Time To Unmask John McCain's Record

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

That is my stance as well. Who am I to tell a woman she must put her body through a pregnancy and all that goes along with it just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc, etc?

Who are you to tell a man he has to pay child support "just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc."? Doesn't the woman have the abortion option? So if she elects not to use it, why should the man have to pay for 18+ years?

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor
That's definitely not what I'm talking about in my 'pro choice' opinion. Are partial birth abortions even legal in the US?

Yes, republicans sent a partial birth abortion bill outlawing the practice several times to Clinton and he vetoed it everytime. I just done understand how anybody can support such a gruesome practice. It is straight out of a horror flick.

Now that you say that I do remember that veto. I would support a partial birth abortion ban except in a case where continuing the pregnancy would result in death for the mother.

 

[jonks]

"His Shocking Record On Reproductive Rights"

Sufficiently dealt with at this point but I'll note that only someone as partisan as jpeyton (or Ariana Huffington) could possibly be shocked at a republican being pro-life.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

That is my stance as well. Who am I to tell a woman she must put her body through a pregnancy and all that goes along with it just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc, etc?

Who are you to tell a man he has to pay child support "just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc."? Doesn't the woman have the abortion option? So if she elects not to use it, why should the man have to pay for 18+ years?

Where did I say a man should be required to pay child support for an accidental pregnancy? Oh wait, I didn't.

 

[BassBomb]

I am more scared that they are voting for people out of spite or out of blindness without knowing what the person is standing for.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

That is my stance as well. Who am I to tell a woman she must put her body through a pregnancy and all that goes along with it just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc, etc?

Who are you to tell a man he has to pay child support "just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc."? Doesn't the woman have the abortion option? So if she elects not to use it, why should the man have to pay for 18+ years?

Where did I say a man should be required to pay child support for an accidental pregnancy? Oh wait, I didn't.

So you're against a man having to pay child support in an unwanted pregnancy?

 

[ElFenix]

i'm pro-death so i'm voting for the muslim.

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Who are you to tell a man he has to pay child support "just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc."? Doesn't the woman have the abortion option? So if she elects not to use it, why should the man have to pay for 18+ years?

there is a big time proof problem there.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Mursilis
So you're against a man having to pay child support in an unwanted pregnancy?

Correct.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i'm pro-death so i'm voting for the muslim.

So, who are you going to write in on the ballot?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i'm pro-death so i'm voting for the muslim.

So, who are you going to write in on the ballot?

the democrats are a major party even in texas

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i'm pro-death so i'm voting for the muslim.

So, who are you going to write in on the ballot?

the democrats are a major party even in texas

But none of the (D)'s running for president are muslim.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i'm pro-death so i'm voting for the muslim.

So, who are you going to write in on the ballot?

the democrats are a major party even in texas

But none of the (D)'s running for president are muslim.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Thats right. Because wanting to not kill a fetus is just plain stupid.

Wow, you really are an idiot, aren't you? I've probably posted more threads in opposition to abortion than anyone else in this entire forum. Now you take something I said completely out of context to make me look like a baby killer. Now either go work on your reading comprehension or DIAF.

Dude chill the fuck out. It was sarcastic.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: blackangst1
I never understood the fear of calling abortion what it is: abortion. We use words like "Right to Choose". "Reproductive Choice". Call it what it is! The only real difference between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice is abortion! "Reproductive Rights"? What a crock of SHIT. Reproduction has ALREADY HAPPENED! Lets call it what it is: Termination rights!

Anyway. I dont even know why this is an issue. A presidents view on abortion has ZERO bearing on ANYTHING. It has about as much effect as what flavor of ice cream he prefers.

I never understood the fear of calling a ban on abortion what it is: forced morality. We use words like "Right to Life", "Pro Abortion". Call it what it is! What a crock of SHIT. Right to life means having control over your life. Let's call it what it is: "You do what we tell you when we tell you"!

See how easy it is to make a counter argument to a position that shouldn't be anything other than a decision made by a mother, father, their physician and anyone that they feel needs to be consulted?

I would never, ever advocate an abortion of any child but I also realize that I don't want government guiding my choices in life and or in death so I should stay off of the slope before it gets even slipperier.

Uh....I know the anti abortion people you refer to DO call it a ban on abortion. Who the fuck are you talking about?

And speaking of government legislating *cough* morality, I think we need to push for the lowering of the age of consent to 11. Get the fuck out of my sex life. If she wants my dick in her, thats none of your business.

/nod

 

[glenn1]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

That is my stance as well. Who am I to tell a woman she must put her body through a pregnancy and all that goes along with it just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc, etc?

