Sadler vs. Cruz - where does GMG stand on this one?

[UNT90]

UNT90,

You want me to say that life beings at conception, or birth, or at age-18 yrs. None of that is sensical. Each is preceded by a living form of human. The egg cell prior to fertilization was living and human just as much as it was following ferlization.

A more rational question, I thnk, is when does the living cell or cells become sacred. Meaning, when does it matter to your religion. Your answer to that question will be one I won't be able to argue with.

No, this is not a religious discussion, it is a legal discussion.

When does life begin? Come on, stop avoiding the question.

Did you know that if a father of a child kicks the mother in the stomach, killing the fetus, he can be charged with murder in the State of Texas? It appears there is a different definition for the father, no? A mother can abort a fetus but a father cannot? It seems that the state has no problem defining human life when it comes to the father. (And no, morons out there, I don't think a father should be allowed to kill an unborn child).

And you are right, you can't answer the question. You can avoid it, Green P1 can joke about it. But you can't answer it. People who defend abortion never can.

[Mean Green Scrappy]

And here we go with the Liberal Media thing. All of those articles are in regards to a debate he had with Dewhurst. “I think that every human life is a precious gift from God and should be protected in law from conception until natural death.” Every human life means every human life. He doesn't have to use the word rape directly, use some logic. He says every woman that gets pregnant should be forced to have the baby, by law, regardless of the manner in which she became pregnant unless her life is in danger. This is an indisputatble fact, he said these things, just accept it and move on.

I cannot accept your thoughts and disputable facts and just move on because they are wrong and lack logic.

This is what I do accept... 1) There is a liberal bias in the mainstream media. It is easy for you to not see it and accept it because they are on your side and you believe them. So we will keep bringing that up because that is half of our battle. Better get use to it. 2) Only one of those articles, the first one, even mentions Cruz and Dewhurst debating. The others were written after Cruz won the nomination. So you are wrong, not all of those articles are in regard to the Dewhurst / Cruz debates. Only one is. Stop making stuff up. 3) Cruz's statement that you quote is correct. Every human life is a precious gift from God and should be protected in law. And if the law states that you cannot get an abortion except under those 3 circumstances then the law has done its job to protect life.

Stop trying to take one single issue, the use of abortion for a pregnancy that stems from rape, and try to lump all conservatives/republicans together because of a few inappropriate words used by others on our side of the aisle. The fact is you do not know anything more then Cruz is pro life and wants to protect life to the best of our ability. That right there is probably enough information for you not to vote for him, which is fine. But it does not give you the right and everyone else in the liberal media to make up the rest of his stance and say he believes in something when the truth is he has never addressed it except in a broad sense. Is this the only single issue you are worried about this election cycle and want to bring up with Cruz or do you have something else to debate?

[glick1980]

I cannot accept your thoughts and disputable facts and just move on because they are wrong and lack logic.

This is what I do accept... 1) There is a liberal bias in the mainstream media. It is easy for you to not see it and accept it because they are on your side and you believe them. So we will keep bringing that up because that is half of our battle. Better get use to it. 2) Only one of those articles, the first one, even mentions Cruz and Dewhurst debating. The others were written after Cruz won the nomination. So you are wrong, not all of those articles are in regard to the Dewhurst / Cruz debates. Only one is. Stop making stuff up. 3) Cruz's statement that you quote is correct. Every human life is a precious gift from God and should be protected in law. And if the law states that you cannot get an abortion except under those 3 circumstances then the law has done its job to protect life.

Stop trying to take one single issue, the use of abortion for a pregnancy that stems from rape, and try to lump all conservatives/republicans together because of a few inappropriate words used by others on our side of the aisle. The fact is you do not know anything more then Cruz is pro life and wants to protect life to the best of our ability. That right there is probably enough information for you not to vote for him, which is fine. But it does not give you the right and everyone else in the liberal media to make up the rest of his stance and say he believes in something when the truth is he has never addressed it except in a broad sense. Is this the only single issue you are worried about this election cycle and want to bring up with Cruz or do you have something else to debate?

#1 - Bullshit, and a stupid arguement and I don't have a side, except anti tea party.

#2 - First you say all of those articles resulted from one article, now you say only one was in regards to what was said in the Cruz vs. Dewhurst debate. Which is it? This is where both men talked about their stances on abortion.

#3-The major problem with you arguement is that Cruz never says anything about three circumstances when it is ok to get an abortion. He says one, when the mother's life is in danger. Meaning that he is against abortion in the case of rape even if he does not outright say the word rape.

These are not the only issues I disagree with Cruz on, he wants to get rid of the departments of education, energy, EPA, transportation, etc, etc.

Edited October 29, 2012 by glick1980

[Mean Green Scrappy]

#1 - Bullshit, and a stupid arguement and I don't have a side, except anti tea party.

#2 - First you say all of those articles resulted from one article, now you say only one was in regards to what was said in the Cruz vs. Dewhurst debate. Which is it? This is where both men talked about their stances on abortion.

