Posted on 06/20/2008 5:09:31 AM PDT by rhema
You are confusing the issue. The punishment that I spoke of is forcing a woman to carry to term her rapists offspring. Forcing her to be reminded every day just how she got in that condition. If that is not punishment for the horrible crime of having been raped, then I just don’t know what is.
Just as soon as you explain why a woman that has been raped deserves the further emotional and physical torture of carrying and delivering her attackers’ offspring.
She doesn’t. But her right to avoid emotional and physical “torture” does not override that innocent unborn child’s right to life.
So to satisfy YOUR beliefs, you would physically, mentally and emotionally torture that woman?
“Please explain why a baby conceived as the result of a rape deserves death.”
It doesn’t but to force that woman to carry that child is worse in my opinion. I am not for abortion but there WILL be exceptions when it is outlawed, and I view that as a good thing. Those that will refuse to compromise on the issue don’t really want abortion ended, they want an issue to fight about and raise money for.
Persons are persons, no matter how they were conceived, and each and every person has an unalienable right to life.
You don’t lessen the horror of a heinous crime by committing another heinous crime. You simply compound the destruction exponentially.
Don't mind him; he's purer than you and I. And he's glimpsed a revelation neither you nor I have: all of the pro-choice organizations that ostensibly fear and loathe McCain are just dissembling so as to swell their coffers. Secretly, they know what Eternal Vigilance knows: McCain's a pro-choice wolf in pro-life sheep's clothing. Never mind his pro-life endorsements and the decades-long pro-life voting record you and I have cited.
“Persons are persons, no matter how they were conceived, and each and every person has an unalienable right to life.”
Okay okay, I get it. You have no problem torturing a rape victim for 9 1/2 months.
I understand.
GOOGLE, ‘THE MOST PRO-ABORTION CANDIDATE EVER’
Bullhockey. To advocate that it's okay to alienate the right to life of any person is to surrender the only moral, philosophical and legal arguments there are against all abortions.
And the fact is, it is the people who are willing to make the exact fatal compromise you're talking about who are collecting the vast majority of the pro-life funds in this country.
They have no intention of taking any action that will actually end abortion.
In the case of a rape that results in pregnancy, there are two victims. You consider carrying a tiny innocent child to term "torture," but have no problem with ripping one of the victims limb from limb, or burning their skin off them in saline solution?
DUMBED DOWN AMERICA IS UNAWARE THAT OBAMA SUPPORTS PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION AND VOTED ‘NO’ MULTIPLE TIMES TO A BILL TO PROTECT BABIES WHO SURVIVED ABORTION- BUT TO ‘SHELVE’ THEM TO DIE.
WE MUST EXPOSE THIS.
Yeah, I will "never-mind" them, since it wasn't very long ago that those exact same endorsers were telling the world what a disaster for the pro-life movement McCain's nomination would be. Nothing but a bunch of compromised hypocrites.
I fully believe in three exceptions to any prohibition on abortion.
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Life (not health) of the mother.
If you are going to ever get any meaningful prohibition on abortion, some form of these three things will be part of it. I wish they were not necessary but having them as part of the compromise will allow us to save those that would have been killed as a form of simple birth control.
Come to think of it, hasn’t the morning after pill pretty much rendered a lot of this debate moot?
Your premises are entirely lacking in any basis, so it is obviously impossible for you to see the end results of your own fallacious thinking processes.
I will just have to settle for the knowledge that while you are more ideologically pure on the issue than I, my view rather than yours is the one that will actually save babies, while you would still be standing alone demanding that you get your views 100% adhered to.
I think that's the acknowledgment that matters to him. Father Pavone, National Right to Life, Sam Brownback: they're all just pro-life poseurs who don't know the real, sinister McCain who's been masking his pro-choice persona behind those 115 pro-life Senate votes.
And pity this poor, deluded writer, who purports to show differences in ideology and actions between Obama and McCain. She apparently doesn't realize they're one and the same, as EV would readily tell us.
You'll never admit it, but you're helping to destroy the very basis of our liberty.
The crowning purpose of the Constitution, according to the Constitution:
"...to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves AND OUR POSTERITY."
I would be surprised if the illinois legislature does video or audio archiving. There should however be transcripts.
There are multiple news and other sources indicating what he said, I presume those come from the transcripts.
I don’t know if Illinois has their transcripts online or not.
Yes, we have lost that issue. No matter who wins election, they won’t veto federal funding.
I’m still hoping we can convince McCain to veto it on the grounds that it would be wasteful spending since ESC hasn’t been shown good for anything, and that the money is better spent on adult stem cell research.
That’s about our only hope at this point. Of course, I’d rather have federal funding of ESC than have more federal funding of abortion.
What strict pro-lifers really need is to call for a ban on the creation of embryos. That’s the real problem. As McCain notes, they are already frozen, and will be forever. They are as good as being murdered now. I don’t support using them for experiments, but if you are being consistant, the problem was allowing people to create these little humans to begin with.
Some are honest enough to argue that point — many more won’t argue that because they lose too much of their support when they come out against in-vitro fertilization.
Yes. If Abortion is murder, we can’t condone it simply because of the sins of the father. Further, if abortion is murder, we can’t allow it simply to relieve the mental anguish of another human being.
You can only truly justify rape and incest exceptions if you don’t really believe the fetus is a human being to begin with. And if you don’t think the fetus is really a person, there’s really no point in opposing abortion at all.
However, given the current state of the law, I see no problem supporting “pro-life” people who want an exception for rape and incest. After all, until we get rid of Roe, we can’t ban ANY abortions. And one we get rid of Roe, we WON’T come close to passing a federal ban.
So if we have a President who will appoint a judge to oppose Roe, that’s really all we need right now. Nothing else truly matters. Except making sure we don’t slip too far backwards, which we will with Obama.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.