Something GOOD Bush did- or do you think he is too evil to do anything good?

[Edric O]

Edric, Karl never implemented it, the soviets did.

The Soviets never implemented communism as defined by Marx and Engels. In fact, they never even CLAIMED to. It was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, remember?

[DukeLeto]

The Soviets ARE the name of communism. Before the Soviets, there was no communism.

Are you really that ignorant, or just acting? Do the names "Karl Marx" and "Freidrich Engels" ring a bell? ::)

Ok, even if they are human beings: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." I would think of all people, a Communist should know THAT.

Oh, yes, certainly. But taking an innocent life is immoral and evil, no matter how many lives you save by doing so.

Not without a host, it won't.

That is self-evident. So?

1. Did they run countries? I think the oOviets, then the Chinese, then the Koreans and Vietnamese, have all proved Marx's wonderful Communist Ideal DOESN'T WORK.

2. So, if you and your entire extended family was dying, you would rather one unborn fetus live, than all of you live?

3. It means it is not self-sufficient, yet another one of the traits of a human being.

[emprworm]

but even so, it is kill a human to save many more. A fair trade IMO.

oooh, of course, Acriku, only when the one being killed isn't YOU!

that is a repugnant argument. It is only a fair trade when the one being killed volunteers to sacrifice themself, rather than some immoral scoundrel making the decisions as to "who dies"

[DukeLeto]

but even so, it is kill a human to save many more. A fair trade IMO.

oooh, of course, Acriku, only when the one being killed isn't YOU!

that is a repugnant argument. It is only a fair trade when the one being killed volunteers to sacrifice themself, rather than some immoral scoundrel making the decisions as to "who dies"

I would give my life in a heartbeat to save my family, and probably anyone else's. Yes, even your's.

[emprworm]

well as long as it is you giving your life for others and not you taking someone's life for others.

[Acriku]

Emprworm, I wouldn't be aware to give an answer either way, and yes, to save many people I would sacrifice myself. But again, if I was a fetus I wouldn't know either way.

[GhostHunter]

Bush doesnt help serve all, he helps his friends and no one else, not suited for president at all, this has been proven many times, thank the lord theres people like Collen Powell around....

[Edric O]

Did they run countries? I think the oOviets, then the Chinese, then the Koreans and Vietnamese, have all proved Marx's wonderful Communist Ideal DOESN'T WORK.

No, they just proved that they were not handling the problem correctly. Marx failed to compensate for the corrupting influence of power. If properly improved, his vision will be able to be correctly implemented.

So, if you and your entire extended family was dying, you would rather one unborn fetus live, than all of you live?

I will not kill an innocent just so I may survive. Or anyone, for that matter.

but even so, it is kill a human to save many more. A fair trade IMO.

So, Acriku, what would you say if that fetus was YOUR child?

[DukeLeto]

Using a fetus "living" in a lab to save a life is akin to using a dead man's healthy organs for the same.

[emprworm]

and yes, to save many people I would sacrifice myself.

that is because, Acriku, you are a decent guy. I am glad to hear that. I'd like to think I would do the same.

But no one has a right to volunteer someone else for the task- most especially someone with no voice. If immoral Fred wants to "volunteer" a born human (any foetus that survives outside the womb is 'born')- then Fred can volunteer HIMSELF and sacrifice HIS OWN LIFE for medical knowledge and not sacrifice someone else's.

[Edric O]

Wait a minute... what am I doing? Am I defending that pathetic corporate puppet's (Bush's) policies? I must be tired... I think I'd better get some sleep.

[emprworm]

if DukeLeeeto has any concern at all for people with diseases for stem cell research, then he would be first inline donating his tissue for those who suffer. BUt because instead he sits on the sidelines volunteering other people in his place, it shows his true nature and his grieviously sad view of human life.

[emprworm]

you are defending the people with no voice, Edric. What higher cause could you do?

Yes, Bush defends them too. Does that mean you should stop?

[Acriku]

emprworm, that was a bit harsh...Sometimes an extra voice is all that is needed.

[GhostHunter]

Wait, Wait, Wait.....

