New Study: Conservatives are Happier Because They Hate Everyone

[red states rule]

This "research study" should get plenty of play in the liberal media. The mean heartless conservatives VS the caring and compassonate left


New Study: Conservatives are Happier Because They Hate Everyone
By Warner Todd Huston | May 7, 2008 - 23:21 ET

There is a news report starting to make the rounds amongst the MSM on a study that claims to have discovered why conservatives tend to be happier than liberals and it is just the sort of bilge that the MSM loves to promulgate. We may see more of it over the next several days because, while it is titled "Conservatives Happier Than Liberals," it is basically saying that the reason conservatives are happier is because they just don't care about other people. This purported research claims to pinpoint the reason conservatives are happier and it is because they have theirs and they don't care if everyone else is poor and downtrodden. In contrast they claim, liberals are less happy because they care more about people and are all heartbroken that people suffer "inequalities."

Yes, if they are telling us that if you're a happy conservative, it's because you are a hateful, meanie. Thank you New York University.


for the complete article

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/05/07/new-study-conservatives-are-happier-because-they-hate-everyone

and the "study"

http://www.livescience.com/health/080507-liberal-conservative.html

[82Marine89]

Screw all of you.





















OK, now I'm happy.

[avatar4321]

Well that explains why i feel so good.. i mean i totally hate.... wait who do i hate now? Cant think of one person.

Seriously though, looking at the study it seems that conservatives are happier because they understand and accept reality much more than liberals do.


"There is no reason to think that the effects we have identified here are unique to economic forms of inequality," the researchers write. "Research suggests that highly egalitarian women are less happy in their marriages compared with their more traditional counterparts, apparently because they are more troubled by disparities in domestic labor."

You mean selfish people are more unhappy than selfless people? What an amazing surprise. They did a study to figure this out?

[diuretic]

I hate everyone and I'm on the Left.....something weird about that study :coffee:

[glockmail]

Actually we conservatives are happier because we don't care to tell other people what to do.

[PostmodernProphet]

I only hate people who draft studies......

[red states rule]

To liberals if you are happy, and you show it; you are spreading hate

[Joe Steel]

Conservatives are happier because all they really need is a gun, a six pack and some time to shoot the empties.

[red states rule]

Conservatives are happier because all they really need is a gun, a six pack and some time to shoot the empties.

Yep, we cling to our guns and beverages all the way to the polls on election day

Much to the dismay of the kook left

[Monkeybone]

Conservatives are happier because all they really need is a gun, a six pack and some time to shoot the empties.

hahahaha it's funny because it's true!

[red states rule]

Please remember thuis "study" is brought to you by the same pointy heads who brought you the "truth" about global warming, global cooling, and climate change

[mundame]

Actually we conservatives are happier because we don't care to tell other people what to do.


I agree. I have some relatives who are furious all the time because they want to control what people do and they can't. They are eaten up with what people OUGHT to be doing, differently.

They are leftwing, of course.

[red states rule]

I agree. I have some relatives who are furious all the time because they want to control what people do and they can't. They are eaten up with what people OUGHT to be doing, differently.

They are leftwing, of course.

Libs should be carrying around guilt for shackling able bodied Americans with their "you can't do it" talking points

[Hagbard Celine]

Sounds like another Rush Limbaugh fiction to me.

[red states rule]

Sounds like another Rush Limbaugh fiction to me.

If you want fiction, read the DNC platform

[Trigg]

Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

We don't rationalize inequalities, we understand that people will never be completely equal. Some people have more drive and ambition than others, this leads them into higher paying jobs.

What exactly is so hard to understand???????


We also know that if a politicians lips are moving they're probably lying. Libs always act shocked when one is caught lying or cheating, unless of course said politician is republican-they all lie doncha know.

[avatar4321]

Actually we conservatives are happier because we don't care to tell other people what to do.

Shut up:p

[avatar4321]

Conservatives are happier because all they really need is a gun, a six pack and some time to shoot the empties.

wish i had a six pack. my abs arent nearly that defined...

[red states rule]

As a conservative, I am happy because I have values and a do my best to live by them

Liberals are miserable because they have ever changing values and standards to reflect the current polls

[midcan5]

This is interesting, but my real life experiences don't support it. I often think happiness is like so many things biologically supported and then life and your other experiences form how you feel. Are poor people happy? Some are very happy, often amazes me. Are rich people happy? Some are. Are conservatives happy, hmm I think not given their constant complaints about liberals, taxes, government, gays, BO, dems, but maybe that makes some happy?

this is excellent.

