coraljunkie
Member
Obama speaks of the need for change. Well this country got its change two years ago in a completely Democratic controlled congress. What has happened in the last two years.
Rylan and Obama supporters please defend this stance for me.
- Thread starter darthtang aw
- Start date
cranberry
Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723343
there are 2 problems with your story and relating it with the bill.... the baby was born and not aborted.... Also, the period of gestation is far to advanced to have been a legal abortion... So this is a birth.... parents had the opportunity to hold the baby.
2nd... a baby that young 21-22 weeks would be rushed off for medical attention... I believe the record for premature birth is somewhere b/w 20 -22 weeks. This case is outside the realm of abortion ...
Okay, so we are trying to say we should attempt to save any attempted aborptions that are below the age of viability if they come out alive? So, if the baby if the parents decide to abort they are not given the choice anymore as to whether the "non-viable" baby should be revived? Is that a punishment for their choice because the mom's that unwillingly give birth prematurely have a choice to a certain gestation.
We ask them.... say a 23 weeker (gestation) "Here is the prognosis of your baby... blah blah... medical jargon..... What would YOU like us to do? Bring the baby back to the unit or would you like to hold"?
We don't rush back babies for medical attention when they are 21-22 weeks. I actually may or may not even attend the delievery. I am a Neonatal ICU charge nurse. At 24 weeks we will automatically try, we are getting good with these little guys. We are starting to dabble into the 23 weekers now. Not doing so good with those. 22 and below...nope.
Non-viable is non-viable, it doesn't make a difference how they come out.. forced or otherwise. We can't medically replace what is missing below that gestation. I have no doubt we'll eventually be able to save everything.... we joke that we will soon be the "Watchers of the Test Tubes". But like it or not that is where we are right now...
And if anyone thinks there is no harm in trying at any gestation..... you have not stayed in the NICU for the 12 hours of that babies life. If a baby cannot medically be saved, which a baby aborted below the age of viability cannot, it is cruel to attempt to prolong their death.
http:///forum/post/2723343
there are 2 problems with your story and relating it with the bill.... the baby was born and not aborted.... Also, the period of gestation is far to advanced to have been a legal abortion... So this is a birth.... parents had the opportunity to hold the baby.
2nd... a baby that young 21-22 weeks would be rushed off for medical attention... I believe the record for premature birth is somewhere b/w 20 -22 weeks. This case is outside the realm of abortion ...
Okay, so we are trying to say we should attempt to save any attempted aborptions that are below the age of viability if they come out alive? So, if the baby if the parents decide to abort they are not given the choice anymore as to whether the "non-viable" baby should be revived? Is that a punishment for their choice because the mom's that unwillingly give birth prematurely have a choice to a certain gestation.
We ask them.... say a 23 weeker (gestation) "Here is the prognosis of your baby... blah blah... medical jargon..... What would YOU like us to do? Bring the baby back to the unit or would you like to hold"?
We don't rush back babies for medical attention when they are 21-22 weeks. I actually may or may not even attend the delievery. I am a Neonatal ICU charge nurse. At 24 weeks we will automatically try, we are getting good with these little guys. We are starting to dabble into the 23 weekers now. Not doing so good with those. 22 and below...nope.
Non-viable is non-viable, it doesn't make a difference how they come out.. forced or otherwise. We can't medically replace what is missing below that gestation. I have no doubt we'll eventually be able to save everything.... we joke that we will soon be the "Watchers of the Test Tubes". But like it or not that is where we are right now...
And if anyone thinks there is no harm in trying at any gestation..... you have not stayed in the NICU for the 12 hours of that babies life. If a baby cannot medically be saved, which a baby aborted below the age of viability cannot, it is cruel to attempt to prolong their death.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by CoralJunkie
http:///forum/post/2723384
Obama speaks of the need for change. Well this country got its change two years ago in a completely Democratic controlled congress. What has happened in the last two years.
but it is only bush's fault,
hey are you on marsh at all?
http:///forum/post/2723384
Obama speaks of the need for change. Well this country got its change two years ago in a completely Democratic controlled congress. What has happened in the last two years.
but it is only bush's fault,
hey are you on marsh at all?
