WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE 'PRO-LIFE'?

hillary clinton, Hannity & Colmes, YouTube ^ | 4.19.07 | Mia T

[Mia T]

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE 'PRO-LIFE'?

by Mia T, 4.18.07

 

HILLARY TAKES VILLAGE: teen abortion / no parent notification (YouTube)

From the Senate: Statement on Supreme Court's Gonzales v. Carhart Decision Washington, DC -- 4/18/2007 "This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman's right to choose and recognized the importance of women's health. Today's decision blatantly defies the Court's recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito." HILLARY CLINTON ON SCOTUS DECISION

HANNITY: Partial birth? GIULIANI: I think that's going to be upheld. I think it should be. as long as there's provision for the life of the mother then that's something that should be done. HANNITY: There's a misconception that you support a partial birth abortion. GIULIANI: If it doesn't have provision for the mother I wouldn't support the legislation. If it has provision for the life of the mother I would support.... GIULIANI: 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 US attorney, also admire. If I had been president over the last four years, I can't think of any-- that I'd do anything different with that. I guess the key is and I appointed over 100 judges when I was the mayor so it's something I take very, very seriously. I would appoint judges that interpreted the constitution rather than invented it. Understood the difference of being a judge and a legislator. And having argued a case before the Supreme Court, having argued in many, many courts is something I would take very seriously. HANNITY: So you would look for a Scalia, Roberts, Alito. GIULIANI: Scalia is another former colleague of mine and somebody I consider to be a great judge. You are never going to get somebody exactly the same. I don't think you have a litmus test. But I do think you have a general philosophical approach that you want from a justice. I think a strict construction would be probably the way I describe it. Giuliani on Hannity: VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT

 

 

COMMENT:

Premise: The only thing electorally each of us controls is our own vote.
Corollary: Each of us is responsible for the consequences of our own vote.

If we take the primary and the general election separately, that helps to define the problem.

IMO, we are faced, in the primary with selecting someone who will successfully prosecute the war, someone who will successfully protect and defend the Constitution. I suspect no one will disagree with this.

But we must also select someone who can win, for reasons that are obvious to me, but not, apparently, to some in this forum.

Anyone who demonstrates to me he can satisfy all of the above gets my attention, and the one who satisfies it best will get my support.

Notice that I do not mention ideological purity. I don't even mention ideology. Lincoln understood that sometimes you must go outside the system to save the system, that Lady Liberty cannot lift herself up by her own bootstraps.

So in step one, the primary, if you (or I) vote for and help nominate a sure loser in the name of ideological purity or for whatever reason, then yes, you are (or I am) helping to elect hillary clinton or whichever D is nominated.

In the general, if it's hillary vs. Rudy, say, and you don't vote, or vote 3rd party, then you are helping to elect hillary clinton. To think that you have any other options in this de facto 2-party system of ours is self-delusion.

And if you help to elect hillary clinton, you must bear the responsibility for all the deaths of all the children, unborn, living, and not yet even imagined that will flow from that election.

Those are the facts. You may not like them. They may disturb your idea of 'pro-life' as viewed through the narrow lens of abortion.

Dilemmas are tough. Life is full of them. Cognitive dissonance is not comfortable and many here, (and most if not all of us some time or other), find comfort in rationalizing dilemmas away.

But the problem is still there; you are no closer to the real solution. To the contrary. You are fast approaching real disaster. I sincerely hope you see it before it is too late.


POSTSCRIPT

MORALITY: Nothing less than morality undergirds my argument. What I am disputing are not your moral underpinnings--I admire them-- but rather your failure to acknowledge that your solution is no less (and I would argue, far more) immoral than the alternative.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE: No insult intended. Dilemmas cause cognitive dissonance. No option is wholly satisfactory. I understand why you don't want to vote for someone who is pro-choice. But there is a dilemma: Your solution, to vote 3rd party or sit home, ultimately helps to elect someone who is by your very own criteria far worse than Rudy.

They may disturb your idea of 'pro-life' as viewed through the narrow lens of abortion.

This statement is not meant as an insult. Being 'pro-life' means so much more than simply being against abortion. When we fail to acknowledge that fact, we do dangerous, irrational, ultimately self-destructive things like helping to elect hillary clinton.

"The power of the harasser, the abuser, the rapist depends above all on the silence of women." (Ursula K. LeGuin)



VOTE SMART: A WARNING TO ALL WOMEN ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON

by Mia T, 3.11.07
A RESPONSE TO 'VOTE DIFFERENT'
(A Mashup of Obama-Apple 1984 Ad Mashup)

YouTube Views for VOTE SMART: 320,931
PLEASE FReep

YouTube (First Month) Honors for VOTE SMART:
#6 - Most Viewed - News & Politics - All
#6 - Most Viewed - News & Politics - English
#33 - Top Rated - News & Politics - All
#30 - Top Rated - News & Politics - English
#7 - Most Discussed - News & Politics - All
#6 - Most Discussed - News & Politics - English
#7 - Top Favorites - News & Politics - All
#7 - Top Favorites - News & Politics - English

 

 

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

 

[Syncro]

Your statement is ovalic.

