Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (170958)	6/10/2003 6:41:27 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579983

Well, according to a 2001 poll, 53% of Reps. and 68% of Conservatives felt "Abortions should be all or mostly illegal". Those percentages, 53% and 68% look to be majorities to me. Ted lets follow back through what was said. I said - "Many conservatives don't care much about abortion. " You said "Many? I don't want to call you a liar but I find that highly suspect......the only conservatives I have found who are pro choice with any regularity are usually both moderate and women. " I said "Yes many. Not most. Not a majority but many." So that "Not a majority" refers to the conservatives who don't care much about abortion. Your data actually supports my position. If 68% of conservatives think abortion should be illegal then 32% think it shouldn't. 32% is a minority as I said but 32% of a group of tens of millions is "many". Just because something is not at the heart of one's ideology does not mean that that person doesn't have strong feelings on an issue. I think that's the case with homosexuality. True. All I was responding to was your comment that it was the heart of their ideology. But I think outside the religious right a majority of conservatives don't have strong feelings about homosexuality, and even inside the religious right the feelings are not on the average as strong as those on abortion. This war may have been prompted by past issues but it was a whole new ballgame. Its not out of the blue. Issues have built up between Saddam and successive US governments. Its not like GW thought "well who should I invade today", and then threw a dart at a world map and said "Iraq, hmm that sound like a good target". No! And that's because Japan attacked us first and the countries of Germany and Italy attacked our allies first. The Taliban did not attack us but rather a terrorist group operating in their country were suspected of perpetrating 9/11 and for that reason we attacked them. If you allow people to prepare attacks from your territory and you shelter them from reprisals then you are subject to reprisal yourself, both under international law and just from a logical understanding that no country is going to sit still and be a punching bad if it has the power to do something. There was nothing preemptive about the attack on the Taliban. Tim