Display posts from previous
Sort by

Why do you support John Kerry?

Poll ended at Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:03 pm You may select 1 option

Because he's not Bush.
Total votes: 8 (100%)
Because he promises...(post below) (No votes)
Total votes: 8

For the European and American Kerry supporters

1 by liberator
SG Defender
Why do you support him? Is it because he's not Bush? Or is it his *cough cough* stances on the various issues? Or is it his voting record in the Senate?

I'm curious to see how you feel, because most of what I observe in the arguments for Kerry are actually arguments against Bush.

Also, how do you feel about the fact that the Democrats have stated that they have a legion of lawyers ready to contend the result if they don't win?
My first Armageddon has died.

2005.11.25 06:22:57 combat Your Tachyon Beam Laser I perfectly strikes Ruined Stargate, wrecking for
733.8 damage.

2 by Flipside
Admin
What needs to be understood here is that 'He's not Bush' includes his voting record in Senate.

I'm not saying that Kerry is the ideal choice for America, I'm sorry to see Nader being deliberately stonewalled, because I think that is a cheap tactic for both Dems and Reps to take. Fortunately, it would be difficult for such a thing to happen here.
I am not a conservative, so my own views veer away from Bush anyway.

Whilst Bush gives the 'strong leader abroad' sttitude, he gets very faint hearted when it comes to standing up against his own religions more radical attitudes, such as abortion and stem cell research and even dealing with Ethnic moniorities/same sex relationships etc. The simple fact that Bush allows religion to set his own views is not a problem, he is, however, alloweing that religion to shape the country.

And considering the way Bush Sr. pushed his buddies in Supreme Court to make his little boy President, I don't actually blame the Democrats :)

You are not put in charge of a country to mould it to your own image, you are put there to govern it and guide it toward a future that will make it's people happy, all of them, not just the ones that you deem 'worthy' of living there.

Humanity will always have it's diverse classes, and indeed 'lower' classes, the trick is not to turn a blind eye and hope they go away, it's to accept them as a neccesary part of it and deal with it as a logistical problem, not a religios one.

3 by Goober5000
Uber Goober
Flipside wrote:Whilst Bush gives the 'strong leader abroad' sttitude, he gets very faint hearted when it comes to standing up against his own religions more radical attitudes, such as abortion and stem cell research and even dealing with Ethnic moniorities/same sex relationships etc. The simple fact that Bush allows religion to set his own views is not a problem, he is, however, alloweing that religion to shape the country.
That's a non sequitur. If he has certain views on abortion or stem cell research or whatever, why shouldn't he act on them?

If I feel strongly about a particular issue, I'm going to govern the way I believe that issue should be handled. If I didn't, I'd either 1) be a hypocrite or 2) realize that I didn't believe in that issue as strongly as I thought I did.

Whether his beliefs are right or wrong is not the point. He is entitled to govern according to his beliefs. If you don't like it, vote for someone who has different beliefs that more closely align with yours. That's the essence of representative democracy.
Fortunes of War
Deus Ex Machina

VWBB Survivor: 12/01-7/04, 130 posts

4 by Black Wolf
Ascended SG Graduate
I'm not ong to try to deny it - I'd rather see Kerry win it that bush because I really don't want Bush to win. Bush is dangerous, incompetent, overly conservative and a religious fanatic. Kerry might not be much better, but at least he's slightly less of a stain.
TI - Coming in 2011 - Promise!
:flag9:
"Everyone has to wear clothes, and if you don't, you get arrested!" - Mr. T

5 by liberator
SG Defender
Black Wolf wrote:Bush is...a religious fanatic.
You know, those other's are probably true on some level. But just because he admits to praying daily and reading the Bible, don't assume he's a fanatic.

That would lump him in with the real fanatics that kill others in their god's name. What kind of a god would ask his people to kill in his name?

There's good fanatacism and bad fanatacism. Good fanatacism would be being patriotic to your country/city/school/ect. Bad fanatacism would be killing yourself with the sole purpose of killing as many of your perceived enemy as you can when you go.
My first Armageddon has died.

2005.11.25 06:22:57 combat Your Tachyon Beam Laser I perfectly strikes Ruined Stargate, wrecking for
733.8 damage.

6 by Flipside
Admin
It's not so much that which is the problem, but by applying your religious beliefs on a country-wide basis is not governance, it's religious rule. The qquestion of freedom remains, simply because if such research is done, it still allows the choice of those who wish to use it or not.
If the research isn't done everyone suffers. That is what I mean by not allowing the churches views, or even your own personal feelings, to over-ride doing what is your responsibility to your people. By taking away choice, you are taking away freedom, on a religious grounding. That sounds like neither a Democracy nor a Republic to me.

7 by liberator
SG Defender
You're mistaking ethical conviction for religous zealotry, I think Flip. There are costs for being unethical or immoral, not all of them immediate or quantifyable by imperical evidence.

