Woo HOO!! Supreme Court upholds Partial Birth Abortion Ban!!!!

[Carlene 12]

The liberal does not want to get his hands dirty by chosing to actively engage in volunteering, in engaging on a personal level to assist his fellow humans, and by choosing to rid himself of some of his wealth - it is much easier when the government simply robs you of it in the form of taxes.

I don't want to argue abortion. I have said everything I have to say on the subject in previous threads.

I will, however, argue with any statement that doubts my (Liberal) voluntary contribution to society. Maybe if Conservatives were more generous, the government could cut back on taxes and still provide for our poor, homeless, hungry, helpless, disenfranchised brothers and sisters.

I can only speak for my Liberal self, but I have volunteered plenty of times in Soup kitchens and homeless shelters. And I've sat down with the clients and eaten with them and listened to them. I've been in their homes (the ones who had homes) and I've held their dirty, snot-nosed babies with cradle cap and cooed over them like they were the sweetest smelling, most beautiful children on God's green earth.

My birthday is Christmas Eve, and I cannot count the number of birthdays I've spent delivering food baskets and Christmas gifts to needy families. My best birthdays, in fact, have been spent that way.

I shop every single week for items that are in short supply at my local food pantry. Every single week. And I never don't buy an item because it's "too expensive". If they need baby formula, I fork over the ten or twelve bucks and count myself lucky that I never had to go begging in order to feed my kids.

So, as much as I respect you, Green, please don't insult me by saying that I don't want to get my hands dirty in the name of charity. My hands have been dirtied way more than most. Now let's hear from the big-hearted Conservatives who pat themselves on the back because they write a check to the Red Cross once a year. Talk about not dirtying your hands!!!!!!!!

[Wheetsin 714]

As for charity, many, many good people here in the U.S. do charitable work. Some do it because they believe it is their duty. Some are involved because their church compels them to. And then there are lots of folks who do charitable work because of how it makes them look to the outside world and because it makes them feel superior. Some people never give any time or money to the needy.

This (emphasis mine) is actually the #1 reason why people donate and are involved in charitable reasons... it makes them feel good. (I don't remember the exact name off hand but this is per your every day college level text on human motivation). It's rarely about the actual charity or what the recipient receives, rather how the giving makes the giver feel. I'm not picking on anyone, and especially not anyone on this thread, even though one of the examples I'm giving was used -- but you'll notice that mention of charity or good deeds is often expressed with some type of personal qualifier - e.g. I make X and give X%, versus just I give X%, or even "I give". Or we donated a set that cost X, versus we donated an expensive set, or "we donated". Or "I gave them almost X worth of clothing" instead of "nice clothing" or just "I gave." A common example is giving a donation that, in turn, gives you recognition. E.g. buying a memmorial brick for someone, that is placed into a new construction, and has your name on it... or theirs, on behalf of you.

Sorry for the tangent, but you know how I have to be all over the psychology.

[FunnyDuddies 6]

Carlene I posted earlier about the amount of liberals versus conservatives i see EVERYDAY in the charities and organizations i belong to. I watch who comes in the door, who does the work, who just writes the checks, and who peters out after a few weeks or months. When tragedies happen lots of people volunteer time. when it is a holiday, lots of people volunteer time. And a lot of them are liberals. But if you got to most charities, and seek out those that have been there for years and years, the majority of them are conservative. The liberals come in with the best intentions, but eventually charity work becomes too much of a bother. Plus, like green said, that fabulous government is there doing a lot of the work for them. Why keep getting their hands dirty.

I do write checks, a lot of checks. I also do a lot of labor. I help build homes. I pass out food, I counsel, I clean. and not just on a holiday. I do it every week. Not just buying formula, but doing the feeding. Don't say that conservatives are not willing to get their hands dirty. I have been getting my hands dirty since I was 12, and I see more conservatives than liberals.

[green 6]

And i want to point out that I am not an anarchist, or anti-govt in any way. I am anti-big government. I believe that the federal government should focus on the protection of our borders and homelands, and that state governments should focus on roads and upholding laws. This is obviously an extreme example, and there are a few toehr things that i think a government should worry about and be involved in, but for the most part I think that things we are taxed for are totally bogus, and that the government has too many "programs" going on. For instance, I have no desire to pay for the living expenses of someone who paints for a living. If you cannot support yourself with your art, choose a different line of work.

