The Emporia Gazette

Pro-life vote

I intend to go with Tiahart. The problem with pro abortionists is that they tend to overlook the words in the Declaration of Indepence of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There is a reason they put life first which should be very obvious even to the most dense pro abortionist--without life the other two are moot. One person complains that Virginia made it too simple--well, that's because it is. The people who make it complex are the people who cloud the issue to rationalize their own feelings that all is well. Nice job Virginia. Well done. If people would bother to go into Oyez Website and read the first oral argument of Sarah Weddington, Justice Stewart had her on the ropes regarding her constitutionality argument and had that been it, the case would likely have ended. But for some reason not spelled out on the page a second oral argument was granted and it was here that Weddington completed the greatest con or one of the greatest by linking a woman's right to privacy to her right to an abortion. There is no such link anywhere in the Constitution. The only link even remotely there is the right to prevention against illegal search and seizure which admittedly the most brazen liberal can stretch to their needs. Weddington indeed is a great lawyer--it is not easy to hoodwink 7 of 9 justices--but she did it. By the way, I believe Roe herself has stated she regrets pursuing the case. Dennis Mosebey

January 27, 2010 at 5:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

First, God does not allow bad things to happen, God gave us free will which means we all get to choose. God is not in the business of unscrewing up things we screw up as human beings. He could but that is not what it is about. He gave Adam and Eve everything they needed to be content and asked only one thing that they not eat the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden. From then on it was really up to them to make it work, but they failed and we humans have been failing ever since, but God in fact did intervene, in the most special way, he sent His Son to redeem us and teach us how to be happy again. But it is still up to us.

Now this debate as to when life starts, when it is a baby or a fetus. Well the problem is there is no scientific proof one way or the other BUT my profession of nuclear power teaches me that when there is doubt you always fail in the safe direction. So if I choose to believe life begins at conception then I know on that final day when God holds me accountable I know on that score I have done the right thing. If I go the other way, in my view I am taking a great risk. Eternity is a long time to be in a place that is very undesirable. But I remind everyone the Declaration of Independence states, "certain unalienable rights that among these are LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I do not believe the Founding Fathers casually put that word LIFE first. They put it there because without that right, the other two do not really count right? I mean they are meaningless. Laws are made by man so people can live together somewhat peacefully, but laws are not the same thing as morals. Morals come uniquely from within. Generally good morals will lead to good laws, but that is NOT always true. So while it was legal to do in Kansas what Tiller did, it defies the higher moral authority and conscience that we are also obligated to consider using the free will God gave us. That is why, "it was legal in Kansas" holds no weight with me. I have to use every peaceable means I can to get the law made by man back in line with the moral law that is the ultimate. I may fail but God expects me to try. I leave you with the final summation in the movie The Verdict where Paul Newman admonishes the jury to not confuse the law with justice. He tells them that they have been told what the law says but they have an opportunity to mete out justice. Ultimately the jury finds for Paul's client. This was after the defense had gotten the only piece of hard evidence thrown out on a technicality. I urge you to watch that movie, it is powerful and it demonstrates very clearly the fundamentals I am talking about here.

June 13, 2009 at 12:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

Tiller himself said. Ok, So it really is not a fact but rather heresay. Heresay leaves the choice up to the hearing person so I have no problem if you believe Tiller. Actually the number he admits too is incredibly higher than my overly conservative benefit of the doubt I gave him which makes it even worse to me.

Thanks Open Eyes you got the point exactly. I did not even ask for Kelley to apologize, just wanted to let him and everyone else know that Roeder DOES NOT represent us.

Hey I never knew that about Churchill. I always thought it was terrible how he saved them in the war then right after it was over they put someone else in. Thanks for that tidbit. Again I thank all those who have written in my support and all those who offer opposing views. All for today. Dennis Mosebey

June 11, 2009 at 7:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

And Sundance also remember by your own admission, Let Butch do the thinking, that is what he is good at. Great Movie. One of my all time favorites. Like the moniker.Dennis

June 10, 2009 at 11:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

history_nerd, you cannot know the 250 or the reasons are accurate, since you could not have seen his records, could you? So you can take his word for it if you want, I choose not to. Publishing it as a fact is hardly accurate.

Open Eyes, thanks for the MSNBC quote--exception vice rule though. Even a blind pig finds an acorn, hope Immelt does not find out who posted it on MSNBC.

Sundance Kid, sorry old chap but I think the guy in the white hat really was out there and got you. So I trust you did your own scientific survey and have details to prove this contention, or is it just something you read on a liberal blog. But no matter, I find it interesting that out of the whole article your main concern is my comment on the Times. Obviously you missed the point. Remember, Butch did all the thinking Sundance, you were just good with the gun.