"Psychologist Dan Gilbert challenges the idea that we'll be miserable if we don't get what we want. Our "psychological immune system" lets us feel real, enduring happiness, he says, even when things don't go as planned. He calls this kind of happiness "synthetic happiness," and he says it's "every bit as real and enduring as the kind of happiness you stumble upon when you get exactly what you were aiming for.""

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/97

[red states rule]

[QUOTE=midcan5;241488] Are conservatives happy, hmm I think not given their constant complaints about liberals, taxes, government, gays, BO, dems, but maybe that makes some happy?

QUOTE]

Because everything libs touch gets screwed up. They are constantly demanding higher taxes, and bigger government to solve everyones problems.

Libs have been redistributing wealth for over 40 years to end poverty - yet they keep telling us poverty is worse then ever

[Hagbard Celine]

If any of you believe this crap you're more idiotic than I thought. Neither "group" is more happy, better in bed, etc. than the other. Liberals and Conservatives aren't separate species, they're all just idiot humans who stuff themselves into categories so that they'll feel like they have some handle on who they are and where they belong. The truth is that happiness is relative. It isn't a state you reach and stay in. It's something that comes in bursts and lasts until the next time some guy in traffic cuts you off and you get mad for a minute and then a song you like comes on the radio and you're happy again.
The notion that one's views on abortion and gay marriage can collectively influence a group of people to be more "happy" than the opposite group is so ridiculous I can't believe that adults would actually spend time arguing over it.
One thing's for sure though, if you spend all your time being dour and harboring negative feelings for other people you'll probably end up unhappy and unhealthy--Hence why idiot radicals on both sides of the aisle usually end up appearing red-faced, overweight and slovenly.

[red states rule]

If any of you believe this crap you're more idiotic than I thought. Neither "group" is more happy, better in bed, etc. than the other. Liberals and Conservatives aren't separate species, they're all just idiot humans who stuff themselves into categories so that they'll feel like they have some handle on who they are and where they belong. The truth is that happiness is relative. It isn't a state you reach and stay in. It's something that comes in bursts and lasts until the next time some guy in traffic cuts you off and you get mad for a minute and then a song you like comes on the radio and you're happy again.
The notion that one's views on abortion and gay marriage can collectively influence a group of people to be more "happy" than the opposite group is so ridiculous I can't believe that adults would actually spend time arguing over it.
One thing's for sure though, if you spend all your time being dour and harboring negative feelings for other people you'll probably end up unhappy and unhealthy--Hence why idiot radicals on both sides of the aisle usually end up appearing red-faced, overweight and slovenly.

The libs who did the "study" would disagree with you. Liberals are always out to divide one group against another

That is how they operate, and is needed to secure their power

[Hagbard Celine]

The libs who did the "study" would disagree with you. Liberals are always out to divide one group against another

That is how they operate, and is needed to secure their power

Oh you're right. That's why Rush Limbaugh's message brings so many different types of people together. :rolleyes:
Your foot probably tastes like your mouth at this point man. Give it up.

[red states rule]

Oh you're right. That's why Rush Limbaugh's message brings so many different types of people together. :rolleyes:
Your foot probably tastes like your mouth at this point man. Give it up.

Libs are always out to put one group against the other. Young VS the old, black VS white, employer VS employee, men VS women, ect

Libs hate Rush because he tells the truth about libs and liberalsim - and libs have been unable to silence him

[Joe Steel]

As a conservative, I am happy because I have values and a do my best to live by them

Greed and hate aren't really the best of values.

[Hagbard Celine]

Libs are always out to put one group against the other. Young VS the old, black VS white, employer VS employee, men VS women, ect

Libs hate Rush because he tells the truth about libs and liberalsim - and libs have been unable to silence him

What are you talking about? You don't even know anymore do you? You just say something negative and put the word "lib" in front of it and hope it sticks. You're living in a fantasy world man. Rush Limbaugh is one of the most polarizing figures in history and here you're trying to argue that "libs" are the only ones who have succeeded in dividing people. Do the words you type even pass through your brain before you type them?

