Obama worshippers, that means you Cali

[Flystripper]

I am not an Obama worshipper but why would I make my voting decision based on abortion when Roe v Wade isn't going anywhere no matter who wins office?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

I am not an Obama worshipper but why would I make my voting decision based on abortion when Roe v Wade isn't going anywhere no matter who wins office?

Obama is making this election about judgment and character.

So far we have several points which point to his bad judgment and character in addition to his bad policy.

First, we have his relationships with certain sullied characters.

Second, he has his 20 year relationship with Wright.

Third, he not only voted in favor of PROMOTING abortion, he tried to conceal his promotion through the voting of PRESENT in Illinois.

What does the fact of promoting abortion, instead of just saying, "yeah, let's uphold the current law, a pro-choice position" and then concealing it through PRESENT votes?

Is that a display of character and good judgment?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Placing a label like "murder" onto abortion is hardly helpful. Is it murder to take the morning after pill? Is it murder to have an abortion when the fetus can't possibly live on its own? Abortion is a debate about lines (when life begins) and competing interests (a woman's control of her body). Claiming abortion is murder assumes that the answer to the first issue mentioned above is obvious, and that the second issue mentioned above isn't a mitigating circumstance.

For me at this point in time, this isn't what abortion is about at all. It's about whether Roe v. Wade was properly decided as it concerns the "right to privacy."

The debate about where life begins and when abortions should be allowed can be continued in state legislatures after the abomination of judicial activism that is Roe v. Wade is finally overturned.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

For me at this point in time, this isn't what abortion is about at all. It's about whether Roe v. Wade was properly decided as it concerns the "right to privacy."

The debate about where life begins and when abortions should be allowed can be continued in state legislatures after the abomination of judicial activism that is Roe v. Wade is finally overturned.

We're not going to change our culture, so it will remain legal and those of us who don't like it, should not invest money to reverse an irreversible social trend.

However, I see no reason for abortion to be advanced further nor funded. If you want one, pay for it yourself. It should be safe and legal, but not provided for, and those fringe ones should be decided by medical ethics.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Tex

For me at this point in time, this isn't what abortion is about at all. It's about whether Roe v. Wade was properly decided as it concerns the "right to privacy."

The debate about where life begins and when abortions should be allowed can be continued in state legislatures after the abomination of judicial activism that is Roe v. Wade is finally overturned.

Absolutely. And Cali, as an attorney, should understand this. I'm pro-choice, in that I don't think the government should be involved in a controversial, very personal matter that has turned women into pawns. However, in a matter with no clear answers to the questions you raise, Cali, it's not the Supreme Court's role to mandate/overrule state's answers to these questions.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

We've got you down that you want a massive oppressive and ungodly expensive new bureaucracy to deliver health insurance at a price we can't afford.

So next issue:

Are you fully comfortable with Obama's stance of actively promoting abortion, even partial birth abortions? Does his promotion of abortion, not just "pro-choice" position concern you?

We'll get to other issues as well, given your desire to promote this socialist.

you're more obssessed with Obama than anyone else. Cali has yet to use homoerotic imagery to describe him.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Placing a label like "murder" onto abortion is hardly helpful. Is it murder to take the morning after pill? Is it murder to have an abortion when the fetus can't possibly live on its own? Abortion is a debate about lines (when life begins) and competing interests (a woman's control of her body). Claiming abortion is murder assumes that the answer to the first issue mentioned above is obvious, and that the second issue mentioned above isn't a mitigating circumstance.

Let's see, murder is the planned and intentional killing of a person, isn't it?

That sounds like abortion to me, as I've never heard of anyone just spontaneously getting an abortion.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Absolutely. And Cali, as an attorney, should understand this. I'm pro-choice, in that I don't think the government should be involved in a controversial, very personal matter that has turned women into pawns. However, in a matter with no clear answers to the questions you raise, Cali, it's not the Supreme Court's role to mandate/overrule state's answers to these questions.

No, that is a debate about whether there is a constitutional right to have an abortion, not a debate about whether or not abortion is desirable at all.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Let's see, murder is the planned and intentional killing of a person, isn't it?

That sounds like abortion to me, as I've never heard of anyone just spontaneously getting an abortion.

A "person." There is the issue (at least the first part of the issue).

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Let's see, murder is the planned and intentional killing of a person, isn't it?

That sounds like abortion to me, as I've never heard of anyone just spontaneously getting an abortion.

Actually, in the medical world, a miscarriage is called exactly that--a spontaneous abortion.

Just nit-picking.