this world and not the world to come. Since people like County Bumpkins don't seem to truly understand that, they have nothing to say to us that is worth hearing.


You and Shirley are so correct. We are on earth for a reason and I believe it is to lead as good a life as we can and to help our fellow humans when ever and where ever we are able. Like Shirley I have known so called "born again" people who were the worst humans I knew. They could do whatever terrible things they wanted to and have no worry 'cause they were "saved". I now think that is one of the biggest hoaxes perpetrated in the name of religion ever. I don't know what happens to us when we die and I don't believe I will go to hell by saying that. I trust my higher power is loving and kind. We are not the haters. What they believe is based on hatred and fear. It is what motivates them and what they believe. What a sad way to live. Since they have nothing worth hearing I look forward to ignoring their proselytizing regardless the topic.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I'm glad you stuck around. You expressed what I think we all believe: that whether it comes from the word of a Higher Being or from one's own heart, to be moral requires that you see to the needs of this world and not the world to come. Since people like County Bumpkins don't seem to truly understand that, they have nothing to say to us that is worth hearing.


That's one of their worst traits. They don't live in the here and now. It reminds me of a country song that describes them perfectly;

Come heed me, my brothers, come heed, one and all
Don't brag about standing or you'll surely fall
You're shining your light and shine it you should
But you're so heavenly minded, you're no earthly good

If you're holding heaven, then spread it around
There's hungry hands reaching up here from the ground
Move over and share the high ground where you stood
So heavenly minded, you're no earthly good

The gospel ain't gospel until it is spread
But how can you share it where you've got your head
There's hands that reach out for a hand if you would
So heavenly minded, you're no earthly good

If you're holding heaven, then spread it around
There's hungry hands reaching up here from the ground
Move over and share the high ground where you stood
So heavenly minded, you're no earthly good

Songwriters

Read more: Johnny Cash - No Earthly Good Lyrics | MetroLyrics


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Consider it a compliment. I can't count the number of times I've been told I'm going to Hell. I'm kind of looking forward to it. At least my feet won't be cold.:twisted:


I'll be right there with you Maid. :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You and Shirley are so correct. We are on earth for a reason and I believe it is to lead as good a life as we can and to help our fellow humans when ever and where ever we are able. Like Shirley I have known so called "born again" people who were the worst humans I knew. They could do whatever terrible things they wanted to and have no worry 'cause they were "saved". I now think that is one of the biggest hoaxes perpetrated in the name of religion ever. I don't know what happens to us when we die and I don't believe I will go to hell by saying that. I trust my higher power is loving and kind. We are not the haters. What they believe is based on hatred and fear. It is what motivates them and what they believe. What a sad way to live. Since they have nothing worth hearing I look forward to ignoring their proselytizing regardless the topic.


I agree with you completely, Cheeky. I've never believed that the afterlife mattered as much as the here and now, and I too trust that all will be sorted out in a fair and just manner. It's always bothered me to see Fundamentalists look at all the troubles here on Earth, shrug, and say that it's simply a sign that Armageddon (or the Rapture or the End Times) is approaching. What a cop out! We humans have created so many of the problems that face us, and I believe He d-mn well expects us to try clean up our messes.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you completely, Cheeky. I've never believed that the afterlife mattered as much as the here and now, and I too trust that all will be sorted out in a fair and just manner. It's always bothered me to see Fundamentalists look at all the troubles here on Earth, shrug, and say that it's simply a sign that Armageddon (or the Rapture or the End Times) is approaching. What a cop out! We humans have created so many of the problems that face us, and I believe He d-mn well expects us to try clean up our messes.


It is a cop out for very lazy people. How convenient for them to not have to take care of the planet or the other people on it. They are just a hapless bunch of moochers and they will let their savior clean up their polluting the planet and making it uninhabitable.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Can't we report her for calling us the devil's children? Please. Pretty pleeeease.


No, we would just be told to play nicely and ignore the nutters.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> If being the opposite of "them" makes us children of the devil, I'm going to consider it a compliment.


 :thumbup: Most definitely. Imagine spending all of eternity in their presence. That sure would be hell.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Thanks for the quote by Country Bumpkins.
> 
> Quote:
> ======================================
> ...


 Shirley, You have the correct interpretation of a true Christian and how they should behave. I remember: love your enemies, do good to those that hurt you, judge not as you shall also be judged. I once thought that CB was a nice, friendly person, she went overboard with her religious quote but she was a nice friendly person who cared about others. Something changed her and she now seems to be filled with hate and bigotry. She is definitely not nice anymore. I do not read the posts on D & P. They all seemed to be the same. Some of the posters ranting that the 'other mob' were being nasty to them and that the 'other mob' should not be allowed to post on D & P. But no mention of the D & P mob posting on the LOLL threads. They seem to post over here just to get a rise out of the LOLL posters, then they hightail back to D & P and call us bullies because we disagree with their individual slant on things. They accuse us of not accepting another person's point of view, well talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Unfortunately some of the D & P crowd appear to only read that thread and are therefore unaware of everything else that happens in the world.

Just a question, what happened to 'she who must not be named'? I have not seen her post on any of the lefty threads of late. Perhaps she has confined herself to D & P. No thank you, I am not going over there to read and see if she is still ranting and raving over there.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Shirley, You have the correct interpretation of a true Christian and how they should behave. I remember: love your enemies, do good to those that hurt you, judge not as you shall also be judged. I once thought that CB was a nice, friendly person, she went overboard with her religious quote but she was a nice friendly person who cared about others. Something changed her and she now seems to be filled with hate and bigotry. She is definitely not nice anymore. I do not read the posts on D & P. They all seemed to be the same. Some of the posters ranting that the 'other mob' were being nasty to them and that the 'other mob' should not be allowed to post on D & P. But no mention of the D & P mob posting on the LOLL threads. They seem to post over here just to get a rise out of the LOLL posters, then they hightail back to D & P and call us bullies because we disagree with their individual slant on things. They accuse us of not accepting another person's point of view, well talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Unfortunately some of the D & P crowd appear to only read that thread and are therefore unaware of everything else that happens in the world.
> 
> Just a question, what happened to 'she who must not be named'? I have not seen her post on any of the lefty threads of late. Perhaps she has confined herself to D & P. No thank you, I am not going over there to read and see if she is still ranting and raving over there.


MIA at last count. Proof that there are gods.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> We can say thanks to them for seeing us as the devil's children.


damemary
if they consider me that, I have no complaints, I am a very happy individual, living a good life without any fear. That is not a burden I carry and however anyone wants to live their life is fine with me. If I am considered a Devil, I see nothing negative in that whatsoever. It is an invention I do not subscribe to.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> damemary
> if they consider me that, I have no complaints, I am a very happy individual, living a good life without any fear. That is not a burden I carry and however anyone wants to live their life is fine with me. If I am considered a Devil, I see nothing negative in that whatsoever. It is an invention I do not subscribe to.


Huck, I totally agree. I know I am in good company with you!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You and Shirley are so correct. We are on earth for a reason and I believe it is to lead as good a life as we can and to help our fellow humans when ever and where ever we are able. Like Shirley I have known so called "born again" people who were the worst humans I knew. They could do whatever terrible things they wanted to and have no worry 'cause they were "saved". I now think that is one of the biggest hoaxes perpetrated in the name of religion ever. I don't know what happens to us when we die and I don't believe I will go to hell by saying that. I trust my higher power is loving and kind. We are not the haters. What they believe is based on hatred and fear. It is what motivates them and what they believe. What a sad way to live. Since they have nothing worth hearing I look forward to ignoring their proselytizing regardless the topic.


Cheeky Blighter
I agree, I agree. Thank you.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Shirley, You have the correct interpretation of a true Christian and how they should behave. I remember: love your enemies, do good to those that hurt you, judge not as you shall also be judged. I once thought that CB was a nice, friendly person, she went overboard with her religious quote but she was a nice friendly person who cared about others. Something changed her and she now seems to be filled with hate and bigotry. She is definitely not nice anymore. I do not read the posts on D & P. They all seemed to be the same. Some of the posters ranting that the 'other mob' were being nasty to them and that the 'other mob' should not be allowed to post on D & P. But no mention of the D & P mob posting on the LOLL threads. They seem to post over here just to get a rise out of the LOLL posters, then they hightail back to D & P and call us bullies because we disagree with their individual slant on things. They accuse us of not accepting another person's point of view, well talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Unfortunately some of the D & P crowd appear to only read that thread and are therefore unaware of everything else that happens in the world.
> 
> Just a question, what happened to 'she who must not be named'? I have not seen her post on any of the lefty threads of late. Perhaps she has confined herself to D & P. No thank you, I am not going over there to read and see if she is still ranting and raving over there.


I hope she is on a permanent vacation.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Apparently we are the devil's children because some of us criticized joeysomma. How do they know? Psychosis tells them so.


Wow! The devil's children? We are evil? 
I have lost any respect I had for the person who posted that. 
She should be ashamed of herself as I would think that Jesus must be. It almost reminds me of "Carrie's mother.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You and Shirley are so correct. We are on earth for a reason and I believe it is to lead as good a life as we can and to help our fellow humans when ever and where ever we are able. Like Shirley I have known so called "born again" people who were the worst humans I knew. They could do whatever terrible things they wanted to and have no worry 'cause they were "saved". I now think that is one of the biggest hoaxes perpetrated in the name of religion ever. I don't know what happens to us when we die and I don't believe I will go to hell by saying that. I trust my higher power is loving and kind. We are not the haters. What they believe is based on hatred and fear. It is what motivates them and what they believe. What a sad way to live. Since they have nothing worth hearing I look forward to ignoring their proselytizing regardless the topic.


Well said, Cheeky! I always wonder if there is a limit on how many times one can be born again.


----------



## Camacho (Feb 3, 2013)

I've missed the last several pages, but I guess I haven't missed all that much. I really appreciate the Constitutional scholarship around here, and am sitting on my hands trying not to get into a discussion of religion. (But I love the topic. PM me for my take on that subject.)


----------



## annamatilda (Aug 10, 2012)

.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Do you think it's mob mentality at work or are these people just plain outright droobs?


Droobs, Now there is a word I haven't heard in a long time.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

annamatilda said:


> .


So what's your point? Margaret Sanger saved a lot of women's lives whether they were black or white.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> And here's the thing. I know her type. You can spoonfeed her the parts of the Constitution she misunderstands and why, and which founding fathers support the Liberal POV ...but she lacks the intellectual capacity to sort it through in her mind and comprehend rudimentary concepts, much less complex ones.
> 
> But I guarantee you she's telling her friends how she kept stumping to ladies over here and we couldn't with against her sharp mind.
> 
> ...


I bow to you, JuliaGirl!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> So what's your point? Margaret Sanger saved a lot of women's lives whether they were black or white.


Exactly, Patty. Many of our Founding Fathers regarded African-Americans as property and bought and sold them like animals--it's unfortunate, but doesn't negate the good that they did.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Exactly, Patty. Many of our Founding Fathers regarded African-Americans as property and bought and sold them like animals--it's unfortunate, but doesn't negate the good that they did.


That's an interesting way to see Margaret Sanger's contribution. Thanks.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> Droobs, Now there is a word I haven't heard in a long time.


My Redheaded Brat has revealed her hell-raising side. L'chaim!

I thought droobs were droopy boobs.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Droobs, Now there is a word I haven't heard in a long time.


Patty, are you running for Spank Me, Daddy girl, too? You'll beat Gerslay by a mile.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> That's an interesting way to see Margaret Sanger's contribution. Thanks.


We cannot ignore that Sanger was into eugenics. But I guess the moral of the story is that good can grow out of bad.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We have a new name & mascot.



Poor Purl said:


> Booooo!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

SQM said:


> My Redheaded Brat has revealed her hell-raising side. L'chaim!
> 
> I thought droobs were droopy boobs.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

He's perfect, Purl!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You and Shirley are so correct. We are on earth for a reason and I believe it is to lead as good a life as we can and to help our fellow humans when ever and where ever we are able. Like Shirley I have known so called "born again" people who were the worst humans I knew. They could do whatever terrible things they wanted to and have no worry 'cause they were "saved". I now think that is one of the biggest hoaxes perpetrated in the name of religion ever. I don't know what happens to us when we die and I don't believe I will go to hell by saying that. I trust my higher power is loving and kind. We are not the haters. What they believe is based on hatred and fear. It is what motivates them and what they believe. What a sad way to live. Since they have nothing worth hearing I look forward to ignoring their proselytizing regardless the topic.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Amen.



Cheeky Blighter said:


> That's one of their worst traits. They don't live in the here and now. It reminds me of a country song that describes them perfectly;
> 
> Come heed me, my brothers, come heed, one and all
> Don't brag about standing or you'll surely fall
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well, ignoring the nutters is a good plan.



EveMCooke said:


> No, we would just be told to play nicely and ignore the nutters.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> :thumbup: Most definitely. Imagine spending all of eternity in their presence. That sure would be hell.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Infrequently posting 'Other Crafts.' Sitting in the corner?



EveMCooke said:


> Shirley, You have the correct interpretation of a true Christian and how they should behave. I remember: love your enemies, do good to those that hurt you, judge not as you shall also be judged. I once thought that CB was a nice, friendly person, she went overboard with her religious quote but she was a nice friendly person who cared about others. Something changed her and she now seems to be filled with hate and bigotry. She is definitely not nice anymore. I do not read the posts on D & P. They all seemed to be the same. Some of the posters ranting that the 'other mob' were being nasty to them and that the 'other mob' should not be allowed to post on D & P. But no mention of the D & P mob posting on the LOLL threads. They seem to post over here just to get a rise out of the LOLL posters, then they hightail back to D & P and call us bullies because we disagree with their individual slant on things. They accuse us of not accepting another person's point of view, well talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Unfortunately some of the D & P crowd appear to only read that thread and are therefore unaware of everything else that happens in the world.
> 
> Just a question, what happened to 'she who must not be named'? I have not seen her post on any of the lefty threads of late. Perhaps she has confined herself to D & P. No thank you, I am not going over there to read and see if she is still ranting and raving over there.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Who said, 'if you want to know how you're doing, look around at your friends.'



Cheeky Blighter said:


> Huck, I totally agree. I know I am in good company with you!


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:XD:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

damemary said:


> Who said, 'if you want to know how you're doing, look around at your friends.'


Or tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are. We are in great company damemary!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I would never say I agree with everything another person might have said. Would you? (You can play bible games if you wish, but I don't play.)



BrattyPatty said:


> So what's your point? Margaret Sanger saved a lot of women's lives whether they were black or white.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm hungry for deviled eggs. You too?



Cheeky Blighter said:


> :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You betcha!



Cheeky Blighter said:


> Or tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are. We are in great company damemary!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> My Redheaded Brat has revealed her hell-raising side. L'chaim!
> 
> I thought droobs were droopy boobs.


Maybe in the Urban Dictionary.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Who was the first slave owner in the colonies?


I know where this is going--according to some Internet sources, a black man named Anthony Johnson was the first slave owner, or at least the first to go to court to hang onto what he he felt was his property (another black man). I'm not sure what that proves, though.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Who was the first slave owner in the colonies?


Is that a rhetorical question?

I don't know why you do this. Were you a teacher in another life? You remind me of a teacher I had, always trying to catch us kids out. Answer your own bloody questions since you're the one who's chafing at the bit about American history.

No one else is.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Is that a rhetorical question?
> 
> I don't know why you do this. Were you a teacher in another life? You remind me of a teacher I had, always trying to catch us kids out. Answer your own bloody questions since you're the one who's chafing at the bit about American history.
> 
> No one else is.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are right. In the early days they were not slaves but indentured servants. They worked for their passage or room and board and then set free. Anthony Johnson was such a man. He was declared a free man and a citizen. Then he would not do the same for his indentured servant. He went to court, he won. Therefore, the beginning of legal slavery in the colonies. When he died, his property did not go to his heirs. Since he was black, he was declared not a citizen, and his property was given to a white man.
> 
> This is one of those cases, of be careful what you wish for, you might get it. I wonder how many African Americans know enough about slavery to blame one of their own for starting it?


You're getting away from the issue, Joey. Which is, of course, that even those we hold in highest regard (such as the Founding Fathers) can have some ideas and attitudes that don't pass muster in the 21st century. Offhand I can't think of any quotes or correspondence of the FFs that demonstrate how they viewed women or African-Americans, but it's safe to assume that their views of these social groups were anything but enlightened. However distressing we may find this, it doesn't negate the good that they did for the country as a whole--and the same goes for Margaret Sanger.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html

Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


Great, you're giving them ideas. Now they'll all be suing.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


BTW, love your new avatar. Tasmanian devil?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


The world's first ass-action lawsuit.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> The world's first ass-action lawsuit.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

I cannot find a devil sloth. The bad ones are saying pornographic things.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> You're getting away from the issue, Joey. Which is, of course, that even those we hold in highest regard (such as the Founding Fathers) can have some ideas and attitudes that don't pass muster in the 21st century. Offhand I can't think of any quotes or correspondence of the FFs that demonstrate how they viewed women or African-Americans, but it's safe to assume that their views of these social groups were anything but enlightened. However distressing we may find this, it doesn't negate the good that they did for the country as a whole--and the same goes for Margaret Sanger.


Also, there is no point to joey's point.

What the heck does "be careful what you wish for" mean in this context?

I also doubt joey even knows any blacks so why does she think she has the right to speculate about what they don't know about slavery? Except perhaps to feel superior to them and somehow discount black experience and history.

Stupid. As usual.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Also, there is no point to joey's point.
> 
> What the heck does "be careful what you wish for" mean in this context?
> 
> I also doubt joey even knows any blacks so why does she think she has the right to speculate about what they don't know about slavery?


The Professor must see them since she lives near an ultra-liberal town. Did you know that a serious case of bird flu has broken out in Wis. and they are killing all the poultry and turkeys ( if turkeys are not in the poultry category). Fill in the punch line.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Is this a reverse Class Action Suit where one person sues a group, instead of a group suing an entity? Lawyers must be starving.



Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> The world's first ass-action lawsuit.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Also, there is no point to joey's point.
> 
> What the heck does "be careful what you wish for" mean in this context?


I suppose it's a way of justifying slavery by pointing out that one black colonist's actions set a legal precedent that ultimately led to the mass enslavement of his fellow blacks. I admit there's a certain irony to it, but once again it's just an attempt to avoid the issue.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> Is this a reverse Class Action Suit where one person sues a group, instead of a group suing an entity? Lawyers must be starving.


Reminds me of the moron from California who tried to swing a ballot initiative stating that all gays would be executed posthaste (wonder what happened to that one? I should check).


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


Another "ambassador of God?" Where do the whackos get their ideas?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

annamatilda said:


> .


annamatilda
what is your point? M. Sanger had some shortcomings which came with the times. Remember you not speaking up when the signs were posted: "Whites only, Jews not allowed". Hopefully we are all growing up. Wonder what we are doing to others today that will not be accepted down the road. Give it some thought.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> You are right. In the early days they were not slaves but indentured servants. They worked for their passage or room and board and then set free. Anthony Johnson was such a man. He was declared a free man and a citizen. Then he would not do the same for his indentured servant. He went to court, he won. Therefore, the beginning of legal slavery in the colonies. When he died, his property did not go to his heirs. Since he was black, he was declared not a citizen, and his property was given to a white man.
> 
> This is one of those cases, of be careful what you wish for, you might get it. I wonder how many African Americans know enough about slavery to blame one of their own for starting it?


joeysomma
being bored to death with your cream cheese crowd? Well, we are being more than bored to death with your antics. Time to get lost. You come up with the weirdest stuff, go bury it, it is not interesting.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


Wombatnomore
there is no shortage of Nuts on the Right. Sure hope that ACA will soon get a hold of them for treatment incl. the Lawyers who take such nonsense cases.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Wombatnomore
> there is no shortage of Nuts on the Right. Sure hope that ACA will soon get a hold of them for treatment incl. the Lawyers who take such nonsense cases.


Apparently there was no attorney who would touch THAT case. Imagine the difficulty in subpoenaing god to testify.

Besides, there is absolutely no legal basis for such a jaw-droppingly stupid lawsuit. The woman hand-wrote it in cursive herself. I read it online and she stated EXACTLY the same points we have heard from joey and her cohorts.

I understand the court has taken no action on it.

Duh.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> BTW, love your new avatar. Tasmanian devil?


Yes. Cute isn't it? :mrgreen:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> The world's first ass-action lawsuit.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: That ass has rocks in it!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Also, there is no point to joey's point.
> 
> What the heck does "be careful what you wish for" mean in this context?
> 
> ...


Absolutely. She'd be reveling in her revelation! Drooling also.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> The Professor must see them since she lives near an ultra-liberal town. Did you know that a serious case of bird flu has broken out in Wis. and they are killing all the poultry and turkeys ( if turkeys are not in the poultry category). Fill in the punch line.


He smites the world with bird flu!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Is this a reverse Class Action Suit where one person sues a group, instead of a group suing an entity? Lawyers must be starving.


No. It's a 'Classless Action Suit!'


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Wombatnomore
> there is no shortage of Nuts on the Right. Sure hope that ACA will soon get a hold of them for treatment incl. the Lawyers who take such nonsense cases.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: "Nuts on the Right!" So funny!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Check this out. A woman in Nebraska is suing all homosexuals:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3070001/Nebraska-woman-sues-homosexuals-accusing-liars-deceivers-thieves.html
> 
> Apologies that it's the Daily Mail/


My question is 'who is behind this woman, who is putting her put to it , who is paying for her legal representation' because this type of action must surely be costly.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes. Cute isn't it? :mrgreen:


Yes, it is!


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Exactly, Patty. Many of our Founding Fathers regarded African-Americans as property and bought and sold them like animals--it's unfortunate, but doesn't negate the good that they did.


Here is something else to think about when some people cannot accurately report what is historical fact and twist the truth to serve their own purposes. Here is the version that some on the right use to "prove" that blacks started slavery in this country ergo they got what they deserved and created their own misery. Consider the source. http://conservative-headlines.com/2012/03/americas-first-slave-owner-was-a-black-man/ - 501k -

Here is the truth.
http://www.mythdebunk.com/first-slave-owner-african-american/ - 72k - Cached - Similar pages

[1] http://www.virtualjamestown.org/practise.html
[2] http://www.nps.gov/jame/historyculture/african-americans-at-jamestown.htm
[3] http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Court_Ruling_on_Anthony_Johnson_and_His_Servant_1655
Sponsored book:
Slavery and the Making of America (Paperback)
By (author): James Oliver Horton, Lois E. Horton


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> My question is 'who is behind this woman, who is putting her put to it , who is paying for her legal representation' because this type of action must surely be costly.


Not if she acts as her own lawyer. ("He who represents himself has a fool for a client. - Abraham Lincoln) Or, in this case, a lunatic.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Here is something else to think about when some people cannot accurately report what is historical fact and twist the truth to serve their own purposes.
> 
> Was the First Slave Owner African American?
> Posted on December 21, 2014 | in Stories | by bja
> ...


Thanks again for the research, Cheeky. There had to be more than what Joey said.

On the other hand, even if she'd been right, so what? There certainly weren't many black slave owners, and it's a disgusting practice no matter who's doing it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes. Cute isn't it? :mrgreen:


Cute as the dickens. :hunf:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Thanks again for the research, Cheeky. There had to be more than what Joey said.
> 
> On the other hand, even if she'd been right, so what? There certainly weren't many black slave owners, and it's a disgusting practice no matter who's doing it.


True, Purl but she would have you believe that black people created slavery in America which is not true. From there she wants us to believe that blacks created the slave system in America and the misery that followed should be blamed on them, they did it to themselves. She even says it in her post. Why only single out blacks when we know that whites and native Americans were also enslaved and also slave owners. If this doesn't scream racism and ignorance on her part I don't know what does. This prejudice on the right continues up to today as we all so well know in their blatant lack of respect for the President and his family.

Here is her source and please see my sources on my previous post. http://conservative-headlines.com/2012/03/americas-first-slave-owner-was-a-black-man/ - 501k

Here are her words from her post.
joeysomma wrote:
This is one of those cases, of be careful what you wish for, you might get it. I wonder how many African Americans know enough about slavery to blame one of their own for starting it?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Slavery has existed for thousands of years. One of the reasons it was so difficult to emancipate the slaves is the fact that slavery was so central to economies.

"To the victor belongs the spoils." Losing people became slaves to the winners. Imagine how it would boost an economy to have "free labor?" If slaves are freed, where do they live, feed their families, obtain skills? How do former slave owners till their fields?

Another one of those complex problems.



Cheeky Blighter said:


> True, Purl but she would have you believe that black people created slavery in America which is not true. From there she wants us to believe that blacks created the slave system in America and the misery that followed should be blamed on them, they did it to themselves. Why only single out blacks when we know that whites and native Americans were also enslaved and also slave owners. If this doesn't scream racism I don't know what does. This prejudice on the right continues up to today as we all so well know in their blatant lack of respect for the President and his family.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> He smites the world with bird flu!


Could god be punishing the religious right! She is bringing down god's wrath on WI! :XD:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Dear Ladies,

I must wait until Friday to put up my Evil Sloth since I cannot figure out the right mouse on this MacBook Air.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> This is just Joey trying to pretend there's no such thing as racism.
> 
> Oh, and BTW, black people kill other black people so it's also OK for white people to kill black people...
> 
> .... or so the racist logic goes.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> Dear Ladies,
> 
> I must wait until Friday to put up my Evil Sloth since I cannot figure out the right mouse on this MacBook Air.


We will be watching for it SQ.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> My question is 'who is behind this woman, who is putting her put to it , who is paying for her legal representation' because this type of action must surely be costly.


Cost = zero.

Lawsuits have to be based on law; in this case since she filed it in Federal court, it would have to be a federal law.

There are no federal laws against sin.

There is no attorney in the country who would touch such a thing, since there is no basis in law. Besides, as I said before, it would be devilishly difficult to subpoena god.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Will someone please clue me in? What's with all the little devils? I can guess, but the real reason might be even better!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> True, Purl but she would have you believe that black people created slavery in America which is not true. From there she wants us to believe that blacks created the slave system in America and the misery that followed should be blamed on them, they did it to themselves. She even says it in her post. Why only single out blacks when we know that whites and native Americans were also enslaved and also slave owners. If this doesn't scream racism and ignorance on her part I don't know what does. This prejudice on the right continues up to today as we all so well know in their blatant lack of respect for the President and his family.
> 
> Here is her source and please see my sources on my previous post. http://conservative-headlines.com/2012/03/americas-first-slave-owner-was-a-black-man/ - 501k
> 
> ...


Once again she misses the point. She want to make it that black people (presumably all black people) are responsible for slavery, rather than what it says, that one black man was the first court-appointed slave owner in the country. It's not as though white families all said, "That's not right; let's free all our servants." They took advantage of court decisions to the maximum.

So apparently some black people are as bad as some white people. So what else is new?

Or, wait, is her point that because the first slave owner was a black man, the entire black race has to be punished for it? I don't think I'll ever understand what she thinks she means.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Dear Ladies,
> 
> I must wait until Friday to put up my Evil Sloth since I cannot figure out the right mouse on this MacBook Air.


Why not Google the problem and see what other users have to say.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

cookiequeen said:


> Will someone please clue me in? What's with all the little devils? I can guess, but the real reason might be even better!


County Bumpkins called us the devil's children, and we liked it.

I should have asked what your guess would be. What would it be?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

JuliaGirl said:


> I've rarely seen any poster on any site who could be so horrifically wrong, factually and morally on so many issues. Statistically, it can't ALL be based on ignorance, could it?


Yes, it can. It's highly improbable, but it's possible. And in some cases, that's the only way it can happen.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Once again she misses the point. She want to make it that black people (presumably all black people) are responsible for slavery, rather than what it says, that one black man was the first court-appointed slave owner in the country. It's not as though white families all said, "That's not right; let's free all our servants." They took advantage of court decisions to the maximum.
> 
> So apparently some black people are as bad as some white people. So what else is new?
> 
> Or, wait, is her point that because the first slave owner was a black man, the entire black race has to be punished for it? I don't think I'll ever understand what she thinks she means.


Yes, she says in her posts that blacks started slavery in America and that people should be careful what they wish for meaning they enslaved themselves and brought about there own misery. Yes, she is crazy and ignorant and sadly her hatred for certain people allows her to demonize them. It's no different than CB calling us all devils and she can ward us off by quoting scripture. What a bunch of crap. The very fact that she keeps making an appearance proves her lack of stability. No one in their right mind acts that way. Maybe it's a martyr complex. :XD: I think it was her who messed up the Hadron Collider too. :XD: :XD:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

JuliaGirl said:


> No, it's just a question that often "asked" as white supremacist sites because they think the answer somehow negates their horrible racism, I'm not surprised with who raised the question here.
> 
> Here's the problem. She's wrong. AGAIN.
> 
> ...


It's interesting that you mention "indentured."

The religious right sometimes attempts to rationalize the bible's endorsement of slavery by claiming (wrongfully) that the slavery the bible endorses was really indentured servitude. Which is easily recognized as a blatant lie. But they try because any god who recognizes and supports slavery would be seen as immoral. Can't have that, so they make up lies.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It's interesting that you mention "indentured."
> 
> The religious right sometimes attempts to rationalize the bible's endorsement of slavery by claiming (wrongfully) that the slavery the bible endorses was really indentured servitude. Which is easily recognized as a blatant lie. But they try because any god who recognizes and supports slavery would be seen as immoral. Can't have that, so they make up lies.


I don't think they know the difference anymore. It has become second nature to them to alter the facts to prove their agenda.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Not if she acts as her own lawyer. ("He who represents himself has a fool for a client. - Abraham Lincoln) Or, in this case, a lunatic.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Lunatic! :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

JuliaGirl said:


> No, it's just a question that often "asked" as white supremacist sites because they think the answer somehow negates their horrible racism, I'm not surprised with who raised the question here.
> 
> Here's the problem. She's wrong. AGAIN.
> 
> ...


Oh, there are no two ways about it, racism is alive and well around these parts. Those guilty of it avoid saying the actual word and cry out "why do you always play the racism card" if someone actually uses it in an intelligent exchange. Ho Hum. (Not ho hum to you)!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Could god be punishing the religious right! She is bringing down god's wrath on WI! :XD:


Well, she smites all the time so I guess that could be the case!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Dear Ladies,
> 
> I must wait until Friday to put up my Evil Sloth since I cannot figure out the right mouse on this MacBook Air.


Found this:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

cookiequeen said:


> Will someone please clue me in? What's with all the little devils? I can guess, but the real reason might be even better!


Cookie, CB said that we are evil and that we are the devil's children.
Nice huh? When she gets to the pearly gates I'll bet St. Finger will shake his 
p#@^r at her!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Yes, she says in her posts that blacks started slavery in America and that people should be careful what they wish for meaning they enslaved themselves and brought about there own misery. Yes, she is crazy and ignorant and sadly her hatred for certain people allows her to demonize them. It's no different than CB calling us all devils and she can ward us off by quoting scripture. What a bunch of crap. The very fact that she keeps making an appearance proves her lack of stability. No one in their right mind acts that way. Maybe it's a martyr complex. :XD: I think it was her who messed up the Hadron Collider too. :XD: :XD:


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It's interesting that you mention "indentured."
> 
> The religious right sometimes attempts to rationalize the bible's endorsement of slavery by claiming (wrongfully) that the slavery the bible endorses was really indentured servitude. Which is easily recognized as a blatant lie. But they try because any god who recognizes and supports slavery would be seen as immoral. Can't have that, so they make up lies.


Not lies Green, delusions.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It's interesting that you mention "indentured."
> 
> The religious right sometimes attempts to rationalize the bible's endorsement of slavery by claiming (wrongfully) that the slavery the bible endorses was really indentured servitude. Which is easily recognized as a blatant lie. But they try because any god who recognizes and supports slavery would be seen as immoral. Can't have that, so they make up lies.


They are getting the slaves mixed up with the immigrants who came here indentured to pay their passage off. There was no mention of the word indentured in the bible. They just make it up.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> They are getting the slaves mixed up with the immigrants who came here indentured to pay their passage off. There was no mention of the word indentured in the bible. They just make it up.


Wow, to catch wombat and Green online at the same time is rare.
Hello to the both of you!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Cookie, CB said that we are evil and that we are the devil's children.
> Nice huh? When she gets to the pearly gates I'll bet St. Finger will shake his
> p#@^r at her!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Having coughing fit!!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Wow, to catch wombat and Green online at the same time is rare.
> Hello to the both of you!


Hello You! Dear Brat, you so make me laugh! I love it! Cough! :-o


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Having coughing fit!!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:

A good laugh is a good thing, wombat ;-)


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:
> 
> A good laugh is a good thing, wombat ;-)


Yes, it certainly is and there is no shortage of them between all of you! So much fun.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes, it certainly is and there is no shortage of them between all of you! So much fun.


WE do have great fun, don't we?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> WE do have great fun, don't we?


Absolutely! I enjoy the very funny and very smart banter among everyone here. So clever. And the way you all bounce off each other makes for a bloody good read! I look forward to logging on every day because every day I get so many laughs, so thank you Brat et al. (I'm doing a D&P).


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Dear Ladies,
> 
> I must wait until Friday to put up my Evil Sloth since I cannot figure out the right mouse on this MacBook Air.


Found this too cute pic also:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Why not Google the problem and see what other users have to say.


I will be getting my desktop hooked up Friday so soon this laptop will be put back under the chair. I am living in chaos with a zillion cartons. I don't even know where to start so I will not start. Friends and niece will come over Friday. One friend is like a General and will get me mobilized.

Sloth sloths.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Found this:


Ha Ha. I cannot swear on KP but you did find a mild one. Some of the bad sloth memes are really over the top.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> Found this too cute pic also:


I am not so sure they are cute - it is their life style I admire so.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

annamatilda said:


> .


Useless bit of info about Margaret Sanger: In her later years she wanted everything she ate to be served flambe... She did some good, but she sis have some unfortunate ideas.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Yes, she says in her posts that blacks started slavery in America and that people should be careful what they wish for meaning they enslaved themselves and brought about there own misery. Yes, she is crazy and ignorant and sadly her hatred for certain people allows her to demonize them. It's no different than CB calling us all devils and she can ward us off by quoting scripture. What a bunch of crap. The very fact that she keeps making an appearance proves her lack of stability. No one in their right mind acts that way. Maybe it's a martyr complex. :XD: I think it was her who messed up the Hadron Collider too. :XD: :XD:


She must have swallowed the God particle.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It's interesting that you mention "indentured."
> 
> The religious right sometimes attempts to rationalize the bible's endorsement of slavery by claiming (wrongfully) that the slavery the bible endorses was really indentured servitude. Which is easily recognized as a blatant lie. But they try because any god who recognizes and supports slavery would be seen as immoral. Can't have that, so they make up lies.


Here I have to disagree: slavery was for no more than seven years. Every seventh year all slaves were set free, though they could ask to stay on.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Here I have to disagree: slavery was for no more than seven years. Every seventh year all slaves were set free, though they could ask to stay on.


Bleep! You mean to tell me that I could have left Ex-man after 7 years?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Cookie, CB said that we are evil and that we are the devil's children.
> Nice huh? When she gets to the pearly gates I'll bet St. Finger will shake his
> p#@^r at her!


 St. Finger!!!


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Absolutely! I enjoy the very funny and very smart banter among everyone here. So clever. And the way you all bounce off each other makes for a bloody good read! I look forward to logging on every day because every day I get so many laughs, so thank you Brat et al. (I'm doing a D&P).


Then where are those little black hearts they send each other?

Who would have thought a black heart symbolized love?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Found this too cute pic also:


Too cute is right. Love it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Useless bit of info about Margaret Sanger: In her later years she wanted everything she ate to be served flambe... She did some good, but she sis have some unfortunate ideas.


Useless but fascinating.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Bleep! You mean to tell me that I could have left Ex-man after 7 years?


I think you'd have to ask a rabbi.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Is it my imagination or are we giving joey more attention than we should? I mean, after all, any attention we pay her is too much. (Please remember, I actually posted about separation of church and state just because she asked for "proof"...)


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Is it my imagination or are we giving joey more attention than we should? I mean, after all, any attention we pay her is too much. (Please remember, I actually posted about separation of church and state just because she asked for "proof"...)


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Is it my imagination or are we giving joey more attention than we should? I mean, after all, any attention we pay her is too much. (Please remember, I actually posted about separation of church and state just because she asked for "proof"...)


Not your imagination at all. She's been feted at D&P for her skill at ignoring your answer, except for one sentence. Ignoring would be the best way to treat her.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Is it my imagination or are we giving joey more attention than we should? I mean, after all, any attention we pay her is too much. (Please remember, I actually posted about separation of church and state just because she asked for "proof"...)


You should win the prize for the most imaginative devil, though the Tasmanian may give you a run for your money.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We've been called the Devil's Children & we decided it's the nicest thing they've called us, hence the Devil Avatars. Mine is a cartoon of a dirt devil, common in southwest. Dust forms into mini-tornadoes.



cookiequeen said:


> Will someone please clue me in? What's with all the little devils? I can guess, but the real reason might be even better!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Once again she misses the point. She want to make it that black people (presumably all black people) are responsible for slavery, rather than what it says, that one black man was the first court-appointed slave owner in the country. It's not as though white families all said, "That's not right; let's free all our servants." They took advantage of court decisions to the maximum.
> 
> So apparently some black people are as bad as some white people. So what else is new?
> 
> Or, wait, is her point that because the first slave owner was a black man, the entire black race has to be punished for it? I don't think I'll ever understand what she thinks she means.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

JuliaGirl said:


> I've rarely seen any poster on any site who could be so horrifically wrong, factually and morally on so many issues. Statistically, it can't ALL be based on ignorance, could it?


No. It's gone on too long. We've seen a willful attempt to confuse others into agreement...and perhaps to action? IMHO


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think of it as exercising our minds, playing with language. It is great fun. I must D&P my friends too. Here's to a Meeting of the Minds! Cheers!



BrattyPatty said:


> WE do have great fun, don't we?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

JuliaGirl said:


> Well, it seemed that was part of her point, that white people 'only' practiced indentured slavery until that guy that had 'the mark of the devil" (black skin) brought it to the white colonists.
> 
> Sort of how Eve is responsible for making that innocent man sin by forcing that 'apple' down his throat, so too is the black man responsible for slavery for 'forcing' it upon the white colonists.
> 
> ...


The similarity is hard to miss. They claim they don't see it, but it's there.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I never heard this before. Is this true? Devious, said the Child of the Devil.



Poor Purl said:


> Here I have to disagree: slavery was for no more than seven years. Every seventh year all slaves were set free, though they could ask to stay on.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Is it my imagination or are we giving joey more attention than we should? I mean, after all, any attention we pay her is too much. (Please remember, I actually posted about separation of church and state just because she asked for "proof"...)


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

JuliaGirl said:


> Well, it seemed that was part of her point, that white people 'only' practiced indentured slavery until that guy that had 'the mark of the devil" (black skin) brought it to the white colonists.
> 
> Sort of how Eve is responsible for making that innocent man sin by forcing that 'apple' down his throat, so too is the black man responsible for slavery for 'forcing' it upon the white colonists.
> 
> ...


Can I take a leaf out of someone else's book and cry that you are all bullies. Here I am sitting at my computer and you say "Sort of how Eve is responsible". Big bully, blame poor old me for everything. Signed by EVEMCooke :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> Wow, to catch wombat and Green online at the same time is rare.
> Hello to the both of you!


Back at you, Patty!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hi Greenie. We both get up with the sun.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

damemary said:


> Hi Greenie. We both get up with the sun.


Hi, Dame.

I don't wait for the sun. Been up since 4:00, baking cookies for the sale tomorrow.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I woke up and went back to bed. You are a marvel. Just say no when you need to. hugs



DGreen said:


> Hi, Dame.
> 
> I don't wait for the sun. Been up since 4:00, baking cookies for the sale tomorrow.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

damemary said:


> I woke up and went back to bed. You are a marvel. Just say no when you need to. hugs


What is this "no" of which you speak?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Hi, Dame.
> 
> I don't wait for the sun. Been up since 4:00, baking cookies for the sale tomorrow.


GOOD LUCK! on your sale. I will be thinking about you! I hope you make lots of dollars. Shirley


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Then where are those little black hearts they send each other?
> 
> Who would have thought a black heart symbolized love?


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


You all know my thoughts on what to do about Joey. ignoring is the only thing that will show we don't want anything to do with her.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I knew you had trouble with it.

Try, "Somebody else can do this because I deserve a break." Quiet breathing before volunteering. Taking a day off because you're already dealing with repairs in the house and now a two-day fundraiser.

I'll see you tomorrow and if you don't crash on Sunday, you may be kidnapped by me.



DGreen said:


> What is this "no" of which you speak?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> What is this "no" of which you speak?


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think of it as exercising our minds, playing with language. It is great fun. I must D&P my friends too. Here's to a Meeting of the Minds! Cheers!


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: 
But how do you D&P your friends?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I never heard this before. Is this true? Devious, said the Child of the Devil.


I didn't know about the exceptions. This from Wikipedia, The Bible and Slavery: section on Manumission



Wikipedia said:


> In a parallel with the Sabbatical Year system, the Covenant Code offers automatic manumission of male Israelite slaves, after they have worked for six years;<46>* this excludes non-Israelite slaves, and specifically excludes Israelite daughters, who were sold into slavery by their fathers, from such automatic seventh-year manumission. *Such were bought to be betrothed to the owner, or his son, and if that had not been done, they were to be allowed to be redeemed. If the marriage took place, they were to be set free if her husband was negligent in his basic marital obligations.<47>


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> They are getting the slaves mixed up with the immigrants who came here indentured to pay their passage off. There was no mention of the word indentured in the bible. They just make it up.


BrattyPatty
yes, they just make it up and that has been the case every time the Bible was rewritten. It has no resemblance to the original.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Not your imagination at all. She's been feted at D&P for her skill at ignoring your answer, except for one sentence. Ignoring would be the best way to treat her.


OOOOhhh, I'll have to drop in at D&P and check that stuff out.:twisted: :mrgreen:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

damemary said:


> I knew you had trouble with it.
> 
> Try, "Somebody else can do this because I deserve a break." Quiet breathing before volunteering. Taking a day off because you're already dealing with repairs in the house and now a two-day fundraiser.
> 
> I'll see you tomorrow and if you don't crash on Sunday, you may be kidnapped by me.


Actually, I've been practicing the art of delegating and saying, "I would love to have help with _______ (insert task here).

Tomorrow I will have my camera around my neck and will be available to point and give orders.

I'm leaving right now to have lunch with the ladies. A TWO HOUR break!

Diane


----------



## Camacho (Feb 3, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> They are getting the slaves mixed up with the immigrants who came here indentured to pay their passage off. There was no mention of the word indentured in the bible. They just make it up.


There is a bit in the Torah that talks about freeing one's servants after so many years but if the servant wants to stay with his master and keep on being that person's servant, they get an ear pierced and stay with that master. There is also something about slaves getting freed and getting to go home for the jubilee if I remember correctly. Lemme look it up.

Here it is:
7If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother: But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth. Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought; and he cry unto the Lord against thee, and it be sin unto thee. Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto. For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
12And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the Lord thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to-day. And it shall be, if he say unto thee, I will not go away from thee; because he loveth thee and thine house, because he is well with thee; Then thou shalt take an awl, and thrust it through his ear unto the door, and he shall be thy servant for ever. And also unto thy maidservant thou shalt do likewise. It shall not seem hard unto thee, when thou sendest him away free from thee; for he hath been worth a double hired servant to thee, in serving thee six years: and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all that thou doest.
Deuteronomy 15:7-18.

But the word "slave" occurs in the Bible only twice. And this bit in Deuteronomy is very different from slavery. The word "indentured" does not seem to appear in the Bible at all. So I don't know where the RW fundamentalists get their notions. At least that's what I find in the King James Version.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> OOOOhhh, I'll have to drop in at D&P and check that stuff out.:twisted: :mrgreen:


I don't think they named you specifically, just congratulated her on sticking to her message (which seemed to change now and then). But they gave her kisses and black hearts and cream cheese - all apparently the rewards of being a good right-wing fundamentalist Christian.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Camacho said:


> There is a bit in the Torah that talks about freeing one's servants after so many years but if the servant wants to stay with his master and keep on being that person's servant, they get an ear pierced and stay with that master. There is also something about slaves getting freed and getting to go home for the jubilee if I remember correctly. Lemme look it up.
> 
> Here it is:
> 7If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother: But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth. Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought; and he cry unto the Lord against thee, and it be sin unto thee. Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto. For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
> ...


Thanks for taking the trouble to look this up. But it's very clear that this time limit applies only to Hebrew slaves. I wonder whether there was a way for Canaanites or Edomites or whatever other nations were around to get free.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> You just described an "indentured servant."


 However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

Ok, so what is this?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

And what about this?

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

And what about this?

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

And what about this?

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

And what about this?

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Am I missing something? Every example is from the Old Testament. I thought Christians were NT. And, really, what has any of this to do with here and now?

