“Only in the case of saving the mom. Paul is a doctor and most likely knows lots of rare and UNHAPPY cases that threaten the life of the mom.”
That is not what Paul said, and I’ve already posted his quote and even bolded the relevant section, so I’m not going to do it again. Nobody is disagreeing with Paul about an exception for the life of the mother, our problem is his nebulous and unspecified exception for thousands of “other things”. That’s just weasel language which opens the door to a doctor approving an abortion of convenience for anyone at anytime.
“Paul is pro-life. I am pro-life. I don’t know why we are disagreeing except that you don’t like Paul, and its totally cool that you don’t. :p”
It has nothing to do with liking or not liking Paul. I’ve already expressed why I have a problem with his statement, and it had nothing to do him personally, it has to do with the fact that it is NOT a pro-life statement. So either you didn’t understand me, or you just want to misrepresent my position and try to demean me with this childish implication that I have something personal against Paul.