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2723372
These bills basically banned killing a baby who survived an abortion. Actually ending the life of the baby outside of the womb.
I understand that but why would someone wait over 5 months to get an abortion in the first place?
Here's another interesting Obama position. He voted against extending the death penalty to gang related murders but he was pefectly willing to limit law abiding citizens right to purchase guns to one a month
http:///forum/post/2723372
These bills basically banned killing a baby who survived an abortion. Actually ending the life of the baby outside of the womb.
I understand that but why would someone wait over 5 months to get an abortion in the first place?
Here's another interesting Obama position. He voted against extending the death penalty to gang related murders but he was pefectly willing to limit law abiding citizens right to purchase guns to one a month
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by CoralJunkie
http:///forum/post/2723384
Obama speaks of the need for change. Well this country got its change two years ago in a completely Democratic controlled congress. What has happened in the last two years.
http:///forum/post/2723384
Obama speaks of the need for change. Well this country got its change two years ago in a completely Democratic controlled congress. What has happened in the last two years.
hlcroghan
Active Member
Thank you Cranberry. That was basically my point. If the baby cannot be saved why would we prolong it's life on and on. Any of the people on here would and have done the same things with the beloved family pet I am betting. (Please understand I am not comparing a dog to a baby. I am just making a point.) If your vet tells you, I am sorry your dog will not survive, all we can do is make him comfortable because of whatever disease, are you going to tell him no, I am sorry I want you to prolong his life as long as possible even though he is suffering? No, of course not. And I wouldn't do that with a brand new baby either.
tangman99
Active Member
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
coraljunkie
Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2723386
but it is only bush's fault,
hey are you on marsh at all?
No. Why do you ask?
http:///forum/post/2723386
but it is only bush's fault,
hey are you on marsh at all?
No. Why do you ask?
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by hlcroghan
http:///forum/post/2723396
Thank you Cranberry. That was basically my point. If the baby cannot be saved why would we prolong it's life on and on. Any of the people on here would and have done the same things with the beloved family pet I am betting. (Please understand I am not comparing a dog to a baby. I am just making a point.) If your vet tells you, I am sorry your dog will not survive, all we can do is make him comfortable because of whatever disease, are you going to tell him no, I am sorry I want you to prolong his life as long as possible even though he is suffering? No, of course not. And I wouldn't do that with a brand new baby either.
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
Originally Posted by TangMan99
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
I've heard alot of pastors in my time, but I don't think he has the same inflection as many that I've heard. I've always pictured a preacher sounding like Duvall in what was it the apostle?
http:///forum/post/2723396
Thank you Cranberry. That was basically my point. If the baby cannot be saved why would we prolong it's life on and on. Any of the people on here would and have done the same things with the beloved family pet I am betting. (Please understand I am not comparing a dog to a baby. I am just making a point.) If your vet tells you, I am sorry your dog will not survive, all we can do is make him comfortable because of whatever disease, are you going to tell him no, I am sorry I want you to prolong his life as long as possible even though he is suffering? No, of course not. And I wouldn't do that with a brand new baby either.
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
Originally Posted by TangMan99
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
I've heard alot of pastors in my time, but I don't think he has the same inflection as many that I've heard. I've always pictured a preacher sounding like Duvall in what was it the apostle?
coraljunkie
Member
Originally Posted by TangMan99
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
I agree. People need to see past all his eloquent speaking ability and really look at what he stands for. Heck even his own party isn't all that enamored with the guy.
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
I agree. People need to see past all his eloquent speaking ability and really look at what he stands for. Heck even his own party isn't all that enamored with the guy.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/2723385
Okay, so we are trying to say we should attempt to save any attempted aborptions that are below the age of viability if they come out alive? So, if the baby if the parents decide to abort they are not given the choice anymore as to whether the "non-viable" baby should be revived? Is that a punishment for their choice because the mom's that unwillingly give birth prematurely have a choice to a certain gestation.
