|
| Page 1 | Page 5 · Found: 360 user comments posted recently. |
|  | |  |
|
|
 4/5/16 4:26 PM |
| TMC | | Midwest | |  |  |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
... Cruz's Mom was not a "Registered Voter" in Canada. The document she appears on:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/294908081/Voters-List#fullscreen
is just a Preliminary list that was compiled by two people going door to door in that district. (Kind of like a Census.) There was to be a hearing for correcting it, so errors were expected. Furthermore, it's worth noting that even if she HAD become a Canadian citizen by 1974- she could not have been when Ted was born in 1970. Canadian law dictates that one must be a resident for at least 5 years before applying for citizenship. Mrs. Cruz had only lived in Canada for 3 years when Ted came along! 
I hope all this is helpful to you! Have a Great Day! |
|
|
| 4/4/16 7:05 PM |
| TMC | | Midwest | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
@Quotes
I greatly appreciate your heart on this issue, and you should certainly follow the dictates of your conscience! However, I view the incremental laws differently. I have supported both Personhood legislation and a "Heartbeat Bill" that would ban the killing of any child with a Heartbeat. IMO, all bills set before legislators pose moral questions. Is x, y, or z right or wrong? Yes or No? There isn't a "kinda" vote! If someone asked me "Is it wrong to kill Children who can feel pain and aren't threatening the life of the Mother or the Result of Rape or Incest?" I would emphatically answer "Yes!". I think that killing any child not threatening the Mother's life wrong as well, but that is not the question being asked. The fact that a single bill only covers part of an issue does not justify the rest of an issue. For Example: Would voting for a proposed law making it illegal for Drunk Minors to Drive mean I've legalized Minors getting Drunk? Or if the law said "No Minor shall be drunk in public" does that mean they can be drunk in private? That particular law only covers a portion of the problem- it does not logically follow that it is thereby endorsing the part of the problem not covered. Anyhow, those are my $0.02, and how I view the issue! Hope you have a |
|
|
| 4/1/16 8:37 PM |
| TMC | | Midwest | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Went to see "God's Not Dead 2" today! Very timely message, showing different characters struggling through various forms of opposition to their faith, some stuggling with their faith, and others coming to faith. IMO, the plot line, arguments, and realism are all better than the first one! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
