I'm a conservative Christian Republican.... - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-27-2004, 02:55 PM   #61
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:51 AM
I have no problem with women serving.
But of course the Republicans try to be some Acrobats who talk about "Family values" and are unable to delay the enlistment for iraq for a family with a 4 months old baby if she asks for it.
That dosn't mean that she has to be on holiday for that time but that she can work at a place where she's able to take her baby with her or at least able to see it after work.

Sting repeated several times that there is no shortage of soldiers - so from my point of view it should be possible that she either serves later in iraq or replaces any other soldier in a safe country where she could take her baby with her and that soldier would go to iraq.

So would it be different under Kerry? I don't think so - but obviousely the "Family values" are no more reason to vote for republicans because it's just lip service - like their religous values
__________________

__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 03:01 PM   #62
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:51 PM
It has NOTHING to do with being a republican. The Republicans and Democrats are not in charge of the military. Under US LAW there are rules which govern maternity leave.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 04:41 PM   #63
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Sorry, but anyone at any job is not given 4 months maternity time.

And the issue you speak of is not republican or democrat. Its the way it is.

Or are you against women serving?
There's a difference between being able to breast feed a child after work and not at all.

I could never join the Guard -- I don't have the balls. I give you guys credit, but I just don't think most Guard members sign up to go into a war in which the U.S. was so unprepared. The National Guard is to be used as "reserves" if we were under attack, not because two years after invading a country, the president realizes "Oh hey! Maybe I should have had a coalition to help with the burden in Iraq." I still see Guard troops around NYC and am glad they are here protecting us. I just wonder how much longer they will be here.

OuttaControl and Dread -- I commend you guys, I really do despite our political disagreements. But we shouldn't have to keep National Guard troops in the line of duty for an extended period of time because we decided to go it alone. And I would recommend you guys post about your experiences to give those of us who haven't served an inside view about whether you expected to be sent to Iraq, what it was like there, etc. if you feel up to it. I think too often -- and this election is no exception -- that we hear "The National Guard" and don't put faces to it.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 05:16 PM   #64
The Fly
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: God is Love
Posts: 185
Local Time: 03:51 AM
A few remarks...

Children change EVERYTHING! The issue is not about my wife not wanting to serve...the issue is a "family values" issue that, with all due respect to the conservatives here, the Republican party actively embraces as their own. The hypocrisy is unbelievable...the very party that emphatically states "We are pro-family, pro-marriage, pro- children" actually does nothing to actually try to keep families together. Let's remember, this is the NATIONAL GUARD we are talking about...not the full-time, active duty troops who sign up for this stuff every day. The National Guard's role is one of stateside duty...yet politicians of both parties have effectively usurped their mission and used them as full-time troops...while implementing unfair "stop-loss" orders that prevent National Guard troops who have honorably served their contractural duties from getting discharged...yet full-time active duty soldiers are unaffected by such stop loss orders. Additionally, (it bears repeating time and time again), Iraq was and is not a threat. Had they invaded us or took aggressive action, the story is different.

It's sad, but my wife made numerous friends at EOBC (Officer Basic Training) who were full-time active duty troops. Guess wha? While my wife is activated for deployment (leaving behind the 4 month old) well over 20 of her acquatainces in the full time Army remained stateside...Bush's Army could have chosen to send someone in my wife's place...one of these active duty soldiers remaining stateside...but there anti-family policy says otherwise...if Pres Bush and the Repub's care so much about "family" perhaps they should consider repealing the anti-family policies of their military instead of simply giving lip service to the family values crowd to secure votes.

So, to those who say "this is what she signed up for" I say you are mistaken. National Guard's role is stateside. They are a last resort in times of war...not a front line defense. I believe the oath says "...to defend our country from enemies both foreign and domestic". Iraq was an enemy? I think not. And the point is less about the merits of the war...but more about pointing out a grossly anti-family policy that takes babies away from their mothers...and fathers too. Child experts know that the first 12 months are critical to a baby's mental development...policies that take breast feeding mothers from their infant babies are abhorrent in what is the most civilized country on the earth...in fact I don't believe ANY other country allows such atrocities to take place.

Thanks, Pres Bush for misleading us into a "war"... thanks for caring so much about my family ... we all know that the adults will be fine...but it is the children that ultimately suffer....

Respectfully,

LSTB
__________________
Like someone to blame is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 05:21 PM   #65
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 05:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Klaus
obviousely the "Family values" are no more reason to vote for republicans because it's just lip service - like their religous values
I am with Klaus on that matter, and it has been proven numerous times, also outside the U.S., that Conservative Christians don´t give a f*** about family values. Yes, there is all that beautiful blah-blah about the family as the ideal form of man and women and children living together and thats how God wants it etc. - and I value that thought. BUT when you look at reality, things are different. Want another shocking example?

Take South Africa, before of Nelson Mandela. Apartheid was in fact a means to maintain white rule. Under Apartheid rule, Blacks and Whites were not allowed to marry, and they lived in different areas. After work in the white areas the Blacks returned to their slum-like townships. Black areas, so called "Bantustans", were too small to support the black population. Family life amongst Blacks was destroyed by the necessity for fathers to work very far away from their homes.

Their continous absence was FORCED on them by a CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN regime.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:00 PM   #66
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 10:51 PM
er, ok, this thread has not helped me in the slightest....

btw, when I refer to myself as a conservative christian, it has more to do with worship style and christian doctrine than anything else. These don't really have anything to do with politics so we can move on....
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:05 PM   #67
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 05:51 AM
So you´re gonna vote Bush then?

