Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Waiting for society to become humane

January 22, 2014

To the editor: Seems more and more like 2 Tim. 3:1-5 is referring to this day and age. It predicts that men will become more inhuman, arrogant and ungrateful....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-03-14 9:24 PM

Phil - keep the letters coming - you make life interesting!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-03-14 9:22 PM

hartman - you are too late - the Medicare death panels are already convening and are restricting medical treatment to those who need it - and who have paid into Medicare for 40 years or more. This is your buddy Obama and his pack of incompetents slashing away at benefits.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-03-14 12:24 PM

Good point, Pointer. That's why it's critical we don't allow the government or courts or religious groups take away our right to make personal choices.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-03-14 10:42 AM

Teacher....draw all the circles you like. Hopefully when you get old, someone doesn't decide you no longer belong in the circle. As you said "especially in modern America, we all accept a degree of injustice that results in premature death".

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 10:21 AM

Welcome to Obama's amerika!

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 7:57 PM

commonman, doublespeak? Tell me where I was being (another big word) duplicitous? Big words are bothering you? They would bother me too if they were misplaced or misused. Mine are not. Interesting response. Avoiding the subject maybe?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 7:41 PM

NBHH, your proclivities on narratives have marginalized and sub-divided my biases. Thank you for trying to educate me, but your doublespeak and big words amount to much ado about nothing. Save it for your next term paper.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 6:45 PM

Sorry for my long-windedness :-)

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 6:44 PM

The unborn and infants are highlighted in my circle of compassion. How could they not be? I have four kids and I love them dearly. I would like to see those in poverty who are most likely to choose abortion get a clearer highlight in the circle of compassion from the pro-life faction.

In the 30+ years I have followed this debate, I haven't seen that happen.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 6:43 PM

The challenge for all of us is that we must consider the living beings who are either outside of our circle of compassion or are not highlighted and ask ourselves why they're not circled or highlighted.

Why do some highlight so strongly an unborn baby, but don't struggle with the unjust death of a poverty-stricken-post-born infant? Especially when the economy in which we all participate keeps that post-born infant in a situation that leads to premature death?

This leads to my original point, which is essentially that I get frustrated with the "absolute shall" approach I see in the pro-life argument. I would like to see pro-life advocates work for policies that do more to promote LIFE on all ends of the spectrum, from beginning to end, rather than simply trumpet piety about evil. (a very emotionally charged word).

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 6:21 PM

Another analogy is called the "circle of compassion." Imagine standing in a spot and drawing a circle around everything that you would not want to see die.

Most of us don't worry a second about eating a hamburger or swatting a flea. But the fact is that something living has died. Cows and bugs are just not in our circle of compassion.

Once you draw your circle of compassion, highlight the beings you ESPECIALLY don't want to see die...the ones you REALLY care about. The ones you REALLY don't want to see die.

Judging from your posts, Alex, the unborn would be among your first and most important highlights.

more in a bit...

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-30-14 6:16 PM

I wish I would have had more time to give to this during the last week because there were signs of a quasi-intelligent conversation starting.

Alex--your concern about pro-choice people holding a degree of "tolerance" for unjustly ending a life strikes me as interesting. Here's why...

To be a human...especially in modern America, we all accept a degree of injustice that results in premature death. If you participate in the American economy (and you do...) you participate in a system that causes egregious injustice and premature death for millions around the globe.

If you pay taxes to the US Gov't. (and you do...) you support the largest, richest and most efficient killing machine the world has EVER known. (You know the US military exists to kill people, right?)

Ralph Waldo Emerson called our ability to exist in a world full of "evil" (to use your word) our "negative capacity"

more in a bit...

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 8:58 PM

Commonman, to understand what I inferred regarding the proclivities of college and high school students, all you need to do is listen to the narrative on abortion as it originates from those groups, sub-divided as suggested. Then you will see that there really isn't much to take issue with in my observations. Please don't marginalize those observations as biases.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 6:50 PM

And NBHH, I have considered adoption; especially since my father was adopted, but have stopped short due to my own children's needs. What you say about college students most likely speaks of your own experiences or biases. I don't agree with either.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 6:31 PM

Could we limit letters to the editor to 2 per person per year? To much Phil, same old same old repeat bs.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 5:13 PM

"I don't understand how a group so opposed to public assistance proposes to pay for all those children, though."