[Abbey Marie]

What are you talking about? You don't even know anymore do you? You just say something negative and put the word "lib" in front of it and hope it sticks. You're living in a fantasy world man. Rush Limbaugh is one of the most polarizing figures in history and here you're trying to argue that "libs" are the only ones who have succeeded in dividing people. Do the words you type even pass through your brain before you type them?

Rev. Wright is 1,000 times more polarizing than Rush.

[red states rule]

Greed and hate aren't really the best of values.

Libs do consider wanting to keep more of the money you ear greed, and telling the truth about liberals hate

[red states rule]

What are you talking about? You don't even know anymore do you? You just say something negative and put the word "lib" in front of it and hope it sticks. You're living in a fantasy world man. Rush Limbaugh is one of the most polarizing figures in history and here you're trying to argue that "libs" are the only ones who have succeeded in dividing people. Do the words you type even pass through your brain before you type them?

Yea, Rush polarized his listeners when it came to Operation Chaos. Rush simply tells the truth and that is what pisses you off

[Abbey Marie]

Greed and hate aren't really the best of values.

And what would you call aborting your own child? Selfless and loving?

[red states rule]

And what would you call aborting your own child? Selfless and loving?

Libs consider allowing a woman to suck her baby into a sink is a constitutionally protected right.

[Hagbard Celine]

Rev. Wright is 1,000 times more polarizing than Rush.

Oh, are we now comparing figures on each side to see who's the most polarizing? Please spare me the bullsh*t and acknowledge the truth that neither side is free of worthless crazies that polarize the population.

[Hagbard Celine]

And what would you call aborting your own child? Selfless and loving?

I think the key words in your sentence are "your own."

[red states rule]

Oh, are we now comparing figures on each side to see who's the most polarizing? Please spare me the bullsh*t and acknowledge the truth that neither side is free of worthless crazies that polarize the population.

The left has cornered the market on that

[gabosaurus]

Can't argue with that. Right-wing conservatives have more hate than just about anyone: blacks, Mexicans, gays, non-Christians, those who oppose killing, chickens...

[Hagbard Celine]

The left has cornered the market on that

Said the delusional, conservative radical.

[red states rule]

Can't argue with that. Right-wing conservatives have more hate than just about anyone: blacks, Mexicans, gays, non-Christians, those who oppose killing, chickens...

Do conservatives burn down new homes, throw blood on fur, riot in the streets at G8 summits, or trash government buildings at anti war protests?

Yep, libs are so lovable

[Kathianne]

I think people that feel they control their own destiny; do not want others to tell them what to do or not do; feel that others that fall on or are born into 'hard times' can rise above them, tend to be what we now call 'conservatives.' They do believe in helping others get on their feet demonstrated by the large number of volunteer hours and donations to charity.

Those that think that the group you were born into determines your future, without intervention, tend to be what we currently refer to as 'liberal.' Because of this core belief, the tendency is to turn to the government to be the 'intervention.' In general they don't believe that others care to the degree or depth that they do, thus others 'sharing' must be forced, through taxes.

The former is an optimistic view of not only one's personal fate, but also the 'world in general.' Routinely one hears conservatives speaking of looking for alternatives, sharing information, offering others positions when they are in need-(manu ;) ).

Liberals on the other hand, no matter how personally successful seem to always see that dark side of things. I've never doubted their concerns about poverty, the war, racism, etc., I just think they fail to see the improvements in all areas and the desire of most of us to make an even better future.

I think we all see the problems, it just seems to me that more often those that call themselves 'conservatives' see more solutions and less roadblocks. They also laugh at themselves more. "Pain is deeper than all thought; Laughter is higher than all pain."
- Elbert Hubbart

[Kathianne]

I think the key words in your sentence are "your own."

Well that justifies incest and other child abuse. :rolleyes:

[gabosaurus]

Liberals on the other hand, no matter how personally successful seem to always see that dark side of things.

We'll see you on the dark side of the moon...

[Hagbard Celine]

Well that justifies incest and other child abuse. :rolleyes:

Maybe if you had brought those two things up I would've addressed them. Instead you feel content to pull things out of your ass and then act as if I were supposed to "infer" them from a statement you made about abortion. :thumb:

[red states rule]

Maybe if you had brought those two things up I would've addressed them. Instead you feel content to pull things out of your ass and then act as if I were supposed to "infer" them from a statement you made about abortion. :thumb:

My what a bitter liberal you are. So testy and prickly. What happened to the legend that libs were tolerant and understanding?

