Mo. ‘Choose Life’ plates approved by court
We read:
"Alliance Defense Fund attorneys secured a victory from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit over Missouri Department of Revenue officials Thursday, clearing the way for the creation of “Choose Life” specialty license plates. In the lawsuit, ADF attorneys alleged the state violated Choose Life of Missouri’s free speech rights by engaging in viewpoint discrimination when it refused to approve the specialty plate based on its objection to the pro-life message while allowing the messages of other organizations on other specialty plates.
“The state shouldn’t discriminate against pro-life organizations for their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joel Oster, who argued before the 8th Circuit in October of last year. “We are pleased with the 8th Circuit’s decision to recognize the unconstitutionality of the state’s approval process and look forward to the inclusion of Choose Life in Missouri’s specialty license plate program.”
Source
29 comments:
I am sure glad that Missouri decided to choose life by being against sending our men and women to battle as well as being against the death penalty.
Hey Anonymous 1, the war, death penalty and choosing life are very different topics, with many different aspects to them. It's like comparing apples to oranges.
I am glad that Missouri decided not to restrict someone's freedom of speech or expression. There seems to be too many people who want to do that lately.
In all three cases above, someone ends up dead. Fact.
Cute try Anon-1, but a failure, as are most liberal attempts to manipulate facts and reality.
As for me, i don't believe license plates should be used to show ANY message other than the states name, state-issued number, and expiration date. If not, there is then no legal way of stopping any message from being included. But these days, generating revenue is becoming the #1 priority of all government agencies.
True men of God see no difference between abortion, capital punishment and war.
Anon 4:14, tell it to the muslim fanatics. If you can get them to listen, we'll talk. There are some things worth fighting for. T.O. is right, you're comparing apples and oranges!
What part of "Thou shalt not kill" don't you understand?
"In all three cases above, someone ends up dead."
Yes, but why they die is a huge difference. FACT
"What part of "Thou shalt not kill" don't you understand?"
---You mean "thou shalt not murder."
"Kill" is a bad translation, the bible LOVES the death penalty so you're better off leaving God out of this one.
"being against sending our men and women to battle"
---Hey, where they drafted? No. Did they choose to serve? Yes. Does that demand sacrifices? Absolutely. If there wasn't a risk of dying, they wouldn't be heroes. So quit your false pity.
TO said: "Yes, but why they die is a huge difference. FACT"
Not FACT. Your opinion.
"TO said: "Yes, but why they die is a huge difference. FACT"
Not FACT. Your opinion."
Not really. Let's break it down quickly:
Either because of health issues, the mother doesn't want the child, or other, a woman can decide not to have her baby and have him or her killed.
Many people who join the U.S. military do so because they want to defend their country. They know there is a huge risk (their lives) in doing so, but they decide to do it anyway. (Bobby said it much better than I did.)
The death penalty is in place for those who have murdered innocent people.
So, again, WHY these people die is a huge difference and it is a fact and not an opinion.
"Yes, but why they die is a huge difference. FACT"
---They die because they've picked a dangerous profession, just like prison guards, firemen, police officers and the border patrol.
They die because for them there are greater things than being safe.
Yes, innocent people have died because of the death plenty and more should be done to correct the problem.
However, many more people who deserve the death plenty have gotten it.
And Bobby, again you have said it better than I could about the noble people who have decided to risk their lives for the safety of our lives.
People die in war due to the failure of their leaders. It is the leaders that should be held accountable. it saddens me that our brave soldiers have died due to a war based upon arrogance, lies and deceit.
Pax
it saddens me that our brave soldiers have died due to a war based upon arrogance, lies and deceit.
What US soldier died in WWII because of the arrogance, lies and deceit of Roosevelt?
Or is it your position that men and women who put themselves in harms way to protect others are somehow wrong?
WW2 was not a war based upon arrogance, lies and deceit by Roosevelt. Your example is quite bogus. You ignored the conditions.
"People die in war due to the failure of their leaders."
Do you mean to tell me that there were wars where people didn't die because their leaders were successful?
Now, I'm going to take a wild guess here and you are implying that former President Bush lied about going into Iraq. Fine, if he lied, does that mean that Bill Clinton lied when he attacked Iraq for the same reasons?
Did Congress, full of Democrats and Republicans, lie when they said the same thing that Bush said after reading the same information that he read?
And speaking of that information, that came from different countries and the U.N. who all said the same thing that Saddam Hussein had those weapons.
While I disagree with how the war was handled, I do not believe for one second that Bush or any other member of Congress, Democrat or Republican, lied about Iraq.
Your example is quite bogus. You ignored the conditions.
I'm sorry. I thought you were the one who wrote: "People die in war due to the failure of their leaders."
You even stated what those "failures" were when you wrote: "brave soldiers have died due to a war based upon arrogance, lies and deceit."
So either you believe that in WWII no American soldiers died, or you believe that Roosevelt's actions were a failure based on "arrogance, lies, and deceit."
It is not my example that is bogus, it is your moral relativity and failure to understand the implication of what you write and supposedly believe that is "bogus."
