Posted on 08/27/2012 10:04:11 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Of course everyone here would vote for akin, but those in CA and other states do not vote in MO.
It is 100% clear that the voters that WILL decide the winner are NOT going to vote for akin.
That is why akin MUST step down so we can win this easy seat.
Why is that so hard to understand?
He'll have to go some to top Alan Keyes' 47 point loss to Obama in 2004.
What good did you just do, except give some Liberal someplace something to point to and giggle over?
He’s in it, for now; Missouri voters are stuck with him. It’s not sticking ones head in the sand; it’s called looking at things in a realistic manner. You want to go ahead and continue to beat this thing in public, you go right ahead. I am sure the DNC has a great set of talking points you can use.
And before you make anymore dumb-a$$ posts about heads being stuck in the sand, or Akin-bots, or kool-aid drinkers, or what-ever, I am not pro-Akin (I voted for Brunner), I am anti McCaskill. Whose doing more to defeat her right now; Missourians who are making the best out of a bad situation by getting behind the person who IS the candidate for the moment, or people like you who are bashing him?
You guys sure aren’t helping us at the moment. Go-ahead and bash Akin; pile it on. We here in Missouri will do the heavy lifting and defeat McCaskill.
“Wrong the first thing a new candidate will be asked is whether an exception should be made for Rape and if he answers NO he will be pilloried no end no matter how he states the answer”
That is the test of fire, how well you can handle the heat from the media. If a candidate can’t put out a valid concise answer that gets the point across, then how much time has that candidate spent really studying and preparing to defend and articulate that belief.
If they can’t then maybe they shouldn’t be running to be one of only 100 people in the world to hold such a position.
Stupidity is hard to overcome.
>Life in the womb IS black and white
Then what is the decision when the baby can be saved by modern medicine but it will kill the mother to carry it?
What is your black or white call in this case?
> the first thing a new candidate will be asked is whether an exception should be made for Rape and if he answers NO he will be pilloried no end no matter how he states the answer
Only someone who wants to lose their election would answer “No”.
“I am not pro-Akin (I voted for Brunner), I am anti McCaskill.”
I’m not pro-Akin either, and I also voted for Brunner, but all our votes combined aren’t going to get Akin a win.
Its the independents and moderates that we will need to gain a win for any Rep candidate and Akin has driven them away and with no money or support, he will not begin to come back enough to win.
The national media and the Dems are not going to let this go, and they will continue to find new ways to through this in his face every time he makes an appearance.
Some mistakes are just too big to get past and we need some one who can beat McCaskill, I like you can’t get through another 6 years of that witch.
After akin’s remarks and latest stupidity no amount of money in the world will help him now.
Maybe if he offered every voter $100.00 contingent on him winning but that is not going to happen.
“Maybe if he offered every voter $100.00 contingent on him winning but that is not going to happen.”
That’s his problem, he doesn’t have that kind of money.
Then what is the decision when the baby can be saved by modern medicine but it will kill the mother to carry it? What is your black or white call in this case?I'm going to peel this off the Net, because she does a good job at answering:
The current Roman Catholic teaching is that an abortion is never to be willfully procured. If there is a case where the mother's life is in danger, a medical procedure (like a hysterectomy) may be performed that saves the mother's life while at the same time ends the child's. The doctrine that is used is Aquinas' Principle (or Doctrine) of Double Effect. This says that there is nothing that prevents an action from having two effects - one good and the other bad. As long as the intention is for the good effect, and the bad effect is foreseen but not willed, one may perform the act in question. So in the case of abortion, an abortion can never be done because "abortion" means the "termination of a pregnancy". BUT, another medical procedure can be performed as long as the intention is to save the mother's life, even if the procedure will kill the child. The death of the child is foreseen but not willed, and in an abortion the death of the child is willed. LinkDoes this make sense? And these cases are extremely minute in number, btw. Rarely is the mother's life truly in jeopardy.
In terms of standing up “hard” for one’s values, I served in the armed forces of the United States at a time soldiers were spat upon. (I used to make a point of having been a volunteer, but I now understand things differently and equally respect all those who served during the era that I did.) Todd Akin, like me, at about the same time as me, served in the military and, on that basis, I respect the sincerity of his beliefs.
I think there is a better than even chance that Akin will lose. But I don’t see it happening by any massive landslide. Maybe by 6 or 7 points max.
If it is Akin vs. McCaskill on Nov 6th, JimRob's for Akin, that's all he says. Nothing more in your quote.
That's entirely immaterial to whether Akin should HIT THE ROAD, before Sept 26th, so the seat can still be won by some other commonsense, pro-life conservative and Claire McCaskill can be retired.
Palin had it right; Akin should follow her example step down for the good of the agenda.
Yes, thanks for the wise words.
I served in the armed forces of the United States at a time soldiers were spat upon...Todd Akin, like me, at about the same time as me, served in the military and, on that basis, I respect the sincerity of his beliefs.Thank you for your service! I think Todd now knows what it's like to be spat upon as well. Did you know that three of his sons are Marines? And yes, he is sincere. :)
The Catholic Church nowadays teaches that human life begins at conception., so they agree with you But, this is not the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church nor is it accepted by all other Christians.
The traditional teaching of the church is that life begins with legal certainty at quickening. Prior to quickening, and at an unknowable time, human life begins when God implants an immortal human soul into the material stuff. Hence, each human life is a miracle and God, as well as the biological father and biological mother, plays a role.
As to how we, as Christians, are supposed to deal with the material which, legally, is merely potentially human, here is what St. Ambrose, a revered Doctor of the Church, said: That which has the potential to be human should be treated as human. The modern Catholic Church makes a fool out of St. Ambrose by taking away the uncertainty of human life prior to quickening. According to the modern Catholic Church there is no such thing that is “potentially human,” it’s black or white.
In our country, the uncertainty of human life prior to quickening was reflected in almost every one of our state laws governing abortion. In 48 of our 50 states, abortion was merely a medical procedure prior to quickening, regulated by the state, and not a crime. But, after quickening, abortion was a crime. I could talk about the other two states, but that’s not my point. My point is that we, a Christian nation, reflected the long time teaching of the Church. This is what was over-turned by Roe v. Wade. It opened abortion up until birth itself.
We can restore what proceeded Roe v. Wade, but that would be unacceptable to the black-or-white’rs. And, yes, I realize that Todd Akin thinks it’s not completely impossible for a pregnant woman to have been made pregnant by rape. But, it is extremely rare. And so it would be impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any pregnant woman was raped. Not seeing this implication of what Todd Akin said, his supporters argue that he (Akin) is actually for punishing rapists, when he would make punishing rapists legally impossible for the women they impregnate.
” That said: Why is it that I always see Rove attacking REPUBLICANS and not DEMOCRATS. “
To be fair, Rove only attacks CONSERVATIVE Republicans....
I am glad that you think anybody is sincere, as you sound quick to doubt the sincerity of others. I didn’t know Congressman Akin has three sons in the Marines. I was happy enough to see that he served in the Army. It really says something about a person that he raises his sons to take personal responsibility for the freedom of our country. My father was proud on the day I was commissioned, although he shared with me that he was told in his day, that he had to fight in Korea so his son would not have to fight in some faraway God-foresaken place. I have one son and he is in the Army. As I was able, I administered the oath of office to him. For me, I am really proud of my son for responding to the call amidst the uncertainty of whether our country will fall into the abyss of atheism, multiculturalism, and socialism.
I don't know what planet you're from, but I suggest you take a closer look at what Akin actually said and actually meant. You'd be doing innocent, unborn people a favor.
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.