As far as the abortion issue goes, because I know that a lot will say "If you believe in smaller government then you believe in fewer laws on our bodies" you are incorrect. This for me is a "murder" issue. A law that must be upheld, or should be upheld, by the government.

There is a fundamental difference between the way Americans and Canadians view the role of their government. We are, I suspect, generally less suspicious and less antagonistic towards our governments - federal, provincial, and municipal. This may be because we are a smaller, younger and much less populous country and thus we do still feel that we can be engaged/have a say in the activities of our government on an individual level. That grassroots business still does work north of the border and our elected governments, regardless of political stripe, still do pay attention to the concerns of the mob, that is to say, us.

It also strikes me that there seems to be for some reason greater transparency up here. Though there is greed, slovenliness and corruption, especially in a party which has been in power for too long, this will be exposed and we, the voters, will chuck 'em out.

In Canada we do have an Auditor-General and the function of this non-partisan office is to review all governmental financial practices for incompetency and corruption and to make such findings public. We also have like offices on the provincial (state) and municipal levels.

The relationship between big business and government also appears to be somewhat more transparent and thus less malign than it does south of the border. This may be because Canada has more many rules and regulations in place regarding business practices, a result of our left-leaning policies. At the same time the Canadian government is anxious to promote economic development inside this country and so does make available interest-free loans and tax breaks to big businesses who are interested in setting up shop here, including American companies. The difference is that these deals are public knowledge.

It has also been said that our relationship to government has been brought about by the differences in the way we came to nationhood. You were oppressed by a mad King and a terrible burden of taxes at a point when you were mature enough to become your own country. You had to fight for your nationhood and then you had to conquer the west. You also engaged in a terrible civil war.

Our settlement came about much later - due to the lousy weather - and our biggest problem as a nation was the war over Quebec, a problem which still exists. Other than that, the settlement of Canada was orderly and peaceful. The explorers were there first, the government second, the settlers third, after the government had made it safe for them....

All of this is to say that, unlike you, we do feel that the government is likely to be on our side and that it is made up of people like ourselves.

As for the abortion issue, as you are now aware many of us do not feel that it is murder and we figure that our beliefs are as valuable as yours. This is why abortion must remain legal. People who don't want them don't have to have them. It is not up to you to force your Christian-based life view as to when life begins on me.

[anonemouse 1]

Funny, you also work with primarily conservative charities. Of course there are going to be more conservatives than liberals at a pro-life pregnancy counseling center. Most liberals believe that a woman has a right to choose, so they aren't going to donate their time to a place that doesn't believe that way. If you work at primarily conservative agencies, you are going to see primarily conservatives.

[396power 2]

Alex, ansewer me this how is waht I said differnt from what you said you picked my group out I picked yours out. I did not attack anyone personaly. I said the things i said about a group of people. as I told you before, my problem with you is that the same rules that you are trying to tell others you don't abide by yourself. So just tell me where My general statements toward certian groups are differnt than your statments?

[FunnyDuddies 6]

This (emphasis mine) is actually the #1 reason why people donate and are involved in charitable reasons... it makes them feel good. (I don't remember the exact name off hand but this is per your every day college level text on human motivation). It's rarely about the actual charity or what the recipient receives, rather how the giving makes the giver feel. I'm not picking on anyone, and especially not anyone on this thread, even though one of the examples I'm giving was used -- but you'll notice that mention of charity or good deeds is often expressed with some type of personal qualifier - e.g. I make X and give X%, versus just I give X%, or even "I give". Or we donated a set that cost X, versus we donated an expensive set, or "we donated". Or "I gave them almost X worth of clothing" instead of "nice clothing" or just "I gave." A common example is giving a donation that, in turn, gives you recognition. E.g. buying a memmorial brick for someone, that is placed into a new construction, and has your name on it... or theirs, on behalf of you.

Sorry for the tangent, but you know how I have to be all over the psychology.

I agree that a lot of people do charity for selfish reasons. Better that it be done for a selfish reason, than not done at all.

