Melanie_

Riverwind, you keep talking about being "saddled" with the financial responsibility of these kids, which I really find sad. This man accepted financial responsibility for these kids long ago, but the financial part of it is secondary, in my opinion. What price can you really put on the relationship between a man and his kids? Because they are his kids, regardless of who was the biological father. He was part of their lives since they were born, and they will always see him as their dad. But rather than value that role, he is turning his back on them to spite their mother and save himself some money. I hope that money gives him comfort.

Beer??? Everyone knows that socialists drink wine. Free Pinot Grigio for all!

I don't have to justify it, because it isn't me making the choice. It isn't my choice to make, it is the choice of the woman who is pregnant. However, it has been shown to you time and time again that late term abortions are reserved for severe health concerns - when you can come up with an example (with a valid link) of someone having a late term abortion on a whim, let me know.

Troll baiting can be fun sometimes!

It's been pointed out to you before (thanks BC_Chick!), So really, you have no argument because the only late term abortions that are done are for health or genetic reasons, which you have already said are OK by you. So, feel free to answer my questions now. (Helpful hint: see posts 43 and 67)

I'll try to keep this short, as your attention span doesn't allow for long posts. Earlier in the thread you said that it is ok to abort a fetus if it is the result of rape or incest, or if there is medical reasons to do so. Is this not also murder? Is the fetus responsible for how it was conceived? I'm just trying to follow your logic here - as I've said before, I fully support a woman's right to choose for whatever reasons seem valid to her, but your position seems contradictory. Can you explain?

You're right, ToadBrother, I was just trying to follow his argument.

How is wanting access to abortion a socialist ideal? Do you really understand what the word socialist means? Pro choice is about individual freedom and personal liberty, which seems to me to be more libertarian than anything else.

Generally speaking, government regulation is seen as a socialist principle. Therefore, government restrictions on abortion would be a socialist ideal.

I believe in a woman's right to choose, without interference from government. But I'm curious, Mr. Canada, about why you feel it is OK to have an abortion early in the pregnancy, but not later in the term. My understanding of your position is that life starts at conception, and that any abortion is murder. Where is the line drawn, and why?

I'm a socialist BJ Hunnicutt (thanks for the M*A*S*H* link, DoP! It was fun!)

Great list, punked. Can I borrow it to use elsewhere? Is it yours, or is it from another source?

Good point, Oleg. Maybe its not a Christmas song at all, maybe its a Hanukkah song...... (I still don't see how it was called a Christmas song in the first place) The Christmas songs I like the best are David Bowie/Bing Crosby singing The Little Drummer Boy/Peace on Earth, and Simon and Garfunkel's Silent Night/7 O'Clock News.

In a different thread, several people identified their favourite Christmas song. The UK newspaper the Telegraph has said that the perfect Christmas song is Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah (although I’m not really convinced it is much of a Christmas song). Anyway, to get into the festive season, do you have a preference for a particular version of the song? Or, do you disagree completely – what is the perfect Christmas song? My preference is none of the versions listed – version of Hallelujah is, IMHO, unparalleled.

Pedophiles, not homosexuals, are attracted to young boys. There may be some homosexuals that are pedophiles, just as some heterosexuals are pedophiles, but they do not necessarily go hand in hand.

Hate is a pretty strong word ; I think we can disagree and question each other's views without hatred. Simply answer the questions that are asked, and stop giving vague responses without any actual substance to them. Saying people hate you because of your beliefs is just silly.

Thanks, BC_Chick. I was beginning to feel like a dog with a bone, but you're right, and I guess I'll just let it go now.

Actually, no, it isn't clear at all. You said and The article says Christians are voting Conservative, but it doesn't say why. You have said it is because the Conservatives are less secular than the other parties, and follow the Bible more closely. All I'm asking for is an example of this, from your own perspective.

No, its not in the article. In fact, the article states So, again, yes I recognize that Christians are voting more for the Conservatives. I'm asking you why. You seem to see the Conservatives as having a less secular agenda, and I'm asking you to point to something specific that makes you think this. I've asked this over and over, but you are dancing around it rather than addressing it. Maybe I'm not being clear enough? What in the Conservative party platform or policies is attracting Christian voters?

Argus, I agree that the Conservatives get the Christian vote; that's what the opening post's link was all about. That's not really what I'm asking Mr. Canada, though. He keeps linking Conservative policy to Biblical teachings, and claims that they are less secular than the other parties. All I want is a something specific that shows that.

So what is this thread about? You've brought in homosexuality and abortion several times, which seems to indicate they are topics on the table. But, if they aren't, I'm going to ask for the third or fourth time, what specific policies of the Conservative Party do you see as being based in Biblical teachings? How do you perceive the Conservatives to be less secular than the other parties?

Hmmm, what exactly do you think you know about me? You're making some pretty big assumptions based on just a few posts, asking you to clarify points. When you start a thread, you invite discussion. You invite people to ask you more about your ideas, and to put their own ideas forward. Shutting down discussion with insults simply indicates you aren't prepared to explain your thoughts beyond superficial generalities.

I'm going to try one more time..... Yes, there seems to be an upswing in Christians voting for the Conservative party, at least according to the article you have cited. What I am asking, though, is why? Specifically, why? What is it about the Conservative party that is attracting the religious vote? We know the policies regarding same sex marriage and abortion aren't exactly what many Christians had hoped for, so there must be something else. Please be specific - what is non-secular about the Conservative Party, and which of their policies are based on the Christian religion?

The Conservative Party's official position on same sex marriage is that it is here to stay. They aren't actively opposing abortion, either, or adultery, so I'm still not seeing the connection you are making between the Conservatives and the Biblical teachings you are quoting.

I'm familiar enough with the Bible to know it doesn't mention the Conservative Party of Canada, and the rest of your post is too vague to truly explain your position. If you can't support your opening post with anything more specific, you are just wasting bandwidth.