As has been said already, he has to govern based on his life experience and beliefs. You would too. Just because you happen to disagree with how he goes about it doesn't make it wrong neccessarily, and you can always vote him out at the next election.(well you can't being a Brit and all)

On the subject of research, would you use research to develop a medicine if you knew that the research had been performed by an unethical, amoral monster who had killed hundreds or thousands in the process of the research? To Pres. Bush and those of us opposed to both Abortion and/or Ebryonic Stem Cell research, that is one of the key issues. We are not willing to sacrifice millions of human lives in the hope that something useful would come of it. There are better ways, find them.
My first Armageddon has died.

2005.11.25 06:22:57 combat Your Tachyon Beam Laser I perfectly strikes Ruined Stargate, wrecking for
733.8 damage.

9 by Flipside
Admin
Once again though, is stem-cell research unethical? You are assuming that all aborted foetus are 'wrong' or 'murder'.
What I mean by personal belief is exactly that.

Let me place a question here.....

Your wife is pregnant, the child is, whilst in the womb, found to have a genetic disorder which means he will have a moderately short and utterly supported life....

If the mother aborts the foetus, it may go to stem cell research towards that genetic condition, but then, all life is sacred, therefore maybe she should have the baby and allow it to live the life God gave it.

Now consider the situation in 20 years time, now, you are faced with two possibilities :-

1 : Because of imposed religious beliefs, the same situation is going on over and over again, because abortion is not allowed and stem-cell research is not allowed.

2 : Rather than giving birth to a child who has a severe genetic disorder, she gives birth instead to a healthy child who can contribute and help society, or become a dropout as he/she sees fit.

Life exists as a quality as well as a quantity. An attempt to ban abortion, from any male-based institute, is Chauvenism in the extreme.

I'm not quite sure where you get this 'genocide of babies' you seem to envision, you must have an extremely low opinion of the bond a mother forms with her child whilst it is in the womb.
Believe it or not, a very large amount of women don't sleep casually and then use the abortion as a contraceptive, it is a small, highlighted minority. And inevitably, they can no longer have abortions for risk of permanent damage.

You see, Pro-Life should consider more than it's own current needs and start looking not just to Life now, but in the future as well.

If we retard our growth by hiding behind convenient labels then we are no better than that poor child in the womb, unable to be what we truly could be.
Check out my music on my YouTube channel :

https://www.youtube.com/user/PRDibble/videos

10 by StratComm
SG Commando
Why even post this poll? I will be sooo glad when this election is over, if only because I am sick and tired of this stupid debate. (That and the stupid, low-blow, non-sequiter political ads that have inundated TV lately) I personally do not support bush because I do not endorse the policies he has enacted in his last term, and I don't particularly want to see more of the same. I don't like Kerry, but hopefully at least one party will grow a brain and actually put up a viable alternative in 2008. The last thing I want to see is Bush as a President who cannot run again, and is thus not nearly as accountable for his actions as one in his first term. He's already proven that he doesn't care about accountability, and this is the last chance the American public is going to have to say something about it.

But what tires me the most is one side or the other dehumanizing their opponents simply because of a difference of oppinions. If you can't get it through your head that not everyone will agree with you simply because you state your opinion, then you shouldn't even be debating policy (much less politics). And no-one state side, or at least no one vocal, will stand up and call both sides out.

11 by Goober5000
Uber Goober
Flipside, consider the medical practices in use by Nazi Germany. Doctors would perform medical experiments on the infirm, the elderly, and those imprisoned in concentration camps. Not standard treat-and-evaluate, mind you, but harmful procedures where the parties involved would be injured or even killed.

That's universally condemned today because people now recognize that performing those kinds of medical experiments on people is morally wrong, irrespective of the potential medical benefits. People opposed to stem-cell research see the same situation repeated today.
Fortunes of War
Deus Ex Machina

VWBB Survivor: 12/01-7/04, 130 posts

12 by Flipside
Admin
In what way though? These are children that women have chosen to abort by themselves.

What's being suggested isn't breaking into nursery schools and stealing children for their brains.

It's not like girls get together for a manicure, haircut and abortion :(
Check out my music on my YouTube channel :

https://www.youtube.com/user/PRDibble/videos

13 by Hippo
Ascended SG Legend
Goober5000 wrote:
That's universally condemned today because people now recognize that performing those kinds of medical experiments on people is morally wrong, irrespective of the potential medical benefits. People opposed to stem-cell research see the same situation repeated today.

Also very similar to Stanley Milgram's studies from 19somthing... People now can't do psychological research without directly telling the subject EXACTLY what is going to be done... That then confounds the experiments though, wich is why a lot of people ARE in favor of Stem cell research, because there are some studies that can only be done once, before people think they're unethocal...

14 by Goober5000
Uber Goober
Flipside wrote:In what way though? These are children that women have chosen to abort by themselves.
So women have chosen to abort them. That doesn't make it right. People make wrong decisions all the time.

Hippo: I'm not quite sure I understand the intent of your post, but we're not arguing against psychological experiments. Those don't result in permanent injury or death to the subject involved.
Fortunes of War
Deus Ex Machina

VWBB Survivor: 12/01-7/04, 130 posts

15 by Hippo
Ascended SG Legend
I know we aren't arguing psychological points :p (even though many can result in permanent psychological injury)


I'm just stating the opposite to your comment on why people oppose Stem cell research, by pointing out why some people suppoer it... (me, for example)...
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”