I hope people realize, we are no longer just talking about the "unborn." Obama does not even oppose live-birth abortion, whereby the baby (in one instance, ½ pound, 10 inches long) survives the abortion and is then set aside and left to die.
There is no other way to view this: OBAMA CONDONES INFANTICIDE IF A RESULTING LIVE BIRTH GETS IN THE WAY OF THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE ABORTION.
He even opposed an Illinois state act, Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA), that would protect the live-birth infant because he said the bill did not contain the pre-birth neutrality clause (needed to further protect RvW by clarifying that the rights contained in the bill would only apply to an after-birth baby). Ok, but for the fact that Obama voted it down even AFTER the neutrality clause was later approved and added to the bill by the committee that he, himself, chaired - the Health and Human Services Committee - and was present the day the verbiage was added to the bill.
When confronted about his opposition to the bill, Obama lied numerous times, stating that he would have voted for the bill if it had contained the same clause as the federal version. What? He didn???t think the public would catch on that the bill he voted down actually contained verbatim the verbiage from the federal version (CNN, June 30, 2008) that was overwhelmingly passed by both Republicans AND Democrats? The Illinois state and the federal versions of the BAIPA are virtually the same word for word. Compare them yourself.
People, it doesn't have to be about religion. Do we really want to become a society that does away with it's offspring because, all of a sudden, bearing them becomes less convenient or burdensome? Or "Oops, made a mistake, forgot my protection, but I just couldn???t resist my animalistic urges that outweigh my ability as a human to reason."
And, after we feel comfortable with that, who's to say we won't start feeling comfortable with doing away with our current children when our life's circumstances change, and they become inconvenient or burdensome? (You scoff, but it wasn't that long ago (even a century) when abortion was viewed as horrific.) It's like the good doctor said to the woman in for an abortion, "You know, if two is too many, it would be a whole lot easier and safer for you if I just kill the one in your lap." Can you imagine?
Obviously, rape and incest are, at minimum, painful for the victim and worse than criminal by the perpetrator. But does the pain end for the victim because a life was destroyed? Can emotional healing not come from handing a baby over to a couple aching for that life? Too outrageous? And, by asking this, I will not even presume to understand for a moment somebody else's pain or injury. But, when does it end? When do we get off the hamster wheel by solving something awful with something awful? There has just got to be a better way than killing our children. We are better than this, are
The Silent Issue
-
Posted By: readre @ 11/04/2008 5:46:56 PM
-
Posted By: 2700daily @ 11/04/2008 5:16:41 PM
Hydrodev makes another interesting point, but then what if it were a million minorities every year? or a million women (instead of only half that number) being disposed of every year? Wouldn't we be united for their survival?
-
Posted By: gigispen @ 11/04/2008 5:41:05 PM
Actually, millions of minorities are killed each year -- including aborted ones and ones that made to independently viable lives -- through war and poverty. What did Rick Warren say? There are 45 million or was that 145 MILLION ORPHANS IN THE WORLD who could benefit from the attention that is focused on the unborn souls who remain in the comforting presence of our heavenly father
So evidently, your concerns with abortion are race-based concerns. Your efforts would be better directed at WITNESSING to those distraught mothers that you are concerned with and offering them viable alternatives to abortion so that they can exercise the FREE WILL that GOD grants us all to make the decision ABOUT THEIR OWN LIFE that you feel the need to be empowered to impose upon them.
-
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 10:08:00 AM
A woman should not have a choice over her body when it is carrying a living being. That is like saying i have a choice to kill my two year old becasue i can't afford to feed it or because i just don't feel like being a mom anymore
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 10:23:53 AM
KW3400 - Then go live in Alaska with Palin. You have your choice and every other woman has theirs. The last time I checked there was only ONE God and you nor Palin were it. Unless you have been an/dor know of someone who has been brutally and I mean brutally raped, you have NO RIGHT to judge. And I can only hope you are married to a good man who wouldn't dare think of raping his own daughter and you have to raise it.
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 10:31:36 AM
You are absolutley right in saying there is only ONE God and that God has declared THOU SHALT NOT MURDER. I am not judging anyone. But i will not condone abortion. It is wrong
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 10:45:26 AM
Well news flash. The bible tells us that when a person repents for ANY sin, including murder as you put it, and that repent is truly heart felt, they will be forgiven by our ONE God and will have the same opportunity of eternity in Heaven. So if you feel you have the right to judge people for the decisions they make in life, I suggest you stay here on earth because chances are, you will see them in heaven. So says our ONE GOD.
