I opined yesterday on the foolishness (in my view) of excluding civil unions in the GOP platform. That's nothing, though, because the party elders have topped themselves by introducing language banning all abortions, even in case of rape or incest.
This is foolish. Never mind the huge gender gap Romney has with women, it really feeds into the war-on-women, back to the fifties storyline that Democrats and their media helpers are pushing. I don't understand why Republicans are so determined to be so exclusive, and I don't understand why they don't appear to have the slightest bit of concern that their approach alienates so many...particularly in the wake of the Akin disaster. Even a pro-lifer can understand-even if they don't support-those exceptions. What are they thinking? Don't they know the media is going to be shouting about this from the rooftops?
Oh, and there's another reason to oppose this idea: it gives 'women's health advocate' Sandra Fluke another opportunity to spout her nonsense.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Sally, Democrats will tell you most Americans favor abortion rights. And that's true, as far as it goes. But what they won't tell you is only for the first trimester. Unlimited abortion on demand polls at about 25%, which not coincidentally is about the same number of hardcore Democrats.
I say lets have the debate on this so called "war on women". Start trotting out the partial birth abortion video. Talk about the abortion mill numbers and how much tax-payers spend on killing babies?
Democrats don't want that debate, they want to intimidate us.
The GOP is on the right in this. For far too many people, abortion is an all-or-nothing deal either way they see it. Want to hand power to the Democrats for a long ways to come? Isolate the social conservatives from the party by officially supporting abortion in some cases. I just was telling someone yesterday that I would not support someone who supported "abortion rights" (if it is clear that a candidate is trying to get the ball rolling, not that they are fine with abortion, I may hesitantly vote for them if the alternative is still worse), and I know there are plenty of voters who hold even stronger viewpoints than that. Such a move will turn this from a "war on women" to a war on pro-lifers.
So in your view, no exceptions for rape or incest? That's just too harsh a stance to too many people. Do you really think it's thumbing your nose to the pro-life movement to have the exceptions?
If it's all or nothing then nothing changes and it will be all. There has to be a compromise position.
I don't like abortion but for rape, incest, and your damn stupid ass 16 year old getting herself in trouble I want it. Plus, if some crackhead or meth addict wants an abortion, hey I'm gonna be there for them with my tax money. Cheaper than raising the next generation of criminals.
Again, I say abortion on demand the first trimester unless it's a know habitual drug user in which case we abort the baby and shoot the friggin' druggie in the head with a .50 Action Express Desert Eagle and dump their body in the projects.
THIS is a good compromise!
Post a Comment