serendipity730
New member
I was just curious who we were all planning on voting for in November. I am unequivocally voting for Kerry, I don't think he is wonderful, but he isn't BUSH!
~ Mary 22 w/CF
~ Mary 22 w/CF
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Vote
- Thread starter serendipity730
- Start date
Not me. While I'm not at all happy with Bush, in my opinion, Kerry makes promises he won't be able to keep, some that NO ONE could keep, and most that he KNOWS he won't and or can't keep. Bottom line for me is that I want a leader with some shred of morality and integrity and I don't think Kerry has either. In my opinion, it's a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils... Just my opinion <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
AbsintheSorrow
New member
I personally don't particularly like Kerry one way or the other, but I'm backing up the Anything But Bush campaign.
AbsintheSorrow
New member
They never are! Haha.
And, I guess, in the end, it doesn't make THAT much difference WHO's in power since he won't be able to do anything without the backing of the House and/or Senate anyway... Funny how it's always the president that gets the blame anyway though...
Hey, I think what we need is a WOMAN president<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
MEL
Hey, I think what we need is a WOMAN president<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
MEL
HollyCatheryn
New member
I'ma Bush person, thinking much like the other Bush voter. I don't trust Kerry to follow through on anything he's promised whether it makes good sense or not. I think he's spineless and just says what he thinks people want to hear. I also happen to believe that stem cell research and health care reform (both of which Kerry doesn't even make sense on regularly) are not THE most important things for this country right now. Making sure that we aren't blown to bits and that our soldiers come home victorious, comes first. If the nation doesn't survive, what good will stem cell research do us?
Neither candidate can say the soldiers are going to come home safely. I beleive we have to look out for the children of the world and if we have noone to look out for us "the middle class" we have nothing. I know in the last 4 years Bush has done nothing for me. He doesn't look out for us. He allowed the big pharmacy co. to higher their prices. If it wasn't for childrens speical health care I wouldnt be able to afford the copays I had to pay. Should anyone have to live that way. NO! Kerry at least has an opinion on middle class subjects. I don't beleive Kerry will do everything he says but I beleive Kerry will try like heck to do what he says because he will have something to prove. Bush however has already screwed up in the 4 years he has been in office. Why would we allow another 4 yrs. Sad! Kerry just was on the news because of Christopher Reeves passing and he said he very much stands for that cause. I have to beleive he's not just blowing smoke. Bush already said he has no stand on the subject. He has not brought our soldiers home. Enough is enough! Your right about if we have no world than what good is stem cell research but also think of it this way people are dying unnecessarily because of research. We won't have a world either if the children keep dying of things that could have been treated but because of a selfish president that had the power in his hands and yet did nothing. Sorry so long. Just trying to make a point. Eva
OK, here's my take. I have no problem w/ them using umbellical fluid for stem cell research. Maybe I don't have all the facts straight, but I'm assuming they are using test tube embryo's and aborted babies for the stem cell research.
I do have a problem w/ using aborted babies for stem cell research. In the state I live in, abortion is legal even in the 3rd trimester, so from what I can conclude, they can use 6-7 month old babies for science & then probably kill them off after they have what they want anyway. I do want a cure for CF, but not at the expense of someone else's life.
I had a baby & went in for a sonogram probably 6-8 weeks into the pregnancy & I saw a heart beat, to me, that indicates life.
So, because of that & many other moral issues & strength of character, I will be a Bush-backer.
Thanks for letting me share my political opinion here. Anyone seen my flip flops?<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
I do have a problem w/ using aborted babies for stem cell research. In the state I live in, abortion is legal even in the 3rd trimester, so from what I can conclude, they can use 6-7 month old babies for science & then probably kill them off after they have what they want anyway. I do want a cure for CF, but not at the expense of someone else's life.
I had a baby & went in for a sonogram probably 6-8 weeks into the pregnancy & I saw a heart beat, to me, that indicates life.
So, because of that & many other moral issues & strength of character, I will be a Bush-backer.
Thanks for letting me share my political opinion here. Anyone seen my flip flops?<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">
Stem cells are retrieved from fertility clinics that otherwise discard (meaning throw away) the fertilized eggs that don't need to be used. When a woman goes in for in fitro fertilization or other processes in which the egg and sperm must be manaully combined outside of the body, some of the eggs are put back into her body and the other ones are simply thrown away. When undergoing such procedures, they have to take many egg/sperm combinations so they have a higher likelihood of a successful pregnancy... This is why you have so many multiple births after fertility treatments because they take many and inject them into the woman hoping one will attach to the uterus and grow into a baby. The excess fertilized eggs are thrown out. They were never put into the woman because they were not necessary once she became pregnant.