We ask them.... say a 23 weeker (gestation) "Here is the prognosis of your baby... blah blah... medical jargon..... What would YOU like us to do? Bring the baby back to the unit or would you like to hold"?
We don't rush back babies for medical attention when they are 21-22 weeks. I actually may or may not even attend the delievery. I am a Neonatal ICU charge nurse. At 24 weeks we will automatically try, we are getting good with these little guys. We are starting to dabble into the 23 weekers now. Not doing so good with those. 22 and below...nope.
Non-viable is non-viable, it doesn't make a difference how they come out.. forced or otherwise. We can't medically replace what is missing below that gestation. I have no doubt we'll eventually be able to save everything.... we joke that we will soon be the "Watchers of the Test Tubes". But like it or not that is where we are right now...
And if anyone thinks there is no harm in trying at any gestation..... you have not stayed in the NICU for the 12 hours of that babies life. If a baby cannot medically be saved, which a baby aborted below the age of viability cannot, it is cruel to attempt to prolong their death.
If a baby is premature.... its been my experience that they will not let the parents sit and hold the baby... the baby will be taken to check lungs, vitals, etc.. etc... babies that young can't even maintain their body temp... so just allowing the parents to hold at this time means there is no chance... If the baby born via abortion failure... its most likly parents would not want to hold it... given the situation and guilt associated, plus the emotional experience... this would be a similar, but perhaps worst experience than when a mother who is giving up their baby for adoption... doesn't want to see or hold the baby...because of the instant emotional attachement
http:///forum/post/2723385
Okay, so we are trying to say we should attempt to save any attempted aborptions that are below the age of viability if they come out alive? So, if the baby if the parents decide to abort they are not given the choice anymore as to whether the "non-viable" baby should be revived? Is that a punishment for their choice because the mom's that unwillingly give birth prematurely have a choice to a certain gestation.
We ask them.... say a 23 weeker (gestation) "Here is the prognosis of your baby... blah blah... medical jargon..... What would YOU like us to do? Bring the baby back to the unit or would you like to hold"?
We don't rush back babies for medical attention when they are 21-22 weeks. I actually may or may not even attend the delievery. I am a Neonatal ICU charge nurse. At 24 weeks we will automatically try, we are getting good with these little guys. We are starting to dabble into the 23 weekers now. Not doing so good with those. 22 and below...nope.
Non-viable is non-viable, it doesn't make a difference how they come out.. forced or otherwise. We can't medically replace what is missing below that gestation. I have no doubt we'll eventually be able to save everything.... we joke that we will soon be the "Watchers of the Test Tubes". But like it or not that is where we are right now...
And if anyone thinks there is no harm in trying at any gestation..... you have not stayed in the NICU for the 12 hours of that babies life. If a baby cannot medically be saved, which a baby aborted below the age of viability cannot, it is cruel to attempt to prolong their death.
If a baby is premature.... its been my experience that they will not let the parents sit and hold the baby... the baby will be taken to check lungs, vitals, etc.. etc... babies that young can't even maintain their body temp... so just allowing the parents to hold at this time means there is no chance... If the baby born via abortion failure... its most likly parents would not want to hold it... given the situation and guilt associated, plus the emotional experience... this would be a similar, but perhaps worst experience than when a mother who is giving up their baby for adoption... doesn't want to see or hold the baby...because of the instant emotional attachement
cranberry
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2723427
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived". You mean lived as in if the abortion never occured? Or do you mean lived as in if we had of intervened after the baby was aborted live?
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723436
If a baby is premature.... its been my experience that they will not let the parents sit and hold the baby... the baby will be taken to check lungs, vitals, etc.. etc... babies that young can't even maintain their body temp... so just allowing the parents to hold at this time means there is no chance... If the baby born via abortion failure... its most likly parents would not want to hold it... given the situation and guilt associated, plus the emotional experience... this would be a similar, but perhaps worst experience than when a mother who is giving up their baby for adoption... doesn't want to see or hold the baby...because of the instant emotional attachement
If a baby is of viable age, we work the baby up on the warmer right next to the parents, intubate and stabilize and run back to the unit. I flash the baby's face to the parents and we take off. I went to a 21 gestation delivery the other day, just because we weren't sure of dates. It popped out, I looked... yup, 21 weeks.... wrapped the baby up and gave it to the mom/dad to hold until she died.
