I'm a Bush supporter and all, but this is just sad - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Seaver · 07-07-2004, 01:48 PM

http://166.70.44.66/2004/Jul/07072004/utah/181590.asp

Yes, I'm a Republican. But this man should never be appointed to any position.

""conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami." Holmes has since apologized for the comment.""

I can ignore the women subserviant to men statement, because I know both men and women who argue for this. But rape not causing pregnancy... how is he in our government?

*Edit* Could anyone help me by letting me include the whole article in this thread?

Edited by hrdwareguy to fix the link

cthulu23 · 07-07-2004, 02:00 PM

Somethings wrong with your url....if you hover over the link, you can see that it is actually pointing to "http:///" instead of the address.

Edit: try editing the post and pasting the link directly into the text box. If you just want a bare url for your link, there is no need to use the "http" button.

How are you having difficulty pasting the article?

Zeld2.0 · 07-07-2004, 02:15 PM

Article:

Quote:

WASHINGTON -- Reading from the Bible on the floor of the Senate on Tuesday, Sen. Orrin Hatch endorsed a federal judicial nominee who wrote that wives should have a subordinate role in marriage, with the Utah Republican emphasizing "millions and millions of people will agree with" that view.
In a preview of the religious rhetoric that will likely dominate next week's scheduled Senate debate over a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, Hatch led the fight for confirming Arkansas lawyer J. Leon Holmes to the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Arkansas.
With Hatch's support and that of Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, Holmes was confirmed 51-46 in the Senate on Tuesday evening, even though many members of the Senate predicted his nomination would be rejected.
Holmes' writing on abortion, marriage, slavery and other theological issues generated opposition from not only many Democrats but also some Republicans.
Fueling much of the debate is a 1997 article Holmes and his wife, Susan, wrote for Arkansas Catholic magazine titled, "Gender Neutral Language, Destroying an Essential Element of Our Faith." The couple wrote that under Catholic teaching, "the woman is to place herself under the authority of the man" in marriage and "is to subordinate herself to the husband."
Senate Democrats who are also members of the Roman Catholic faith, such as Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, have said the positions taken by Holmes "reflect a narrow view of the Catholic theology and do not embody contemporary standards that should be followed by any federal judge in any state."
Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Penn., lashed out at Durbin's criticism during floor debate.
"We hear so much from the other side about tolerance," said Santorum. "Where is the tolerance for people who want to believe what has been taught for 2,000 years?"
After reading aloud from Chapter 5 of the Book of Ephesians, Hatch said "it gets pretty bad around here" when lawmakers condemn Holmes for quoting the teachings of St. Paul the Apostle.
"I don't think anybody can read this without understanding husbands have tremendous obligations in order to gain the respect of their wives," said Hatch. "You might disagree with St. Paul but there are hundreds of millions of people who agree with St. Paul."
Hatch also discounted criticism over a 1980 letter Holmes wrote to a newspaper arguing that rape victims should not be allowed to have abortions because "conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami." Holmes has since apologized for the comment.
"I find his statement to be insensitive and appalling," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, a former criminal prosecutor who cited studies showing an estimated 25,000 pregnancies occur each year due to rape. "Speak to the family of a 13-year-old girl who is pregnant by being raped by her family's best friend, the next-door neighbor."
Said Hatch: "I believe all of us have made statements in the past for which we wished we could apologize."

Rape not causing pregnancy is.. pretty incredible to be stated...

cthulu23 · 07-07-2004, 02:25 PM

Are they trying to breed controversy? I don't want to hear about obstructionist, partisan Democrats on this one. I would like to point out that what this man espouses is pretty far from mainstream Catholic thought. I'm not a Catholic now, but I was raised as one and I attended 11 years of parochial school. At no time did I hear anything about the subservience of women (I don't think that we ever covered the conception rate of rapes, either).

apeman · 07-07-2004, 03:05 PM

oh my good Lord

if it's any consolation, we don't think worse of Republicans just because there's some crazy people associated with you

it does make us wonder sometimes mind

sounds to me like as bad a misreading of the scriptures as that that allows "islamic" people to murder westerners

there're crazy people on both sides dude

I know the Bible states that the husband is the head of the family, but this *asshole* is giving an idiotically one-sided view of the matter

surely the Public Relations people should have shut him the fuck up?

sheeeit no wonder i drink so much

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 03:10 PM

It's fine with me if that is what they want to believe and practice in their personal lives - but not that they impose such beliefs upon others nor try to codify them into law.