To be honest, though, I'm a bit distracted by our General Election tonight. It's not going well for the opposition, by the early exit polls.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Am I missing something? Every example is from the Old Testament. I thought Christians were NT. And, really, what has any of this to do with here and now?
> 
> To be honest, though, I'm a bit distracted by our General Election tonight. It's not going well for the opposition, by the early exit polls.


In the New Testament they refer to "servants" in most translations, but it is obvious that they mean slaves (such as in Ephesians and 1 Peter 2) when servants are told to obey and submit to their master as they would God, to take the master's buffets without protest, etc.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

D&P-ing friends is:

Thanking them effusively, with or without smooches, for being such fine people. In our cases, it's actually true.



Poor Purl said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> But how do you D&P your friends?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Whooohoo. Good girl.



DGreen said:


> Actually, I've been practicing the art of delegating and saying, "I would love to have help with _______ (insert task here).
> 
> Tomorrow I will have my camera around my neck and will be available to point and give orders.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I take it that if a man loves his wife and family enough not to leave them, he commits himself and the family to a lifetime of slavery.

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)[/quote]


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Am I missing something? Every example is from the Old Testament. I thought Christians were NT. And, really, what has any of this to do with here and now?
> 
> To be honest, though, I'm a bit distracted by our General Election tonight. It's not going well for the opposition, by the early exit polls.


Fundamentalists (like joey) will quickly tell you that nothing in the new testament or the teachings of Jesus does away with the old testament or anything it teaches. At the same time, they try very hard to deny that slavery is endorsed by their god by trying to characterize the slavery of the bible as "indentured servitude." Doing so gets their god off the hook for being immoral, since indentured servitude is more of a willing contract than actual slavery, or in practice not as horrendous as slavery.

All of which is total baloney. The old testament AND the teachings of Jesus clearly endorse slavery. It' immoral and endorsed by the Christian god. Period.

What this has to do with today? Nothing except as the apologist's answer to those who point out the absurdity of religion in general and Christianity in specific.

Hope your election works out as you hope.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Fundamentalists (like joey) will quickly tell you that nothing in the new testament or the teachings of Jesus does away with the old testament or anything it teaches. At the same time, they try very hard to deny that slavery is endorsed by their god by trying to characterize the slavery of the bible as "indentured servitude." Doing so gets their god off the hook for being immoral, since indentured servitude is more of a willing contract than actual slavery.
> 
> All of which is total baloney. The old testament AND the teachings of Jesus clearly endorse slavery.
> 
> What this has to do with today? Nothing except as the apologists' answer to those who don't believe as they do.


Thank you, D. At the risk of alienating absolutely everyone, I am more and more convinced that religion is used only in order to support the nasty stuff.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Thank you, D. At the risk of alienating absolutely everyone, I am more and more convinced that religion is used only in order to support the nasty stuff.


There are several of us on this thread who feel the same. I, for one, am openly atheist. I respect my Christian friends who practice the love taught by their religion, but as you may have guessed, am antagonistic to those like joey, who use religion to oppress and discriminate against others.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

DGreen said:


> There are several of us on this thread who feel the same. I, for one, am openly atheist. I respect my Christian friends who practice the love taught by their religion, but as you may have guessed, am antagonistic to those like joey, who use religion to oppress and discriminate against others.


Phew - I thought I was the only one here. I try to hide my contempt, with varying degrees of success, but I am an alien here (I have to say I really hate that usage) and we Brits are allowed to laugh at fairy tales of every kind.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Phew - I thought I was the only one here. I try to hide my contempt, with varying degrees of success, but I am an alien here (I have to say I really hate that usage) and we Brits are allowed to laugh at fairy tales of every kind.


You aren't alone here aw.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Phew - I thought I was the only one here. I try to hide my contempt, with varying degrees of success, but I am an alien here (I have to say I really hate that usage) and we Brits are allowed to laugh at fairy tales of every kind.


Alien? This is a worldwide thread. Though some may not agree, I appreciate observations on our political system from Brits, Aussies, Germans, Canadians..et al. You give a valuable perspective.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Thank you for your kind words, D. I was only saying that I really dislike your compatratiots' use of the word "alien", when to me it means someone like Jabba The Hutt, not a human being from a different country.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Thank you for your kind words, D. I was only saying that I really dislike your compatratiots' use of the word "alien", when to me it means someone like Jabba The Hutt, not a human being from a different country.


Gotcha. Consider the source.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

DGreen said:


> And what about this?
> 
> When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)


DGreen
it is this kind of stuff that should make everyone gag and has turned me away from Religion.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Thank you, D. At the risk of alienating absolutely everyone, I am more and more convinced that religion is used only in order to support the nasty stuff.


aw9358
I am with you.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Phew - I thought I was the only one here. I try to hide my contempt, with varying degrees of success, but I am an alien here (I have to say I really hate that usage) and we Brits are allowed to laugh at fairy tales of every kind.


aw9358
please, shed the thought of being an Alien here. You are one of us and an equal.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> DGreen
> it is this kind of stuff that should make everyone gag.


It definitely makes me gag.

I find it interesting that many who claim the bible is the source of morals can do so in the light of that passage and others saying the victor in battle may rape women as spoils of war, etc.

At the same time, they insist morality is NOT relative. Definitely a failure of logic. Either the bible allows and encourages immoral acts or Christian morality is relative. Can't have it both ways.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Am I missing something? Every example is from the Old Testament. I thought Christians were NT. And, really, what has any of this to do with here and now?
> 
> To be honest, though, I'm a bit distracted by our General Election tonight. It's not going well for the opposition, by the early exit polls.


So are you going to end up with a coalition government, Anne or is Cameron back in?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> So are you going to end up with a coalition government, Anne or is Cameron back in?


Last I heard the Conservatives are hanging in. Are they as odious as the conservatives in the States? What is their agenda?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It definitely makes me gag.
> 
> I find it interesting that many who claim the bible is the source of morals can do so in the light of that passage and others saying the victor in battle may rape women as spoils of war, etc.
> 
> At the same time, they insist morality is NOT relative. Definitely a failure of logic. Either the bible allows and encourages immoral acts or Christian morality is relative. Can't have it both ways.


DGreen
the bible is a book of contradictions, imagination, hatred and on and on and on. I think that Christian morality is rather questionable.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.

The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.

For the last five years we have endured a coalition of Conservative/Liberal Democrat parties. The Conservatives gained fewer seats, but the LibDems went with them in 2010 to form a coalition government. The result is that the LibDems have been destroyed today because of the perceived betrayal of their 2010 election promises, but the Tories have benefited. The pre-election polls showed the main two parties neck and neck, but the exit polls predict a Tory majority. This happened in 1993 as well. I, and many others, suspect that people lie in pre-election polls, where they don't want to say that they intend to vote Conservative.

Of course, the majority of the press is anti-Labour. The newspapers have ridiculed the leader unmercifully, and it's very difficult to to fight that kind of scorn. I have just heard on tv that Ed Milliband is going to resign later today.

The problem for me, and for many people I know, is that we are what we call Old Labour: the party that sprang from the trades union movement and spoke with an authentic voice for the working class. Too many of our professional politicians have never had a real job. Actually, I suspect I'm too old for this world.

What I really fear is the projected (promised) £12 billion of benefits cuts. The right-wing press has relentlessly campaigned against "benefits scroungers", and it has finally worked. The actual figures don't matter: most of the benefits budget goes on retired people, but who cares about truth? There are so many stories of people who have starved to death or committed suicide because their benefits were stopped. The scroungers include the disabled and sick, as well as people without jobs.

I'm going to stop now. I don't really expect anyone to read my rant, but I'm in despair.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> DGreen
> the bible is a book of contradictions, imagination, hatred and on and on and on. I think that Christian morality is rather questionable.


Oh, I agree. Those Christians who behave morally and ethically would do so anyway. I truly believe that.

Those who don't use the passages that support their personal desires. Like the fabulously wealthy televangelists, the anti-gay bigots, those who deny climate change in hopes of the rapture. As we all know, the devil can quote scripture to his own ends.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


aw, I understand your pain. It's a world-wide phenomenon.

That is why I ask myself every morning when I get up what I can do to save our Democracy. The thought of the right-wingers and the extreme religious candidates winning office in 2016 and actually implementing their insane agenda is incomprehensible and horrifying. I can only imagine how discouraged and hopeless you must be feeling.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> D&P-ing friends is:
> 
> Thanking them effusively, with or without smooches, for being such fine people. In our cases, it's actually true.


What a wonderful idea! You are absolutely brilliant, and I'm so lucky to know you and to be able to learn at your knee how to treat the people you love.

You mean like that? Oy vey!


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

D, thank you for your understanding. I just don't get how the turkeys can vote for Christmas. I don't recognise the country I grew up in. I know it's changed, but the level of selfishness and ignorance is horrifying. People either don't want to know or will accept what they read in Murdoch papers about the "horrors" of immigration and the poor, ill and vulnerable. Oh my goodness, UKIP have just won a seat in Essex. They don't know what they do. If you search UKIP you will find a collection of absolute nutters and racist, sexist morons. The only thing missing is a fundamentalist christian dimension and you would recognise them immediately.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


Please don't despair, Anne. I wish I could make you feel better. Our conservatives are like yours plus ours have the religious bent that justifies all the terrible things they want to do to those least able to defend themselves. Your politicians don't seem to mince words or try to pretend they are concerned or charitable in any way. If the conservatives win here next year we may be in despair too. If it gets too bad we may be taking to the streets in revolt. I am glad I am old and not young and trying to raise a family.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Cheeky, hello again. Your good wishes do make me feel a bit better. Sadly, our politicians do mince words - they just don't do it with religion. Tony Blair was actually ridiculed for bringing his Christianity into politics. That's the difference between us. Nobody here would think of saying "God bless the UK" for fear of being laughed at. For that I do thank our British cynicism. However, the right has lied consistently. They play on fear. I'm sorry, it's 5.20 now and I think I ought to sleep for a while. I always stay up for elections, but this one is so depressing.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


I've read every word and am disappointed and fearful for your country and mine. Seems like our governments march in lockstep and it would be a nightmare if the same happens here with our Ship of Fools. As an undergraduate, I had a pol. sci. professor who said just don't give legitimacy to the bad government. It worked for me during Nixon, Reagan, Carter, Ford, et al. I know the poor and elderly are carrying the brunt of the opposition's cruelty; let's hope the 60s generation take out their protest clothes and get out on the streets again. We have more time now.


----------



## Camacho (Feb 3, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


I am so sorry. It's okay to rant about that tragedy.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> Thank you, D. At the risk of alienating absolutely everyone, I am more and more convinced that religion is used only in order to support the nasty stuff.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: You haven't alienated me. I tend to agree with you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think everyone should have a turn at the other end of the stick. Then their opinions on slavery would have meaning.



Huckleberry said:


> DGreen
> it is this kind of stuff that should make everyone gag and has turned me away from Religion.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I've read every word and I weep with you. At times like this I always try to think of ways to protect myself and help others who need it. I suspect we are of the same generation. This too shall pass.



aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It feels squiggley (a new invented word of mine) because it reminds us of D&P. But the appreciation is true and dear friends are a treasure. Of course we're also mocking those who need it so desperately. Win/win. hugs



Poor Purl said:


> What a wonderful idea! You are absolutely brilliant, and I'm so lucky to know you and to be able to learn at your knee how to treat the people you love.
> 
> You mean like that? Oy vey!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


I also read every word and I'm concerned for how you're feeling. Aw, why do you think the majority voted for Cameron's party?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


aw9358
Thank you for explaining the behavior of the parties involved. All you can hope for now is that things get so bad
that the next time a turn-around will be easy. As happens here, people vote against their best interest. I think some get so tired that they pay no attention to facts and wake up wonder what happened and then blame others for their dilemma. Don't let it get you down, let it make you more determined to work on change. Nothing is permanent and that is comforting.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> Last I heard the Conservatives are hanging in. Are they as odious as the conservatives in the States? What is their agenda?


SQM
From what I have read, they stink when it comes to looking out for the "lesser" Citizens. Unfortunately Cameron is still in charge and I hope that the opposition makes him bleed this time around. Change will come. O.k. a little later than expected but it will happen. We can only hope that the needy are not being trampled on any more. They have suffered enough.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> aw9358
> Thank you for explaining the behavior of the parties involved. All you can hope for now is that things get so bad
> that the next time a turn-around will be easy. As happens here, people vote against their best interest. I think some get so tired that they pay no attention to facts and wake up wonder what happened and then blame others for their dilemma. Don't let it get you down, let it make you more determined to work on change. Nothing is permanent and that is comforting.


My oh my...people are the same all over, that stuff about welfare cheats and scrounges certainly sounds familiar.
Don't despair, Aw. As Huck said, the conservative kooks now leading Britain will make such a mess of things they'll be tossed out on their collective ear when the next election rolls around. I do credit most folks with at least marginal amounts of common sense--they might be duped by politicians' smooth talk, but when the fantastic campaign promises remain unfulfilled they inevitably throw the Pied Pipers out.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Thanks very much to everyone who took the trouble to read and respond to my complaints. It is such a horrible feeling to know that we are in for even more misery for the next five years. Still, the rich will get richer, so it's not doom and gloom, is it?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Thanks very much to everyone who took the trouble to read and respond to my complaints. It is such a horrible feeling to know that we are in for even more misery for the next five years. Still, the rich will get richer, so it's not doom and gloom, is it?


aw9358
never give up, you can always give them Hell. This may well be a wake-up call for those who slept through this election and things will turn around perhaps sooner than you think. Cameron cannot continue treading on those who need a helping hand or he runs the whole Country into the ground. The rich will never be able to build it up again, it always is the little guy who does the rebuilding. Never become a Pessimist, it drains your strength and you will need much to survive a few more years of this government. Someone also needs to go after the Press, they seem to have screwed with the truth a great deal. They need to be kept honest.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Thanks very much to everyone who took the trouble to read and respond to my complaints. It is such a horrible feeling to know that we are in for even more misery for the next five years. Still, the rich will get richer, so it's not doom and gloom, is it?


Just curious, Aw...as I understand it, Cameron's Conservative Party now has 331 out of 650 seats. Does that mean he and his party pretty much have free rein to do as they please?


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Just curious, Aw...as I understand it, Cameron's Conservative Party now has 331 out of 650 seats. Does that mean he and his party pretty much have free rein to do as they please?


Sadly, yes. They have an overall majority, so they don't have to rely on other parties to vote with them to get legislation through. My constituency in Manchester was a big Labour gain over the LibDems, mainly because we have a big student population. They had promised before the 2010 election that they would not raise tuition fees and then went back on it when they went into coalition with the Tories.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Sadly, yes. They have an overall majority, so they don't have to rely on other parties to vote with them to get legislation through. My constituency in Manchester was a big Labour gain over the LibDems, mainly because we have a big student population. They had promised before the 2010 election that they would not raise tuition fees and then went back on it when they went into coalition with the Tories.


Winner take all, I suppose. Boy, that's really a bummer for those whose party loses the majority--they're relegated to the back seat for five long years. It seems both a plus and a minus that in the US the power is split a little more evenly between the Executive and Legislative branches. On one hand it means that losing any given Presidential election is no big deal (particularly if one's chosen Party has gained or retained a majority in Congress). The down side: the President can be absolutely hamstrung if Congress is determined to fight him or her at every turn.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Thanks very much to everyone who took the trouble to read and respond to my complaints. It is such a horrible feeling to know that we are in for even more misery for the next five years. Still, the rich will get richer, so it's not doom and gloom, is it?


=========================
Aw9358 -

It seems to be happening any many places. There is a huge chasm developing between the right and the left in many places. It is interesting Alberta (the Province where I was born and raised) in Canada, has had a Conservative Govt. for over 40 years and has had an iron grip on the Provincial Government. Suddenly this past week, the New Democratic Party won 53 seats and the Conservatives only won 14 seats and was third. It was a majority Government and ahead of times the pundits said they thought NDP would gain some seats but they walked all over the opposition, and as a result there will be some interesting differences for Albertans in the next 4 years.

It will be interesting to see if the NDP manages to cut into the Federal Government Progressive Conservatives. I hope to see a change Nationally, but I would honestly be surprised if they lose the majority- however no one dreamed it would happen in Alberta so it will be an interesting election to say the least.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> =========================
> Aw9358 -
> 
> It seems to be happening any many places. There is a huge chasm developing between the right and the left in many places. It is interesting Alberta (the Province where I was born and raised) in Canada, has had a Conservative Govt. for over 40 years and has had an iron grip on the Provincial Government. Suddenly this past week, the New Democratic Party won 53 seats and the Conservatives only won 14 seats and was third. It was a majority Government and ahead of times the pundits said they thought NDP would gain some seats but they walked all over the opposition, and as a result there will be some interesting differences for Albertans in the next 4 years.
> ...


No kidding--Alberta's swing to the left seems to have taken everyone by surprise. The national elections are in October, aren't they? If so, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more hoopla and hype about them. Americans, by way of contrast, are in a frenzy about a national election that's some sixteen months away.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Designer, that's very interesting. How left-leaning is the New Democratic Party, and what do you think caused the change?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Thanks very much to everyone who took the trouble to read and respond to my complaints. It is such a horrible feeling to know that we are in for even more misery for the next five years. Still, the rich will get richer, so it's not doom and gloom, is it?


Anne, you're not the only person who's feeling horrible. The New York Times today had a column by Paul Krugman (Nobel Prize in Economics) saying the same thing. The piece is at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/opinion/paul-krugman-triumph-of-the-unthinking.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0

This is one section that made me think of your message:

_So I guess we shouldnt be too harsh on Ed Miliband, the leader of Britains Labour Party, for failing to challenge the economic nonsense peddled by the Conservatives. Like Mr. Obama and company, Labours leaders probably know better, but have decided that its too hard to overcome the easy appeal of bad economics, especially when most of the British news media report this bad economics as truth. But it has still been deeply disheartening to watch.

What nonsense am I talking about? Simon Wren-Lewis of the University of Oxford, who has been a tireless but lonely crusader for economic sense, calls it mediamacro. Its a story about Britain that runs like this: First, the Labour government that ruled Britain until 2010 was wildly irresponsible, spending far beyond its means. Second, this fiscal profligacy caused the economic crisis of 2008-2009. Third, this in turn left the coalition that took power in 2010 with no choice except to impose austerity policies despite the depressed state of the economy. Finally, Britains return to economic growth in 2013 vindicated austerity and proved its critics wrong.

*Now, every piece of this story is demonstrably, ludicrously wrong. *_


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No kidding--Alberta's swing to the left seems to have taken everyone by surprise. The national elections are in October, aren't they? If so, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more hoopla and hype about them. Americans, by way of contrast, are in a frenzy about a national election that's some sixteen months away.


Federal Elections to vote for Members of Parliament (MP's)
I am often amazed at how involved and confusing your elections are. Ours is coming up in October - you are correct. A lot of Canadians won't pay too much attention until the last month or two. Others are very involved. One person from each party run in each riding,in all elections, Provincial and Federal.

We have 3 people running for Prime Minister -- the heads of the three different parties. Our Provincial governments run each Province and work together with some laws with the Federal Government when necessary - they could represent two different parties.

_ The federal election will mean there will be people running in each 'Riding' to become "Members of Parliament". So that is separate from Provincial MLA's Members of the Legislative Assembly in each Province. They are not all held at the same time (Provincially).

There is a campaign that lasts a few months and each 
person running only runs for a Federal seat. That is why Provincial elections can go NDP provincially but Conservative or Liberal or New Democratic Federally. The party with the majority of their members voted in across the country wins the election and the Prime Minister is voted on by the party members - He is chosen by Party Members before the election usually which means he is the Prime Minister as soon as the election is decided.

With three parties (which works well for us) (there are sometimes another party like the Parti Quebecois but usually they are not strong enough to do much Federally.

Right now the Progressive Conservatives and Prime Minister Stephen Harper are in power. The New Democrats are the main opposition and the Liberal Party members are third. If the two other parties have more voted members voted in than the main party then the Government will be automatically a minority Government and would be able to out vote the leading party_.

That is stated very simply. The Liberals have had many well known Prime Ministers in past years and it is unusual for the NDP to be the opposition Party rather than the Liberals r but the PC's have been in control for some time. It slowly seems to be changing from right to left but it is still unknown whether the Progressive Conservatives will once again achieve a majority. I would think that they must be uneasy after what happened in Alberta. Most of my friends are liberal minded and are very happy with the fact that the PC's were beaten so badly. Many many Conservatives are horrified in Alberta though. Politics is nothing like in the States where people decide to run under the cover of either the right or left. Personally, as I have learned much about your system, I prefer ours. I have often voted for the person in my riding, who I like rather than the party. I think that will change now that the NDP is gaining strenth.

It is so much less complicated than the US situation. No one from any party can just decide to RUN for Prime Minister - once the election results are in the leader of that party becomes Prime Minister. I believe the British Australian and NewZealand have the same basic rules. The Federal election takes about 3 or 4 months and it is over and things settle down with whoever wins. I am a strong liberal but voted Conservative federally as I didn't like the liberals in the past few years. It didn't seem as if theNDP could win, but I will likely vote for the NDP in this next election. Alberta has been the strongest far right Province for years and years.

I have written this 'off the cuff' as I usually do and if you want more information. Just search Canadian Provincial Elections and then Canadian Federal Elections.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Anne, you're not the only person who's feeling horrible. The New York Times today had a column by Paul Krugman (Nobel Prize in Economics) saying the same thing. The piece is at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/opinion/paul-krugman-triumph-of-the-unthinking.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0
> 
> This is one section that made me think of your message:
> 
> ...


An interesting article, Purl. Thanks for posting. I can't help but point out one flaw in the author's reasoning, though. Obama paid lip service to the GOP's hysteria about the budget but pursued his own agenda and won a second term. Sounds like the Labour Party tried the same approach but ultimately lost--or at least lost the majority in Parliament.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Federal Elections to vote for Members of Parliament (MP's)
> I am often amazed at how involved and confusing your elections are. Ours is coming up in October - you are correct. A lot of Canadians won't pay too much attention until the last month or two. Others are very involved. One person from each party run in each riding,in all elections, Provincial and Federal.
> 
> We have 3 people running for Prime Minister -- the heads of the three different parties. Our Provincial governments run each Province and work together with some laws with the Federal Government when necessary - they could represent two different parties.
> ...


Thanks, Designer. Forgive if I ask some very dumb questions (just trying to sort all this out!)

And yes, Canada's system does seem a lot less complicated--and quieter! I never realized before how, um, _unique_ the US system was until I started seeing it through non-American eyes. Here it's like the Super Bowl, a sporting event complete with sound bites, bumper stickers, and half-time performers.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Purl, he's got it exactly correct. We have been screaming here for Labour to take on this myth, but after years of its being pushed on the electorate by the Tories and their friends in the press, maybe they thought it was too difficult. I really wish they had tried, though. The campaign was inept at best - there were many influential voices saying that the "deficit" story was completely misleading, but they seemed to give in. That word has gained so much currency, and every time I hear someone say it I ask them what they think "the deficit" means. Nobody actually knows, but they know it has to be defeated. It beggars belief. The press in this country is getting worse, and so many people just don't seem to be able to think for themselves (or they don't want to). I've seen interviews on tv where people parrot what the papers say, but when they are asked about their experience they say they haven't actually seen it, but it must be true because the papers say it is. I despair of the incuriousness, or laziness, or lack of education, or just bloody stupidity, of so many people in this country.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Purl, he's got it exactly correct. We have been screaming here for Labour to take on this myth, but after years of its being pushed on the electorate by the Tories and their friends in the press, maybe they thought it was too difficult. I really wish they had tried, though. The campaign was inept at best - there were many influential voices saying that the "deficit" story was completely misleading, but they seemed to give in. That word has gained so much currency, and every time I hear someone say it I ask them what they think "the deficit" means. Nobody actually knows, but they know it has to be defeated. It beggars belief. The press in this country is getting worse, and so many people just don't seem to be able to think for themselves (or they don't want to). I've seen interviews on tv where people parrot what the papers say, but when they are asked about their experience they say they haven't actually seen it, but it must be true because the papers say it is. I despair of the incuriousness, or laziness, or lack of education, or just bloody stupidity, of so many people in this country.


Well, one interesting thing: Cameron doesn't appear to be a total puppet of British Big Business. It seems odd that he's open to Britain leaving the EU when business leaders are so much against it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> An interesting article, Purl. Thanks for posting. I can't help but point out one flaw in the author's reasoning, though. Obama paid lip service to the GOP's hysteria about the budget but pursued his own agenda and won a second term. Sounds like the Labour Party tried the same approach but ultimately lost--or at least lost the majority in Parliament.


Krugman has been saying for years that the stimulus wasn't big enough and hasn't gone to the right people, and he attributes this to Obama's accepting the GOP's claim that the deficit or the debt is too high. I don't know whether it was lip service or not. I suspect you have a better handle on such things than I have.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, one interesting thing: Cameron doesn't appear to be a total puppet of British Big Business. It seems odd that he's open to Britain leaving the EU when business leaders are so much against it.


To be honest, I think he feels he doesn't have a choice. Maybe he'll feel differently after the results, but UKIP, and the far right of his own party, are the ones who have been pushing for our exit from the EU. UKIP only gained one seat in the end, but there has always been quite a strong movement here on the starboard fringe for leaving the EU. That's where UKIP came from - the racist and anti-immigration flavour came from their mopping up the British National Party (a truly shameful "party" made of up of mostly morons and thugs). My husband has just come back from the pub, and I read to him what I've written so far. He agrees (and he's an old Labour apparatchik from way back, even though he's a very posh southern public schoolboy).

The recent referendum on Scottish independence was a masterstroke by the Tories. Although the vote resulted in a majority in favour of remaining in the United Kingdom, it galvanised Scottish politics. The Tories had had no Parliamentary seats in Scotland for years, so the result in this election was that Labour was also wiped out in Scotland - a loss of 50 seats. They do have some evil geniuses on their team. I just don't know where the left is going to go from here. You know I could write an essay on this, but I'll spare you. For now.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Thanks, Designer. Forgive if I ask some very dumb questions (just trying to sort all this out!)
> 
> And yes, Canada's system does seem a lot less complicated--and quieter! I never realized before how, um, _unique_ the US system was until I started seeing it through non-American eyes. Here it's like the Super Bowl, a sporting event complete with sound bites, bumper stickers, and half-time performers.


Exactly - and to me it is hit or miss ,which I have avoided saying until this post. We have 3 parties, all the elections, both Provincial and Federal have a member from EACH PARTY running. Those are the only ones running in either the Federal or the Provincial elections. It is decided prior to the election which person applying to run will be accepted by the party to represent them in the election. Then during the Provincial and Federal elections, those 3 names only are entered on the Ballot and the voter chooses which he will vote for. OOPS!!! an independent can also put his name in but would not represent a party --- it is not that often that an independent will be elected but it does happen. That person can then vote - as can all members, as they like during a vote in Parliament - (usually they vote along party lines, but not always.)

It is so much less dramatic but so much better organized in my opinion. We don't have the drama you have,thank heavens. There is not the nastiness in our elections that there is down there, another thank heavens.

On election night (both types of elections, Provincial or Federal) the votes for each person in one riding are totalled and the winner in Federal election, goes to Ottawa and to the capital of the Province in the Provincial elections. The party with the most members wins. There is very very little animosity and you are welcome to volunteer in each riding to help your Party representative win. Much like the States but without the animosity that is down there. I have been so thankful that our elections are so much better run. jmo.

Please don't take offense but if you lived up here you would be absolutely amazed at how smooth our elections are and how well it works.

EVE or WOMBAT - your elections are much like ours - is that correct?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Purl, he's got it exactly correct. We have been screaming here for Labour to take on this myth, but after years of its being pushed on the electorate by the Tories and their friends in the press, maybe they thought it was too difficult. I really wish they had tried, though. The campaign was inept at best - there were many influential voices saying that the "deficit" story was completely misleading, but they seemed to give in. That word has gained so much currency, and every time I hear someone say it I ask them what they think "the deficit" means. Nobody actually knows, but they know it has to be defeated. It beggars belief. The press in this country is getting worse, and so many people just don't seem to be able to think for themselves (or they don't want to). I've seen interviews on tv where people parrot what the papers say, but when they are asked about their experience they say they haven't actually seen it, but it must be true because the papers say it is. I despair of the incuriousness, or laziness, or lack of education, or just bloody stupidity, of so many people in this country.


Economics seems to frighten otherwise thoughtful people into trying not to think about it. Terms like deficit, fiscal, monetary policy, GDP, etc. cause them to run screaming to the corner where they don't have to think. So they settle for what's there, the devil they know.

Though most people in any country don't do all that much thinking. That's why the music is so loud.

I was touched by Krugman's saying that the political situation in the UK is disheartening. That's how I felt in 2004, when Bush was re-elected in spite of his stupid war and his stupid everything else. Eventually this country survived, and so will yours. But it won't be a cheery time.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Purl, meant to add that I live through the 1993 election. It was just as surprising and depressing. 

it's 1.40 here and well past my bedtime after last night. I read out the Paul Krugman piece to the old man, and he agreed it's exactly what needs to be said. The war on "welfare" (a lovely term borrowed from the US, sadly) has worked so well, but the real numbers are never disseminated. Well over half of the benefits budget is spent on retired people; another big proportion is spent on tax credits on the working poor, and quite a small share actually goes to the perennial hate figures, the unemployed and sick and disabled. You will never see that represented in the press, of course.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Designer, that's very interesting. How left-leaning is the New Democratic Party, and what do you think caused the change?


It is basically labour and left - and the Conservatives are at the other end of the spectrum. It is more labour than the Liberals. So far the Right have managed to make sure that they don't go anywhere - the Liberals and the Conservative have always been the two main parties with NDP running third but the last election changed that a lot. NDP had a very fine man as head of the NDP and he was highly thought of across the board. He passed away with Cancer just after the election, and Steven (?) Mulcair took his place. I am impressed with him and I think a lot of others (except those who are very conservative are too. The liberals seem to be disappearing into the woodwork, but they could show up at the party -- The head of the Liberal Federals is Justin Trudeau. His father was Pierre Trudeau who was well known as a very dashing person in the States. Used to date some of the Movie stars.

Well ladies that is all I can tell you. as I said this is my take on Canadian Politics. The next election (Federal) could be very interesting after what happened in Alberta.

As to the reason it happened - I am very liberal, and I am sure my opinion would be very different than anyone of the Far right Conservatives so I am speaking for myself alone.
I think the Right Wing every where is going further and further right and is not nearly so middle ground as it was. I know that many Canadians are Liberal and NDP is a new, fresh face. I am not too concerned if they get elected in October. I think we are due for a change. They do care about those who are not as wealthy or out of jobs etc. here. My uncle was one of the founding members of the CCF which changed into the New Democratic party- when Iwas in my early20's and they were very concerned about the lack of help for poor people, widows, men unable to work, and the trade and labour unions. (sound familiar? they have always been liberal. Trudeau might to better than expected, but there is a lot of grumbling about 
the Prime Minister and the Federal Tories. How much it will change will be interesting to watch. I know I won't ever vote Conservative again, especially after joining in on the liberal threads in the States. There is a strong Christian Conservative group in Alberta much like the far right there and I believe that had a lot to do with losing.-and there are lots of more liberal minded people each year. Certainly not the dislike and nastiness that is happening in t he States but it seems to be solidifying here too. If you spoke to a Conservative you would likely get a completely different opinion so if you want to know both sides there are lots of them on KP.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Krugman has been saying for years that the stimulus wasn't big enough and hasn't gone to the right people, and he attributes this to Obama's accepting the GOP's claim that the deficit or the debt is too high. I don't know whether it was lip service or not. I suspect you have a better handle on such things than I have.


No, not really. To be honest, I've never been terribly interested in the nuts and bolts of the American election process--and never paid more than a fleeting glance at those held in other countries. I'm not sure why the British and Canadian elections have suddenly grabbed my attention--they seem to hold a significance that previous ones didn't. The world seems to be in a state of flux, and I suppose these are the first hints as to which direction we're headed in.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Exactly - and to me it is hit or miss ,which I have avoided saying until this post. We have 3 parties, all the elections, both Provincial and Federal have a member from EACH PARTY running. Those are the only ones running in either the Federal or the Provincial elections. It is decided prior to the election which person applying to run will be accepted by the party to represent them in the election. Then during the Provincial and Federal elections, those 3 names only are entered on the Ballot and the voter chooses which he will vote for. OOPS!!! an independent can also put his name in but would not represent a party --- it is not that often that an independent will be elected but it does happen. That person can then vote - as can all members, as they like during a vote in Parliament - (usually they vote along party lines, but not always.)
> 
> It is so much less dramatic but so much better organized in my opinion. We don't have the drama you have,thank heavens. There is not the nastiness in our elections that there is down there, another thank heavens.
> 
> ...


I'm not offended in the least, Designer--just amazed I never realized that the American political parties are expected to produce not only viable candidates but a damn good show. This is nothing new, I suppose--in the old days the Parties entertained prospective voters with excursions on the Hudson and lashings of free booze. Now we're promised 18-20 months of non-stop multimedia entertainment--postings on Facebook and Twitter 24/7, books, movie deals, sound bites, comedic acts, and hundreds of clever political ads that leave us either roaring with laughter or growling at the screen. You're right--viewing Canada's more businesslike approach to such matters would probably leave me slack-jawed in amazement. I can't even imagine American politics sans the media coverage, the glitz, and the overflowing war chests--it'd be like ducking into a circus tent and finding three empty rings and a busted pipe organ inside.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm not offended in the least, Designer--just amazed I never realized that the American political parties are expected to produce not only viable candidates but a damn good show. This is nothing new, I suppose--in the old days the Parties entertained prospective voters with excursions on the Hudson and lashings of free booze. Now we're promised 18-20 months of non-stop multimedia entertainment--postings on Facebook and Twitter 24/7, books, movie deals, sound bites, comedic acts, and hundreds of clever political ads that leave us either roaring with laughter or growling at the screen. You're right--viewing Canada's more businesslike approach to such matters would probably leave me slack-jawed in amazement. I can't even imagine American politics sans the media coverage, the glitz, and the overflowing war chests--it'd be like ducking into a circus tent and finding three empty rings and a busted pipe organ inside.


That's one heck of a metaphor. :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> I apologise for this, but I don't have another forum to express it. It's after 4 am here, and I'm watching the General Election results come in. I'm down to Christmas port and coconut water and adrenalin and sadness. The Conservatives are going to win, probably with a workable majority, so we have another five years of austerity and extreme right-wing government. After the referendum last year for Scottish independence, which resulted in a win for continuing the UK, the SNP (Scottish National Party) is going to win every seat in Scotland. This is at the expense of the Labour Party: the Conservatives didn't have a single MP in Scotland, so the SNP has won at the expense of Labour.
> 
> The other problem we have had is the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which is the "respectable" wing of the extreme right-wing, anti-Europe, anti-immigration movement. They have taken some votes from the Conservatives, but many more from traditional working-class Labour constituencies, who have experienced so much hardship and need someone easy to blame.
> 
> ...


I read your post and can imagine your despair. The 2016 Presidential election here is probably going to be horrible. Conservatives have taken to calling benefits people legitimately need or have paid jnto as we do with our Social Security benefits "entitlements". They have made "entitlement" a dirty word. It's compete nonsense to think that people with legitimate needs and who qualify for certain benefits are acting like the country owes them a living. I'm feeling pretty pessimistic about what will happen in the US after the 2016 election.

I feel I'll be watching the election returns with tears running down my face. I thing back to the night in 1972 when Nixon was reelected. I sat with my housemates watch the election returns and we all were crying silently, watching Nixon, already known to be a crook, win. He ended up disgracing the Office of the President and the US when he had to resign. If he's stayed In office he would have been impeached and then for his crimes.

I'm developing a very deep bunker mentality. I wish I had gone off the grid to the middle of nowhere just to be safely far, far away from any government. I'm too old to do that now and have too many obligations that I can't walk away from.

Our "scroungers" are the same as yours, retired people, the disabled and sick, as well as people without jobs. I'm sure there are people who have starved to death or committed suicide because their benefits were stopped. I'll bet we start to hear a lot more of the stories all too soon.

Hang in there aw, and rant here all you want to. I'm not the only person who cares.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Exactly - and to me it is hit or miss ,which I have avoided saying until this post. We have 3 parties, all the elections, both Provincial and Federal have a member from EACH PARTY running. Those are the only ones running in either the Federal or the Provincial elections. It is decided prior to the election which person applying to run will be accepted by the party to represent them in the election. Then during the Provincial and Federal elections, those 3 names only are entered on the Ballot and the voter chooses which he will vote for. OOPS!!! an independent can also put his name in but would not represent a party --- it is not that often that an independent will be elected but it does happen. That person can then vote - as can all members, as they like during a vote in Parliament - (usually they vote along party lines, but not always.)
> 
> It is so much less dramatic but so much better organized in my opinion. We don't have the drama you have,thank heavens. There is not the nastiness in our elections that there is down there, another thank heavens.
> 
> ...


Yes, they are Designer. The good thing about our political landscape is that more smaller parties have come into the mix and they are attracting votes. Several smaller party individuals were voted in during the last Federal Election and they now have representation in the Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate has successfully blocked all of the unpopular 'bills' put forward by the Government which has recently forced them to rethink and come up with fairer options, particularly in the area of welfare, e.g., pensions and medicare.

Our election frenzy (if you can call it that) usually takes place in the 4 weeks leading up to it. It's comparatively 'calm' in the grand scheme of things but there's always a chance that anything can happen.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm not offended in the least, Designer--just amazed I never realized that the American political parties are expected to produce not only viable candidates but a damn good show. This is nothing new, I suppose--in the old days the Parties entertained prospective voters with excursions on the Hudson and lashings of free booze. Now we're promised 18-20 months of non-stop multimedia entertainment--postings on Facebook and Twitter 24/7, books, movie deals, sound bites, comedic acts, and hundreds of clever political ads that leave us either roaring with laughter or growling at the screen. You're right--viewing Canada's more businesslike approach to such matters would probably leave me slack-jawed in amazement. I can't even imagine American politics sans the media coverage, the glitz, and the overflowing war chests--it'd be like ducking into a circus tent and finding three empty rings and a busted pipe organ inside.


It's not that bad. Actually, we enjoy our elections. We are different than Americans at least many of us are. It is there to do what it is supposed to do without nastiness, lies, scandals etc. I wouldn't change our method for the world.

I think it would be a good idea if the U.S. tried something a little less like a circus (grin). It also means that weirdos don't usually get a chance to 'run' for Prime Minister ! You guys are welcome to the circus. I don't mean that in a nasty way, and you all know that but we have had straightforward elections since the beginning and it works very well. Canada is a great country and I wouldn't change it. I am a proud Canadian. Not many countries in the world have fewer enemies. This past week there was an hour long program from Holland where the Canadians who freed HOlland in the 2nd world war were honoured as well as troops from other countries as it is the 70th anniversary of D Day. Holland still ends a huge number of tulips to Ottawa EVERY YEAR in thanks for the Canadians driving out the Nazis at the end of the war. Part of an estate in Ottawa was given Dutch ownership as Queen Julianna and her children spent the was in Ottawa. Princess Margareit was born in Canada and because it was part of Holland she retained her Dutch Citizenship. zo


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> aw9358
> Thank you for explaining the behavior of the parties involved. All you can hope for now is that things get so bad
> that the next time a turn-around will be easy. As happens here, people vote against their best interest. I think some get so tired that they pay no attention to facts and wake up wonder what happened and then blame others for their dilemma. Don't let it get you down, let it make you more determined to work on change. Nothing is permanent and that is comforting.


 :hunf: :hunf: I agree completely. I would only add that we should do everything we can to protect ourselves from the bad effects. Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> aw9358
> never give up, you can always give them Hell. This may well be a wake-up call for those who slept through this election and things will turn around perhaps sooner than you think. Cameron cannot continue treading on those who need a helping hand or he runs the whole Country into the ground. The rich will never be able to build it up again, it always is the little guy who does the rebuilding. Never become a Pessimist, it drains your strength and you will need much to survive a few more years of this government. Someone also needs to go after the Press, they seem to have screwed with the truth a great deal. They need to be kept honest.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Like our Repubs in mid term election? Majority of both houses?

Here's hoping for Dem President in 2016. I feel certain that our dear Aussie friends will be ready for change. Hang in there.



aw9358 said:


> Sadly, yes. They have an overall majority, so they don't have to rely on other parties to vote with them to get legislation through. My constituency in Manchester was a big Labour gain over the LibDems, mainly because we have a big student population. They had promised before the 2010 election that they would not raise tuition fees and then went back on it when they went into coalition with the Tories.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Change is the only constant.



Designer1234 said:


> =========================
> Aw9358 -
> 
> It seems to be happening any many places. There is a huge chasm developing between the right and the left in many places. It is interesting Alberta (the Province where I was born and raised) in Canada, has had a Conservative Govt. for over 40 years and has had an iron grip on the Provincial Government. Suddenly this past week, the New Democratic Party won 53 seats and the Conservatives only won 14 seats and was third. It was a majority Government and ahead of times the pundits said they thought NDP would gain some seats but they walked all over the opposition, and as a result there will be some interesting differences for Albertans in the next 4 years.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> No kidding--Alberta's swing to the left seems to have taken everyone by surprise. The national elections are in October, aren't they? If so, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more hoopla and hype about them. Americans, by way of contrast, are in a frenzy about a national election that's some sixteen months away.


This is one of the reasons Americans manage to spend such huge sums on an election. Another one I hate are those 30 second ads. Tells you nothing. Costs a fortune.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good comparison. Americans treat an election as entertainment and then complain about it. IMHO



susanmos2000 said:


> Thanks, Designer. Forgive if I ask some very dumb questions (just trying to sort all this out!)
> 
> And yes, Canada's system does seem a lot less complicated--and quieter! I never realized before how, um, _unique_ the US system was until I started seeing it through non-American eyes. Here it's like the Super Bowl, a sporting event complete with sound bites, bumper stickers, and half-time performers.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Economics seems to frighten otherwise thoughtful people into trying not to think about it. Terms like deficit, fiscal, monetary policy, GDP, etc. cause them to run screaming to the corner where they don't have to think. So they settle for what's there, the devil they know.
> 
> Though most people in any country don't do all that much thinking. That's why the music is so loud.
> 
> I was touched by Krugman's saying that the political situation in the UK is disheartening. That's how I felt in 2004, when Bush was re-elected in spite of his stupid war and his stupid everything else. Eventually this country survived, and so will yours. But it won't be a cheery time.


I saw a quote that made me gasp. Jeb (Bush III) admitted his closest advisor is GW (Bush II aka Shrub.) I can envision a cabinet in wheelchairs with scowls on their faces. NOOOO!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> :hunf: :hunf: I agree completely. I would only add that we should do everything we can to protect ourselves from the bad effects. Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst.


damemary
you are correct, protecting ourselves is essential for survival.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes, they are Designer. The good thing about our political landscape is that more smaller parties have come into the mix and they are attracting votes. Several smaller party individuals were voted in during the last Federal Election and they now have representation in the Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate has successfully blocked all of the unpopular 'bills' put forward by the Government which has recently forced them to rethink and come up with fairer options, particularly in the area of welfare, e.g., pensions and medicare.
> 
> Our election frenzy (if you can call it that) usually takes place in the 4 weeks leading up to it. It's comparatively 'calm' in the grand scheme of things but there's always a chance that anything can happen.


Thanks Wombat -- ours last about a month too. We had a huge turnover in Alberta last week, as I mentioned above and many are wondering whether it will carry over to the Federal election.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> I saw a quote that made me gasp. Jeb (Bush III) admitted his closest advisor is GW (Bush II aka Shrub.) I can envision a cabinet in wheelchairs with scowls on their faces. NOOOO!


damemary
scary isn't it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I saw a quote that made me gasp. Jeb (Bush III) admitted his closest advisor is GW (Bush II aka Shrub.) I can envision a cabinet in wheelchairs with scowls on their faces. NOOOO!


Like those old guys on The Muppet Show?

Why would Jeb take advice from W after having spent a lifetime living with him and seeing how he worked out? He might as well take advice from Katherine Harris.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Yes, they are Designer. The good thing about our political landscape is that more smaller parties have come into the mix and they are attracting votes. Several smaller party individuals were voted in during the last Federal Election and they now have representation in the Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate has successfully blocked all of the unpopular 'bills' put forward by the Government which has recently forced them to rethink and come up with fairer options, particularly in the area of welfare, e.g., pensions and medicare.
> 
> Our election frenzy (if you can call it that) usually takes place in the 4 weeks leading up to it. It's comparatively 'calm' in the grand scheme of things but there's always a chance that anything can happen.


