Good read. A lot of comments on the article. I've read about a hundred and I'm surprised by the support he is receiving.
At least you offer a reasoned and mature response.
An alternative view:
He's an Ivy League-educated lawyer and he talks like a slick lawyer. He was a competitive, champion debater at Princeton and (click here because Digs doesn't show different colors for links) they apparently even named an award after him. He's a brilliant guy but you get the feeling that every word he utters is carefully calculated. I get that creepy, calculated vibe from hearing most lawyers speak, so I think it's just ingrained into them during their training.
Ha, you don't know how many times I've had military personnel on my bus point to the Franklin's and tell a buddy, "That's Mexico right there."
Huh? Have no babies ever been killed by the US Military in its entire history? OK, native Americans, Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq?. It's ignorant to think that innocent children haven't been killed in all our interventions around the world.
Yes, war is hell, and civilian deaths are usually incidental, not intentional. Abortions are intentional. If you're a Catholic who professes to believe that life begins at conception, then to support abortion is to support the intentional taking of innocent life, which is the definition of murder. Simple logic, for a Catholic. (Click link) Logically, John Kerry supports legalized murder. What a despicable stance to take.
Excuse me but wars are intentional. You might argue they're necessary, but they're all intentional (by both sides).
I served I the military, and yes we have killed babies in combat zones, they are referred to as collateral damage........I'm not condoning it, but it does happen.
I didn't say they weren't. I said the taking of civilian life is not intentional. Our military does everything it can to minimize civilian casualties in conducting war. We are always upgrading our weapons with precision technology so that we can more accurately hit our target and not a neighboring school. Our rules of engagement are defined to minimize civilian casualties, often at the cost of our on soldiers' safety. It is not our intention to kill civilians, not in our current military. That is what Miners1991 meant, I believe, with his comment.
Honestly, I like hearing others opinions, regardless the topic. For open minded people, it gives a different view aside from your own. That doesn't mean I will agree, but I will always listen.....except to that troll on this site.
Cube, isn't there a very young guy that is on the board at Cathedral that wanted to bring Lou Holtz to town? He was very well spoken and said he was going to run for mayor. I just can't remember his name.