I am missing something, however. Hatch is the voice in the article - not Bush.

As an aside, if conceptions occur so infrequently in rapes, why not let the few unfortunate victims have abortions? Using the rarity excuse is a red herring.

tecoyah · 07-07-2004, 03:14 PM

Think I'll go re-read "HandmaidsTale".

Might as well brush up on 1984 while I'm at it.

Lebell · 07-07-2004, 03:18 PM

I find this mindset to be quite disturbing, especially as I know someone who has had a child that was the result of a rape.

apeman · 07-07-2004, 03:20 PM

Brave New World anyone?

at least they get drugs in that one

did anyone actually mention Bush? we know he's crazy, but not that crazy

anyone for declaring the value of PI to be 4 exactly?

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 03:31 PM

Actually, Pi should be rounded down to 3.

apeman · 07-07-2004, 03:38 PM

heheh good one ... i can handle most ideologies as long as the sense of humour is still there ... when the sense of humour goes, it's time to start running for cover

PS: like the new avatar, still disagree violently with your politics

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 03:45 PM

When the humor goes, they can pronounce me dead.

apeman · 07-07-2004, 03:54 PM

awww you're not all bad after all

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 04:02 PM

I am having a Sally Fields moment.

:sniff:

apeman · 07-07-2004, 04:20 PM

*hugs wonderwench but refuses to agree with any of her political opinions at all*

hmmm did anyone see the topic go by?

i'm sure there was a whoosh noise just now

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 04:26 PM

Well, you could always throw out a few "Bush is a chimp" comments.

Actually, no. I can't see you doing that.

apeman · 07-07-2004, 04:41 PM

nah, time was though ...

now i'd say that he can't be that stupid if he's in charge of the world's last remaining superpower ... the thing was, he pissed most of us Europeans off right at the beginning, with Kyoto and various other treaties ...

wonderwench · 07-07-2004, 04:44 PM

Considering that many European countries have not approved Kyoto, that's a bit of a stretch.

apeman · 07-08-2004, 12:05 AM

I guess Kyoto's got to be another thread

back to the original topic, and I'm not from the US so I wouldn't know, but does this kind of thing happen more in Utah than e.g. NYC?

Superbelt · 07-08-2004, 03:30 AM

This guy is still a far cry away from the psychosis that Ashcroft has.

There ya go wonderwench, I tied Bush's values and judgment into this thread.

Kadath · 07-08-2004, 04:42 AM

I don't support violence, but if I could punch Rick Santorum in his face, I would. That man is an unmitigated jackass, and I hate that he represents me.

Anyway, I think the title should have been "I'm a Republican and all" but since Bush is the head of the party, that connection is present, though tenuous.

Superbelt · 07-08-2004, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kadath
I don't support violence, but if I could punch Rick Santorum in his face, I would. That man is an unmitigated jackass, and I hate that he represents me.

I view Pennsylvania reasonable as a whole. As long as there is a valid opponent to Santorum in 06, he will be on his ass. We won't have to deal with him long.

The state didn't know how off the wall he was when first elected, and he was blessed by circumstance and for his reelection.

He turned himself into a lightning rod since though. He's gone.

pan6467 · 07-08-2004, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by apeman
I guess Kyoto's got to be another thread

back to the original topic, and I'm not from the US so I wouldn't know, but does this kind of thing happen more in Utah than e.g. NYC?

Yes, Utah is a very religious state. I believe it is like 75% Mormon/Latter Day Saint.

Some would go as far as to say the Mormons (or Churh of the Latter Day Saints) run the state. Having spent time there I have my opinion but shall not give it as not to upset anyone.

Needless to say it is a very conservative state. Yet, bigamy was legal for years and years and maybe within the last 10 became illegal. So I find it funny Hatch quotes the Bible about husband and wife.

Quote from article:

"I don't think anybody can read this without understanding husbands have tremendous obligations in order to gain the respect of their wives," said Hatch. "You might disagree with St. Paul but there are hundreds of millions of people who agree with St. Paul."

More hypocrasy.

It is also, I believe, 1 of the 2 states where any form of gambling is still illegal, and has some of the most beautiful scenery you will ever see, so Utah does have some positive things going for it.