And I have no idea what kind of hospital the chicky would be in who was quoted above. A baby brought to the dirty utility? Please... what backwards country would that be in? Dirty utility is for equipment... equipment that needs to be cleaned. Not for babies. Even if it was just product of conception, it is not placed in the dirty utility room. And at what age gestation did the lady have the abortion? Anything less than 22 weeks is not going to last 45 mins.
http:///forum/post/2723427
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived". You mean lived as in if the abortion never occured? Or do you mean lived as in if we had of intervened after the baby was aborted live?
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723436
If a baby is premature.... its been my experience that they will not let the parents sit and hold the baby... the baby will be taken to check lungs, vitals, etc.. etc... babies that young can't even maintain their body temp... so just allowing the parents to hold at this time means there is no chance... If the baby born via abortion failure... its most likly parents would not want to hold it... given the situation and guilt associated, plus the emotional experience... this would be a similar, but perhaps worst experience than when a mother who is giving up their baby for adoption... doesn't want to see or hold the baby...because of the instant emotional attachement
If a baby is of viable age, we work the baby up on the warmer right next to the parents, intubate and stabilize and run back to the unit. I flash the baby's face to the parents and we take off. I went to a 21 gestation delivery the other day, just because we weren't sure of dates. It popped out, I looked... yup, 21 weeks.... wrapped the baby up and gave it to the mom/dad to hold until she died.
And I have no idea what kind of hospital the chicky would be in who was quoted above. A baby brought to the dirty utility? Please... what backwards country would that be in? Dirty utility is for equipment... equipment that needs to be cleaned. Not for babies. Even if it was just product of conception, it is not placed in the dirty utility room. And at what age gestation did the lady have the abortion? Anything less than 22 weeks is not going to last 45 mins.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by CoralJunkie
http:///forum/post/2723432
I agree. People need to see past all his eloquent speaking ability and really look at what he stands for. Heck even his own party isn't all that enamored with the guy.
I'd say its much worst for the republican party and John McCain, whos support comes for people against democrates, and not for McCain.
http:///forum/post/2723432
I agree. People need to see past all his eloquent speaking ability and really look at what he stands for. Heck even his own party isn't all that enamored with the guy.
I'd say its much worst for the republican party and John McCain, whos support comes for people against democrates, and not for McCain.
tangman99
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2723427
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
I've heard alot of pastors in my time, but I don't think he has the same inflection as many that I've heard. I've always pictured a preacher sounding like Duvall in what was it the apostle?
It's not exact, but it is there. It's a combination of the whole speech, body language thing. Maybe it's because I've used it and been taught to recognize and interpret it that I see it more.
http:///forum/post/2723427
Whether the baby has a chance or not isn't the issue. If they do it right, the baby doesn't have a chance anyway. These bills were intended to stop the destruction of the baby who would otherwise have lived.
I've heard alot of pastors in my time, but I don't think he has the same inflection as many that I've heard. I've always pictured a preacher sounding like Duvall in what was it the apostle?
It's not exact, but it is there. It's a combination of the whole speech, body language thing. Maybe it's because I've used it and been taught to recognize and interpret it that I see it more.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/2723438
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived".
I don't think he know exactly what he is talking about..
http:///forum/post/2723438
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived".
I don't think he know exactly what he is talking about..
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/2723438
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived".
that is my understanding of the bill, it was in reference to 3rd trimester abortions, where the baby survived the abortion process. And at that point the baby was taken alive to another room where the baby was killed or left to die.
This isn't a "life directive" type issue where the grandma says don't recessitate me. This bill banned the doctor doing nothing to keep the baby alive after the alive baby was birthed.
http:///forum/post/2723438
So we are talking late term abortions? Just trying to clarify where you said "destruction of baby that would otherwise have lived".
that is my understanding of the bill, it was in reference to 3rd trimester abortions, where the baby survived the abortion process. And at that point the baby was taken alive to another room where the baby was killed or left to die.
