Posted on 11/05/2008 12:19:54 AM PST by BearArms
Pierre, SD (LifeNews.com) -- For a second time, the voters of South Dakota defeated a state ballot measure that would have banned most abortions after defeating a similar measure two years ago. The 2006 ban would have only allowed abortions to save the life of the mother and the 2008 ban added rape and incest exceptions with the hope of persuading more pro-life voters to support it.
Instead, South Dakota voters defeated Initiated Measure 11 by a 55-45 percentage point margin.
The margin was similar to the vote last time around despite the attempt to appeal to the majority of voters who said in 2006 that they would support a ban with the additional exceptions..
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome?
and keep losing elections!
Our ‘tactics’ are working just fine, but to finally ban that despicable practice we must first get Roe overturned. We real conservatives have worked endlessly to see that anti-Roe justices make their way to the federal bench and it’s taken a long time, but so far, we’ve been pretty successful.
Buzz off, I wasn’t addressing you, nor do I have any reason to talk to a supporter of baby murder.
yup! one person at a time. with obama in office, with all restrictions on abortion gone, we will see a whole new movement. most people wont like what they see. as this happens we need to learn to reach out, not get in their faces. some times people have to see for themselves some thing at its most horrendous to wake up. i wish it was not so. if we can manage to keep him from turning us into cuba i think we will do OK. he has, in my opinion embodied the worst of the left. with a win behind him, we will begin, as will the rest of our nation see what the man and the democrat party is really about (they are already coming out proudly as socialists). maybe some good can come of this. i just aint seeing it now:(
And end up like Sodom and Gomorrah. Sure.
Nice counter argument LOL
Whaddaya mean end up? we are already there! Gay marriage, drugs galore, prostitutes in every city, more murders than the rest of the world combined...blah blah blah.
Can we place crime prevention as top priority before we involve the government as moral police?
Kill babies is not a crime?
Killing any one is a crime. That includes “babies”.
But my whole point is you can not force abortion ban on the people if they are not ready for it. The only way abortions will stop is if you can change hearts and minds first.
Losing elections won’t get you there.
Look, you didn’t even really present an argument, so spare me.
George W. Bush is very pro-life. He supported the partial-birth abortion act, appointed judges who are very likely to be anti-Roe, and opposed funding of abortions overseas using our “family planning” foreign aid that we like to give out. He was VERY vocal about this. And guess what? He won two times. Abortion does not lose us elections. The diehard baby-killer supporters aren’t going to support the Republicans anyway.
If you really want to lose elections, I suggest you have the republicans be pro-choice. That decision will give pro-lifers (which includes some catholics who would swing dem otherwise) no place to go but a third party. You may not care for the GOP’s position on abortion, but it’s critical that it keeps it because it helps distinguish itself from the other major political party.
Now, like I said, I wasn’t really talking to you. I see from your post history that abortion is something you think we shouldn’t care about, but many of us do, and will continue to do so no matter what.
Your use of babies in quotes is quite telling. You merely see the unborn child as a fetus and nothing more. We have nothing more to discuss.
I thought both McCain & Palin are pro-life. How come they still lost?
That’s not necessarily true. We didn’t change the hearts of minds of Nazi Germany. We didn’t change the hearts and minds of the slave owners of the Confederacy. No, we forced them to stop.
Uh, that wasn’t my point. I didn’t say being pro-life automatically won elections. I was responding to YOUR comment about LOSING elections. Being pro-life does not make a national candidate LOSE an election. This isn’t difficult logic here.
To add to this, McCain would have lost by a much larger margin if he were not pro-life. Without the pro-life bloc, Republicans have a very difficult time winning elections. Having that group doesn’t mean they’re going to win elections every time, but without it, it’d be almost impossible for them to win, as that group would most likely vote third party.
This nation is not like S & G. YET. But it won’t take long. I give it 10 years at the most. Many places in the world are already there. Crime/morals. Hand in hand.
I have to admit it, although illegal aliens not lawful immigration pulled me over to this side, this issue is one of the reasons why I always voted Dem. I do think you can get some of the measures passed like parental notification, rape and incest, and perhaps partial birth or abortion survial but the rest would take alot of time. Unfortunately, what shocked me about some of my Dem peers is that they were offended by Palin having Trig and wondered why she didn’t abort and were grossed out about Trig. Although, I do not agree with Palin idealogy wise, choosing to have Trig is one of the things that made me like Palin and realize she is a strong woman. For me pro choice means you can choose to keep a child as well but it doesn’t seem that way to the people who just won. They think anytime life is imperfect, pro choice means taking life, not having a child. With socialized medicine like the rest of the world, I am afraid we will see more of that—imperfect baby—push abortions—that’s why Austrailia didn’t take the doc with a Down’s child into their country since they said socialized medicine couldn’t pay. This for me is scary.
But at the same time, things like women using abortion as a form of birth control routinely could be brought up.
Abortion takes the right of an individual to live.
Sarah, on the other hand, is ardently for the right to life.
And by the way, Scalia is awesome. Read his dissents where he gobsmacks the liberal justices.
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.