Israel has a jillion small parties, but they ended up with Netanyahu again anyway.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I read your post and can imagine your despair. The 2016 Presidential election here is probably going to be horrible. Conservatives have taken to calling benefits people legitimately need or have paid jnto as we do with our Social Security benefits "entitlements". They have made "entitlement" a dirty word. It's compete nonsense to think that people with legitimate needs and who qualify for certain benefits are acting like the country owes them a living. I'm feeling pretty pessimistic about what will happen in the US after the 2016 election.
> 
> I feel I'll be watching the election returns with tears running down my face. I thing back to the night in 1972 when Nixon was reelected. I sat with my housemates watch the election returns and we all were crying silently, watching Nixon, already known to be a crook, win. He ended up disgracing the Office of the President and the US when he had to resign. If he's stayed In office he would have been impeached and then for his crimes.
> 
> ...


I remember the night Nixon was re-elected, too, and the same tears running down my face. The thought occurred to me that once Dracula has been allowed to enter someone's home, he can go back there as often as he wants to, and the same thing was happening to us all in real life.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Good comparison. Americans treat an election as entertainment and then complain about it. IMHO


I wonder what election campaigns were like before television.Once a profit is to be made, all decency flies out the window. It's TV we have to thank for this circus, and all its clowns.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> damemary
> scary isn't it.


Oh dear! won't that lose him votes? It should. Was Bush THAT Popular with the right ? even though he and Cheney started the war? I sure wouldn't like him depending on GEO W. if I was an American!! your thoughts everyone?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

I never remember hearing so much talk re: the Evangelicals in an election. It frightens me. Is my memory right?

Jeb, initially was trying to distance himself from his brother, but it seems that lasted only a week. Maybe it won't matter. He may not get the nomination. Too early to call. But the American public has a memory like a sieve.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Oh dear! won't that lose him votes? It should. Was Bush THAT Popular with the right ? even though he and Cheney started the war? I sure wouldn't like him depending on GEO W. if I was an American!! your thoughts everyone?


I dont' think so, Shirley. They never mention him, (GW) Notice that they skip over Bush 1 and 2 and claim Ronald Reagan as the better Republican, if there is such a thing.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Hi. Just jumping in here.
> 
> I felt that way too.
> 
> ...


I loved Keith Olberman. I was so sad to see him go.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

SQM said:


> I never remember hearing so much talk re: the Evangelicals in an election. It frightens me. Is my memory right?
> 
> Jeb, initially was trying to distance himself from his brother, but it seems that lasted only a week. Maybe it won't matter. He may not get the nomination. Too early to call. But the American public has a memory like a sieve.


As I said before, SQ, every time we plant a Bush in the WH, we grow a war.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> I loved Keith Olberman. I was so sad to see him go.


He caught me too and got me hooked on MSNBC. Seems he is constantly having employment problems, tho. What exactly goes wrong with him?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I read that Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford didn't raise a penny to run. They made do with funds available. Think about it.



Poor Purl said:


> I wonder what election campaigns were like before television.Once a profit is to be made, all decency flies out the window. It's TV we have to thank for this circus, and all its clowns.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> He caught me too and got me hooked on MSNBC. Seems he is constantly having employment problems, tho. What exactly goes wrong with him?


SQM
he calls it as he sees it and that is a no no in the Media. If you are part of it, you need to learn to dance. His independence is a thorn. Tells us about Freedom of Speech, doesn't it.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

It is the FCC that calls the shots. And don't believe for a minute that there is a free press. Why is news news?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Hi. Just jumping in here.
> 
> I felt that way too.
> 
> ...


Oh, boy, does that take me back.

I rarely pay attention to TV news. But there was Knight Ridder, which later became McClatchy News Service, who were the only ones talking straight about the war.

"Why, in a nutshell, was our reporting different from so much other reporting? One important reason was that we sought out the dissidents, and we listened to them, instead of serving as stenographers to high-ranking [Bush administration] officials and Iraqi exiles."

And that was all, until Air America began. And now that's gone.

As for what the conservatives like to pretend about the media,
Paul Krugman quote: "Being a good liberal doesn't require that you believe, or pretend to believe, lots of things that almost certainly are not true, being a conservative does."


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> It is the FCC that calls the shots. And don't believe for a minute that there is a free press. Why is news news?


SQM
do not rely on the FCC, they are way understaffed.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> SQM
> do not rely on the FCC, they are way understaffed.


I don't want to rely on them. They are censors.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> As I said before, SQ, every time we plant a Bush in the WH, we grow a war.


Well, if the Shrub goes in, who knows? The Apocalypse? :mrgreen:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> I don't want to rely on them. They are censors.


SQM
I have no problem with them. At least they keep the air somewhat clean.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> SQM
> I have no problem with them. At least they keep the air somewhat clean.


But not clean of American propaganda.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> But not clean of American propaganda.


SQM
that is free speech and all it takes is a good education to sort it all out.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> aw9358
> please, shed the thought of being an Alien here. You are one of us and an equal.


AW--We have different opinions about some of the nitty gritty, but we all are liberal and definitely on the Left. Some of us go to Church, but I would think none of us are 'born again' ! I would think we are in the majority. I have learned so much on this thread.

We have just about every personal belief or non belief, but we care about each other and respect each other's opinions. I have learned so much about American Politics and have made so many friends here. We are on the same basic page about the election. There are two Australians, and me, a Canadian and so you are welcome to join us. Many people who are interested and who 'want to know'. We have real discussion and we sometimes disagree but that is what I like about this thread. We all care about those who are less fortunate and we don't care for what is said on the Right, about the President and his family, nor do we agree with 90% of what they say and what they Preach.

You are welcome to join us - Shirley


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Folks, what do you think, is someone poisoning the Water in Texas with LSD? Someone who is in the business of building Insane Institutions and is looking to fill the beds as quickly as possible? Those people there are truly going bananas. The international News Media is really having a ball with what comes from the Lone Star State.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks, what do you think, is someone poisoning the Water in Texas with LSD? Someone who is in the business of building Insane Institutions and is looking to fill the beds as quickly as possible? Those people there are truly going bananas. The international News Media is really having a ball with what comes from the Lone Star State.


I don't understand what is happening.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Oh, now see, that really puts it into a nutshell. That's exactly right.


"Nutshell" is exactly right!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> SQM
> that is free speech and all it takes is a good education to sort it all out.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: That's how I see it too.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

A Band of Sisters.



Designer1234 said:


> AW--We have different opinions about some of the nitty gritty, but we all are liberal and definitely on the Left. Some of us go to Church, but I would think none of us are 'born again' ! I would think we are in the majority. I have learned so much on this thread.
> 
> We have just about every personal belief or non belief, but we care about each other and respect each other's opinions. I have learned so much about American Politics and have made so many friends here. We are on the same basic page about the election. There are two Australians, and me, a Canadian and so you are welcome to join us. Many people who are interested and who 'want to know'. We have real discussion and we sometimes disagree but that is what I like about this thread. We all care about those who are less fortunate and we don't care for what is said on the Right, about the President and his family, nor do we agree with 90% of what they say and what they Preach.
> 
> You are welcome to join us - Shirley


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks, what do you think, is someone poisoning the Water in Texas with LSD? Someone who is in the business of building Insane Institutions and is looking to fill the beds as quickly as possible? Those people there are truly going bananas. The international News Media is really having a ball with what comes from the Lone Star State.


Many Texans seem to like the attention. Annoying bunch IMHO.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> "Nutshell" is exactly right!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

damemary said:


> Many Texans seem to like the attention. Annoying bunch IMHO.


Hey guys.....there are some good Texans ...like me. Our politicians are an annoying and nutty bunch.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Excellent distinction. There is always an exception to the rule. I value you highly. I apologize.

If you feel you are a Texan in GW's vein, speak up and get an apology.



GWPlver said:


> Hey guys.....there are some good Texans ...like me. Our politicians are an annoying and nutty bunch.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

GWPlver said:


> Hey guys.....there are some good Texans ...like me. Our politicians are an annoying and nutty bunch.


Hey Good Texan! How are you?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Excellent distinction. There is always an exception to the rule. I value you highly. I apologize.
> 
> If you feel you are a Texan in GW's vein, speak up and get an apology.


Hi Dame, How are you?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

The Australian Government outlined it's annual budget on Tuesday night. Only 30 million dollars was allocated to domestic violence nation wide. Two women a week are murdered in Australia as a result of domestic violence. Apprehended Violence Orders and Intervention orders do nothing to protect women who are living in fear of former partners who have committed assault on them. None of these violent offenders have been jailed for contravening these orders.

Interesting article where interviewer challengers Minister of Communications on this sad subject:

http://www.9news.com.au/entertainment/2015/05/13/20/31/waleed-aly-interrogates-malcom-turnbull-over-budget


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

GWPlver said:


> Hey guys.....there are some good Texans ...like me. Our politicians are an annoying and nutty bunch.


GWPIver
of course there are good Texans but like in some other States, it also has its share of Clowns and right now they are really performing badly and are giving those who are truly nice a sorry name. I like you very much and feel your pain. I am in a State that has no shortage of Nuts. Huck


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

GWPlver said:


> Hey guys.....there are some good Texans ...like me. Our politicians are an annoying and nutty bunch.


What's interesting is that both your senators (at least one of whom is at the top of the "annoying and nutty" list) did not fall in with the conspiracy, though your governor did.

And we need to talk about Texas governors. What happened after Ann Richards?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> What's interesting is that both your senators (at least one of whom is at the top of the "annoying and nutty" list) did not fall in with the conspiracy, though your governor did.
> 
> And we need to talk about Texas governors. What happened after Ann Richards?


Poor Purl
Ann Richards was a Jewel.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just fine. Going to sneak off and make some breakfast. How about you?



Wombatnomore said:


> Hi Dame, How are you?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Even in this day and age. We'll just have to go on supporting options for the abused without much help from gummint. Wonder what would be being done if most of these abused were male?



Wombatnomore said:


> The Australian Government outlined it's annual budget on Tuesday night. Only 30 million dollars was allocated to domestic violence nation wide. Two women a week are murdered in Australia as a result of domestic violence. Apprehended Violence Orders and Intervention orders do nothing to protect women who are living in fear of former partners who have committed assault on them. None of these violent offenders have been jailed for contravening these orders.
> 
> Interesting article where interviewer challengers Minister of Communications on this sad subject:
> 
> http://www.9news.com.au/entertainment/2015/05/13/20/31/waleed-aly-interrogates-malcom-turnbull-over-budget


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

That reminds me, AZ hasn't jailed a governor in awhile. Must be about time.

I miss Ann Richards and Molly Ivans.



Poor Purl said:


> What's interesting is that both your senators (at least one of whom is at the top of the "annoying and nutty" list) did not fall in with the conspiracy, though your governor did.
> 
> And we need to talk about Texas governors. What happened after Ann Richards?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> Ann Richards was a Jewel.


She certainly was. Twice as bright as the men who have followed her in office.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Even in this day and age. We'll just have to go on supporting options for the abused without much help from gummint. Wonder what would be being done if most of these abused were male?


That couldn't happen. There may be some women abusers, but they're pretty rare (except for the disciplinarians who spank their children - too many of those). If it were men being abused, that would mean women were in charge, and my guess is they'd do what was right.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> That reminds me, AZ hasn't jailed a governor in awhile. Must be about time.
> 
> I miss Ann Richards and Molly Ivans.


♥♥♥


----------



## rosebud527 (Jun 20, 2014)

This is not the place for such rhetoric!


----------



## rosebud527 (Jun 20, 2014)

This is NOT the place for such rhetoric!


----------



## rosebud527 (Jun 20, 2014)

Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Hey Good Texan! How are you?


Nice to see you with us. There are some very nice Texans and I hope you will continue joining in here. Welcome! and don't leave!


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> GWPIver
> of course there are good Texans but like in some other States, it also has its share of Clowns and right now they are really performing badly and are giving those who are truly nice a sorry name. I like you very much and feel your pain. I am in a State that has no shortage of Nuts. Huck


I don't think there is a city or town in the world that doesn't have some weirdos. It is just that they don't know or think they are and can be overbearing at times.

It is nice that you join us. With the Politics the way it is right now down there, the weirdos often come out of the woodwork, not just in Texas. Then there are those who 
don't join in with the rhetoric and they are sometimes not noticed. Shame about that.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

rosebud527 said:


> Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


rosebud
or feed those children who go hungry day after day.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We don't know what you're talking about. Please use Quote Reply.



rosebud527 said:


> This is not the place for such rhetoric!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Please use Quote Reply so we know what topic you're answering. Thank you.



rosebud527 said:


> Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

rosebud527 said:


> Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


It would help if you use "quote reply" so readers would know what/who you're responding to.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> It would help if you use "quote reply" so readers would know what/who you're responding to.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Just fine. Going to sneak off and make some breakfast. How about you?


Doing okay thank you.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It would help if you use "quote reply" so readers would know what/who you're responding to.


I went back quite a few posts and couldn't figure out what this was about . Rosebud, how about clarifying what you mean. Please use Quote reply as Green suggested. It makes it so much easier to figure out who is talking. Thanks.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> A Band of Sisters.


I like that - that is what we are! I am proud to be one of them!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

rosebud527 said:


> This is not the place for such rhetoric!


How so?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

rosebud527 said:


> Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


Speaking of rhetoric...


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> We don't know what you're talking about. Please use Quote Reply.


I would guess Rosebud is talking about joeysomma's various rants on this thread.

The KP Users list also lists someone who calls herself JoeySomma Lies. Who would do such a thing? :shock:


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> Ann Richards was a Jewel.


 I so loved Ann Richards! She was feisty and gutsy! And a friend to Molly Ivins. We need more of these women in Texas and less "old white men conservatives".


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

rosebud527 said:


> Since you feel so strongly about this perhaps you should adopt every baby that is carried full term. You need to get over yourself.


Welcome but I can't help but wonder if you are in the wrong thread? It seems as such.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Nice to see you with us. There are some very nice Texans and I hope you will continue joining in here. Welcome! and don't leave!


 Certainly I won't leave!! Love this group. I just do not have the opportunity to post as often as I would like but I do read the posts at least 2 or 3 times a week. Best group of ladies!


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

So, just read our local newspaper. Interesting article about the decline in Christianity beliefs. (Not meant to bring insult to anyone -just quoting statistics that I find interesting). In 2007, 51.3% of the population defined themselves as Christians; in 2014 that number is 46.5%. The groups that grew in numbers were: Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Agnostic and Not Affiliated. The reason for the decline in the Christian affiliates were due to the politicization of religion by American Conservatives and a broader disengagement from the traditional institutional labels. Meaning....the Millennials have grown up with a diverse group and are more accepting of other religions as well as the LGBT individuals. Thank goodness, the tide is finally changing and, in my opinion, for the better.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I would guess Rosebud is talking about joeysomma's various rants on this thread.
> 
> The KP Users list also lists someone who calls herself JoeySomma Lies. Who would do such a thing? :shock:


Is this a PP joke?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

SQM said:


> Is this a PP joke?


Nope. A real user name.

Not a single post, though. It's been there for a while.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> JoeySomma lies where?
> 
> Are you sure it's not "Here Lies JoeySomma?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I would guess Rosebud is talking about joeysomma's various rants on this thread.
> 
> The KP Users list also lists someone who calls herself JoeySomma Lies. Who would do such a thing? :shock:


Anyone with a brain in their heads and a desire for real discussion?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Amen. Amen. Amen.



GWPlver said:


> I so loved Ann Richards! She was feisty and gutsy! And a friend to Molly Ivins. We need more of these women in Texas and less "old white men conservatives".


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And it's always a pleasure to see you. Any time you have time.



GWPlver said:


> Certainly I won't leave!! Love this group. I just do not have the opportunity to post as often as I would like but I do read the posts at least 2 or 3 times a week. Best group of ladies!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

GWPlver said:


> So, just read our local newspaper. Interesting article about the decline in Christianity beliefs. (Not meant to bring insult to anyone -just quoting statistics that I find interesting). In 2007, 51.3% of the population defined themselves as Christians; in 2014 that number is 46.5%. The groups that grew in numbers were: Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Agnostic and Not Affiliated. The reason for the decline in the Christian affiliates were due to the politicization of religion by American Conservatives and a broader disengagement from the traditional institutional labels. Meaning....the Millennials have grown up with a diverse group and are more accepting of other religions as well as the LGBT individuals. Thank goodness, the tide is finally changing and, in my opinion, for the better.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Huck always said the young people will save us all. Looks like she nailed it on this one.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Search under user list.

Wishful thinking.



KnitKnova said:


> JoeySomma lies where?
> 
> Are you sure it's not "Here Lies JoeySomma?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

GWPlver said:


> I so loved Ann Richards! She was feisty and gutsy! And a friend to Molly Ivins. We need more of these women in Texas and less "old white men conservatives".


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: The women of your state seem, on average, to be much smarter than the men. There's no female version of Louie Gompert, for instance.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> JoeySomma lies where?
> 
> Are you sure it's not "Here Lies JoeySomma?


No, Knova, not sure. Good suggestion.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: The women of your state seem, on average, to be much smarter than the men. There's no female version of Louie Gompert, for instance.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: or Rick Perry........


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: or Rick Perry........


I think there might be female versions of Rick Perry. His hair is too good to be wasted only on a man. Come to think of it, he may be his own female version.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

HELP! THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT A JOKE, IT IS SERIOUS.

Who exactly is David Shears. And why has be told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers in Australia! I think it would have bee polite to have asked our Prime Minister first!. It is all over our news that David Shears has told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers here in Australia. Honestly, this is not a joke. Our Prime Minister knows nothing about it. The matter has not been raised with either him or the Australian Government. As David Shears is a senior defence person in the USA and a Congressional Hearing is a serious forum I think there must be something in this report.

Australia is an independent country, it is not a USA air force base. If the USA wants to base their heave B1 bombers in Australia they should have consulted our Prime Minister.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> HELP! THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT A JOKE, IT IS SERIOUS.
> 
> Who exactly is David Shears. And why has be told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers in Australia! I think it would have bee polite to have asked our Prime Minister first!. It is all over our news that David Shears has told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers here in Australia. Honestly, this is not a joke. Our Prime Minister knows nothing about it. The matter has not been raised with either him or the Australian Government. As David Shears is a senior defence person in the USA and a Congressional Hearing is a serious forum I think there must be something in this report.
> 
> Australia is an independent country, it is not a USA air force base. If the USA wants to base their heave B1 bombers in Australia they should have consulted our Prime Minister.


EveMCookeI 
agree, that serious undertaking is not joke EVER. We need to check this out and most of all this guy.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> EveMCookeI
> agree, that serious undertaking is not joke EVER. We need to check this out and most of all this guy.


They are now saying he 'misspoke' and he meant to say B52 bombers, but it seems a very serious mistake for a senior defence personnel to make. Tony Abbott, our Prime Minister was not amused.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> EveMCookeI
> agree, that serious undertaking is not joke EVER. We need to check this out and most of all this guy.


The following article seems to clarify:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/15/tony-abbott-says-us-defence-official-misspoke-on-b-1-bombers-in-australia


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> HELP! THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT A JOKE, IT IS SERIOUS.
> 
> Who exactly is David Shears. And why has be told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers in Australia! I think it would have bee polite to have asked our Prime Minister first!. It is all over our news that David Shears has told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers here in Australia. Honestly, this is not a joke. Our Prime Minister knows nothing about it. The matter has not been raised with either him or the Australian Government. As David Shears is a senior defence person in the USA and a Congressional Hearing is a serious forum I think there must be something in this report.
> 
> Australia is an independent country, it is not a USA air force base. If the USA wants to base their heave B1 bombers in Australia they should have consulted our Prime Minister.


hear hear! Sounds as if something is wrong here.


----------



## marty1136 (Aug 2, 2011)

You got that right Joeysomma


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Folks
what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what "Reply/Quote Reply/etc." means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks
> what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what "Reply/Quote Reply/etc." means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks
> what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what "Reply/Quote Reply/etc." means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.


They aren't the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, Huck.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> They aren't the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, Huck.


BrattyPatty
they all must be suffering from Watt shortage and therefore are so dim - witted.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> BrattyPatty
> they all must be suffering from Watt shortage and therefore are so dim - witted.


Hah! The Wit sisters.... dim and nit :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: or Rick Perry........


BrattyPatty
yes and with all that Rick Perry has hanging around his neck he is running for President. Well, let's face it, there is a lot of money to be scooped up and until the elections next year he can live pretty comfy without working, just blabbering. Can't wait to see whom Reince Pribus elects to be in the debates. That should give us a clue whom they consider the smartest with regard to buffaloing the public. Wonder if there is a stage strong enough to hold up under all of the lying that will be spewed. Ringling will look amateurish compared to the performances by the Republicans. Let the fun begin. It would be truly funny, if it was not so very serious. How low can the GOP stoop? They must really hate our Country to keep running it into the ground and with so much gusto.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Hah! The Wit sisters.... dim and nit :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


BrattyPatty
that is cute. I am enjoying it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> BrattyPatty
> yes and with all that Rick Perry has hanging around his neck he is running for President. Well, let's face it, there is a lot of money to be scooped up and until the elections next year he can live pretty comfy without working, just blabbering. Can't wait to see whom Reince Pribus elects to be in the debates. That should give us a clue whom they consider the smartest with regard to buffaloing the public. Wonder if there is a stage strong enough to hold up under all of the lying that will be spewed. Ringling will look amateurish compared to the performances by the Republicans. Let the fun begin. It would be truly funny, if it was not so very serious. How low can the GOP stoop? They must really hate our Country to keep running it into the ground and with so much gusto.


Huck, I agree. They love the money more than they love America. Their votes are bought and paid for.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Huck, I agree. They love the money more than they love America. Their votes are bought and paid for.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

That's a good one, wombatnomore!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

! Maybe we should write our senators a note???


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

*


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Shocking. I'm going to see what I can find.



EveMCooke said:


> HELP! THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT A JOKE, IT IS SERIOUS.
> 
> Who exactly is David Shears. And why has be told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers in Australia! I think it would have bee polite to have asked our Prime Minister first!. It is all over our news that David Shears has told a Congressional Hearing that the USA is going to base B1 Bombers here in Australia. Honestly, this is not a joke. Our Prime Minister knows nothing about it. The matter has not been raised with either him or the Australian Government. As David Shears is a senior defence person in the USA and a Congressional Hearing is a serious forum I think there must be something in this report.
> 
> Australia is an independent country, it is not a USA air force base. If the USA wants to base their heave B1 bombers in Australia they should have consulted our Prime Minister.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

dp


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I found the best quote saying Australia wishes good relations with USA and China. I think an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease.



Wombatnomore said:


> The following article seems to clarify:
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/15/tony-abbott-says-us-defence-official-misspoke-on-b-1-bombers-in-australia


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

<<<whispering....speaking of misspoke....>>>



marty1136 said:


> You got that right Joeysomma


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks
> what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what "Reply/Quote Reply/etc." means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: I don't want to hear what they attempt to say anyway. I think it's a hoot. :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> BrattyPatty
> they all must be suffering from Watt shortage and therefore are so dim - witted.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: They aren't even plugged into the wall. Could they think they found wireless?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> Hah! The Wit sisters.... dim and nit :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: It's Comedy Night.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I have no doubts how low the Republicans will go. My only question is how many voters will vote against their own self interest.



Huckleberry said:


> BrattyPatty
> yes and with all that Rick Perry has hanging around his neck he is running for President. Well, let's face it, there is a lot of money to be scooped up and until the elections next year he can live pretty comfy without working, just blabbering. Can't wait to see whom Reince Pribus elects to be in the debates. That should give us a clue whom they consider the smartest with regard to buffaloing the public. Wonder if there is a stage strong enough to hold up under all of the lying that will be spewed. Ringling will look amateurish compared to the performances by the Republicans. Let the fun begin. It would be truly funny, if it was not so very serious. How low can the GOP stoop? They must really hate our Country to keep running it into the ground and with so much gusto.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

....Thanks for the mental image. Repubs suffocating to spite the Dems.



BrattyPatty said:


> ! Maybe we should write our senators a note???


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> ! Maybe we should write our senators a note???


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Sad but true!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I found the best quote saying Australia wishes good relations with USA and China. I think an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease.


When I think of China, it's not a good feeling. Despite it's size and influence, not much is known about it's political agenda.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks
> what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what "Reply/Quote Reply/etc." means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.


Seriously?!?
Do you ever wonder how statements like this divide our nation? The hatred? The vitriol? How are we to ever move forward in peace, when even in this microcosm of humanity, we say things like this?

It's my birthday. I'm going to try and find something uplifting, instead of this blanket condemnation, this hatred for those who are different. Have a good day!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

damemary said:


> I found the best quote saying Australia wishes good relations with USA and China. I think an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease.


I was just reporting what I had heard a few minutes earlier on the Australian Broadcasting Commission news broadcast. Not quite sure what you mean by " an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease". I did not mean to upset anyone. Sorry.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I was just reporting what I had heard a few minutes earlier on the Australian Broadcasting Commission news broadcast. Not quite sure what you mean by " an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease". I did not mean to upset anyone. Sorry.


I think the Dame was referring to the person who 'misspoke' regarding U.S. bombers.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

BrattyPatty wrote:
! Maybe we should write our senators a note???

Save yourself the trouble. If John McCain sends me another reply although I have attempted to unsubscribe, I will scream until I run out of breath.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think we can assume their intentions are formulated very differently. I think we must commit to understanding their culture and do everything to develop diplomacy in Asia. What other choice do we have besides sabre rattling?



Wombatnomore said:


> When I think of China, it's not a good feeling. Despite it's size and influence, not much is known about it's political agenda.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Oh no! I didn't mean you! I was thinking of USA big mouthed expert. You were/are kind enough to bring this to our attention. Sorry I wasn't clear.



EveMCooke said:


> I was just reporting what I had heard a few minutes earlier on the Australian Broadcasting Commission news broadcast. Not quite sure what you mean by " an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease". I did not mean to upset anyone. Sorry.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks. That's exactly what I meant. Sorry I wasn't clear.



Wombatnomore said:


> I think the Dame was referring to the person who 'misspoke' regarding U.S. bombers.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I think the Dame was referring to the person who 'misspoke' regarding U.S. bombers.


 Thanks, I thought she might be referring to me. Too cold at the moment to think straight, plus it is raining. I am freezing, I must get a hot water bottle to warm myself up.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

marty1136 said:


> You got that right Joeysomma


 :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Seriously?!?
> Do you ever wonder how statements like this divide our nation? The hatred? The vitriol? How are we to ever move forward in peace, when even in this microcosm of humanity, we say things like this?
> 
> It's my birthday. I'm going to try and find something uplifting, instead of this blanket condemnation, this hatred for those who are different. Have a good day!


Knitter from Nebraska
you are not paying too much attention, are you.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Seriously?!?
> Do you ever wonder how statements like this divide our nation? The hatred? The vitriol? How are we to ever move forward in peace, when even in this microcosm of humanity, we say things like this?
> 
> It's my birthday. I'm going to try and find something uplifting, instead of this blanket condemnation, this hatred for those who are different. Have a good day!


Nebs - happy birthday. Please cheer up on this day unless you are turning 65 and then I can understand your comment better. Many more!


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Happy Birthday Nebraska! Hope things go very well for you and the family.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I think we can assume their intentions are formulated very differently. I think we must commit to understanding their culture and do everything to develop diplomacy in Asia. What other choice do we have besides sabre rattling?


Yes, I agree with you on that point absolutely.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Thanks, I thought she might be referring to me. Too cold at the moment to think straight, plus it is raining. I am freezing, I must get a hot water bottle to warm myself up.


Is there nothing more heavenly than to curl up with a hot water bottle on a freezing cold day? Get your hotty, your favourite blanky and enjoy! Might do the same actually.

You are getting winter's blast in the west! It's been bitterly cold over here in the east over the past week. Starting to warm up ever so slightly but I think we can safely say that winter has come early.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Thanks. That's exactly what I meant. Sorry I wasn't clear.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

This piece of news was most welcome by me because it tells me that the Coalition, U.S., in particular, are actively seeking these death squad leaders out and dealing with them in the most appropriate way:

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2015/05/16/22/48/senior-is-militant-killed-by-us-forces


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I was just reporting what I had heard a few minutes earlier on the Australian Broadcasting Commission news broadcast. Not quite sure what you mean by " an idiot saber rattler shows signs of Foot-in-Mouth disease". I did not mean to upset anyone. Sorry.


EveMCooke
I am more than sure that dame did not mean you but the idiot Politician who spoke wrongly.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Happy Birthday Nebraska. May your new Year bring you lots of pleasantries and most of all GOOD HEALTH. Huck


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> This piece of news was most welcome by me because it tells me that the Coalition, U.S., in particular, are actively seeking these death squad leaders out and dealing with them in the most appropriate way:
> 
> http://www.9news.com.au/world/2015/05/16/22/48/senior-is-militant-killed-by-us-forces


Don't celebrate. They are weeds and will only multiply.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:XD:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :XD:


I find this meme totally insulting --------------- to baboons.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

SQM said:


> I find this meme totally insulting --------------- to baboons.


Please note my apology, SQ. :lol:


----------



## kwright (Mar 16, 2012)

Happy Birthday, Nebraska. My eldest son turns 34 today, also.

I find group nouns fascinating: murder of crows; gaggle of geese; parliament of owls; etc.

I read the first fifteen pages and skipped to page sixty. Boy, y'all sure know how to stir up the pot. I usually find it an interesting read. I have not been online lately as I have been busy with other things. DH is working contract work and has odd hours. My DD finally married in March. Mom is 91 and the dementia is getting worse. My sis has difficulties dealing with it. She is living with her now, and I try to give her a break. I lived with her for twenty-one years and raised my three children. The youngest gave his oral dissertation Friday week ago. He walks in August for his Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering. I have a pretty good bunch of dyslexic children and two autistic grandchildren. That which appears to be genetic.

Sloth, it is good to know all is well for you.

I have to go now. Check in later tonight. Stay warm and dry all of you. We are still having rain and flooding in the general area.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

kwright said:


> Happy Birthday, Nebraska. My eldest son turns 34 today, also.
> 
> I find group nouns fascinating: murder of crows; gaggle of geese; parliament of owls; etc.
> 
> ...


Hey Wright! So glad to hear from you. Congrats on the good things; sorry about the bad things. I moved to Chicago and am now wearing your slippers almost all the time. It is chillier here. Keep in touch.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Don't celebrate. They are weeds and will only multiply.


I don't understand the Syrian government sitting on it's hands as it is and the Iraqi government look like they're having a hissy fit! No doubt there are machinations going on behind the scenes oabout which us plebs know nothing and probably never will.

I'd like to see a lot more action from a lot more contributors to deal with this mess.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :XD:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Baboons are made that way! It's congress 'aping' them!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I find this meme totally insulting --------------- to baboons.


No SQ! Baboons are being baboons. They can be loud and raucous in a group however, they make a lot of sense if you can understand their baboonery apparently! :-D


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> No SQ! Baboons are being baboons. They can be loud and raucous in a group however, they make a lot of sense if you can understand their baboonery apparently! :-D


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Nebs - happy birthday. Please cheer up on this day unless you are turning 65 and then I can understand your comment better. Many more!


Thanks, SQM! I am now 60! OMG! When did that happen? How did I get so old, all of a sudden? I had a busy day. I got a haircut, went to a yarn store and then to a nursery, for plants. My sister and niece plotted with my hubby to meet us at the nursery and kidnapped me for lunch. Then hubby and I shopped for more plants at another nursery, then my son and dil had a birthday party for me. We just got home and I'm tired and happy. Thank you for the birthday wishes.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thanks, SQM! I am now 60! OMG! When did that happen? How did I get so old, all of a sudden? I had a busy day. I got a haircut, went to a yarn store and then to a nursery, for plants. My sister and niece plotted with my hubby to meet us at the nursery and kidnapped me for lunch. Then hubby and I shopped for more plants at another nursery, then my son and dil had a birthday party for me. We just got home and I'm tired and happy. Thank you for the birthday wishes.


Sounds great Youngster. Many more.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Happy Birthday Nebraska! Hope things go very well for you and the family.


Thank you, Shirley! All is well. Dil was 31 weeks, Thursday. She is doing so much better than anyone thought. It's been a blessing. At this point, there's a good probability that all of the babies will be born healthy. I can't wait to see my new little grandbabies!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Sounds great Youngster. Many more.


Ahahahahahaha! Thanks!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Happy Birthday Nebraska. May your new Year bring you lots of pleasantries and most of all GOOD HEALTH. Huck


Thanks, Huck!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

kwright said:


> Happy Birthday, Nebraska. My eldest son turns 34 today, also.
> 
> I find group nouns fascinating: murder of crows; gaggle of geese; parliament of owls; etc.
> 
> ...


Thank you, kwright!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Seriously?!?
> Do you ever wonder how statements like this divide our nation? The hatred? The vitriol? How are we to ever move forward in peace, when even in this microcosm of humanity, we say things like this?
> 
> It's my birthday. I'm going to try and find something uplifting, instead of this blanket condemnation, this hatred for those who are different. Have a good day!


Happy Birthday, Nebraska.

We've said a lot of things you wouldn't like, but why pick on this one? It's talking about a woman who, for weeks, has been posting replies but not hitting Quote Reply, so no one knows what she's talking about or whom she's saying it to. She's been asked dozens of times to Quote Reply but either doesn't read messages or chooses not to quote. If anyone deserves vitriol, she does. And it will just roll off her because she won't pay any attention, anyway.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Ahahahahahaha! Thanks!


Many Happy Returns KFN. 60 is the new 40 they say!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Happy Birthday, Nebraska.
> 
> We've said a lot of things you wouldn't like, but why pick on this one? It's talking about a woman who, for weeks, has been posting replies but not hitting Quote Reply, so no one knows what she's talking about or whom she's saying it to. She's been asked dozens of times to Quote Reply but either doesn't read messages or chooses not to quote. If anyone deserves vitriol, she does. And it will just roll off her because she won't pay any attention, anyway.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Happy Birthday KFN! Sounds like you had a wonderful day. :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Happy Birthday, Nebraska.
> 
> We've said a lot of things you wouldn't like, but why pick on this one? It's talking about a woman who, for weeks, has been posting replies but not hitting Quote Reply, so no one knows what she's talking about or whom she's saying it to. She's been asked dozens of times to Quote Reply but either doesn't read messages or chooses not to quote. If anyone deserves vitriol, she does. And it will just roll off her because she won't pay any attention, anyway.


Thank you for your birthday wishes!

I keep dropping in on "Thing are heating up" and "LOLL". I've been looking for an " in", something that I can comment on, to talk to my friends. But every time I check in, the discussions involve cutting up conservatives, republicans and "righties". The discussion is rarely about the issues, THOSE I could comment on. But instead, I find insults and ridicule. What could I possibly have to add to that?

The reason I picked this one is because, this is what came up when I clicked on " Things". This comment wasn't directed at the person who fails to hit " quote reply", but at "righties". Here's the quote: "Folks what is it with the Righties? Do not any of them understand what " Reply/Quote Reply/etc" means? And they vote? Boy that is more than scary.".

So, if this woman is guilty of not hitting "quote reply", why should all of us " righties" be insulted? Are the rest of us somehow, ignorant by association? I use "quote reply" quite frequently, and have nothing to do with this woman, and yet get insulted for her actions. I like to discuss issues, but there's precious little of that going on here. I'll keep checking back to see if anyone is discussing the issues, but don't expect me to participate in insulting myself. Neither will I defend republicans, just because I'm conservative.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Many Happy Returns KFN. 60 is the new 40 they say!


Thanks, Wombat! I'll try to remember that after I get a few days rest.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Happy Birthday KFN! Sounds like you had a wonderful day. :thumbup:


Thanks, Cheeky. It was a wonderful day.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Flagstaff Arizona (high country) has 6 inches+ of new snow. It's beautiful to see fresh snow on mountain tops when Phoenix/Tucson is 75 degrees. I love the contrast.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> :XD:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: A Congress of Baboons. Perfect and apologies to the baboons.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

IMHO the key is for USA to extricate itself from the conflict. We do not have the respect of the countries directly involved, and we have little real understanding of the true issues. If we earn that, USA could help. Until then, zip it.



Wombatnomore said:


> I don't understand the Syrian government sitting on it's hands as it is and the Iraqi government look like they're having a hissy fit! No doubt there are machinations going on behind the scenes oabout which us plebs know nothing and probably never will.
> 
> I'd like to see a lot more action from a lot more contributors to deal with this mess.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: Baboons are made that way! It's congress 'aping' them!


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Happy More Fun Birthdays to you!!!



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thanks, SQM! I am now 60! OMG! When did that happen? How did I get so old, all of a sudden? I had a busy day. I got a haircut, went to a yarn store and then to a nursery, for plants. My sister and niece plotted with my hubby to meet us at the nursery and kidnapped me for lunch. Then hubby and I shopped for more plants at another nursery, then my son and dil had a birthday party for me. We just got home and I'm tired and happy. Thank you for the birthday wishes.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

IMHO your help and support resulted in this outcome. Best to all.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you, Shirley! All is well. Dil was 31 weeks, Thursday. She is doing so much better than anyone thought. It's been a blessing. At this point, there's a good probability that all of the babies will be born healthy. I can't wait to see my new little grandbabies!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sorry no reference. Maybe there's a glitch in the system. 

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Flagstaff Arizona (high country) has 6 inches+ of new snow. It's beautiful to see fresh snow on mountain tops when Phoenix/Tucson is 75 degrees. I love the contrast.


I'd agree that it was beautiful as long as I was in Phoenix, and not Flagstaff. I've had enough snow. I've also had enough rain for a while, as well. It's been raining here for days, no weeks. I still haven't gotten my garden in. The soil is too wet to til. My son lives in western Nebraska and they got 8" of snow last week. So, I guess I shouldn't complain.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Happy More Fun Birthdays to you!!!


Thank you, dame!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> IMHO your help and support resulted in this outcome. Best to all.


Thank you so much! I'd like to think that my part had something to do with it. That's why I've been doing it. My dil's mother is going to take 6 weeks off work when the babies arrive. My son is taking 8 weeks (I think). So, I'm looking forward to a little bit of time off. I should be able to sleep in once in a while and just hold babies. We'll see.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I don't understand the Syrian government sitting on it's hands as it is and the Iraqi government look like they're having a hissy fit! No doubt there are machinations going on behind the scenes oabout which us plebs know nothing and probably never will.
> 
> I'd like to see a lot more action from a lot more contributors to deal with this mess.


I agree with SQM. They're like weeds. Another will take his place. I also agree with you about something going on behind the scenes. I have a hard time believing that the combined armies of the biggest nations on earth, can't take out this ragtag army of terrorists. I think there's a hidden agenda that has yet to be fulfilled.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

High country out here fears wild fires. Any rain is celebrated. Actually all rain in Southwest is a Whoopeee!



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I'd agree that it was beautiful as long as I was in Phoenix, and not Flagstaff. I've had enough snow. I've also had enough rain for a while, as well. It's been raining here for days, no weeks. I still haven't gotten my garden in. The soil is too wet to til. My son lives in western Nebraska and they got 8" of snow last week. So, I guess I shouldn't complain.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It'll be a vacation for you. I'm pleased.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you so much! I'd like to think that my part had something to do with it. That's why I've been doing it. My dil's mother is going to take 6 weeks off work when the babies arrive. My son is taking 8 weeks (I think). So, I'm looking forward to a little bit of time off. I should be able to sleep in once in a while and just hold babies. We'll see.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ISIS has been described as al Quaida 6.0. They are not just in Iran and Syria. They also have groups in Yemen, North Africa, and they sucessfully recruit malcontents from the West to train in Syria and return as cells in the West. That's why the warnings. It's like trying to fight a wasp's nest with a flyswatter.

IMHO the danger is very high that someone will succeed in an attack in West. Once they are at the stage of Lone Wolf in West, it is extremely difficult to detect.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree with SQM. They're like weeds. Another will take his place. I also agree with you about something going on behind the scenes. I have a hard time believing that the combined armies of the biggest nations on earth, can't take out this ragtag army of terrorists. I think there's a hidden agenda that has yet to be fulfilled.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you for your birthday wishes!
> 
> I keep dropping in on "Thing are heating up" and "LOLL". I've been looking for an " in", something that I can comment on, to talk to my friends. But every time I check in, the discussions involve cutting up conservatives, republicans and "righties". The discussion is rarely about the issues, THOSE I could comment on. But instead, I find insults and ridicule. What could I possibly have to add to that?
> 
> ...


Knitter from Nebraska
well, if the Shoe fits, wear it. We Liberals are being depicted as being all the same, which we are not and that has not infuriated any of us, has it. Have a good day. Huck


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> High country out here fears wild fires. Any rain is celebrated. Actually all rain in Southwest is a Whoopeee!


I wish I could send you some of ours. It rained again today and we've standing water in our back yard. Everything is muddy. Enough is enough.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> ISIS has been described as al Quaida 6.0. They are not just in Iran and Syria. They also have groups in Yemen, North Africa, and they sucessfully recruit malcontents from the West to train in Syria and return as cells in the West. That's why the warnings. It's like trying to fight a wasp's nest with a flyswatter.
> 
> IMHO the danger is very high that someone will succeed in an attack in West. Once they are at the stage of Lone Wolf in West, it is extremely difficult to detect.


al qaida was created by our government, to fight Russia in Afghanistan. They recruited men from all over the middle east, trained them, radicalized them and armed them. isis is an offshoot of al qaida. We radicalized them, trained them and armed them, to cause chaos in Syria, with the intention of ousting Assad. Assad hasn't been ousted yet and the American people are not in support of going to war with Assad. So isis presents a very convenient excuse to convince the American people that we must go to war in the middle east. If the American people don't support the war with flags flying, I predict that there will be a false flag terror attack on American soil. There's nothing like an attack on American soil to get the people to join the chant for war. Besides, they've already been telling us that its coming.

Based upon the reading I've done, I believe that all of current wars (and war like skirmishes) are about oil and the ability to control the oil, and thus control countries. It's about the rich and powerful, becoming more rich and powerful. Our government and our army have become tools of the 1%. Lives are lost and blood is shed, not to defend our nation, but to control other nations and peoples, and to make $Billions for the 1%.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> well, if the Shoe fits, wear it. We Liberals are being depicted as being all the same, which we are not and that has not infuriated any of us, has it. Have a good day. Huck


That's my point. The shoe does not fit! I use the "quote reply" feature almost every time I post something. So do many of us "righties". Whether or not an individual has suggested that liberals are all the same, has nothing to do with the slur against "righties". And apparently it it HAS infuriated you because you're using that as an excuse to insult all " righties".


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you for your birthday wishes!
> 
> I keep dropping in on "Thing are heating up" and "LOLL". I've been looking for an " in", something that I can comment on, to talk to my friends. But every time I check in, the discussions involve cutting up conservatives, republicans and "righties". The discussion is rarely about the issues, THOSE I could comment on. But instead, I find insults and ridicule. What could I possibly have to add to that?
> 
> ...


There's a problem with your regarding yourself as conservative, because your definition of "conservative" is one that no longer exists. I don't think many of us here see you as a conservative. Instead, we see you as someone with your own set of values that sometimes coincide with some of ours and sometimes don't.

But even your quote proves that it was the Quote-Quote Reply issue that got someone worked up enough to blame all righties. Which, as I tried above to make clear, does not include you.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> al qaida was created by our government, to fight Russia in Afghanistan. They recruited men from all over the middle east, trained them, radicalized them and armed them. isis is an offshoot of al qaida. We radicalized them, trained them and armed them, to cause chaos in Syria, with the intention of ousting Assad. Assad hasn't been ousted yet and the American people are not in support of going to war with Assad. So isis presents a very convenient excuse to convince the American people that we must go to war in the middle east. If the American people don't support the war with flags flying, I predict that there will be a false flag terror attack on American soil. There's nothing like an attack on American soil to get the people to join the chant for war. Besides, they've already been telling us that its coming.
> 
> *Based upon the reading I've done, I believe that all of current wars (and war like skirmishes) are about oil and the ability to control the oil, and thus control countries. It's about the rich and powerful, becoming more rich and powerful. Our government and our army have become tools of the 1%. Lives are lost and blood is shed, not to defend our nation, but to control other nations and peoples, and to make $Billions for the 1%.*


This is surely not mainstream conservative talk, possibly not conservative talk at all. You're more likely to find liberals who agree with you on this. The current crop of American conservatives seem to want the 1% to prosper further and tell them what to do. Why else would they choose to cut school lunches and also taxes on the top?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> This is surely not mainstream conservative talk, possibly not conservative talk at all. You're more likely to find liberals who agree with you on this. The current crop of American conservatives seem to want the 1% to prosper further and tell them what to do. Why else would they choose to cut school lunches and also taxes on the top?


I always claimed that Our Nebs went so far to the right she became left. A bit if left wing politics with a bit of religion makes her a unique thinker.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> I always claimed that Our Nebs went so far to the right she became left. A bit if left wing politics with a bit of religion makes her a unique thinker.


I don't know about going that far to the right - and I don't think the left-right spectrum is circular.

