You've missed my point and interjected a wacky nonsequitur. My point was that taking the position that abortion should be legal is not equivalent (morally or otherwise) to participating in an abortion, just as taking the position that adultery should be legal is not equivalent to participating in adultery.
Those who are for the religion of murder of the unborn are usally the same who are against freedom of religious choice in public schools.
I don't know what religion you are talking about, but anti-abortion zealots like you are being totally inconsistent if you think that the state is entitled to force a woman to bear children but the state is not entitled to force a woman to send her children to a school where prayer is prohibited. (I don't think the state is entitled to do either myself.)
Who is more likely to commit adultury within the week, President Bush or Bill Clinton?
Another nonsequitur. Coulter didn't limit her remarks to Bush and Clinton. Had she done so it appears that she would have been on much firmer ground.
Which camp champions the cause of adultury as a basic right?
I don't know of any political parties that "champion the cause of adultury as a basic right". I do know that plenty of Republican and Democratic office holders commit adultery.
Go get any 20 Republicans off the street and any 20 Democrates. Then ask each one who is more likely to vote for a candidate based on character.
Republicans and Democrats both seem to be quite willing to vote for candidates with deep character flaws, as their respective senatorial nominations in Arkansas vividly demonstrate.
Depends on what you mean by "participate." Legalization certainly encourages action. And taking a life is not a Constitutional right. Abortion has yet to be proven void of taking human life, so the assertion that what the woman is doing is not affecting another's life, cannot be made.
"I don't think the state is entitled to do either myself."
Maybe not, but I must be forced to pay for state schools that do not allow one to chose freely to worship God by praying to Him publicly, or to conduct Bible studies on school grounds while every other belief and offensive anti-Christian, socialist doctrine under the sun but Christianity is vocalized and represented publicly.
"Another nonsequitur. Coulter didn't limit her remarks to Bush and Clinton. Had she done so it appears that she would have been on much firmer ground."
I was merely demonstrating the differences in idealologies by reference to two popular icons of both camps. You tried to assert that both parties accept each other's morality, which is simply not true.
"I do know that plenty of Republican and Democratic office holders commit adultery."
No denial of that fact here, but which party champions paying for both multiple children out of wedlock and abortion? Conservative Republicans tend to want to see the mother take responsibility and care for the baby rather than live a lifestyle of adulterous affairs.
" Republicans and Democrats both seem to be quite willing to vote for candidates with deep character flaws, as their respective senatorial nominations in Arkansas vividly demonstrate."
Yes, I know scum exists on either side. Some don't mind, but most of the moral conservatives are Republicans. Are you trying to assert that no moral differences exist between Republican and Democrat idealologies?
Goodnight everybody.