Posted on 03/30/2016 2:07:44 PM PDT by xzins
Left wing? So, if a woman takes a pill that kills a full term baby, then that is ok. Does that sound pro-life? No doctor is involved, the woman is free and clear, and the baby is dead. Nothing to see here. Move right along...
It strikes me that ‘no consequence abortion’ is very much a pro-abortion position.
I don't like Cruz much but his position is fully within this strategic plan. To say he "supports abortion" is a total lie.
This. It's just so frustrating.
Politicians must never say anything against the goddesses. Who forgot to tell Trump?
Hinckley, you’re a good person, but “no consequence abortion” is a pro-abortion position.
“No consequence illegal immigration” is a pro-illegal immigration position. Why can we see that so clearly with illegal immigration, but we want to play games with the abortion issue.
Let’s be very honest. The pro-life movement has been selling us a bill of goods, or they haven’t really considered the logical conclusion of the ‘no consequence abortion’ position.
You do realize that the historical reason women weren’t prosecuted back than was to get convictions against the abortion providers. The women being considered a victim was a more compelling case. You do also realize that women were treated differently back then as well.
So considering current times, why are women the victims? Can they not think for themselves? Can they not make their own choices? Is their testimony the only way to get a conviction? Hasn’t technology and forensic science advance far enough?
Trump actually applied sound logic, and it injured him. Sadly, he backtracked. He was told he should have known ‘the right answer’, which is ‘no consequence abortion’. He folded, and went with it. Now he believes that the woman can kill the baby without consequence.
Now we have 3 pro-abortion candidates running as conservatives. I think Kasich at least came out saying he is pro-choice.
Cruz and Trump are now diminished by the sophistry they promote.
“If...not called a cruzbot...not doing it right.”
Ha! Well said my FRiend.
Now we have 3 pro-abortion candidates running as conservatives. I think Kasich at least came out saying he is pro-choice.
To me, there is zero distance between being pro choice and pro gay marriage. The token, crafted statements about social issues made by the GOPe are completely hollow.
The difference is that abortion kills much more quickly than does homosexual behavior. But make no mistake...both kill.
According to your pretzel logic, the March For Life and the Susan B Anthony list are both pro-abortion!
My bible thumping sensitivities seem to be equally offended by both.
Your bible isn’t too fond of killing babies or of unnatural, death delivering sex.
Yes. March for Life is pro-abortion.
Let me clarify. IF the tweet I saw yesterday was correct - M4L released a comment that No. Women should not be punished.
Sorry, but that is NOT a conservative anti-abortion POV.
JMHO.
Sorry, but when your logic tells you that the major pro-life groups are “pro-abortion”, you should probably recheck your logic.
Follow my logic here..
If a woman hires a hit man to kill her husband, should she also be punished?
Yes? Then why not punish a woman who hires a hit man (doctor) to kill her baby?
Look. I understand why the “pro-life” groups are taking the softer approach. It’s all about being PC.
And I get that. Yes, if hard-core fanatics like me chilled out and allowed wiggle room (compromise) and agreed to give women a free pass, or allow abortions in case of rape or incest, or allowed abortions up to 10-15 weeks or whatever - but made all other cases illegal - then yeah.
There would be fewer abortions. And isn’t that the goal? The pro-life groups will argue (probably right) that we will NEVER make all abortions illegal - so take what you can get right?
“I understand why the “pro-life” groups are taking the softer approach. It’s all about being PC.”
No, it’s not at all about being PC. It’s about stopping abortions.
You see, if pro-life groups (and candidates) were to run around saying “we’re going to outlaw abortion and prosecute women who get abortions for murder”, then we play right into the “war on women” narrative, we let the left dictate the discussion in a light that is favorable to them, and we don’t get pro-life laws passed.
On the other hand, if we are pragmatic, and target the act of abortion without demonizing the women who may have sought them, then we have a much better chance of achieving our goals.
If all you care about is looking right, then by all means, keep doing what you are doing. I’d prefer to end abortion rather than look perfectly morally correct.
“The pro-life groups will argue (probably right) that we will NEVER make all abortions illegal - so take what you can get right?”
I don’t know of any pro-life groups that take that stance. The stance they do take is to not oppose legislation outlawing SOME abortions just because the legislation doesn’t outlaw ALL abortions. Their stance is basically: don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.