This is exactly why you and Perkins and the lot of you need to make good on your threat to form your own monomaniacal Anti-Abortion Party.
As it stands now, your association with us standard-issue Republican Conservatives means that you're forced to twist and manipulate words and reality to give your issue urgent primacy among the many issues we're concerned about, one of which, but not the only one, is abortion. Abortion is not "war on the womb" it's a bad law permitting a barbaric practice which must be changed. Period. But it is not the only issue.
I know "war on the womb" is a dramatic sound bite, but one could just as easily make the case that (for example) the pending and growing Islamist threat is a war on the womb, the testicles, the fetus, the toddler, and the adult American. Are we to wait until al Qaeda has detonated 10 nukes in 10 American cities before we give terrorism the same primacy you;d like to have for abortion? I think not.
So again I think you should go with Huckster and Perkins, so that we Conservative Republicans can reassume the clarity of our 150-year-old message and principles, and so that you can promote your single issue Anti-Abortion platform without any further histrionics and drama or dilution by your ... ahem .... "association" with our Grand Old Party. (I'll leave it to you to determine why I've italicized the relationship as an "assocation").
OK, how can we be speaking past each other on this one when you openly concede its barbarism? A "barbaric practice" is usually relegated to experiments on animals, war atrocities, or violent exchanges in society.
Call it what you will, if there was a particular turf in this country where you could be killed with impunity; and if you were deemed inconvenient, too disabled, too expensive, too intrusive, or too whatever, then if you choose NOT to call your forthcoming potential dismemberment as something other than "warfare," so be it.
But it is not the only issue.
Never said it was.
...one could just as easily make the case that (for example) the pending and growing Islamist threat is a war on the womb, the testicles, the fetus, the toddler, and the adult American. Are we to wait until al Qaeda has detonated 10 nukes in 10 American cities before we give terrorism the same primacy you'd like to have for abortion? I think not...So again I think you should go with Huckster and Perkins.
Again, it's not like we're on distinct pages here. I'm sure if I perused Perkins' daily e-mail messages to his constituents, there might be one two-week period I could find where he didn't mention pro-life concerns but mentioned Islamofascism. (Yet I wouldn't start railing against him for failing to speak out for the pre-born & advise him to take his "Islamophobia" packing from the Republican party...talk about somebody who's "extemist"...I keep envisioning your front door as you slam repeatedly slam it upon showing your guests the exit as quickly as possible...maybe you can apply to be a hospitality greeter @ the GOP Convention this year?)
...you can promote your single issue Anti-Abortion platform...
"Single-issue" is your words, not mine. I wouldn't dare to operate as a judgmental mind-reader and say that terrorism was your only concern 'cause I'm sure you're a more complicated individual than that.
But the fact that you can so easily reduce your pre-born neighbors to the level of a mere "issue" is quite telling. In Germany, the "question" was once upon a time the "Jewish question." In the West, the "issue" is the "abortion issue." Had even the Jewish advocates 60-70 years ago or the supposed pro-lifers of this country in these past 35 years actually lived out their rhetoric that these were actual people at risk, more of them would have been protected.
Instead, we get invectives hurled at their protectors by even those who concede, "Yup, it's a barbaric practice..."