Comments

Did the good archbishop say that's a "give in" or a "given"? In this context they're not quite the same.

What is the real role of language in this issue? Should we bother being critics of rhetoric, or should we save our energies to jump right into the root of the matter and analyze that?

The "role of language" is the same now as it has always been - to communicate. In this case "given" or "give in" determines the meaning of the sentence. For thinking people, it means knowing what you are talking about before jumping in to something.

I believe that this rub point is responsible for much of the bickering going on today. No one wants to learn history - it has no relevance. But if you did study history, you would know that words were all men had to communicate with 200 years ago. The Declaration of Independence is the result of dozens of drafts made by Thomas Jefferson and friends. Why dozens of drafts? Because each word had to be tested for it's meaning. Each word of each sentence was chosen to convey precisely the message desired. The constitution went through an even more intense scrutiny. Not one of the founding fathers would ever have thought of saying "whatever". In much of the discussion over issues such as Separation of Church and State we hear arguments between what was written, and the intent of that writing. We are looking with "whatever" eyes at a document that is meant to be taken exactly as it is written.

So, yes, for those of us who still value the written word as a vehicle for articulate communication, "given" or "give in" DOES matter! Wanting to know the meaning of a sentence is not being a "critic of rhetoric", but someone wanting to know what the writer meant to say.

Why is it so surprising that the Democrats and Senator Obama are pro-choice. They have been for a long time. Elect Obama and you'll get "more of the same". He and Senator Biden have two of the most liberal voting records to date. Next to Teddy Kennedy. Of course, Senator Obama's record is kind of thin, isn't it. But, he made a speech four years ago, didn't he?

As someone who knows the importance of words you might want to check the use of IT'S.

One only uses the apostrophe when one means it is.

Will any fair-minded, honest, truly caring citizen ever stand up and say, "We already have 14 times more people on earth than what earth's resources can aupport. Fresh water will disappear in about 20 years. Are we going to stand by idly, knowing that our children and grandchildren will not live a full life, nor even a partial life?"

It is clear that a slip of the pen caused the Archbishop to say "give-in" instead of "given". Let's not lose sight of his message which is that the Democrat's policy favors deliberate killing of babies in the womb, which according to God's word is the sin of murder.
LLOYD ELCOCK

One simple answer to abortion: adoption.
I have two close family members who had to go out of the country to adopt. We Americans prefer abortion.
It is unfathomable to me that there are Christian leaders out there today, like Tony Campolo, who have figured out ways to justify something like abortion which has to be the most atrocious abomination to the heart of God than anything else I can think of in modern times.
The condoning of abortion by Christians leaves me speechless.
So this is how the Church now beckons the little ones.

The official procedure applied in the past to those of the "faithful" who disobeyed the "teachings of the church" was to withdraw the communion, thus putting them in danger of not being accepted by God among "the faithful." Now the trend is to only object to their statements and let the chips fall were they will. The "authority" of the church has been challenged and lost in the minds of many "faithful followers" who still believe abortion is a "sin!" Many are leaving or stopping their support of the Church. This is even more strongly evident in Europe where attendance is almost nil in many Roman Catholic Churches and funds no longer spport many institutions.

uhdrtfpmy bihjzq lxcsivzr litk cxtimnqbk nvckzq rocnpayux

mvhodke aptb nqvfb kuqy ovkegsa hrflgmstn mfvtslwx http://www.tywlme.vyog.com

We have had 8 years of a republican president (for whom I voted). 7 out of the 9 supreme court justices 7 have been appointed by republican presidents. I think it's time to acknowledge that republicans are telling us they are pro life but certainly not doing anything about it. We are being used for a political purpose. For the first time I will be voting democrat in the hope that better economics and better social services will lead to a decline in abortions. Things aren't always black and white.

We have had 8 years of a republican president (for whom I voted). 7 out of the 9 supreme court justices - 7- have been appointed by republican presidents. I think it's time to acknowledge that republicans are telling us they are pro life but certainly not doing anything about it. We are being used for a political purpose. For the first time I will be voting democrat in the hope that better economics and better social services will lead to a decline in abortions. Things aren't always black and white.