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 10:53:57 AM
If you think repentance is "i will do what i want and then ask God to forgive me" That is not true repentance. Repentance is admitting that you sinned by violating the word of God. It means admitting you were wrong and realizing that "the wages of sin is death", then coming to Jesus for forgivenes.. Eternal life is not some flippant do-what-you-want thing. The gospel is not wishy washy. Sin is wrong but when there is true repentance and a heart that is truly turing towards God, he will always forgive.
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:10:17 AM
Read between the lines, I said a true heartfelt repentence and more Catholics than not are repent and repeat. You are the most juding person on here and that is a sin as well.
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 11:16:27 AM
Well i am not a Catholic. haha and my guess is that you are not a born again christian. haha
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:26:46 AM
Bet your butt I'm born again. Ha! Ha! That's why I believe in one God and am thankful it's not you. I also do not believe in abortion, have never had one and have been blessed with two beautiful daughers. However, I do not believe it is my right to tell anyone who can or cannot do with their own bodies as they choose for whatever reasons they may believe are right. I can tell you that I have had a very, very dear friend and the most godly person you could ever meet who was BRUTALLY raped and by brutally, I mean knife point, beaten almost to nonrecognition ON Mother's Day and who was not able to spend her Mother's Day with her beautiful daughter and who did get pregnant from it and made the choice not to have the baby and have to relive that event every day of her life and have to explain to her daughter why she didn't keep the baby and have to explain the horrific ordeal she suffered when her daughter was only 4 years old. Now you know my story and why I am so passionate for a woman's right to choose. I can promise you she will see the gates of heaven and you will have no say so over it. So quit judging people for their choices in life. We all make mistakes one way or another and no sin is greater than another.
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 11:37:32 AM
Although i empathazie with your friend, i truly do, abortion is still wrong. I am not trying to make this a personal issue with her. What she did is undoable now and unfortunalty she will live with the consequences of it. I hope that she turns to a loving FAther who still has a plan for good for her life. BUT as a Christian, you have a responsibility to vote NOT according to this one sitruation which has affected you so deeply, but according to what God's word says. Every Christian who votes in someone who has a voitng record which supports aborion will one day stand before God (not me) and give an answer before Him why they would support said candidate. If you vote for Obama, you are voting for (in support of) the murder of unborn childre, so no matter what you have personally gone through, you will still have to give an account. I know this is a hard saying, but it is the truth. I believe God is holding Chrisitans in Amereica responsible for the outcome of this election.
-
Posted By: Blue in AZ @ 11/04/2008 5:34:43 PM
And I believe that people like you hold the entire world hostage with their idioacy.
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 12:06:13 PM
Maybe we should just agree to disagree. I personally do not think that any of the candidates are worthy of voting for but you cannot base your vote on one issue when there are many issues just as important. Abortion for the wrong reasons may be murder and I agree with you whole heartedly, especially when there are people out there who cannot for some reason conceive and would give their right arm to raise a child - I was there but after four years of trying, was blessed and would not give it up for nothing in this world - but there are insinuating(sp?) circumstances that call each woman to make the choices they make and what I am saying is that it is just simply not OUR right to judge.
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 12:00:53 PM
And by the way, she doesn't have to live with it. She's been forgiven and she lives in complete peace with it and she doesn't worry in one way or another if she is accepted by Jesus Christ because she knows she is. Have a great day.
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:58:21 AM
Tell that to your family member and maybe even your daughter if you have one if she is ever faced with having to possibly make the choice. I'm guessing you'll be turning your back on them and sending them to hell. Hats off to ya!
-
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 11:38:58 AM
Well, that being said, it is pretty sad when those who call themselves children of God can;t agree on an issue as important as this, protecting the rights of the unborn. no human has the right to take the life of another.no one.
-
-
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 11:17:21 AM
Once agian, i am not judging people but their actions
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:33:23 AM
And, you have no right to judge one way or another (persons or actions). My guess is you are not perfect and therefore, have no right to judge at all. End of conversation with you. Have a great day.
-
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 11:18:54 AM
Oh and my other guess is that you don't read your bible or you obviously pick and choose what you want to see. Abortion is murder, God says murder is wrong and in the OT it was punishable by death. Hence the reason why we have capital punishment in many states
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:31:57 AM
You are the only picking and choosing. You are absolutely right that murder is wrong and so is stealing, JUDGING, and all sins will be exposed, etc., etc. However, any person who accepts the Lord and Savior into their life, MURDERERS or not, and repents of their sins in a TRUE HEARTFELT way, will be FORGIVEN. Have you not read that or do you follow a different book?
