Bramps, we can plainly see where you’re coming from and where your questions lead. The two main problems you’ve posed on this long thread both rely on backing the listener into a corner and demanding they give you an answer they don’t want to and then chastising them in advance for not answering the way you think they’ve been trapped.
This style of setting up leading hypotheticals is not a pleasing form of discussion and sounds a lot like other posters on FR who like to bully those who choose not to vote for Romney.
Agreed. If I’m in court and I hear a loaded question like that, I’m objecting and I’m winning the objection. It gives dictatorial control to the interrogator, which is not conducive to genuine exploration of an issue.
Now, on the other hand, I had law school professors who loved to “slice the baloney” using exactly that kind of tightly controlled hypothetical. An in the classromm of course they really were the dictator, so what can a poor 1L do? And if, in law school, I had been presented with such a question, I might have answered, “pray, then flip a coin,” because on either island my children would likely be lost to the same kingdom of darkness, unless God should grant a miracle.
********************************************************
And bramps, as for Reagan (and I know you’re hearing this from others, but I thought I would reiterate it for effect), you know he felt duped by his lawyers, right? He didn’t see the “health of the mother” loophole. He was never for abortion on demand:
http://www.lifenews.com/2008/03/11/nat-3790/
So to equate him with Romney on that issue is flat out misleading. There’s another word for that, but I will assume you had no intent to intentionally mislead.
BTW, Romney’s alleged conversion to prolife was in November, 2004, right?
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2876445/posts
But here’s the interesting thing. I was working as a legal intern for Liberty Counsel after than alleged conversion, and we were having people from MA begging us to get involved in supporting their conscientious objection against the Romney administration’s pro-abortion policies. He was still running roughshod over these people AFTER his “conversion,” still picking proabort judicial nominees, and even to this day will not sign on to the Susan B Anthony commitments to keep proaborts out of his presidential administration.
So Romney versus Reagan? Not even in the same solar system, let alone the same ball park.