[Bratch]

Full quote for perspective:

“I’m pro choice, and here’s why,” Lahren said.

“I am a constitutional, y’know, someone that loves the Constitution. I’m someone that’s for limited government. So I can’t sit here and be a hypocrite and say I’m for limited government but I think the government should decide what women do with their bodies.

I can sit here and say that, as a Republican and I can say, you know what, I’m for limited government, so stay out of my guns, and you can stay out of my body as well…”

[ozaukeemom]

I honestly don’t care why. She supports murder. Should we be allowed to kill someone who lives with us because we want government to stay out of our homes? Why does my roommate have more protection than an innocent baby?

[McBuff]

It's not about you, Tomi. . .it's about the other person in the womb. When life begins is a mystery. . .You, therefore, cannot assert that life only begins after birth just because that assertion suits you. . .and yes, neither can one unequivocally assert when life begins. . however, what is not a mystery is that life is precious, therefore it is incumbant upon society to protect life, and thus, err on the side of life. . .not err on the side of the assumption that a fetus is not "life."

Therefore it is about protecting those who cannot protect themselves and I believe that is a responsibility of government, albeit limited.

[Architect of Avalon]

She gave a cheap excuse for killing innocent little babies.

[Sam Gamgee]

That doesn’t make it any better for me. She slyly avoids the point that the Constitution protects each of us from murder, including our children to be. She is willfully ignorant on this issue. That makes it worse.

[Yaelle]

“I can’t sit here and be a hypocrite and say I’m for limited government but I think the government should decide what women do with their bodies.”

---

Wow, quite limited. Not government, cognitive thinking. I can sit HERE and know that even as laws are created and passed and enforced that go against our founding documents, I am not hypocritical in wishing the laws were done away with if they are against life and freedom.

I suppose this non mother doesn’t understand that less than three weeks after sex a baby has a beating heart. Our symbol of life. That she out of convenience no doubt prefers to make a baby disappear rather than give it the freedom of its continuing life. Because, you know, career.

Women have been granted a magnificent gift because Gd trusts them to sacrifice for their babies. Some women do not understand that they were given their bodies in part to care for other people’s bodies. It’s only a “Hey, this is MY body” if she was raped. (And yes, for a real rape victim I support the morning after pill which is progesterone in a high dose making the uterus a more difficult place for a fertilized egg if there should be one in the tubes, which there probably isn’t.) If she had sex, she needed to take responsibility, the one granted by her Creator, to care for any children resulting. At least to care for them until they can be safely adopted.