Posted on 10/23/2012 7:22:09 PM PDT by Bratch
That Mourdock's statement would only be offensive to self-proclaimed atheists is a fantasy.
Very few people self-identify (particularly publicly) as atheists because of the stigma.
But there are plenty of people to whom the very idea that some sort of deity is making things happen on Earth (regardless of what those things are) is somewhat silly, and you'd be amazed how many of them vote Republican most of the time (and in many cases those votes are needed to win an election), and generally put up with candidates flaunting their religiosity, in recognition of the importance of that to a lot of the electorate - up to a point.
If you can’t justify killing a baby who was conceived in rape after the umbilical cord is cut, how do you justify killing a baby who was conceived in rape before the umbilical cord is cut?
He sounds like the kind of person who tries to answer the question “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
So when a father rapes his daughter...
“If you can’t justify killing a baby who was conceived in rape after the umbilical cord is cut, how do you justify killing a baby who was conceived in rape before the umbilical cord is cut?”
I don’t justify rape abortion. It’s just no point in talking about it when we have all these other non-rape abortions. Great, now the dems will win and we’ll have even more abortions.
Another Republican candidate self immolates.
But some borderline voters might not be inspired by his theological expressions
This sound familiar as in....
Gee, I’m doing good in the economy but my neighbors might not be doing so good.
I knew what he said but my dummy neighbor might not.
I understand Obamacare but my co-workers might be too slow to comprehend.
Those who claim to speak with G*d’s perspective are more than a tad presumptuous.
By definition, the mind of the Divine is rather greater than that of Man. Therefore, those who invoke the Almighty’s perspective without specific citations are, arguably, substituting their thought for G*d’s.
I seem to remember such error being dubbed ‘blasphemous’, but that was a long time ago.
Very well put.
Romney will win this state by a hefty margin (bank on it). There will be coat tails which will help. Let this play out.
But if the worse does happen, and if Obamacare becomes permanent, you can can slap you neighbor on the back and say “hey, aren’t you glad you voted against Mourdock? What?...having trouble finding a doctor or getting that replacement knee for grandpa....hmmmmm, wonder why? But hey, aren’t you glad Mourdock got defeated? What’s that? Your company dumped your healthcare plan and you can’t afford the state exchange plan? What? Now the Feds are taxing you and the fine is increasing due to inflation? Well gee...sucks to be you but look on the bright side....you voted Mourdock out and a Demmie is our Senator!”
You have to go way out of your way to decide you’re going to make a comment on this subject, this close to the election, on the heels of Akin’s similar comments and the resulting fallout.
It’s almost always ok to JUST SHUT UP!
Why is it the Pro-Life side always has to Shut Up?
Because the people who view a rapist's baby as a "gift from God" represent a very small percentage of the electorate.
It is beyond me why someone would not be very guarded when discussing an issue as sensitive as rape.
Momentum swing back to the Democrats. We had improving polling numbers in some Senate races that was making it look more likely we would pick it up - but now this seat is probably gone and will be used against other candidates. This will also create a new media firestorm against the GOP nationally which will blunt our momentum like it did before going into our convention and demoralize the base / turnout.
Rather typical Romney move, if you ask me. He’s always been a wish-washy weasel. I hold no hope that he will be a good president.
Pro-death people always bring up the rape/incest issue, even though those instances account for a tiny percentage of abortion. The next time a pro-life candidate is asked about that, he should respond with a question of his own - What crime did the baby commit that he or she should be put to death? We don’t execute children for their fathers’ crimes.
You’re trying to reason with facts and logic but once the emotionally charged word ‘rape’ is used, there is no hope for rational discussion. The mind just locks up and says “I don’t even want to deal with it.”
How effing stupid can you be? GOP SENATE CANDIDATES: DON’T TALK ABOUT RAPE.
Does God intend piece of shite Osamacare commie scumsack “Red” Joe Donnelly to be the next Senator from Indiana? America can’t afford Red Joe and joining his ideological and intellectual soulmate Claire “The mirror shatteror” McCaskill in the Senate fighting for the legacy of their boyfriend, Former President Hussein Osama.
IBTZ
“Why is it the Pro-Life side always has to Shut Up?”
Because we want to actually save babies instead of politicians who only talk about saving them but don’t actually do anything that makes a difference.
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.