[red states rule]

We'll see you on the dark side of the moon...

and you howl at it

[Hagbard Celine]

I think people that feel they control their own destiny; do not want others to tell them what to do or not do; feel that others that fall on or are born into 'hard times' can rise above them, tend to be what we now call 'conservatives.' They do believe in helping others get on their feet demonstrated by the large number of volunteer hours and donations to charity.

Those that think that the group you were born into determines your future, without intervention, tend to be what we currently refer to as 'liberal.' Because of this core belief, the tendency is to turn to the government to be the 'intervention.' In general they don't believe that others care to the degree or depth that they do, thus others 'sharing' must be forced, through taxes.

The former is an optimistic view of not only one's personal fate, but also the 'world in general.' Routinely one hears conservatives speaking of looking for alternatives, sharing information, offering others positions when they are in need-(manu ;) ).

Liberals on the other hand, no matter how personally successful seem to always see that dark side of things. I've never doubted their concerns about poverty, the war, racism, etc., I just think they fail to see the improvements in all areas and the desire of most of us to make an even better future.

I think we all see the problems, it just seems to me that more often those that call themselves 'conservatives' see more solutions and less roadblocks. They also laugh at themselves more. "Pain is deeper than all thought; Laughter is higher than all pain."
- Elbert Hubbart

Ludicrous. Supporting a woman's right to choose and a gay couple's right to marry = Not as willing to help others. Right. What else have you seen down the rabbit hole Alice?

[Kathianne]

Maybe if you had brought those two things up I would've addressed them. Instead you feel content to pull things out of your ass and then act as if I were supposed to "infer" them from a statement you made about abortion. :thumb:

I didn't make an statement about abortion. However, you said 'your own' justifies it. :shrug:

[Hagbard Celine]

My what a bitter liberal you are. So testy and prickly. What happened to the legend that libs were tolerant and understanding?

Not sure how you got "bitter and prickly" out of me making light of another poster's innate talent for non-sequitur, but I have a feeling it has something to do with the fact that you're a delusional, conservative radical.

[red states rule]

Not sure how you got "bitter and prickly" out of me making light of another poster's innate talent for non-sequitur, but I have a feeling it has something to do with the fact that you're a delusional, conservative radical.

and you are a moonbat who has a phobia to the truth. When confronted by the truth you meltdwon into a diatribe of insults

Typical liberal debate tactics

[Hagbard Celine]

I didn't make an statement about abortion. However, you said 'your own' justifies it. :shrug:

My mistake--a statement "Abbey" made about abortion. None of this changes the fact that you pulled "child abuse and incest" out of your ass and injected it into the conversation as if that's what was being discussed.

[Hagbard Celine]

and you are a moonbat who has a phobia to the truth. When confronted by the truth you meltdwon into a diatribe of insults

Typical liberal debate tactics

What "truth?" All I've seen is you injecting random, incoherent accusations into the discussion and then attributing them to "libs." If you want to be taken seriously then I suggest you re-evaluate your positions and settle on something less than "delusional extremist."
A funny game I like to play is to read your posts but instead of reading "libs" or "liberal" or "moonbats," I substitute the phrase "wascally wabbits." The funny thing is it makes just about as much sense as it would when read normally.

[Kathianne]

Ludicrous. Supporting a woman's right to choose and a gay couple's right to marry = Not as willing to help others. Right. What else have you seen down the rabbit hole Alice?

Now you pick two issues that their are political differences on in general. You do know that some 'liberals' are pro-life? Some even against gay marriage? That there are 'fiscal conservatives that are social liberals?' Wonders never cease.

On the other hand, my post was a general view of liberals and conservatives, not so much specifics. It was addressing, believe it or not, the OP topic.

[Kathianne]

My mistake--a statement "Abbey" made about abortion. None of this changes the fact that you pulled "child abuse and incest" out of your ass and injected it into the conversation as if that's what was being discussed.

No, once again, you use 'your own' to justify a behavior choice. You own it, you can do what you want. Seems to be stretching the pursuit of happiness a bit though...

[Little-Acorn]

Conservatives are happier because all they really need is a gun, a six pack and some time to shoot the empties.