I have no problem with anyone going with anyone else's opinion, just don't accuse me of causing Tiller's murder. I have never told anyone to bomb a clinic, in fact I am ashamed to admit I never even went down to picket Tiller. I should have. Shame on me. There are still people who believe Kennedy was killed by the CIA, that multiple shooters were in the Plaza and that the Masons have all the Templar treasure. Conspiracy theories are a part of the American psyche.

Some liberals do hate the military, but I would not demonize all liberals to that category. Like let's see Harry Reid, "This war is lost." Now I think Harry is somewhat liberal right? Do I believe all liberals are like him? Nope my cousin is not, Colmes is not,

Okay I think that summarizes all my rebuttals to the opposing camp for today. I thank all those folks who replied with good hard points on the other side as well. The dialog is what is important. Well done to you all.

Remember Sundance, watch out for the guy in the white hat, if he is out there, stay in the building. Dennis Mosebey

June 10, 2009 at 10:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

Oh one more thing, Fox News does not hold a candle to Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow when it comes to condeming groups of people. MSNBC is one of the primer offenders in that regard. At least Fox does have some other views, tough to consider a guy like Marc Lamont Hill anything but to left of center and Ellis Hennican certainly is no Rush Limbaugh. Fox must be doing something right since they are beating the pants off everyone else.

I don't buy the argument on why the Times is losing readers either. I have not cancelled by Gazette subscription due to recession or the Internet, have you? Nice excuse, looks good. Fact is most Americans know when a newspaper has become the official paper of the Democratic Party.

June 9, 2009 at 11:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

There are all types of extremists out there. Tim McVeigh was one. David Koresh was one. Never said there were not extemists. I even consider George Tiller one. So let's see, 60000 abortions. Conservatively I have heard it said 10000 later term. Let us say that number is a factor of 100 too high, leaving 100 actual late terms. Now even Roe V Wade understood, extreme medical circumstances only--since you can't see his records and I cannot either, we have to take his word for it that all of them were extreme medical circumstances. Talk about Kool aid? But the real issue with Roe V Wade aside from my personal views is that the Supreme Court should have refused to hear the case and kicked it back to the Congress to decide if the decision belonged at the Federal or State Level. Instead they decided that some of my tax dollars have to go to supporting something I do not believe in. If it truly is as good a solution as proponents say, then it would have passed the muster of public debate and scrutiny.Proponets call it Pro Choice, well at least be proud of your stance if you endorse it and call it Pro Abortion. I do not care for Fred Phelps either, he is an extremist. He is protected but he is an extremist. So no I do not endorse the premise that there is an anti abortion terrorist movement in the US. Sorry your premise is flawed. But no matter I heard a commentator say just yesterday that Obama is beyond the world, he is like kind of God looking down on the world. And tonight another abortion doctor was on stating what a hero George was. Okay, but I prefer heroes like Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Monroe, Madison more than George Tiller. To each his or her own.

Dennis

June 9, 2009 at 11:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

Allow me to be perfectly clear.

1.I know what an editorial page is. I also know that when they have a constant slant to them rather than presenting balance it is abuse of said page without equal time and frequently equal time is not given. I have written numerous rebuttals before to differnt things never published. I really wish some other folks would rebut Mr. Kelly, as I know the paper cannot publish mine all the time. I do not expect them to do so. I feel a strong obligation as one of the generation who through just standing by frittered away the gift of the Greatest Generation. It was my generation that slowly allowed a Socialst state to take over the USA. I started way too late to rerefute the views of some liberals.
2.It is not morally wrong to have an opinion, it is morally wrong to condemn a group of people because they have opposing views as inciting someone to murder someone else.
3.It is tough not to read Mr. Kelly's column when it is the only paper in town and takes up so much space on a regular basis.
4.It is good the NY times has the largest circulation in the US, cause it is losing about 10,000 readers a day because no one believes in what it publishes anymore. They will be the next ones asking for a bailout and they will get it.
5. I appreciate all comment--even negative ones. At least someone read the article. My goal was accomplished.
6. I notice that no one refutes the basic premise of the article, at least so far. It is good Mr. Kelly has friends. Everyone should have friends.

Dennis Mosebey

June 9, 2009 at 9:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Cries foul

No need to remove. I am not offended. I would never subscribe to the New York Times, it is going broke peddling nothing but bias. It is a shame, great newspaper with great history.

Thanks for publishing and thanks for catching my error and correcting. Squeaky did in fact try to assassinate Gerald Ford not Ronald Reagan. Again thanks for publishing.

Dennis Mosebey

June 9, 2009 at 7:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Vote against Obama

Good point Open Eyes. I liked it. Pithy indeed.

November 5, 2008 at 8:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )