Another in the never ending stream of Republican vote frauds.

https://videosift.com/video/Republican-Election-Official-Arrested-For-Vote-Fraud-Again

Funny how many 100% pro life no-exception Republicans have erased their abortion position from their websites and campaigns and now claim to be totally pro choice despite decades of anti abortion legislation and positions. ROEVEMBER is going to be a hoot. Thanks Graham for publicly tipping your hand before the election and putting forth a national federal abortion ban bill so no one could honestly say Republicans don’t plan to ban abortion nationally, can’t sit on the “states rights” lie they’ve used for decades to fight against and erode a federal right….not that anyone was fooled for a second, but now the lie that they won’t outlaw abortion nationally, and won’t ban contraception nationally, and won’t outlaw gay marriage nationally, and won’t outlaw interracial marriage nationally are all dead by their own hands.

BTW- Kemp was caught on tape saying if the legislature is willing (if there’s enough Republicans elected) he’s on board with banning chemical contraception and will try. He’s not the only Republican governor saying it. I wonder….who’s going to pay for these hundreds of thousands of unwanted children? Do red states have a surplus to spend opening state orphanages? You people like to bemoan single parent households and parentless children, saying it’s creating criminals, and then you legislate away rights and self autonomy to create hundreds of thousands more unwanted children every single year. Just asinine.

Are you having a stroke? If you talked like you write, I would call an ambulance. Read it, carefully.

1). Nice misdirection there. Way to completely ignore the accusation, and pretend you didn’t just call yourself and all republicans heavily armed crybaby pussies afraid of a few hipsters holding poster board signs.
Funny, because what you described is EXACTLY what women’s healthcare providers suffer from people just like you on a daily basis…the minimum they must tolerate, Bob. Not what happens TO the right, it’s what the right DOES. That’s called projection, you insane idiot. Those healthcare workers have the testicular fortitude to stand up to it daily, with not just constant protesters but death threats and murders and attempted murders constantly, bombings, firebombs, etc….so much they don’t make the news anymore.

2) I thought you cared about the law (*snickers*), the law doesn’t call abortions murder, neither does medical science…are you talking about Texans who immorally execute the mentally disabled? Or morally bankrupt Republicans who try to prosecute women who miscarry for child murder, with no child involved?

3) Are you really so intellectually bankrupt that you don’t think Republican women get abortions? I know you are morally and ethically bankrupt enough to say it even if you don’t believe it, but I’m not sure even you are dumb enough to think it’s true…but you’ve surprised me before.

4) 16 million? How far up your ass did you reach for that number? There were near 600000 terminated pregnancies last year. Would you like to be taxed enough to support them in state orphanages? Only around $1k per year (and rising 2-3% per year) for your share.

Such a little crybaby. You need a nap?

the word "orphanage" in the video description might answer your question


very cute...the elephants, too

Not going to ban you for your opinion. But saying a veteran should have been kia is pretty goddamn low. You are, as all the dumbass motherfuckers on the interweb who have been calling him a traitor are, referring to the fact that he broke during his POW incarceration.

Here is a brief excerpt of the new techniques that came out right around the time he was captured. Techniques that were so insidious that the military had to REWRITE the code regarding breaking under torture.

"Some were physically tortured, some of them succumbed to the pain and broke, some did not, but there was also a new technique employed, and it took time.

Put into a dark box, not large enough to even stretch out, it is called sensory deprivation, and along with other enhancements, it turns a person insane, malleable, and open to the most ridiculous suggestions. like confessing to the war crime of being ordered to bomb hospitals and orphanages, and doing so.

Some of those who broke under this new kind of interrogation feared to be repatriated, thinking they would be tried for collaboration upon their return. American psychologists and psychiatrists, after interviewing some of these ex-POW’s, determined that, given enough time, anyone, if not everyone, could be broken.

John McCain made them start all over on him a number of times, until his Vietnamese interrogators finally gave up, and threw him into a miserable cell, and not back into his horribly, miserable dark box. His conduct, during his interrogation period, and thereafter, was nothing short of heroic."

Now, if you ever go through enhanced interrogation techniques, please feel free to report back to us how you managed not to break or suffer mental damage from them. Until that time, I find your opinion to be ill informed and lacking weight.

