Posted on 10/14/2008 3:55:59 PM PDT by wagglebee
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Polls have been showing this for years. One of the ways the media warps the polls is to ask a bout “Roe v. Wade”, which most Americans understand about as well as they understand “The Bush Doctrine”.
I’m in Wisconsin and receive mass mailing almost on a daily basis. Most from planned parenthood of course.
“John McCain doesnt care about womens rights”
“Gov Palin makes Alaskans pay for rape kits”
I would like to think the majority are good, moral people. And I dont think (even from reading the puma sites) that pro-choice is as big an issue as the democratic party would like it to be. I do hope this question comes up in the debate.
I wonder if these Pro Life positions translate to votes affecting law.
people confuse pro-choice with pro-abortion, all the pro-choice people I know are actually against it themselves but think a woman should have the option
My problem with that has always been that the "option" is to kill another human being.
NOBODY would accept the following statement:
"I am personally opposed to murder/rape/arson/armed robbery, but I think others should have the option of committing murder/rape/arson/armed robbery."
“Which means that the ONLY way for Obama to win is to hide just how pro-abortion he is. “
or it means that pro-lifers are compromising or they are not voting in this election or the poles are wrong.
I hope the latter is true myself and that all pro lifer people vote.
...so you’re against free will then?
The polls at this point four years ago had Kerry winning in a landslide.
Ronald Reagan did not pull ahead of Carter until the third week in October in 1980.
In reality we are about halfway through the first quarter.
If it's costing an INNOCENT HUMAN BEING their life or freedom I am.
From the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
(added emphasis is mine)
Abortion, like few other things, is often situational in the minds of most Americans. This is because there are few circumstances where anyone can make a blanket statement, yet not be tripped up with, “But what about when...”
So even to ask questions about abortion, if you want accuracy in your answers (and often people don’t), you really have to have a broad survey.
Ironically, the broad survey would probably be pretty close to the same results as you get with a limited question survey like this. But the truth of the matter would amount to:
1) It is too complicated for the federal government, and they are not allowed to do it in the constitution, anyway. And,
2) State laws about abortion cannot be simple. In fact, they need to be elaborate and very detailed, to the point of being a separate code. This is because the abortion issue *overlaps* civil and criminal law, medical policy and malpractice, State and federal medical funding, free speech, parental rights, religious rights, legal recognition, acts of God, insurance law, and employment law. Probably a lot of others.
The alternative to this complexity is acceptance that on one hand, life might be jeopardized by poorly written law, and on the other hand, that life might be extinguished by poorly written law.
I understand that. I just disagree with your argument... it simply has too many ‘/’-ed parts in it. Each one may be valid in itself, but when reading as a whole, it reads more like the argument in my old Philosophy class for a “Limited free will”; but, if your free will is limited so that you are unable to, say, commit murder, then what would keep people from saying that adultery or lying are too horrible for God to allow.
That is the problem with moral relativism, there are no stopping points, or objective arguments that can be made. Even the law could be thought irrelevant because it is someone else’s attempt to impose morality on you.
This is all rooted in a denial of accountability, of personal responsibility, and is a consequence of inheriting a sin nature. There ARE indeed moral absolutes, and there is an ideal way to live; these, however, cannot be realized within a sinful society; that is why we need a law and a government.
Did you make that pic?
(I’d say it’s nice, but you might misunderstand and assume I’m agreeing... instead, I’ll say it’s nicely done.)
If your parents are Pro-Choice then you're just lucky. Some of your siblings weren't.
“If it’s costing an INNOCENT HUMAN BEING their life or freedom I am.
Freedom is where you lose most “pro-choice, anti-abortion” people. That is why it’s a moral not a Constitutional issue. When you make it a Constitutional issue you lose those that see it as the equivalent of the Dumbocrats making laws to control our lives. YOU HAVE TO WIN THE MIND’S of those thinking about abortion. You just have to realize that your going to lose sometime, criminalizing something won’t help in the long run and it may make it worse, remember prohibiton.
YOU TUBE video
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.