-
-
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:16:07 AM
I think that's what I said. Thanks for repeating it.
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: ck3313 @ 11/04/2008 10:15:24 AM
That is the most ridiculous argument regarding the government having control over my body. I am sure there are cases of extreme neglect because of the mother not wanting or being able to take care of the already born child. But, that is not pro-choice . Once the child is born, it is a citizen and it has rights, so your argument is not even applicable to abortion.
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 10:24:37 AM
That child is a living breathing human being from conception as an ultra sound will prove . Think of it this way. A lad name Jane Doe went to the abortion clinic and told her doctor that she had three kids already and having one more would be too much so she would like to have an abortion. The doctor told her if she felt that way, lets just kill your two year old to make room for the baby that's coming. Then it shouldn;t be a problem. Ridiculous i know but that is how we mus view abortions, as the murder of a child
-
-
Posted By: unityfirst23 @ 11/04/2008 10:10:59 AM
it is her body. and there are lots of women who carry a child to full term and then throw it away when there are places that would take that child and adopted it to a loving family. if we leave the government to control our bodies then what are we??????
-
Posted By: kw3400 @ 11/04/2008 10:16:14 AM
To say it is her body is selfish to the core. As human beings we have the responsibility to protect those who are too weak to protect themselves. This is not about the government contorlling bodies, it as about protecting life. There are many people willing to adopt babies. There are alternatives to killliing an unborn child.
-
-
-
Posted By: 1proudamerican2 @ 11/04/2008 10:15:05 AM
I am so sick of hearing people say abortions are murder! You can't kill anything which is not alive. They are developing and maybe one day become alive. If it's murder, would it be involuntary manslaughter if your actions like physical activities accidently cause a miscarriage or maybe you take a prescription your doctor gave you...would they be responsible for this as well?
And if we force woman to bring children into this world that are unwanted, due to financial or personal reason and these children grow up unloved or living in poverty...isn't that torture? How is having this child grow up with emotional issues going to save the world and our country? A child doesn't have the choice to come into this world. That is OUR choice. Shouldn't we make sure they are being raised correctly?
Don't want an abortion...don't believe in them? Don't have one. And if you can't afford the child...adoption! But don't treat me like a third class citizen and I don't have a right to my body! I will never torture a LIVE child. I waited until late in life to have a child so they could be raised correctly and not live a torturous life from being unloved and/or in poverty. I believe in abortions but I believe in our REAL children first!-
Posted By: KJC03 @ 11/04/2008 10:21:10 AM
They are alive. Ask anyone who has had a baby. Ask an obstetrician. They are definitely alive.
-
Posted By: Blue in AZ @ 11/04/2008 5:33:03 PM
It is not a child. It is a potential child. When I miscarried at 5 weeks, the cells inside me never had a heartbeat. When I miscarried again at 3 months, what came out of me in no way resembled a baby. You cannot claim to represent all women or to know our feelings.
-
-
Posted By: misch-SD @ 11/04/2008 10:28:11 AM
Aren't you glad your parents chose to have you so you could post your opnion. The fact of the matter is it is a child. And one who has a right to live. Yes you have a right to make choices, here one, if you are not ready to have a child then DON'T HAVE SEX!!!!! There are consequences to every action we take. If you choose to have sex then you are choosing the possibility of creating a life. Once you have made that choice then NO you should not have the choice to kill it. I am amazed at people's ignorance with the technology we have today to see that we are not dealing with a blob of tissue, he or she is a human being who has the same right to life as you or I. No ones life is perfect but at least we get the chance to live it. Shouldn't everyone???
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 11:51:35 AM
What about the ones who didn't choose to have sex? Who were violated by a brutal crime such as rape, incest, rape by a relative, father, etc.? Do you think you have the right to tell them they have to have the chld? I don't believe in abortion for the WRONG reasons either and if I made a mistake by having sex too early and it ended in pregnancy, I, myself would choose to keep the baby or maybe put it up for adoption but there are insinuating(sp?) circumstances because I myself have been there for someone who went through it by being brutally raped not to mention, it was on Mother's Day and she missed that day with the daughter she conceived in love and did choose to have.
-
-
Posted By: ck3313 @ 11/04/2008 10:16:38 AM
hear, hear!