Empr your telling me your trying to make a guy who helps the rich more then poor, doesnt get the job done, starts unessacary wars, has no idea what hes doing look good?

[emprworm]

well, when it comes to volunteering someone's life, that is a harsh statement, and if you look at dukeleeeto's last 10 posts, you will see nearly all of them are republican slams against me. Coupled with his obvious wanton disregard for the life of human beings who's lives are forcibly sold to be tissue scrap for research, I think the statement was rather mild on my end.

[Edric O]

you are defending the people with no voice, Edric. What higher cause could you do?

Yes, Bush defends them too. Does that mean you should stop?

No, it means I have to make it clear that by arguing this I am NOT supporting Dubya in any way. And he's not interested in whether people have a voice or not - he's more interested on their ears, so they can hear his propaganda...

And by the way, Acriku and Duke, you should know that the person I loved most in the world was my grandfather. He died of Parkinson's disease.

Yet I stand by my defense of innocent life, and he would have, too.

[emprworm]

make a guy who helps the rich more then poor,

i was laid off by the end of october 2001. I had no job and no income. Thanks to Bush who helped me as a very poor person, I was able to obtain longer unemployment to find work in a horrible economy. If it wasn't for bush taking care of me while financially poor and in debt, I would have had no where to live for 4 months.

so, I'm not really sure what you mean about helping only the rich. this same situation is with my mother as well.

[VigilVirus]

My opinion on this is that the fetus is not a human being until it is born and until born it is the property of the mother (just like a parasite living in a host, which essentially it is). And therefore it is up to the mother to do anything she wants with it.

It states in the bill of rights that humans have the right to manage their own body.

[Acriku]

Did he tuck you in when you went to bed? :D

[Edric O]

Don't make me feel like donating your various internal organs to science, Acriku.

[Gobalopper]

1) His tax cuts favor the rich more then the poor, not saying that the cuts dont HELP the poor but they favor the 400,000+ income a year people a lot, now tell me if you were making that much money would you want to get more of it by tax cuts or keep it the same and help less fortunate people?

Err what is your definition of rich? Did you know that 50% of the population pays 96% of the taxes? So any tax cut is going to affect rich people more then anything else, especially when the top 5% pays 56% of the taxes. Saying that tax cuts are only good for rich people is stupid. If you cut taxes across the board of course the rich are going to get more back because they pay a higher percentage. Do they not teach math anymore?

[VigilVirus]

I thought you were against involuntary sacrifice, Edric ;). How hypocritical ::)

[Acriku]

I think that was a joke Bel, but Edric does not show any sign of it. ;)

[SurlyPIG]

LOL anti-abortionists make me laugh.

They say "How can you possibly say STEALING a life is ok when it isn't your own?"

Well, how can you say abortions are bad when you're not the fatherless 11-year-old that was raped and is now carrying a "fetus/human being/baby/whatever".

If you say a fetus is a human, you have to say sperm and eggs are too...

"Given time a fetus will develop into a human" - only if it has a host. And you can say the same thing about sperm. Given time, it may find itself an egg, become a zygote and develop into a human. Think about that the next time you have a wet dream or something.

This is just a PR stunt. If he followed this, it would be fantastic. But he doesn't respect human life, the homeless or anything at all. When he starts to care about civillians being killed in the war he's going to start, then I'll listen. When he starts being more ballsy about the military (people who volunteer to risk their lives) and respects the civillians of countries he invades (people who did nothing to deserve death) then I'll applaud him. But he keeps making huge tax cuts for the rich and minimal cuts for the poor. In other words, what he preaches is a far shout from what he practices.

If he actually followed the principles of this day he's declared, that would be fantastic. (except for the fetus nonsense)

Edric, Carl Marx invented Marxism - not Communism. Communism is different and actually goes against one of the main points of Marxism. Communism referrs to the political system created by the Bolshevik party in Moscow in the Octobrist revolution. The Bolshevik party later became known as the Communist party.

And dont judge them by the USSR name. There was nothing socialist about communism. Technically, North Korea's name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It's not a republic, it's not democratic, and it's certainly not for the people. It's BS. Don't buy into the silly pet names they create for their totalitarian dictatorships.