But she's certainly has a rare combination of opinions. A valuable combination.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> There's a problem with your regarding yourself as conservative, because your definition of "conservative" is one that no longer exists. I don't think many of us here see you as a conservative. Instead, we see you as someone with your own set of values that sometimes coincide with some of ours and sometimes don't.
> 
> But even your quote proves that it was the Quote-Quote Reply issue that got someone worked up enough to blame all righties. Which, as I tried above to make clear, does not include you.


Regardless of how others see me, it's wrong to judge and criticize a group for the actions of one or a few. It leaves no room to come together on anything. It creates animosity where none exists. The people in this country have become so divided, I wonder if we'll ever be able to come together on anything. "United we stand. Divided we fall."

You're probably right that my definition of conservative, no longer exists. What makes me really sad is that people follow their party, right or wrong. We're stuck in the way it used to be. We believe what we're told even when presented with evidence to the contrary. We KNOW that all politicians lie and make promises they can't keep. We KNOW that all politicians are beholden to those with the money, to finance their campaigns, and yet we defend those in our own party. If one group is held accountable, so should be, the other. But, what if we stopped attacking or defending one party or another? What if we attacked or defended ideas and actions?


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree with SQM. They're like weeds. Another will take his place. I also agree with you about something going on behind the scenes. I have a hard time believing that the combined armies of the biggest nations on earth, can't take out this ragtag army of terrorists. I think there's a hidden agenda that has yet to be fulfilled.


Just read that ISIS has taken control of Ramadi, a significant city in Iraq and they're running an on line campaign about their intention to take Rome!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3085479/ISIS-supporters-post-photos-notes-showing-group-s-logo-messages-near-famous-Italian-landmarks-warning-counting-till-zero-hour.html

Sorry it's the Daily Mail!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> ISIS has been described as al Quaida 6.0. They are not just in Iran and Syria. They also have groups in Yemen, North Africa, and they sucessfully recruit malcontents from the West to train in Syria and return as cells in the West. That's why the warnings. It's like trying to fight a wasp's nest with a flyswatter.
> 
> IMHO the danger is very high that someone will succeed in an attack in West. Once they are at the stage of Lone Wolf in West, it is extremely difficult to detect.


That's true Dame. There are 'cells' all over the place. In Australia, 2 plots to attack police, behead members of the public have been thwarted in the last month. One of the conspirators was a 14 year old male in the U.K.

In the news today, a 19 year old Australian male's parents confirmed he'd been killed trying to leave Syria after joining militants there. Unconfirmed reports say he was beheaded and the family won't confirm or deny.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Regardless of how others see me, it's wrong to judge and criticize a group for the actions of one or a few. It leaves no room to come together on anything. It creates animosity where none exists. The people in this country have become so divided, I wonder if we'll ever be able to come together on anything. "United we stand. Divided we fall."
> 
> You're probably right that my definition of conservative, no longer exists. What makes me really sad is that people follow their party, right or wrong. We're stuck in the way it used to be. We believe what we're told even when presented with evidence to the contrary. We KNOW that all politicians lie and make promises they can't keep. We KNOW that all politicians are beholden to those with the money, to finance their campaigns, and yet we defend those in our own party. If one group is held accountable, so should be, the other. But, what if we stopped attacking or defending one party or another? What if we attacked or defended ideas and actions?


I commented in another thread about how democracy is a wonderful ideology and intention but it, and indeed communism for example, are doomed to fail due to the nature of humans. Power does corrupt despite all efforts to the contrary.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> This is surely not mainstream conservative talk, possibly not conservative talk at all. You're more likely to find liberals who agree with you on this. The current crop of American conservatives seem to want the 1% to prosper further and tell them what to do. Why else would they choose to cut school lunches and also taxes on the top?


Could I possibly expect the liberals to admit that the conservatives aren't the only ones who pass legislation that favors the 1%? Many conservatives have bought the idea that if the rich get richer, we will all prosper from the jobs they create. They mean well, but they're being deceived. The evidence shows that when the rich get more, they want more. The quest becomes, to have it all. The rest of us are akin to slaves. As the 1% buy everything, the rest of us have no choice but to work for peanuts. You can work for company A or company B, but they're all owned and controlled by the same people. Very few are allowed to prosper.

But, this isn't something that's happened in the last decade or so. Its been happening for a very long time, and both parties have passed legislation that benefits the the 1%. It goes back from the Rockerfellers and the Carnegies to the Gates and the Buffets. ALL of these have benefited from government funds and government legislation. The democrats are being deceived as well. They're told by the liberal media that the republicans are the ones supporting the 1%. The republicans are not the only ones providing the largesse. Somewhere along the line, the 1% decided that it would be profitable to buy off the politicians on both sides of the aisle. That way, they're assured of being on the side of the winners and the winners are indebted to them.

As long as republicans AND democrats believe the lies, the 1% will continue to grow in money, power and control, until they own everything, including us. It has made no difference which party is in power. The 1% continue to grow stronger while the rest of us grow weaker.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know about going that far to the right - and I don't think the left-right spectrum is circular.
> 
> But she's certainly has a rare combination of opinions. A valuable combination.


Thank you.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Just read that ISIS has taken control of Ramadi, a significant city in Iraq and they're running an on line campaign about their intention to take Rome!
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3085479/ISIS-supporters-post-photos-notes-showing-group-s-logo-messages-near-famous-Italian-landmarks-warning-counting-till-zero-hour.html
> 
> Sorry it's the Daily Mail!


This is happening everywhere. Refugees are flooding into countries the world over. None of these refugees are being checked for ties to isis or other criminal activity. I know that they're being placed all over the US and are trying to bring shariah law with them. Many of these people are being brought here under direction from the UN. Others are walking across our border with Mexico. But as long as our government has an attitude that anyone can come in, the terrorists will be coming along with the poor and persecuted. There WILL be terrorist attacks on US soil. But our government knows this. Let the war cry begin.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> Happy More Fun Birthdays to you!!!


I remember my 60th Nebs, and I was horrified when I turned 60. It really bothered me. Then when I turned 61 I decided that there was darned little I could do about it, and stopped worrying about it. Actually my 60's were a very good time in my life.

The thing about aging is - there is nothing you can do to stop it so don't waste your life worrying about something that will happen anyway.

My Dad fought growing old from the time he was 40. He told us that he 'refused ' to grow old and each year he allowed himself to get more and more angry and depressed. He 
let the fear and worry ruin his last years. I used to try to talk him into letting it go and suggested he live day by day the best way he could. He used to get upset so I had to let him worry about it and didn't say any more.

You are entering a fantastic part of your life. New wee ones in your family, and what a joy they will be for you. I am nearly 25(inAugust) years older than you and they have been some of my happiest times ever. You won't have time to be concerned about it once those wee ones arrive.

I wish you well for the next 25 years and more. Enjoy it, live it, and have fun. Shirley


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I commented in another thread about how democracy is a wonderful ideology and intention but it, and indeed communism for example, are doomed to fail due to the nature of humans. Power does corrupt despite all efforts to the contrary.


Our founding fathers did not support having a democracy. Benjamin Franklin is often quoted as saying, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.". They created a representative republic. But over the years, the lines have been blurred and our politicians have told us we're a democracy. They claim that the majority want something and in democracy, the majority rules. Individual rights are no longer supported. Our government was never intended to hold power, but we've allowed it through our complacency and apathy.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I remember my 60th Nebs, and I was horrified when I turned 60. It really bothered me. Then when I turned 61 I decided that there was darned little I could do about it, and stopped worrying about it. Actually my 60's were a very good time in my life.
> 
> The thing about aging is - there is nothing you can do to stop it so don't waste your life worrying about something that will happen anyway.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Shirley! I will take your advice to heart.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Knitter, I agree with much of what you say. I don't think you are correct that a lot of people are ignorant to the fact that the government on both sides of the aisle often favors the wealthiest among us. I believe most people vote for who they believe to be the lesser of two evils. As Bernie Sanders keeps saying we have to get money out of our elections. I think that is one of the biggest obstacles to fair elections. Other countries do very well in limiting the spending and many do not even allow political ads. People really need to educate themselves about the candidates and many people are very lax in doing their own research. Our form of government as I see it encourages the buying of politicians. If you don't go to Washington wealthy you will end up with lots of money or be given a job where you can earn millions as a payoff for your services in office. Politics is a very dirty business and I don't care who you are you have to make deals and trade-offs in backrooms to get what you want. I can honestly say I have always voted my conscience and sometimes my candidate lost. Another problem is that we have low voter turnout. The last presidential election 57.5% of eligible voters voted. Where were the rest of them? Most other countries with governments that are similar to ours have much higher turnouts and for some countries voting is mandatory. Something else we could do here is automatically register people when they become voting age so having to register to vote would no longer be a problem. The people in this country have to take personal responsibility and do something. I am very active politically and I feel it is a duty to do so. It's also fun and exciting. I have narrowed my choice for President down to a couple people but if I don't get out there and be an active participant I have no one to blame but me and maybe a few million other people if my candidate doesn't win. I value your opinions as I think the rest of us do. Wouldn't it be boring if we all were exactly the same? I see us as an interesting assortment of enlightened women who are always learning and having a lot of fun along the way. :thumbup:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Knitter, I agree with much of what you say. I don't think you are correct that a lot of people are ignorant to the fact that the government on both sides of the aisle often favors the wealthiest among us. I believe most people vote for who they believe to be the lesser of two evils. As Bernie Sanders keeps saying we have to get money out of our elections. I think that is one of the biggest obstacles to fair elections. Other countries do very well in limiting the spending and many do not even allow political ads. People really need to educate themselves about the candidates and many people are very lax in doing their own research. Our form of government as I see it encourages the buying of politicians. If you don't go to Washington wealthy you will end up with lots of money or be given a job where you can earn millions as a payoff for your services in office. Politics is a very dirty business and I don't care who you are you have to make deals and trade-offs in backrooms to get what you want. I can honestly say I have always voted my conscience and sometimes my candidate lost. Another problem is that we have low voter turnout. The last presidential election 57.5% of eligible voters voted. Where were the rest of them? Most other countries with governments that are similar to ours have much higher turnouts and for some countries voting is mandatory. Something else we could do here is automatically register people when they become voting age so having to register to vote would no longer be a problem. The people in this country have to take personal responsibility and do something. I am very active politically and I feel it is a duty to do so. It's also fun and exciting. I have narrowed my choice for President down to a couple people but if I don't get out there and be an active participant I have no one to blame but me and maybe a few million other people if my candidate doesn't win. I value your opinions as I think the rest of us do. Wouldn't it be boring if we all were exactly the same? I see us as an interesting assortment of enlightened women who are always learning and having a lot of fun along the way. :thumbup:


Cheeky Blighter
the greatest thread to our Democracy is the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United. That law favors money over everything else and that is wrong, very wrong, absolutely wrong. It is devastating for our Nation.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Cheeky Blighter
> the greatest thread to our Democracy is the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United. That law favors money over everything else and that is wrong, very wrong, absolutely wrong. It is devastating for our Nation.


You are right on, Huck. Too much money in too few hands and the Kochs and the Waltons are getting away with buying the whole country.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> well, if the Shoe fits, wear it. We Liberals are being depicted as being all the same, which we are not and that has not infuriated any of us, has it. Have a good day. Huck


I have to admit I agree with you Huck. We are much more willing to accept differences than others because we value
people who think things through. We are much more different in my opinion than those who are all quoting each other and those who in my opinion never disagree or offer individual thoughts from the rest.

We never hear any one question anything, except for you Nebs. I am not on the same page as you very often, but I know you are willing to express different opinions and don't follow the herd. Yes, we sometimes color all those on D and P with the same brush. I believe that there are a few who are more independent in their thinking than others realize but don't feel they want to go against the crowd. However if you go there they do the same to us. All libs are exactly the same, we follow like sheep and on and on. We are evil, (quoted), It works both ways. Read their posts.

That is why we really don't like being scolded for the things like asking a person 5 or 6 times to use quote reply so that we can follow what she is saying and who she is answering. None of us could figure out who she was talking to. I personally finally thought that she was not a liberal at all, and that she was here to upset us.

You are very judgmental yourself and I think you know it, so it is hard for us to accept your judging us for saying what we feel, when we give you that courtesy. You have scolded us quite often and usually we just ignore it but once in awhile, speaking for myself, I get to the point where I just take some time off because I don't want to get nasty.

You are an exceptional person, and we all know it. We don't agree with most things you believe - we are strongly liberal and will not be changing our minds. We don't have much respect for those on the right -and they certainly make it clear they have no respect for us. So be it.

It is hard, I am sure to be in a group who are on the left and don't agree with your thoughts. You are very welcome here but we have to treat each other with respect as our beliefs are so different. I am sure you get frustrated, however that is your choice. It would be as if I went there and joined in and discussed my beliefs - (it wouldn't work at all as there really is no discussion there or really ever any disagreement. That is why you are here. But being in the minority makes it hard - your choice though.

Anyway, soon the babies will be arriving -- please either pm one of us or post on LOLL and let us know how it goes. You are in all our thoughts. Just please try not to scold us. I wouldn't allow my daughter to scold me nor my son. 
Take care.

Well ladies, I am going to get my book and read for awhile before lights out. Pat and I had another wonderful drive today though some roads we had never been on before. 
It was so beautiful. All different shades of greens and pinks and yellows and blues, and on and on. So beautiful. Our favorite thing has always to take drives and find new places, we have such a great time the two of us that it makes my day when we head out together. Stopped and had a creamsicle (haven't had one for years. ) talk to you all tomorrow


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Complaining about laziness in hitting the reply button is dividing our nation and not the systemic killing of black male youths?
> 
> ...


Thank you - you spoke for me in this. There is a huge difference between the right and the left, even if money rules so many.

I think that what's dividing our nation is not the names we call each other but the fact that some people have allowed themselves to be fooled into voting against their own - as well as our - interests. They show themselves to be stupid, and they deserve to be called stupid.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Our founding fathers did not support having a democracy. Benjamin Franklin is often quoted as saying, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.". They created a representative republic. But over the years, the lines have been blurred and our politicians have told us we're a democracy. They claim that the majority want something and in democracy, the majority rules. Individual rights are no longer supported. Our government was never intended to hold power, but we've allowed it through our complacency and apathy.


Winston Churchill said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." Shall we have a quote-pissing contest? If you've read Jefferson or Madison, you'll see a lot that favors democracy. To call it "majority rules" is to show how simplistically you think about things, or rather how the right-wing bloggers you read think about such things. Joeysomma must read the same blogs.

Given all possible "-ocracies," which would you choose?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Our founding fathers did not support having a democracy. Benjamin Franklin is often quoted as saying, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.". They created a representative republic. But over the years, the lines have been blurred and our politicians have told us we're a democracy. They claim that the majority want something and in democracy, the majority rules. Individual rights are no longer supported. Our government was never intended to hold power, but we've allowed it through our complacency and apathy.


And, by the way, a representative republic is simply the form our particular democracy takes. The UK has a parliamentary system and is still a democracy, despite being a monarchy.

There's a good reason the right chooses to pretend we were not formed as a democracy - if we're not a democracy, we could become a theocracy, a plutocracy, a fascist state (fascism is the system wherein the corporations run the country), etc. Any one of these can exist in the form of a republic.

Well, it's about 2:15 am, so I'll stop babbling and say goodnight.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> I have to admit I agree with you Huck. We are much more willing to accept differences than others because we value
> people who think things through. We are much more different in my opinion than those who are all quoting each other and those who in my opinion never disagree or offer individual thoughts from the rest.
> 
> We never hear any one question anything, except for you Nebs. I am not on the same page as you very often, but I know you are willing to express different opinions and don't follow the herd. Yes, we sometimes color all those on D and P with the same brush. I believe that there are a few who are more independent in their thinking than others realize but don't feel they want to go against the crowd. However if you go there they do the same to us. All libs are exactly the same, we follow like sheep and on and on. We are evil, (quoted), It works both ways. Read their posts.
> ...


While I always find Shirley interesting, I prefer not to be included in this "we" post. I do not share many of her opinions re: Nebs.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

KnitKnova said:


> I agree with much, if not all of this.
> 
> But it is annoying that people like KiN dismiss the reality that the 'side' that fights the hardest against things like hyper money in elections is Liberals.
> 
> ...


Let us consider Obama's horrendous decision to champion the new trade agreement. Even my Evil Republican Brother was dismayed by it. I will agree with Nebs - their strings are being manipulated and the dems and the reps are both capable of doing the bidding of corporate America.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Our founding fathers did not support having a democracy. Benjamin Franklin is often quoted as saying, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb, voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.". They created a representative republic. But over the years, the lines have been blurred and our politicians have told us we're a democracy. They claim that the majority want something and in democracy, the majority rules. Individual rights are no longer supported. Our government was never intended to hold power, but we've allowed it through our complacency and apathy.


Be that as it is, whatever ideology is adopted, the power given to the relatively few at the top will corrupt some of them to varying degrees. There's no question about that and _these people_ become complacent because they know the masses are. This type of behaviour is as old as time itself. I don't think there will ever be a solution unfortunately.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> al qaida was created by our government, to fight Russia in Afghanistan. They recruited men from all over the middle east, trained them, radicalized them and armed them. isis is an offshoot of al qaida. We radicalized them, trained them and armed them, to cause chaos in Syria, with the intention of ousting Assad. Assad hasn't been ousted yet and the American people are not in support of going to war with Assad. So isis presents a very convenient excuse to convince the American people that we must go to war in the middle east. If the American people don't support the war with flags flying, I predict that there will be a false flag terror attack on American soil. There's nothing like an attack on American soil to get the people to join the chant for war. Besides, they've already been telling us that its coming.
> 
> Based upon the reading I've done, I believe that all of current wars (and war like skirmishes) are about oil and the ability to control the oil, and thus control countries. It's about the rich and powerful, becoming more rich and powerful. Our government and our army have become tools of the 1%. Lives are lost and blood is shed, not to defend our nation, but to control other nations and peoples, and to make $Billions for the 1%.


And the 1% is not just the Middle Eastern oil moguls. There are 1 percenters in every country, looking out for their own continuous enrichment and disregarding all the rest of us as peripheral to their ambitions and interchangeable cannon fodder. They manipulate people into thinking it is their fight, and the people seduced by al quaida and isis are manipulated using their religious beliefs as the hook.

The dumbing down of education in what were the enlightened countries such as the US, France, and Great Britain is, in my deeper thoughts, a deliberate part of the system of making us all unthinking shills to their personal ambitions. And our politicians, left, right, moderate, are bought off and also manipulated to think they have power to get them to create laws that benefit the 1%.

Big Brother wears Prada and Rolex and Lobb.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> That's my point. The shoe does not fit! I use the "quote reply" feature almost every time I post something. So do many of us "righties". Whether or not an individual has suggested that liberals are all the same, has nothing to do with the slur against "righties". And apparently it it HAS infuriated you because you're using that as an excuse to insult all " righties".


If we moderates and liberals lump all conservatives into one box aren't we as thoughtless as the right wingers who lump all of us into one box?

People like Nan, with her conservative perspective, are not the same as some of the mean girls we have encountered.

We need to respect and listen to other viewpoints whether we agree or not to maintain a discourse that can lead to a balanced country where we all have our freedoms, look out for those who cannot look out for themselves, and all retain our deeper humanity.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Knitter, I agree with much of what you say. I don't think you are correct that a lot of people are ignorant to the fact that the government on both sides of the aisle often favors the wealthiest among us. I believe most people vote for who they believe to be the lesser of two evils. As Bernie Sanders keeps saying we have to get money out of our elections. I think that is one of the biggest obstacles to fair elections. Other countries do very well in limiting the spending and many do not even allow political ads. People really need to educate themselves about the candidates and many people are very lax in doing their own research. Our form of government as I see it encourages the buying of politicians. If you don't go to Washington wealthy you will end up with lots of money or be given a job where you can earn millions as a payoff for your services in office. Politics is a very dirty business and I don't care who you are you have to make deals and trade-offs in backrooms to get what you want. I can honestly say I have always voted my conscience and sometimes my candidate lost. Another problem is that we have low voter turnout. The last presidential election 57.5% of eligible voters voted. Where were the rest of them? Most other countries with governments that are similar to ours have much higher turnouts and for some countries voting is mandatory. Something else we could do here is automatically register people when they become voting age so having to register to vote would no longer be a problem. The people in this country have to take personal responsibility and do something. I am very active politically and I feel it is a duty to do so. It's also fun and exciting. I have narrowed my choice for President down to a couple people but if I don't get out there and be an active participant I have no one to blame but me and maybe a few million other people if my candidate doesn't win. I value your opinions as I think the rest of us do. Wouldn't it be boring if we all were exactly the same? I see us as an interesting assortment of enlightened women who are always learning and having a lot of fun along the way. :thumbup:


For most of my life, I would have agreed with you. I registered to vote when I turned 18. I've voted in every election since then. I'd always assumed that those who didn't vote, were apathetic. I felt that they were shirking their responsibility as citizens if they didn't vote.

However beginning in 1992, I started to become disenchanted. That's when I started to realize that we had no real choice. The republicans foisted bush sr on us, even though we didn't want him. I was one of those, who voted for Perot. I thought I was sending a message to the republican party. A LOT of us sent that message, but they didn't care. I admit, I was naive and gullible. I thought that the people had a voice. I was wrong. Since that time, the republican party has foisted upon us, a continuous stream of candidates that I've had to plug my nose, to vote for. I don't want to be a republican anymore! The ONLY reason I've hesitated to change my party affiliation is so that I can vote in the primary elections (even though, I think it's all fixed).

I have come to realize that when we vote for the lesser of two evils, we are voting for evil! We are supporting the very system that is destroying us. We are giving them our approval, and permission to allow the 1% to enslave us and rule over us. I don't think I have the stomach for it, anymore. What's the point in voting, when you can only choose between corporate puppet A or corporate puppet B?

I've decided that the only way I can change things, is to change people. I have to make people see that as long as WE allow the system to remain as it is, we're not voting for anyone. Puppet A and puppet B are the SAME thing. They have different faces and different party affiliations, but the SAME puppet masters.

NOW, I understand why a lot of people choose not to vote. They are not all apathetic. Some refuse to vote, in protest of a system in which we have no representation. A system which has become polluted with corruption. A system that is out to destroy the middle class. A system which is no longer a republic or even a democracy, but has become an oligarchy.

Our children's future is in our hands. If we continue to support this system, they will have no future.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Cheeky Blighter
> the greatest thread to our Democracy is the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United. That law favors money over everything else and that is wrong, very wrong, absolutely wrong. It is devastating for our Nation.


I'm not sure if it's the greatest threat, but it's certainly right up there. Even before the supreme court ruled, the money flowed. They've just made it a little easier.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> You are right on, Huck. Too much money in too few hands and the Kochs and the Waltons are getting away with buying the whole country.


I agree BUT...don't forget the buffets, the gates and the steyer brothers. Both sides benefit.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I have to admit I agree with you Huck. We are much more willing to accept differences than others because we value
> people who think things through. We are much more different in my opinion than those who are all quoting each other and those who in my opinion never disagree or offer individual thoughts from the rest.
> 
> We never hear any one question anything, except for you Nebs. I am not on the same page as you very often, but I know you are willing to express different opinions and don't follow the herd. Yes, we sometimes color all those on D and P with the same brush. I believe that there are a few who are more independent in their thinking than others realize but don't feel they want to go against the crowd. However if you go there they do the same to us. All libs are exactly the same, we follow like sheep and on and on. We are evil, (quoted), It works both ways. Read their posts.
> ...


No one was scolded for asking someone to use "quote reply". I'd have told that person myself, to use " quote reply". But to suggest that all "righties" are too stupid to use "quote reply" and thus too stupid to vote, was over the top. You say, you treat each other with respect. All I'm asking is that you extend that respect to others. There is a difference between respecting someone and treating them with respect. Respecting some, is a measure of their value (in our eyes). Treating others with respect is a measure of our own value. If we allow those who push our buttons, to bring us to our lowest level, they've won and we've lost. We need to be able to discus issues without engaging in personal insults because it changes who we are.

My son called earlier. My dil is going to check into the hospital, today. She's been very uncomfortable and has been having minor contractions and just feels she is ready. She's not in active labor but can receive the care she needs now. They're on their way now with Max, so if I drop out, that's why.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

KnitKnova said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Complaining about laziness in hitting the reply button is dividing our nation and not the systemic killing of black male youths?
> 
> ...


Perhaps, you should go back and read it again. My comment had nothing to do with "complaining about laziness". Neither, is the "systematic killing of black male youths", dividing our nation. That is a symptom of the division. Whether its criticizing all of one party or all of one race, it's playing into the division that's being created. Divide and conquer!

If you want to discuss the " systematic killing of black male youths", just say so! I suspect we'd land on the same side of the issue, which is kind of funny, considering that my black dil disagrees with both of us. People should not put others into a group and assume that they all think the same.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree BUT...don't forget the buffets, the gates and the steyer brothers. Both sides benefit.


There is a difference between these people. Look at the Waltons for one.
http://gawker.com/the-waltons-are-the-greediest-family-in-the-world-1300311273

They Waltons pay some of their employees so little they have to rely government assistance.
Or this.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/20/3595067/walmart-food-drive-oklahoma/


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Thank you - you spoke for me in this. There is a huge difference between the right and the left, even if money rules so many.
> 
> I think that what's dividing our nation is not the names we call each other but the fact that some people have allowed themselves to be fooled into voting against their own - as well as our - interests. They show themselves to be stupid, and they deserve to be called stupid.


IMO, the divide has been intentionally created and nurtured so as to distract the people from what's actually happening. While everyone is busy arguing over the issue of the week, others are working behind the scenes, with very little notice taken.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

KnitKnova said:


> Let us also consider the only group, generally, that fought against it.
> 
> I don't think anyone claimed the Left is incapable of it.
> 
> ...


My Dear Smart Friend,

Your argument still does not get Obama off the hook for his ruinous decision to imperil US manufacturing even more so that Mr. Walton has more cheap markets for his chasari - cheap goods in Yiddish.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

KnitKnova said:


> I agree with much, if not all of this.
> 
> But it is annoying that people like KiN dismiss the reality that the 'side' that fights the hardest against things like hyper money in elections is Liberals.
> 
> ...


Riiiight! The left are fighting with their hands open behind their backs. You're naive to think that either side wants to stem the flow of money. NONE of them are fighting the flow of money. They just speak out when it's safe to do so. If they close one loophole, you can be assured, another will be opened.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Winston Churchill said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." Shall we have a quote-pissing contest? If you've read Jefferson or Madison, you'll see a lot that favors democracy. To call it "majority rules" is to show how simplistically you think about things, or rather how the right-wing bloggers you read think about such things. Joeysomma must read the same blogs.
> 
> Given all possible "-ocracies," which would you choose?


I choose NONE! I choose rule of the people, by the people and for the people.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> While I always find Shirley interesting, I prefer not to be included in this "we" post. I do not share many of her opinions re: Nebs.


Thanks, SQM!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> For most of my life, I would have agreed with you. I registered to vote when I turned 18. I've voted in every election since then. I'd always assumed that those who didn't vote, were apathetic. I felt that they were shirking their responsibility as citizens if they didn't vote.
> 
> However beginning in 1992, I started to become disenchanted. That's when I started to realize that we had no real choice. The republicans foisted bush sr on us, even though we didn't want him. I was one of those, who voted for Perot. I thought I was sending a message to the republican party. A LOT of us sent that message, but they didn't care. I admit, I was naive and gullible. I thought that the people had a voice. I was wrong. Since that time, the republican party has foisted upon us, a continuous stream of candidates that I've had to plug my nose, to vote for. I don't want to be a republican anymore! The ONLY reason I've hesitated to change my party affiliation is so that I can vote in the primary elections (even though, I think it's all fixed).
> 
> ...


Keep saying it Girl.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree BUT...don't forget the buffets, the gates and the steyer brothers. Both sides benefit.


And now that I am in Chicago - The Pritzkers - Obama's puppet masters.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Let us consider Obama's horrendous decision to champion the new trade agreement. Even my Evil Republican Brother was dismayed by it. I will agree with Nebs - their strings are being manipulated and the dems and the reps are both capable of doing the bidding of corporate America.


Sadly, this isn't the first disastrous trade agreement the dems have passed. Even after half of our workforce has become unemployed, they still push to allow the rest of our jobs to leave our country, not to mention giving up our sovereignty and our ability to regulate safety and ecological issues. Who are they representing?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

KnitKnova said:


> Let us also consider the only group, generally, that fought against it.
> 
> I don't think anyone claimed the Left is incapable of it.
> 
> ...


You want to equivocate? Go ahead! Bury your head under your pillow while you're at it. NO ONE can measure the corruption that occurs on either side because we only hear a fraction of it. The FACT that both sides engage in corruption, is enough for me. It makes NO difference whether one side is " equally" corrupt. There is NO such thing as a little corruption.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Be that as it is, whatever ideology is adopted, the power given to the relatively few at the top will corrupt some of them to varying degrees. There's no question about that and _these people_ become complacent because they know the masses are. This type of behaviour is as old as time itself. I don't think there will ever be a solution unfortunately.


You're right except that the power wasn't given to these people. They've taken it so gradually that the complacent masses didn't even notice. Boiling frogs!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> And the 1% is not just the Middle Eastern oil moguls. There are 1 percenters in every country, looking out for their own continuous enrichment and disregarding all the rest of us as peripheral to their ambitions and interchangeable cannon fodder. They manipulate people into thinking it is their fight, and the people seduced by al quaida and isis are manipulated using their religious beliefs as the hook.
> 
> The dumbing down of education in what were the enlightened countries such as the US, France, and Great Britain is, in my deeper thoughts, a deliberate part of the system of making us all unthinking shills to their personal ambitions. And our politicians, left, right, moderate, are bought off and also manipulated to think they have power to get them to create laws that benefit the 1%.
> 
> Big Brother wears Prada and Rolex and Lobb.


I absolutely agree with you!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> If we moderates and liberals lump all conservatives into one box aren't we as thoughtless as the right wingers who lump all of us into one box?
> 
> People like Nan, with her conservative perspective, are not the same as some of the mean girls we have encountered.
> 
> We need to respect and listen to other viewpoints whether we agree or not to maintain a discourse that can lead to a balanced country where we all have our freedoms, look out for those who cannot look out for themselves, and all retain our deeper humanity.


Thank you, thank you, thank you! Not just for your support, but for expressing the viewpoint that we need to maintain discourse. The only way we can influence others is through discourse. Name calling alienates.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> No one was scolded for asking someone to use "quote reply". I'd have told that person myself, to use " quote reply". But to suggest that all "righties" are too stupid to use "quote reply" and thus too stupid to vote, was over the top. You say, you treat each other with respect. All I'm asking is that you extend that respect to others. There is a difference between respecting someone and treating them with respect. Respecting some, is a measure of their value (in our eyes). Treating others with respect is a measure of our own value. If we allow those who push our buttons, to bring us to our lowest level, they've won and we've lost. We need to be able to discus issues without engaging in personal insults because it changes who we are.
> 
> My son called earlier. My dil is going to check into the hospital, today. She's been very uncomfortable and has been having minor contractions and just feels she is ready. She's not in active labor but can receive the care she needs now. They're on their way now with Max, so if I drop out, that's why.


Prayers are with her, the babies and you. I will be thinking about you all day. Do you think they will decide that now is the time? She will be in the right place. My thoughts really are with you all. So exciting, and it will be such a relief for you. Take Care and try to get some rest. Are you looking after Max?? take care.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Agreed. This also reveals itself. in the ant-government rhetoric.
> 
> Do people really believe, that as individuals, with less government they will be able to stand against corporate power?
> 
> ...


That makes sense to me. It is scary,


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

lins said:


> There is a difference between these people. Look at the Waltons for one.
> http://gawker.com/the-waltons-are-the-greediest-family-in-the-world-1300311273
> 
> They Waltons pay some of their employees so little they have to rely government assistance.
> ...


Another equivocator? In case you didn't know it, LOTS of businesses, big and small, underpay their employees. Walmart is probably in the majority. The problem lies with the fact that the lucrative jobs are gone! All that's left for many, are retail jobs or other "service" jobs like waitressing. Those have ALWAYS been low paying jobs. The ONLY way that people will get the wage they deserve is if there are more jobs, than there are workers. That won't happen as long as our government makes trade deals that send the jobs overseas. So, if you really want people to receive a fair wage, talk to YOUR politicians. They're negotiating another trade treaty right now, that will send even more jobs overseas.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Most interesting thoughts. Thanks for sharing.



MarilynKnits said:


> And the 1% is not just the Middle Eastern oil moguls. There are 1 percenters in every country, looking out for their own continuous enrichment and disregarding all the rest of us as peripheral to their ambitions and interchangeable cannon fodder. They manipulate people into thinking it is their fight, and the people seduced by al quaida and isis are manipulated using their religious beliefs as the hook.
> 
> The dumbing down of education in what were the enlightened countries such as the US, France, and Great Britain is, in my deeper thoughts, a deliberate part of the system of making us all unthinking shills to their personal ambitions. And our politicians, left, right, moderate, are bought off and also manipulated to think they have power to get them to create laws that benefit the 1%.
> 
> Big Brother wears Prada and Rolex and Lobb.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> My Dear Smart Friend,
> 
> Your argument still does not get Obama off the hook for his ruinous decision to imperil US manufacturing even more so that Mr. Walton has more cheap markets for his chasari - cheap goods in Yiddish.


Do we still have any manufacturing jobs? Pretty soon, ALL of us will be working for Walmart. We'll also be buying all of our goods from them, because they'll be the only ones to survive these trade deals.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you, thank you, thank you! Not just for your support, but for expressing the viewpoint that we need to maintain discourse. The only way we can influence others is through discourse. Name calling alienates.


Nan- I hope I haven't made you feel that I am in disagreement with everything you say. I am not. I know you are an individual and not one who would be comfortable on the other thread -you question, and it doesn't appear that they do too much'- Marilyn is correct. It takes a lot of thinking and consideration to be able to stand up to both sides with your beliefs. You have courage and I applaud you. The nitpicking I did in my last post was just 
that. We do need to maintain discourse. YOu and I have disagreed about some things and we have each spoken our piece - I do want you to know that I appreciate your courage - it is hard to sometimes be a "voice of your own in the wilderness".

Because we have basic disagreement about some important things I think we manage very well to communicate with each other. Take care, friend.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Keep saying it Girl.


I will. I'll be the voice in the wilderness.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

When I think of Gates Foundation I think of world-wide vaccinations, clean water, etc. I don't think of Buffet either of political ads for gain. What am I missing?



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree BUT...don't forget the buffets, the gates and the steyer brothers. Both sides benefit.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> And now that I am in Chicago - The Pritzkers - Obama's puppet masters.


There are many more who remain nameless. They work in the background. By "work", I mean buy.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> Nan- I hope I haven't made you feel that I am in disagreement with everything you say. I am not. I know you are an individual and not one who would be comfortable on the other thread -you question, and it doesn't appear that they do too much'- Marilyn is correct. It takes a lot of thinking and consideration to be able to stand up to both sides with your beliefs. You have courage and I applaud you. The nitpicking I did in my last post was just
> that. We do need to maintain discourse. YOu and I have disagreed about some things and we have each spoken our piece - I do want you to know that I appreciate your courage - it is hard to sometimes be a "voice of your own in the wilderness".
> 
> Because we have basic disagreement about some important things I think we manage very well to communicate with each other. Take care, friend.


Since Nebs has an insightful, sophisticated political analysis, my voice joins hers in the wilderness. Nebs can be Hansel and I will be Gretel.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Have fun with Max and I'm sure you'll receive regular updates.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> No one was scolded for asking someone to use "quote reply". I'd have told that person myself, to use " quote reply". But to suggest that all "righties" are too stupid to use "quote reply" and thus too stupid to vote, was over the top. You say, you treat each other with respect. All I'm asking is that you extend that respect to others. There is a difference between respecting someone and treating them with respect. Respecting some, is a measure of their value (in our eyes). Treating others with respect is a measure of our own value. If we allow those who push our buttons, to bring us to our lowest level, they've won and we've lost. We need to be able to discus issues without engaging in personal insults because it changes who we are.
> 
> My son called earlier. My dil is going to check into the hospital, today. She's been very uncomfortable and has been having minor contractions and just feels she is ready. She's not in active labor but can receive the care she needs now. They're on their way now with Max, so if I drop out, that's why.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

IMHO you argue for anarchy and I hope I don't see that.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I choose NONE! I choose rule of the people, by the people and for the people.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thanks, SQM!


SQM - you are a good friend of Nebs. I think she knows that I am too.

You and I disagree about a lot of things and this will have to be one of them.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

SQM said:


> Since Nebs has an insightful, sophisticated political analysis, my voice joins hers in the wilderness. Nebs can be Hansel and I will be Gretel.


Good for you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Have the Republicans ever advocated a trade agreement? I'll have to look. My memory fails.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Sadly, this isn't the first disastrous trade agreement the dems have passed. Even after half of our workforce has become unemployed, they still push to allow the rest of our jobs to leave our country, not to mention giving up our sovereignty and our ability to regulate safety and ecological issues. Who are they representing?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Prayers are with her, the babies and you. I will be thinking about you all day. Do you think they will decide that now is the time? She will be in the right place. My thoughts really are with you all. So exciting, and it will be such a relief for you. Take Care and try to get some rest. Are you looking after Max?? take care.


No, they won't decide to take the babies any sooner than they have to. She went into the hospital so that she'd have more help going to the bathroom, showering and she needs help just rolling over in bed and getting up. She's hoping that she'll be able to sleep in a hospital bed because she can't get comfortable enough to sleep, in her bed or recliner. She's hoping an adjustable bed will help her sleep. She's also had several episodes of contractions and is afraid that she'll go into labor, and not know it. Most women carrying quads enter the hospital at 20 weeks. So, her getting to 31 2/2 weeks is fantastic.

I am watching Max. We'll try to keep his life as normal as possible. We'll still spend part of the days at his house and part at mine. I'll take him to visit his mother whenever she calls. From my driveway to the hospital is a 7 minute drive, so that'll be easy. I've packed a bag full of new little junk to amuse him for when he gets restless. We're in the final stretch. Yay!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

This agrees with my personal opinion on the subject. I think it's the main reason anti-government rhetoric bothers me as much as it does. Thank you for expressing it so clearly.



KnitKnova said:


> Agreed. This also reveals itself. in the ant-government rhetoric.
> 
> Do people really believe, that as individuals, with less government they will be able to stand against corporate power?
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Nan- I hope I haven't made you feel that I am in disagreement with everything you say. I am not. I know you are an individual and not one who would be comfortable on the other thread -you question, and it doesn't appear that they do too much'- Marilyn is correct. It takes a lot of thinking and consideration to be able to stand up to both sides with your beliefs. You have courage and I applaud you. The nitpicking I did in my last post was just
> that. We do need to maintain discourse. YOu and I have disagreed about some things and we have each spoken our piece - I do want you to know that I appreciate your courage - it is hard to sometimes be a "voice of your own in the wilderness".
> 
> Because we have basic disagreement about some important things I think we manage very well to communicate with each other. Take care, friend.


Thank you, Shirley! We agree on lots of things and we can still talk about the things on which we disagree. I respect you and your opinion, even when I disagree.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> When I think of Gates Foundation I think of world-wide vaccinations, clean water, etc. I don't think of Buffet either of political ads for gain. What am I missing?


Well, here's just a tiny piece. Gates donates LOTS of money to the politicians and sells LOTS of computers to the government in exchange. Buffet donates LOTS of money to politicians and gets to transfer tar sands oil by train, from Canada to the gulf, as long as the government delays the keystone pipeline.

There is always quid pro quo.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Since Nebs has an insightful, sophisticated political analysis, my voice joins hers in the wilderness. Nebs can be Hansel and I will be Gretel.


Gee, SQM! You're gonna give me a big head. But never mind. I will be Hansel to your Gretel, any time.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Have fun with Max and I'm sure you'll receive regular updates.


Thanks! I'm just waiting to hear that she's settling in. I'm not expecting any other news at the present. But I will keep everyone informed.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> IMHO you argue for anarchy and I hope I don't see that.


I believe in peaceful protest. You could not find a less violent person than me. In person, I am very non confrontational. But I've left my comfort zone, seeking to instill change. I'd like to believe that enough people engaging in some type of peaceful protest, could bring about change. The alternatives are too horrible to think about.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> SQM - you are a good friend of Nebs. I think she knows that I am too.
> 
> You and I disagree about a lot of things and this will have to be one of them.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Have the Republicans ever advocated a trade agreement? I'll have to look. My memory fails.


Makes no difference. They don't pass the treaties for the dems or the reps. The treaties don't benefit any of US. They benefit the 1%.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you, Shirley! We agree on lots of things and we can still talk about the things on which we disagree. I respect you and your opinion, even when I disagree.


That is what discourse is about.

We are far apart in our political opinions and I doubt that will change. We have each reached where we are by 'thinking' and sorting things out.

I will never see that getting rid of your, or my Government is going to solve anything. To me that just isn't realisitic. What would happen then? What is the alternative. We the people - I wish it could happen, but it has to be organized by someone, it has to be chosen by the people, and it has to be
done in a way that things run smoothly. What are the alternatives to Government -- none that I can see. It could easily turn into mob rule and chaos. There has to be some sort of organization and a way to work with each other.

The idea is great - the doing is a different matter. Look at the mess that is happening with two parties that are isolated from each other -- How could your country manage without someone - or some group, doing the organizing etc. I just can't see it.

Anyway, I have to go for groceries, see you all later.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> This agrees with my personal opinion on the subject. I think it's the main reason anti-government rhetoric bothers me as much as it does. Thank you for expressing it so clearly.


I am not anti government. I am anti this corrupt government. Shouldn't all of us be exposing corruption where we see it? Shouldn't all of us be trying to do something, to eliminate the corruption? Shouldn't all us take a stand against corruption in government? A little bit of corruption is just as bad, as a lot. But really, there's no such thing as "a little bit of corruption". Its like when a piece of bread gets mold on it. Before long, the mold spreads to the whole loaf and it rots.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Another equivocator? In case you didn't know it, LOTS of businesses, big and small, underpay their employees. Walmart is probably in the majority. The problem lies with the fact that the lucrative jobs are gone! All that's left for many, are retail jobs or other "service" jobs like waitressing. Those have ALWAYS been low paying jobs. The ONLY way that people will get the wage they deserve is if there are more jobs, than there are workers. That won't happen as long as our government makes trade deals that send the jobs overseas. So, if you really want people to receive a fair wage, talk to YOUR politicians. They're negotiating another trade treaty right now, that will send even more jobs overseas.


With the low wages earned people are only buying the cheap goods from overseas. That's all they can afford.

I don't have an opinion about the PTT yet, but where is America going sell the goods they make unless they compete by reducing the wages in America?
So here we are, exactly where the big boys want.

In other words, a race to the bottom for everyone in the world except the 1%.
It may be too late to stop it anyway because the corporations are and have been running the elections and making the rules for a long time now.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I believe in peaceful protest. You could not find a less violent person than me. In person, I am very non confrontational. But I've left my comfort zone, seeking to instill change. I'd like to believe that enough people engaging in some type of peaceful protest, could bring about change. The alternatives are too horrible to think about.


Who would organize the peaceful protest. How would you keep it peaceful? I am not trying to throw roadblocks in front of you. I honestly don't see how it could be accomplished.

Therefore, in my opinion, the only choice we have is to work in the parameters of Government. HOwever, that doesn't mean Government should not be improved or in many ways changed. It is overwhelming when you think of it. I honestly think that things seem to be coming to a head down there (jmo) and Anarchy is a possibility. There is such a wide chasm between those on the left and right - how do you bridge that gap when people have no interest in coming together? It's fine to say it - but how do you think you all can DO it.

Change is happening up here. I have absolutely no idea how far the change will go but certainly some very surprising things have occurred this past while. I personally feel that there is a good chance that there will be a major chance for change in our Federal Government as there was in Alberta.

We are searching for the answers too. Many of us up here are watching what is happening down there. We have a different system which (not just because I live here) seems to make more sense than your system. However once a system is in place, how do you change it when there are two distinct opinions about what should happen.

Closed minds on both sides are not going to do it. There has to be the will to change on both sides. Off my soap box.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> That is what discourse is about.
> 
> We are far apart in our political opinions and I doubt that will change. We have each reached where we are by 'thinking' and sorting things out.
> 
> ...


As I stated earlier, I am not anti government. I recognize that all peoples need some sort of government, in order to avoid chaos. I AM against corrupt government. I think the people need to stand together and DEMAND prosecution and stiff penalties for those who engage in ANY form of corruption.

I am also against a government that tries to control the thoughts and actions of its people. I am against one that spies on its people, and keeps dossiers. I am for laws that protect the rights of all, without infringing upon the rights of others. I am also for a government that expects and encourages its people to be responsible, independent citizens. I am for a government that encourages everyone to care about, and for each other. One that unites instead of, divides.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Agreed. This also reveals itself. in the ant-government rhetoric.
> 
> Do people really believe, that as individuals, with less government they will be able to stand against corporate power?
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

lins said:


> With the low wages earned people are only buying the cheap goods from overseas. That's all they can afford.
> 
> I don't have an opinion about the PTT yet, but where is America going sell the goods they make unless they compete by reducing the wages in America?
> So here we are, exactly where the big boys want.
> ...