EDIT: Before you go saying I am a fanboy, I didn't care for him as a senator or presidential candidate. He was gullible enough to get sucked into the Keating Five mess and I didn't feel he would be a good president, so I voted democrat in 2008, even though I generally vote republican. I can still recognize him as a war hero and for his service though. The man was not a traitor.

This is an amazing organization (David Sheldrick Trust): they maintain quite the orphanage; the game guards/rangers work to keep the poachers out of the reservation space east and south of Nairobi---and they try to make it all work for the local villages, so that it's not an animal win/people lose...

https://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org/asp/orphans.asp

"Doing these things as a prelude to proselytizing means they aren't altruistic..."

Altruism isn't the right word. When people help others to their hurt, that is called agape love, a word the Christian community has owned for 2000 years. You're right of course, that more than a few churches out there are always trying to figure out how to get more members, more money etc. But that isn't all the churches, or even nearly so. For instance the churches in this community dont care who goes where; they all work together and no one is taking the credit for it. This is just one counter example to the broad brush strokes you're painting here.

I think you need a little more nuance here too, newtboy; for instance, would you say it is wrong for atheists to do good deeds in the name of atheism? Or, for the red cross to air commercials showing their accomplishments so they could raise more money to expand their mission in the world?

"And yet, here you are calling attention to yourself (and them), so you proved your statement wrong by stating it publicly. Oops! ;-)"

I didn't mention what I do newtboy, but I have no problem calling attention to the righteous who glorify God through their lives.

"Churches are for profit institutions.."

The church according to the bible is a non-profit organization. Whether churches in America reflect that or not is another question entirely. I know for my church, and almost any other church, you can request to see how the church spends its money year by year. None of the churches I have dealings with are making "profits"

"Once again I would ask, why do you question your god's clear wish that I (and others) not believe in him..."

Jesus Christ died for our sins, yours and mine. God already demonstrated His love for us while we were sinners, now the only question is, will you reciprocate? The insanity of the question posed to Stephan Fry, ie what would you say to God, is exposed by the answer "How dare you!" by Stephan. It seems that people believe God is a man who needs to explain Himself, who has something to hide. Yet, Stephan and every other human being have a lot to hide; the brutal and ugly truth of how we have all lived our lives here.

It's easy for a man to say to people who know nothing about him that he will shake his fist at God when they meet. Yet, what will he do when all of his lawless deeds are exposed and the secrets he has kept from everyone are brought to light? All the fight will go out of him immediately, this I guarantee you. Yet, this in itself is still ridiculous, considering that even merely being in Gods presence is enough to make the most hardened sinner fall to his knees and weep uncontrollably. But people won't be weeping because God loves them on that day, they will be weeping and gnashing their teeth after being confronted by the fact that they have missed the boat for eternity.

"Shirley.."

My name isn't Sherlock..

"Doing 100 good deeds and one incredibly evil deed makes one evil. No church in history has ever reached that level of goodness. Churches are evil. I hope that clears things up."

I'm glad you understand what I have been trying to explain to the sift for years; a relative goodness is no goodness at all. If you set fire to someones home, and then built 27 orphanages, would people call you good? Why is it then that people think that all of our good deeds should cause God to forgive us for a single sin? This is the reason Jesus died for us, because we can't earn Gods forgiveness and our good deeds can't erase our bad ones. Could you ever go to court and say "your honor, although I commited this crime I have done over 1000 hours of community service in my lifetime, so please dismiss the case; will that ever happen? That wouldn't be justice, and if God threw out our case without true justice, He wouldn't be a just judge.

What would I say about churches who have done evil? These are institutions; the true church is the body of Christ, of which every born again believer is a member of. That is what is happening in my community, is that no one cares about the institution of the church; they are just being the church. The reward is simply this, to serve God honorably by living a sacrificial life predicated on sacrificial love.

Fuck ants! I want to back up a truck of molten aluminum into the top of an orphanage!

It will be a silvery Pompeii of children! A work of art!

A10anis, comparing killing an anthill to the holocaust? Really? You're an idiot.