#3-The major problem with you arguement is that Cruz never says anything about three circumstances when it is ok to get an abortion. He says one, when the mother's life is in danger. Meaning that he is against abortion in the case of rape even if he does not outright say the word rape.

These are not the only issues I disagree with Cruz on, he wants to get rid of the departments of education, energy, EPA, transportation, etc, etc.

1) Its only bullshit and a stupid argument to you. To me and millions of others it is a real concern. I don't call your arguments stupid or bullshit. I think them through and try to understand them, then I prove them wrong. And it sure seems like you have side.

2) I said two of the top three articles site the first one as their source that Cruz believes abortion should not be used in rape cases (which he has not said), and the first article just said he believes that without offering any proof. So as you see I never said all those article resulted from one article. Again, you are just making stuff up. And yes that is correct, only one, the first one, was in regards to the debates between them but even it failed to use any quotes or words that the candidates said from those debates.

3) Just because he does not say anything about those three circumstances does that mean he is for or against any of them with regard to abortion. You will have to accept that he has not told you his stance on those three individual circumstances and stop trying to tell people he is one way or the other when you do not know. I know this is hard for you to get but you do not know where he stands on it so stop assuming and stop letting the liberal media try to tell you.

So you have other issues. Let's tackle those. Why should any of those departments be around anymore? Do you really think they are doing a good job and are using their resources as efficiently and effectively as possible?

[glick1980]

1) Its only bullshit and a stupid argument to you. To me and millions of others it is a real concern. I don't call your arguments stupid or bullshit. I think them through and try to understand them, then I prove them wrong. And it sure seems like you have side.

2) I said two of the top three articles site the first one as their source that Cruz believes abortion should not be used in rape cases (which he has not said), and the first article just said he believes that without offering any proof. So as you see I never said all those article resulted from one article. Again, you are just making stuff up. And yes that is correct, only one, the first one, was in regards to the debates between them but even it failed to use any quotes or words that the candidates said from those debates.

3) Just because he does not say anything about those three circumstances does that mean he is for or against any of them with regard to abortion. You will have to accept that he has not told you his stance on those three individual circumstances and stop trying to tell people he is one way or the other when you do not know. I know this is hard for you to get but you do not know where he stands on it so stop assuming and stop letting the liberal media try to tell you.

So you have other issues. Let's tackle those. Why should any of those departments be around anymore? Do you really think they are doing a good job and are using their resources as efficiently and effectively as possible?

I provided you 6 sources that say that Cruz only supports abortion in the case that the mother will die. Your "proving me wrong" invloves you calling the media liars, telling me I am just making stuff up when I am the one with sources, and saying he has not said where he stands on the issue when he has clearly stated that he is only for abortion in the case that the mother will die. Provide some real proof.

Edited October 30, 2012 by glick1980

[Green P1]

Green P1 can joke about it.

As long as we're clear on this.

[Mean Green Scrappy]

I provided you 6 sources that say that Cruz only supports abortion in the case that the mother will die. Your "proving me wrong" invloves you calling the media liars, telling me I am just making stuff up when I am the one with sources, and saying he has not said where he stands on the issue when he has clearly stated that he is only for abortion in the case that the mother will die. Provide some real proof.

My proof is he has not ever said anything about those circumstances other than to save the mother’s life and you can't find anything about him ever doing so. Boom, done! You provided 6 liberal articles that do not say anything about what he ONLY supports, just that he supports abortion to protect the life of the mother, nothing more and nothing less. And they aren't sources except for one because five of them can't reference Cruz in his own words. The liberal media does lie, and you do make up random stuff to throw out there like saying I said something when I never did. Read previous postings for proof. I on the other hand admitted when I misread and misused what you said and apologized. Another example of you putting words in Ted Cruz's mouth and stating you know what his stance is when you don't... You - “and saying he has not said where he stands on the issue when he has clearly stated that he is only for abortion in the case that the mother will die". When has he clearly stated that is his only stance? When? Where? You can't find it. This is you making stuff up my friend.

I do want to clarify the "three circumstances" because I am afraid I have been misusing it. Assuming the three are incest, rape, and when the mother’s life is in danger I have obviously been miss speaking. Cruz has addressed the issue of when the mother’s life is in danger but he has not addressed it in regards to incest and rape. I am sorry for any confusion.

Lets move the conversation forward. I don't know what Cruz's stance is under the case of rape and neither do you because he has not and will not address it. He isn't going to give in to this game that you and your liberal friends are playing of gotcha; you are a right wing nut. The only thing we can agree on is that yes he is pro-life but thinks abortion is an ok alternative when the mother’s life is in danger. Beyond that we just don't know.

So I'll give you another chance to move on to another topic to debate because we aren't going to agree on this and that is ok. I respect your perspective on it. Fighting it out all the way up to the election though will not serve us any good and I doubt bring us to the same opinion. So, how about those departments? Why should they stick around? Aren't they just a waste of our money and a mass expansion of our government that isn't needed? I think Cruz is right on with this one.

