Posted on 03/11/2005 6:32:41 PM PST by Sola Veritas
Rice pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008 on Friday during an hour-long interview with reporters at WASHINGTON TIMES, top sources tell DRUDGE. Rice gave her most detailed explanation of a 'mildly pro-choice' stance on abortion, she would not want the government 'forcing its views' on abortion... She explained that she is libertarian on the issue, adding: 'I have been concerned about a government role'... Developing late Friday for Saturday cycles... MORE...
Neither can a single Senator or Congressman, but his/her position on Abortion is a factor in my vote.
I will not vote for anyone who disavows the death of innocent life.
:-)
The only concept to which abortion (or more appropriately stated, the ending of pregnancy) may be even considered a right for a woman is in regards to self-defense ... and that concept extends to ending a rape pregnancy or that of a minor child. BUT, and this the vital corollary, such ending of a pregnancy must be done earliest possible date in the lifetime already begun. [Donning my flame suit now ...]
There are other issues you know. Would you vote for a pro-gay, anti-military, anti-american candidate that happened to be pro-life? If so, then you would vote for Harry Reid for President. One would hope that we are a big tent party to the extent that pro-life conservatives realize that not voting for the Republican nominee hands to Presidency back to the Michael Moore crowd. These are serious times, and Condi is the toughest potential President out there period. Sign that woman up!
>>>Hush! Just because YOU don't have any convictions doesn't mean no one else can!>>>
What good are you 'convictions' gonna do ya with a Clinton in office?
Hardly. "Mildly pro-choice" describes about 70-80% of Republicans. If you poll Republicans on whether or not abortion should be legal in the first trimester for rape and when the mother's life is threatened, you'll find the absolutists are in the minority.
And her stand on government intervention is the status quo before Roe v. Wade when the federal government took no stand on the issue leaving it up to the individual states to decide. Legal in California, illegal in Utah.
Keep up your delusion...it fits you.
as a man and not nearly as fanatical as some on FR, I think exceptions in the case of rape, incest are justifiable, just like war is justifiable......I won't argue you the point much...seems like it is morally reasonable and I'll work it out in heaven if need be
Now where have I seen that before? Oh, I remember! 2000 -- and it was Bush, not Condi.
Me too. And I've been told my acceptance of the morning after pill is no less evil than being for partial birth abortion.
That kind of radical positioning of the pro-life movement is why partial birth abortion is still legal, IMO.
She's mildly pro-choice, I'm mildly against her nomination now.
Stalk, stalk, stalk, stalk, stalk, stalk...like a record with a scratch on it...
So is wanting a girl and being pregnant with a boy. I know this is an incredibly emotional issue for you and for me. I simply cannot find justification to kill a human being just because it is small. A 2 year old is small and still developing. The product of rape is a terrible thing, but it is not common. I will think more on this subject, but I do not think this rare occurrance should penalize 45 million deaths which this country has inflicted on the unborn, nor should that hypothetical dictate the countries position on abortion as a nation.
Jerks don't usually last long around here.
How'd you pull it off?
Just asking.....
"only interested in how her own life is impacted, not about the value of life itself..."
Oh please. Its 2010 and two SCOTUS slots are open. Who do you want to nominate replacements - Condi or Hillary?
You have NO idea that I'm a pro abortion advocate. None.
But you single issue voters are the most immature group of people I've ever heard in my life.
And let me say this, if you sit home and let a Democrat get in office, abortion will be the LAST thing you will have argued on this site convincingly. Because Democrats care NOTHING about national security. Nothing.
Rice is a bad choice because she probably couldn't beat Clinton. She has ever been elected to office and we have no idea where she stands on many issues. I have heard she is pro-abortion and supports affirmative action. If those are true I definitely won't support her. I like Rice but not as a presidential nominee.
Not many conservatives who care about this country.
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.