But since i am the only one who posted numbers, and that is what you are refering to, let me explain my motivation behind placing numbers with my posts. Being a conservative, a lot of people (its already been done here) will trivialize the charity and state that it might be a little, or "you just cut a check" without realizing how much we are actually talking. I think it is important to show exactly how much is given to qualify the charity being given, and the level of commitment from the giver. Someone doing something to make themselves feel better will give 2-5%, according to studies. My numbers are a little over 25% of my personal income, not even including my husband's which is almost 35% given. and this is just the financial portion. We donate at least 20 hours a week in physical labor as well, and when the weather is good, even more than that. ( we love working outside )

I hear what you are saying, but just because someone quantifies something does not mean they are doing it for purely selfish reasons. My case is merely using it to qualify, in the eyes of my doubters, that I am very devoted to my charities to a level much further than those who "just do it to feel good".

[BJean 16]

funnyd: Who cares what charitable work you do? The people you help may, but who here cares? I'm really ashamed of both of you who are saying that you're doing all this great and wonderful charitable work and then accuse the opposition of not doing anything. You both sound disengenuous. You, funnyd because you want your money and your time to be spent ONLY the way you want it. (Not necessarily where it is needed as far as the majority of needy people is concerned.) You don't want your tax dollars spent on pamphlets that help women to learn about abortion resources. You, you, you. That's what you're all about.

The fact is funnyd you are completely wrong about the government. Most programs were not bad from the beginning. And for you to say that the government helping people is causing them to be needy is bullshit. If you really believed that, you wouldn't think of giving anyone who needed help.

Of course people take advantage of the system. Of course you and your conservative co-horts believe that government assistance of any kind is bad. But you are dead wrong and you, and they, sound like very greedy selfish money-grubbing snobs.

[Wheetsin 714]

I will, however, argue with any statement that doubts my (Liberal) voluntary contribution to society. Maybe if Conservatives were more generous, the government could cut back on taxes and still provide for our poor, homeless, hungry, helpless, disenfranchised brothers and sisters.

Reading your post made me reflect, and I've realized something. I don't really donate money. Most of that comes from working for nation-wide and international charitable organizations and seeing what really happens with the money. And being a cynic at heart. I just find it hard to trust that the money goes where it should be going. I probably donate something measly like $20 a year, in the form of a few dollars to the firemen on the street, etc. Well, that's to human-based organizations. I do give much more to wildlife and more environmental causes. I do adopt a family each year and sometimes two for the holidays. That's probably the biggest source of charitable $ outlay.

But I have done a lot of "effort" donation - where I'm giving my time or my labor instead of my money. Volunteering in Soup kitchens, hospitals (used to do this every summer in high school, and still do it when I can and they need someone), the animal shelter, Habitat for Humanity, etc. I own a business that builds websites and last year we donated our services to build sites for 11 charities. If you convert that to dollars, it's probably significant, but it's still not us handing out money.

[FunnyDuddies 6]

Funny, you also work with primarily conservative charities. Of course there are going to be more conservatives than liberals at a pro-life pregnancy counseling center. Most liberals believe that a woman has a right to choose, so they aren't going to donate their time to a place that doesn't believe that way. If you work at primarily conservative agencies, you are going to see primarily conservatives.

Absolutely not. If you had given the time to read my posts, only one of the programs that I volunteer at is conservative in politics. The rest of them are actually quite favored by liberals. Beach cleanup and sea turtle rescue and protection. Home building for struggling families who just need a leg up in the world (very similar to habitat for humanity, started by one of the most favored liberal presidents of our generation), drug rehab programs and a clinic for users trying to clean up, the American Cancer Society, the local ronald mcdonald house. Are these all too conservative for you? And NONE of these are charities that our church gives to, and only one of them has another member of our church working with them as well.

[green 6]

I don't want to argue abortion. I have said everything I have to say on the subject in previous threads.

I will, however, argue with any statement that doubts my (Liberal) voluntary contribution to society. Maybe if Conservatives were more generous, the government could cut back on taxes and still provide for our poor, homeless, hungry, helpless, disenfranchised brothers and sisters.

