Replies

Your understanding of political realities fall short. we have a pro-life President now but we are still having abortions.
***And we are close to being able to overturn Roe v Wade, undoing some of the damage done by liberal activist judges who legislated from the bench. If we elect Rudy, we won't move forward with that, and babies will die as a result.

No president has the power to stop abortion.
***Straw argument. The president has the power to nominate judges who would overturn this poorly conceived law. Which would put a big dent on abortion. Lives would be saved. I'd rather have a president who chooses to save lives than one who supports partial birth abortions.

Rudy has already said he supports strict constructionist judges like John Roberts.
***He also said he supports partial birth abortion. I do not trust him on this issue.

He constantly praised the President for appointing Roberts and Alito. On Hannity Rudy said “I think the appointment of judges that I would make would be very similar to, if not exactly the same as, the last two judges that were appointed. Chief Justice Roberts is somebody I work with, somebody I admire, Justice Alito someone I knew when he was U.S. attorney, also admire. If I had been president over the last four years, I can't think of any, you know, that I'd do anything different with that.”
***The man will say anything to spin the fact that he is pro-choice and when it comes down to it, he will allow someone as liberal as Ginsberg to be a justice.

Assuming Rudy gets elected President and appoints Roberts-like justices then maybe Roe v. Wade will get overturned.
***The problem here is that big maybe, and there's another big maybe that Rudy will simply not nominate someone who cherishes the sanctity of life. He simply does not value it. That's okay that he disagrees with us, but trying to pretend that he does is a political death wish.

But even if it does get overturned we know that this won’t stop all abortions.
***If it stops one abortion, then it's worth the effort. These are babies that are getting killed. I would love to stop all abortions, but I'll settle with saving millions of lives. As a nation, we grew up and extended the rights of personhood to slaves; now it's time for us to grow up further and extend the right of personhood to someone even more innocent. When a pregnant woman gets hit by a drunk driver & the baby gets killed, we extend the protection of law to that unborn child. The precedent for extending legal protection is already set. It's time we stopped pretending that the woman carrying that life is making a choice over her own body -- it's two bodies, not one.

The abortion issue would then revert back to the states and does anyone really think California would outlaw abortions?
***Eventually, even the heathens out here in caleefornia voted for proposition 187 to deal with illegal aliens, and they would instinctively vote for extending rights to innocent babies. Yes, there would be fewer abortions as a result, and lives would be saved. Would abortions be completely outlawed? Probably not, but if any lives are saved, it's worth the effort.

Thus being pragmatic in our thinking we all know we can't completely stop abortions.
***This is a straw argument. Who said anything about completely stopping abortions? We're trying to do as much as we can with what we have to save as many lives as possible. Rudy isn't. He fails that litmus test.

Therefore voting solely on this issue very unpragmatic.
***I am not voting solely on this issue, but there are probably millions who do. I don't care how pragmatic it is, those are dead babies. Hold one in your arms if you really want to get an idea of how little we value pragmatism on this issue.

I hate abortions like everyone else on here but I realize that regardless of how many pro-life presidents we elect, its just not going to stop.
***If you hate abortions, then support the guy who would do what he could to get rid of them. That's what we're doing, and we'd be pleased if you would join us. If you don't think you can join us because you don't agree with us, let us know so that we don't go round & round and waste each other's time. But if it's because you don't think Hunter is "electable", I'm not buying it. Rudy splits the base and didn't even win in a head-to-head poll against Hillary in his own state. He is not electable. Note that we're no longer talking about your baseball batting average analogy, because it fell apart.