You're right! If she was found to of committed a more serious crime she should definitely of been electrocuted.

What level of crime would say makes it ok? On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being parking ticket and 10 being doomsday device terrorist attack targeting the president and a kitten orphanage?

Obama has divided the nation all by himself, has he?

Let's never mind the do-nothing House. Never mind the Republican nominee with positions like "the solution is to do the opposite of whatever Obama is for." Wow, nuanced! Never mind the Republican pow wow where they decided they were going to put politics ahead of progress, and then all that time they put politics ahead of progress.

Obama asked them to pass legislation _they_ invented! They _still_ said no. Sounds to me like he was trying to work with them, but all they wanted to do was program people to talk about how divided the President has made the country. Mission success! If you want to see politicians that are dividing the country, look no further than the House. Take a gander at the Senate filibuster statistics. A huge spike coincides with '08 that hasn't abated. Take a look at Wisconsin, where unions are being destroyed. Take a look at half a dozen or more states where the Republican state houses are trying to stop poor non-Republicans from voting. NOPE! NOT A PROBLEM!

Obama is literally hitler! If this President went into a burning orphanage and rescued every single orphan in there, people who think he's the problem would find a way to have a problem with that.

The real culprit of divisiveness is all cable news. Turn off the Fox and MSNBC and get real news.

(from YouTube)

Movies in order of appearance:

Halloween
Freddy VS. Jason
Resident Evil
The Amityville Horror
Night of the Demons
Christine
Shocker
From Dusk Till Dawn
Planet Terror
Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood
The Thing
Alice Sweet Alice
Don't Look Now
The Town That Dreaded Sundown
Madman
The Shining
The Exorcist
Poltergeist
Child's Play
28 Days Later
Psycho
Cemetery Man
Salem's Lot
Hellraiser II: Hellbound
Bram Stoker's Dracula
Jacob's Ladder
Suspiria
Slither
Trick R Treat
Re-Animator
Killer Klowns From Outer Space
Creepshow
American Psycho
Leprechaun
The Dark Half
The Hitcher
The Final Destination
Zombi 2
Audition
The Changeling
The Omen
Drag Me To Hell
The Crazies
The Ring
Jaws
The Descent
When a Stranger Calls
Dawn of the Dead
The Devil's Rejects
The Exorcist
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Near Dark
Motel Hell
Carrie
Spontaneous Combustion
An American Werewolf in London
The Blair Witch Project
[REC]
Paranormal Activity
Day of the Dead
Cube Zero
Ichi the Killer
Dead Snow
The Machine Girl
Wrong Turn 2
Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead
Black Sheep
Saw III
Freddy VS. Jason
Hatchet II
The Descent
Braindead (Dead Alive)
Day of the Dead
Troll 2
Shaun of the Dead
Phantasm
Profondo Rosso (Deep Red)
Return of the Living Dead
Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn
C.H.U.D.
Baby Blood
Slugs
Tales From the Crypt: Demon Knight
Bride of Chucky
976-EVIL
Tremors
The Devil's Backbone
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare
A Tale of Two Sisters
Jeepers Creepers II
Basket Case
Alien
Cujo
Rosemary's Baby
Interview with the Vampire
Let the Right One In
Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Scream
Chakushin Ari (One Missed Call)
Ju-On (The Grudge)
House on Haunted Hill
Hostel
Candyman
Insidious
The Orphanage
Black Christmas
Pet Semetary
Fright Night
The Exorcist
Mother's Day
Scanners
The Shining
The Evil Dead
The Exorcism of Emily Rose
Chopping Mall
Braindead (Dead Alive)

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^bcglorf:
The tragedy is neither side wants to discuss the underlying problem of reaching an agreement on when life begins, and thus is granted full human rights.
People have trouble accepting conception as that point.
People have trouble accepting birth as that point.
What's worse, is people refuse to discuss that point as it makes them uncomfortable.