So, I personally think that if they're going to throw them away anyway, why not use them for research? If you consider life as starting as soon as the egg is fertilized by the sperm, even if it is in a dish, then I could see an argument against this, however, the argument would be better suited that you're then against ALL infertility measures because they all will end up in "lives" being thrown away. I am not pro-abortion, and think if it is an aborted fetus that is being used (which its not) that would be terrible! It is good to know all the facts though before making a decision and I think many people have the wrong idea about what stem cells are and thus think it is an aborted fetus and are against it. Our current president, however, DOES have all the facts and continues to allow stem cells to be discarded when they could otherwise help lead to cures for many different diseases. There are great websites you can visit to get ALL of the facts (pro and con) if you just do a search for "embryonic stem cell research" on any 'ol search engine.
Happy Voting!
So, I personally think that if they're going to throw them away anyway, why not use them for research? If you consider life as starting as soon as the egg is fertilized by the sperm, even if it is in a dish, then I could see an argument against this, however, the argument would be better suited that you're then against ALL infertility measures because they all will end up in "lives" being thrown away. I am not pro-abortion, and think if it is an aborted fetus that is being used (which its not) that would be terrible! It is good to know all the facts though before making a decision and I think many people have the wrong idea about what stem cells are and thus think it is an aborted fetus and are against it. Our current president, however, DOES have all the facts and continues to allow stem cells to be discarded when they could otherwise help lead to cures for many different diseases. There are great websites you can visit to get ALL of the facts (pro and con) if you just do a search for "embryonic stem cell research" on any 'ol search engine.
Happy Voting!
I do believe life begins at conception. As a result, I have issues with invitro and many similiar fertility treatments, as well as selective reduction (just a "nicer" way of saying abortion), abortion, stem cell research, etc. On some I have strong opinions, on others such as stem cell research, I'm VERY conflicted. Although I consider abortion equivalent to murder and would never choose it as an option for myself, at the same time, I realize there are times and people that should have the option available and am not an advocate of banning all abortions, IVF, etc. I DO believe in controls however. (for example, in my opinion, abortion should never be an option past 24 weeks because at that point we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to save premature babies so why should someone else be allowed to kill a child so easily when someone else would spend everything they have to save the same child? And, my opinion on abortion is that YES it IS the woman's body and NO the child can't survive without the woman but you know what, neither can an infant or small child survive without a caretaker.) Because of these (and many other moral reasons), I will vote for Bush. No, I'm not happy with him. He definitely looks out for the rich first but he has also passed some tax breaks for working class, too. I know because I've taken advantage of many of them myself, as have probably most of the Americans on this board without realizing it. I don't vote for him easily because I am disappointed in many of his decisions; however, I also realize that a president can promise all he wants and if he doesn't have the senate or the house behind him, it isn't going to happen. If we were given a better option, I'd definitely vote for that person; however, given the two choices, I choose Bush. From what I've seen of Kerry, he appears to be a smooth talker who says whatever he thinks the people want to hear. If you look at his record, first off, he FAILED TO EVEN SHOW UP A LOT when the senate convened. Why would we want a president who thinks that it's ok to just not show up??? If he cares so little about his job as a senator, why would he make a good president?? He also had the most liberal voting record when he did decide to show. NOT what I want in a president. Just my opinion.
lets just hope your election was nothing like australias. most people voted the liberals just because they a. hate mark latham of labor or b. thought 'lets stick with the person we know'. labor got slaughtered so much that they hold little to no seats in the senate. so if john howard wants to pass some law, no matter how crazy it is, he can do it. now that hes back in hes probably going to go ahead with his plans of taking away disability pensions for alot of people, killing off medicare and making a US type health system, amending the free trade agreement back to having no new generic drugs etc etc. hmm *sigh*
I hate to hear that Kylie. From what little I know of Australia (and yes, it's very little), my understanding was that at least for the most part, medical care was more readily available for the poor and working class than it is here in the US... I'm not sure what the right answer is for the medical care for any of us, but I know the "american" way ain't working!
serendipity730
New member
Please, I beg of you, do not vote on abortion alone, there are many many many many more important issues!
Serendipity, I'm not voting just on abortion alone. I totally agree that there are many key issues and looking at the whole picture is crucial when voting. Voting based on just one or two "hot" topics will result in a candidate that may fulfill those issues but create much bigger problems. I think we just agree on what we want in a candidate<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0"> As long as our choice is informed and true to our own beliefs, we can't go wrong whether voting Bush or Kerry.