IMO, the only way to save our country, is to void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas. That would remove the incentive for taking the jobs overseas. Goods made in America, would be comparably priced. Manufacturing plants would reopen, because why ship things from around the world, if they can be made right here, with the same profit margin?

Now, I'm not totally ignorant. I recognize the upheaval this would cause. We owe China lots! I doubt that we could do this, without it creating war and the demise of dollar. However, I believe those things are coming anyway. The difference between doing something and doing nothing, is that by doing something, we would retain our sovereign nation. If we continue on the road we're on, we will end up with nothing.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

I've got to go swing, with Max. I'll check in later.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> When I think of Gates Foundation I think of world-wide vaccinations, clean water, etc. I don't think of Buffet either of political ads for gain. What am I missing?


I agree l00% - I personally think Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are good people - they have money - Gate's started apple - and he has given billions of dollars away to many different charities, that is a fact. Should he not have gone into business? I don't think having money means that someone is evil. I think people like the Waltons and the way they treat their employees are a different kettle of fish from Gates and Buffett. I agree with everyone here about the tax situation, it boggles my mind that they pay less tax than the poor do. Those are some of the things I was talking about in my previous post to Nebraska. There are things that could be done, but only if both parties cooperate. I hope it can happen but I doubt it will.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

KnitKnova said:


> Agreed. This also reveals itself. in the ant-government rhetoric.
> 
> Do people really believe, that as individuals, with less government they will be able to stand against corporate power?
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As I stated earlier, I am not anti government. I recognize that all peoples need some sort of government, in order to avoid chaos. I AM against corrupt government. I think the people need to stand together and DEMAND prosecution and stiff penalties for those who engage in ANY form of corruption.
> 
> I am also against a government that tries to control the thoughts and actions of its people. I am against one that spies on its people, and keeps dossiers. I am for laws that protect the rights of all, without infringing upon the rights of others. I am also for a government that expects and encourages its people to be responsible, independent citizens. I am for a government that encourages everyone to care about, and for each other. One that unites instead of, divides.


I think all of us want that - it is how we go about obtaining that Government, that is the question.

How would you start? where would you start? I mean specifically? I think it would be wonderful if you could say abra ka dabra and have it all in place. It will take a huge amount of agreement, discourse, agreeing that neither side has all or even a few of the answers. It has to start somewhere. How do you get rid of the l% who control everything -howdo you get rid of the lobbyists? How do you sort of what should be Federal Responsibility and what should be State responsibility. What do you do with those who don't agree and like things the way they are? what do you do to fix that ? Where would you start?? Once you have done that (if it is possible) what would you change then? It would have to be done one step at a time. I agree with a lot of your answers what I don't agree with is that it can happen. Unless a huge majority agree and I just don't see it.

I can't see any answer except one step at a time and there has to be a majority who wants that, in the Government. It has to mean both parties work together. We have seen how unlikely that is.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> IMO, the only way to save our country, is to void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas. That would remove the incentive for taking the jobs overseas. Goods made in America, would be comparably priced. Manufacturing plants would reopen, because why ship things from around the world, if they can be made right here, with the same profit margin?
> 
> Now, I'm not totally ignorant. I recognize the upheaval this would cause. We owe China lots! I doubt that we could do this, without it creating war and the demise of dollar. However, I believe those things are coming anyway. The difference between doing something and doing nothing, is that by doing something, we would retain our sovereign nation. If we continue on the road we're on, we will end up with nothing.


'void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas.' This would not work. Treaties work in both directions. Both imports and exports. If the USA wishes to sell to overseas markets and not have the importing country place tariffs on the USA's goods when they enter a foreign country then the USA also has to remove tariffs from goods imported from overseas countries. Remember, the USA exports to a lot of countries and if those countries placed tariffs on goods imported from the USA then the goods that the USA exports to those countries would not be competitive in those countries and the people would not buy them. This could lead of a loss of valuable export markets for the USA and result in a trade imbalance, not in the USA's favour. A free trade agreement means that neither country will place tariffs on goods imported from the other country. You cannot have it lopsided with the USA imposing tariffs on imports but not wanting other countries to impose tariffs on USA exports. Countries who have reached free trade agreements with each other tend to trade with each other more than with countries with whom they have not reached a free trade agreement. If the USA renege on free trade agreements reached with other countries then they may find that they are excluded from trade with that country. That is both import and export trade. The USA will not be able to export to the other country nor will it be able to import from the other country.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> I think all of us want that - it is how we go about obtaining that Government, that is the question.
> 
> How would you start? where would you start? I mean specifically? I think it would be wonderful if you could say abra ka dabra and have it all in place. It will take a huge amount of agreement, discourse, agreeing that neither side has all or even a few of the answers. It has to start somewhere. How do you get rid of the l% who control everything -howdo you get rid of the lobbyists? How do you sort of what should be Federal Responsibility and what should be State responsibility. What do you do with those who don't agree and like things the way they are? what do you do to fix that ? Where would you start?? Once you have done that (if it is possible) what would you change then? It would have to be done one step at a time. I agree with a lot of your answers what I don't agree with is that it can happen. Unless a huge majority agree and I just don't see it.
> 
> I can't see any answer except one step at a time and there has to be a majority who wants that, in the Government. It has to mean both parties work together. We have seen how unlikely that is.


We start by demanding the overturn of Citizen's United PLUS strict limits on campaign contributions.

Then we place draconian limits on lobbyists.

"there has to be a majority who wants that, in the Government"

None of those yahoos in government want to give up the money. Even the honest politicians have been sucked into that vortex because they can't do any good, they can't fight, they can't influence - without money. Congress has demonstrated its total unwillingness to act on this problem. Bills have been proposed but are dead on arrival. It is up to the citizens to demand it.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> 'void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas.' This would not work. Treaties work in both directions. Both imports and exports. If the USA wishes to sell to overseas markets and not have the importing country place tariffs on the USA's goods when they enter a foreign country then the USA also has to remove tariffs from goods imported from overseas countries. Remember, the USA exports to a lot of countries and if those countries placed tariffs on goods imported from the USA then the goods that the USA exports to those countries would not be competitive in those countries and the people would not buy them. This could lead of a loss of valuable export markets for the USA and result in a trade imbalance, not in the USA's favour. A free trade agreement means that neither country will place tariffs on goods imported from the other country. You cannot have it lopsided with the USA imposing tariffs on imports but not wanting other countries to impose tariffs on USA exports. Countries who have reached free trade agreements with each other tend to trade with each other more than with countries with whom they have not reached a free trade agreement. If the USA renege on free trade agreements reached with other countries then they may find that they are excluded from trade with that country. That is both import and export trade. The USA will not be able to export to the other country nor will it be able to import from the other country.


Once again, thank you, Eve, for being the voice of reason. Simplistic answers sound wonderful, but the world economy is complicated and as much as we Americans would like to wave a magic wand, it just doesn't work that way.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Who would organize the peaceful protest. How would you keep it peaceful? I am not trying to throw roadblocks in front of you. I honestly don't see how it could be accomplished.
> 
> Therefore, in my opinion, the only choice we have is to work in the parameters of Government. HOwever, that doesn't mean Government should not be improved or in many ways changed. It is overwhelming when you think of it. I honestly think that things seem to be coming to a head down there (jmo) and Anarchy is a possibility. There is such a wide chasm between those on the left and right - how do you bridge that gap when people have no interest in coming together? It's fine to say it - but how do you think you all can DO it.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. I think things are coming to a head down here. I think we're headed for a crash of epic proportion. I believe that the 1% has drained just about everything they can get and soon, things won't be sustainable. Technically, things are already unsustainable. We just haven't felt the repercussions yet. There aren't enough taxpayers to support the unemployed and the wealthy and still pay for war and funding other countries. Taxpayers don't make enough money to support our own poor, let alone the millions of poor, crossing our borders (both legally and illegally). No one is lending us money anymore (except the federal reserve, who creates it out of thin air). So, how far we can go on this road, is anybody's guess. IMO, the 1% are creating chaos and social division, so that when everything crashes, the people will readily turn against each other and blame each other. That's why I hate to see people blaming each other already. We're going to need each other in the future.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> IMO, the divide has been intentionally created and nurtured so as to distract the people from what's actually happening. While everyone is busy arguing over the issue of the week, others are working behind the scenes, with very little notice taken.


I don't know how to respond. I don't believe that anyone, however much money they have, can actually cause hundreds of millions of people to do their bidding. It just sounds like another conspiracy theory to me. I know you don't like that term, but in my opinion that's all it is, with a small tie to the truth.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know how to respond. I don't believe that anyone, however much money they have, can actually cause hundreds of millions of people to do their bidding. It just sounds like another conspiracy theory to me. I know you don't like that term, but in my opinion that's all it is, with a small tie to the truth.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Call me an incurable optimist, Pollyanna or stupid or ignorant - I have faith in our system of government and I have faith in the American people. I can't buy into the dark and grim attitude that millions of us are being duped and manipulated to fulfill the evil designs of some mysterious power.

Do we have problems? Many. Serious problems.

Do we have enough intelligence and passion to resolve them? Yes. Not all at one time and not quickly, but we do have the ability if we don't give up and sit idly by, wringing our hands and if we don't stop using our brains.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I choose NONE! I choose rule of the people, by the people and for the people.


Then guess what!

*de·moc·ra·cy*
dəˈmäkrəsē/
noun
*a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives <this is where your "representative republic" fits, as the typical form of democracy>.*
"capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world"
synonyms:	representative government, elective government; More
antonyms:	dictatorship
a state governed by a democracy.
plural noun: democracies
"a multiparty democracy"
control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
"the intended extension of industrial democracy"

origin: late 16th century: from French démocratie, via late Latin from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos the people + -kratia power, rule.

Surprise, surprise. Google "democracy" and see what comes up most.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Sadly, this isn't the first disastrous trade agreement the dems have passed. Even after half of our workforce has become unemployed, they still push to allow the rest of our jobs to leave our country, not to mention giving up our sovereignty and our ability to regulate safety and ecological issues. Who are they representing?


It's not "the dems"; it's a Democratic president, and the major opposition is coming from Democrats in the legislature. Any Repubs that are with them are there to make Obama fail. Though the real failure would be the blind passage of this agreement.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> No one was scolded for asking someone to use "quote reply". I'd have told that person myself, to use " quote reply". But to suggest that all "righties" are too stupid to use "quote reply" and thus too stupid to vote, was over the top. You say, you treat each other with respect. All I'm asking is that you extend that respect to others. There is a difference between respecting someone and treating them with respect. Respecting some, is a measure of their value (in our eyes). Treating others with respect is a measure of our own value. If we allow those who push our buttons, to bring us to our lowest level, they've won and we've lost. We need to be able to discus issues without engaging in personal insults because it changes who we are.
> 
> My son called earlier. My dil is going to check into the hospital, today. She's been very uncomfortable and has been having minor contractions and just feels she is ready. She's not in active labor but can receive the care she needs now. They're on their way now with Max, so if I drop out, that's why.


Best wishes for four healthy thriving babies and a quick recovery from childbirth to your DIL.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Since Nebs has an insightful, sophisticated political analysis, my voice joins hers in the wilderness. Nebs can be Hansel and I will be Gretel.


Then the witch will gobble you both up.

I'm afraid her "insightful, sophisticated political analysis" is as simplistic as those of the blogs she reads. I've said this before, so I hope she doesn't feel hurt by it.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

I just love how people are all up in arms these days about government surveillance. When the Bush administration started up the DHS the majority of people were squawking that it would be well worth losing some liberties in order to be "safe." And the same goes for when the NSA was formed under the Eisenhower administration.

It's a case of being careful what you wish for.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

O


Knitter from Nebraska said:


> IMO, the only way to save our country, is to void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas. That would remove the incentive for taking the jobs overseas. Goods made in America, would be comparably priced. Manufacturing plants would reopen, because why ship things from around the world, if they can be made right here, with the same profit margin?
> 
> Now, I'm not totally ignorant. I recognize the upheaval this would cause. We owe China lots! I doubt that we could do this, without it creating war and the demise of dollar. However, I believe those things are coming anyway. The difference between doing something and doing nothing, is that by doing something, we would retain our sovereign nation. If we continue on the road we're on, we will end up with nothing.


Just a thought.
Rather than tariffs, the manufacturers of overseas goods should be required to pay their employees a decent wage so that the employees can turn around and spend their money on goods imported from other countries as well.

How might they do that? Take Niki who employs thousands of workers in other countries. They bring their shoes into the US for roughly 5.50 per pair, if you added 5.00 per pair to go directly to the employees making the goods overseas it would be benificial to everbody except perhaps the billionaire that owns Niki...boohoo.

That's for sure, we don't need a war with China. Have you seen their rested,
humongous military? They stay out of other people business in that regard but one day who knows. I just hope the US and Canada are not too war weary to protect us all.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

sumpleby said:


> I just love how people are all up in arms these days about government surveillance. When the Bush administration started up the DHS the majority of people were squawking that it would be well worth losing some liberties in order to be "safe." And the same goes for when the NSA was formed under the Eisenhower administration.
> 
> It's a case of being careful what you wish for.


You are correct about the hysteria surrounding passage of the Patriot Act. But please remember there were MANY who opposed it for all the reasons they are opposing it now.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

lins said:


> With the low wages earned people are only buying the cheap goods from overseas. That's all they can afford.
> 
> I don't have an opinion about the PTT yet, but where is America going sell the goods they make unless they compete by reducing the wages in America?
> So here we are, exactly where the big boys want.
> ...


If we were to reinstate tariffs, it would go far toward bringing mfg. back to this country. If Nike, e.g., pays $1 for the labor in each pair of sneakers, and they had to pay a $6 or $7 import tax (to raise labor cost to the US minimum wage) to bring those sneaks into this country, they'd find it just as cheap to make them here.

This country was supported by tariffs alone until the income tax was finally adopted in 1913.

It was Reagan and Poppy Bush who started the elimination of tariffs, using GATT ( General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), and Clinton who pretty much finished them off, with NAFTA.

Never mind - there's no chance of bringing them back with this president and Congress.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> IMO, the only way to save our country, is to void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas. That would remove the incentive for taking the jobs overseas. Goods made in America, would be comparably priced. Manufacturing plants would reopen, because why ship things from around the world, if they can be made right here, with the same profit margin?
> 
> Now, I'm not totally ignorant. I recognize the upheaval this would cause. We owe China lots! I doubt that we could do this, without it creating war and the demise of dollar. However, I believe those things are coming anyway. The difference between doing something and doing nothing, is that by doing something, we would retain our sovereign nation. If we continue on the road we're on, we will end up with nothing.


Hey, there it is: something we agree on!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> 'void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas.' This would not work. Treaties work in both directions. Both imports and exports. If the USA wishes to sell to overseas markets and not have the importing country place tariffs on the USA's goods when they enter a foreign country then the USA also has to remove tariffs from goods imported from overseas countries. Remember, the USA exports to a lot of countries and if those countries placed tariffs on goods imported from the USA then the goods that the USA exports to those countries would not be competitive in those countries and the people would not buy them. This could lead of a loss of valuable export markets for the USA and result in a trade imbalance, not in the USA's favour. A free trade agreement means that neither country will place tariffs on goods imported from the other country. You cannot have it lopsided with the USA imposing tariffs on imports but not wanting other countries to impose tariffs on USA exports. Countries who have reached free trade agreements with each other tend to trade with each other more than with countries with whom they have not reached a free trade agreement. If the USA renege on free trade agreements reached with other countries then they may find that they are excluded from trade with that country. That is both import and export trade. The USA will not be able to export to the other country nor will it be able to import from the other country.


I don't think anyone advocates "reneging" on trade agreements, but there must be a way to negotiate them away. And there's already an imbalance in tariffs. China has a high tariff on American-made cars but we have none, or almost none, on Chinese cars. Not that anyone here would want to buy one.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Another equivocator? In case you didn't know it, LOTS of businesses, big and small, underpay their employees. Walmart is probably in the majority. The problem lies with the fact that the lucrative jobs are gone! All that's left for many, are retail jobs or other "service" jobs like waitressing. Those have ALWAYS been low paying jobs. The ONLY way that people will get the wage they deserve is if there are more jobs, than there are workers. That won't happen as long as our government makes trade deals that send the jobs overseas. So, if you really want people to receive a fair wage, talk to YOUR politicians. They're negotiating another trade treaty right now, that will send even more jobs overseas.


Lest we forget, it is not just manufacturing jobs that have gone overseas. Think of all the tech support that is done in other countries where wages that are below poverty level here are superior to anything else available there. It will not be until upper management jobs go overseas at 10¢ to the dollar that lower level 1%ers will start to wake up - too late - and the 1/2 or 1/4 of the upper 1% will be on their thrones laughing at all the rest of us.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> If we were to reinstate tariffs, it would go far toward bringing mfg. back to this country. If Nike, e.g., pays $1 for the labor in each pair of sneakers, and they had to pay a $6 or $7 import tax (to raise labor cost to the US minimum wage) to bring those sneaks into this country, they'd find it just as cheap to make them here.
> 
> This country was supported by tariffs alone until the income tax was finally adopted in 1913.
> 
> ...


I agree.

Sadly, its those who control the president and congress that have all the say.

There's no more 'we the people' it's corporations making wee people.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Gee, SQM! You're gonna give me a big head. But never mind. I will be Hansel to your Gretel, any time.


Just keep pebbles in your pockets, not bread crumbs!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> You are correct about the hysteria surrounding passage of the Patriot Act. But please remember there were MANY who opposed it for all the reasons they are opposing it now.


Oh, this reminds me.

Russ Feingold is planning to run for the Senate seat he lost last time. He was the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act, and one of the few who voted against the Iraq war. And he's the Feingold in McCain-Feingold.

Wisconsinites, time to organize for him (before Joey and the Yarnlady organize against him).


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I am not anti government. I am anti this corrupt government. Shouldn't all of us be exposing corruption where we see it? Shouldn't all of us be trying to do something, to eliminate the corruption? Shouldn't all us take a stand against corruption in government? A little bit of corruption is just as bad, as a lot. But really, there's no such thing as "a little bit of corruption". Its like when a piece of bread gets mold on it. Before long, the mold spreads to the whole loaf and it rots.


There are still some newspapers that try to bring corruption to light. Read the Star Ledger www.nj.com to see the sorts of information and discourse presented by columnists such as Paul Mulshine and Tom Moran. I am sure there are other such newspapers that try to make their readership aware of issues that affect all our lives and promote discourse and critical thinking.

If you know of others, let's make one another aware so we can keep up to date, write to editors, and support one another's free press.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As I stated earlier, I am not anti government. I recognize that all peoples need some sort of government, in order to avoid chaos. I AM against corrupt government. I think the people need to stand together and DEMAND prosecution and stiff penalties for those who engage in ANY form of corruption.
> 
> I am also against a government that tries to control the thoughts and actions of its people. I am against one that spies on its people, and keeps dossiers. I am for laws that protect the rights of all, without infringing upon the rights of others. I am also for a government that expects and encourages its people to be responsible, independent citizens. I am for a government that encourages everyone to care about, and for each other. One that unites instead of, divides.


It is somewhat encouraging that the spying on citizens by the government is being questioned, and that its effectiveness is being questioned. The article http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-infighting-over-nsa-surveillance-program-renewal/ presented some thought provoking discourse. Interesting to see who took which position.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> IMO, the only way to save our country, is to void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas. That would remove the incentive for taking the jobs overseas. Goods made in America, would be comparably priced. Manufacturing plants would reopen, because why ship things from around the world, if they can be made right here, with the same profit margin?
> 
> Now, I'm not totally ignorant. I recognize the upheaval this would cause. We owe China lots! I doubt that we could do this, without it creating war and the demise of dollar. However, I believe those things are coming anyway. The difference between doing something and doing nothing, is that by doing something, we would retain our sovereign nation. If we continue on the road we're on, we will end up with nothing.


It is more "the further demise of the dollar". Our politicians have been selling our nation's soul bit by bit.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> It is more "the further demise of the dollar". Our politicians have been selling our nation's soul bit by bit.


It was my understanding (maybe I read about it in Krugman's column) that the dollar is being kept artificially high at the request of some European countries. If it were lower, so that people in other countries could afford to buy American-made stuff, unemployment might get even lower.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think you're mistaken. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation includes huge donations from Warren Buffet.

Here is a statement from them directly.

"Guided by the belief that every life has equal value, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives. In developing countries, it focuses on improving peoples health and giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty. In the United States, it seeks to ensure that all peopleespecially those with the fewest resourceshave access to the opportunities they need to succeed in school and life. Based in Seattle, Washington, the foundation is led by CEO Dr. Susan Desmond-Hellmann and Co-chair William H. Gates Sr., under the direction of Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett.

Grantmaking Areas

Global Development Program
Global Health Program
Global Policy and Advocacy
United States Program"

More detail available.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, here's just a tiny piece. Gates donates LOTS of money to the politicians and sells LOTS of computers to the government in exchange. Buffet donates LOTS of money to politicians and gets to transfer tar sands oil by train, from Canada to the gulf, as long as the government delays the keystone pipeline.
> 
> There is always quid pro quo.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know how to respond. I don't believe that anyone, however much money they have, can actually cause hundreds of millions of people to do their bidding. It just sounds like another conspiracy theory to me. I know you don't like that term, but in my opinion that's all it is, with a small tie to the truth.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> Call me an incurable optimist, Pollyanna or stupid or ignorant - I have faith in our system of government and I have faith in the American people. I can't buy into the dark and grim attitude that millions of us are being duped and manipulated to fulfill the evil designs of some mysterious power.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: I'm with you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

sumpleby said:


> I just love how people are all up in arms these days about government surveillance. When the Bush administration started up the DHS the majority of people were squawking that it would be well worth losing some liberties in order to be "safe." And the same goes for when the NSA was formed under the Eisenhower administration.
> 
> It's a case of being careful what you wish for.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I think all of us want that - it is how we go about obtaining that Government, that is the question.
> 
> How would you start? where would you start? I mean specifically? I think it would be wonderful if you could say abra ka dabra and have it all in place. It will take a huge amount of agreement, discourse, agreeing that neither side has all or even a few of the answers. It has to start somewhere. How do you get rid of the l% who control everything -howdo you get rid of the lobbyists? How do you sort of what should be Federal Responsibility and what should be State responsibility. What do you do with those who don't agree and like things the way they are? what do you do to fix that ? Where would you start?? Once you have done that (if it is possible) what would you change then? It would have to be done one step at a time. I agree with a lot of your answers what I don't agree with is that it can happen. Unless a huge majority agree and I just don't see it.
> 
> I can't see any answer except one step at a time and there has to be a majority who wants that, in the Government. It has to mean both parties work together. We have seen how unlikely that is.


I would start right where I've started. We need to talk about these things. We can talk until we find something we have in common. I think that all of us can agree that there is corruption in our political system. Then we can get involved at whatever level suits us. Green is making things and having a sale. She's writing her representatives. She is getting involved on many levels. I write both letters and e mails to my representatives. I instigate discussion. We need to start conversations with as many people as possible. We need to let our representatives know that we're not going to stand for it, and want stronger laws. We need to pressure our county attorneys, district attorneys and even our attorney general, to prosecute corruption wherever it exists.

You don't get rid of the 1%, you just get rid of the laws and regulations that favor them. You get laws passed that make lobbying illegal. Everyone should have an equal voice and a level playing field.

Nothing will change unless huge numbers of people get involved. If a representative or senator receive 20 letters, they don't care. They have an aide type up a response, print 20 copies and stick them in the mail. If they were to receive thousands or tens of thousands, of letters, they'd sit up and take notice. Unless the entire electoral process is rigged, they'd worry about reelection. I think this is the place to start. There is power in numbers.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> 'void the trade treaties and go back to putting tariffs on goods manufacture overseas.' This would not work. Treaties work in both directions. Both imports and exports. If the USA wishes to sell to overseas markets and not have the importing country place tariffs on the USA's goods when they enter a foreign country then the USA also has to remove tariffs from goods imported from overseas countries. Remember, the USA exports to a lot of countries and if those countries placed tariffs on goods imported from the USA then the goods that the USA exports to those countries would not be competitive in those countries and the people would not buy them. This could lead of a loss of valuable export markets for the USA and result in a trade imbalance, not in the USA's favour. A free trade agreement means that neither country will place tariffs on goods imported from the other country. You cannot have it lopsided with the USA imposing tariffs on imports but not wanting other countries to impose tariffs on USA exports. Countries who have reached free trade agreements with each other tend to trade with each other more than with countries with whom they have not reached a free trade agreement. If the USA renege on free trade agreements reached with other countries then they may find that they are excluded from trade with that country. That is both import and export trade. The USA will not be able to export to the other country nor will it be able to import from the other country.


I understand that trade treaties go both ways. But where is the benefit when there are trade deficits? Trade treaties benefit major corporations and one could argue that they help workers who earn 10¢ an hour, in poor countries. But they do not help the American people. Sure, we get to buy cheap goods. But because the jobs are gone, we HAVE to buy cheap goods. I'd like to return to the time when American manufacturers created goods for Americans. Jobs were plentiful. Benefits were created, to compete for workers. People thrived.

Here's a list of the top ten countries with which we have trade deficits. It includes figures for April and year to date figures. From what I see, corporations profit and the people lose. Unless and until our government brings back the jobs, we will have no economic recovery and no future.
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/dst/current/deficit.html


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> We start by demanding the overturn of Citizen's United PLUS strict limits on campaign contributions.
> 
> Then we place draconian limits on lobbyists.
> 
> ...


I agree! Except that, I think lobbying should be illegal, unless one is lobbying for him or herself.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think you're mistaken. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation includes huge donations from Warren Buffet.
> 
> Here is a statement from them directly.
> 
> ...


I watched a speech when we were in Alberta from Bill Gates, he stated absolutely that Warren Buffet was involved with his charities. I have also listened and read what Buffett has to say, and I believe he is not if favor of what is happening
with the l%.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Once again, thank you, Eve, for being the voice of reason. Simplistic answers sound wonderful, but the world economy is complicated and as much as we Americans would like to wave a magic wand, it just doesn't work that way.


As long as we're tied to the world's economy, corporations win and people lose. The 1% LOVE a global economy. It allows them to suck the life out of every country, at the same time. Simplistic answers are often best, and always better, than no answers at all.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know how to respond. I don't believe that anyone, however much money they have, can actually cause hundreds of millions of people to do their bidding. It just sounds like another conspiracy theory to me. I know you don't like that term, but in my opinion that's all it is, with a small tie to the truth.


So, why do you think that the newscasters spend more time talking about Angelina Jolie, than trade deficits or inflation or unemployment or the national debt or any number of important issues???


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> Call me an incurable optimist, Pollyanna or stupid or ignorant - I have faith in our system of government and I have faith in the American people. I can't buy into the dark and grim attitude that millions of us are being duped and manipulated to fulfill the evil designs of some mysterious power.
> 
> ...


Well, call me a pessimist, negative Nell or stupid or ignorant. Our system of government has proven itself. And the American people are apathetic and ignorant. Most, only care about earning a paycheck and sitting in front of the boob tube. Unless and until the American people get informed and involved, I don't hold out much hope.

I agree that we have the intelligence to fix things, but the passion is lacking. Most people don't even know there's a problem and many don't care, as long as they get theirs.

IMO, it's conversations like these that will wake people up. We need to take these discussions and pass them along. Like..."say, do you know what I heard ?..." We need to get people talking and wake up that passion in them. Unless people understand and care, the future will be bleak.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

CNN- Waco Texas had a bad motorcycle gang fight today - 9 Bikers killed and over a hundred bikers arrested. They are concerned that there are many bikers on the road heading toward Waco. I guess two of the major gangs (including the largest outlaw gang) were meeting to sort out some problems and someone started shooting. The police got involved and it sounds as if it was a real fire fight. Sounds like a real mess. The Sheriff was just interviewed and said t hey were 'ready' for any further problems. Sounds like a gunfight at the OK corral. One of the gangs were the Banditos which are world wide and the biggest group. Some of the announcers wondered why any other group would take them on. Comments, anyone?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Then guess what!
> 
> *de·moc·ra·cy*
> dəˈmäkrəsē/
> ...


I'm not surprised when the definitions of words change, over time. Why, just look up the word "gay", if you want proof.

Anyone can say that a republic IS a democracy, BUT the major difference lies in the fact that in a democracy, the majority rules. The rights of the individual are sacrificed for the many. In a republic, the rights of the individual are preserved and laws are passed to protect the safety of the people, not to control the people.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> It's not "the dems"; it's a Democratic president, and the major opposition is coming from Democrats in the legislature. Any Repubs that are with them are there to make Obama fail. Though the real failure would be the blind passage of this agreement.


When I referred to the dems, I was thinking of clinton and NAFTA as well. I worry about the blind passage of this treaty. obama wants to fast track it. If he succeeds, no one will be allowed to change any part of it, not the congress nor the senate.

But, now that I think about it, if they fast track the bill, ALL of them can claim that it wasn't their fault. So, I think they'll fast track it.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Best wishes for four healthy thriving babies and a quick recovery from childbirth to your DIL.


Thanks, Marilyn!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Then the witch will gobble you both up.
> 
> I'm afraid her "insightful, sophisticated political analysis" is as simplistic as those of the blogs she reads. I've said this before, so I hope she doesn't feel hurt by it.


I'm not hurt when people express an opinion. It's the personal attacks that sting.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Oh, this reminds me.
> 
> Russ Feingold is planning to run for the Senate seat he lost last time. He was the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act, and one of the few who voted against the Iraq war. And he's the Feingold in McCain-Feingold.
> 
> Wisconsinites, time to organize for him (before Joey and the Yarnlady organize against him).


So happy Feingold is running for Senate again. He was one of the best Progressive senators we have had and hopefully he can win that seat back in Wisconsin. We need more like him.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

sumpleby said:


> I just love how people are all up in arms these days about government surveillance. When the Bush administration started up the DHS the majority of people were squawking that it would be well worth losing some liberties in order to be "safe." And the same goes for when the NSA was formed under the Eisenhower administration.
> 
> It's a case of being careful what you wish for.


I was never one of those people who thought losing liberties for the false promise of safety, was worth it.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think you're mistaken. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation includes huge donations from Warren Buffet.
> 
> Here is a statement from them directly.
> 
> ...


I would like to know what the Koch's and the Walton's do as far as charitable foundations. The Gate's and Buffett put their money back into doing good for people world wide. I don't see that level of giving on the right. Correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> Call me an incurable optimist, Pollyanna or stupid or ignorant - I have faith in our system of government and I have faith in the American people. I can't buy into the dark and grim attitude that millions of us are being duped and manipulated to fulfill the evil designs of some mysterious power.
> 
> ...


I so agree. We can't live our lives saying woe is me and everything is hopeless. We must take action and not leave it for others to do. There is so much that can be done and "WE" not someone else must do it. Get off our duffs and get politically active if you aren't already. That is where change begins at the grassroots level. 
FDR's First Inaugural Address: I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I would like to know what the Koch's and the Walton's do as far as charitable foundations. The Gate's and Buffett put their money back into doing good for people world wide. I don't see that level of giving on the right. Correct me if I am wrong.


One of the Waltons built a fine art gallery/museum somewhere in the backwoods of the Appalachians, I believe. But demanded preferential tax treatment for building there.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

lins said:


> O
> 
> Just a thought.
> Rather than tariffs, the manufacturers of overseas goods should be required to pay their employees a decent wage so that the employees can turn around and spend their money on goods imported from other countries as well.
> ...


Interesting thought, and it would be great, except that I can't think of any countries that would allow us to dictate a minimum wage.

I don't know the state of Canada's military, but ours has been drastically reduced, to the point that we're sending reserves and the National Guard to do our fighting for us.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> You are correct about the hysteria surrounding passage of the Patriot Act. But please remember there were MANY who opposed it for all the reasons they are opposing it now.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Interesting thought, and it would be great, except that I can't think of any countries that would allow us to dictate a minimum wage.
> 
> I don't know the state of Canada's military, but ours has been drastically reduced, to the point that we're sending reserves and the National Guard to do our fighting for us.


It wouldn't be the country paying a living wage it would be the American Corp, Nike. I would think that Vietnam and the other countries where Nike has their plants would love to have their people make more money. Also, you have the GOP to thank for the continuous erosion of our military. Also, we have been using the National Guard and the reserves starting back in 1990 with Desert Shield and Desert Storm thanks to President Bush and Dick Cheney. We know the rest of the story and how well that turned out.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/.../dec/23/rep-paul-ryan-defends-cuts-military-retirement/ - 174k - Cached - Similar pages
Dec 23, 2013 ... Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, defended controversial cuts to military retirement pay in the budget deal://
http://samuel-warde.com/2015/03/military-groups-slam-republican/ - 244k - Cached - Similar pages
Mar 10, 2015 ... It has been a winter of discontent, starting when Congress cut military retirement benefits before being pressured into reversing course


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> If we were to reinstate tariffs, it would go far toward bringing mfg. back to this country. If Nike, e.g., pays $1 for the labor in each pair of sneakers, and they had to pay a $6 or $7 import tax (to raise labor cost to the US minimum wage) to bring those sneaks into this country, they'd find it just as cheap to make them here.
> 
> This country was supported by tariffs alone until the income tax was finally adopted in 1913.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

This question is directed toward everyone. Can anyone suggest a way to get the people employed, short of dropping minimum wage to 10¢ an hour? Not 100 people, not 1,000, but all of the unemployed? I can't think of any other way to bring back the jobs, other than tariffs. Maybe, I'm just stuck on tariffs. Suggestions, please.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Hey, there it is: something we agree on!


It happens, once in a while. :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't think anyone advocates "reneging" on trade agreements, but there must be a way to negotiate them away. And there's already an imbalance in tariffs. China has a high tariff on American-made cars but we have none, or almost none, on Chinese cars. Not that anyone here would want to buy one.


That sounds like they're already in violation of the treaty???


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Lest we forget, it is not just manufacturing jobs that have gone overseas. Think of all the tech support that is done in other countries where wages that are below poverty level here are superior to anything else available there. It will not be until upper management jobs go overseas at 10¢ to the dollar that lower level 1%ers will start to wake up - too late - and the 1/2 or 1/4 of the upper 1% will be on their thrones laughing at all the rest of us.


I agree! But the masses probably won't even notice. They'll be too busy watching TV.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> One of the Waltons built a fine art gallery/museum somewhere in the backwoods of the Appalachians, I believe. But demanded preferential tax treatment for building there.


Yes, it's called Crystal Bridges Museum.

Here is a link. 
http://business.financialpost.com/news/retail-marketing/how-wal-marts-walton-family-holds-onto-their-billions#__federated=1

Crafty lawyers.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

lins said:


> I agree.
> 
> Sadly, its those who control the president and congress that have all the say.
> 
> There's no more 'we the people' it's corporations making wee people.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Just keep pebbles in your pockets, not bread crumbs!


We'll forge a new trail. :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Oh, this reminds me.
> 
> Russ Feingold is planning to run for the Senate seat he lost last time. He was the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act, and one of the few who voted against the Iraq war. And he's the Feingold in McCain-Feingold.
> 
> Wisconsinites, time to organize for him (before Joey and the Yarnlady organize against him).


I know nothing about him. I'll have to do some reading. If he voted against the patriot act and the Iraq war, I like what I know, so far.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> There are still some newspapers that try to bring corruption to light. Read the Star Ledger www.nj.com to see the sorts of information and discourse presented by columnists such as Paul Mulshine and Tom Moran. I am sure there are other such newspapers that try to make their readership aware of issues that affect all our lives and promote discourse and critical thinking.
> 
> If you know of others, let's make one another aware so we can keep up to date, write to editors, and support one another's free press.


I'm not sure when I'll find time, but I'll check them out. Thanks!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> It is somewhat encouraging that the spying on citizens by the government is being questioned, and that its effectiveness is being questioned. The article http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-infighting-over-nsa-surveillance-program-renewal/ presented some thought provoking discourse. Interesting to see who took which position.


I wish that I thought there was any chance, that spying on citizens would end. They'll probably change the wording, and assure the people that the spying will stop, all while they take advantage of loopholes in the law, to continue. I don't believe that the spying will stop.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> It is more "the further demise of the dollar". Our politicians have been selling our nation's soul bit by bit.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: 
I agree! Thank you for correcting me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> It was my understanding (maybe I read about it in Krugman's column) that the dollar is being kept artificially high at the request of some European countries. If it were lower, so that people in other countries could afford to buy American-made stuff, unemployment might get even lower.


This doesn't make sense to me. Was he suggesting that our government does not want to lower unemployment?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I think you're mistaken. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation includes huge donations from Warren Buffet.
> 
> Here is a statement from them directly.
> 
> ...


Are you aware that India is bringing a lawsuit against Gates, for testing vaccines on children without obtaining informed consent? Many children have become ill, and at least seven have died. India's supreme court is investigating.

Furthermore, the Gates foundation is vaccinating children in India using the oral polio vaccine. The oral polio vaccine is a live virus and is known to cause polio. It has been banned in the US since 2000. The CDC acknowledged that it causes polio, that's why it was banned. After vaccinating Indian children, nearly 48,000 of them have come down with polio.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I watched a speech when we were in Alberta from Bill Gates, he stated absolutely that Warren Buffet was involved with his charities. I have also listened and read what Buffett has to say, and I believe he is not if favor of what is happening
> with the l%.


He IS the 1%. He could inspire change if he wanted to.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> CNN- Waco Texas had a bad motorcycle gang fight today - 9 Bikers killed and over a hundred bikers arrested. They are concerned that there are many bikers on the road heading toward Waco. I guess two of the major gangs (including the largest outlaw gang) were meeting to sort out some problems and someone started shooting. The police got involved and it sounds as if it was a real fire fight. Sounds like a real mess. The Sheriff was just interviewed and said t hey were 'ready' for any further problems. Sounds like a gunfight at the OK corral. One of the gangs were the Banditos which are world wide and the biggest group. Some of the announcers wondered why any other group would take them on. Comments, anyone?


I heard about it on the news, but I don't know much about it. What I heard, said that they'd made plans over the internet. So, I'm just wondering why the NSA didn't warn the authorities.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I so agree. We can't live our lives saying woe is me and everything is hopeless. We must take action and not leave it for others to do. There is so much that can be done and "WE" not someone else must do it. Get off our duffs and get politically active if you aren't already. That is where change begins at the grassroots level.
> FDR's First Inaugural Address: I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.


Thanks Cheeks for reminding us of better times. Let us hope that courage and fairness will rule again.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I would like to know what the Koch's and the Walton's do as far as charitable foundations. The Gate's and Buffett put their money back into doing good for people world wide. I don't see that level of giving on the right. Correct me if I am wrong.


One of the Koch's "modestly" saved the State Theatre in Lincoln Center and had the name changed to his. That went thru my mind when I decided to leave NYC.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> So, why do you think that the newscasters spend more time talking about Angelina Jolie, than trade deficits or inflation or unemployment or the national debt or any number of important issues???


Because the people they're talking to don't give a hoot for trade deficits or inflation because they don't understand those things. Unemployment they understand, but there's not much they can add to the discussion. Angelina Jolie is much prettier than the national debt.

Really, for many years I've thought that television has caused enormous damage to the thinking habits of this country. When 24/7 entertainment came into our homes, most people stopped thinking altogether. The major industry in this country is entertainment+sports. Sure, the 1% will take advantage of it, but I doubt that they were involved when David Sarnoff and William Paley started broadcasting. It was the people themselves who gave up using their brains, because it was easier and more fun.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> It wouldn't be the country paying a living wage it would be the American Corp, Nike. I would think that Vietnam and the other countries where Nike has their plants would love to have their people make more money. Also, you have the GOP to thank for the continuous erosion of our military. Also, we have been using the National Guard and the reserves starting back in 1990 with Desert Shield and Desert Storm thanks to President Bush and Dick Cheney. We know the rest of the story and how well that turned out.
> 
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/.../dec/23/rep-paul-ryan-defends-cuts-military-retirement/ - 174k - Cached - Similar pages
> Dec 23, 2013 ... Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, defended controversial cuts to military retirement pay in the budget deal://
> ...


First, I believe that if our government passed a law that required Nike to pay their overseas employees more, they would leave the US, and register in another country, like lots of other corporations have already done.

Second, it makes no difference who is ultimately responsible for cutting the military. The point I was making is that we're in no condition to defend ourselves, as our military is already spread too thinly.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As long as we're tied to the world's economy, corporations win and people lose. The 1% LOVE a global economy. It allows them to suck the life out of every country, at the same time. Simplistic answers are often best, and always better, than no answers at all.


I don't agree - simplistic answers need the will, and sometimes there are no answers. Either simplistic or more involved answers still require a way to fix them and that is where we would have to start.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I so agree. We can't live our lives saying woe is me and everything is hopeless. We must take action and not leave it for others to do. There is so much that can be done and "WE" not someone else must do it. Get off our duffs and get politically active if you aren't already. That is where change begins at the grassroots level.
> FDR's First Inaugural Address: I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.


I agree with you Cheeky -- the United States has shown that
if you can get people to work together, nothing can stop you. I agree also that fear is something you have faced before and have overcome. When it comes right down to it I think the Americans WILL pull together but the question is, what will it take to convince them that it is the only answer. The main one that comes to me is that average person has to get
involved - I mean those that don't vote and just follow along without really thinking of the consequences. I think if you reach them you guys can do anything.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Because the people they're talking to don't give a hoot for trade deficits or inflation because they don't understand those things. Unemployment they understand, but there's not much they can add to the discussion. Angelina Jolie is much prettier than the national debt.
> 
> Really, for many years I've thought that television has caused enormous damage to the thinking habits of this country. When 24/7 entertainment came into our homes, most people stopped thinking altogether. The major industry in this country is entertainment+sports. Sure, the 1% will take advantage of it, but I doubt that they were involved when David Sarnoff and William Paley started broadcasting. It was the people themselves who gave up using their brains, because it was easier and more fun.


I agree with most of what you're saying. But I believe that television has been used to brainwash and lull the masses. Read about Edward Bernays, nephew of Sigmond Freud and the father of propaganda. 
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I'm not surprised when the definitions of words change, over time. Why, just look up the word "gay", if you want proof.
> 
> Anyone can say that a republic IS a democracy, BUT the major difference lies in the fact that in a democracy, the majority rules. The rights of the individual are sacrificed for the many. In a republic, the rights of the individual are preserved and laws are passed to protect the safety of the people, not to control the people.


I don't see that being done.

The meaning of the word hasn't changed, but the right has been going after it for years now, trying to make it sound like something bad. It doesn't mean "majority rule" except in small groups, where it sometimes ends up as tyranny. It simply means "government of, by, and for the people," and this can be carried out in many ways. A republic is one of them, and I don't believe that a republic is necessarily democratic. Once you elect people to represent you, you give them the wherewithal to do as they please, and now they're speaking for hundreds of thousands who don't necessarily agree with them.

What's changed is that, though this country was founded as a democracy, the people have lost a lot of their power. And don't forget that all Communist countries have called themselves People's Republics.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Good night, everyone.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> When I referred to the dems, I was thinking of clinton and NAFTA as well. I worry about the blind passage of this treaty. obama wants to fast track it. If he succeeds, no one will be allowed to change any part of it, not the congress nor the senate.
> 
> But, now that I think about it, if they fast track the bill, ALL of them can claim that it wasn't their fault. So, I think they'll fast track it.


This worries me, too. But so far the only people trying to fight it are liberals like Elizabeth Warren.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Interesting thought, and it would be great, except that I can't think of any countries that would allow us to dictate a minimum wage.
> 
> I don't know the state of Canada's military, but ours has been drastically reduced, to the point that we're sending reserves and the National Guard to do our fighting for us.


We don't have a military which is on par with yours. Never have had in recent years. However when push comes to shove we do well. We are not interested in being thought of as a World power with all it's problems. We don't have the 
population, and we are not quick to make war like decisions. Just my opinion.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I'm not hurt when people express an opinion. It's the personal attacks that sting.


Like when I call you multi-Grandma? (Remember the Octomom? Whatever happened to her and those poor octuplets?)


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Like when I call you multi-Grandma? (Remember the Octomom? Whatever happened to her and those poor octuplets?)


I haven't heard about her for years. She really was a weird one. Those poor little ones.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I would like to know what the Koch's and the Walton's do as far as charitable foundations. The Gate's and Buffett put their money back into doing good for people world wide. I don't see that level of giving on the right. Correct me if I am wrong.


David Koch gives a lot of money to cultural organizations. I guess museums and the opera count as doing good for people, at least in New York, which is the world, anyway. :roll:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> I so agree. We can't live our lives saying woe is me and everything is hopeless. We must take action and not leave it for others to do. There is so much that can be done and "WE" not someone else must do it. Get off our duffs and get politically active if you aren't already. That is where change begins at the grassroots level.
> FDR's First Inaugural Address: I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.


