Who Is Mitt Romney's 47 Percent? - Page 7
Register Today!-
Sep 23, '12 by JolieSo, the discussion about why some do not care for Obama gets diverted, again to discuss contraception. (From AKY post # 59 above.)
Such rich irony. You're getting indignant about the shift of conversation from Obama to birth control, when the topic of this thread is Romney's 47%
You're right. Your family members birth control pills are none of my business, unless you expect me to pay for them.Last edit by Jolie on Sep 23, '12 - Sep 23, '12 by Jolie[COLOR=#003366]Quote[/COLOR] from Wet NoodleBeside all that, I am regularly shocked at the ice-cold lack of concern we have for one another. So much for the salutary effect of so much religion in our nation.Replace "one another" with "unborn children" and you might have an idea of why some of us have issues with being forced to fund a health care 'system' that takes innocent life. (from Viva)
I agree Viva, but would go one step further and replace "religion" with the "liberal movement."
Those who claim to be compassionate, but seem to reserve that compassion for those fortunate enough to have survived the fetal period. I thought that the measure of compassion was a society's treatment of it's most vulnerable members. -
Sep 23, '12 by TweetyQuote from JolieSo, the discussion about why some do not care for Obama gets diverted, when..............the topic of this thread is Romney's 47%
Yeah, I hate too when the subject gets changed (except in the election thread). The topic is not "why some do not care for Obama" by the way, it's what you said that I highlight. Defend that change of topic and you defend aky too. Just sayin'aknottedyarn and herring_RN like this. -
Sep 24, '12 by tewdlesQuote from Jolie$10 prescription? Last time my daughter had to pay out of pocket for hormone therapy for her bleeding it cost her way more than $10, just sayin. And of course, no one thinks that insurance should pay for it because those hormones are packaged as...you guessed it...oral birth control.How has your niece survived to this point, AKY, without the mandate that Roman Catholics and other faithful violate their deeply held religious beliefs to provide products and services that destroy life?
If anyone would allow a family member to bleed to death for want of someone else paying for a $10/month prescription that has never before been mandated, that speaks far more loudly about the individual and family than it does religious beliefs.
Perhaps she survived to this point because she was premenstrual in age group???mediajunkie650 and aknottedyarn like this. - Sep 24, '12 by tewdlesAt the risk of sounding callous... most of us do care for the most vulnerable of society's members. At this time fetal tissue, living or not, is not considered a citizen or member of the society... yet. While I do not believe in abortion for myself or my family, it is currently the law of the land and women are currently entitled to make those personal health and parenting choices for themselves with their loved ones and physician. Our society decided, when I was a teen, that legal abortion was desireable.
The compassion for citizens needing comprehensive health care is not related to the compassion a person may have for the unborn...they are 2 entirely different health care scenarios. It is simply not honest to say that professionals reserve compassion for one over the other as a statement of fact.
To me, abortion is not the deciding factor in my voting...for some it is...
That says NOTHING about my compassion or the compassion of millions who feel similarly to me. - Guide
Sep 24, '12 by aknottedyarnThank you Tewdles. As I tried to explain the other day the BCP necessary are not the $10 month. I did not really appreciate the snide comments about expecting others to pay for it. The issue is obviously not black/white. Actually I can see the religious reasons for not paying for BCP. I do not agree because it opens the barn door to every religion, even the mail order preachers, to decide what is acceptable. Certainly when hormone therapy is used I can see no reason for any religion to object.
But it is a fight where I will use my vote and try to get others to vote. I vote on a compilation of issues. I don't think I have ever based my vote entirely on one issue. In some ways I feel sorry for those who do. We have seen politicians change their views so often. Did any of your votes go to the person who asked you to read his lips about taxes? How about other one issue votes? Got any? How did it turn out.
I ask this not being snarky. I hope it did work out I just have a bit of cynacism and doubt that any stance I found strong enough to influence a vote by itself would remain untarnished.tewdles likes this. - Guide
Sep 24, '12 by herring_RNIn California hundreds of nurses took a chance and worked on the campaign of Gray Davis for governor based on his promise to sign the "Safe Staffing Ratio Law"
Thankfully at the last hour he signed it.
I think he would have been recalled if he had vetoed it. that one time a single issue paid off. (see attachment)aknottedyarn likes this. - Guide
Sep 24, '12 by Spidey's momQuote from herring_RNGray Davis DID get recalled.In California hundreds of nurses took a chance and worked on the campaign of Gray Davis for governor based on his promise to sign the "Safe Staffing Ratio Law"
Thankfully at the last hour he signed it.
I think he would have been recalled if he had vetoed it. that one time a single issue paid off. (see attachment)
Of course, we got Arnold instead.
herring_RN and VivaLasViejas like this. - GuideSep 25, '12 by herring_RNMy point was that nurses got a law passed that helps 100% of patients in hospitals. Lives are saved because there are fewer deaths to failure to rescue. Supporting a candidate on one issue worked out OK.
And Gray Davis would have been recalled whether he signed the bill or not.
I don't think Arnold was a better governor. - Guideherring_RN likes this.