Bill O'Rights · 07-08-2004, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kadath
I don't support violence, but if I could punch Rick Santorum in his face, I would. That man is an unmitigated jackass, and I hate that he represents me.

Anyway, I think the title should have been "I'm a Republican and all" but since Bush is the head of the party, that connection is present, though tenuous.

First let me offer my condolences for having Santorum as your Senator. Being an ex-Pennsylvanian myself, I can feel some of your pain. However, noting that I am no longer a voting resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, what in the hell were you guys thinking?!?

Next...yes, I wholeheartedly agree that any connection to Bush, as it relates to this situation, is ridiculously far stretched and, quite frankly, more than a little "Limbaughesque", if you ask me. Bush has plenty enough faults all on his own little time card. I don't see the point in adding phantom issues.

Finally...apeman! wonderwench! You guys wanna go get a room or something?

apeman · 07-08-2004, 05:50 AM

mad heretical phil: ah, thanks, i thought it was mormonised there ... they have some odd ideas don't they?

BOR: i was overcome by emotion when i found we agreed on something

if people spent more time finding things they agree on instead of working out where they differ, the world would be a better place

i felt it was an interesting new direction for a politics thread too ... makes a change eh?

cthulu23 · 07-08-2004, 06:03 AM

So apeman supports more sloppy kisses in the political forum....that's fine, but I'm not hugging Artelevision

In this new spirit of inclusivity and tolerance, here are some suggestions for future political forum topics:

Carbon-based lifeforms unite
Rainbows, pro or con?
Who wants ice cream?

kulrblind · 07-08-2004, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonderwench
Considering that many European countries have not approved Kyoto, that's a bit of a stretch.

Sorry to go back off-topic for this thread, but:

If you look at which countries in Europe have ratified Kyoto, you'll see:

Austria
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Norway
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Portugal
United Kingdom

If you check out the rates of acceptance, accession, and approval, you can add in even more. What's more important than the number of nations who sign / ratify is the percentage of emissions each country is responsible for, and whether or not the combined percentage is equal to or above 55% of total emissions. If smaller countries don't sign and also don't pollute (oversimplifying), their signing/ratification isn't much of a loss.

just not letting it go,
Kulrblind

tecoyah · 07-08-2004, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cthulu23
So apeman support more sloppy kisses in the political forum....that's fine, but I'm not hugging Artelevision

In this new spirit of inclusivity and tolerance, here are some suggestions for future political forum topics:

Carbon-based lifeforms unite
Rainbows, pro or con?
Who wants ice cream?

Ice cream?....did someone say Ice cream?

I would give wonderwench a big smooch.....but I am afraid I'd just get slapped. If I remember correctly, that kinda stings.

apeman · 07-08-2004, 06:34 AM

i absolutely agree with anything you say

further non-divisive suggested topics:
Richard Ashcroft's garden
aren't little fluffy bunnies cute?
are apples better than oranges?*

heheh

nah, there's a happy medium though isn't there? maybe time to start a thread ...

*CAUTION - may lead to flame-wars

Superbelt · 07-08-2004, 06:41 AM

Let's go a step further with that.
Currently 123 nations* have ratified or accessed the Kyoto Protocol. They account for 44.2% of CO2 emissions. If the US ratifies it that skyrockets to 80.3% of emissions.

Russia is stillholding Kyoto hostage with their 17.4% trying to squeeze some Economic Aid from the European Community for itself. Once they fully sign on Kyoto will be possible without the United States. We'll be in it anyway in January. When Kerry signs it.

*There's about 190 countries on earth. Like kulrblind said, most of the small ones who this won't really affect didn't bother to be a part of the process whatsoever.

cthulu23 · 07-08-2004, 07:17 AM

I wouldn't be so sure that Kerry will sign Kyoto, as it will raise a howl from industry that will be audible on Mars. I lobbied US representatives at the UNFCC COP6 (UN framework committee on climate change, conference of the parties 6) in the Hague in the waning days of Clinton's presidency. Even then, the US was the largest obstructionist in attendance. As the US is the global leader in carbon emissions by a wide margin, this definitely strained the proceedings.

Superbelt · 07-08-2004, 07:28 AM

Clinton isn't exactly an environmentalist. Kerry is hardcore environment.
Kerry is one of the original Earth Day Organizers.
When he was Lt Governor of Mass he led the fight against Acid Rain.
He helped keep the CAA from being bastardized.