I propose the parents take care of their children. Problem solved.

3 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 9:35 AM

I doubt it too.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-28-14 9:34 AM

Now, if only you were in charge...

Al, do you suppose the day will ever come when you understand math enough to realize how skewed the statistics are in comparing kids across the world?

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-27-14 9:29 PM

Here's my reforms - 1. Adopt a person of color or mixed racial background; people go overseas to get a white or Aisian kid. 2. Identify all the deadbeat fathers - other wise no aid to the mothers and take the children away. 3. More than two out of wedlock babies should result in sterilization for both parents if they can't pay for their upkeep. 4. No abortion of kids old enough to survive out of the womb. 5. forget the schools and the education system - they can't educate kids on reading writing and math so why would we expect them to do a good job on sex ed. 6. SEL - round up your friends and create a fund for birth control that you pay for, not the taxpayer.

2 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-27-14 1:23 PM

Interesting can of worms Phil opened this time. Like Teacher I believe that abortion should remain legal; in every place it has been restricted it has continued underground, often with increased frequency. I also agree that it should be rare & I agree that it shouldn't be hindsight birth control. So how do we make it rare? A few simple reforms would help: 1) Stop this abstinence only sex ed nonsense; teach kids about contraception & safe sex. 2) Provide free birth control. 3) Make adoption an easy & affordable process. There's a reason people are adopting foreign babies. 4) Quit stigmatizing unwed mothers. Abortion looks like a much better option to a teen who believes her parents will disown her if she says she's pregnant. 5) Provide support for all these children you insist should be born. "Pro-life" shouldn't end at birth.

9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-27-14 10:47 AM

Your rants, NBHH, offer a great example of self control.

You missed the point NBHH. I did not poke fun at the idea of abstention. I was ridiculing conservatives for their general belief that teaching abstention is the only means of birth control necessary to eliminate unwanted pregnancies. It doesn't appear to work for them either since we've witnessed more than a few holier than thou conservatives "hop from bed to bed".

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-26-14 8:01 PM

hartmann, I noticed that you were ridiculing the idea of abstention as a method of preventing pregnancy as well. But I guess that makes perfect sense. Self control was never high on the priority list of the hard core liberal. Remember the hippie era? Religion, Ten Commandments, biblical teachings are all pretty much a joke to liberals. Why? Heaven forbid you should exercise self control! Don't adhere to anything that requires self control, not even the Constitution. Why that's a "living document" (sayeth Obama) to be changed at will. So abstention from sex before marriage as something to be considered honorable and effective as birth control? That's a joke! Yup, its far better to hop from bed to bed and then eliminate any child that might be conceived as you go. That's the way of the liberal. Do not even talk to them about self control!

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-26-14 7:05 PM

What I said was that abortion is nothing more than the elimination of a child, therefore it is birth control. What part of "birth control", or "elimination of a child" don't you understand, hartmann? The very definition of abortion.

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-26-14 4:41 PM

"That coming from someone in the liberal camp, where the primary agenda is to smear conservatives with any unsubstantiated or exaggerated fact, but usually using just gutter dirt for the sake of using gutter dirt."

That’s clever NBHH, smearing liberals for using “gutter dirt”, when actually rangeral the Conservative smeared liberals and Planned Parenthood with "gutter dirt” by claiming “the agency that touts aid for women and children, actually spends 80% of its budget on abortion.” Per FactCheck, "Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law."

My goodness, It’s simply mindboggling that a conservative would intentionally misrepresent Planned Parenthood when Republicans offer so many alternatives to abortion like abstention and…uh…well…that’s ALL they have to offer.

9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-25-14 4:48 PM

"Active" college or high school students will always be proponents of abortion. Oh, they'll spout some "noble" reason why abortion should be legal-constitutionality or privacy, or some such thing. But in fact for them, abortion needs to be legal as a way out of potential "unanticipated pregnancies". Very likely, you will encounter a much more morally driven perspective among "non-active" students.

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 70 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web