Posted on 04/05/2006 9:33:51 PM PDT by Coleus
PHILADELPHIA -- Republicans in Washington are always willing to weigh in on the issues that are important to their conservative base -- Iraq, immigration, taxes, federal spending, the Medicare drug plan, the Dubai ports deal, you name it.
But, lately, hardly anybody in the GOP camp seems eager to address the historic event that transpired this month out on the high plains and now threatens to roll eastward, to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is, of course, abortion. For the party of the elephant, the new South Dakota law -- which prohibits the procedure for every woman in the state, unless she is dying -- is truly the elephant in the room.
It puts Republican politicians, especially those seeking the 2008 presidential nomination, squarely on the spot. If they side with conservatives -- who tend to vote heavily in the primaries, and who generally hope that the South Dakota law will be a weapon to overturn Roe v. Wade -- they risk alienating the independent voters who often swing November elections and generally desire that the right to legal abortion be preserved.
That explains why not a single Republican with White House aspirations has declared that the South Dakota law should be the model for an ultimate ban on abortions nationwide. It's a crossroads moment in the 33-year-old debate. Grass-roots conservatives are clearly forcing the issue, hoping this law might ultimately find a receptive audience in Washington on a high court now staffed with two Bush appointees.
South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds calls the law "a direct frontal assault" on the landmark 1973 ruling. Yet, even ardent foes of abortion acknowledge that the issue is dicey especially for Republicans, who appear to have the most to lose. Jack Pitney, a former national Republican official and Capitol Hill staffer who closely tracks GOP politics, called the abortion law "a delicate situation for the Republicans."
He said, "It makes a lot of them nervous. It's one thing to just talk about banning abortion -- and they do that all the time, because it's a great way to fire up the base and raise money. But it's another thing to actually ban abortion nationwide. "Because that would raise all kinds of uncomfortable questions that could hurt the party politically -- such as, if this is truly a crime, whom do you jail? Very few Republican candidates want to answer that question."
change the word "abortion" to "end the life of the fetus" would you still go with answer A?
LOL, I was just looking at your profile page--I can see that! :) I love the pictures, btw. :)
I really hate waking up in the middle of the night and then immediately knowing I won't be able to fall back asleep. :(
Oh well. I'm going to try now, I have a couple of hours before the alarm rings, and then I have to get the kids off to school.
Take care! :)
good luck on the sleep, and thanks for the nice comments on the pictures. I need to update that blog sometime, I guess im just to lazy to keep it up to date.
If a 40 year old raped your 12 year old daughter and gave her AIDS, and you could go back in time and prevent the rape by killing someone at random, would you do it?
Abortion is my most important personal issue. I want this abolished for all reasons. My most important American issue is the War on Terror. If a person is for both of those I would vote for that person. The rest is crap in my opinion. Yes tax cuts are nice, but that is not going to affect American as much as War on Terror and Abortion.
Sam Brownback for POTUS in 2008.
From everything I have read about the man he is 100% Pro-Life without exceptions or apologies. Also 100% Pro-Family and anti sodo-marraige.
Pro-Life PING
He sounds good. What is his take on the War on Terror. He is not calling for troops to leave is he?
i'm pro-life but believe rape and incest and the life of the mother should be allowed. If your daughter was raped by a teacher would you make her give birth or would you allow for an abortion?
Can't possibly be pro-life than. You are pro-choice with a little bit of pro-life thrown in for you to feel good. If a person is raped they can put it up for adoption that has been the way things were done for 150 years before 1973. I think the stigma of pregancy of your girls should be lifted. Obviously we should preach abstinence as the main source of sex, but if someone screws up than I think she should be supported and have the baby put up for adoption. If my rules would pass, then America would be a much better place where after a generation we would have a population growth so Social Security would not even be an issue.
I still think its her choice, to force her have the child is also robbing her of her childhood and she could also have the same feelings if she were to give the kid up for adoption.
Robbing her of her childhood? 9 months? Really six months by time it is found out. I don't call that a very long time for give a life and then making a couple or family happy. I call that a miracle. Before you ask, I have three sons so I won't have that but I could if one of my sons makes a stupid decision (they are 8, 6, 4). I may have some more kids and have a daughter someday if that is part of God's plans for us.