I have many problems with Kerry, but on the Environment he is truly strong. I have no doubt he will sign Kyoto

Link
Now, he will have many problems with the Senate when he tries to do that. If we're lucky the Democrats can wrest control of that as well.

apeman · 07-08-2004, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Sorry to go back off-topic for this thread, but:

If you look at which countries in Europe have ratified Kyoto, you'll see

...

aha, i thought europe was doing ok on this ... is it Russia that's sort of hovering on the edge of ratifying now?

of course, a lot of people don't think Kyoto goes far enough ... we'll see in a few hundred years

btw i wouldn't worry about the thread going off topic, given past form

Superbelt · 07-08-2004, 07:41 AM

Russia is also waiting on us. Them signing it won't sit well with the Bush admin. So if Bush gets reelected,

they will be less likely to sign. When Kerry is, they will almost definetley follow suit.

07-07-2004, 01:48 PM	#1 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	I'm a Bush supporter and all, but this is just sad http://166.70.44.66/2004/Jul/07072004/utah/181590.asp Yes, I'm a Republican. But this man should never be appointed to any position. ""conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami." Holmes has since apologized for the comment."" I can ignore the women subserviant to men statement, because I know both men and women who argue for this. But rape not causing pregnancy... how is he in our government? Edit Could anyone help me by letting me include the whole article in this thread? Edited by hrdwareguy to fix the link Last edited by hrdwareguy; 07-07-2004 at 02:50 PM..

07-07-2004, 02:00 PM	#2 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	Somethings wrong with your url....if you hover over the link, you can see that it is actually pointing to "http:///" instead of the address. Edit: try editing the post and pasting the link directly into the text box. If you just want a bare url for your link, there is no need to use the "http" button. How are you having difficulty pasting the article? Last edited by cthulu23; 07-07-2004 at 02:16 PM..

07-07-2004, 03:05 PM	#5 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	oh my good Lord if it's any consolation, we don't think worse of Republicans just because there's some crazy people associated with you it does make us wonder sometimes mind sounds to me like as bad a misreading of the scriptures as that that allows "islamic" people to murder westerners there're crazy people on both sides dude I know the Bible states that the husband is the head of the family, but this asshole is giving an idiotically one-sided view of the matter surely the Public Relations people should have shut him the fuck up? sheeeit no wonder i drink so much __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 03:14 PM	#7 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	Think I'll go re-read "HandmaidsTale". Might as well brush up on 1984 while I'm at it. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

07-07-2004, 03:18 PM	#8 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	I find this mindset to be quite disturbing, especially as I know someone who has had a child that was the result of a rape. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

07-07-2004, 02:25 PM	#4 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	Are they trying to breed controversy? I don't want to hear about obstructionist, partisan Democrats on this one. I would like to point out that what this man espouses is pretty far from mainstream Catholic thought. I'm not a Catholic now, but I was raised as one and I attended 11 years of parochial school. At no time did I hear anything about the subservience of women (I don't think that we ever covered the conception rate of rapes, either).

07-07-2004, 03:10 PM	#6 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	It's fine with me if that is what they want to believe and practice in their personal lives - but not that they impose such beliefs upon others nor try to codify them into law. I am missing something, however. Hatch is the voice in the article - not Bush. As an aside, if conceptions occur so infrequently in rapes, why not let the few unfortunate victims have abortions? Using the rarity excuse is a red herring.

07-07-2004, 03:20 PM	#9 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	Brave New World anyone? at least they get drugs in that one did anyone actually mention Bush? we know he's crazy, but not that crazy anyone for declaring the value of PI to be 4 exactly? __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 03:31 PM	#10 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	Actually, Pi should be rounded down to 3.

07-07-2004, 03:38 PM	#11 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	heheh good one ... i can handle most ideologies as long as the sense of humour is still there ... when the sense of humour goes, it's time to start running for cover PS: like the new avatar, still disagree violently with your politics __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 03:45 PM	#12 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	When the humor goes, they can pronounce me dead.

07-07-2004, 03:54 PM	#13 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	awww you're not all bad after all __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 04:02 PM	#14 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	I am having a Sally Fields moment. :sniff:

07-07-2004, 04:20 PM	#15 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	hugs wonderwench but refuses to agree with any of her political opinions at all hmmm did anyone see the topic go by? i'm sure there was a whoosh noise just now __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 04:26 PM	#16 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	Well, you could always throw out a few "Bush is a chimp" comments. Actually, no. I can't see you doing that.