-
Posted By: ck3313 @ 11/04/2008 10:28:24 AM
that "hear, hear" was to 1proudamerican2....not KJC03....just to clear that up.
-
-
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 10:43:54 AM
One of my big problems is how the past couple of liberal candidates have claimed to be somewhat prolife in their private lives; but they all cite the same reason for being pro-choice as a candidate: they feel they can't legislate against it because it is not a legislating issue. They try to claim that moral issues should not clash with government.
I feel this arguement is 100% baseless and lame. It is baseless because, whether you like it or not, our forefathers created this country's laws based on religious principles. Therefore, you can absolutely legislate when it comes to a moral issue. This argument is lame because it is just a half-hearted effort by pro-choice candidates to try to appeal to both sides. You simply cannot claim to be personally pro-life if your political moves will all be pro-choice. When a candidate makes a contradictory statement like this, you know what it tells me? That they do not have the guts to fight for what they believe in. Because if they are truly pro-life, as they state, they would do everything in their power as president to stop this act which is intrinsically evil.-
Posted By: liberaldemocratwoman @ 11/04/2008 11:01:49 AM
I assure you jammalang that there is nothing half hearted in my beliefs...nor am I lacking guts to fight, I forever debate this with my very pentecostal sister that I love dearly. I just take a different view of what freedom of religion means. I believe God allowed this country to become great because the founding fathers ideals were that of tolerance and freedom for all people. I am still brought to tears by our pledge of allegiance, our national anthem...I truly take to heart the ideals put forth in the constitution.
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 11:42:04 AM
If you cry over our constitution and believe in it so much, why do you not pay attention to the part where it says that we all have "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" This most basic of our country's policies clearly gives us the right to live. And this includes the unborn.
-
Posted By: liberaldemocratwoman @ 11/04/2008 3:08:37 PM
No where in the constitution does it outline the description of life as including a fetus or unborn child. Since that is not specifically stated, please do not interject your interpretation of what they meant., because that is your speculation only. Unfortunately, because science and medicine have made such advancement we are now faced with issues that could not have been forseen by our founding fathers.
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 3:47:40 PM
Me providing an interpretation of the constitution is exactly what the Supreme Court did in Roe v. Wade. I just interpret it differently than they did.
-
Posted By: Blue in AZ @ 11/04/2008 4:10:57 PM
and that's why they get to wear the pretty robes and park in the cool parking spots and you get...well, to maybe feel righteous and superior?
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 4:16:33 PM
Yeah, because liberals never want to appear high and superior. O_o
And don't deny that you do. If you didn't, we wouldn't be having this discourse.-
Posted By: Blue in AZ @ 11/04/2008 5:25:58 PM
But I'm not the one comparing myself to the Supreme Court. Why should your interpretation matter? why are you so great?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: lucy2008 @ 11/04/2008 10:48:04 AM
Abortion as it has been discussed by the right is a highly emotional and devisive issue. For those in the center and on the left, the issue is about women's reproductive choice and choice for the family. A woman's womb should not be owned by the state. A person's religious belief should not be narrowly defined by the state- one type of religion. Our founding fathers distrusted government and so separated Church and State. However, there are paths for a win win. Senator Obama supports easy and affordable access to birth control- making fewer unwanted pregnancies and making abortion rare. Furthermore, Obama supports programs to help women pregnant who wish to keep their child are able to do so without the woman or family suffering. This is a win win to make abortion rare.
-
Posted By: lagata @ 11/04/2008 10:57:03 AM
Obama also supports greater access to health care for a greater number of Americans, which will also undoubtedly contribute to fewer abortions and healthier babies in general. It boggles my mind that so-called "pro-lifers" refuse to take this reality into consideration in the voting booth.
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 11:13:24 AM
Yeah, he wants more affordable health care, which includes mothers having access to affordable abortions. Obama's health care plan is in no way, shape, or reason pro-life on any level.
-
Posted By: lagata @ 11/04/2008 2:18:13 PM
(Are you seriously equating access to health care to access to abortion??!) FYI, the Hyde Amendment prevents federal dollars from being spent on abortions except for therapeutic abortions. And as for my rationale, I feel strongly that Obama's fiscal policies will contribute to greater social and financial stability for the greatest number of Americans. Those are the conditions under which most women choose to carry unplanned pregnancies to term - TONS of data and studies back that claim up, and indeed we saw this happen under the economic boom years of President Clinton: abortion rates declined under Clinton and rose again when the Republicans came back to power. There's no way to prove that there will be fewer abortions under Obama than McCain because only one of them can be POTUS at a time, but if you believe that Obama's policies will provide more security and stability to the average American family than McCain's - then it's safe to say that fewer abortions will take place during an Obama administration.