I often wonder how a man who grew up in great wealth came to think the way he did. Kennedy, too.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> It happens, once in a while. :lol:


To tell you the truth, I agree with you on a lot more than I agree with my husband. Never a dull moment in the Purls household.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Oops.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> That sounds like they're already in violation of the treaty???


No, I think it's done by agreement. "You lend us lots of money, and we'll allow you to charge lots of money for our cars."


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree! But the masses probably won't even notice. They'll be too busy watching TV.


Once again we agree. This is more than I can stand. :?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> This doesn't make sense to me. Was he suggesting that our government does not want to lower unemployment?


No, he was saying that if the dollar is high relative to other currencies, our exports are too expensive for people in other countries to buy, which results in lower demand for our goods and therefore less work. If the dollar were at its natural level (don't ask me how that's determined), our goods would be more affordable elsewhere, etc. Hence more work for our workers.

China has been artificially keeping its currency low, and there have been complaints from other countries, but China, being an 800-pound gorilla, does what it wants. This is why I can't understand the push to keep the dollar at a high value.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree with most of what you're saying. But I believe that television has been used to brainwash and lull the masses. Read about Edward Bernays, nephew of Sigmond Freud and the father of propaganda.
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays


I know about Bernays. Another uncle was a very famous mathematician (if the word "famous" can be applied to mathematicians). Creepy kind of guy, but a lot of his stuff worked, to the detriment of us all.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Good night, everyone.


Have a good rest. I'm sure you need it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> We don't have a military which is on par with yours. Never have had in recent years. However when push comes to shove we do well. We are not interested in being thought of as a World power with all it's problems. We don't have the
> population, and we are not quick to make war like decisions. Just my opinion.


I can't remember who said it, though I just read it yesterday, but someone said that Canada was like a very nice apartment with a meth lab on the floor below.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Are you aware that India is bringing a lawsuit against Gates, for testing vaccines on children without obtaining informed consent? Many children have become ill, and at least seven have died. India's supreme court is investigating.
> 
> Furthermore, the Gates foundation is vaccinating children in India using the oral polio vaccine. The oral polio vaccine is a live virus and is known to cause polio. It has been banned in the US since 2000. The CDC acknowledged that it causes polio, that's why it was banned. After vaccinating Indian children, nearly 48,000 of them have come down with polio.


BILL GATES VACCINATIONS IN AFRICA  ANTIVACCINE HATRED
2015/04/07 THE ORIGINAL SKEPTICAL RAPTOR 728 COMMENTS
The antivaccination cult really despises Bill Gates vaccinations in Africa. Not that he actually gives the vaccines, his foundation supports vaccinating kids in Africa, so that they have a better chance to survive.

One of the worlds leading sponsors of vaccine research and bringing healthcare (including vaccinations) to underdeveloped countries is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, located in Seattle, Washington.

There is nothing more admirable and moral than a person who has built incredible wealth, and then decides to give it back to the world in a way that cannot be measure monetarily. Bill Gates foundation is working to eradicate polio and HIV in countries where they are the some of the leading causes of death.

Of course, the Foundations support of vaccinations has caused it to be the target of the vaccine denialism movement. These attacks border on the vicious and insanehere are the worst of the worst:

Natural News, the faux science website, promoted one of the most pseudoscientific lunatics on the planet, Mike Adams, pushes the frightening news that Gates Foundation partner forces vaccines on Malawian children at gunpoint, arrests parents. And then theres a blog, that insists that vaccines cause autism (no it doesnt), has this outrageous headline: 131 African Children Vaccinated at Gunpoint  Do Bill Gates and Paul Offit Approve? So, is this true? Well, every article about these vaccinations done at gunpoint referred to this article. Its been pulled, for unknown reasons, probably because it was found to be inaccurate. It has not been replaced by any other article. And theres no other article out there (other than the usual vaccine denialist websites repeating the same nonsensical myth) that substantiates this story. It was probably some police protecting the healthcare workers, but absent any other reliable evidence (and repeating the same myth is not evidence), it is nothing.
Another antivaccination group is pushing the story that Gates is at fault for 47,500 paralysis cases after polio vaccine in India. However, the CDC has reported that there have been no cases of polio in India since 2011, compared to the 741 case in 2009. The paralysis cases were identified as non polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis, which can result from any number of non-polio viruses or bacterium. In this case, non-polio enteroviruses were identified as the cause, and not polio that resulted from the vaccines themselves. In fact, as I discussed before, polio vaccines may spontaneously recombine in the wild, and can be transmitted to other humans. However, in India with a population of 1.2 billion people, there have only been a few cases of actual polio from recombination events. If it were widespread, wed see millions of cases, but we dont. Debunked.
Ugandas Children are Dying! Are Pharmaceutical Trials to Blame? Its a mysterious disease, called Nodding Disease, which the anti-vaxxers immediately blame on vaccine trials (sponsored by Gates of course). Because those same anti-vaxxers have access to massive scientific laboratories staffed with huge numbers of scientists and medical professionals they were able to uncover this cause immediately. Well, actually they dont. Real scientists are unsure of the cause, but they are running real clinical trials, providing real medical care, and are attempting to uncover the real cause. Thats science.
Bill Gates says vaccines can help reduce world population. And its Natural News at it again with Quote Mining. What Gates actually said was that the birth rate drops naturally because survival rate of children INCREASES from vaccines! Saving children is precisely what vaccines are supposed to do.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> We don't have a military which is on par with yours. Never have had in recent years. However when push comes to shove we do well. We are not interested in being thought of as a World power with all it's problems. We don't have the
> population, and we are not quick to make war like decisions. Just my opinion.


I found it; it was Robin Williams.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I often wonder how a man who grew up in great wealth came to think the way he did. Kennedy, too.


Just goes to show not all the wealthy are heartless. Some of them really want to leave the world a better place.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Just goes to show not all the wealthy are heartless. Some of them really want to leave the world a better place.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I found it; it was Robin Williams.


So true. :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> I watched a speech when we were in Alberta from Bill Gates, he stated absolutely that Warren Buffet was involved with his charities. I have also listened and read what Buffett has to say, and I believe he is not if favor of what is happening
> with the l%.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Agreed.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

IMHO simplistic answers never solve complex questions.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As long as we're tied to the world's economy, corporations win and people lose. The 1% LOVE a global economy. It allows them to suck the life out of every country, at the same time. Simplistic answers are often best, and always better, than no answers at all.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Personally, I favor optimism.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, call me a pessimist, negative Nell or stupid or ignorant. Our system of government has proven itself. And the American people are apathetic and ignorant. Most, only care about earning a paycheck and sitting in front of the boob tube. Unless and until the American people get informed and involved, I don't hold out much hope.
> 
> I agree that we have the intelligence to fix things, but the passion is lacking. Most people don't even know there's a problem and many don't care, as long as they get theirs.
> 
> IMO, it's conversations like these that will wake people up. We need to take these discussions and pass them along. Like..."say, do you know what I heard ?..." We need to get people talking and wake up that passion in them. Unless people understand and care, the future will be bleak.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hey, I live in Arizona home of the First Gunfight at the OK Corral. In these parts we say let em fight and stay out of their way. You'll notice Sheriff Joe didn't show up.



Designer1234 said:


> CNN- Waco Texas had a bad motorcycle gang fight today - 9 Bikers killed and over a hundred bikers arrested. They are concerned that there are many bikers on the road heading toward Waco. I guess two of the major gangs (including the largest outlaw gang) were meeting to sort out some problems and someone started shooting. The police got involved and it sounds as if it was a real fire fight. Sounds like a real mess. The Sheriff was just interviewed and said t hey were 'ready' for any further problems. Sounds like a gunfight at the OK corral. One of the gangs were the Banditos which are world wide and the biggest group. Some of the announcers wondered why any other group would take them on. Comments, anyone?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you for reminding us all of one of the most inspiring and optimistic quotes ever made about the state of the USA.



Cheeky Blighter said:


> I so agree. We can't live our lives saying woe is me and everything is hopeless. We must take action and not leave it for others to do. There is so much that can be done and "WE" not someone else must do it. Get off our duffs and get politically active if you aren't already. That is where change begins at the grassroots level.
> FDR's First Inaugural Address: I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itselfnameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'd tell him to take his art and put it somewhere the sun don't shine. (And I love art.)



DGreen said:


> One of the Waltons built a fine art gallery/museum somewhere in the backwoods of the Appalachians, I believe. But demanded preferential tax treatment for building there.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Attracting higher wage positions by concentrating on having the best education system in the word and by making Associate Technical Degrees made available at no cost, and higher education affordable without crushing debt.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> This question is directed toward everyone. Can anyone suggest a way to get the people employed, short of dropping minimum wage to 10¢ an hour? Not 100 people, not 1,000, but all of the unemployed? I can't think of any other way to bring back the jobs, other than tariffs. Maybe, I'm just stuck on tariffs. Suggestions, please.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

He also fought (and lost) trying to institute campaign reform.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I know nothing about him. I'll have to do some reading. If he voted against the patriot act and the Iraq war, I like what I know, so far.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm not saying the surveillance is right, but we are currently at very high risk of terror attacks by 'Lone Wolf Terrorists.' My question is, should this effect our position and how?



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I wish that I thought there was any chance, that spying on citizens would end. They'll probably change the wording, and assure the people that the spying will stop, all while they take advantage of loopholes in the law, to continue. I don't believe that the spying will stop.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> No, he was saying that if the dollar is high relative to other currencies, our exports are too expensive for people in other countries to buy, which results in lower demand for our goods and therefore less work. If the dollar were at its natural level (don't ask me how that's determined), our goods would be more affordable elsewhere, etc. Hence more work for our workers.
> 
> China has been artificially keeping its currency low, and there have been complaints from other countries, but China, being an 800-pound gorilla, does what it wants. This is why I can't understand the push to keep the dollar at a high value.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you Cheeky.



Cheeky Blighter said:


> BILL GATES VACCINATIONS IN AFRICA  ANTIVACCINE HATRED
> 2015/04/07 THE ORIGINAL SKEPTICAL RAPTOR 728 COMMENTS
> The antivaccination cult really despises Bill Gates vaccinations in Africa. Not that he actually gives the vaccines, his foundation supports vaccinating kids in Africa, so that they have a better chance to survive.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks Purl. Robin Williams, thank you also.



Poor Purl said:


> I found it; it was Robin Williams.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Like when I call you multi-Grandma? (Remember the Octomom? Whatever happened to her and those poor octuplets?)


She seems to have carved a new life for herself. Porn star, welfare cheat and fraud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadya_Suleman

Summer 2012, Suleman appeared in theadult film Octomom Home Alone produced by Wicked Pictures. The film is solely of Nadya Suleman in solo scenes with the aid of sex toys; there are no male actors. The film was released on June 20, 2012

She has also begun work as an adult entertainer dancing in men's clubs.

She released a single called "Sexy Party" with Adam Barta in September, and caused a controversy when he was seen holding her breasts surrounded by crucifixes on a bed on the compact disc artwork. She claimed she was inspired by the work of Madonna.

http://www.tmz.com/2014/07/14/octomom-cops-plea-welfare-fraud-masturbation-video-nadya-suleman/

Nadya Suleman was facing 3 felonies for failing to disclose around $25K -- mostly from her sex tape/masturbation video.

If you want to you can read more:

http://www.tmz.com/2014/07/14/octomom-cops-plea-welfare-fraud-masturbation-video-nadya-suleman/#ixzz3aZ6a4Zrr


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> Is anyone else really annoyed by the mainsream media's amnesia regarding the run-up to the Iraq war?
> 
> The Iraq war wasn't a mistake. Bushco WANTED the war with Iraq ... so they Cherry-picked the intel they wanted and ignored the rest.
> 
> ...


Yes.

Agree.

Agree.

Agree.

Agree.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> BILL GATES VACCINATIONS IN AFRICA  ANTIVACCINE HATRED
> 2015/04/07 THE ORIGINAL SKEPTICAL RAPTOR 728 COMMENTS
> The antivaccination cult really despises Bill Gates vaccinations in Africa. Not that he actually gives the vaccines, his foundation supports vaccinating kids in Africa, so that they have a better chance to survive.
> 
> ...


THANK YOU, Cheeky.

Another example of the lies told and believed by the anti-vaxxers. Repeat it often enough and it becomes "truth," just like the lie that vaccines cause autism. Pseudo science passing for evidence. And for those who would equate what Gates and Buffet do with their wealth with what the Kochs do with theirs, a handy talking point.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Personally I agree with your assessment.



Lilith-Frasier said:


> Is anyone else really annoyed by the mainsream media's amnesia regarding the run-up to the Iraq war?
> 
> The Iraq war wasn't a mistake. Bushco WANTED the war with Iraq ... so they Cherry-picked the intel they wanted and ignored the rest.
> 
> ...


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree! But the masses probably won't even notice. They'll be too busy watching TV.


With marijuana being legalized they won't even need TV. They will be stoned out of their skulls.

Saw a segment on CBS this morning about the businesses manufacturing marijuana products like candy and cookies. Not quite bringing back the sorts of jobs we need.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I wish that I thought there was any chance, that spying on citizens would end. They'll probably change the wording, and assure the people that the spying will stop, all while they take advantage of loopholes in the law, to continue. I don't believe that the spying will stop.


Kim Komando's column in today's Gannett newspapers showed how to remove some of the spying features on various cell phones. She also warned that companies like Amazon and Verizon were working to develop tracking programs that were harder to get rid of.

Possibly one of the few ways to keep one's product research private is to use public access computers at the library where you don't have to provide personal information to log on.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Simplistic answers are often best, and always better, than no answers at all.


Really?

The simple answer to 9/11 was to invade Iraq. Trillions of dollars later, at the cost of thousands of American lives and quite literally millions of lives in the mid-East, we now recognize that simplistic answer as a disaster of epic proportions.

The simplistic answer to our energy needs? Fracking of natural gas (after all, we have the technology) and the planned fracking for oil that is destroying our water. Never mind the horror it represents for people living near fracking sites, the toxic chemicals that are being dumped into our aquifers can NEVER be remedied and represents an environmental disaster for future generations. There is no such thing as "clean" recovery, so instead of investing in alternative energy which represents a more complex solution, we go with the easy, simplistic one. Certainly NOT better than doing nothing.

The simplistic answer to drug use? Jail 'em. Get tough on drugs, start a war on them and spend untold billions of dollars to punish users. Of course, this heavy hammer has landed most heavily on people of color and has criminalized them to the point that we have, for all intents and purposes, created a new type of slave. Way to go, America!

The simplistic answer to our crumbling infrastructure? Pass NO NEW TAXES to pay for public safety. The bill is coming due, people, and we WILL pay not only with dollars but in lives and economic disruption.

What these simplistic answers have in common is a complete and utter disregard for the predictable consequences of our actions or lack thereof. Simple answers play well as sound bites in political discussions but fall short in reality.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> With marijuana being legalized they won't even need TV. They will be stoned out of their skulls.
> 
> Saw a segment on CBS this morning about the businesses manufacturing marijuana products like candy and cookies. Not quite bringing back the sorts of jobs we need.


Those who use marijuana will use it; those who don't, won't. Legalization is far and away a better answer than spending massive amounts of money to stamp out something that can't be stamped out. Legalization has been a huge economic boon for the tax collectors. It has helped those with medical needs in fantastic ways.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

damemary said:


> Personally, I favor optimism.


Pragmatically, hope for the best but prepare for the worst.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Really?
> 
> The simple answer to 9/11 was to invade Iraq. Trillions of dollars later, at the cost of thousands of American lives and quite literally millions of lives in the mid-East, we now recognize that simplistic answer as a disaster of epic proportions.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Excellent examples. Bravo.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

If anyone out there thinks abortion is not a violent, cold, calculated murder, then watch silent scream. Or watch a video of a real live abortion as I have!!! I guarantee, you will finally agree that abortion is murder!! Chris. Dallas oregon


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> If anyone out there thinks abortion is not a violent, cold, calculated murder, then watch silent scream. Or watch a video of a real live abortion as I have!!! I guarantee, you will finally agree that abortion is murder!! Chris. Dallas oregon


What is the relevance of your comment to this conversation? If you want to grind that axe, go over to D&P. You'll find plenty of friends there.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> If anyone out there thinks abortion is not a violent, cold, calculated murder, then watch silent scream. Or watch a video of a real live abortion as I have!!! I guarantee, you will finally agree that abortion is murder!! Chris. Dallas oregon


Looking at your posts it appears you are another user who refuses to use the "quote reply" function. What IS IT with you people?

(Of course, I don't expect a reply. Another new troll out to irritate.)


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I have Jesus to back me up!!! Who do you have?? And I have plenty of godly friends already, thanks!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> I have Jesus to back me up!!! Who do you have?? And I have plenty of godly friends already, thanks!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


Hello, Joey. Bored this morning?


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

One so called troll as you put it! To another!! I'm new, so I didn't quite know where exactly to put my replies!!!! Diddo Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

No, but I can see you are!!!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> One so called troll as you put it! To another!! I'm new, so I didn't quite know where exactly to put my replies!!!! Diddo Chris. Dallas,oregon


If you really want to know where to put your replies, you can stick them where the sun don't shine.

Looks like they have a new tactic going, Ladies. Lots of "new" users trolling our site. I say we return the favor. So easy to get their little christian minds in an uproar of shock and outrage.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> I have Jesus to back me up!!! Who do you have?? And I have plenty of godly friends already, thanks!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


Jesus wants you to use the quote button because it shows ignorance if you don't.

Isn't he watching your every move?


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> If you really want to know where to put your replies, you can stick them where the sun don't shine.
> 
> Looks like they have a new tactic going, Ladies. Lots of "new" users trolling our site. I say we return the favor. So easy to get their little christian minds in an uproar of shock and outrage.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> Jesus wants you to use the quote button because it shows ignorance if you don't.
> 
> Isn't he watching your every move?


It's not ignorance, it's deliberately intended to annoy.

I checked joey's responses under the user list and quite coincidentally, she is posting to D&P within seconds of posting to this thread. I'm thinking gork is really joey. The topic of her first post is quite revealing, as well.

I do believe there is an organized effort afoot, since all the "new" trolls refuse to use the "quote reply" and our requests that they do so has given them leverage. I can hear the witches cackling now.

Perhaps we should return the favor.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> I can't stick it where the sun don't shine! Its already up yours!! If anyone is trolling our site its definitely you! Miss green! I'm not outraged at all! But rest assured, I'll be reporting you and your ugly backbiting posts to the head of kp!!!! Chris. Dallas,Oregon.


Jesus is watching you post nasty things here...tsk, tsk. 
He doesn't think youre being very christian like.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> I can't stick it where the sun don't shine! Its already up yours!! If anyone is trolling our site its definitely you! Miss green! I'm not outraged at all! But rest assured, I'll be reporting you and your ugly backbiting posts to the head of kp!!!! Chris. Dallas,Oregon.


I'm definitely not posting to D&P, since I never read your drivel. Your imagination is getting the best of you. Better get out your tinfoil hat and calm down.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> I can't stick it where the sun don't shine! Its already up yours!! If anyone is trolling our site its definitely you! Miss green! I'm not outraged at all! But rest assured, I'll be reporting you and your ugly backbiting posts to the head of kp!!!! Chris. Dallas,Oregon.


"our" site?

Which one would that be?

Odd, too, that you're too new to know where to post but are already threatening to report people.

Your attempt at a disguise is an epic fail.

On second thought, I think gork may be Knit Crazy, based on her use of punctuation and general inability to communicate intelligently.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It's not ignorance, it's deliberately intended to annoy.
> 
> I checked joey's responses under the user list and quite coincidentally, she is posting to D&P within seconds of posting to this thread. I'm thinking gork is really joey. The topic of her first post is quite revealing, as well.
> 
> ...


Idiots stirring the caldron. What a bunch losers. 
They have evil brains, inward vision, they're two faced, petty and lack any ability to think for themselves.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I'm not joey!!!!!! Whoever your joey is!!!!! I'm Chris!! And I really actually don't know exactly know the correct place to put replays!! And if you were any kind of a lady you would tell me as I am new!! Instead of trying to insult me and back bite!!!! As that is not what this forum is for!! And I apologize if I've offended you!!! Let's start over!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> I'm not joey!!!!!! Whoever your joey is!!!!! I'm Chris!! And I really actually don't know exactly know the correct place to put replays!! And if you were any kind of a lady you would tell me as I am new!! Instead of trying to insult me and back bite!!!! As that is not what this forum is for!! And I apologize if I've offended you!!! Let's start over!! Chris. Dallas,oregon


Definitely Knit Crazy.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I'm not the one who started the nasties!!! Even as Christians, we have the right to defend ourselves!!! I merely gave my opinion on abortion, and was attacked!!! Chris. Dallas oregon


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> One so called troll as you put it! To another!! I'm new, so I didn't quite know where exactly to put my replies!!!! Diddo Chris. Dallas,oregon


You joined today!! Ya' right.
Are you really that stupid??? What's wrong with you??
Go knit something and grow up.

Your Jesus doesn't like devious people, does he? 
He's watching you like a hawk.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> I'm not the one who started the nasties!!! Even as Christians, we have the right to defend ourselves!!! I merely gave my opinion on abortion, and was attacked!!! Chris. Dallas oregon


The topic being discussed had nothing to do with abortion. If you want to start a discussion on that, start a different thread. Your post was a transparent attack intended to provoke.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

You still haven't told me who joey is?? Why not,sweetie????I can prove who I am!!! Chris. Dallas oregon


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> You still haven't told me who joey is?? Why not,sweetie????I can prove who I am!!! Chris. Dallas oregon


Isn't it a sin to lie? 
The gates of heaven are getting further away...


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

No! I'm crochet crazy!!!! Lol. Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> No! I'm crochet crazy!!!! Lol. Chris. Dallas,oregon


Janeway - that's my third guess and I think I'm right this time.

"Oh, Joey, I love you! You are one of my best friends."

There's your answer to "Who is joey" from the D&P thread.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

It was the other way around dear!!! You attacked first and I'm not playing your nasty brainless game anymore!!! Haven't you got some laundry to do or something miss green.??? Hateful, in Arizona!!!!and I won't satisfy your hate mongering mind with any more spars! So you're wasting your time with any more evil comments! They won't be read!!! Chris


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Prove!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm lying!!! You numb skull!!!! The gates of heaven are getting further away from you!! Yes!!!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> It was the other way around dear!!! You attacked first and I'm not playing your nasty brainless game anymore!!! Haven't you got some laundry to do or something miss green.??? Hateful, in Arizona!!!!and I won't satisfy your hate mongering mind with any more spars! So you're wasting your time with any more evil comments! They won't be read!!! Chris


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Prove!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm lying!!! You numb skull!!!! The gates of heaven are getting further away from you!! Yes!!!


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

You're the crazy one!!!! You're Satan incarnate!!!!! I don't knit, I crochet, thanks!!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

A rose is a rose by any other name. None of the trolls sign name and place of origin. I believe Chris is Chris but that is the least of the matter. Chris - many of the posters here are pro-choice and have been for decades. We are never going to change our minds. Please post your anti-abortion stuff elsewhere and donate your tunisian crochet hooks to the women who will try to self abort.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

SQM said:


> A rose is a rose by any other name. None of the trolls sign name and place of origin. I believe Chris is Chris but that is the least of the matter. Chris - many of the posters here are pro-choice and have been for decades. We are never going to change our minds. Please post your anti-abortion stuff elsewhere and donate your tunisian crochet hooks to the women who will try to self abort.


Note the extreme overuse of the exclamation point. Typical Janeway. I don't think there is a Chris.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Wow! You're handsome lines!!! So you really are a transgender!!! Congradulations lins.!!!! Have a nice day. Good bye. I won't be watching for any more of your comments, so don't waste any more of your time. He,she!!!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> You're the crazy one!!!! You're Satan incarnate!!!!! I don't knit, I crochet, thanks!!


Ooooh! Be careful. Talk with the devil and you could end up in big trouble.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Wow! You're handsome lines!!! So you really are a transgender!!! Congradulations lins.!!!! Have a nice day. Good bye. I won't be watching for any more of your comments, so don't waste any more of your time. He,she!!!


Now I'm a transgender? Is that a new word you learned today? 
Is that the best you can do? 
Your posts are so ignorant that all I can say is...


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Ooooh! Be careful. Talk with the devil and you could end up in big trouble.


I think that's the end of her today...she's getting nervous about how her Jesus is judging her.

What a stupid cow.

Have a good day DGreen. I'm going outside to pull some weeds!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> Sqm,I feel sorry for you!! And your unwanted murdered precious babies! Its just unfortunate you weren't the one aborted by the tunision needle!!! One less sicko in the world!


So you DO support abortion? Interesting.

There's some hate for you.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Oh, I'm sorry, lins! No new word, just fact!! Go to hell!! How original! But that is the best you can do though!!!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Sqm,I feel sorry for you!! And your unwanted murdered precious babies! Its just unfortunate you weren't the one aborted by the tunision needle!!! One less sicko in the world!


What a mean and nasty mentality you have, your deity will get you for this post.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

No, what's good for the babies, is good for you


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> I think that's the end of her today...she's getting nervous about how her Jesus is judging her.
> 
> What a stupid cow.
> 
> Have a good day DGreen. I'm going outside to pull some weeds!


We'll see. Interesting how her level of vitriol has escalated this morning, so I'm sure she won't be able to contain her desire to read and respond further with her anger and liberal sprinkling of !!!!!!!!!!'s.

For those of you who wonder how extreme conservatives can vote against their own interests, I present the words and attitude of gork as evidence. The extreme hatred of liberal ideas overrides the ability to make intelligent judgments.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

You're the one with the mean, nasty mentality sweetie!! But I love you anyway lins


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Oh, I'm sorry, lins! No new word, just fact!! Go to hell!! How original! But that is the best you can do though!!!


Typical Republican putting anything out with no facts...lol.

I want to ask you something. 
Why would you use the word transgender as a slur?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> What a mean and nasty mentality you have, your deity will get you for this post.


I disagree. Gork's god is cheering her on, don't you know. It is the responsibility of god-fearin' christians to speak out against all that bad stuff - abortion, homosexuality, transgender-ism, etc. because they want to be sure they are not punished for those sins. The rapture is coming and it's because god is flat-out PISSED at us liberals who are ruining the world.

The Westborough Baptist Church mentality from the comfort of the computer chair. At least the WBC wackos have the courage to show their faces in public for what they believe. Gork is hiding behind a pseudonym for a pseudonym.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> IMHO simplistic answers never solve complex questions.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Attracting higher wage positions by concentrating on having the best education system in the word and by making Associate Technical Degrees made available at no cost, and higher education affordable without crushing debt.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Attracting higher wage positions by concentrating on having the best education system in the word and by making Associate Technical Degrees made available at no cost, and higher education affordable without crushing debt.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> BILL GATES VACCINATIONS IN AFRICA  ANTIVACCINE HATRED
> 2015/04/07 THE ORIGINAL SKEPTICAL RAPTOR 728 COMMENTS
> The antivaccination cult really despises Bill Gates vaccinations in Africa. Not that he actually gives the vaccines, his foundation supports vaccinating kids in Africa, so that they have a better chance to survive.
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting. It's frightening to see how ignorance can damage good works.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Thanks for posting. It's frightening to see how ignorance can damage good works.


Not ignorance. Deliberate lies.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> She seems to have carved a new life for herself. Porn star, welfare cheat and fraud.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadya_Suleman
> 
> ...


Thanks, Eve. I think I'll skip the tmz coverage.

I wonder whether she's been allowed to keep all her children. My hope is that she grew tired of them and they've all been adopted by less crazy people, but that probably hasn't happened.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I disagree. Gork's god is cheering her on, don't you know. It is the responsibility of god-fearin' christians to speak out against all that bad stuff - abortion, homosexuality, transgender-ism, etc. because they want to be sure they are not punished for those sins. The rapture is coming and it's because god is flat-out PISSED at us liberals who are ruining the world.
> 
> The Westborough Baptist Church mentality from the comfort of the computer chair. At least the WBC wackos have the courage to show their faces in public for what they believe. Gork is hiding behind a pseudonym for a pseudonym.


I hope she has no children.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> Is anyone else really annoyed by the mainsream media's amnesia regarding the run-up to the Iraq war?
> 
> The Iraq war wasn't a mistake. Bushco WANTED the war with Iraq ... so they Cherry-picked the intel they wanted and ignored the rest.
> 
> ...


The intelligence community was given the shaft when 9/11 happened. Briefings sent to the WH were ignored; Condoleeza Rice was especially to blame for that. The FBI had real information but somehow it got swept under the rug. I'm not in favor of an American Stasi, but if they have something to offer, at least use it.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It's not ignorance, it's deliberately intended to annoy.
> 
> I checked joey's responses under the user list and quite coincidentally, she is posting to D&P within seconds of posting to this thread. I'm thinking gork is really joey. The topic of her first post is quite revealing, as well.
> 
> ...


*No, no, no, do not play their little games, ignore them.* Please leave the idiots alone to stew in their own mess. They only want you to retaliate so they can lodge a complaint that they are being harassed. What is their agenda, to kick every one off the site who does not follow their idiotic line of thinking? Do they want KP to be a place where they and they alone can contribute? No, just ignore the idiots they are only succeeding in making themselves look bigger fools.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> I hope she has no children.


I agree!

Hope your weed-pulling is satisfying. I personally don't like the task (too hard on my old joints) but I do admit to taking a great deal of satisfaction in the one-on-one approach to pulling the weeds up with roots dangling. Too bad we can't do that with the extremists among us.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Really?
> 
> The simple answer to 9/11 was to invade Iraq. Trillions of dollars later, at the cost of thousands of American lives and quite literally millions of lives in the mid-East, we now recognize that simplistic answer as a disaster of epic proportions.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> *No, no, no, do not play their little games, ignore them.* Please leave the idiots alone to stew in their own mess. They only want you to retaliate so they can lodge a complaint that they are being harassed. What is their agenda, to kick every one off the site who does not follow their idiotic line of thinking? Do they want KP to be a place where they and they alone can contribute? No, just ignore the idiots they are only succeeding in making themselves look bigger fools.


You are right, of course.

But, Eve, the vision of those flaming crazies having heart palpitations over criticism of their religion/attitudes/beliefs/god/prejudices gives me such satisfaction.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

lins said:


> Jesus wants you to use the quote button because it shows ignorance if you don't.
> 
> Isn't he watching your every move?


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> You're the one with the mean, nasty mentality sweetie!! But I love you anyway lins


You love me????
You really are a nut case.

I would never like, let alone love, someone as mean and narrow minded as you. 
By your behaviour here, just dropping in and posting nasty things out of nowhere and changing ID proves that you're not a very nice person.

It's devious behaviour.


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I still cannot find my second set of car and house keys and I am sure that is also President Obama's fault.


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> "our" site?
> 
> Which one would that be?
> 
> ...


I agree. She wouldn't use her "real" name to post here, but she'd hide behind someone like gork.

Joeysomma at least has the courage, and the decency, to take responsibility for her posts.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Really?
> 
> The simple answer to 9/11 was to invade Iraq. Trillions of dollars later, at the cost of thousands of American lives and quite literally millions of lives in the mid-East, we now recognize that simplistic answer as a disaster of epic proportions.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> gork15 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not joey!!!!!! Whoever your joey is!!!!! I'm Chris!! And I really actually don't know exactly know the correct place to put replays!! And if you were any kind of a lady you would tell me as I am new!! Instead of trying to insult me and back bite!!!! As that is not what this forum is for!! And I apologize if I've offended you!!! Let's start over!! Chris. Dallas,oregon
> ...


Maybe not. She seems to be sincere, or at least lost and in need of help. Knit Crazy isn't sincere, ever, though she's also in need of help, just of a different kind.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

gork15 said:


> No! I'm crochet crazy!!!! Lol. Chris. Dallas,oregon


I'll bite (I looked it up, and there really is Dallas, Oregon).

To respond to a specific message, go to the Reply, Quote Reply, Report Issue buttons and press the second one. That will quote the original message and allow you to reply to it.

As for the right place to discuss abortion, you can find a thread where it's being discussed or you can start your own. Right now on this thread we've been talking about politics and what money does to it. You're welcome to join on that topic, but you can't post something irrelevant and meant to annoy and then complain that we haven't welcomed you with open arms.

You will be better off joining Denim and Pearls. They all have the same answer to every question that you have.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> A rose is a rose by any other name. None of the trolls sign name and place of origin. I believe Chris is Chris but that is the least of the matter. Chris - many of the posters here are pro-choice and have been for decades. We are never going to change our minds. Please post your anti-abortion stuff elsewhere and donate your tunisian crochet hooks to the women who will try to self abort.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: minus the yucky ending.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Ooooh! Be careful. Talk with the devil and you could end up in big trouble.


Hey, watch it. That my Pops you're talking about. :twisted:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Not ignorance. Deliberate lies.


Which the ignorant accept as truth.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

lins said:


> You love me????
> You really are a nut case.
> 
> I would never like, let alone love, someone as mean and narrow minded as you.
> ...


She's real. She signs her real name and the town she lives in, and such a person exists. You can look up her address. (Or, if you were a 9-year-old boy, you could look up her dress. Kill me before I say more.)


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

No one is going to change anyone else's opinion at this point. Agree to disagree and that is the end of topic here. As mentioned, there are other threads that welcome your views.



DGreen said:


> What is the relevance of your comment to this conversation? If you want to grind that axe, go over to D&P. You'll find plenty of friends there.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

gork15 "New" member. Less than 50 posts. Fighting constantly. Sounds like some favorite with scores to settle. IGNORE completely.



DGreen said:


> Looking at your posts it appears you are another user who refuses to use the "quote reply" function. What IS IT with you people?
> 
> (Of course, I don't expect a reply. Another new troll out to irritate.)


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Dgreen,I love you! Have a beautiful warm sunny, Arizona day Chris. Dallas Oregon. No more sparring


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I changed no id you idiot!! I gave my name and town because I have nothing to hide! And I don't need your love or approval


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> Jesus wants you to use the quote button because it shows ignorance if you don't.
> 
> Isn't he watching your every move?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Seems fair to me that we need to go troll D&P and those of us who don't believe in god need to challenge THEIR constant bible thumping, praying and praising god for the evil THAT represents. After all, Joey comes here and never contributes anything but attacks.
> 
> Fair is fair.


Bible thumpers should open their bibles and read what it actually says about abortion (Numbers 5:11-31) and the status of women (Numbers 31:1-54), the fetus, marriage, and the sanctity of life. It is neither a science textbook nor a medical textbook. No one knows who wrote it.

Cliff's Notes ... women are property. All women. The penalty for rape is pay the woman's father and marry the woman. If the woman becomes pregnant and the husband decides his wife needs an abortion, she can be forced to drink poison to expel the fetus. She has no choice in the matter.
Polygamy was the law. As well as concubines, sex slaves, servants, and women taken as prizes in battle as long as they were virgins and children. Men, boys, and babies were killed, along with pregnant and married women.

The fetus was not an individual entity, but part of the mother's body, considered as nothing but water, until after its first breath, and not a person until the age of 5.

According to Genesis, the Earth was a snow globe. The 2 naked people in the garden and the serpent ? God lied, the serpent told the truth.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Dangrktty said:


> Bible thumpers should open their bibles and read what it actually says about abortion (Numbers 5:11-31) and the status of women (Numbers 31:1-54), the fetus, marriage, and the sanctity of life. It is neither a science textbook nor a medical textbook. No one knows who wrote it.
> 
> Cliff's Notes ... women are property. All women. The penalty for rape is pay the woman's father and marry the woman. If the woman becomes pregnant and the husband decides his wife needs an abortion, she can be forced to drink poison to expel the fetus. She has no choice in the matter.
> Polygamy was the law. As well as concubines, sex slaves, servants, and women taken as prizes in battle as long as they were virgins and children. Men, boys, and babies were killed, along with pregnant and married women.
> ...


Excellent!

The extremists won't be happy until we return to being the property of males or under the absolute control of males.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> Isn't it a sin to lie?
> The gates of heaven are getting further away...


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Watch out for lightning bolts.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

SQM said:


> A rose is a rose by any other name. None of the trolls sign name and place of origin. I believe Chris is Chris but that is the least of the matter. Chris - many of the posters here are pro-choice and have been for decades. We are never going to change our minds. Please post your anti-abortion stuff elsewhere and donate your tunisian crochet hooks to the women who will try to self abort.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

What's next? Your mother wears Army boots?



lins said:


> Now I'm a transgender? Is that a new word you learned today?
> Is that the best you can do?
> Your posts are so ignorant that all I can say is...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think doctors who provide in vitro fertilization services should have some ethics and/or common sense. How many people decide they must have another child/children when they don't have the financial ability to care for these children? There are thousands of children ready to adopt. Not good enough gene match? Arrogance.

Perhaps these doctors should be sued. At least it would put some lawyers in jobs.



Poor Purl said:


> Thanks, Eve. I think I'll skip the tmz coverage.
> 
> I wonder whether she's been allowed to keep all her children. My hope is that she grew tired of them and they've all been adopted by less crazy people, but that probably hasn't happened.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for the reminder.



EveMCooke said:


> *No, no, no, do not play their little games, ignore them.* Please leave the idiots alone to stew in their own mess. They only want you to retaliate so they can lodge a complaint that they are being harassed. What is their agenda, to kick every one off the site who does not follow their idiotic line of thinking? Do they want KP to be a place where they and they alone can contribute? No, just ignore the idiots they are only succeeding in making themselves look bigger fools.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> I agree!
> 
> Hope your weed-pulling is satisfying. I personally don't like the task (too hard on my old joints) but I do admit to taking a great deal of satisfaction in the one-on-one approach to pulling the weeds up with roots dangling. Too bad we can't do that with the extremists among us.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Hey, watch it. That my Pops you're talking about. :twisted:


 :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Really?
> 
> The simple answer to 9/11 was to invade Iraq. Trillions of dollars later, at the cost of thousands of American lives and quite literally millions of lives in the mid-East, we now recognize that simplistic answer as a disaster of epic proportions.
> 
> ...


Excellent!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> She's real. She signs her real name and the town she lives in, and such a person exists. You can look up her address. (Or, if you were a 9-year-old boy, you could look up her dress. Kill me before I say more.)


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: I love it when you get going like this. Lunch will wait.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you for the interpretation.



Dangrktty said:


> Bible thumpers should open their bibles and read what it actually says about abortion (Numbers 5:11-31) and the status of women (Numbers 31:1-54), the fetus, marriage, and the sanctity of life. It is neither a science textbook nor a medical textbook. No one knows who wrote it.
> 
> Cliff's Notes ... women are property. All women. The penalty for rape is pay the woman's father and marry the woman. If the woman becomes pregnant and the husband decides his wife needs an abortion, she can be forced to drink poison to expel the fetus. She has no choice in the matter.
> Polygamy was the law. As well as concubines, sex slaves, servants, and women taken as prizes in battle as long as they were virgins and children. Men, boys, and babies were killed, along with pregnant and married women.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

How ya gonna keep em down on the farm after they've seen Pair-eee?



DGreen said:


> Excellent!
> 
> The extremists won't be happy until we return to being the property of males or under the absolute control of males.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

damemary said:


> How ya gonna keep em down on the farm after they've seen Pair-eee?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

This woman has seen Pair-eee and they'll play hell getting me back under the thumb of the male gender. Like, they'll have to kill me first!


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

You're one sick puppy! You know nothing about what the bible says. You're the spawn of the Antichrist!


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Amen sister, Chris. Dallas,oregon


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Interesting thought, and it would be great, except that I can't think of any countries that would allow us to dictate a minimum wage.
> 
> I don't know the state of Canada's military, but ours has been drastically reduced, to the point that we're sending reserves and the National Guard to do our fighting for us.


Our military has not been "drastically" reduced. We spend more on it than than a good many countries combined. What _is_ reduced is the number of people signing up for it. If we jump into more wars the draft will have to be brought back in order to up enlistments.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Poor purl is correct. You're sick


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Excellent!
> 
> The extremists won't be happy until we return to being the property of males or under the absolute control of males.


I don't understand why anyone would sign up for all of that by voting against their best interests.
Sometimes things go horribly wrong, and abortion is the best choice for the mother and the fetus. I can't make choices for other people, glad I don't have to! Not my job, none of my business.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Dangrktty said:


> I don't understand why anyone would sign up for all of that by voting against their best interests.
> Sometimes things go horribly wrong, and abortion is the best choice for the mother and the fetus. I can't make choices for other people, glad I don't have to! Not my job, none of my business.


Maybe they like "being taken care of" by the patriarchy and have been so brainwashed by religion they have lost their ability to think for themselves.

Too bad when the patriarchy fails them (as it always does) and they find themselves unprepared for real life.

Other people's bodies and what they do with them is not my concern, so long as it is THEIR decision. We ALL should be concerned about female genital mutilation - wonder why those so-called christian zealots don't take up THAT cause.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'd guess the maiming would be vice versa. Me too.

I love and trust my husband completely but we both consider us to be partners in all we do.



DGreen said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> This woman has seen Pair-eee and they'll play hell getting me back under the thumb of the male gender. Like, they'll have to kill me first!


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Maybe they like "being taken care of" by the patriarchy and have been so brainwashed by religion they have lost their ability to think for themselves.
> 
> Too bad when the patriarchy fails them (as it always does) and they find themselves unprepared for real life.
> 
> Other people's bodies and what they do with them is not my concern, so long as it is THEIR decision. We ALL should be concerned about female genital mutilation - wonder why those so-called christian zealots don't take up THAT cause.


My best guess... selective stupidity. If it happens to other people, far away, it isn't 'real' to them. Like starvation, poverty, disease, and genocide in war-torn countries, racism in the US. If Bill O'Reilly is ranting about it, or Glen Beck is whining about, it just has to be important, and their viewers are whipped into a frenzy. If there is nothing to be upset about, they can just invent something, like the persecution of Christians in the US and the war on Christmas, neither of which actually exist.

Abortion is a choice we can all vote on , and it gives some people an opportunity to feel arrogant and superior towards the perceived transgressions of others...
" Their sins are big, my sins are little, therefore they should suffer and repent, let me help punish them"...
Translation...
"How dare that woman have a sex drive and defile her body with sexual acts outside of marriage"...

There is a correlation between those who are pro life and at the same time anti child.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

gork15 said:


> I can't stick it where the sun don't shine! Its already up yours!! If anyone is trolling our site its definitely you! Miss green! I'm not outraged at all! But rest assured, I'll be reporting you and your ugly backbiting posts to the head of kp!!!! Chris. Dallas,Oregon.


How about staying true to what you claim are your ideals and act nicely? You are showing a mean spirited perspective to fellow human beings.

If you want others to respect you and your beliefs you need to behave like a person worthy of respect, not an attack machine.

Unless you are terminally stupid you should realize that the tactics of you and some of the people suspected of being your cohorts tend to alienate people rather than win them to your cause. In the process it makes your cause unappealing and undermines kind and pleasant people who share your basic tenets but who have the grace and classiness not to try to force something down people's throats.

Do you really think Jesus, were he alive today, would support someone who behaves the way you have in your brief cameo on this topic? Step back and see yourself the way others perceive you then see the light and truly walk in Jesus' humble and gracious footsteps.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

DGreen said:


> It's not ignorance, it's deliberately intended to annoy.
> 
> I checked joey's responses under the user list and quite coincidentally, she is posting to D&P within seconds of posting to this thread. I'm thinking gork is really joey. The topic of her first post is quite revealing, as well.
> 
> ...


Do we really want to waste our time dissing trolls when we have so many interesting and informative comments to share with one another? These people will never change their minds or what passes for such to enter in any sort of meaningful dialog. They are so unrepresentative of most Christians with whom I interact in real life and thinking conservatives who debate, not use their perspective as a club.

And aren't they really like small children who try to get Mama's attention when she is busy with things that need to be done? The ones who always whine when you are on the phone, who try to break down the bathroom door when you are in the shower? Let them have their tantrums and let me present you with a fine useful Yiddish phrase. Gerecht Meshugener. It is sort of patting little Igor on the head and saying "there, there" while rolling your eyes.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

gork15 said:


> Prove!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm lying!!! You numb skull!!!! The gates of heaven are getting further away from you!! Yes!!!


Please don't get your foot stuck in the floor like Rumpelstiltskin as you stamp your foot like a two year old having a tantrum. If you want to exchange ideas like a real grown up people will be happy to enter into a dialog with you.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I agree!
> 
> Hope your weed-pulling is satisfying. I personally don't like the task (too hard on my old joints) but I do admit to taking a great deal of satisfaction in the one-on-one approach to pulling the weeds up with roots dangling. Too bad we can't do that with the extremists among us.


Have you tried pouring some cheap vinegar on the weeds and waiting a day or two until they wilt away to clip or pull them?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> Have you tried pouring some cheap vinegar on the weeds and waiting a day or two until they wilt away to clip or pull them?


Soaking rain is also a help. We've had that lately.

