BBC Blog Network

User Profile

smasher-lagru

Listed below are comments made by smasher-lagru between Monday, 12th January 2009 and Thursday, 22nd January 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Obama takes the oath -- again 10:32am on 22 Jan 2009 Will - did you post this twice as an attempt at humour, or a genuine mistake?

Two thoughts - his first act as President (Americans always use a capital P for their President) was a proclamation of a Day of Reconciliation (or some hope'n'change thing), so presumably that was invalid.

And then he doesn't use a bible when nobody is looking. Makes you wonder.
Praying for Barack Obama 12:15pm on 20 Jan 2009 Now now, Portwyne, no need to present stereotypical views of homosexual promiscuity
What should Obama read? 10:34am on 20 Jan 2009 A book on how to tell the time so he doesn't show up to take the oath at 11am (GMT) as William suggests -that would be six in the morning Eastern Standard and might confuse the schedulers.

I think he should read any thing by the late Fr Richard John Neuhaus, a friend of Martin Luther King Jnr, who saw that the pro-life movement was the natural successor of the civil rights movement.

It's a big day for America and we wish him well and will keep him in our prayers.

Perhaps now that that barrier has been broken, the UK could embrace the possibility of a Catholic head of state.
How to beat Blue Monday 10:26am on 20 Jan 2009 I came out of work yesterday evening at my usual time and it was still daylight - only just, but still, summer's on the way!
Praying for Barack Obama 10:25am on 20 Jan 2009 I suspect Gene Robinson is the anti-Christ.

Interesting that Obama didn't have any Jews or Catholics invited to pray - very inclusive.

And I believe Sarah Palin didn't get an invite either.
Too fat to adopt 4:16pm on 13 Jan 2009 At least it's something they can change (cos she's not exactly thin either). Worse when you're told you're too old.
Autism, abortion and prenatal screening 2:50pm on 13 Jan 2009 Helio - suppose we find a prenatal test for homosexuality - would you say families could quite legitimately exercise their choice?

The distinctions you make between individuals, families and society aren't clear cut in reality. Families chose to kill their Downs babies because the state/society tells them they can, in fact tells them they are good citizens for doing so. People don't make these choices in isolation.
Autism, abortion and prenatal screening 1:00pm on 13 Jan 2009 Guys it was William who introduced the reference to the Nazis, not me so he can hardly appeal to Godwin's law.

He introduced the subject of eugenics - not abortion in general - so it obviously makes sense to refer to other examples of eugenics. Wearing a white coat and operating within the law doesn't make something right - that's exactly what the Nazis tried to claim at subsequent trials.

Why are people so afraid of mentioning the Nazis? Could it be that their consciences are pricked. If you say something like "abortion in America has killed more people since 1973 than the Nazis" that is simply a fact. You could equally say, more than Stalin or Mao, or car accidents. The reason why the analogy with the dictators applies so well is that so many people were blind to their actions at the time (and still now where a restaurant is happy to call itself "Maos") and the same is true with abortion.

My assertion that calling for a debate makes you pro-choice may not be scientfically based but is anecdotally true. Look at the previous instances. It's almost always a prelude to someone trying to bring in euthanasia, or cloning, or gay marriage. The suggestion of a debate implies an unsettled question, a need for change on some issue. And if you look at say the practice of pro-lifers wanting to change the abortion law - they never say, "let's have a debate on viability" - they know the ethics, they don't need to debate it.

Getting into discussions about the spectrum of autism and whether it is linked to brilliance and how it might or might not be compared with Downs would be fine if the context were not the killing fields.
Autism, abortion and prenatal screening 10:33am on 13 Jan 2009 No William, you haven't made a pro-choice argument - just a pro-choice statement. You attempt to undermine the obvious link to Nazi eugenics by mentioning it first.

Whenever someone calls for an ethical debate you know they are pro-choice - it's simple and obvious. The ethics are easy - it's wrong to kill an innocent child whether they have autism, Downs, are in Nazi Germany or New Labour England. If you think there is something to debate then you're already lost.
Prince Harry's homophobia 4:03pm on 12 Jan 2009 Augustine - I just think its sledgehammer cracking nuts time. I have no personal experience of the British army, but I imagine the language is usually not what you'd like your mother to hear and Harry is being singled out because he is well known. I don't think that is particularly fair.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

smasher-lagru