I support abortion rights also. There's probably many millions less "progressive" voters now because of it.

Be pro-choice, the liberal's socially acceptable method for being racist.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Mursilis
Two questions on that stance:

1) What's your position on drug legalization?

2) Does the gov't have the right to prohibit certain physical punishments ('child abuse') of children by their parents?

1. Go for it. :thumbsup:

2. The gov't already has laws against child abuse and a child =/= a fetus.

How do you explain Scott Peterson's conviction?

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Genx87
Give me a break. This isnt a sex issue, but a life issue. That is like saying women shouldnt have a say in creating laws against murder if a murder is committed by a man.

Calling it reproductive rights is putting a shine on a turd, that turd being abortion.

Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

Thats pretty much what I said...so how am I 180 degrees backwards?

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

That is my stance as well. Who am I to tell a woman she must put her body through a pregnancy and all that goes along with it just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc, etc?

Who are you to tell a man he has to pay child support "just because a rubber broke, the pill failed, etc."? Doesn't the woman have the abortion option? So if she elects not to use it, why should the man have to pay for 18+ years?

Where did I say a man should be required to pay child support for an accidental pregnancy? Oh wait, I didn't.

So you're against a man having to pay child support in an unwanted pregnancy?

I am.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Mursilis
So you're against a man having to pay child support in an unwanted pregnancy?

Correct.

Well, I disagree, but at least you're being consistent.

 

[Skitzer]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
I never understood the fear of calling abortion what it is: abortion. We use words like "Right to Choose". "Reproductive Choice". Call it what it is! The only real difference between Pro-Life and Pro-Choice is abortion! "Reproductive Rights"? What a crock of SHIT. Reproduction has ALREADY HAPPENED! Lets call it what it is: Termination rights!

Anyway. I dont even know why this is an issue. A presidents view on abortion has ZERO bearing on ANYTHING. It has about as much effect as what flavor of ice cream he prefers.

QFT :thumbsup:

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Robor
Gotta love the men in this thread who are in favor of laws that would force their moral outlook on women. :roll:

Why? Lots of non-parents tell parents they can't discipline Junior with cigarette burns, non-drinkers tell drinkers they can't drive drunk, non-bankers tell bankers they can't falsify security records, and on and on and on. Law is nothing more than morality codified. Are you in favor of no laws?

Uhmm, laws are a lot different then codified morality. The reason why it is important to have murder be illegal isn't so a sky beardo doesn't get mad at us, it is because society would be unable to function if we were all going around killing one another. The reason you can't cheat on your taxes isn't because lying is wrong, it's because then the government couldn't function because nobody would pay them. And so on...

 

[senseamp]

If USSC overturns Roe, it will make GOP a permanent minority party until it's reinstated. So I say, Go Johnny Boy, Go!
Complete the destruction of your party that GWB started.

 

[NeoV]

I have to ask internet tough guy blackanst1 a question..

"Anyway. I dont even know why this is an issue. A presidents view on abortion has ZERO bearing on ANYTHING. It has about as much effect as what flavor of ice cream he prefers."

Even you aren't that naive, are you?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Skitzer

Originally posted by: blackangst1
A presidents view on abortion has ZERO bearing on ANYTHING. It has about as much effect as what flavor of ice cream he prefers.

QFT :thumbsup:

I guess you guys missed that little "how a bill becomes a law" thing. :roll:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...ictims_of_Violence_Act

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Genx87
Give me a break. This isnt a sex issue, but a life issue. That is like saying women shouldnt have a say in creating laws against murder if a murder is committed by a man.

Calling it reproductive rights is putting a shine on a turd, that turd being abortion.

Perhaps, but Blackangst still has it 180 degrees backwards when he suggests the debate is really pro-abortion vs. pro-life. Like so many people, while I personally dislike abortion, I nonetheless support each woman's right to make her own choices. I am therefore NOT pro-abortion, but I am pro-choice.

Similarly, the phrase "pro-life" is in most cases a misnomer since there is no general agenda to promote life -- anti-war, anti-capital punishment, feed the hungry, free health care (or even free prenatal care), etc. -- but rather a focus on stopping abortions. Therefore, it is more accurate to frame that position as anti-abortion. It always struck me as a bit strange that they hide from that label, preferring instead to mask their true agenda behind the "pro-life" euphemism. Are they ashamed to oppose abortion or just pro-deception?

Thats pretty much what I said...so how am I 180 degrees backwards?

I think it has something to do with the part when you said calling it the "Right to Choose" was NOT calling it what it is, whereas I'm saying "Right to Choose" is exactly what it is. That 180 degrees backwards.