A is my vote.
Take a look in the yellow pages. There are plenty of abortion alternative clinics all across the country that actually offer help to the woman and her child. You just never hear about the good work they are doing to help women and save babies. The media won't acknowledge they are there because that would blow the whole argument that these women have no alternative and that pro-lifers don't care about the women or what happens to the child after it's born.
CBR - Center for Bioethical Reform - has an interesting campaign. They put "FETUS", "ABORTION", and then a picture of an aborted "FETUS" (baby to normal folks), and then something to get a perspective of the size of the aborted infant...
Maybe they should help tourism in DC by making trips around the White House, Capitol, etc...
It's usually pointless to ask such "what if" questions. Naturally, those who have not been faced with the real situation are going to answer a hypothetical according to their stated moral position.
Haley is right. Though I would vote for a measure that only gave the life of the mother as an exception, the VAST majority of people in this country would not. So I would accept the other exceptions, if that is all we could get, and in MOST states that is all. I would require that it be cases of REPORTED rape or incest, though, or it becomes as meaningless as the 'health of the mother' exception has been.
You won't change the violence that was done to your daughter by perpetrating yet another act of violence. It is not the baby's fault that it was conceived in such a way. I would encourage my daughter to bring the baby to term, then allow someone who has no history with the baby to raise and love it. That way, she may still have the horrible memory of the attack, but an even better memory of giving life and a chance at happiness to that child.
If she is a normal woman, she'd do whatever she needed to do to take care of herself and the baby. It is INSTINCT! In some women, that instinct is not as strong because of circumstances like ongoing physical or emotional abuse, or existing heavy alcohol or drug use. But I'm thinking, as you mentioned teenagers, that those problems are not there, yet, so she could be persuaded to take care of herself, since she has her whole life ahead of her after the baby is born. She's not being 'sentenced to a life term', she only has to wait a few months until the baby is born, then she can allow someone to adopt it, and she'll be free, knowing that she did the right and JUST thing.
I'd discount everything he says. Concerning abortion I don't know of any Pub politician seeking the national spotlight boasting about being "pro choice". Note that Rudy, himself, has been quiet on the matter.
Since we just won two big battles on the Supreme Court it may be smart to be quiet about it. Frankly, rather than a frontal assault on Roe right now I'd rather see a massive attempt to defund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers-- restricting Fed money to states that fund it would be an interesting thing to try.
And rather than using abortion to overturn Roe, it might be smarter to use something else -- someone claiming the right to sell his kidney or share dirty needles or that case where that idiot was claiming a man has a right to an abortion.
A few posts ago, you were talking about a 12 or 13 year old rape victim, not a "woman." And I explained that for rape victims, and especially for the young girls, the interventional abortion is another horrible experience to get through. I've never been there for an abortion, but I've accompanied friends to a physical - and done quite a few for patients - after the rape. I've talked to other girls and women after abortion.
Nothing is going to make the rape "better" except time and loving support. There are flash backs, for years. Future happy events like falling in love, having a new baby stir up the memories. In the meantime, all we can do is our best not to make those memories worse.
The only reason for someone to intentionally interfere to end a pregnancy is if the mother's life is in danger. That's the only reason we justify any other killing.
The reason she should carry a child she does not want is because the unborn child is her human child.
Some girls and women do all of the things you mention, now, even though it's legal to get an abortion. Girls who are not supported in their pregnancies, who are afraid of getting caught doing something they know they shouldn't have done, and girls who have been taught that the child is not a child will do unhealthy things.
We shouldn't make law based on those who won't be "responsible." We can never stop all behavior we consider wrong, such as murder, stealing, the rape you mentioned in the first place. But I sure hope they don't make any of these acts of aggression and force against another human being legal.
Making her carry an unwanted child will make the memory of the rape last forever and possibly even more painful, every time she takes a shower and looks at her body and the stretch marks she will be reminded of the rape, and the adoption.
I thought we already established that the memory of rape (and of pregnancy) lasts forever.
We are only discussing the associated memories, now.
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.