I know you so-called "pro-lifers" hate putting things into context (how many posters here have proudly boasted that they see abortion as a "black-or-white issue"?), but unfortunately things like social and economic conditions do affect how many abortions are performed in the U.S. So if you cared more about reducing abortions in real numbers rather than about flinging rhetoric, you would get behind Obama and his wise social and fiscal policies. But my guess is that "saving lives" (as you call it) is less important to you than "being right" - and righteous.-
Posted By: lagata @ 11/04/2008 3:41:50 PM
Also, here's a link to a New Republic article discussing how Obama has supported funding that will have the effect of helping uninsured children and the families of special needs children, while Republicans (including John McCain) opposed them on the grounds they were too expensive. It goes without saying that fewer fetuses with Down Syndrome, Tay-Sachs, and other genetic disorders would be aborted if parents could be assured of a social safety net that would ensure they could care for their child throughout its life without incurring catastrophic financial costs. So again, I ask: whose positions on the issues are more "pro-life"? Whose political philosophies and ideas are more likely to lead to fewer abortions in real numbers?
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/11/03/why-palin-s-policies-won-t-help-special-needs-kids.aspx-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 4:12:57 PM
Reading that article, I think that particular policy of Obama would be something I support. However, for me it does not in any way make up for a pro-choice policy that has resulted in over 40 million abortions in the U.S. alone since Roe v. Wade.
-
Posted By: lagata @ 11/04/2008 5:25:11 PM
For the record, I said "I strongly feel" that Obama's social economic policies are superior to McCain's in terms of creating conditions for lowering rates of abortion - I didn't say that it's a fact. But I do disagree with your rationale that lower taxes will be more effective at creating those conditions than the social safety net programs that Obama favors - just think about it : if you were a woman facing the prospect of raising a child with severe cognitive or physical diabilities, which would make you feel more secure, lower taxes or programs aimed specifically at helping you and your child cope with the long-term financial and emotional challenges of the disability? I think you have been drinking the Reaganomics Kool-Aid, which sounds good on paper, but in practice these big macroeconomic theories don't hold a candle to the positive psychological effects of safety net entitlement programs such as Medicaid and Social Security in terms of making people feel secure about their futures. I know that you probably have an arsenal of arguments as to why these programs are the work of the Devil or whatever, but that is how I see things, and I know I am not alone.
-
-
-
Posted By: jammalang @ 11/04/2008 3:59:25 PM
You only feel that Obama's social and fiscal policies are wise because you swing to the left. This is also why you feel that the economic boom during the Clinton administration was due to Clinton policies that didn't even have time to mature, rather than due to the long-term effect of Reaganonmics from the 80's and early 90's. I'll bet you also blame today's hurting economy on Bush instead of blaming it the stupid decsions of loan companies in the late 90's under the Clinton administration to give sub-prime loans.
I totally agree with your point that a good economy equals less abortions. But I feel that raising taxes on people who make $200,000 or more (assuming Obama doesn't change mind and lower this number...again) only hurts the economy because it gives employers less money to pay existing employees and hire new ones. It also promotes shipping operations overseas because businesses will always go where they can operate cheaper. This will only make unemployment in the U.S. go higher, as foreign nations reep the benefits of U.S. companies' overseas operations. Less jobs means less people paying taxes, more spending on programs like welfare for said people who lost their jobs, and a bigger domestic debt.
But this is all my own opinion. I won't claim this is a fact; whereas you claim Obama's plans will definitely help us, without question. My point is that I personally feel that McCain's economic policies promote the pro-life movement more than Obama's.
-
-
Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 11/04/2008 12:05:23 PM
how is pro-choice NOT pro-life?
its really simple...
its p-r-o...(c-h-o-i-c-e)
a choice doesnt mean people will automatically "murder babies". there are a large number of teens and young adults that opt to keep they're childeren, i have....
-
-
Posted By: KJC03 @ 11/04/2008 11:14:58 AM
lagata, can you tell me your rationale behind this? I'm trying to understand why there would be fewer abortions... birth control is already handed out for free at Planned Parenthood.
