StraightAndNarrow
Active Member
The flame of freedom and liberty burns a little brighter with the replacement of Ashcroft as Attorney General.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I didn't see anyone here say that. Some of you guys have no problem making stuff up ... That is sad.So it's okay to have a pro-choice president, pro-choice AG, pro-choice Secretary of State, pro-choice Senators, etc., as long as we get some pro-life judges?
If pro life protesters break the law then they should be prosecuted. That simple. It doesn't depend on whether you are pro-life or not. Protests are largely pretty useless. After all, look how much good they have done.The office of the Attorney General decides whether to prosecute pro-life protesters. One of the reasons the liberals protested Ashcroft in 2000 was because of his strong pro-life stand.
Spoken like a true blue liberal. Oh, puleeese!Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
The flame of freedom and liberty burns a little brighter with the replacement of Ashcroft as Attorney General.
A gentlemanly and diplomatic way of saying the stress and evil and constant attacks on my character, threats of lawsuits, (and probably threats on my life from the wicked) have exhausted me.The demands of justice are both rewarding and depleting. I take great personal satisfaction in the record which has been developed. The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved. The rule of law has been strengthened and upheld in the courts. Yet, I believe that the Department of Justice would be well served by new leadership and fresh inspiration. I believe that my energies and talents should be directed
toward other challenging horizons.
If the SCOTUS said that it was legal to kill the elderly or the handicapped would you support the law or would you do whatever it takes to protect those lives that would be butchered under the new law?Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
SCOTUS has determined abortion to be protected under law. I believe they are sorely wrong. But I don't get to disobey the law in pursuit of that. There is a legal means to pursue that.
I would do what I do now ... Not support the law, preach and teach about the sanctity of human life, and use legal means to change it.If the SCOTUS said that it was legal to kill the elderly or the handicapped would you support the law or would you do whatever it takes to protect those lives that would be butchered under the new law?
I can support President Bush, having voted for him, without approving of every move he makes. There is no one who could be president whose every move I would agree with.Originally posted by PastorGreg:
All KenH can say about both of Bush's very "unconservative" moves today is "Kerry would have been worse."
I thought he was joking.Originally posted by PastorGreg:
...All KenH can say about both of Bush's very "unconservative" moves today is "Kerry would have been worse." ...
And now, because of your vote, something will finally be done about it.I'll vote for people who actually want to do something about it.