To put a finer point on it, take this example. Suppose, in the context of a discussion on murder, I said, ‘Some people, in the heat of the moment, will choose to commit murder’.
If it were a one-for-one analogy, xzins would hound me for several hundred posts, claiming I encourage and support murder. Merely because I state a simple and obvious truth: some people DO choose to commit murder, despite the fact it is illegal.
Have you, gc, ever heard of anything so hateful and vile in your life? I can honestly say that this level of smear and dishonesty takes my breath away. I wouldn’t even expect it of a non-Christian, much less of someone who claims to follow Jesus.
Cain's comments were about the government staying out of those decisions, that those are personal decisions, and that some families to get around illegal abortions could decide to do something illegal.
So your proper analogy would have to start with you saying the government is against murder, that you think a family has to make that decision on their own, and that some families will decide to go ahead and murder.
This easily reads as a possible acceptance (encouragement?) on Cain's part for families to commit an illegal act of murder.
You can deny Cain's words all you want, Fantasy, but they are what they are in black and white there for everyone to read.
All along you've used adjectives like vile, hateful, and dishonest to describe me, but when I say you've simply sold out to your candidate despite his words, you get all huffy about mentioning you personally.
That's another reason I'm having trouble taking your logic seriously. You don't argue seriously.