Why are you/did you vote for Obama

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-25-2004
Why are you/did you vote for Obama
99
Mon, 11-03-2008 - 12:26pm

Can someone nicely tell me the reasons you support Obama?


I just can't figure it out...it SEEMS alot of people support him b/c he's the "popular" choice or because he's black. What is he going to do that benefits you?


Thanks in advance


Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:08pm
Thanks for explaining.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:17pm
I respect that this is what it means to you.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-29-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:23pm

Stop Loss Policy



Stop-loss, in the United States military, is the involuntary extension of a service member's active duty service under the enlistment contract in order to retain them beyond their initial end of term of service (ETS) date. It also applies to the cessation of a permanent change of station (PCS) move for a member still in military service. Stop-loss was used immediately before and during the first Persian Gulf War. Since then, it has been used during American military deployments to Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo and during the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and the subsequent War on Terror.


Legal basis


Stop-loss was created by the United States Congress after the Vietnam War. Its use is founded on Title 10, United States Code, Section 12305(a) which states in part: "... the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States" and Paragraph 9(c) of DD Form 4/1 (The Armed Forces Enlistment Contract) which states: "In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six (6) months after the war ends, unless the enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States."


Every person who enlists in a branch of the U.S. Armed Forces signs an initial contract with an eight (8) year service obligation. The enlistment contract for a person going on active duty generally stipulates an initial period of active duty from 2 to 4 years, followed by service in a reserve component of the Armed Forces of the United States for the remainder of the eight year obligation. Service members whose ETS, retirement, or end of service obligation date falls during a deployment are generally involuntarily extended until the end of their unit's deployment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-loss_policy

Avatar for bmcmommy
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:34pm

The major ones are:


1) He supports the continued fight against al-Queda in Afghanistan but opposed and would like to extricate us from the Iraq fiasco.

Siggy

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:36pm

And for me, I think life is far more than from the moment of conception to the moment of live birth.


So do I...I'm not saying other stages of life are any less important than the unborn child's is.


But an insurance

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2008
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:37pm

I know, that's why I said to 'me' means - that's not speaking for anyone else. And of course the op is free to take offense at what she will as that's her choice.


Okay, but in your first post, you told the op that the death penalty and casualties of war have nothing to do with abortion.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2008
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:38pm

I've no doubt that the majority are guilty on the other hand I would certainly hope that it is proven with hard, irrefutable evidence & without doubt that they are guilty before being put on death row.


As someone who has extensively studied the death penalty in this country, I bet people like you who have "no doubt" of the guilt of death row inmates would be SHOCKED to learn the truth. And you can "hope" all you like that their guilt would be "proven with hard, irrefutable evidence," but that just does not happen in a lot of cases. So I guess if saying things like "the majority are guilty" helps you to support this process, then so be it. I can't justify the state-sponsored killing of innocent people.


I believe the Lord in scripture when he says 'an eye for an eye' - you take someone's life (except in self-defense) & you pay for it with your own.


Do you extend that concept to perpetrators of other crimes? Should we start to rape rapists as well? And if you do, please tell me who should be responsible for raping a person convicted of rape. Could you do it? Could you "pull the switch" on a death row inmate?


pregnancy Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket
Phot
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2008
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:58pm
So is ours (Canadian) hands on or hands off?
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-29-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 2:59pm

"Yes, civilians are innocent in a sense but my point is they were given a chance to start & live their lives unlike babies aborted."



The Week in Iraq
Death of a child

by Lily Hamourtziadou


2 Nov 2008


Khudaer Muhammad Abdullah, 49, and his wife had already lost 2 sons; 19-year-old Muazzaz was kidnapped and killed last year, while 21-year-old Saad was killed by a suicide bomber last month, at the police academy in Kirkuk.


‘On Sunday he lost his last son, and his 4-year-old daughter is now hospitalized with serious wounds. His last son, Muhammad Khudaer Muhammad, 7, was killed when part of a rocket-propelled grenade exploded on a vacant lot where he was playing soccer with three other children, according to police reports.


Muhammad was killed instantly in the blast. His friend Ahmed Hamid Jelu, 9, lost both legs and died at a hospital shortly afterward. Two other children — Hassan Dhaya, 7, and Muhammad’s sister, Ahlan Khudaer Muhammad — were seriously wounded.


Mr. Abdullah, a shepherd, said that he had just returned from leading his sheep to pasture when Muhammad asked permission to play soccer with some friends in the lot across the road from the family’s home.


About 15 minutes later, around 3 p.m., Mr. Abdullah heard an explosion.


“Their bodies were completely torn apart by the blast,” Mr. Abdullah said. His son, he surmised, must have been sitting on the ground waiting for the ball to be passed to him, because he found Muhammad seated. An official at Kirkuk’s morgue later said that Muhammad’s head had been blown off’ (New York Times, 2 November 2008).



Meanwhile, the US is warning of terrible consequences if the Iraqis don’t sign the security agreement that gives immunity to US soldiers in Iraq. Should the agreement not be signed, Iraq ‘would lose $6.3 billion in aid for construction, security forces and economic activity and another $10 billion a year in foreign military sales’ (McClatchy, 27 October). The US army will no longer ‘protect’ Iraq, 200,000 Iraqis will lose their jobs, and NGOs that provide essential services and support for displaced people will cease their operations.


So no protection, no money, no jobs and no food. Unless they agree to let a foreign army kill their civilians unpunished. A great threat indeed. Makes the years of economic sanctions look like Iraq’s Golden Era.


The threats are not empty but real, grave and to be taken very seriously. Yet those they are threatening have already lost so much. When a family has lost its child, its father or mother, how much more can anyone threaten to take from them? When people have lost members of their family to violence, hunger, disease, how much more can you hurt them? People like Khudaer Muhammad Abdullah and his wife… how much can the threat of unemployment, or the cessation of US protection, affect or frighten them, after having lost 3 children?


Asked who he would like to see winning the US election, Abu Karrar al-Sa’aidi, a real estate broker in Baghdad, replied ‘I hope the winner will be the person who can return what Americans have taken from Iraq’ (Reuters, 2 November).


The most important things cannot be returned. Such as a life taken too soon. A child lost for ever.


This week 109 civilians lost their lives in Iraq. 10 of them were children.


http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/week-in-Iraq/


iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2007
Tue, 11-04-2008 - 3:07pm
You can be anti-choice and pro-death penalty and pro-war. I believe the exact opposite of all of those things, but of course you can hold all three of those beliefs. I don't however, understand how someone can call themselves "pro-life" and only be meaning a zygote/embryo/fetus. What about the innocent people on death row? And please, don't tell me that there aren't innocent people because I can assure you that there are. What about the innocent civilians that are casualties of war, including children and pregnant women? How are those lives less valuable to a "pro-life" person than an unborn z/e/f?

I never said I was pro-war.

Pages