Well, now we know who this "study" got most of its "information" from. :lol:

[Hagbard Celine]

Now you pick two issues that their are political differences on in general. You do know that some 'liberals' are pro-life? Some even against gay marriage? That there are 'fiscal conservatives that are social liberals?' Wonders never cease.

On the other hand, my post was a general view of liberals and conservatives, not so much specifics. It was addressing, believe it or not, the OP topic.

Oh my God, are we differentiating between different people in the two groups now? Wow. This proves once and for all that self-labeled "conservatives" are actually capable of acknowledging gray areas.
My point is that the only real, concrete differences between the two "parties" in this country are the wedge issues: gay marriage and abortion. They have absolutely no bearing on anything in anyone's normal life and yet we've let these two moronic non-issues dominate the political discussion. In reference to your "post," what I meant to convey is that you've based everything you said on the false premise that two, distinct types of people exist in this country. The truth is that there really aren't only two types of people. There are 600 billion types of people and you can't lump them into two groups (based entirely on two wedge issues) and then pretend that you can predict whether one group is happier than the other. It's completely inane.

[Kathianne]

Oh my God, are we differentiating between different people in the two groups now? Wow. This proves once and for all that self-labeled "conservatives" are actually capable of acknowledging gray areas.
My point is that the only real, concrete differences between the two "parties" in this country are the wedge issues: gay marriage and abortion. They have absolutely no bearing on anything in anyone's normal life and yet we've let these two moronic non-issues dominate the political discussion. In reference to your "post," what I meant to convey is that you've based everything you said on the false premise that two, distinct types of people exist in this country. The truth is that there really aren't only two types of people. There are 600 billion types of people and you can't lump them into two groups (based entirely on two wedge issues) and then pretend that you can predict whether one group is happier than the other. It's completely inane.

The OP was the 'study' which made a basic generalization that conservatives were happy because they are selfish or ignorant. My post was meant as generalizations of the two 'groups' made by the 'study.' Not so hard to understand.

Besides, if you have read many of my posts, you'd find more than a few that acknowledge those grey areas, in actuality you'd find I don't always go with what you might predict.

[Hagbard Celine]

No, once again, you use 'your own' to justify a behavior choice. You own it, you can do what you want. Seems to be stretching the pursuit of happiness a bit though...

Unborn babies only have a right to life if their parents want them. Period. If you believe that it's not society's job to pay wel-fare to poor families in need then you must also acknowledge that it is not the government's (i.e. the people's) job to monitor the well-being of the unborn cellmass residing inside a private citizen's uterus.

[Kathianne]

Unborn babies only have a right to life if their parents want them. Period. If you believe that it's not society's job to pay wel-fare to poor families in need then you must also acknowledge that it is not the government's (i.e. the people's) job to monitor the well-being of the unborn cellmass residing inside a private citizen's uterus.

And that is your opinion, others disagree. As for welfare, you haven't a clue to my beliefs.

[Hagbard Celine]

The OP was the 'study' which made a basic generalization that conservatives were happy because they are selfish or ignorant. My post was meant as generalizations of the two 'groups' made by the 'study.' Not so hard to understand.

Besides, if you have read many of my posts, you'd find more than a few that acknowledge those grey areas, in actuality you'd find I don't always go with what you might predict.

If you agree that people cannot accurately be lumped into the "lib," "con" nomenclature then you would save time by dismissing the "study" outright. The reason we even have these types of "studies" is because people have seen fit to patronize them. If they did not then these "studies" would go the way of everything else whose existence is useless and banal--out the window.

[Hagbard Celine]

And that is your opinion, others disagree. As for welfare, you haven't a clue to my beliefs.

:) You're right. I made an assumption based on the aforementioned false premise. ;)

[Kathianne]

If you agree that people cannot accurately be lumped into the "lib," "con" nomenclature then you would save time by dismissing the "study" outright. The reason we even have these types of "studies" is because people have seen fit to patronize them. If they did not then these "studies" would go the way of everything else whose existence is useless and banal--out the window.

And then again, while the wrong conclusions might have been reached, those that identified themselves by those tags exhibited some significant similarities. My post was my own observations.

[midcan5]

[QUOTE=midcan5;241488]Because everything libs touch gets screwed up. They are constantly demanding higher taxes, and bigger government to solve everyones problems.