-
-
-
Posted By: lmmjr @ 11/04/2008 5:24:41 PM
Quality or sanctity. No grey. Just black or white. THe NARAL crowd doesn't give a hoot for women's "rights" as long as they collect north of $800 per abortion for half an hour's work.. The issue is money, not rights and certainly not the rights of the unborn child.
-
Posted By: denniskinkaid @ 11/04/2008 5:23:37 PM
Luther's theology of the 2 kingdoms of God would certainly apply here... much better than rationalization
-
Posted By: denniskinkaid @ 11/04/2008 5:22:22 PM
Luther's theology of 2 kingdoms (based on the Bible) would be an excellent read concerning all these religious issues and elections
-
Posted By: gigispen @ 11/04/2008 5:22:12 PM
If abortion is really their decisive issue, above poverty and war, then what they SHOULD do is form their own party and put up their own candidate to advance a FULL CHRISTIAN AGENDA or at least write in the name of a candidate who says that they will work to BAN abortion, not merely pass the decision back down to the states. That is still a pro-choice position any way you look at it. And a weak reason to support any candidate, imo unless you believe in their other political positions.
-
Posted By: lmmjr @ 11/04/2008 5:19:52 PM
It is quality or sanctity. No grey. Just black and white. Quibble and dissemble all you want, the bottom line is abortions can be done for north of 800 per half hour. Concern for women's rights are just a shill for special interests that control alot of money from these bloody procedures.
-
Posted By: 2700daily @ 11/04/2008 4:45:17 PM
I like Dutchman01's comment - The sheer quantity of "legal" abortions in America should convince any thinking person. Most people simply don't believe the "40 million" or "50 million" figures - yet the statistics are publicly available on the website of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) for everyone to see.
-
Posted By: Big Monday @ 11/04/2008 6:49:24 AM
I have two disabled kids. I'm struggling to make my mortgage payments. I oppose the war in Iraq. I think Barak will be a great leader. Nonetheless I would pull the lever for McCain if I actually thought it would end abortion. But abortion is a big issue every 4 years for the Republicans then, after the election, it recedes. 20 of the last 28 years there has been a Republican president yet abortion remains the law of the land. In the early part of his first term we had a Republican president (Bush) a Republican House, and (I believe) a Republican Senate. They accomplished a ot of their agenda; War, capital gains tax cuts for rich investors, de-regulation of the economy, relaxed enviornmental standards, and juicy contracts for firms like Haliburton. We saw Abu Ghraib, wiretapping and Guantonamo Bay. Yet abortion still remained the law of the land.
I think abortion is a horrible tragedy. But to get my vote Republicans would have to make abortion more than a once every four year issue.-
Posted By: dixie90000 @ 11/04/2008 7:08:53 AM
president bush has passed bans on late term abortion and partial birth abortions. that's further then anyone else has gotten.
-
Posted By: Big Monday @ 11/04/2008 4:36:38 PM
But he didn't really put a dent in it. I dunno...maybe the best way is to end abortion is at the local level. Maybe we should be more active in terms of individual churches making sure people know there are alternatives to abortion. I wish Planned Parenthood was required to have a pro-life counseler available for women to discuss other alernatives...I think women are pressured to have abortions and that should never happen. I think some people don't know what else is available. I know we should make adoption cheaper, easier, and more available. thousands waiting to adopt and then we have so many abortions. A true American tragedy. But if history is any indication; it's not one we solve by presidential politics.
-
-
-
Posted By: 2700daily @ 11/04/2008 4:34:46 PM
Abortion is bigger than a personal matter when nearly a million American babies (~1,000,000) are disposed of EVERY YEAR. Thousands every day, all year long. Check out the stats for yourself on the Center for Disease Control website.
-
Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 11/04/2008 4:11:05 PM
support diverse and thorough sex-ed
support free contraceptives
support free (or very cheap) varieties of birth control
support better orphanages
support better adoption laws
support mothers to be (that opted to not have an abortion) by providing free daycares in schools/colleges and work places. why? so they can provide for the life they just brought into the world without being stuck in a dead end job and living check to check.
support answers, not dictation. support choice (it is a choice, much like turning the TV on and off). support eachother.
get off your high horse's of morality and make a difference if your god opposes abortion so much.
if you oppose abortion so staunchly, i would hope you wouldnt have "moral" issues adopting babies of another color than yourself, or of another religion, or that arent "normal" or in "gods image"...
until all of this happens...most likely this debate will never end as long as religion is involved...-
Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 11/04/2008 4:20:53 PM
and not to reply to myself but i find it interesting that people are only interested in the babies when there are toddlers, childeren, highschool aged kids with no parents or support...and you can find kids like this in any orphanage...and no one is adopting them...people want a cute little baby to raise, most are to scared to adopt an aged child...and then the same people that oppose abortion, support adoption, support the death penalty and war call these "innocent" kids degenerates, outcasts, criminals, scum of society...and have no intention of making a lasting difference in the life of a person that could make differences in they're own lives...
teach a man to fish and he feeds for a life time...
