Regarding abortion, aren't Palin and Obama both technically 'extremists'?
Can we just be honest about that Obama supporters? As a fiscal conservative, I think abortion should be legal but limited....your guy Barry seems think we should have drive through abortion clinics spotting the land...and then has the nerve to say that he doesn't know when life begins? Why didn't he just say what he believed? He believes that life begins after 9 months and the baby is out of the womb.
Here is documentation to back me up.
Most Americans are middle of the road when it comes to abortion...they want it restricted and the vast majority are against partial birth abortion....BHO can't get enough of abortion.
So, can we just admit this guy is just as extreme idealogically on the issue as Sarah Palin.?
Linda. We can state what we 'believe'. It's not that hard. I don't believe in God, but I believe life begins at conception. Isn't that weird? I mean, it's a scientific thing for me......once the sperm gets into that egg.....well....it's going to eventually get eyes, legs, a brain etc....
At least I state a belief and why I have it. It's too much for BHO to even do that and that guy wants to be PREZ?
- Charles DLv 41 decade agoFavorite Answer
'Here is documentation to back me up.'
Actually, your documentation does NOT back you up.
'He believes that life begins after 9 months'
It doesn't say that in your 'documentation'. At Saddleback (transcript: http://www.rickwarrennews.com/transcript/ ), he hardly said anything like what you're claiming.
'BHO can't get enough of abortion.'
Where in your documentation does it indicate that? As he said at Saddleback, his being pro-choice does not mean that he is pro-abortion. He would like to see the abortion rate drop, JUST LIKE THE REST OF US. He has taken steps to achieve that: http://mediamatters.org/items/200804020009?f=s_sea...
'the vast majority are against partial birth abortion'
The insinuation that Obama is for it has been debunked numerous times here at Yahoo Answers, so you have no excuse for reposting it. From your own documentation:
1) 'Ok for state to restrict late-term partial birth abortion'
2) 'Although these bills [banning PBA] included an exception to save the life of the mother, they didn't include anything about abortions necessary to protect the health of the mother. The legislation defined a fetus as a person, & could have criminalized virtually all abortion.'
To explain the GOP strategy behind (2) a little more, these bills were designed as 'wedge' legislation. They were designed for just for the sort of attack that you are purveying. When a bill-authoring group does this, they put in one horrible provision (the 'infanticide' part of the bill) and package it with a bunch of other provisions that assault a woman's right to choose. Then, when someone votes against the bill to protect that right, they say the vote was over the 'infanticide.'
Articles that spin such legislation as 'infanticide' are little more than gullibility tests, and I'm afraid you flunked it. Didn't this story seem a little implausible to you from the start? You're being intellectually lazy, letting headlines and ratings do the thinking for you, without looking below the headline to see if it's really supported or not.
'I believe life begins at conception.'
Actually, it begins before conception. The unfertilized egg is a live, respiring cell.
- 1 decade ago
Sorry, but you are wrong. To say a person can not, under any circumstances what so ever, have an abortion is not the same as saying a person can chose to have one or chose not to have one. Palins stance is extreme, unyielding, unfeeling, unfair, and insulting to the intelligence of American women, whereas Obama's stance leaves room for personal beliefs. Under Obama's ideology a Christian can chose not to have an abortion. Under Palin's ideology you can not have an abortion regardless of you own religious believes or personal convictions, or personal situation surrounding the conception.
P.S. - as a "fiscal conservative" how could you possibly support the Republican party after the way the Bush administration has butchered the budget?
- kpk02Lv 61 decade ago
I don't know if it's a common belief or not, but what should be the position of most people is that the federal government has no business getting involved. It should be the decision of individual state governments.
My personal opinion is that the issue of abortion is the least of my concerns for the next 4-8 years with everything else that's going on. Yet another reason why the federal government shouldn't even be getting involved. They have too many other important concerns they should be focused on.
- Wayne GLv 51 decade ago
I would agree, and we can also agree that no matter who the president or VP is, abortion will never be overturned. The Pres and VP don't have the power to do that. But one's stance on the issue speaks volumes about an individual. And to be in favor of murdering a baby born after a botched abortion is unfathomable. And no matter what, I don't believe our tax dollars should go into funding abortions.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 5 years ago
<<If abortion is legal, then how come countries that allow it consider killing a fetus a murder ?>> Just because something it legal doesn't mean it's right. <<If abortion is legal then we should assume that fetus is not a human.>> There's a reason you can't spell 'assume' without '***'. People who assume too much end up making asses of themselves. <<But in countries <snip> murder, how come?>> Doesn't make sense, does it - and yet, there you are advocating people merely ASSUME the government is right! <<The contest of the woman, being legal, and the medical procedure is not excuse neither a difference. So it is either both are murder or both are NOT. Right ?>> WRONG! <<Marc, perhaps you are too id**t to understand the question and put the answer "Not">> Ad hominem attacks hurt your credibility. Perhaps Marc, like me, doesn't see too much in the way of credibility when reading your question. <<mnwomen you are <snip> is NOT murder.>> The term "fetus" literally means "the young in the womb". The fetus IS a living human being. Life begins at conception, not birth nor some arbitrary point in between. Therefore, every abortion constitutes the murder of an unborn human being. <<If it is NOT human then killing it is NOT a murder.>> But the fetus IS human. Therefore, abortion IS murder. <<No difference between <snip> and stupid imagination.>> What's so narrow minded about acknowledging the unborn for the living human beings they are? Since you're unable to do that, wouldn't that suggest your mind is in fact more narrow than mine? <<Billy, did you <snip> person NOT two.>> That just goes to show how schizophrenic human institutions can be - and you want to ASSUME such an institution (the government) is right.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
I agree with you. Barry wants to let a possible viable child that was being aborted to die outside the womb rather than treat that life as a being and saving it.
I am not for abortion and will certainly not consider this person as a president to this great country.
- Linda CLv 41 decade ago
I didn''t see anything in the link you added about Obama wanting drive through abortion clinics. Also, who really knows then life begins except for God.