I think one side rejects discussion more than the other - no prizes for guessing which one. And if it's true that abortion IS murder, we're gonna have to build a few hundred jails for all the millions of women that are gonna be imprisoned for murder.
And the doctors, and anyone else involved. Maybe fathers too?
How about rape pregnancies? Should we force the mother to look after it? Maybe dump it in an orphanage? If god forbid someone got pregnant in this way, and the woman got rid of it, the woman could end up with a smaller sentence than the scumbag who raped her.
There are a fucking billion nuances that need sorting out, but they just want to shout each other down, or stand outside abortion clinics yelling at innocent people in the street.
The pro life community in general has its head up its own arse - it is currently legal; to change the law you must put forward a convincing, logical argument. By taking the approach they're taking, they're never gonna get anywhere. Not that i want them to.

I said nothing about sides, but I dare say neither side has much claim to focusing on presenting a convincing, logical argument. People are either murderers or haters of women and lovers of rapists. Both sides are equally negligent and stubborn in their refusal to recognize or even acknowledge the real underlying question.
You should note you even just did it yourself leaping right over any discussion of when life begins and went straight after people's heart strings over jailing millions of women and even jailing of rape victims.
Stop and have the logical discussion of when a fetus is a human and should be granted full human rights.

No, i didn't skip over anything - you can hardly expect me to discuss all aspects of abortion in a few paragraphs. I stated some of the issues that would need to be handled if the law is changed, i stated my opinion, and criticised the approach of pro-lifers. I think that is a logical thing to do - the law is the law and if they want to change it, it is they who need the convincing argument. That isn't because i'm pro-choice, that's just a fact of life.
I didn't intend tug on any heart strings, hence why i framed my argument without emotive language; it appears matter of fact to me, if you can suggest some appropriate adjustments then i may make them. But why would you rather skip over the discussion of such things? Perhaps that shows your own desire to skip over some issues.
Don't forget that if i am pro-choice, then i will frame an argument for pro-choice. It is not my responsibility to do otherwise.
If i wanted to change marijuana laws (and i do), then i need to provide a convincing argument first (which i can). Then i have to make sure others are listening and focus my energies on those who are not. This seems logical and sensible to me. Do you disagree? If so, how else do you suggest we go about changing established norms? Problems must be identified before they are adressed, no?


My problem is you still have the same frightened attitude as any of the other combatants on either side. The 'heroic' girl in this video is the same as well.

Why is everyone so scared by consideration of the real question, when does life begin?

All of your pro-life arguments apply to the exact moment before the child leaves the womb. Should anybody having a c-section get to choose if the doctor hands them the baby or slits it's throat and tosses it aside? After all, it hadn't been born yet so it's a matter of choice.

The question of when life begins is paramount, and both sides are uncomfortable with it. You haven't shown my you are in any way unique, you've failed in both posts to even touch the notion of when a human life should be granted full rights. One might assume the being pro-life, you feel life begins at birth, but that of course introduces the ugliness mentioned above.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^bcglorf:
The tragedy is neither side wants to discuss the underlying problem of reaching an agreement on when life begins, and thus is granted full human rights.
People have trouble accepting conception as that point.
People have trouble accepting birth as that point.
What's worse, is people refuse to discuss that point as it makes them uncomfortable.

I think one side rejects discussion more than the other - no prizes for guessing which one. And if it's true that abortion IS murder, we're gonna have to build a few hundred jails for all the millions of women that are gonna be imprisoned for murder.
And the doctors, and anyone else involved. Maybe fathers too?
How about rape pregnancies? Should we force the mother to look after it? Maybe dump it in an orphanage? If god forbid someone got pregnant in this way, and the woman got rid of it, the woman could end up with a smaller sentence than the scumbag who raped her.
There are a fucking billion nuances that need sorting out, but they just want to shout each other down, or stand outside abortion clinics yelling at innocent people in the street.
The pro life community in general has its head up its own arse - it is currently legal; to change the law you must put forward a convincing, logical argument. By taking the approach they're taking, they're never gonna get anywhere. Not that i want them to.

I said nothing about sides, but I dare say neither side has much claim to focusing on presenting a convincing, logical argument. People are either murderers or haters of women and lovers of rapists. Both sides are equally negligent and stubborn in their refusal to recognize or even acknowledge the real underlying question.
You should note you even just did it yourself leaping right over any discussion of when life begins and went straight after people's heart strings over jailing millions of women and even jailing of rape victims.
Stop and have the logical discussion of when a fetus is a human and should be granted full human rights.