[hickoryhouse]

From the Houston chronicle... Doesn't advance the abortion discussion, but Interesting none the less....

"Asked how he'd answer the question Mourdock faced, Cruz said, "I'm not going to engage in hypotheticals. It seems the media is never asking Democrats what their view is, of say, partial-birth abortion. ... Instead, you see reporters engaging sometimes in 'gotcha' games where they try to get Republicans to make ill-considered comments.""

[GTWT]

No, this is not a religious discussion, it is a legal discussion.

No, UNT90, it's a religious question. It's a case where one group of people wants to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else.

[oldguystudent]

Just want to say that it's been my experience that vehement, generally high profile, anti-abortion families frequently, and very discretely suspend their moral, religious and legal beliefs when the situation hits a little too close to home. Glad they have those resources.

Obviously no citations, just anecdotal observation.

[meangreendork]

Just want to say that it's been my experience that vehement, generally high profile, anti-abortion families frequently, and very discretely suspend their moral, religious and legal beliefs when the situation hits a little too close to home. Glad they have those resources.

Obviously no citations, just anecdotal observation.

Actually,

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/oct/30/tennessee-conservative-union-chairman-calls-scott/

[At the time] married physician hooks up with patient, gets her pregnant, pressures her to get an abortion while he's in the process of divorce.

[UNT90]

No, UNT90, it's a religious question. It's a case where one group of people wants to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else.

No, it's not, because when you consider a child a human life, it is illegal to kill him/her.

Again, you are unable to answer a simple question about when a life begins.

Not surprised.

Edited October 30, 2012 by UNT90

[mattmartin817]

I feel like somebody is really going to get their point across and change the others mind about this issues at any minute. That always happens in regards to this issue.

[Mean Green Scrappy]

I feel like somebody is really going to get their point across and change the others mind about this issues at any minute. That always happens in regards to this issue.

You know it. That is why you have to know when to move on and agree to disagree, then try to find something else to discuss to see if you can come to an agreement over anything then build a friendship around that. People get tied down on one issue like this and you know for the most part no one's mind is going to change so you lay out your thoughts for those who haven't maid up their mind and let them decide. This isn't an abortion thread, its a Cruz vs Sadler thread and that is what needs to be discussed. We know for the most part where both men stand on the issue of abortion so I think we can move on to some of their other beliefs and thoughts.

[mattmartin817]

You know it. That is why you have to know when to move on and agree to disagree, then try to find something else to discuss to see if you can come to an agreement over anything then build a friendship around that. People get tied down on one issue like this and you know for the most part no one's mind is going to change so you lay out your thoughts for those who haven't maid up their mind and let them decide. This isn't an abortion thread, its a Cruz vs Sadler thread and that is what needs to be discussed. We know for the most part where both men stand on the issue of abortion so I think we can move on to some of their other beliefs and thoughts.

Like the fact that Cruz has zero legislative experience? Pow pow!

[FirefightnRick]

Like the fact that Cruz has zero legislative experience and may be able to dodge the standard pressures inside the D.C. Beltway Because of it and get something done? Pow pow!

There you go.

Rick

[Mean Green Scrappy]

Like the fact that Cruz has zero legislative experience? Pow pow!

This is true, I agree, and I find this to be a good thing. Yay, we agree and can be friends! Pow pow! I think #powpow will be my new twitter hash tag.

[GTWT]

I feel like somebody is really going to get their point across and change the others mind about this issues at any minute. That always happens in regards to this issue.

Dat true.

The only positive thing about having political discussions on GMG is that it diverts some of us from discussions of whether Coach Mac should be lynched or whether DT is the 10th best or 100th best MG qb of the last 10 years.

By the way, I really appreciate the posts of Scrappy. I've awarded him more +1s than anyone I've ever been in total disagree with. I like your attitude son.

[mattmartin817]

There you go. Also, I'm a life long member of the communist party. I heart Fidel.

Rick

We had no idea Rick. It's fun to change peoples words.

[FirefightnRick]

We had no idea Rick. It's fun to change peoples words.

Yes it is.

BTW, Cruz is leading Sadler 54 to 39 with 6 days to go.

Rick

[Mean Green Scrappy]

By the way, I really appreciate the posts of Scrappy. I've awarded him more +1s than anyone I've ever been in total disagree with. I like your attitude son.

Thank you, I appreciate the nice words.

[mattmartin817]

Yes it is.

BTW, Cruz is leading Sadler 54 to 39 with 6 days to go.

Rick

Not really a shock.

[TheTastyGreek]

No, it's not, because when you consider a child a human life, it is illegal to kill him/her.

What about the Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground?

If someone is inside your body... Just like a black teenager drinking tea in public- You should be able to exterminate them whenever and whyever you want. No prosecution.

(GreenP1 isn't the only one who can joke)

[Christopher Walker]

Rather impressed Sadler even got 40%.

http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/texas/senate/#.UJoTQ2l261M

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I hate to see K.Bailey H. go ..... and hate more to see Cruz walk in.