-
-
Posted By: readre @ 11/04/2008 12:51:46 PM
Whadamess ??? Concerning your comment at 9:55 AM this morning about reporting the truth on Obama's position on live-birth abortion, here is the information you requested:
Illinois State Senate 92nd General Assembly; Senate Vote on Bill No. 1661. Obama opposed protection for the infant born alive having survived an abortion. No protection ??? just set it aside and let it die - no harm, no foul - it's what the mother intended.-
Posted By: Pampam @ 11/04/2008 1:51:20 PM
He voted against it, as did many others, because there was no provision for saving the life of the mother. So if the mother and baby were both in danger, the life of the baby took precedence over the mother's life. That was the way the bill was written.
-
Posted By: readre @ 11/04/2008 4:04:23 PM
Actually, that is not the reason. By Obama's own admission he voted against the bill because he said it did not contain the pre-birth neutrality clause (further clarifying that the rights contained in the bill would only apply to an after-birth baby), which would protect Roe v. Wade. All well and good except for the fact that Obama voted it down after the neutrality clause was later approved and added to the bill by the committee that he, himself, chaired ??? the Health and Human Services Committee ??? and was present the day the verbiage was added to the bill.
Then, to top it off, when confronted about his opposition to the bill, he has lied numerous times, stating that he would have voted for the bill if it had contained the same clause as the federal version. What? He didn???t think the public would put two and two together and realize that his story and dates didn???t line up ??? that the bill actually contained verbatim the verbiage from the federal version (CNN, June 30, 2008) that was passed hands down by both Republicans AND Democrats, then signed into law by Bush? The Illinois state and the federal versions of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) are virtually the same word for word. Read and compare them yourself.
There is no other way to view this: OBAMA CONDONES INFANTICIDE IF A RESULTING LIVE BIRTH GETS IN THE WAY OF THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE ABORTION.
-
-
-
Posted By: Young Hickory @ 11/04/2008 3:17:37 PM
Why do you Republicans keep acting as if Roe versus Wade is the fault of Democrats? It was decided in 1973. Since then, there have been 24 years of Republican administrations and only 12 Democratic. It is these administrations that chose Supreme Court justices. The onus is on Republicans to overturn Roe versus Wade but they only pay lip service because they know that they can only continue to milk Roe v. Wade for votes as long as it is the law of the land. So jwcannalte, you should redirect your energy towards those Republicans you have elected instead of issuing challenges to Democratic voters. Your guys have the power, you just refused to see that you have been used.
-
Posted By: Dutchman01 @ 11/04/2008 3:59:35 PM
It's too bad the Republicans couldn't overcome Democratic Party support of abortion. We could have had 40 million more americans today and less of an illegal immigration problem.
-
-
Posted By: I'mokYourok @ 11/04/2008 10:11:31 AM
As a father, grandfather, and an 18 year volunteer in an organization providing physically challenged, cognitively challenged, and underproviledged children some joy in their life through experience in the outdoor world, I feel a real affinity for children. These are not just words. However, I've have also seen children who should never have been born to parents who were monsters, who then raised children of their own who in turn would become monsters. (these are monsters who maim, rape, kill, cheat, and steal from our families. I have experienced the loss of a wonderful family member when she would not choose to abort for medical reasons because of church pressure, leaving 2 children under the age of 6 without a loving mother. I have watched a nation send its fathers, mothers, sisters, and brothers to a needless, faithless, evil and unjustified war in Iraq to abort their lives so that their family responsibilities are never met. I have seen them come home terribly maimed and damaged, only to be cast out of the Veterans Affairs midical system with dishonerable discharge due to involuntary brain injury or PTSD behavior, to be left on their own and a burden to their families. I have seen this nation turn a volunteer military into a slave army through "stop loss" greatly enhancing their risk of their never returning home by continually moving the goal post. I have seen a nation of mean spirited politicians spit on our good religious intentions with contempt and jokery only to use them for political gain. I have seen these same political powers subvert our justice system, our economic system, and our news reporting institutions to cheat and deceive us, greatly privileging a few while dragging the rest of the nation into servitude, debt, and dispair.
