Friday April 18, 2014
Jump to content
Anyone who would think these issues are nonsense and don't deserve to be printed has to be not only uninformed but completely brainwashed. These self same issues have been continuously ongoing in the news and media. Congress has held Eric Holder in contempt for his actions in Fast and Furious and the President has helped keep vital information out of Congress' hands. Where has Volz and Paulk been all this time? If Obama isn't jeopardizing religious freedom then why are so many Churches and religious organizations, the Catholic Church foremost, filing lawsuits to stop the violation of their consciences? Just because abortion is a legal procedure, does that make it right? A human being's life is snuffed out. Don't those of us who still have consciences have the right to oppose such an atrocity? Not according to Obama and his henchmen/women. If Obama is a Christian why does he oppose biblical principles and commandments at every turn (For example: the killing of babies, homosexual "marriage")? Things completely against what the Bible says. Sorry to disappoint you, Volz and Paulk, but it's all true. Stop deluding yourselves.
Anyone who would think these issues are nonsense and don't deserve to be printed has to be not only uninformed but completely brainwashed. These self same issues have been continuously ongoing in the news and media. Congress has held Eric Holder in contempt for his actions in Fast and Furious and the President has helped keep vital information out of Congress' hands. Where has Volz and Paulk been all this time? If Obama isn't jeopardizing religious freedom then why are so many Churches and religious organizations, the Catholic Church foremost, filing lawsuits to stop the violation of their consciences? Just because abortion is a legal procedure, does that make it right? A human being's life is snuffed out. Don't those of us who still have consciences have the right to oppose such an atrocity? Not according to Obama and his henchmen/women. If Obama is a Christian why does he oppose biblical principles and commandments at every turn (For example: the killing of babies, homosexual "marriage")? Things completely against what the Bible says. Sorry to disappoint you, Volz, but you are a liberal in the truest sense of the word. Stop deluding yourself.
No wonder these people are in La La Land. They can't even look up simple facts. Every one of these assertions are true and have been substantiated. Do your own homework. I'm not going to spend my precious time citing every fact. They are there for any rational individual to see. Stop living with your heads in the sand and wake up. How can people be so brainwashed. My challenge to you liberals is, prove that none of these things are true. You won't be able to.
Allan, do you really expect a liberal to come up with a rational argument. They can't. The best they can do is attack you personally. When there is nothing to back up their claims they resort to exaggerations about you, your family, your faith, etc. If you expect some kind of logic or truth, forget it. Once they insult every aspect of you they sit back and gloat over the great way they responded, all the while proving their own ignorance, intolerance, illogic, etc. Decent folks know the character assassinations for what they are. Attempts by emotion-driven, misinformed, brainwashed radicals to change the subject and hide the real issues. If this sounds a lot like Obama and his henchmens tactics then you didn't hide behind the door when God handed out brains.
Thank you, editor, for calling our attention to the fact that Ron Gould, a smart Republican running for congress, wants to allow professors and students to be armed just in case there may be some loon out there like there was in Columbine and Virginia Tech. Gould knows that our Second Amendment rights should be more broadly applied in order to save lives. Liberals counter by saying there might a huge gun fight if both sides are armed. I guess they would rather see innocent people slaughtered by an unencumbered maniac based on a "might." It's like a shepherd leading his flock to the wolves and saying "Bon Appetit!" I wonder how different things would have been in the Tucson shootings if it had been a Republican gathering? I'm not trying to be insensitive. Some radical will latch onto this one sentence and call me a hate-monger or something. I'm just speculating about how more lives might have been saved if someone in the audience was carrying a gun. There are numerous incidents where people are saved from murder, robbery, and rape, because they were carrying a gun. Look up Armed Citizen or go to the NRA website. There's no bias either. Just ordinary news articles from all over the country showing the value of having a gun in a dangerous situation. A nice surprise is that there are many Democrats in Congress who understand this kind of common sense. Go figure. And don't be fooled if some "expert" says crime goes up when ordinary citizens are armed. Time and time again statistics have proven just the opposite. If someone tells you otherwise they are being dishonest. Before you are hoodwinked by the anti-gun zealots in our midst, get all the facts. Make decisions based on fact and common sense rather than touchy-feely emotions.
Aw Sylvia. Why didn't you mention the most important place to register to vote, the Republican Headquarters on Hwy 87 next to the Post Office? Especially if you want to elect any loyal Americans.
One should be asking "What is Obama Hiding?" Especially with the Fast and Furious scandal that had the justice dept. under Eric Holder walking guns across the Mexican border without tracking them. How many of these guns have killed people? One of the guns ended up killing a US border patrol agent, and now that there is a Congressional investigation, Holder has stone-walled at every turn and Obama added his Executive Privilege to it so the facts won't come out. Why? Because Obama was probably the ring-leader and Holder the instigator. Rather than worrying about Romney's taxes, shouldn't we be worrying about re-electing an accomplice to murder?
Yeah, go ahead and find a rock you can commune with. And they say Christians are crazy.
Gosh, you liberals must be really smart too, to be able to read my mind that I want all those who question my beliefs to burn in hell. Tell me, can you look in your crystal ball and tell me what I'm going to say or feel next? Just another name-calling liberal side-stepping the issues by trying to paint good Christians as hate-filled, intolerant, etc. A good Christian wants everyone to stay out of hell by telling them the truth. How sad there are some who don't want help. Maybe there's still hope. Paulk is still fighting his conscience. If he wasn't, he would care less. Let's hope his conscience finally wins.
Sorry Sylvia. Once again you've been duped by distortions. When liberals accused Rick Santorum of "loving torture" they took his words completely out of context. Not unusual at all for left-wingers of the lame-stream media. The poor liberals think news companies have the final word on truth. If a newscaster says it, it has to be true. And if they just happen to be wrong once in a while it's just an innocent mistake. Yeah, right! Secondly, Sylvia does not take the time to let us know the definition of torture or decide what exactly is meant by torture. The concept of torture is so vague no one seems to be absolutely sure how to classify each method. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2297) says, "Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity." The 1984 United Nations Convention on Torture called it "the intentional infliction of severe pain." The words violence and severe are themselves somewhat vague. Who draws the line - and where? We all know that burning, breaking limbs, drawing and quartering are real torture. But what about less extreme interrogation techniques like sleep deprivation, being kept under harsh temperatures, or water-boarding (causes a brief panic-induced sensation of drowning but does not physically harm or injure)? Putting someone in solitary confinement might be torture to one person and a peaceful retreat to someone else. The point is, if you're trying to show that someone is a hypocrite, get your facts straight. Rick Santorum is not a sadist. Nor is he contradicting his faith. He knows the power of persuasion can be a useful tool to save lives. If someone, using sleep deprivation on a terrorist, had been able to extract information about the attacks on 9/11 before they happened would that person be wrong to save over 2,000 lives just by making the terrorist uncomfortable? Listen to your friends and family, Sylvia. Let it go. Being your brother/sister's keeper is more complicated than you think.
Last login: yesterday