I have to be in the mood to pull weeds. Waiting for the vinegar to work I would find plenty of reasons to NOT go back to that task. Short attention span, I guess, at least when it comes to manual labor.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

damemary said:


> What's next? Your mother wears Army boots?


Neener, neener.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Our military has not been "drastically" reduced. We spend more on it than than a good many countries combined. What _is_ reduced is the number of people signing up for it. If we jump into more wars the draft will have to be brought back in order to up enlistments.


And if the draft is reintroduced, it needs a careful review of exemptions so children of the rich and famous don't automatically get a bye at the expense of children of the poor and anonymous.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

MarilynKnits said:


> Please don't get your foot stuck in the floor like Rumpelstiltskin as you stamp your foot like a two year old having a tantrum. If you want to exchange ideas like a real grown up people will be happy to enter into a dialog with you.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Hi, marilynknits, I'd love to chat with you! However, I am not who d green from Arizona calls me constantly! Joey!!! I'm Chris! Please write to me. Chris


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Dangrktty said:


> My best guess... selective stupidity. If it happens to other people, far away, it isn't 'real' to them. Like starvation, poverty, disease, and genocide in war-torn countries, racism in the US. If Bill O'Reilly is ranting about it, or Glen Beck is whining about, it just has to be important, and their viewers are whipped into a frenzy. If there is nothing to be upset about, they can just invent something, like the persecution of Christians in the US and the war on Christmas, neither of which actually exist.
> 
> Abortion is a choice we can all vote on , and it gives some people an opportunity to feel arrogant and superior towards the perceived transgressions of others...
> " Their sins are big, my sins are little, therefore they should suffer and repent, let me help punish them"...
> ...


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

You make no sense!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Soaking rain is also a help. We've had that lately.
> 
> I have to be in the mood to pull weeds. Waiting for the vinegar to work I would find plenty of reasons to NOT go back to that task. Short attention span, I guess, at least when it comes to manual labor.


I hear you, D. It's been steadily raining and storming here. My garden is riddled with weeds, and it is too wet to till or even weed. The only thing that I have planted are my containers. Send some of that Arizona heat and sunshine up this way! The vinegar does a great job on dandelions here.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

lins said:


> What a mean and nasty mentality you have, your deity will get you for this post.


Saint Finger will meet her at the pearly gates, lins. No worries. She won't get in.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Between The Dame, Patty, and Purl somehow I am getting a subliminal urge to make deviled eggs.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Between The Dame, Patty, and Purl somehow I am getting a subliminal urge to make deviled eggs.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I wish that I thought there was any chance, that spying on citizens would end. They'll probably change the wording, and assure the people that the spying will stop, all while they take advantage of loopholes in the law, to continue. I don't believe that the spying will stop.


Knitter from Nebraska
why does spying worry you so much? It could never change my Life but most likely make all of us safer.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Dangrktty said:


> My best guess... selective stupidity. If it happens to other people, far away, it isn't 'real' to them. Like starvation, poverty, disease, and genocide in war-torn countries, racism in the US. If Bill O'Reilly is ranting about it, or Glen Beck is whining about, it just has to be important, and their viewers are whipped into a frenzy. If there is nothing to be upset about, they can just invent something, like the persecution of Christians in the US and the war on Christmas, neither of which actually exist.
> 
> Abortion is a choice we can all vote on , and it gives some people an opportunity to feel arrogant and superior towards the perceived transgressions of others...
> " Their sins are big, my sins are little, therefore they should suffer and repent, let me help punish them"...
> ...


Dangrktty
Thank you. Well said.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> why does spying worry you so much? It could never change my Life but most likely make all of us safer.


Being spied on gives you a creepy feeling like when you were little and some little boy kept trying to look up your skirt. That being said, it is the price to be paid for the government to keep vigilant in the face of ongoing attempts to undermine and steal the security and freedom we have in our daily lives by hostile entities. It is an imperfect world and we have to weigh what is more or less dangerous to our well being and safety.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Oh,go soak your head!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> why does spying worry you so much? It could never change my Life but most likely make all of us safer.


Because those who would use that information against you work from a presumption of guilt. We who have not been unfairly prosecuted don't have a frame of reference for this, but we must protect our privacy and freedom (and that means all of us) from invasive and illegal search and seizure.

There have been LOTS of reports in the media - written by former policemen - that many carry an extra gun and a baggie of drugs with them so they can plant incriminating evidence on people or in their cars. Don't think for a moment the police would hesitate to use information - even the most innocent - against you.

For an even better explanation, please read the article in this link. Not the NSA, but close enough to be frightening, especially knowing that the NSA already has loads of information on you, what you read, where you go, what you do on-line.

http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/tutorials/never-talk-to-the-police-without-an-attorney/


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

gork15 said:


> Sqm,I feel sorry for you!! And your unwanted murdered precious babies! Its just unfortunate you weren't the one aborted by the tunision needle!!! One less sicko in the world!


Actually after having moved halfway across the country, I agree with you. "Won't you be my neighbor?"


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Saint Finger will meet her at the pearly gates, lins. No worries. She won't get in.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Dangrktty said:


> Bible thumpers should open their bibles and read what it actually says about abortion (Numbers 5:11-31) and the status of women (Numbers 31:1-54), the fetus, marriage, and the sanctity of life. It is neither a science textbook nor a medical textbook. No one knows who wrote it.
> 
> Cliff's Notes ... women are property. All women. The penalty for rape is pay the woman's father and marry the woman. If the woman becomes pregnant and the husband decides his wife needs an abortion, she can be forced to drink poison to expel the fetus. She has no choice in the matter.
> Polygamy was the law. As well as concubines, sex slaves, servants, and women taken as prizes in battle as long as they were virgins and children. Men, boys, and babies were killed, along with pregnant and married women.
> ...


I think I'll disagree with the snow globe paragraph, but it's really time the bible-thumpers were shown what the Bible actually says. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

gork15 said:


> Poor purl is correct. You're sick


What? I never said anyone was sick.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Dangrktty said:


> My best guess... selective stupidity. If it happens to other people, far away, it isn't 'real' to them. Like starvation, poverty, disease, and genocide in war-torn countries, racism in the US. If Bill O'Reilly is ranting about it, or Glen Beck is whining about, it just has to be important, and their viewers are whipped into a frenzy. If there is nothing to be upset about, they can just invent something, like the persecution of Christians in the US and the war on Christmas, neither of which actually exist.
> 
> Abortion is a choice we can all vote on , and it gives some people an opportunity to feel arrogant and superior towards the perceived transgressions of others...
> " Their sins are big, my sins are little, therefore they should suffer and repent, let me help punish them"...
> ...


And anti-sex, as you point out. Which also explains why they don't care about female genital mutilation, whose entire point is to do away with women's enjoyment of sex.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Have you tried pouring some cheap vinegar on the weeds and waiting a day or two until they wilt away to clip or pull them?


And if it's dandelions you're getting rid of, there's a dressed salad waiting for you.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Wow! You're handsome lines!!! So you really are a transgender!!! Congradulations lins.!!!! Have a nice day. Good bye. I won't be watching for any more of your comments, so don't waste any more of your time. He,she!!!


You can't take it huh, gork15? 
Poor, silly, desperate fool that posts such nonsense and then can't take the criticism.

If I was a transgender I would be proud that I had the couarage to be myself in spite of hateful people like you. 
I would be thankful that I still had choices to be the person I really was, in spite of hateful people like you.
I would feel sorry for the ignorant and judgemenal that harbour hate, people like you.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

lins said:


> You can't take it huh, gork15?
> Poor, silly, desperate fool that posts such nonsense and then can't take the criticism.
> 
> If I was a transgender I would be proud that I had the couarage to be myself in spite of hateful people like you.
> ...


Well said Lins!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Well said Lins!


Thanks Designer1234.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> You're on a winding road alright! You sick fool. You're the one spewing hate, with all your hateful remarks. Yeah, I can take it lady. Don't write me again you ignorant idiot.I just wish you could put your money where your mouth is! We all know where that's at!


Well aren't you in a bad mood.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

lins said:


> You can't take it huh, gork15?
> Poor, silly, desperate fool that posts such nonsense and then can't take the criticism.
> 
> If I was a transgender I would be proud that I had the couarage to be myself in spite of hateful people like you.
> ...


I feel sorry for people who live in such homogeneous communities that they do not get the opportunity to meet people across the rainbow spectrum of races, religions, gender orientation, whatever differences are part of what makes each of us unique. I started out in a very sheltered narrow community but when I was 9 my dad got a job opportunity in a very multifaceted small town.

I learned quickly that there were more people who were different from me than were very like me. It didn't take long for me to learn to judge people by how decent or not they were regardless of other factors. I was blessed to have friends from various backgrounds and 70 years later I am still blessed to have had those precious friends, although too many of them are no longer on this side of the sod.

In my two careers I worked with people from all sorts of backgrounds who lived all sorts of personal lives. The lessons of getting along from my childhood served me well and again it was not who the basic person was but how the person acted and how we were able to work together that counted.

People who do not get to know people of other ethnicities and faiths and gender identities as just people with varying aspects of character are missing so much. You can't lump people under a label, we are all so different. Knowing people different from myself on a personal level has enriched my life unbelievably.

Time to get off my soap box.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

gork15 said:


> You're on a winding road alright! You sick fool. You're the one spewing hate, with all your hateful remarks. Yeah, I can take it lady. Don't write me again you ignorant idiot.I just wish you could put your money where your mouth is! We all know where that's at!


Charm will get you nowhere.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Gork is a dork.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> I feel sorry for people who live in such homogeneous communities that they do not get the opportunity to meet people across the rainbow spectrum of races, religions, gender orientation, whatever differences are part of what makes each of us unique. I started out in a very sheltered narrow community but when I was 9 my dad got a job opportunity in a very multifaceted small town.
> 
> I learned quickly that there were more people who were different from me than were very like me. It didn't take long for me to learn to judge people by how decent or not they were regardless of other factors. I was blessed to have friends from various backgrounds and 70 years later I am still blessed to have had those precious friends, although too many of them are no longer on this side of the sod.
> 
> ...


You are right, it is a shame that people don't get to experience people that are different than themselves, to be open and accepting.

There is a GE commercial that I love.





To me it says a lot. There are some really nice people out there, they make up for the haters.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Those who use marijuana will use it; those who don't, won't. Legalization is far and away a better answer than spending massive amounts of money to stamp out something that can't be stamped out. Legalization has been a huge economic boon for the tax collectors. It has helped those with medical needs in fantastic ways.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

lins said:


> You are right, it is a shame that people don't get to experience people that are different than themselves, to be open and accepting.
> 
> There is a GE commercial that I love.
> 
> ...


I like how that poor, depressed, shlumpy idea, with a little encouragement, becomes a Las Vegas showgirl.


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

lins said:


> You can't take it huh, gork15?
> Poor, silly, desperate fool that posts such nonsense and then can't take the criticism.
> 
> If I was a transgender I would be proud that I had the couarage to be myself in spite of hateful people like you.
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I feel sorry for people who live in such homogeneous communities that they do not get the opportunity to meet people across the rainbow spectrum of races, religions, gender orientation, whatever differences are part of what makes each of us unique. I started out in a very sheltered narrow community but when I was 9 my dad got a job opportunity in a very multifaceted small town.
> 
> I learned quickly that there were more people who were different from me than were very like me. It didn't take long for me to learn to judge people by how decent or not they were regardless of other factors. I was blessed to have friends from various backgrounds and 70 years later I am still blessed to have had those precious friends, although too many of them are no longer on this side of the sod.
> 
> ...


Bravo, well said! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I think doctors who provide in vitro fertilization services should have some ethics and/or common sense. How many people decide they must have another child/children when they don't have the financial ability to care for these children? There are thousands of children ready to adopt. Not good enough gene match? Arrogance.
> 
> Perhaps these doctors should be sued. At least it would put some lawyers in jobs.


I feel compelled to comment on this. I agree with you about doctors needing to have ethics. There is no reason EVER, to implant eight embryos into a woman. And in fact, Nadia Suleiman's fertility doctor lost his medical license. And IMO, the woman is insane. She couldn't even support the children she had, she had no business having eight more, and expecting others to care for them and support them. I also agree that people who cannot afford to support a child shouldn't be having in vitro.

BUT! I don't think you know what you're talking about, when you say there are thousands of children ready for adoption. Very few infants are available for adoption in this country. And the vast majority of older children who are available for adoption, are damaged in some way. Many are the offspring of drug addicts. Many are born with drugs in their systems. Some are the products of physical or sexual abuse. And as in my daughter's case, some are the victims of neglect (and the offspring of drug abusers).

Do you have the slightest idea of what it takes to raise these children? Can you imagine having a child who hates you and wants to kill you? Or one that starts fires? Or one that abuses other children? Or one that destroys everything? Or one who cuts themselves? Can you imagine dealing with trauma, EVERYDAY for the next 20 years? Can you imagine the expense of psychologists, psychiatrists, lawyers, and other interventions? I've lived some of these, and believe me, it's no picnic. Hard, doesn't begin to describe it. Not everyone is cut out for it. And some don't know that they are, until they're faced with it.

I don't blame people who choose fertility treatment. I don't judge them. And very few people who can afford fertility treatment, don't have the resources to provide for their children. Nadia Suleman was a nutcase and her doctor was, as well.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Shortened quote to save space.

KFN said:
BUT! I don't think you know what you're talking about, when you say there are thousands of children ready for adoption. Very few infants are available for adoption in this country. And the vast majority of older children who are available for adoption, are damaged in some way. Many are the offspring of drug addicts. Many are born with drugs in their systems. Some are the products of physical or sexual abuse. And as in my daughter's case, some are the victims of neglect (and the offspring of drug abusers).

Patty said:
This is exactly why I believe in a woman's right to choose.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> And if the draft is reintroduced, it needs a careful review of exemptions so children of the rich and famous don't automatically get a bye at the expense of children of the poor and anonymous.


I can guarantee you that if the draft were reinstated, and the children of the rich and famous WERE drafted, they would be placed safely behind the lines on desk duty. (Unless they wanted to be heroes.)


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I like how that poor, depressed, shlumpy idea, with a little encouragement, becomes a Las Vegas showgirl.


Lol...yeah.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I hear you, D. It's been steadily raining and storming here. My garden is riddled with weeds, and it is too wet to till or even weed. The only thing that I have planted are my containers. Send some of that Arizona heat and sunshine up this way! The vinegar does a great job on dandelions here.


Hubby got my raised beds tilled tonight. We only had a little rain on Sunday, so they were dry enough. But its started raining now, so I don't know when I'll be able to plant. Rain, rain, rain! I've had enough!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

SQM said:


> Gork is a dork.


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> why does spying worry you so much? It could never change my Life but most likely make all of us safer.


Because it's too much like Nazi Germany!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Being spied on gives you a creepy feeling like when you were little and some little boy kept trying to look up your skirt. That being said, it is the price to be paid for the government to keep vigilant in the face of ongoing attempts to undermine and steal the security and freedom we have in our daily lives by hostile entities. It is an imperfect world and we have to weigh what is more or less dangerous to our well being and safety.


I'll bet that's what hitler told the German citizens.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

SQM said:


> Gork is a dork.


I looked up GORK 
http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition

God Only Really Knows.
Isn't that fitting?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Because those who would use that information against you work from a presumption of guilt. We who have not been unfairly prosecuted don't have a frame of reference for this, but we must protect our privacy and freedom (and that means all of us) from invasive and illegal search and seizure.
> 
> There have been LOTS of reports in the media - written by former policemen - that many carry an extra gun and a baggie of drugs with them so they can plant incriminating evidence on people or in their cars. Don't think for a moment the police would hesitate to use information - even the most innocent - against you.
> 
> ...


Another good point!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> I looked up GORK
> http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition
> 
> God Only Really Knows.
> Isn't that fitting?


Fitting and telling.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

lins said:


> I looked up GORK
> http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition
> 
> God Only Really Knows.
> Isn't that fitting?


It is fitting for certain "Christians" here on KP. They can condemn, judge, and swear and tell someone that is too bad she wasn't aborted all in the name of God. Nauseating, isn't it?

Just as nauseating as this guy. He thinks rape is "God putting one into you."
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/02/west-virginia-republican-says-rape-can-be-beautiful-if-it-produces-a-child/comments/


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Fitting and telling.


 :thumbup:


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Same to ya!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Gork is a dork.


I don't believe that she's someone new. She knew exactly where to go to get the reaction she wanted.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> It is fitting for certain "Christians" here on KP. They can condemn, judge, and swear and tell someone that is too bad she wasn't aborted all in the name of God. Nauseating, isn't it?
> 
> Just as nauseating as this guy. He thinks rape is "God putting one into you."
> http://www.rawstory.com/2015/02/west-virginia-republican-says-rape-can-be-beautiful-if-it-produces-a-child/comments/


What a creep. Honestly, what century is he from?


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I don't believe that she's someone new. She knew exactly where to go to get the reaction she wanted.


I agree, 100%


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!


Ahh...so is that where you really live?


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I only said, what's good for the poor little baby, is good for you. What makes you so special?


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Is that a fact? I don't care what you believe.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Is that a fact? I don't care what you believe.


Why don't you go knit some presents or gifts?


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

Amen! Gork


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

lins said:


> What a creep. Honestly, what century is he from?


We have to do everything we can to get these psychos out of office. What woman in her right mind would vote for this pile of garbage?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

gork15 said:


> Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!


Earlier today you posted a message saying you loved me and pledged to stop sniping. Since then, I have not responded to your rather disturbing posts.

If you want to call me an idiot, go for it. But out of common courtesy, you might at least let people know what I said that was idiotic. Failure to do so makes YOU appear to be a moron and incapable of learning.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> We have to do everything we can to get these psychos out of office. What woman in her right mind would vote for this pile of garbage?


gork15?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Hubby got my raised beds tilled tonight. We only had a little rain on Sunday, so they were dry enough. But its started raining now, so I don't know when I'll be able to plant. Rain, rain, rain! I've had enough!


We were under a tornado warning Sunday night. By the time we grabbed the cats and flashlights and made our way downstairs, the warning had expired. It has been rainy with scattered severe storms. 
Glad to see you have something done!

PS Happy Belated Birthday


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

lins said:


> gork15?


Oh no! Don't tell me it can vote!!


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Oh no! Don't tell me it can vote!!


I doubt it, she can't even click on quote.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> We were under a tornado warning Sunday night. By the time we grabbed the cats and flashlights and made our way downstairs, the warning had expired. It has been rainy with scattered severe storms.
> Glad to see you have something done!
> 
> PS Happy Belated Birthday


Thank you, Patty! 
We haven't had any exciting weather, just rain. Love to watch storms.


----------



## gork15 (May 17, 2015)

I just wish I knew what you looked like! But I personally don't care what you think of me and no, I'm not dignifying any more of your posts with an answer.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

gork15 said:


> I just wish I knew what you looked like! But I personally don't care what you think of me and no, I'm not dignifying any more of your posts with an answer.


Nothing you've said yet, has been dignifying. Why start now?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Nothing you've said yet, has been dignifying. Why start now?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

gork15 said:


> Amen! Gork


Are you talking to yourself? Maybe you would like to take that conversation to another thread where you can have some privacy. :roll:


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Are you talking to yourself? Maybe you would like to take that conversation to another thread where you can have some privacy. :roll:


 :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cheeky Blighter (Nov 20, 2011)

:thumbup:


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> It is fitting for certain "Christians" here on KP. They can condemn, judge, and swear and tell someone that is too bad she wasn't aborted all in the name of God. Nauseating, isn't it?
> 
> Just as nauseating as this guy. He thinks rape is "God putting one into you."
> http://www.rawstory.com/2015/02/west-virginia-republican-says-rape-can-be-beautiful-if-it-produces-a-child/comments/


What is wrong with these people ? A gift from God? The German word for poison is 'das Gift'. And the woman's body can reject the sperm, just like a duck? Amazing.

Once again, if it does not happen to them, it is not real, and therefore unimportant. Rape is no big deal if it happens to a woman, and she should just accept this wonderful gift ?

My best friend's mother was the resulting baby of rape and incest in the 1930s, and it was not wonderful. She was not adopted by loving parents and knew she was the result of a violent crime.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> You can't take it huh, gork15?
> Poor, silly, desperate fool that posts such nonsense and then can't take the criticism.
> 
> If I was a transgender I would be proud that I had the couarage to be myself in spite of hateful people like you.
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Go lins.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> Well aren't you in a bad mood.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

SQM said:


> Gork is a dork.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :XD: :XD: :XD: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I understand what you're saying about the difficulties in adoption.

I'm coming at it from the point of why people feel they must have a biological child. Arrogance or pride? There are frequent problems with bio children too. Drug addiction. Autism. Learning disabilities. Life is like a box of chocolates.
You never know what you're gonna get. Forest Gump



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I feel compelled to comment on this. I agree with you about doctors needing to have ethics. There is no reason EVER, to implant eight embryos into a woman. And in fact, Nadia Suleiman's fertility doctor lost his medical license. And IMO, the woman is insane. She couldn't even support the children she had, she had no business having eight more, and expecting others to care for them and support them. I also agree that people who cannot afford to support a child shouldn't be having in vitro.
> 
> BUT! I don't think you know what you're talking about, when you say there are thousands of children ready for adoption. Very few infants are available for adoption in this country. And the vast majority of older children who are available for adoption, are damaged in some way. Many are the offspring of drug addicts. Many are born with drugs in their systems. Some are the products of physical or sexual abuse. And as in my daughter's case, some are the victims of neglect (and the offspring of drug abusers).
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

The list is much longer. Nearly every country in the world collects intelligence.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Because it's too much like Nazi Germany!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> I looked up GORK
> http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition
> 
> God Only Really Knows.
> Isn't that fitting?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Because it's too much like Nazi Germany!


And Communist East Germany.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Why don't you go knit some presents or gifts?


So you see how annoying they can get.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Cheeky Blighter said:


> Are you talking to yourself? Maybe you would like to take that conversation to another thread where you can have some privacy. :roll:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:  :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lins said:


> Ahh...so is that where you really live?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: Pason AZ is really spelled Payson AZ.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Why don't you go knit some presents or gifts?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

lins said:


> :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

DGreen said:


> Earlier today you posted a message saying you loved me and pledged to stop sniping. Since then, I have not responded to your rather disturbing posts.
> 
> If you want to call me an idiot, go for it. But out of common courtesy, you might at least let people know what I said that was idiotic. Failure to do so makes YOU appear to be a moron and incapable of learning.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And Russia, UK, France, etc. A long, long list.



Poor Purl said:


> And Communist East Germany.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> I question the obsession with IVF in the Christian community in particular.
> 
> It is literally throwing what THEY call 'babies' against a uterine wall as if it's a game of craps. Somehow suddenly those embryos have no more value than dice.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

lins said:


> I looked up GORK
> http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition
> 
> God Only Really Knows.
> Isn't that fitting?


This isn't pleasant but a 'GORK' in the medical profession is slang and can mean a person who is in a vegetative state.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!


So does Dallas, Oregan.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> This isn't pleasant but a 'GORK' in the medical profession is slang and can mean a person who is in a vegetative state.


If the definition fits.........


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> I question the obsession with IVF in the Christian community in particular.
> 
> It is literally throwing what THEY call 'babies' against a uterine wall as if it's a game of craps. Somehow suddenly those embryos have no more value than dice.
> 
> ...


Absolutely the truth.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> If the definition fits.........


I'll see if I can find a picture with someone expressing 'The Q Sign' which would embody the meaning.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I'll see if I can find a picture with someone expressing 'The Q Sign' which would embody the meaning.


This is as close as I could get:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> This is as close as I could get:


Sad but I picture the Dork as male or a female with too much testosterone.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Sad but I picture the Dork as male or a female with too much testosterone.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: O lordy! The visage in my mind's eye is hysterical!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Saint Finger will meet her at the pearly gates, lins. No worries. She won't get in.


But you just have to love the name she says is hers, the one in her signature line *Chris tanner*. Does she honestly think we are as stupid as she is.......Chris tanner.......Christian.......or Christianity. No, Chris tanner is not her real name just a nom de plume and she thinks she is so smart, so cute for thinking it up.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> I feel sorry for people who live in such homogeneous communities that they do not get the opportunity to meet people across the rainbow spectrum of races, religions, gender orientation, whatever differences are part of what makes each of us unique. I started out in a very sheltered narrow community but when I was 9 my dad got a job opportunity in a very multifaceted small town.
> 
> I learned quickly that there were more people who were different from me than were very like me. It didn't take long for me to learn to judge people by how decent or not they were regardless of other factors. I was blessed to have friends from various backgrounds and 70 years later I am still blessed to have had those precious friends, although too many of them are no longer on this side of the sod.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Well said. I have always found that people may be different to me but they are basically the same; good, honest, decent, hard working folk. They have the same basic needs as I do, they have the same basic goals as I do. I find I have much in common with many people. I guess this can be attributed to Australia's post war immigration drive when we welcomed people from so many nations, and some of us are still welcoming people from so many nations. I went to school with children who initially did not speak a word of English but they were soon great school mates. My father also worked as a cook in the migrant hostel about 2 km from where we lived, it was for single immigrant males. He was always introducing us to the different men who lived in the camp. But then I guess that is just part of being an Aussie. As the song says "We are one but we are many". Aussie Aussie Aussie oy oy oy.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

lins said:


> I looked up GORK
> http://slang.org/GORK-meaning-definition
> 
> God Only Really Knows.
> Isn't that fitting?


As I said in a previous post, she says her name is Chris Tanner. Well, Chris tanner.......Christian.......or Christianity. No, Chris tanner is not her real name just a nom de plume and she thinks she is so smart, so cute for thinking it up.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

gork15 said:


> Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!


Gork, aka Chris Tanner, or whatever. If all the village idiots in all the villages in all the world left their villages and formed their own village then in that village you would be the village idiot.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Oh no! Don't tell me it can vote!!


Even worse, it may be influencing other regarding their choice of votes.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

gork15 said:


> I just wish I knew what you looked like! But I personally don't care what you think of me and no, I'm not dignifying any more of your posts with an answer.


Is your real name Yesmin by any chance? You sure sound like her.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I understand what you're saying about the difficulties in adoption.
> 
> I'm coming at it from the point of why people feel they must have a biological child. Arrogance or pride? There are frequent problems with bio children too. Drug addiction. Autism. Learning disabilities. Life is like a box of chocolates.
> You never know what you're gonna get. Forest Gump


I am familiar with bio children as well. Remember... I have a son with Cerebral Palsy. But at least with bio children, you can be absolutely sure that they weren't exposed to drugs and alcohol, in the womb. From my own experiences, IMO raising a child with Cerebral Palsy was a walk in the park, compared to raising a drug baby who had been severely neglected.

I would be willing to bet my last dollar, that after someone has suffered through years of infertility, spent thousands of dollars and gone through humiliating treatments, they're not going to leave their baby sitting in a car seat, 24 hours a day. I would also be willing to bet that drug addicts are not the ones, going through fertility treatments.

I love my daughter! I would walk through fire, for her! But I'm not sure that I would recommend adopting a damaged child. It takes an incredible amount of strength and perseverance. Every day is a hard day. Every day, you question whether you can do it. It is a never ending sorrow.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> The list is much longer. Nearly every country in the world collects intelligence.


I have no problem with a government collecting intelligence on those who are suspected of a crime, or those suspected of having ties to terrorism. What I have a problem with, is a government who keeps on file in a computer, every phone call, every email, records of every purchase and everything else they can get their hands on, from law abiding citizens, going about their daily lives.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> And Communist East Germany.


Yup!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> I question the obsession with IVF in the Christian community in particular.
> 
> It is literally throwing what THEY call 'babies' against a uterine wall as if it's a game of craps. Somehow suddenly those embryos have no more value than dice.
> 
> ...


"obsession with IVF in the Christian community"? I think you made that up. Please document this statement.

I also challenge your statement, that it takes 1-3 years to adopt an infant in the US. It took us over two years to adopt a child that had been in our custody , for nearly two years, previous to filing for adoption. All you do, is wait. I also challenge the idea that infants are readily available for adoption. Whatever infants might have been available for adoption, languish in foster homes until parental rights can be terminated. That can take months or years. Then you're dealing with attachment issues. Why do you think people are willing to travel to China or Russia to adopt children? It's because our government has made adoption, an extremely difficult process. It is rare to be able to get an infant of any race, here in the US. Foster parents get the first stab at it. So, if you're willing to foster children, love them and lose them, for a few years first, you MIGHT be able to adopt an infant that comes up for adoption.

Talk to people who have actually adopted. Then, you might know what you're talking about.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> So you see how annoying they can get.


I was sending a subliminal message.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> Absolutely the truth.


Actually, it's not.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> As I said in a previous post, she says her name is Chris Tanner. Well, Chris tanner.......Christian.......or Christianity. No, Chris tanner is not her real name just a nom de plume and she thinks she is so smart, so cute for thinking it up.


She definately won't be someone that many look up to, unless of course their minds are as small as hers.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Actually, it's not.


I appreciate that you speak from your own experience with adoption but please don't tell me that adoption is an easy undertaking. It certainly is not in Australia and in many other countries in the world. I've included a link to an article by Deborah Lee Furness who is an adoption ambassador for Australia. Please read it. There are other populations in the world besides the population of the U.S.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/deborra-lee-furness-crusading-for-adoption-in-australia/story-fni0cx12-1227188224372?nk=933365408e9e5a7caa9d8618dcedf701


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Actually, it's not.


I've just re-read your message. You ARE saying that adoption is *not* easy so I'm sorry.


----------



## Leah C (Apr 30, 2015)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> "obsession with IVF in the Christian community"? I think you made that up. Please document this statement.
> 
> I also challenge your statement, that it takes 1-3 years to adopt an infant in the US. It took us over two years to adopt a child that had been in our custody , for nearly two years, previous to filing for adoption. All you do, is wait. I also challenge the idea that infants are readily available for adoption. Whatever infants might have been available for adoption, languish in foster homes until parental rights can be terminated. That can take months or years. Then you're dealing with attachment issues. Why do you think people are willing to travel to China or Russia to adopt children? It's because our government has made adoption, an extremely difficult process. It is rare to be able to get an infant of any race, here in the US. Foster parents get the first stab at it. So, if you're willing to foster children, love them and lose them, for a few years first, you MIGHT be able to adopt an infant that comes up for adoption.
> 
> Talk to people who have actually adopted. Then, you might know what you're talking about.


For the record, I think I'd probably be considered a member of the Christian community and I STRONGLY oppose IVF. It totally grates on me when people feel that Christians are trying to get as many babies born as possible. NO, that is not what pro-life means. It means keeping kids alive who already exist. Or at least that's what it means to me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I appreciate that you speak from your own experience with adoption but please don't tell me that adoption is an easy undertaking. It certainly is not in Australia and in many other countries in the world. I've included a link to an article by Deborah Lee Furness who is an adoption ambassador for Australia. Please read it. There are other populations in the world besides the population of the U.S.
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/deborra-lee-furness-crusading-for-adoption-in-australia/story-fni0cx12-1227188224372?nk=933365408e9e5a7caa9d8618dcedf701


It was "Lilith" who was portraying adoption as an easy undertaking, not I. I was saying the opposite. She thinks people should be prohibited from using IVF until they've tried to adopt. By then, they'd be old enough to be grandparents. Unless you're willing to take a damaged older child from the foster care system, it's very difficult to adopt here in the US.

And you agreed with her.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> I've just re-read your message. You ARE saying that adoption is *not* easy so I'm sorry.


I just saw this. Apology accepted.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Leah C said:


> For the record, I think I'd probably be considered a member of the Christian community and I STRONGLY oppose IVF. It totally grates on me when people feel that Christians are trying to get as many babies born as possible. NO, that is not what pro-life means. It means keeping kids alive who already exist. Or at least that's what it means to me.


 :thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Leah C said:


> For the record, I think I'd probably be considered a member of the Christian community and I STRONGLY oppose IVF. It totally grates on me when people feel that Christians are trying to get as many babies born as possible. NO, that is not what pro-life means. It means keeping kids alive who already exist. Or at least that's what it means to me.


It totally grates on me when Christians try to impose their beliefs on other people regarding pregnancy. None of your business what others do.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> And Russia, UK, France, etc. A long, long list.


Really, the UK, France, etc. are all spying on all their citizens? Granted, the UK has cameras all over, and Russia is where we would expect such spying, but surely nobody else has anything like the NSA's memory dumps.


----------



## Leah C (Apr 30, 2015)

DGreen said:


> It totally grates on me when Christians try to impose their beliefs on other people regarding pregnancy. None of your business what others do.


I don't think it's really the place to rehash this old argument, but please do stop to consider that most people think at least some of their beliefs should be imposed on others. Such as the belief that it's wrong to murder or steal. What bothers you is that you disagree with certain beliefs. And that's okay because I can almost guarantee that I disagree with some of yours as well.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks, Eve.



EveMCooke said:


> But you just have to love the name she says is hers, the one in her signature line *Chris tanner*. Does she honestly think we are as stupid as she is.......Chris tanner.......Christian.......or Christianity. No, Chris tanner is not her real name just a nom de plume and she thinks she is so smart, so cute for thinking it up.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> gork15 said:
> 
> 
> > Pason Arizona, only has one ignorant idiot!
> ...


I don't know about Payson, but I bet Dallas, Oregon has more than one ignorant idiot.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Well said. I have always found that people may be different to me but they are basically the same; good, honest, decent, hard working folk. They have the same basic needs as I do, they have the same basic goals as I do. I find I have much in common with many people. I guess this can be attributed to Australia's post war immigration drive when we welcomed people from so many nations, and some of us are still welcoming people from so many nations. I went to school with children who initially did not speak a word of English but they were soon great school mates. My father also worked as a cook in the migrant hostel about 2 km from where we lived, it was for single immigrant males. He was always introducing us to the different men who lived in the camp. But then I guess that is just part of being an Aussie. As the song says "We are one but we are many". Aussie Aussie Aussie oy oy oy.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Gork, aka Chris Tanner, or whatever. If all the village idiots in all the villages in all the world left their villages and formed their own village then in that village you would be the village idiot.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It totally grates on me when Christians try to impose their beliefs on other people regarding pregnancy. None of your business what others do.


She's not imposing anything on anyone. She's expressing her views, which you (and the rest of us) do, on a regular basis.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I have no problem with a government collecting intelligence on those who are suspected of a crime, or those suspected of having ties to terrorism. What I have a problem with, is a government who keeps on file in a computer, every phone call, every email, records of every purchase and everything else they can get their hands on, from law abiding citizens, going about their daily lives.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was sending a subliminal message.


Your liminal message was very clear. "Get outta here!"


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Really, the UK, France, etc. are all spying on all their citizens? Granted, the UK has cameras all over, and Russia is where we would expect such spying, but surely nobody else has anything like the NSA's memory dumps.


 :thumbup:

One more thing...IF this data collection is for the purpose of protecting us, they're failing. They knew, that the Fort Hood muslim was communicating with known terrorists beforehand, yet they did nothing to prevent the attack. They knew that the muslim in Oklahoma was communicating with terrorists before he cut off that woman's head. I'm sure there were other instances, I just can't think of any, right now.

And now, they're warning us to expect terrorist attacks on US soil. So, apparently, their data collection isn't protecting us at all, if it was ever meant to.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Your liminal message was very clear. "Get outta here!"


Well, nobody took the bait. I was quite surprised.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Leah C said:


> I don't think it's really the place to rehash this old argument, but please do stop to consider that most people think at least some of their beliefs should be imposed on others. Such as the belief that it's wrong to murder or steal. What bothers you is that you disagree with certain beliefs. And that's okay because I can almost guarantee that I disagree with some of yours as well.


"I don't think it's really the place to rehash this old argument"

YOU brought it up.

"most people think at least some of their beliefs should be imposed on others"

No, most people DO NOT think their beliefs should be imposed on others. I certainly don't think your beliefs, which are grounded in your christian faith, should be imposed on me or anyone else. When it comes to a matter of law, we ALL live by certain rules and it has nothing to do with your beliefs - it's the social contract we agree to. Things like stealing, murder, endangering others are against the law and while there may be a coincidental prohibition on those things and your beliefs, the law is NOT IN ANY WAY grounded in your particular faith.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> It's real, or at least there's a real Chris Tanner living in a real Dallas, Oregon.
> 
> See http://www.whitepages.com/name/Chris-A-Tanner/Dallas-OR/70uhki9


Brilliant sleuthing. Point to PP. And it seems like our Chris Tanner may be male. If so, point to Sloth.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> "I don't think it's really the place to rehash this old argument"
> 
> YOU brought it up.
> 
> ...


Very well expressed. People who have no internal moral center need to be told what to do. They seem to think nobody knows right from wrong without being told.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Brilliant sleuthing. Point to PP. And it seems like our Chris Tanner may be male. If so, point to Sloth.


It's brilliant to Google "Chris Tanner, Dallas, Oregon"? You should see me do mixture problems.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I am familiar with bio children as well. Remember... I have a son with Cerebral Palsy. But at least with bio children, you can be absolutely sure that they weren't exposed to drugs and alcohol, in the womb. From my own experiences, IMO raising a child with Cerebral Palsy was a walk in the park, compared to raising a drug baby who had been severely neglected.
> 
> I would be willing to bet my last dollar, that after someone has suffered through years of infertility, spent thousands of dollars and gone through humiliating treatments, they're not going to leave their baby sitting in a car seat, 24 hours a day. I would also be willing to bet that drug addicts are not the ones, going through fertility treatments.
> 
> I love my daughter! I would walk through fire, for her! But I'm not sure that I would recommend adopting a damaged child. It takes an incredible amount of strength and perseverance. Every day is a hard day. Every day, you question whether you can do it. It is a never ending sorrow.


I adopted a little girl too, when my youngest son was l0 years old. When we lost our daughter to SIDs we thought then that if we still felt the same way down the road we would.

It wasn't an easy road. I don't know if any of you have heard of Reactive Attachment disorder. We are close now but she was always distant from us and it was hurtful. A friend told me about RAD and it made sense which helped us deal with it.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> It's brilliant to Google "Chris Tanner, Dallas, Oregon"? You should see me do mixture problems.


Shucks I do mixture problems every day. I have to mix meds in "Dove's" food every day. Give us an example of a mixture problem and the first person who can solve it, besides PP, will get THREE points tonight. Give us an easy one if there are easy mixture problems.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Very well expressed. People who have no internal moral center need to be told what to do. They seem to think nobody knows right from wrong without being told.


Waiting for the claim that our constitution was based on the bible. Aaack!


----------



## Leah C (Apr 30, 2015)

DGreen said:


> "I don't think it's really the place to rehash this old argument"
> 
> YOU brought it up.
> 
> ...


Sorry if I sounded like I was trying to bring up the argument. I was just trying to clarify what seemed a common misunderstanding about some folks' beliefs.

You said, "When it comes to a matter of law, we ALL live by certain rules and it has nothing to do with your beliefs - it's the social contract we agree to." So my question is then, where do those certain rules come from? Do they pop out of the air? Or are they an approximation of the views (beliefs) of enough of the population that we have all decided it's worth enforcing them?

It's not a coincidence that laws align themselves with people's beliefs. We don't have laws against chewing gum or wearing purple shoes exactly because nobody (or almost nobody) believes that those things are wrong.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Leah C said:


> Sorry if I sounded like I was trying to bring up the argument. I was just trying to clarify what seemed a common misunderstanding about some folks' beliefs.
> 
> You said, "When it comes to a matter of law, we ALL live by certain rules and it has nothing to do with your beliefs - it's the social contract we agree to." So my question is then, where do those certain rules come from? Do they pop out of the air? Or are they an approximation of the views (beliefs) of enough of the population that we have all decided it's worth enforcing them?
> 
> It's not a coincidence that laws align themselves with people's beliefs. We don't have laws against chewing gum or wearing purple shoes exactly because nobody (or almost nobody) believes that those things are wrong.


I draw a distinction between beliefs and morals. Morality has been part of the social contract since we crawled out of the slime. The definition of morality:

principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Beliefs are something else entirely.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

gork15 said:


> I just wish I knew what you looked like! But I personally don't care what you think of me and no, I'm not dignifying any more of your posts with an answer.


===================
Is it my imagination that once again an unwelcome visitor is NOT going to answer any of our posts? sure does sound like the olden days! It is so pleasant around here when she keeps her promise. Ttyal -- going to the Seniors club and knit.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Leah C said:


> Sorry if I sounded like I was trying to bring up the argument. I was just trying to clarify what seemed a common misunderstanding about some folks' beliefs.
> 
> You said, "When it comes to a matter of law, we ALL live by certain rules and it has nothing to do with your beliefs - it's the social contract we agree to." So my question is then, where do those certain rules come from? Do they pop out of the air? Or are they an approximation of the views (beliefs) of enough of the population that we have all decided it's worth enforcing them?
> 
> It's not a coincidence that laws align themselves with people's beliefs. We don't have laws against chewing gum or wearing purple shoes exactly because nobody (or almost nobody) believes that those things are wrong.


Chewing gum was - maybe still is - a crime in Singapore. Purple shoes are a crime, period.

But many things were considered "wrong" long before the Bible. The ancient Greeks were very legalistic, without the Judeo-Christian laws. In general people know right from wrong, and that's where laws come from. If not, China, Japan, India, etc. would not have become the civilizations they did become.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I draw a distinction between beliefs and morals. Morality has been part of the social contract since we crawled out of the slime. The definition of morality:
> 
> principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
> 
> Beliefs are something else entirely.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Shucks I do mixture problems every day. I have to mix meds in "Dove's" food every day. Give us an example of a mixture problem and the first person who can solve it, besides PP, will get THREE points tonight. Give us an easy one if there are easy mixture problems.


Don't tempt me. I have one I ought to do right now, involving bread-baking, something else I ought to do right now.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I adopted a little girl too, when my youngest son was l0 years old. When we lost our daughter to SIDs we thought then that if we still felt the same way down the road we would.
> 
> It wasn't an easy road. I don't know if any of you have heard of Reactive Attachment disorder. We are close now but she was always distant from us and it was hurtful. A friend told me about RAD and it made sense which helped us deal with it.


My daughter was also diagnosed with RAD. We started seeing psychologists when she was four years old, but she wasn't diagnosed until she was 12. From the ages of 12-20, she was in therapy on and off. Her last and final therapist had formed an Attachment Disorders Clinic and specialized in RAD. She too, had adopted a daughter with RAD, so she knew what we were going through. I don't know what we would have done, without her. She helped my daughter understand, why she did the things she did, why she had to control everything, why she couldn't let anyone get close to her and why she hurt others on purpose.

My daughter and I are also very close now. When she hugs me and tells me that she loves me, I know that all of our struggles were worth it. But it was very hard.


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

Leah C said:


> Sorry if I sounded like I was trying to bring up the argument. I was just trying to clarify what seemed a common misunderstanding about some folks' beliefs.
> 
> You said, "When it comes to a matter of law, we ALL live by certain rules and it has nothing to do with your beliefs - it's the social contract we agree to." So my question is then, where do those certain rules come from? Do they pop out of the air? Or are they an approximation of the views (beliefs) of enough of the population that we have all decided it's worth enforcing them?
> 
> It's not a coincidence that laws align themselves with people's beliefs. We don't have laws against chewing gum or wearing purple shoes exactly because nobody (or almost nobody) believes that those things are wrong.


 My undergrad is Criminal Justice. My background is in law enforcement and sociology. Although I am not an attorney, I know a good bit about Criminal Law in Texas. Sometimes one thing becomes another.

Laws are written to fix problems. This is know as a remedy, and it usually comes about to clarify a situation, settle a dispute, prevent harm, protect, general welfare, keep the peace,etc.

Traffic lights, railroad crossings and others fall under safety and general welfare.

In the US, laws are divided into categories... Civil Laws and Criminal Laws. There are penalties and levels of severity, this is no surprise to anyone older than the age of 5. There are also real estate laws, tax laws, and several others, but this thread is about laws and beliefs, isn't it?

Some laws, by happy coincidence, are aligned with people's beliefs.
Do you recall the 1994 caning of Michael W. Fay in Singapore?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_P._Fay





We don't do this in the US, but apparently the people in Singapore think this is a good deterrent, and as a result, illegal gum chewing is not much of a problem in Singapore, in addition to some 30 other criminal acts.

Early in the colonization, and later the founding of the US, Europeans, both Catholic and Protestant individuals
(of several competing and combating varieties) arrived on land already occupied by other people and many of the colonists proceeded to move in, take over, and change the beliefs and culture of the native residents who had their own social mores, tribal customs, culture, and beliefs.

This has happened all over the planet, involving many different ethnicities. For the purposes of this post, I am using the US as an example, not a whipping post.
. 
During the American Civil War, both sides included people who worshiped the same deity, and used the same Bible.

Slavery was not only endorsed, in both the Old and New Testaments, it was also codified and regulated. So how could slavery be wrong if it is right there in the Bible ?