This isn't a "life directive" type issue where the grandma says don't recessitate me. This bill banned the doctor doing nothing to keep the baby alive after the alive baby was birthed.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by TangMan99
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
no, I simply like his plans and directions more than I like McCain's... I don't like what has happened the last 8 years.. and I am voting Obama because I believe he will change our current course and improve our lives as Americans
http:///forum/post/2723397
It's my own opinion but I feel sorry for this country if Obama wins. It's true that most of those that follow him don't know or care about his professional past. The thing that makes him so appealing is his speaking mannerisms and they are not by chance. Every notice in many churches how a lot of the preachers all use the same voice inflection and patterns? Notice Obama does that also? This isn't by chance. My cousin is a Baptist minister and had to go to school to learn about how to influence people with how you talk. In short, it's a mild form of brain washing if you will for lack of a better term. You would be shocked if you knew how much power and influence a voice inflection and body language can have over the unsuspected person. I used to do gang identification many years ago and used voice technique in interviews. I also watch body language closely. That is why I can't stand listening to preachers like that. I can almost count the time between words, the hand motions and how they move. It's so intentional, it makes me ill.
There are many forms of how to influence people. If you are a professional salesman, you know what I am talking about. If you are any kind of salesman and don't know, you may want to find out. You will eat much better.
no, I simply like his plans and directions more than I like McCain's... I don't like what has happened the last 8 years.. and I am voting Obama because I believe he will change our current course and improve our lives as Americans
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by TangMan99
http:///forum/post/2723442
It's not exact, but it is there. It's a combination of the whole speech, body language thing. Maybe it's because I've used it and been taught to recognize and interpret it that I see it more.
I do watch, I'm not a cop nor have "official training" but did put myself through college working off of commission. Maybe in a more "traditional sense of a pastor" maybe, most preachers i've seen have been more mobile not reading their message.
http:///forum/post/2723442
It's not exact, but it is there. It's a combination of the whole speech, body language thing. Maybe it's because I've used it and been taught to recognize and interpret it that I see it more.
I do watch, I'm not a cop nor have "official training" but did put myself through college working off of commission. Maybe in a more "traditional sense of a pastor" maybe, most preachers i've seen have been more mobile not reading their message.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2723445
that is my understanding of the bill, it was in reference to 3rd trimester abortions, where the baby survived the abortion process. And at that point the baby was taken alive to another room where the baby was killed or left to die.
This isn't a "life directive" type issue where the grandma says don't recessitate me. This bill banned the doctor doing nothing to keep the baby alive after the alive baby was birthed.
aren't those already outlawed?
http:///forum/post/2723445
that is my understanding of the bill, it was in reference to 3rd trimester abortions, where the baby survived the abortion process. And at that point the baby was taken alive to another room where the baby was killed or left to die.
This isn't a "life directive" type issue where the grandma says don't recessitate me. This bill banned the doctor doing nothing to keep the baby alive after the alive baby was birthed.
aren't those already outlawed?
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723443
I don't think he know exactly what he is talking about..
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723449
no, I simply like his plans and directions more than I like McCain's... I don't like what has happened the last 8 years.. and I am voting Obama because I believe he will change our current course and improve our lives as Americans
You mean rapid economic growth, the liberation of millions of people in tyranny, terrorist countries abandoning there nuclear programs, lower taxes, record government revenues, record humanitarian aid to places like africa, and constitutionalist judges appointed to the bench?
works for me.
http:///forum/post/2723443
I don't think he know exactly what he is talking about..
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2723449
no, I simply like his plans and directions more than I like McCain's... I don't like what has happened the last 8 years.. and I am voting Obama because I believe he will change our current course and improve our lives as Americans
You mean rapid economic growth, the liberation of millions of people in tyranny, terrorist countries abandoning there nuclear programs, lower taxes, record government revenues, record humanitarian aid to places like africa, and constitutionalist judges appointed to the bench?
works for me.