Posted on 06/24/2007 7:54:42 AM PDT by rob21
We are holding Rudy and Mitt to the fire about their past on abortion. Lets not forget Fred Thompson.
Abortions should be legal in all circumstances as long as the procedure is completed within the first trimester of the pregnancy. Link
A very strong statement from Fred Thompson when he was running for congress.
I think every baby deserves life, but overturning Roe V Wade is POSSIBLE. What you want may not be possible for decades.
We need to take every victory we can, even if it is only a partial victory.
What is impossible is overturning Roe without a determination that babies are persons, and are therefore endowed by their Creator with an unalienable right to live.
**APPLAUSE**
Compromise is not possible when you enter into the realm of life and death.
You either live, or you die.
You either protect the lives of the innocent, or you join all the other tyrants of history on the ashheap.
1. On what basis could the court overturn Roe without recognizing the personhood of the unborn?
2. If Roe were somehow overturned on some basis other than the personhood of the unborn, on what basis could any of the several states overturn abortion? What would be their constitutional reasoning?
3. Even if you overturned Roe without sound moral, intellectual, and constitutional reasoning, what would then stand in the way of the whole cycle beginning all over again?
I am tired of you, and tired of your “I am the only person who is REALLY pro-life” attitude.
You are completely obnoxious.
Your no compromise position means abortion continues at the rate it is at now. Overturning Roe V Wade however it can be done, is a way to save some babies. That’s a GOOD thing.
I am done with you.
Arguing with a passionate, dedicated pro-life mother is absurd, EV.
Patently absurd.
You need to yield.
In other words, you have no answer to my questions.
Carry on with your cheerleading, then. Sadly, you’re cheering for the status quo.
Why should I “yield”?
Cheerleading for the status quo, and pretending that babies don’t have a God-given, unalienable right to life will do nothing but continue the holocaust on into perpetuity, or actually, until the Almighty has had quite enough of it.
Carry a baby in your womb, then get back to me.
We’ve been over and over this statement so many times on Free Republic.
Now if we don’t go over the statements on Free Republic and analyze them. How will be public be able too. Supposedly FREEPERS like each other or it is supposed to be that way. The general public does not so do you think that they are going to be fair with the statements? I doubt it. How do you think the media is going to spin these statements that Fred wrote down? Why get upset with Duncan Hunter supporters if we are just debating? Is Fred not going to be debating these issues? Will he just get upset like some on this site? I hope not because if Fred is ultimately the candidate he is going to have to be strong enough to fight the democrat.
Sorry, but that’s a pathetic argument.
In fact, that sounds like a pro-abortion argument that I’ve heard more times than I can count.
You don’t have a clue, EV.
I truly believe you are jealous that you can’t give birth yourself.
You should be ashamed, accusing righteous mothers of not caring as much as you do.
I’ve had countless pro-aborts make that specious argument, but never someone who called themselves pro-life.
You will NEVER understand what pro-life means.
God help you.
I have four beautiful children whose very existence says otherwise.
Thank you, thank you, you’re a lovely audience. :-)
Because the ones we're upset with aren't debating. They're saying "Thompson said this, therefore he's a wolf in sheeps clothing and you can't say anything otherwise." And if somebody tells them they're wrong they just say "'elp, 'elp, I'm bein' opressed, the Fred mafia is oppressin' me!"
You know why you don't see any debates about Thompson's abortion record? Because it's not debatable. He's solid, and Hunter's supporters who are dealing in truth instead of delusion know that.
I offered up very solid debatable points about what is without argument Fred's position vis a vis abortion, and you ignored them. What's up with that?
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.