The penalty for picking up sticks on the Sabbath was stoning. A woman who was not a virgin on her wedding night could also be stoned. The penalty for rape was marriage. Abortion and polygamy were not only practiced, they were sanctioned.

Which beliefs are we talking about ? There were 2 sets of 'Ten Commandments', and actually over 100.

Jesus had plenty to say about divorce and hypocrites who make a show of praying in public, and absolutely nothing to say about homosexuality and polygamy.

How many of the married religious KPers would be happy if their husbands arrived home one day with a kidnapped girl and said,

" Hey honey, here is another teenager I raped, and I'll be marrying her in the next day or so. Put her with the other ones while I go write a check to her father".

Against the law, and completely Biblical.

Odd isn't it, how people can pick and choose which beliefs they like and discard the ones that do not fit their personal mores.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I draw a distinction between beliefs and morals. Morality has been part of the social contract since we crawled out of the slime. The definition of morality:
> 
> principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
> 
> Beliefs are something else entirely.


Morals have always been tied to beliefs . In fact, morals are based upon beliefs. You can't separate the two. People's morals vary based upon the dominant religion where they live. Just ask a Saudi or an Iranian what defines their morals. Our morals and even our laws, started out being based on Judeo Christian beliefs. As our beliefs have changed, so too have our laws. Here in the US, morals and laws are fluid, never staying the same. So, how is one to know, what is right or wrong? Good or bad?


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> It's real, or at least there's a real Chris ....Oregon.
> 
> See http://www.whitepages.com/


I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.

I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Very well expressed. People who have no internal moral center need to be told what to do. They seem to think nobody knows right from wrong without being told.


Either that or they have thoughts and desires that would be called "sins" within the faith structure they profess to follow, which makes them think everybody else has a compromised moral compass.

They must have limited exposure to people outside their narrow little world and do not realize that others have strong ethical and moral values they live by without needing the threat of eternal damnation to make them behave.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Chewing gum was - maybe still is - a crime in Singapore. Purple shoes are a crime, period.
> 
> But many things were considered "wrong" long before the Bible. The ancient Greeks were very legalistic, without the Judeo-Christian laws. In general people know right from wrong, and that's where laws come from. If not, China, Japan, India, etc. would not have become the civilizations they did become.


Are you suggesting that advanced civilizations are all ruled by the same list of rights and wrongs? That they honor the same morals?


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> It's brilliant to Google "Chris Tanner, Dallas, Oregon"? You should see me do mixture problems.


Checking on Yellowpages.com there are three Chris Tanners listed and all are male, ranging in age from 44 to early/mid 60's. Could be the rants are misogynistic aimed at all us smart,sassy, sensible women.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My daughter was also diagnosed with RAD. We started seeing psychologists when she was four years old, but she wasn't diagnosed until she was 12. From the ages of 12-20, she was in therapy on and off. Her last and final therapist had formed an Attachment Disorders Clinic and specialized in RAD. She too, had adopted a daughter with RAD, so she knew what we were going through. I don't know what we would have done, without her. She helped my daughter understand, why she did the things she did, why she had to control everything, why she couldn't let anyone get close to her and why she hurt others on purpose.
> 
> My daughter and I are also very close now. When she hugs me and tells me that she loves me, I know that all of our struggles were worth it. But it was very hard.


But bottom line is that you persevered and saved someone you now love from a life that was probably destined to be lonely, difficult, and unimaginably sad. You have done a mitzvah, as has Shirley, adopting children with serious issues and not giving up on them.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


SHE posted her own name and location! Of course, some of us question her veracity.


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that of all people you are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


It's called public information. Anything you do in public is pubic information. Birth, death, traffic tickets, it's all out there.

Facebook is a great source of public information, and completely voluntary.

I was a Private Investigator before I retired. You would be amazed how much information is available at your fingertips and in your trash.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


Big "Doh!", sweetie.

The person in question gave the name and location him/herself.

If I signed off in my profile as Marilyn Jackson and listed my location as Mexico NY or Bird in Hand PA it would be an invitation for anybody who was curious to look me up. The individual gave his/her own (purported) name and location.

Your indignation and self righteousness comes off as a Hyacinth Bucket moment.


----------



## Dangrktty (Feb 22, 2013)

[Your indignation and self righteousness comes off as a Hyacinth Bucket moment.[/quote]

" Boo-kaay residence, lady of the house speaking". 
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks for that !


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Either that or they have thoughts and desires that would be called "sins" within the faith structure they profess to follow, which makes them think everybody else has a compromised moral compass.
> 
> They must have limited exposure to people outside their narrow little world and do not realize that others have strong ethical and moral values they live by without needing the threat of eternal damnation to make them behave.


There's a threat of damnation either way. Morals are fluid conditions, set by man. If you don't follow those morals, you face damnation, by mankind or society. When man's laws interfere with GOD'S laws, it comes down to who you're going to follow. I choose GOD!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Dangrktty said:


> [Your indignation and self righteousness comes off as a Hyacinth Bucket moment.


" Boo-kaay residence, lady of the house speaking". 
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks for that ![/quote]

I was going to say that. You beat me to it. :lol:


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> There's a threat of damnation either way. Morals are fluid conditions, set by man. If you don't follow those morals, you face damnation, by mankind or society. When man's laws interfere with GOD'S laws, it comes down to who you're going to follow. I choose GOD!


I have a different perspective to some degree.

Some of G-d's laws as stated in the Torah are down right scary and, if followed to the letter, would land a person in the slammer so fast nowadays their ears would ring as the gates banged shut.

Some of man's laws in various places are manufactured so as to produce revenue for specific governmental entities.

My solution is to keep a low profile, stay within the speed limit, don't drink when I am driving, and pay my income taxes.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> There's a threat of damnation either way. Morals are fluid conditions, set by man. If you don't follow those morals, you face damnation, by mankind or society. When man's laws interfere with GOD'S laws, it comes down to who you're going to follow. I choose GOD!


But that is YOUR god and your beliefs. You can't reasonably expect everyone to believe the same. Besides, your god is immoral and illogical in many ways so you're actually following your own moral code anyway.

Here's the logic.

If you believe that every word of the bible is true, then you necessarily believe in slavery, rape of captives and that women have less value than men, among other despicable and immoral things.

If you pick and choose which passages you believe and reject others, you are following your own internal moral code which is decidedly relativistic.

There is really no third option.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> I have a different perspective to some degree.
> 
> Some of G-d's laws as stated in the Torah are down right scary and, if followed to the letter, would land a person in the slammer so fast nowadays their ears would ring as the gates banged shut.
> 
> ...


Rules to live by. Smart - especially to keep your head down.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> I think it's highly offensive for you to presume that all or most adoptive children are likely damaged.
> 
> It's also naive of you to think that parents of bio children are somehow better more caring parents.


Thank you, Lilith. I have an adopted son whose birth mother took care of herself and of him during pregnancy. He was (and is) perfect and wonderful. Hard-wired a little differently than our natural daughter, but a treasure. My love for both of my children is the same. I'm very fortunate and have always been thankful to be entrusted with their care and love them the same.

I'm sorry for those whose experience with adoption was different. There are no guarantees with natural-born children, either.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I apologize if this question is too nosy, but I'm curious. No need to answer. Is it all worth it to you now that you've all survived the process?



Designer1234 said:


> I adopted a little girl too, when my youngest son was l0 years old. When we lost our daughter to SIDs we thought then that if we still felt the same way down the road we would.
> 
> It wasn't an easy road. I don't know if any of you have heard of Reactive Attachment disorder. We are close now but she was always distant from us and it was hurtful. A friend told me about RAD and it made sense which helped us deal with it.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Big "Doh!", sweetie.
> 
> The person in question gave the name and location him/herself.
> 
> ...


That's an insult to Hyacinth, Marylin!"


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> Yes it IS a coincidence that SOME laws line up with people's religious beliefs.
> 
> No, the 'belief' lies in whether something we're doing is imposing on other's rights. Gum chewing or wearing purple shoes would be against the law if were shown to be a detriment to society or someone's safety etc... If it ALSO happened to be a religious practice, that's not WHY it became unlawful.
> 
> ...


Well done.

But I think you're spitting into the wind if you're trying to get fundamentalists to accept the truths you explain. They are highly motivated to always argue that christianity is the basis for our country's morals and laws, blah blah blah. It fits with their BELIEF that the bible should be taught in schools, that we have descended into immorality because we approve of same-sex marriage, ad infinitum. We've all heard the frenzied calls to return to god's law. They won't give up easily and resist all attempts to use logic.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> Well done.
> 
> But I think you're spitting into the wind if you're trying to get fundamentalists to accept the truths you explain. They are highly motivated to always argue that christianity is the basis for our country's morals and laws, blah blah blah. It fits with their BELIEF that the bible should be taught in schools, that we have descended into immorality because we approve of same-sex marriage, ad infinitum. We've all heard the frenzied calls to return to god's law. They won't give up easily and resist all attempts to use logic.


We've more thank likely descended into into immorality BECAUSE OF religion.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Wombatnomore said:


> We've more thank likely descended into into immorality BECAUSE OF religion.


Absolutely correct.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> SHE posted her own name and location! Of course, some of us question her veracity.


For a sometimes smart cookie you are occasionally naive. Gork is Lisa playing games again... what she's done is made another Jody Brieske...shes introduced another innocent person's real name and location and PP went along with it.

They don't care who they use, including you!


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> For a sometimes smart cookie you are occasionally naive. Gork is Lisa playing games again... what she's done is made another Jody Brieske...shes introduced another innocent person's real name and location and PP went along with it.
> 
> They don't care who they use, including you!


Go and knit something Gerslay.


----------



## Wombatnomore (Dec 9, 2013)

This article sent shivers down my spine. What in the hell is going on if the major financial institutions are carrying on like this? And surely this won't be the last time they try to suck their investors dry (including us mere plebs).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/us-britain-fine-top-banks-nearly-6-bn-for-forex-libor-abuses/6485510


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> Go and knit something Gerslay.


:::sobbing:::

doesn't you love me no more, Womby?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Dangrktty said:


> My undergrad is Criminal Justice. My background is in law enforcement and sociology. Although I am not an attorney, I know a good bit about Criminal Law in Texas. Sometimes one thing becomes another.
> 
> Laws are written to fix problems. This is know as a remedy, and it usually comes about to clarify a situation, settle a dispute, prevent harm, protect, general welfare, keep the peace,etc.
> 
> ...


Dangrktty, you're a mine of information, and a real addition to this thread. Glad you found us.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Morals have always been tied to beliefs . In fact, morals are based upon beliefs. You can't separate the two. People's morals vary based upon the dominant religion where they live. Just ask a Saudi or an Iranian what defines their morals. Our morals and even our laws, started out being based on Judeo Christian beliefs. As our beliefs have changed, so too have our laws. Here in the US, morals and laws are fluid, never staying the same. So, how is one to know, what is right or wrong? Good or bad?


Morals are born in us, not learned. It's the result of natural empathy, and babies know right from wrong, or fair from unfair, very early. Morals don't change, though some behaviors have been called immoral in earlier times that we now recognize as not immoral.

See http://www.nytimes.com/video/magazine/1247467772000/can-babies-tell-right-from-wrong.html?action=click&contentCollection=Magazine&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


SHE posted it, both her name and her location. Anything else you have to contribute?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


See, e.g., http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-337427-83.html#7355623, or any other message posted by gorp15.

Then invite her to D&P. I'm sure she'll fit in perfectly.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Either that or they have thoughts and desires that would be called "sins" within the faith structure they profess to follow, which makes them think everybody else has a compromised moral compass.
> 
> They must have limited exposure to people outside their narrow little world and do not realize that others have strong ethical and moral values they live by without needing the threat of eternal damnation to make them behave.


Yes, very limited exposure. One wonders how the human race didn't wipe itself out during those 4,000 years before Christianity came along. :roll:


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Morals are born in us, not learned. It's the result of natural empathy, and babies know right from wrong, or fair from unfair, very early. Morals don't change, though some behaviors have been called immoral in earlier times that we now recognize as not immoral.
> 
> See http://www.nytimes.com/video/magazine/1247467772000/can-babies-tell-right-from-wrong.html?action=click&contentCollection=Magazine&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article


It does seem that morality is hard wired. Look at the number of people who are amoral. But moral behavior can be taught in an effort to ameliorate the damage naturally amoral people can do to society. I am no sociologist or psychologist nor have I done research on the issue, so I cannot say if it has a chance to work.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> I can't believe that you of all people are posting someone's REAL NAME and LOCATION.
> 
> I guess you've decided to stop bitchen about it being done to you!


And in case my previous two messages didn't get through to you,


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> SHE posted it, both her name and her location. Anything else you have to contribute?


Ooh, do we jump on Gersley for hovering on the topic the way those of us who bother visiting FFDP are accused of hovering and stalking?

As far as I am concerned, any topic is an open topic and anybody who has a constructive comment to make is welcome to do so. Note I said *constructive* comment.

But some people get so possessive of particular topics you would think the enemy were invading for someone other than the "regulars" to join the discussion. It is sort of the way little kids on the playground make themselves feel important by excluding other kids from their games.

I saw enough of that growing up that I never bothered with sorority rushes when I got to college. Going to college in a major city, who needed artificial friendships, either. Too many interesting places to go and things to do.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Are you suggesting that advanced civilizations are all ruled by the same list of rights and wrongs? That they honor the same morals?


Pretty much, yes. Even unadvanced groups. But there are plenty of reasons to deviate from them, and plenty of deviants born without a conscience.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Checking on Yellowpages.com there are three Chris Tanners listed and all are male, ranging in age from 44 to early/mid 60's. Could be the rants are misogynistic aimed at all us smart,sassy, sensible women.


Did you mean to say "smart,sassy, sensible sisters"? Or "senoras"?

But it might be a man, true.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> SHE posted her own name and location! Of course, some of us question her veracity.


Thank you. I seem to be the only person here who thinks she's genuine.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Dangrktty said:


> It's called public information. Anything you do in public is pubic information. Birth, death, traffic tickets, it's all out there.
> 
> Facebook is a great source of public information, and completely voluntary.
> 
> I was a Private Investigator before I retired. You would be amazed how much information is available at your fingertips and in your trash.


A private investigator? You get better and better. You've really brightened my day today.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> SHE posted it, both her name and her location. Anything else you have to contribute?


She posted her name and location and YOU POSTED HER ACTUAL ADDRESS...which is against the rules and is a reportable abuse!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I have a different perspective to some degree.
> 
> Some of G-d's laws as stated in the Torah are down right scary and, if followed to the letter, would land a person in the slammer so fast nowadays their ears would ring as the gates banged shut.
> 
> ...


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> Nobody said SHE, personally was imposing anything. Just that too many Christians make a habit of doing so.
> 
> That's in part due to the duty to proselytize. It's part of Islam too which, IMO leads to such turmoil. Because, for some people, it's in their religious teachings to not respect other people's beliefs.
> 
> Even evangelizing, depending o how it's done can be a violation of others beliefs, when people won't take 'NO' for an answer.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Thank you. I seem to be the only person here who thinks she's genuine.


Changed my mind about commenting.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My daughter was also diagnosed with RAD. We started seeing psychologists when she was four years old, but she wasn't diagnosed until she was 12. From the ages of 12-20, she was in therapy on and off. Her last and final therapist had formed an Attachment Disorders Clinic and specialized in RAD. She too, had adopted a daughter with RAD, so she knew what we were going through. I don't know what we would have done, without her. She helped my daughter understand, why she did the things she did, why she had to control everything, why she couldn't let anyone get close to her and why she hurt others on purpose.
> 
> My daughter and I are also very close now. When she hugs me and tells me that she loves me, I know that all of our struggles were worth it. But it was very hard.


---------------------------------------------------------
====================================
Neb - isn't it interesting that two of us have also dealt with RAD and have had much the same background. I feel another bond with you. Our daughter took years.
At one point she phoned me and told me that she wanted nothing more to do with us and that she had no intention of giving us her reasons. She moved away and luckily kept in touch with our son. Then one day she phoned me (4 years later) and told us she would like to have a relationship with us but had no intention of explaining why she had acted that way. I talked to the RAD counsellor and she said 'that was because she didn't know, herself, why she acted that way". She also said that she likely wanted to fix it right after she phoned us the first time, but wouldn't give in. It was so sad for us.

Then dh had his first heart attack and she called and said she wanted to come home. She surprised him in the hospital, and as I said before, she and I covered each 24 hours with him. It was like a roller coaster.

It just re confirms to me that people can have different opinions about important things, but that we are still able to disagree but respect and care for each other. When she came for our anniversary she hugged me and hugged me for the first time ever and it was such a wonderful anniversary.

It has to be on their timeline - not all adopted children suffer with RAD - but it is something that should be brought up when someone wants to adopt. I am glad you and your daughter are close too. You must have had your hands full. Anyone tells you that it is always easy to raise children, either adopted or not, are in a dreamworld. I think we were given the heartbreak we felt, because we could handle it no matter how difficult it was.

That is one reason we 
have learned to trust ourselves - we have been through the fire and have survived. Pat and I are so close because we held each other up. He adored her and it broke my heart, however she has always known we are there for her.

By the way, any news of your dil and the babies???


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

DGreen said:


> Well done.
> 
> But I think you're spitting into the wind if you're trying to get fundamentalists to accept the truths you explain. They are highly motivated to always argue that christianity is the basis for our country's morals and laws, blah blah blah. It fits with their BELIEF that the bible should be taught in schools, that we have descended into immorality because we approve of same-sex marriage, ad infinitum. We've all heard the frenzied calls to return to god's law. They won't give up easily and resist all attempts to use logic.


At least one still thinks premarital sex is immoral. I do not think that word means what she thinks it means.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Gerslay said:


> She posted her name and location and YOU POSTED HER ACTUAL ADDRESS...which is against the rules and is a reportable abuse!


The horse is dead, woman. Let it go.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> For a sometimes smart cookie you are occasionally naive. Gork is Lisa playing games again... what she's done is made another Jody Brieske...shes introduced another innocent person's real name and location and PP went along with it.
> 
> They don't care who they use, including you!


I happen to know you're wrong about this. But sure, blame everything on Lisa, who can't be here to defend herself. In fact, gork15 is more likely to be someone close to you.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> For a sometimes smart cookie you are occasionally naive. Gork is Lisa playing games again... what she's done is made another Jody Brieske...shes introduced another innocent person's real name and location and PP went along with it.
> 
> They don't care who they use, including you!


I happen to know you're wrong about this. But sure, blame everything on Lisa, who can't be here to defend herself. In fact, gork15 is more likely to be someone close to you.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

DGreen said:


> The horse is dead, woman. Let it go.


Go carry a poster somewhere...far away!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Thank you. I seem to be the only person here who thinks she's genuine.


Not correct. The Psychic Sloth believed he was real and was a "he".


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I happen to know you're wrong about this. But sure, blame everything on Lisa, who can't be here to defend herself. In fact, gork15 is more likely to be someone close to you.


Pshaw! What do you mean she can't be here? She'll be here in any one of half a dozen names any time she wants. Course, she won't last long, but....


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Wombatnomore said:


> This article sent shivers down my spine. What in the hell is going on if the major financial institutions are carrying on like this? And surely this won't be the last time they try to suck their investors dry (including us mere plebs).
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/us-britain-fine-top-banks-nearly-6-bn-for-forex-libor-abuses/6485510


How else can the rich get richer without having to share?

Their greed is unsatisfiable. If it were food they grabbed up, we'd all make fun of them, but since it's money, they still have their friends and fawners.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> I draw a distinction between beliefs and morals. Morality has been part of the social contract since we crawled out of the slime. The definition of morality:
> 
> principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
> 
> Beliefs are something else entirely.


Well said. Who was it who said "Religion needs morality but morality does not need religion."


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Gerslay said:


> Go carry a poster somewhere...far away!


I already did that today. It was in support of same sex marriage, actually. Thankfully, I'm pretty sure it's far away from you.

Get a grip on reality and recognize that if the gorp doesn't feel the need to report something that doesn't involve you, you're probably butting in where you're not needed. Whoever gorp is, if he/she can run a computer she probably is an adult and can take care of her own business.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

DGreen said:


> I already did that today. It was in support of same sex marriage, actually. Thankfully, I'm pretty sure it's far away from you.
> 
> Get a grip on reality and recognize that if the gorp doesn't feel the need to report something that doesn't involve you, you're probably butting in where you're not needed. Whoever gorp is, if he/she can run a computer she probably is an adult and can take care of her own business.


The World According to Gorp: You should take your own advice and only speak when spoken to!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Gerslay said:


> The World According to Gorp: You should take your own advice and only speak when spoken to!


Where does that put you?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

This whole tempest in a teapot over gorp's identity is like the right-wing obsession with Benghazi. It never seems to end, even when the proof is staring them in the face.


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> It totally grates on me when Christians try to impose their beliefs on other people regarding pregnancy. None of your business what others do.


I know, like I don't care if they are against abortion, it's their prerogative.
It's none of my business so quit trying to make it my business, right?


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

DGreen said:


> This whole tempest in a teapot over gorp's identity is like the right-wing obsession with Benghazi. It never seems to end, even when the proof is staring them in the face.


Good one!!! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Well said. Who was it who said "Religion needs morality but morality does not need religion."


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## lins (Jan 8, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> And in case my previous two messages didn't get through to you,


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

lins said:


> I know, like I don't care if they are against abortion, it's their prerogative.
> It's none of my business so quit trying to make it my business, right?


Trouble is, they're (fundamentalists/conservatives) trying to outlaw abortion across the country and they have made significant strides toward that end. A woman's personal decision about her own abortion is her business and hers alone. The LEGALITY of abortion is an issue every woman has a stake in. That's my business.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> I have a different perspective to some degree.
> 
> Some of G-d's laws as stated in the Torah are down right scary and, if followed to the letter, would land a person in the slammer so fast nowadays their ears would ring as the gates banged shut.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: I've the same perspective.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> I think it's highly offensive for you to presume that all or most adoptive children are likely damaged.
> 
> It's also naive of you to think that parents of bio children are somehow better more caring parents.


First of all, the majority of children who are available for adoption, ARE likely damaged in some way. Like it or not! It is very difficult to adopt a normal healthy infant in this country. Most of the unwanted babies of healthy women are aborted.

Second of all, I did NOT say that parents of bio children are likely better, more caring parents. I SAID, that when a person goes to such extremes as fertility treatment, they're not likely to neglect their babies. Those babies are probably the most wanted babies in the world. You'd be hard pressed to say otherwise. First these couples experience the grief and anguish of not being able to have children. Then, they spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars trying to get pregnant. The wife goes through all sorts of humiliating procedures and the husband has to jack off in a cup. I'd be willing to bet that anyone who's willing to go through all of this to have a baby, would end up being the best, most attentive parents ever. Their baby isn't going to be sitting in a car seat, being ignored, 24 hours a day.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> But that is YOUR god and your beliefs. You can't reasonably expect everyone to believe the same. Besides, your god is immoral and illogical in many ways so you're actually following your own moral code anyway.
> 
> Here's the logic.
> 
> ...


Read my comment again. I was just expressing that we all face damnation whether we go against GOD'S morals or man's morals. Mankind can be just as damning.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Read my comment again. I was just expressing that we all face damnation whether we go against GOD'S morals or man's morals. Mankind can be just as damning.


No, mankind is not as damning as your god. Humans can be cruel and evil and judgmental, but your god will damn a soul for eternity for evil THOUGHTS. At least humans have a sense of proportionality - the christian god does not. Eternal. Think about the concept of ETERNAL hell for not loving god and being obedient.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> For a sometimes smart cookie you are occasionally naive. Gork is Lisa playing games again... what she's done is made another Jody Brieske...shes introduced another innocent person's real name and location and PP went along with it.
> 
> They don't care who they use, including you!


I've never been called "a sometimes smart cookie" before. I guess that's why I didn't think of VL. Maybe you're the smarter cookie.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I've never been called "a sometimes smart cookie" before. I guess that's why I didn't think of VL. Maybe you're the smarter cookie.


VL is characteristically sympathetic to the liberal view. It makes no sense that she would deliberately appear on this thread to insult and annoy. If you find yourself saying, "I can't believe she would do that" perhaps you shouldn't believe it. Gerslay is far more likely to take pleasure in attacking those on this thread. I definitely believe she would be party to an attack on libs. We already know Gerslay monitors this site so she can jump in and be disruptive.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Green- how did your big sale go? It was last weekend wasn't it. I was thinking of you. Or am I incorrect about the date. Let us know. Shirley


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

DGreen said:


> VL is characteristically sympathetic to the liberal view. It makes no sense that she would deliberately appear on this thread to insult and annoy. If you find yourself saying, "I can't believe she would do that" perhaps you shouldn't believe it. Gerslay is far more likely to take pleasure in attacking those on this thread. I definitely believe she would be party to an attack on libs. We already know Gerslay monitors this site so she can jump in and be disruptive.


Also report to those who are not joining us for whatever reason?


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> Green- how did your big sale go? It was last weekend wasn't it. I was thinking of you. Or am I incorrect about the date. Let us know. Shirley


The weather was horrible - high winds and cold. It snowed that day just 20 miles north and 500 feet higher in elevation.

BUT. One of our members, whose family owns a couple of large plant nurseries in Phoenix, brought a truckload of very large plants and they sold very well. We were also successful with our baked goods. Crafts? A near total bust. I should have known from experience.

All told, we cleared about $700. Not big money, but when the treasury is hovering around $2,000, a nice boost.

I have lots of totes, purses and garden signs left. Anyone in the market?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Designer here - I have changed part of my post after reading it - I implied that I knew 3 people who had abortions. I have know three people - 2 said they were getting abortions, but if I remember they changed their minds. One woman was attacked and raped and did have one. I have never had a friend or a close acquaintance have an abortion. I never would and most of us here never would. However, I believe that someone who decides to have one has that right.I have removed that part of my post. I just gave the wrong impression.
=====================


Knitter from Nebraska said:


> ======== " Most of the unwanted babies of healthy women are aborted"
> What makes you know that? I think many women have babies who are not aborted, who wish they were not pregnant. When I was of child bearing age I knew quite a few women over the years who didn't want a child at certain times when they got pregnant. Most I knew were glad the baby had arrived once it was born. jmo. I am not stating that every Mother wanted her baby, but that didn't mean she had an abortion. I know lots of women who were pregnant and were unhappy about it but ended up having and loving their baby.
> ==========
> Neb said
> I'd be willing to bet that anyone who's willing to go through all of this to have a baby, would end up being the best, most attentive parents ever.  Their baby isn't going to be sitting in a car seat, being ignored, 24 hours a day.


========================

I don't agree with your statement above.
You are once again saying one of your beliefs is based on fact.

Once again, you can't make flat statements as if they are the only truth. I know 2 parents who used envitro and were terrible parents. One of them had a sister with 3 kids of her own and because of the Mother who wanted to have a pregnancy more than she wanted children, was a horrible parent. The sistertookk on the task of raising the 3 children plus her own children. They are very fine young people -{ the mother never was interested in taking part in their lives}. She {the sister and her husband are wonderful parents}. The mother who used en vitro doesn't have any interest in her children, although the father is very involved.

The other story- the children were taken away because of abuse. That is not the norm I am sure, but once again I don't think you can put people in a box. Good and bad things happen no matter what is expected. I don't know any Mothers who allow their children to sit in car seats 24 hours a day. I doubt that you do . I am sure it happens in very rare cases but you imply that all normal parents (who don't use en vitro) allow that to happen. It is just not the case.

Once again implying something that isn't a fact as if it is a known fact. I find that hard to accept, as I have said before. Even if you say "I think" but you state many things as if you know they are true. I feel as if I have to call you on it or I would be agreeing by keeping silent.

I have absolutely nothing against en vitro - I would suggest that anyone who puts themselves through that are very
conscientious parents, but so are a lot of parents who have their babies normally. You can't say one group is better than the other to make a point unless it is true. I take exception to your statement which implies that those who don't have envitro pregnancies are bad parents who would leave their children in car seats all day because of negligence. I don't think you meant for it to come across like that , but it did. That is my point. Please don't make statements about what you think, as if they are facts. The reality is often quite different than what you say.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

DGreen said:


> The weather was horrible - high winds and cold. It snowed that day just 20 miles north and 500 feet higher in elevation.
> 
> BUT. One of our members, whose family owns a couple of large plant nurseries in Phoenix, brought a truckload of very large plants and they sold very well. We were also successful with our baked goods. Crafts? A near total bust. I should have known from experience.
> 
> ...


Post pics of them in classified and let us know the title of the post.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Wombatnomore said:


> This article sent shivers down my spine. What in the hell is going on if the major financial institutions are carrying on like this? And surely this won't be the last time they try to suck their investors dry (including us mere plebs).
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/us-britain-fine-top-banks-nearly-6-bn-for-forex-libor-abuses/6485510


It's much worse than this (at least in the US). They've passed a law that says, depositors are no longer depositors, but are creditors. If and when the banks collapse again (and they will), the bank can take the funds from our bank accounts, to bail themselves out. They call it a bail in. We'll never see our money again because all of the small creditors will be in line behind the big creditors. Its legalized theft. The reason I say that the banks WILL collapse, is because theyve been gambling on derivatives. According to the International Bank of Settlements, the total notional value of derivative contracts is $710 TRILLION. These are the top 5 American bank's exposure to derivatives: J P Morgan Chase - more than $67trillion, Citibank - nearly $60 billion, Goldman Sachs - more than $54 trillion, Bank of America - more than $54 trillion, Morgon Stanley - more than $44 trillion.

If you really want to be shocked, take a look at how much they have in assets.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-25/5-us-banks-each-have-more-40-trillion-dollars-exposure-derivatives


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Morals are born in us, not learned. It's the result of natural empathy, and babies know right from wrong, or fair from unfair, very early. Morals don't change, though some behaviors have been called immoral in earlier times that we now recognize as not immoral.
> 
> See http://www.nytimes.com/video/magazine/1247467772000/can-babies-tell-right-from-wrong.html?action=click&contentCollection=Magazine&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article


Honestly??? I'm not convinced. First I saw the woman put a tray with the "good" block and the "bad" block. The baby reached for the block that was nearest her right hand first and when she reached for the other block with her left hand, the lady pulled the tray away and the film stopped. With the puppets, the lady held the "good" puppet in front of her and wiggled it around. That would definitely attract a baby's attention. This video wasn't enough to convince me of anything.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> It does seem that morality is hard wired. Look at the number of people who are amoral. But moral behavior can be taught in an effort to ameliorate the damage naturally amoral people can do to society. I am no sociologist or psychologist nor have I done research on the issue, so I cannot say if it has a chance to work.


I believe that morality is taught. Our schools are dealing with lots of kids who weren't taught morals, and are actually teaching them in elementary school. If children were born with morals, how can we explain all of the kids, killing kids? Or kids stealing? Or kids hurting each other?

I think a lot of parents have not been teaching their children morals.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Pretty much, yes. Even unadvanced groups. But there are plenty of reasons to deviate from them, and plenty of deviants born without a conscience.


How do you explain Saudi Arabia or Iran, or for that matter, isis? They have very different morals than we do. They murder people for all kinds of reasons, many of them legal.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Thank you. I seem to be the only person here who thinks she's genuine.


I don't think she's genuine. Look at her posts. She made a few remarks on benign threads and then zeroed in on "things", where her comments would get the most reaction. Too much of a coincidence, IMO.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

DGreen said:


> No, mankind is not as damning as your god. Humans can be cruel and evil and judgmental, but your god will damn a soul for eternity for evil THOUGHTS. At least humans have a sense of proportionality - the christian god does not. Eternal. Think about the concept of ETERNAL hell for not loving god and being obedient.


Buddhists do not have commandments, where the operative word is 'command'. They have precepts where they 'they undertake to refrain from' which recognises human frailty, meaning that if we fail then we accept that we have failed and endeavour to try harder in the future. In this regard free choice and intention is important. It is "I undertake" not Thou Shalt" - a personal choice, not an external command.

There are five Precepts for lay Buddhists. Observance of the five precepts constitutes the minimum moral obligation of a practicing lay Buddhist. These five precepts enjoin against killing living beings, taking what is not given (or stealing), sexual misconduct, false speech, and use of intoxicating drink or drugs


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------
> ====================================
> Neb - isn't it interesting that two of us have also dealt with RAD and have had much the same background. I feel another bond with you. Our daughter took years.
> At one point she phoned me and told me that she wanted nothing more to do with us and that she had no intention of giving us her reasons. She moved away and luckily kept in touch with our son. Then one day she phoned me (4 years later) and told us she would like to have a relationship with us but had no intention of explaining why she had acted that way. I talked to the RAD counsellor and she said 'that was because she didn't know, herself, why she acted that way". She also said that she likely wanted to fix it right after she phoned us the first time, but wouldn't give in. It was so sad for us.
> ...


A hug says so much, doesn't it? The mother of a child with RAD, will never take a hug for granted. It's worth all the gold in the world.

Dil is in the hospital. Nothing has changed. She is still having some contractions, but is not in labor. Tomorrow, she will be 32 weeks. She's having an ultrasound tomorrow and they will try to measure the babies again. Last month, they couldn't get an accurate measurement of Baby B, because he was covered up by the other babies. The doctor is hoping they can see him, to know that he's growing. If they can't confirm that he's growing, they may go ahead with the C Section now. This is two weeks before they'd planned on taking them. Otherwise... 2 more weeks! Yay!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> No, mankind is not as damning as your god. Humans can be cruel and evil and judgmental, but your god will damn a soul for eternity for evil THOUGHTS. At least humans have a sense of proportionality - the christian god does not. Eternal. Think about the concept of ETERNAL hell for not loving god and being obedient.


My comment wasn't an either/or. Neither was it about who is more damning. But since you can't leave it alone, I will add...My GOD is more forgiving than any human.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> VL is characteristically sympathetic to the liberal view. It makes no sense that she would deliberately appear on this thread to insult and annoy. If you find yourself saying, "I can't believe she would do that" perhaps you shouldn't believe it. Gerslay is far more likely to take pleasure in attacking those on this thread. I definitely believe she would be party to an attack on libs. We already know Gerslay monitors this site so she can jump in and be disruptive.


I do not believe it was VL but don't try to tell me, that she doesn't "deliberately appear on this thread to insult and annoy". She DOES that, ALL OF THE TIME!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> The weather was horrible - high winds and cold. It snowed that day just 20 miles north and 500 feet higher in elevation.
> 
> BUT. One of our members, whose family owns a couple of large plant nurseries in Phoenix, brought a truckload of very large plants and they sold very well. We were also successful with our baked goods. Crafts? A near total bust. I should have known from experience.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry the crafts didn't go well. They're hit or miss, aren't they? But any money is better than no money. I hope you find good uses for it.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I believe that morality is taught. Our schools are dealing with lots of kids who weren't taught morals, and are actually teaching them in elementary school. If children were born with morals, how can we explain all of the kids, killing kids? Or kids stealing? Or kids hurting each other?
> 
> I think a lot of parents have not been teaching their children morals.


Children learn from examples and they learn their behaviour from their parents; they ape their parents and follow their parent 's examples. The school children who have to be 'taught morals because their parents have not taught them morals' are merely following their parents behaviour and it is more a case of teaching the child not to follow their parents behaviour. Children will always believe that their home situation is the 'norm' and that other families are the 'not normal' ones. For example, children who grow up in a violent home situation are more likely to believe that violence in the home is normal. It is also the case with children who grow up in a home where one or both parents are alcoholics; they believe that excessive alcoholic consumption is normal.

I can see your point "Our schools are dealing with lots of kids who weren't taught morals, and are actually teaching them in elementary school" but I honestly think it is more a case of teaching the children not to follow their parents antisocial behaviour because their parents antisocial behaviour is not normal behaviour.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How do you explain Saudi Arabia or Iran, or for that matter, isis? They have very different morals than we do. They murder people for all kinds of reasons, many of them legal.


We, in parts of both our countries murder people (sentence them to death and follow up, and it is legal. Different places, different ideas and different ways. That is why peace is so difficult to achieve.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I believe that morality is taught. Our schools are dealing with lots of kids who weren't taught morals, and are actually teaching them in elementary school. If children were born with morals, how can we explain all of the kids, killing kids? Or kids stealing? Or kids hurting each other?
> 
> I think a lot of parents have not been teaching their children morals.


Of course morality is taught, but I think there is also an inborn element as part of the complex human brain. I don't see this as black or white, either/or. Morals are transmitted in myriad ways in our culture.

Humans kill each other. They steal. They hurt one another and it isn't necessarily because they had bad parents or a lack of moral teaching.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> It does seem that morality is hard wired. Look at the number of people who are amoral. But moral behavior can be taught in an effort to ameliorate the damage naturally amoral people can do to society. I am no sociologist or psychologist nor have I done research on the issue, so I cannot say if it has a chance to work.


I've read that most of what you call amoral people, as long as they're not so damaged that they want to cause trouble, will go along to get along, especially if they have reasons to act like us all, such as a family whom they love or a very good job. They may not be able to tell right from wrong, but they can tell what society finds acceptable or unacceptable.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How do you explain Saudi Arabia or Iran, or for that matter, isis? They have very different morals than we do. They murder people for all kinds of reasons, many of them legal.


How do you explain Mexico, a predominantly catholic country? They are taught morals and yet there is an epidemic of horrible murders there, too.

Culture, politics, economics, social unrest, poverty. These lead to crime, too, in spite of the best teaching. Not every evil in the world can be laid at the feet of "lack of moral teaching."


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Designer here - I have changed part of my post after reading it - I implied that I knew 3 people who had abortions. I have know three people - 2 said they were getting abortions, but if I remember they changed their minds. One woman was attacked and raped and did have one. I have never had a friend or a close acquaintance have an abortion. I never would and most of us here never would. However, I believe that someone who decides to have one has that right.I have removed that part of my post. I just gave the wrong impression.
> =====================
> 
> ========================
> ...


I DO KNOW a mother who left her children in their car seats, 24 hours a day! It is my daughter's birth mother! She did that to my daughter and her sister. I'm sure she took the babies out occasionally, maybe to change them, once in a blue moon. I can assure you, that with my daughter's bloody diaper rash, it wasn't often. My daughter never slept in a crib, until we adopted her. So while I NEVER said that all natural mothers did this, I was stating the truth that this can happen to children who are neglected and then, adopted.

I NEVER SAID that one group was better than the other! I SAID, SOME people choose fertility treatment because they don't want to take a chance on getting a child that is severely damaged (like your daughter and mine). And I KNOW that my statement is true because my very own son and dil went through fertility treatment for that very reason. My dil's mother raised some of her other daughter's children who were born to their drug addicted, mother AND my son grew up seeing what we went through with our daughter. Neither one of them wanted to take that chance. They'd already lived it.

I believe that the examples you gave of abusive parents are interesting, but... I was referring to the damage that neglect causes when a baby is left in her carseat, 24 hours a day, as my daughter was. I still do not believe that anyone would go through fertility treatment, only to neglect the baby once it arrived. You yourself said, "I would suggest that anyone who puts themselves through that are very conscientious parents, but so are a lot of parents who have their babies normally". I wasn't making a statement about people who have their babies normally. Only that one cannot be sure what has happened to any baby that they haven't given birth to, themselves. There are a LOT of damaged children out there. In our case, that damage was caused by the mother's drug abuse, and drug abuse is rampant.

My reality is different than yours. So please stop accusing me of making untrue statements. While we have things in common, my experiences have been different than yours. I said a lot of children available for adoption, have been damaged. That is true. I said, I didn't believe that anyone would go through fertility treatment, just to neglect that infant. I still believe that is true. That doesn't mean that I don't think that these parents can't be abusive later on. Anyone can become abusive.

If you think I've posted false information, please put up evidence to the contrary. And if I say " I think", that's what I mean! You don't get to call me on it. I get to think, whatever I want to think! If you don't think what I think, say so. But stop telling me that I say "I think" like, I know. When I say "I think", of course I think I'm right! Why would I say it if I thought I was wrong. Do you not believe what you say? I do. Disagree with me if you like, but don't tell me how to think or what to say.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Children learn from examples and they learn their behaviour from their parents; they ape their parents and follow their parent 's examples. The school children who have to be 'taught morals because their parents have not taught them morals' are merely following their parents behaviour and it is more a case of teaching the child not to follow their parents behaviour. Children will always believe that their home situation is the 'norm' and that other families are the 'not normal' ones. For example, children who grow up in a violent home situation are more likely to believe that violence in the home is normal. It is also the case with children who grow up in a home where one or both parents are alcoholics; they believe that excessive alcoholic consumption is normal.
> 
> I can see your point "Our schools are dealing with lots of kids who weren't taught morals, and are actually teaching them in elementary school" but I honestly think it is more a case of teaching the children not to follow their parents antisocial behaviour because their parents antisocial behaviour is not normal behaviour.


I agree!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> We, in parts of both our countries murder people (sentence them to death and follow up, and it is legal. Different places, different ideas and different ways. That is why peace is so difficult to achieve.


So, is a death sentence carried out after a trial that determines guilt or innocence, the same as beating you daughter to death because she was raped? Or beating your wife to death because she made you angry? In some countries, murder is acceptable behavior. Morals are not the same across different cultures. That's the point I was trying to make. Beliefs influence morals.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Lilith-Frasier said:


> So what you're saying is that you're a bad person and had to be religiously taught not to murder and steal.
> 
> Ewwwkay.


Where I live, kids are killing kids all of the time. So, if a human being is born with morals, why do we keep having kids commiting more and more crimes. I'm saying that you're not born with morals, they're taught. (And I never said they had to be taught religiously) I've also said that morals change over time, as society changes. Those changes are taught as well.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Ooh, do we jump on Gersley for hovering on the topic the way those of us who bother visiting FFDP are accused of hovering and stalking?
> 
> As far as I am concerned, any topic is an open topic and anybody who has a constructive comment to make is welcome to do so. Note I said *constructive* comment.
> 
> ...


The possessiveness is very funny. It's not just childish; it's as if having to pay attention to opinions different from yours is too much of a burden. If they can't play by their own rules, they're not going to play at all.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DGreen said:


> How do you explain Mexico, a predominantly catholic country? They are taught morals and yet there is an epidemic of horrible murders there, too.
> 
> Culture, politics, economics, social unrest, poverty. These lead to crime, too, in spite of the best teaching. Not every evil in the world can be laid at the feet of "lack of moral teaching."


I don't know what you're referring to. I was commenting on a post where someone said that morals were the same everywhere. I was just pointing out that they're not.

I'm going to bed. Goodnight!


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My comment wasn't an either/or. Neither was it about who is more damning. But since you can't leave it alone, I will add...My GOD is more forgiving than any human.


Since your god invented sin, he has more to forgive.

I'm not trying to provoke you, Nebs. Try to understand that to many of us (and the number is growing), the guilt-laden character of christianity is one of the reasons we reject your god and all other gods. Not because we are looking for guilt-free vice and license to live without conscience. Far from it. I simply don't believe the idea that I'm fundamentally defective and in constant need of forgiveness. The idea that blood sacrifice is required to atone for the "sin" of existence is grotesque to me. Remember, christians constantly remind everyone - and themselves - that they are ALL SINNERS and in need of forgiveness sort of on general principles, let alone any specific wrongdoing, like thinking bad thoughts.

I have a very clear sense of right and wrong, of ethics and morals and I live by my beliefs to the best of my ability. My personal integrity is the guiding force for how I live my life. Like everyone else, I give thought to my actions, but I'm not burdened with the sin of your god. And I'm not impressed with the morals taught in the bible, which are NOT the foundation of all good that you seem to think, nor are they necessary to a functioning, moral society. If they have meaning to you, I'm glad. I will, however, dispute the idea that our country, our culture, our legal system and our well-being rely on the bible for guidance and inspiration. It simply isn't so.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> She posted her name and location and YOU POSTED HER ACTUAL ADDRESS...which is against the rules and is a reportable abuse!


So report me. Geez Louise, you're getting so worked up that I'm beginning to think you're the injured party.

Anyway, I don't think I POSTED HER ACTUAL ADDRESS; I thought I posted a link showing where it could be found. If you'd read any other messages, you may have figured out why I did it, but apparently the spy only sent you to check out my offense and and discipline me.


----------



## DGreen (Nov 1, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> So report me. Geez Louise, you're getting so worked up that I'm beginning to think you're the injured party.
> 
> Anyway, I don't think I POSTED HER ACTUAL ADDRESS; I thought I posted a link showing where it could be found. If you'd read any other messages, you may have figured out why I did it, but apparently the spy only sent you to check out my offense and and discipline me.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Pshaw! What do you mean she can't be here? She'll be here in any one of half a dozen names any time she wants. Course, she won't last long, but....


Pshaw? Fiddlesticks!

Course she doesn't last long cause certain people keep their finger on the Report button just in case she shows up. She says things they don't want to hear.


----------



## admin (Jan 12, 2011)

This is an automated notice.

This topic was split up because it reached high page count.
Please feel free to continue the conversation in the new topic that was automatically created here:

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-343755-1.html

Sorry for any inconvenience.


----------