07-07-2004, 04:41 PM	#17 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	nah, time was though ... now i'd say that he can't be that stupid if he's in charge of the world's last remaining superpower ... the thing was, he pissed most of us Europeans off right at the beginning, with Kyoto and various other treaties ... __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-07-2004, 04:44 PM	#18 (permalink)
wonderwench Banned	Considering that many European countries have not approved Kyoto, that's a bit of a stretch.

07-08-2004, 12:05 AM	#19 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	I guess Kyoto's got to be another thread back to the original topic, and I'm not from the US so I wouldn't know, but does this kind of thing happen more in Utah than e.g. NYC? __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-08-2004, 03:30 AM	#20 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	This guy is still a far cry away from the psychosis that Ashcroft has. There ya go wonderwench, I tied Bush's values and judgment into this thread.

07-08-2004, 04:42 AM	#21 (permalink)
Kadath Muffled Location: Camazotz	I don't support violence, but if I could punch Rick Santorum in his face, I would. That man is an unmitigated jackass, and I hate that he represents me. Anyway, I think the title should have been "I'm a Republican and all" but since Bush is the head of the party, that connection is present, though tenuous. __________________ it's quiet in here

07-08-2004, 05:50 AM	#25 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	mad heretical phil: ah, thanks, i thought it was mormonised there ... they have some odd ideas don't they? BOR: i was overcome by emotion when i found we agreed on something if people spent more time finding things they agree on instead of working out where they differ, the world would be a better place i felt it was an interesting new direction for a politics thread too ... makes a change eh? __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-08-2004, 06:03 AM	#26 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	So apeman supports more sloppy kisses in the political forum....that's fine, but I'm not hugging Artelevision In this new spirit of inclusivity and tolerance, here are some suggestions for future political forum topics: Carbon-based lifeforms unite Rainbows, pro or con? Who wants ice cream? Last edited by cthulu23; 07-08-2004 at 06:38 AM..

07-08-2004, 06:34 AM	#29 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	i absolutely agree with anything you say further non-divisive suggested topics: Richard Ashcroft's garden aren't little fluffy bunnies cute? are apples better than oranges?* heheh nah, there's a happy medium though isn't there? maybe time to start a thread ... *CAUTION - may lead to flame-wars __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

07-08-2004, 06:41 AM	#30 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Let's go a step further with that. Currently 123 nations* have ratified or accessed the Kyoto Protocol. They account for 44.2% of CO2 emissions. If the US ratifies it that skyrockets to 80.3% of emissions. Russia is stillholding Kyoto hostage with their 17.4% trying to squeeze some Economic Aid from the European Community for itself. Once they fully sign on Kyoto will be possible without the United States. We'll be in it anyway in January. When Kerry signs it. There's about 190 countries on earth. Like kulrblind said, most of the small ones who this won't really affect didn't bother to be a part of the process whatsoever. Last edited by Superbelt; 07-08-2004 at 06:43 AM..*

07-08-2004, 07:17 AM	#31 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	I wouldn't be so sure that Kerry will sign Kyoto, as it will raise a howl from industry that will be audible on Mars. I lobbied US representatives at the UNFCC COP6 (UN framework committee on climate change, conference of the parties 6) in the Hague in the waning days of Clinton's presidency. Even then, the US was the largest obstructionist in attendance. As the US is the global leader in carbon emissions by a wide margin, this definitely strained the proceedings.

07-08-2004, 07:28 AM	#32 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Clinton isn't exactly an environmentalist. Kerry is hardcore environment. Kerry is one of the original Earth Day Organizers. When he was Lt Governor of Mass he led the fight against Acid Rain. He helped keep the CAA from being bastardized. I have many problems with Kerry, but on the Environment he is truly strong. I have no doubt he will sign Kyoto Link Now, he will have many problems with the Senate when he tries to do that. If we're lucky the Democrats can wrest control of that as well.

07-08-2004, 07:41 AM	#34 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Russia is also waiting on us. Them signing it won't sit well with the Bush admin. So if Bush gets reelected, they will be less likely to sign. When Kerry is, they will almost definetley follow suit.