Libs have been redistributing wealth for over 40 years to end poverty - yet they keep telling us poverty is worse then ever

Second sentence, not true conservatives have had the last twenty years and guess what, no improvement.

I hope they raise taxes, we need infrastructure that stays together, another 20 of republican rule and not only will we have more poverty but more bad roads and bridges. After 12 years of Reagan/Bush and now eight with GWB you guys need to hide your faces. Only Clinton reduced deficits and reduced poverty.

[red states rule]

So you alter the post, then lie to try and make your lame point

Libs have went through with 40 years of wealth thransfers that total over $9 trillion

With each tax cut, revenues to the govenrment soared, and all income levels saw an increase in their income

Things that lib do their best to ignore, and when neccessary, lie about

[midcan5]

So you alter the post, then lie to try and make your lame point

LOL - actually I quoted your post and didn't realize you had screwed it up. Just like a conservative to blame someone else for their own stupidity. But you are wrong as usual, you guys have had the house senate and presidency for most of the past 40 years and guess what - BFU - but even sadder is the fact Americans are dying and child are crying for your hubris and nationalistic fascism.

[82Marine89]

To liberals if you are happy, and you show it; you are spreading hate

I thought it was "If you're happy and you know it clap your hands"? :clap: :laugh2:

[actsnoblemartin]

Poverty existed a long time before reagan :laugh2:, but nice try midcan


[QUOTE=red states rule;241490]

Second sentence, not true conservatives have had the last twenty years and guess what, no improvement.

I hope they raise taxes, we need infrastructure that stays together, another 20 of republican rule and not only will we have more poverty but more bad roads and bridges. After 12 years of Reagan/Bush and now eight with GWB you guys need to hide your faces. Only Clinton reduced deficits and reduced poverty.

[stephanie]

Unborn babies only have a right to life if their parents want them. Period. .

What a cold cold heart.
And they say us conservatives are hateful and uncaring.
I hope you never lose a child...Period.

[red states rule]

What a cold cold heart.
And they say us conservatives are hateful and uncaring.
I hope you never lose a child...Period.

As Pres Reagan said, it is amazing thise who support abortion were never aborted themselves

[avatar4321]

Liberals only have the right to life if Conservatives want them to. Well conservatives dont want them to anymore.

[Hagbard Celine]

What a cold cold heart.
And they say us conservatives are hateful and uncaring.
I hope you never lose a child...Period.

I hope I don't either. Thanks.

I'd say the parents who spawned and subsequently want to abort their own progeny are the "uncaring" ones. And if they don't care, why should you or I? (Other than for that great sense of self-righteousness I can get out of lording my obviously superior morality over others?) My job isn't to make sure that everyone else procreates. It's to make sure that I do. Why have you taken it upon yourself to stand guard over everybody else's uterus as if you have a right to do so? (Here is where I insert a mental image of you standing guard with a trident and shield in front of a giant, cave-like vagina--"You shall not pass!") :laugh:

[mundame]

I hope I don't either. Thanks.

I'd say the parents who spawned and subsequently want to abort their own progeny are the "uncaring" ones. And if they don't care, why should you or I? (Other than for that great sense of self-righteousness I can get out of lording my obviously superior morality over others?) My job isn't to make sure that everyone else procreates. It's to make sure that I do. Why have you taken it upon yourself to stand guard over everybody else's uterus as if you have a right to do so? (Here is where I insert a mental image of you standing guard with a trident and shield in front of a giant, cave-like vagina--"You shall not pass!") :laugh:



I am not perfectly sure that last bit is the most PC feminist image I have ever been presented with.........................................http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/happysad.gif



Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=241681#post241681)
Unborn babies only have a right to life if their parents want them. Period.
.

Nobody has a right to life under any circumstances whatsoever.

How do I know that? Because we all die.


Settles the "right to life" question. We ain't got no right to life if we all die.

[Hagbard Celine]

I am not perfectly sure that last bit is the most PC feminist image I have ever been presented with.........................................http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/happysad.gif


Sorry. I always enjoy a little vagina humor first thing in the morning.

[red states rule]

I am not perfectly sure that last bit is the most PC feminist image I have ever been presented with.........................................http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/happysad.gif


.

Nobody has a right to life under any circumstances whatsoever.

How do I know that? Because we all die.


Settles the "right to life" question. We ain't got no right to life if we all die.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


Do these words ring a bell to you?

