you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
<<The last straw is the UTTER lack of leadership by Romney in just meekly accepting the Republican platform plank which calls for no abortion even in cases of incest and rape. I(n the past, abortion hasn't been a major issue for me but something this extreme is completely off the wall>>.
IF one is pro-life, the only intellectually honest view is NOT to make an exception for rape or incest. The fetuses that result from such despicable acts represent life just as any other fetus as to which they would find abortion unacceptable. The only legitimate issue is where the life of the mother is at serious risk because there you will likely lose a life no matter what you do. Those who make an exception for rape and incest are doing so for political reasons only. They think that a warmer and fuzzier version of pro-life will attract some in the middle. I have no problem with people being pro-choice or pro-life. I have a great problem with hypocrisy. But then again you know that from all of my criticisms of you and your illogical and hypocritical views over the years.
It is absolutely nuts to believe that the Presidential race is over. The consistently close tracking polls from Gallup and Rasmussen completely belie such a view. The fact that undecideds almost certainly will strongly move to the opponent make Romney have a very good chance. In a close race like this one, the debates, what happens with Iran, economic data to come, how well the conventions come off (watch for Chris Christie to make a very memorable speech that will then be frequently repeated in ads, cable news, talk radio, etc.), turnout and unknowables will in the aggregate determine the outcome.
As usual, you take an extreme, definitive view, never allow for any chance of it going the other way, and then when Romney wins you will concoct some ridiculous excuse. Fair and logical analysis has never been your thing.
You don't seem to understand that I am talking about forcible rape, not just regular rape. Sure if it your every day run of the mill rape, then I can agree that we shouldn't kill the baby. But for forcible rape, all deep thinking people agree it is okay to kill the baby. This is the kind of logic that you simpletons just don't get.
What is truly amazing is the moron's ignorance. The Supreme Court has ruled abortion is a right. Congress can not make a law prohibiting abortion and the President can make NO law. The make abortion illegal would take a constitutional amendment and the President is not involed in that process. This is just another case of the moron making noise.
It's positively ABSURD to ask a woman who has been forcibly raped to carry to term and bear the expense of bearing a child created by such a horrific act. After a forcible rape, the woman would want to do her utmost to put the past behind her; not to first have to undergo many months carrying a child conceived in hate which she absolutely does NOT want.
I didn't think that you wwere this much of an extremist but I probably shouldn't be surprised.
The Rasmussen poll is a complete GOP outlier this year and I think that it's because it isn't effectively dealing with the fact that i-Phone users (heavily for Obama on balance) just aren't being represented.
I certainly won't have to make any excuses "after Romney wins" because I have a scoop for you. HE AIN'T WINNING! PERIOD!
When a woman is raped;
A. The police are called
B. She is taken to the hospital
C. Doctors and Nurses collect evidence and take measures to sanitize her so she does not become pregnant.
D. She is also given counseling to help her.
So if a women does all of the above; your reasoning quoted below is false. If a woman fails to seek help the chances are still slim according to doctors. And then there is the morning after pill.
"It's positively ABSURD to ask a woman who has been forcibly raped to carry to term and bear the expense of bearing a child created by such a horrific act. After a forcible rape, the woman would want to do her utmost to put the past behind her; not to first have to undergo many months carrying a child conceived in hate which she absolutely does NOT want."
Now that really blows your statement out of the water and really makes you look stupid.
Explain how iPhone users are different from other cell phone users, laughable nitwit.
It's not just Rasmussen, but practically all polls that show the race a dead heat, effectively tied statistically, numbers numbskull.
In the latest Rasmussen, Obama is actually ahead by a point, which is just as insignificant as being behind by a point.
<<I have no problem with people being pro-choice or pro-life. I have a great problem with hypocrisy>>.
To which you responded:
<<I didn't think that you wwere this much of an extremist but I probably shouldn't be surprised>>.
I understand how one can be pro-choice and I understand how one can be pro-life and respect both sides. The latter requires a belief that life begins at conception. Such belief cannot be reconciled with an exception for rape, any more than it could be with an exception if the woman doesn't feel like raising a child, can't afford to do so or is seeing a psychiatrist for depression. The only logically possible exception is where it's a choice between the life of the child and the life of the mother. Other than that, the exceptions are simply political calculations. They are logically indefensible.
It is absolutely maniacal to look at months of daily tracking polls by both Gallup and Rasmussen which have both been consistently very close to dead even, together with all the unknowns concerning how the conventions, debates, economic data to come and potential geopolitical events before the election, especially Israel/Iran, and conclude that either side is a lock to win. It is simply your desperate need for attention that causes you to make outlandish, unsupportable claims knowing that people with logical minds and some knowledge about polls and politics will respond, if only to, with good reason, dump on your ignorance.