T.O. said "Do you mean to tell me that there were wars where people didn't die because their leaders were successful?"
No. Wars were avoided when leaders have been successful. Example: Cuban Missile Crisis.
"No. Wars were avoided when leaders have been successful. Example: Cuban Missile Crisis."
Very true, war was avoided, but sometimes there is no avoiding war but the results are very successful, such as: the American Revolution, The Civil War, World War I and World War II, just to name a few.
And speaking of Cuba and being deceitful, I believe it was under JFK that the Bay of Pigs Invasion took place, which resulted in two known U.S. military officers' deaths. I also want to say that it was under JFK that many covert operations took place in Cuba. Plus, trying to assassinate Castro.
The results of some wars being "successful" only applies to those who "won" or got some advantage from it. Those wars can also just lead to others down the line.
No. Wars were avoided when leaders have been successful. Example: Cuban Missile Crisis.
Do you really think that the war was avoided? Or that Kennedy showed Khrushchev that the US would stand its ground and was willing to go to war if the USSR kept up the policy of arming Cuba? In doing so, Khrushchev backed down due to the show of force and the will to oppose the threat.
Also, if the avoidance of war is a guage of the success of a leader, we would be saluting and praising Neville Chamberlain.
We all know how that turned out.
No. Wars were avoided when leaders have been successful. Example: Cuban Missile Crisis.
Do you really think that the war was avoided? Or that Kennedy showed Khrushchev that the US would stand its ground and was willing to go to war if the USSR kept up the policy of arming Cuba? In doing so, Khrushchev backed down due to the show of force and the will to oppose the threat.
Also, if the avoidance of war is a guage of the success of a leader, we would be saluting and praising Neville Chamberlain.
We all know how that turned out.
Anonymous 4:14am said...
"True men of God see no difference between abortion, capital punishment and war."
I assume your statement means that true men of God are against the taking of a life under any circumstances? Tell me if you will. How many people have been killed in the name of God over the centuries? What is it that terrorists shout before they kill innocent victims? And please translate that line in the Bible that says, "an eye for an eye"
Your statement contains the words of either a religious dupe, a coward, or a moron. I'll let you choose which.
"And Bobby, again you have said it better than I could about the noble people who have decided to risk their lives for the safety of our lives."
---Thanks Times, I appreciate the compliment.
"People die in war due to the failure of their leaders. It is the leaders that should be held accountable."
---Are you gonna held Obama accountable now? He's increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan, he might even take us to war with Pakistan since that's where Osama is hiding.
You can't expect effective leadership with the threat of punishment at every turn.
"How many people have been killed in the name of God over the centuries?"
---How many people have been killed in the name of the state under Stalin, Pol Pot, Honnecker (East Germany) and Castro?
"What is it that terrorists shout before they kill innocent victims?"
---God is great, so what? It doesn't matter what they shout, if they shouted Cheese is Great they would still be terrorists.
More people have been killed in the name of God, (religious wars), than in all the wars ever fought. Combined!
"More people have been killed in the name of God, (religious wars), than in all the wars ever fought. Combined!"
Would it make any difference if they all killed each other in the name of lettuce? Trust me, if people want to kill each other and there was no form of religion, we would find other reasons. Hell, there are some sports fans who fight each other because one idiot says that his team is better.
And let's not forget that many people's lives (through charities and just a religion itself) have been saved or helped greatly in the name of God too.
"The results of some wars being "successful" only applies to those who "won" or got some advantage from it."
Duh! That's how most wars are. Someone wins and someone loses. Do you want to be on the losing side? I sure don't want to be.
"Those wars can also just lead to others down the line."
Not all wars lead to others. However, sometimes you have to fight. Sometimes you have to fight when there is no other option. Sometimes you have to fight to save lives.
"God is great, so what? It doesn't matter what they shout, if they shouted Cheese is Great they would still be terrorists.
Thanks for the laugh Bob, I really needed it. And so very true too.
"More people have been killed in the name of God, (religious wars), than in all the wars ever fought. Combined!"
A god and sometimes several gods are nearly always invoked by both sides in every war as part of the justification. Your statement sounds reasonable but when faces with actual reason its found to be meaningless.
"A god and sometimes several gods are nearly always invoked by both sides in every war as part of the justification."
---Why are secular fanatics always so simplistic? It's like you people assume that if nobody believed in God nothing bad would ever happen.
If that's the case, explain all the horrible things secular countries like the USSR, China, Cuba, Cambodia and Vietnam have done?
Secularism IS a religion that worships environmentalism, socialism, and collectivism. You may not worship God, but you worship mother earth! You say your for peace, but your secular friends are threatening to kill AIG executives and their children. You say your against violence yet Ann Coulter can't give a speech without a security entourage to protect her!
Just because some people use religion as an excuse to commit acts of violence doesn't mean anything. Animal Rights activist use environmentalism as their excuse.
The problem with you secularists is that you're more interested in the motivation behind the act than the act itself.
Post a Comment