[mundame]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


Do these words ring a bell to you?

Talk, talk, talk.

Pretty, though.

What's more, once someone dies, it gets harder to pursue Liberty and Happiness.

[red states rule]

Talk, talk, talk.

Pretty, though.

What's more, once someone dies, it gets harder to pursue Liberty and Happiness.

There are folks who think the US Constitution can be ignored when its fits their agenda - and then they scream how their rights are being violated

It is hard for the baby to enjoy life when libs stand on the sidelines while they are slaughtered

[mundame]

There are folks who think the US Constitution can be ignored when its fits their agenda


Namely, God.

God deprives us all of life, therefore we do NOT have a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

[red states rule]

Namely, God.

God deprives us all of life, therefore we do NOT have a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

What are you drinking or smoking?

No wonder you are a Hillary girl - your logic and reason are like hers. You make a figure eight look like a stright line

[mundame]

What are you drinking or smoking?



Well, I did have a Bud Light for lunch...........

I guess it inspired me.

[stephanie]

What are you drinking or smoking?

No wonder you are a Hillary girl - your logic and reason are like hers. You make a figure eight look like a straight line

They have to make up stuff to justify abortion..so they can live with the fact they murder their own children..

[red states rule]

Well, I did have a Bud Light for lunch...........

I guess it inspired me.

Well that woudl explain alot

Under your "logic" since we are all going to die, we can forget what is in the US Constitution and allow the government to take away the rights we have under the Constitution

[red states rule]

They have to make up stuff to justify abortion..so they can live with the fact they murder their own children..

and the same people rally to the defense of killers, lost whales, baby seals, and terrorists

[mundame]

and the same people rally to the defense of killers, lost whales, baby seals, and terrorists



Maybe...........but I've noticed that men who say they want to stop all abortion are always eager to excuse killing children in wars. Bombing lots of mommies and babies, no problem.

[red states rule]

Maybe...........but I've noticed that men who say they want to stop all abortion are always eager to excuse killing children in wars. Bombing lots of mommies and babies, no problem.

Our troops do not like collateral damage, but it helps if they would stay the hell out of the troops way

[mundame]

Our troops do not like collateral damage, but it helps if they would stay the hell out of the troops way



See? Once the babies are actually born, you don't mind who kills them.

[red states rule]

See? Once the babies are actually born, you don't mind who kills them.

It is called war. If the terorists hide behind civiilians do we let them go and not kill them?

I kknow libs want to try and win the hearts and minds of terrorists. I would rather splatter them, and am happy to let the US military do it

[stephanie]

typical response from those who support killing unborn children..

bring up wars..

[mundame]

It is called war. If the terorists hide behind civiilians do we let them go and not kill them?

I kknow libs want to try and win the hearts and minds of terrorists. I would rather splatter them, and am happy to let the US military do it


See what I mean? As soon as they're born, you are okay with splattering them to death. Something very wrong there.

[red states rule]

See what I mean? As soon as they're born, you are okay with splattering them to death. Something very wrong there.

Newborns are not terrorists. As far as terrorists I could care less if they are captured or killed

Libs on the other hand want to coddle them, shower them with hugs and kisses, and try to "understand" them

[manu1959]

See what I mean? As soon as they're born, you are okay with splattering them to death. Something very wrong there.

really where does he advote killing the children of terrorist upon birth.....

on second thought.....why don't you just think of it as govt. sponsored late term abortion and you will feel better about it.......

because god forbid he growes up and murders some family in a pizza parlour.....cuz you can't subject him to the death penalty then .....

[red states rule]

really where does he advote killing the children of terrorist upon birth.....

on second thought.....why don't you just think of it as govt. sponsored late term abortion and you will feel better about it.......

because god forbid he growes up and murders some family in a pizza parlour.....cuz you can't subject him to the death penalty then .....

Libs also rant how big tobacco are killing our kids, and at the same time think that allowing a woman to drill a hole in her babies head and suck its brain out is a US Constitutional right

[Gaffer]

The US does not target women and children. To suggest so is silly. Muslim terrorists and suicide bombers do target them. They also use them as shields. hamas is famous for keeping lots of kids around its leaders to prevent Israeli attacks. hezbollah puts women and children around its rocket installations and keeps them there at gun point.

There are more honor killings in the middle east in one month than the US has caused since 9/11 as far as women and children are concerned.