No, i didn't skip over anything - you can hardly expect me to discuss all aspects of abortion in a few paragraphs. I stated some of the issues that would need to be handled if the law is changed, i stated my opinion, and criticised the approach of pro-lifers. I think that is a logical thing to do - the law is the law and if they want to change it, it is they who need the convincing argument. That isn't because i'm pro-choice, that's just a fact of life.

I didn't intend tug on any heart strings, hence why i framed my argument without emotive language; it appears matter of fact to me, if you can suggest some appropriate adjustments then i may make them. But why would you rather skip over the discussion of such things? Perhaps that shows your own desire to skip over some issues.

Don't forget that if i am pro-choice, then i will frame an argument for pro-choice. It is not my responsibility to do otherwise.

If i wanted to change marijuana laws (and i do), then i need to provide a convincing argument first (which i can). Then i have to make sure others are listening and focus my energies on those who are not. This seems logical and sensible to me. Do you disagree? If so, how else do you suggest we go about changing established norms? Problems must be identified before they are adressed, no?

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^bcglorf:
The tragedy is neither side wants to discuss the underlying problem of reaching an agreement on when life begins, and thus is granted full human rights.
People have trouble accepting conception as that point.
People have trouble accepting birth as that point.
What's worse, is people refuse to discuss that point as it makes them uncomfortable.

I think one side rejects discussion more than the other - no prizes for guessing which one. And if it's true that abortion IS murder, we're gonna have to build a few hundred jails for all the millions of women that are gonna be imprisoned for murder.
And the doctors, and anyone else involved. Maybe fathers too?
How about rape pregnancies? Should we force the mother to look after it? Maybe dump it in an orphanage? If god forbid someone got pregnant in this way, and the woman got rid of it, the woman could end up with a smaller sentence than the scumbag who raped her.
There are a fucking billion nuances that need sorting out, but they just want to shout each other down, or stand outside abortion clinics yelling at innocent people in the street.
The pro life community in general has its head up its own arse - it is currently legal; to change the law you must put forward a convincing, logical argument. By taking the approach they're taking, they're never gonna get anywhere. Not that i want them to.


I said nothing about sides, but I dare say neither side has much claim to focusing on presenting a convincing, logical argument. People are either murderers or haters of women and lovers of rapists. Both sides are equally negligent and stubborn in their refusal to recognize or even acknowledge the real underlying question.

You should note you even just did it yourself leaping right over any discussion of when life begins and went straight after people's heart strings over jailing millions of women and even jailing of rape victims.

Stop and have the logical discussion of when a fetus is a human and should be granted full human rights.

>> ^bcglorf:

The tragedy is neither side wants to discuss the underlying problem of reaching an agreement on when life begins, and thus is granted full human rights.
People have trouble accepting conception as that point.
People have trouble accepting birth as that point.
What's worse, is people refuse to discuss that point as it makes them uncomfortable.


I think one side rejects discussion more than the other - no prizes for guessing which one. And if it's true that abortion IS murder, we're gonna have to build a few hundred jails for all the millions of women that are gonna be imprisoned for murder.

And the doctors, and anyone else involved. Maybe fathers too?

How about rape pregnancies? Should we force the mother to look after it? Maybe dump it in an orphanage? If god forbid someone got pregnant in this way, and the woman got rid of it, the woman could end up with a smaller sentence than the scumbag who raped her.

There are a fucking billion nuances that need sorting out, but they just want to shout each other down, or stand outside abortion clinics yelling at innocent people in the street.

The pro life community in general has its head up its own arse - it is currently legal; to change the law you must put forward a convincing, logical argument. By taking the approach they're taking, they're never gonna get anywhere. Not that i want them to.

>> ^AnimalsForCrackers:

I think they should have kept the setting more contemporary.
The whole "cultural mainstays of yesteryear in modern fish out of water situations" is a comedic dead-horse to me. I mean, Snooky, reeeally? Fer fucks sake, Hollywood.
Looks like the setup is them being raised in the Sisters of Mercy Orphanage so "fish out of water" would make more sense, and could account for Curly's innocence (as WP mentioned).