"See that child over there?
She belongs to the Government!
If her mother didn't want her to belong to the Government,
she could have killed her in the womb"
"Ecce Homo...!"
"So it doesn't surprise me that someone in the pro-abortion camp finally admitted he supports the "right" to an abortion even if it means killing actual human beings in the process. It does surprise me, however, that that someone is Sen. John Kerry."
It doesn't surprise me. He killed little babies back in Vietnam too. (Along with all the other American soldiers. /sarcasm)
f'n's rationale for killing unborn babies was that due to "separation of church and state", he couldn't "impose his beliefs on Protestants or Jews". As usual, this attempt to be on all sides of every issue is completely irrational. If his argument were a viable one, he would have to apply it to other issues and people of other faiths. For instance, he would not be able to impose his views on radical islamists who believe in the "eye for an eye" adage, therefor he would have to pass legislation that allows people to chop each others hands off, or poke each other's eyes out. Also, he would have to vote to allow people to marry multiple partners, after all, who is he to tell them they can't? And let's not forget stealing, heck, if we don't listen to God's commandment "Thou shalt not steal", what reason do we have not to? Why not have a new law that says if I want it, and I saw it first, its mine. Or if I'm bigger and stronger than you, and I can take it from you, its mine.
Obviously, any civilized society's laws are based on the Big Ten given to us by God's own Hand. "Thou shalt not kill" is way near the top of the list, right after the ones about honoring, and not mocking, our Creator. If that feckless, flipflopping, disingenuous, metrosexual dandy really believed that unborn babies are babies, he would be obligated by conscience to vote to protect their unstained and innocent lives from senseless murder. And if he doesn't have a conscience, then he needs to be under the care of a psychological professional immediately, because that would mean he is a sociopath. (See description here http://home.datawest.net/esn-recovery/artcls/socio.htm - notice parallels to f'n's behaviors, at least those we have been privvy to hearing about.) Either way, his defense of his record holds no water, particularly his vote ****against**** the Laci and Connor's Law (Unborn Victims of Violence Act, I believe is the official name.) In that case, he voted to protect a felonious criminal's "right to choose", should he choose to kill a pregnant woman and her baby.
Give me a break! I think if jfk ever actually spoke the truth, his considerably large head would explode. He sickens me.
Its a given some things are always wrong because they have always been wrong. There are other things that are wrong cause the state says there are wrong. Murder and rape are example of the former and gambling and illegal drugs belong in the latter. Abortion is somewhere in between. The fact an abortion may be a necessary evil at times doesn't always make it right. Does John F*ckin' grasp the distinction? If he doesn't, he's not fit to become our next President.
As I said in another thread, Al Qaeda was practicing its religion on 9/11, so according to Kerry's "logic," if as president he goes after AQ, he will be violating the separation of church and state.
Live and let li... er, live and let kill?