[pa mom]

My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue? If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. Teach your children it's wrong. But, pun intended, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!

[sweetjane]

Well-reasoned response.

[ApesForEvolution]

Anyone that can't be trusted with an unborn baby can't be trusted...

[NorCalRepub]

alot of FReepers are one issue voters..........I am not. They have that right but I'm going to look at all the pros and cons of an issue.....ie:.. a pro lifer weak on defense would not get my vote since that issues is more overriding. Too many one issuer voters also won't vote if "their" one issue isn't addressed thus assuring an even worse result most of the time......picking up your toys and going home seems to be a weak minded alternative

[Protagoras]

My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue?

Ummm, yeah, the one issue where the candidate says murdering innocent babies is OK.

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one.

If you don't like slavery, don't own a slave.

Teach your children it's wrong.

Is that what you did? "Hey kids, murdering little babies is wrong, kinda, but not enough to keep you from voting for a murder advocate".

[ElectionTracker]

"If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. Teach your children it's wrong."

If you don't want murder, don't commit it. Teach your children that it's wrong. Yeah, that'll help...

[savedbygrace]

Here's the reasoning, mom:

Either the unborn are live people or they aren't. We who know they are live people, conclude therefore that abortion on demand is murder.

Any politician at any level who believes murder is acceptable, and that these most vulnerable little ones do not merit government protection from murder, does not deserve or receive our vote.

If Secretary Rice doesn't accept that reasoning, then I would disagree with your statement that she is "reasoned".

[tmbarth]

This is a very important issue. If you understand economics, then you understand that Social Policy drives Physical Policy. If we had not been destroying life through abortions for the past 3 decades then we would have a workforce that could support our current needs for Social Security.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Anti-abortion is in no way a single issue. We're talking over 45 million issues, and how to end it before we are talking 90 million issues.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

"My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue? If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. "

Abortion is not just one issue. It's a fundamental value of human life. Those who don't oppose it don't realize or don't think that each embryo or fetus is a human being.
That is a non-debatable scientific fact, regardless of religion. Human DNA means the homo sapiens species. Period. The fact the DNA is always different from the mother's takes away her right to kill her child and transforms it to murder.

To vote for any politician who is willing to allow human murder is not only a political error, but also immoral from a Christian point of view. Consider Luke 2, where the fetus who was John the Baptist, leaped in the womb in the presence of Jesus, who at the time may well have been an unattached blastoid. This one incident shows the Bible considers human life starts at conception. That also was the general belief in the US up to 1973, when the activist judges in the Supreme Court concocted the Roe v. Wade decision and conjoined the valid right to privacy with poor science, saying they didn't know when human life began.

Unless Condi changes her abortion stance (which may well be like Laura Bush's, hence the President's tolerance for it), she cannot be nominated for President. She might sneak in as the lower half of a ticket.

"Teach your children it's wrong. But, pun intended, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!""

Don't kill the baby--throw out the candidate.

[churchillbuff]

My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue?"""

Yes. If she was reasoned and intelligent, but happened to support segretation, that's "one issue" that would be a deal breaker; or if she was intelligent and reasoned -- but antisemitic -- that's a "one issue" deal breaker; also if she's ok with the killing of unborn babies - - that's a deal breaker. It's also worth noting that a "pro choice" Republican is unlikely to give us good strong conservative judges. Gerald Ford didn't - - he nominated the ultra liberal Stevens to the Supreme Court.

[adiaireton8]

My goodness, you'd throw out a reasoned intelligent candidate over one issue? If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. Teach your children it's wrong. But, pun intended, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!

Replace the word "abortion" with "genocide" or "child abuse" and watch where the logic leads.

-A8