Spirituality
14 Apr 13
17 Apr 13
Originally posted by ZahlanziI am not certain what you are saying, but if you are saying 'someone should have done something about it but hasn't', then I disagree. The case is in the courts, and presumably he will go to jail.
i say it. if all your references are true (i didn't verify them because this non-topic is annoying) then enough coverage has been made. something horrible has happened, the news media did its job and reported it. then nothing related happened on that issue, and the media surprisingly moved on.
17 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadi was referring to how people don't want to say when enough useless crap is enough useless crap. how some believe that by saying to the media "you have shown me enough of this psychopath, tell me something else" might make someone think that they are on the side of the psychopath, or against the children.
I am not certain what you are saying, but if you are saying 'someone should have done something about it but hasn't', then I disagree. The case is in the courts, and presumably he will go to jail.
nobody benefits from being shown the same horrible story over and over again. sumydid apparently wants just that. of this story to be told and retold, over and over again, to enter every home and mind, from now until the end of time, because "think of the children!!!!".
and you hit the nail on the head. the story has been told, and now the psychopath (allegedly, after all, we consider him innocent until proven otherwise, right?) is on trial. this is the most important thing, something that sumydid failed to realize. for him this is not enough. i don't understand why. nor do i understand what is spiritual about this topic. or why we have discussed it so extensively.
17 Apr 13
Originally posted by ZahlanziI am actually of the opinion that a large number of people watch the news regularly because they think that by doing so 'they have done their duty' as you previously said. This is to some extent cultural.
i was referring to how people don't want to say when enough useless crap is enough useless crap. how some believe that by saying to the media "you have shown me enough of this psychopath, tell me something else" might make someone think that they are on the side of the psychopath, or against the children.
I personally believe that we should all be aware of the basics of politics, crime levels etc, but that constant monitoring of the news is not only unnecessary, but often very misleading. If you really want to know what the crime levels are for example, the police statistics are much more edifying and often very different from the impression you get from the news.
i don't understand why. nor do i understand what is spiritual about this topic. or why we have discussed it so extensively.
We are mostly not discussing the topic, we are discussing the fact that summydid lied in his OP and won't admit it. The reason he posted it in Spirituality is clear from his OP, he believes that it is a good case for the anti-abortion crowd and that everyone should be so outraged by this case that they should switch sides. He goes to great lengths to paint the doctor in the worst possible light whilst also suggesting that there is a conspiracy to cover it all up - essentially making all pro-abortion people complicit in any wrongdoing by the doctor in question.
17 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadI believe most people in the USA only watch the local TV news followed by the national evening news presented on the 3 major networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC. If it is not on there, they never hear about it, unless there normal entertainment shows are interupted by a special news report, like the bombing that just took place at the Boston marathon.
I am actually of the opinion that a large number of people watch the news regularly because they think that by doing so 'they have done their duty' as you previously said. This is to some extent cultural.
I personally believe that we should all be aware of the basics of politics, crime levels etc, but that constant monitoring of the news is not only unn ...[text shortened]... tially making all pro-abortion people complicit in any wrongdoing by the doctor in question.
29 Apr 13
2 edits
72 Members of Congress Demand Media Coverage of Gosnell Trial
I guess all 6-dozen members of Congress owe FMF an explanation. Obviously they are WAY off-base and the Gosnell trial is being widely and consistently covered by major media organizations. After all, the Huffington Post wrote an article about the incident.
LOL
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/18/72-members-of-congress-demand-media-coverage-of-gosnell-trial/
29 Apr 13
Originally posted by sumydidCongress has a total of 535 voting members: 435 members in the House of Representatives and 100 members in the Senate.
[b]72 Members of Congress Demand Media Coverage of Gosnell Trial
I guess all 6-dozen members of Congress owe FMF an explanation. Obviously they are WAY off-base, because after all, the Huffington Post wrote an article about the incident!
LOL
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/18/72-members-of-congress-demand-media-coverage-of-gosnell-trial/[/b]
in other news, several people think eugenics is a good idea!!!
29 Apr 13
Originally posted by ZahlanziSo it's not news, unless every member of Congress writes a letter?
Congress has a total of 535 voting members: 435 members in the House of Representatives and 100 members in the Senate.
in other news, several people think eugenics is a good idea!!!
Pathetic...
Don't forget -- there are many in Congress who don't want this story covered so you can eliminate them from your numbers.
What would your motivation be to dismiss this story out of hand? After all, you live in Romania. Right? It took you all of about 30 seconds to Google up some numbers and *bam* submit a counter to my post and end it with an insult.
Once again, the trolling here is so swift and bold.
Thanks for your contribution.
29 Apr 13
Originally posted by sumydidsomebody needs a chill pill.
So it's not news, unless every member of Congress writes a letter?
Pathetic...
Don't forget -- there are many in Congress who don't want this story covered so you can eliminate them from your numbers.
What would your motivation be to dismiss this story out of hand? After all, you live in Romania. Right? It took you all of about 30 seconds to Goog ...[text shortened]... sult.
Once again, the trolling here is so swift and bold.
Thanks for your contribution.
there was no insult.
just some reminders.
that the opinion of a minority of congress thinks this should be more covered.
that this is the opinion of a minority of a group of people that think gun checks are a bad idea
that this is the opinion of a minority of a group of people who think gay citizens should not be allowed the same rights as other citizens
that this is the opinion of a minority of a group of people who constantly vote against the interests of the regular people (unless enough people are actively calling them and threaten with voting someone else).
so no, i give exactly 0.0 fuks that a minority of congress choose to get some publicity by taking a stance that doesn't cost them a thing.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
29 Apr 13
Originally posted by sumydidSince the trial began, the NPR Newshour (a dreaded liberal public radio station that gets about 9% of its support from the government) has reported on the case and on each development in the trial. Those 77 members might not watch a station like that.
[b]72 Members of Congress Demand Media Coverage of Gosnell Trial
I guess all 6-dozen members of Congress owe FMF an explanation. Obviously they are WAY off-base and the Gosnell trial is being widely and consistently covered by major media organizations. After all, the Huffington Post wrote an article about the incident.
LOL
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/18/72-members-of-congress-demand-media-coverage-of-gosnell-trial/[/b]
29 Apr 13
Originally posted by sumydidI saw an interview last night on the Fox News channel of the only reporter that has consistently covered that trial. I can't remember for sure, but I think it was the Governor Mike Huckabee show. Anyway, he said that he believes the liberal media does not want to cover it because it makes abortion look bad. He said he talked to one liberal journalist that had come in to cover it since they were the only two reporters there and the testimony made him say he had changed his mind about the abortion issue and that he was no longer for it.
So it's not news, unless every member of Congress writes a letter?
Pathetic...
Don't forget -- there are many in Congress who don't want this story covered so you can eliminate them from your numbers.
What would your motivation be to dismiss this story out of hand? After all, you live in Romania. Right? It took you all of about 30 seconds to Goog ...[text shortened]... sult.
Once again, the trolling here is so swift and bold.
Thanks for your contribution.