Do you think the fact that five days ago the republican nominee formally announced that he was against the current pro-life party platform on abortion, and that he was personally committed to ‘health of the mother’ meaning abortion on demand, is worthy of conservatives discussing it?
What. Is. Your. Proposed. Solution?
If you can offer any alternatives to voting Romney or Obama, let’s hear them.
You wanna talk abortions? Let’s talk abortions.
There are seven possible outcomes for 2012-2016.
1: Obama elected: Funding for abortions rises and number of abortions goes up.
2: Obama elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof stays the same.
3: Obama elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof is reduced.
4: Romney elected: Funding for abortions rises and number of abortions goes up.
5: Romney elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof stays the same.
6: Romney elected: Abortion percentage and funding thereof is reduced.
7: Jesus returns and it won’t matter at all.
Now, which of these is most likely to happen?
I will laugh in the face of anyone who claims that the funding and number of abortions will go down under an Obama presidency. He is the most radical pro-abortion candidate we have had, EVER. For that matter, if he’s elected, then Obamacare WON’T be repealed and the abortion funding that’s contained within it will be put into effect. Not to mention the many possible executive orders that he’ll send out.
On the other hand, Romney’s promised to repeal Obamacare. Oh, sure, maybe he said repeal and replace, but if he gets into office, there won’t be a Democrat supermajority calling the shots. Even in a worst-case scenario and Obamacare DOESN’T get repealed at all or gets replaced with a Romneycare redux, the worst that will happen is that the number of abortions will stay the same as it would be under Obama.
So if you’re talking strictly about number of children killed under each Presidency? Obama wins on number of dead bodies in dumpsters, hands down.
If you cared about the number of abortions in this country at ALL, you would get behind Romney and then try to force him to a pro-life position. Because at least Romney, as he has shown, is amenable to conservative and pro-life influence, unlike the radical in the White House at the moment. He’s far from perfect, but even if there were only a 5% chance that the life of an unborn child would be saved, I’d vote for him, because we know that child would be murdered if Obama was prez.
YOUR constant kvetching about Romney and attempts to suppress the vote are making it more likely for Obama to win, and for more babies to be murdered if he does. I hope you’re happy with that on your conscience.
But I could be wrong. Please, if there is any position that we could take that would result in fewer murdered babies in which we DON’T have to support Romney for prez, tell me. I’d love to hear it.