I can only speak for my Liberal self, but I have volunteered plenty of times in Soup kitchens and homeless shelters. And I've sat down with the clients and eaten with them and listened to them. I've been in their homes (the ones who had homes) and I've held their dirty, snot-nosed babies with cradle cap and cooed over them like they were the sweetest smelling, most beautiful children on God's green earth.

My birthday is Christmas Eve, and I cannot count the number of birthdays I've spent delivering food baskets and Christmas gifts to needy families. My best birthdays, in fact, have been spent that way.

I shop every single week for items that are in short supply at my local food pantry. Every single week. And I never don't buy an item because it's "too expensive". If they need baby formula, I fork over the ten or twelve bucks and count myself lucky that I never had to go begging in order to feed my kids.

So, as much as I respect you, Green, please don't insult me by saying that I don't want to get my hands dirty in the name of charity. My hands have been dirtied way more than most. Now let's hear from the big-hearted Conservatives who pat themselves on the back because they write a check to the Red Cross once a year. Talk about not dirtying your hands!!!!!!!!

Carlene, I was talking about an article in a Canadian newspaper written by a Canuck about our charitable practices as contrasted with the US. As you know, Canadian society is much more socialist and left-wing than American society but it seems that when it comes to charitable activities we far under-perform our neighbours to the south.

Please don't take this personally, kiddo. I am very aware that folks like you and TOM walk the walk.

[Wheetsin 714]

I should add - do I think it has anything to do with being a liberal? Maybe - in the distrust. But I think it has more to do with my personality/cynical nature. I don't like the spotlight, hence I prefer anonymous or "behind the scenes" work. I don't really like people that much, hence I prefer the "hands off" situations. Etc.

[FunnyDuddies 6]

funnyd: Who cares what charitable work you do? The people you help may, but who here cares? I'm really ashamed of both of you who are saying that you're doing all this great and wonderful charitable work and then accuse the opposition of not doing anything. You both sound disengenuous. You, funnyd because you want your money and your time to be spent ONLY the way you want it. (Not necessarily where it is needed as far as the majority of needy people is concerned.) You don't want your tax dollars spent on pamphlets that help women to learn about abortion resources. You, you, you. That's what you're all about.

The fact is funnyd you are completely wrong about the government. Most programs were not bad from the beginning. And for you to say that the government helping people is causing them to be needy is bullshit. If you really believed that, you wouldn't think of giving anyone who needed help.

Of course people take advantage of the system. Of course you and your conservative co-horts believe that government assistance of any kind is bad. But you are dead wrong and you, and they, sound like very greedy selfish money-grubbing snobs.

Well you are very welcome to just put me on ignore if you do not wish to read what charities i work for or contribute to. I am personally very proud of the strides my groups have made in all of their fields.

LOL Saying and opinion I have is wrong is quite laughable though. How's this, you're wrong! hehehe, See it really does nothing. You hate conservatives. I get it. If I say I work for charities, I am evil. If I say I contribute, I don't do it enough. If I say how much I do it, then it is self serving. when there is this much hatred towards a whole group of people, that prejudice taints everything you see from that person.

I am not sure what part of my life you see to think I am a money grubbing snob, but I am sorry you developed that view of me. You don't even know me! But I guess you have your reasons.

[green 6]

What I like about government linked assistance programmes as contrasted with private charities is that these are not as likely to be agenda-based. It strikes me that religious charities may exact a toll; a grrl might just have to spend some of her time going to faith meetings or whatever in order to get food and delousing Shampoo for her family.:tired

[FunnyDuddies 6]

What I like about government linked assistance programmes as contrasted with private charities is that these are not as likely to be agenda-based. It strikes me that religious charities may exact a toll; a grrl might just have to spend some of her time going to faith meetings or whatever in order to get food and delousing Shampoo for her family.:tired

Actually, here a lot of charities have to fight for government assistance, and they must pander to whomever the political person in charge of their sector and industry in order to win the charity. This makes them even more agenda-based, both conservative and liberal. I HATE that. Private charities can spend less on the over head and chiefs, and put more money towards the actual people needing the help. And they can give their money to whomever or whatever they feel necessary without having to follow whatever guidelines the govt has put on them.