Except it's not, is it? Legal on demand, and legal under certain circumstances are opposing arguments. Legal on demand (without exceptions) is only 35%.

But yeah, not just legal under certain circumstances, but legal if taxpayers don't have to pay for it would give that much larger side a healthy majority.

Even I'd be on your side, but why would we still be arguing?

Hey, come to think of it Rivr, and just because I'm interested, and the Scott Brown angle seems to be dying here anyway - where do you stand on late terms?

No, they're not opposing arguments at all. I support it being legal on demand, in certain circumstances.

Taxpayers shouldn't be paying for any medical stuff except for temporary exceptions for those in dire straights. However, given the choice between paying for a kid for 18 years and paying for an abortion, as a taxpayer I choose paying for an abortion. Any fiscally conservative person would. And like it or not, those are the two choices.


I'm against late terms, hence the "with exceptions". After 20 weeks I think it should be illegal except when the woman's life is in danger.

__________________


To tax the larger incomes at a higher percentage than the smaller, is to lay a tax on industry and economy; to impose a penalty on people for having worked harder and saved more than their neighbors. ~ John Stuart Mill

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
Success Freaks

The only mistake the RNC can make with regard to abortion, contraception, homosexual marraige etc. is to allow the left to make those trivial things the issue in the election instead of the economy,unemployment,national debt, national security et.al.

__________________
ΜΌΛΌΝ ΛΆΒΈ (come and take them)

Al Gore didn't invent the internet, but he did invent global warming

Actually the pro-life is about wanting elective abortions to be illegal.There is no such thing as pro-choice and pro-life at the same time. You are either for abortion being legal which makes you pro-choice or you are against it which makes you pro-life.

Pro-life | Define Pro-life at Dictionary.com
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life.

Pro-choice | Define Pro-choice at Dictionary.com
supporting or advocating legalized abortion.

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

Scott Brown is a RINO, of course he would say something like that.

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

Given that most now consider themselves "pro-life" and would grant exceptions for rape and incest, but never for late term abortions, how is it that the Democrat platform which approves of late term or partial birth abortions is more mainstream or even palatable?

And how is Obama who supported a bill to allow the terminations of delivered babies that somehow survived an abortion any more extreme that that GOP senate candidate in Missouri?

__________________
Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit. Mahatma Gandhi

That's a rather disengenius statement on many levels.

For one thing - the survey that showed "most people consider themselves "pro-life" doesn't distinquish between those who might believe each person has a right to their own choice but would choose pro-life for themselves and those who feel that pro-life is the only choice for everyone.

The other thing is partial birth and late term abortions are two very different things. Partial birth is a procedure that can be done even fairly early in the pregnancy - it's poorly defined which is why banning it leaves a big loophole. Late term is generally considered to be the third trimester. Even though most people oppose late term abortions and, in fact - most states ban it with exceptions only for medical or life of mother reasons. Those exceptions are important and I think few people would say even a late term abortion should be banned if the mother's life is in danger.

The Democratic platform states:

The Republican Platform states:

Now...we come to "mainstream" and "palatable". Palatable: that's really a matter of opinion isn't it? The Republican might seem more "palatable" through it's verbage exploiting people's fears and pushing a need to have much more done at the federal level but, like the example of late term abortion - it is already mostly illegal and where it isn't, it's important to keep an exception.

As far as "mainstream", I see the more moderately worded Democratic version to be so. I would look at the Republican statetment: ...we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed... and see how very clearly that can allow for no exceptions except, maybe - just maybe - the life of the mother. It goes on to outline specific things they oppose and would like to end but not ONCE does it state an exception.

So...you tell me? I suppose it depends on your viewpoint.


What does one have to do with the other?

__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.

What I don't get is that the Republican Party goes around the country preaching that they are the Party of small Government. They tell you they want the Government out of our lives. The business of Government is Military and not much else. Yet when it comes to peoples rights they will amend the Constitution to fit their own preconceived notion of what life should be.

Women should have the right to choose.. It's not the Governments business, period. The same goes for other social issues, but I'll leave it at that since this topic is abortion related.

So what is it that gives Republicans the Idea that they can dictate what someone else decides to do with their body? Why does the Government have a roll in when a Woman has a child and when she doesn't?

__________________

What you, and others, fail to acknowledge is the fact that many of those Republicans honestly feel that a fetus is not just some blob of tissue to be exercised like some annoying wart. They honestly and sincerely believe that it is a human life. And the fact that this fetus has its own unique DNA different from that of its mother means that its NOT just "her body". And thus it NOT just a matter of the them wanting to control something but they honestly feel they are protecting a human life.

I dont expect you to adopt this viewpoint, but to ignore it and ascribe their motives as merely some onerous and nefarious will to control the lives of women is intellectually dishonest.

__________________
Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit. Mahatma Gandhi