I was referencing no threads.

And I know nothing of sh-sh deals. Whatever they are. Circular maybe?

[Syncro]

Now that is circular. Thanks for the illustration

[Syncro]

You are welcome

[MACVSOG68]

I disagree. Respecting the written statement of the founder of this site is not fearing "reasoned debate". Comparing that respect to what goes on at DU is insulting.

You misunderstand me. I don't disrespect either the founder nor of his statement. But many Freepers don't subscribe to every facet of the statement, nor do they necessarily accept the social aspects of it as a priority for the Nation. We're not talking about respect. Those who throw the statement up continually are attempting to show that the statement is akin to one of the sacred documents of this Nation and to disagree with anything it says is to prove one does not belong here on FR. Today, one of the great Freepers of all time was banned simply for her support of a Republican candidate and for her eloquence and keen ability to articulate why we as Republicans should all come together to defeat Hillary.

That respect you refer to has manifested itself in some disgusting tactics, obscene insults, and continual threats of zotting. That is what I am comparing to DU, not the founders statement nor the respect we all have for it.

[TommyDale]

If you only knew!

[Alia]

"Ovalic"?

I'm very clear on your concept.

Much better use of creative language, synchro.

Care for a smoke?

[TommyDale]

Sorry you didn’t recognize the sarcasm in that, but I have stopped identifying with “/sarcasm” because if I have to tell people, it ruins the effect. My condolences to those who don’t recognize it.

[dirtboy]

What if Thompson's sole purpose is to give McCain the nomination by skimming off just enough conservatives from Rudy?

News flash: Rudy Giuliani has accomplished the impossible - he's made McCain palatable to me and many other freepers.

That is just how bad Rudy is. And it also shows just how pathetic your attempts to boost Rudy, attack Fred, and redefine the pro-life movement downward are.

Or should we say, were.

[Syncro]

Today, one of the great Freepers of all time was banned simply for her support of a Republican candidate and for her eloquence and keen ability to articulate why we as Republicans should all come together to defeat Hillary.

I hope everyone that cares sees your statement and now knows why Mia is no longer posting

That's a first, but I guess you nailed it.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“News flash: Rudy Giuliani has accomplished the impossible - he’s made McCain palatable to me and many other freepers”

And THAT ain’t easy.....lol!

[dirtboy]

Today, one of the great Freepers of all time was banned simply for her support of a Republican candidate

Hardly.

She also managed to try to define the basic concept of pro-life downwards, and also tried to imply that Fred was in the race just to draw votes away from Rudy.

Rudy booster nonsensical attacks on Fred have become hazardous to one's posting privs on FR. Especially when they support a guy with far, far more liberal warts than Fred and have no problem with that.

[Incorrigible]

Total bummer.

There have been Linux/Windows threads hundreds of times more boisterous than this thread.

As I understand it, being negative about FR on anti-FR web board sites is pretty much grounds for expulsion and I don’t disagree with that. Though I have not looked to see if Mia participates in other sites.

Hope it’s just a cooling off period.

[Registered]

Why don’t you post to people that can actually post back?

You might also want to open up another browser window so you can hop back and forth. The way things are going you’ll be posting to yourself in the near future. ;-)

[Incorrigible]

On the lighter side, perhaps someone discovered that MiaT was really ClassyGreenEyedBlonde.

;-)

[dirtboy]

Here's how you define pro-life downward:

And if you help to elect hillary clinton, you must bear the responsibility for all the deaths of all the children, unborn, living, and not yet even imagined that will flow from that election.

Those are the facts. You may not like them. They may disturb your idea of 'pro-life' as viewed through the narrow lens of abortion.

So to MiaT, if someone refuses to vote for pro-abort Rudy, they are responsible for pro-abort Hillary.

As opposed to the Rudy supporters being responsible for pushing a pro-abort candidate for the nomination in a pro-life party. It's a complete cop-out on their part, so they try to blame those who are aghast at what they are trying to do for being unwilling to be complicit in such an action.

After all, every day in this country, abortion kills as many Americans as the 9-11 attacks did.

[Syncro]

LOL

I used to smoke ovalato delicatos(not sure about the spelling.) They were a nickle a pack back in the day. As strong as Navy Cuts

Oh and thanks for the compliment.

[dirtboy]

Why don’t you post to people that can actually post back?

Why don't you quit shilling for a pro-abort liberal? After all, I did show you that Rudy said abortion is a Constitutional right. Apparently, that didn't faze you.

[Miss Didi]

If I only knew what? I’m a New Yorker and I was being sarcastic.

[Miss Didi]

Today, one of the great Freepers of all time was banned simply for her support of a Republican candidate and for her eloquence and keen ability to articulate why we as Republicans should all come together to defeat Hillary.

Bravo.

[Syncro]

I swear, that is the reason!

It was posted on this very thread

Case closed, lets all leave.

Well if we are great, support a Republican, and are eloquent and have a keen ability to articulate why Rudy is the only alternative to Hilliary.