Lets not continue to be so myoptic folks. Abortion is not a pleasant reality, but the evolving devastation can be so much worse. I for one have had enough and will vote for the greater need of our nation. I suggest those which cannot get past it, provide an alternative by joining groups which encourage unwilling mothers to go to term and give up the child to devoted families for a decent upbringing. Words or personal belief without positive action is meaningless and damaging. Merely stopping aborttion by an unfit mother who would raise a monster is a disservice to mankind. Stopping a medically needed abortion to a mother of existing children is a hellish and evil self-rightous imposition of your warped values on another family. Stay out of my family and I'll stay out of yours. Let me and my family face the Lords ultimate judgement because I don't trust yours.-
Posted By: liberaldemocratwoman @ 11/04/2008 3:25:38 PM
Bravo! Thank you for saying it so perfectly!
-
-
Posted By: floridacadman @ 11/04/2008 11:11:44 AM
The right wing is a contradiction in terms. Anti-abortion but cut the social programs, pro-life, but kill them at 18, (while theyre still children by the way). Smaller gov't, but get between my wifes legs and tell her what she can and cant do. Talk about religeon, but are the first to condem gay/human rights.
They think through nothing, just complain. The consequences to all these changes they want are a religeous dictatorship and millions more people floating around in need of social programs that they wont pay for. Imagine a society of homeless, starving people with an elite few at the top of the food chain proclaiming how rightous they are, and you have the far right agenda if they got their way on everything.
Talk about a group headed for hell.-
Posted By: Dutchman01 @ 11/04/2008 11:18:47 AM
Kill off 40 million americans and import 37 million immigrants. Tell people they can't kill but allow women to kill their children. I tend to think of the left as a contadiction.
-
Posted By: floridacadman @ 11/04/2008 11:25:36 AM
Nah, killing people is fine if its for a reason. This war, your precious GW proclaimed won 6 years ago. As far as the abortion issue goes, you simply dont get to make a law based on religeon, it has no place in American gov't...none.
-
Posted By: Dutchman01 @ 11/04/2008 12:15:08 PM
George Bush never killed 40 million, but then neither did Hitler, Stalin, or Mao. It's a pity the Democratic Party and its supporter have managed that. .
-
Posted By: catjax @ 11/04/2008 2:52:45 PM
Your President Bush has been in office for eight years and certainly did nothing to prevent it either. Neither did Reagan, Bush, Sr. Shall I go on?
-
-
Posted By: KJC03 @ 11/04/2008 11:56:53 AM
Actually, all of our laws come from the judeo-christian ideals.
-
Posted By: KingsBard @ 11/04/2008 12:19:21 PM
That is a fallacy. There are plenty of Judeo-Christian "ideals" that are not part of our legal system. They are simple mores by which we agree to live. The Ten Commandments was NOT the basis of the legal system, which evolved separate from the Church for a reason. We do not consider adultery to be criminal, nor do we allow people to own slaves anymore (Thank God for that).
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Nowforsomemoretruth @ 11/04/2008 12:13:23 PM
The problem with Obama is a simple one. One association does not a radical make. But in Obama's case, the list of left-wing radical mentors and associates is seemingly endless, (Davis, Ayers, Wright, Khalidi , etc., etc.) with a new revelation practically every day. With that trend, a picture begins to emerge, and that picture is that Obama is as steeped, not in just left-wing political thought, but in radical left-wing economic and race ideology, to the same extent that Pat Robertson was steeped in the ideology of the radical Religious Right. I would not have voted for Pat Robertson for dog catcher, and for similar reasons, I did not vote for Obama.
-
Posted By: liberaldemocratwoman @ 11/04/2008 2:43:46 PM
Obviously you did not hear the latest story of egg on McCain's face....since Obama gave Khalidi $80,000 and McCain gave Khalidi more than $480,000....also linking him to Ayers!
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones!
-
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- Black Friday should unleash pent-up demand. Analyst Bill DreherNYT
- The task is to restore our conservative bona fides James Bopp Jr. on a 10-pt GOP checklist NYT
- Twenty five years feels right in my bones and right in my spirit. Oprah on ending her showCST
- It’s going to be a holy war Orrin Hatch on debate over the Senate health billNYT
- The nation and the world will see him for the coward he is Holder, on trying KSMAP
Discuss