"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOBBY wrote:

The Constitution doesn't grant the right to take another life.

Actually, the Constitution doesn't address that issue drectly. But it
certainly
does not grant the right of one group to impose it's religious beliefs, in
the
form of law, on the entire country.

Abortion has nothing to do with one's religious belief. Abortion and
religion shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence, IMO. It's a
scientific and legal issue. Science and the law get their basis in
"objectivity". Religion gets its basis in "subjectivity". The debate has
now progressed to exactly the point where it should be: at what point is the
fetus considered "alive"? I say it's when the heart starts beating.






You keep calling yourself "conservative", but have yet to mention one
single
"conservative" issue that you believe in.

Actually, I posted a list of conservative principles some time ago. Oddly
enough, all the Bush cheerleaders were silent. Shall I post it again?

Sure. It'll be worth a chuckle.

NOYB wrote:


Abortion has nothing to do with one's religious belief. Abortion and
religion shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence, IMO.

Well, there you have it. Your opinion does not have the weight of law,
fortunately.

DSK

I'm still waiting for a list of your conservative beliefs. Or did you post
it already...and the list was entirely blank?


"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:


Abortion has nothing to do with one's religious belief. Abortion and
religion shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence, IMO.

Well, there you have it. Your opinion does not have the weight of law,
fortunately.

DSK

NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting for a list of your conservative beliefs. Or did you post
it already...and the list was entirely blank?


Like many facts & events in the real world, it passed you by, didn't it?

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=re...e+princip les

Here is the text

The resident right-wing whackos of this newsgroup
have shown consistent disregard for what is
really "conservative" and what is really
"liberal." It's not likely that most of them will
ever learn anything, much less the following
principles, but at least I have tried.

Conservatives believe:

The gov't should be fiscally restrained.

The country's military should be maintained or
increased in strength to the extent of
being able to defeat any realistic threats.

Criminals guilty of certain heinous acts deserve
the death penalty.

Every right comes at a cost, and every priviledge
carries a corresponding obligation.

Morals are not relative, and principles are not a
matter of inconvenience. In the same light,
hypocrisy regarding morals, ethics, and principle
is one of the most repugnant human failings.

The status quo of social and economic order should
be maintained, or adjusted to
meet certain demands. (Note: the corresponding
liberal belief is that the social and
economic order of society is secondary to the
needs of individuals, and that the
status quo should not be respected.) This is
probably the core divider between real
conservatism and liberalism.

I strongly believe in all these things, and yet am
not a cheerleader for President Bush. Tub thumping
for one's favorite politico is partisanship, not
conservatism.

Regards
Doug King

"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting for a list of your conservative beliefs. Or did you
post
it already...and the list was entirely blank?


Like many facts & events in the real world, it passed you by, didn't it?


http://groups.google.com/groups?q=re...e+princip les

Here is the text

The resident right-wing whackos of this newsgroup
have shown consistent disregard for what is
really "conservative" and what is really
"liberal." It's not likely that most of them will
ever learn anything, much less the following
principles, but at least I have tried.

Conservatives believe:

The gov't should be fiscally restrained.

The country's military should be maintained or
increased in strength to the extent of
being able to defeat any realistic threats.

Criminals guilty of certain heinous acts deserve
the death penalty.

Wow. You're more conservative than me on this one.


Every right comes at a cost, and every priviledge
carries a corresponding obligation.

Morals are not relative, and principles are not a
matter of inconvenience. In the same light,
hypocrisy regarding morals, ethics, and principle
is one of the most repugnant human failings.


It's funny that you specify morals, ethics, and principle as conservative
traits. I agree...and it's the opposite of liberal traits.



The status quo of social and economic order should
be maintained,

Bzzzzzt. Nice try, but no. Under the status quo, Americans currently pay a
progressive tax. Conservatives abhor the idea of a progressive tax...which
is designed to undo the status quo and take more money from the wealthy and
give it to the poor via government entitlements.


or adjusted to
meet certain demands.

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's why
we should have a flat tax. Wanna raise my *rate*? Then everybody's *rate*
is increased.

NOYB wrote:
It's funny that you specify morals, ethics, and principle as conservative
traits. I agree...and it's the opposite of liberal traits.

That you say this only shows that you don't really know what morals &
ethics are. Perhaps you should look up the definition of 'ethos' to get
started.

Anyway, some liberals have principles too. And some people, such as
yourself and our current President & Vice President, give lip service to
the idea of principles but really act out whatever is most expedient &
profitable.

Principles that are abandoned at the first (or even the second) hint of
trouble aren't really principles, are they?

As for adopting an unwanted child, I only know what you yourself have
told me (and the rest of the group)... that you might have considered it
but did not actually do it.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
It's funny that you specify morals, ethics, and principle as
conservative
traits. I agree...and it's the opposite of liberal traits.

That you say this only shows that you don't really know what morals &
ethics are. Perhaps you should look up the definition of 'ethos' to get
started.

Anyway, some liberals have principles too. And some people, such as
yourself and our current President & Vice President, give lip service to
the idea of principles but really act out whatever is most expedient &
profitable.

Principles that are abandoned at the first (or even the second) hint of
trouble aren't really principles, are they?

As for adopting an unwanted child, I only know what you yourself have
told me (and the rest of the group)... that you might have considered it
but did not actually do it.

I have three sons under the age of 5. Why would I adopt at this point in my
life? Perhaps we *will* adopt a girl once the boys have grown a little bit
older, however.

"NOYB" wrote in message news:1z8Wb.20660

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's
why
we should have a flat tax.

I disagree here, Doc. I prefer to see a national consumption tax of about
10%, coupled with total repeal of any income tax. The national consumption
tax would be implemented with similar exemptions and exclusions as are found
in most sales tax structures today. A very simple form could be submitted
annually documenting income status below a certain threshold for rebate
purposes to the very poor. Benefits would be several: minimal
bureaucracy - the electronic mechanism to account and collect such a tax is
already in place in many states, and is easily copied elsewhere;
substantially increased tax base - ALL monies would naturally fall under the
umbrella of such a tax: criminal income, legitimate income, welfare
payments, inheritance income, etc.; it would almost totally eliminate the
opportunity for Congress to screw up peoples' lives with inept attempts at
social engineering, and it would virtually eliminate the IRS - probably the
most unchecked and abusive bureaucracy this government has ever produced.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message news:1z8Wb.20660

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's
why
we should have a flat tax.

I disagree here, Doc. I prefer to see a national consumption tax of about
10%, coupled with total repeal of any income tax. The national
consumption
tax would be implemented with similar exemptions and exclusions as are
found
in most sales tax structures today.

Just one problem: Cash sales. I'm talking about under-the-table sales done
by legitimate businesses, as well as transfers of goods outside of that
venue, as between criminal elements. Truckload of DVD players....that sort
of thing.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message news:1z8Wb.20660

I'm ok with that as long as it's equitable and across the board. That's
why
we should have a flat tax.

I disagree here, Doc. I prefer to see a national consumption tax of about
10%, coupled with total repeal of any income tax.

Fine. I can go along with that. However, I was promoting a flat tax that
phases out at a certain income level...just to be "fair" to our Democratic
colleages. A consumption tax is even better.