If yes, give me a good reason.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:12 PM   #68
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Like someone to blame


So, to those who say "this is what she signed up for" I say you are mistaken. National Guard's role is stateside. They are a last resort in times of war...not a front line defense. I believe the oath says "...to defend our country from enemies both foreign and domestic". Iraq was an enemy? I think not. And the point is less about the merits of the war...but more about pointing out a grossly anti-family policy that takes babies away from their mothers...and fathers too. Child experts know that the first 12 months are critical to a baby's mental development...policies that take breast feeding mothers from their infant babies are abhorrent in what is the most civilized country on the earth...in fact I don't believe ANY other country allows such atrocities to take place.

Thanks, Pres Bush for misleading us into a "war"... thanks for caring so much about my family ... we all know that the adults will be fine...but it is the children that ultimately suffer....

Respectfully,

LSTB
The national Guard is not just for stateside emergencies, and anyone who has payed attention to the last 30 years would not make such a statement.

I made a decision when I joined the reserves. That decision was for the benefits of being in the reserves, I would step up to the plate when called upon to do so. That means my free state tuition, my student loan repayments, and my monthly salary entitled Uncle Sam to call me to duty when necessary.

When I got married, I had to weigh my commitment to the guard verses my pending family. After being activated for the first Gulf War, and watching parents in my unit and sister unit leave their children and families for almost a year, I had to decide, do I reinlist or get out. What were my priorities. I chose to get out.

It is not easy to fulfill ones obligations when faced with leaving a wife, a child, or a husband.

I do not feel that your feelings are misplaced. Having children totally changes ones mindset.

You, your wife, and your family are in my prayers.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:19 PM   #69
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
So you´re gonna vote Bush then?

If yes, give me a good reason.
B/c everytime I ask for straight up info (not opinions or speculations) regarding Kerry, all I get is arguements and name calling and references to topics that don't have anything to do with the election.

I'm assuming the debates will clear up all the issues/questions I have so I guess this thread has worn out its purpose.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:24 PM   #70
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Actually, there are jobs at which more than 4 months of maternity leave are given--and even if it's not legally required to do so, one usually needs at least six months after a baby is born to be ready to go back to work. (IMHO)

I agree that it's hard for a person to claim he or she is pro-family if he or she is willing to separate a four-month-old breastfeeding newborn from its mother--and not for a pleasure cruise, either--on a long-term basis.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:27 PM   #71
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars


I am with Klaus on that matter, and it has been proven numerous times, also outside the U.S., that Conservative Christians don´t give a f*** about family values.
I think it would be nice if you would not judge a religious tradition that encompasses many millions of people on the actions of a few political figures with whom you may disagree.

LivLuv, I personally am sorry for the derailment of this thread and the defamation of your religious beliefs. However, I'd like to keep it open, in hopes that maybe some nice, levelheaded people (on either side) will be able to help you out. If you'd rather I close it, PM or e-mail me and I'll close it.

BTW, not everyone in this thread has misbehaved...but you know who you are.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:49 PM   #72
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 05:51 AM
I´m not supposed to be nice.

What I talked about wasn´t the actions of a few political figures. I talked about Apartheid, a political system that was upheld for decades, by a conservative Christian regime.

I will admit though, that Apartheid has not much to do with the original question of this thread, even if the title uses the words conservative Christian (I just had to add regime, interesting, no?). On the other hand, threads develop all the time into something that hasn´t a lot to do with the original; just take a look at hundreds of other threads on FYM. As a mod, you are surely aware of that.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 06:54 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 10:51 PM
Not to dismiss the significance of Apartheid, but it doesn't have anything to do with the upcoming election....

And like I said, unless you're a conservative chrisitan yourself, I doubt you have any knowledge or concern for the discrepancies in worship style and Reformed doctrine that I use to define myself as "conservative". Anyway, I should've made that more clear from the beginning, so just forget I ever mentioned that.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 07:03 PM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 05:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LivLuvAndBootlegMusic
I doubt you have any knowledge or concern for the discrepancies in worship style and Reformed doctrine that I use to define myself as "conservative".
True.

I am a Christian. Most of what I know and have heard from conservative Christians, is totally contrary to my belief as a Christian.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-27-2004, 07:04 PM   #75
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
I´m not supposed to be nice.
As long as I'm moderating FYM, you are.

Quote:
What I talked about wasn´t the actions of a few political figures. I talked about Apartheid, a political system that was upheld for decades, by a conservative Christian regime.
Compared with the millions of persons worldwide who describe themselves as conservative Christians, this is not many people. Also, most of those people are probably now dead.

Quote:
On the other hand, threads develop all the time into something that hasn´t a lot to do with the original; just take a look at hundreds of other threads on FYM. As a mod, you are surely aware of that.
I'm aware of that, but this thread really has derailed spectacularly. And, to be perfectly frank, I feel personally badly for LivLuv because a thread that was started in good faith was hijacked--yes, hijacked--so people could have more of the same bitter arguments they've been having for months now.

I've been a moderator of FYM now for over two years, and this is one of the worst derailments/hijackings I've seen. And that's saying a lot. So I'd appreciate it, if you're not going to help LivLuv out, if you'd post elsewhere.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com