I can’t argue with you since you obviously won’t get behind someone unless they unequivocally tell you they’ll make abortions illegal, even if their previous record suggests otherwise. That’s flawless logic.
So you’re saying a guy can never change? What about Ronald Reagen and Bush Senior. RONALD REAGAN WAS A FLIP FLOPPER. How come we don’t have flip flops for him?
george - 07:10am on 10/19/2007
I’m not saying a guy can never change. But it’s not the only issue he’s flip flopped on. I think neither Romney nor Guliani believe they are far enough to the right to get a commanding lead for the nomination (even though Rudy leads in most polls), but I admire Guliani for sticking to his guns about issues that a lot of conservatives clearly wouldn’t agree with.
I also think people go to extremes in terms of Guliani’s position on abortion. Yes, he doesn’t want to make them universally illegal. But that doesn’t mean he’s the biggest pro-abortionist the world has ever seen, and people think he’s going to start violating the hyde amendment and lying about the type of judges he would appoint, and that’s simply untrue. If he’s going to lie about that stuff, why wouldn’t he just lie and say he’s a pro-lifer? It doesn’t add up.
I’m not saying you should get behind someone who goes against what you believe in. But let’s not go crazy either. Rudy is more moderate than a lot of conservatives might want on some issues, but let’s face it, he’s not going to start appointing activist judges and requesting federal abortion funding.
Bags - 07:10am on 10/19/2007
You’re a 1/2 baked conservative, my friend.
So this one issue nullifies every other conservative belief I have?
Bags - 07:10am on 10/19/2007
I admire Guliani for sticking to his guns
That’s precisely where we differ. I don’t admire someone who is pro-legal-abortion.
george - 08:10am on 10/19/2007
I don’t admire someone who is pro-legal-abortion.
I kind of figured that :p
But the point I’m trying to make is, there’s a difference between someone who is pro-family but doesn’t want abortions to be illegal, and being a fanatical pro-abortionist as many are falsely making Rudy out to be.
Bags - 08:10am on 10/19/2007
I kind of figured that :p
That implies you are OK that he is pro-legal-abortion.
and being a fanatical pro-abortionist as many are falsely making Rudy out to be.
fanatical killer vs. a non fanatical killer? HUH?
#^$@#$!@#&^@$#$
Vote for Rudy because he only wants to kill babies if they aren’t wanted!
george - 09:10am on 10/19/2007
Ok, so there’s absolutely no middle ground? Either you support abolishing all abortions in all forms in any cirumstance, or you’re a bloodthirsty baby killer? Is that correct?
Bags - 10:10am on 10/19/2007
Once we establish and admit the truth about abortion, which is that it’s killing a human being, and is done almost exclusively for birth control purposes, then we might be able to negotiate in good faith for a real solution. Under what conditions is it right to kill a defenseless human being? Who gets to decide?
robert108 - 10:10am on 10/19/2007
Ok, so there’s absolutely no middle ground?
Correct. Last I checked, there’s no middle ground when it comes to murder, is there?
It’s pretty obvious do not know when life begins.
george - 10:10am on 10/19/2007
Once we establish and admit the truth about abortion, which is that it’s killing a human being, and is done almost exclusively for birth control purposes, then we might be able to negotiate in good faith for a real solution. Under what conditions is it right to kill a defenseless human being? Who gets to decide?
So, that’s the truth, then? The irredeemable scientific truth is that a fruit sized lump of cells with no cognitive thought and is biologically more primitive than a fish is more important than the woman who is actually a human being? It has the potential to be a human, yes. But if that’s murder, then when does it end?
It’s pretty obvious do not know when life begins.
Is birth control murder too? Is condom use sinful? Are women and families better off breeding uncontrollably like farm aminals?
No. The truth is, it’s not fact. It’s your opinion. I don’t like abortions either. I would rather see adoptions than abortions. But the choice should be the woman’s or the family’s, not the state’s. Fine, describe to me the gory details of a partial birth abortion, but don’t mention the fact that they are the vast minority of abortions, and are usually done due the fetus being malformed or the mother’s health being in jeopardy.
I’m not telling you your opinion is unequivocally the wrong one. But to tell me I’m wrong and that it’s an utter absolute fact that the potential for human life is the equivalent of human life when in reality that is based on your own personal moral or religious beliefs, makes you sound extreme.
So you’re saying a guy can never change? What about Ronald Reagen and Bush Senior. RONALD REAGAN WAS A FLIP FLOPPER. How come we don’t have flip flops for him?
I’m not saying a guy can never change. But it’s not the only issue he’s flip flopped on. I think neither Romney nor Guliani believe they are far enough to the right to get a commanding lead for the nomination (even though Rudy leads in most polls), but I admire Guliani for sticking to his guns about issues that a lot of conservatives clearly wouldn’t agree with.
I also think people go to extremes in terms of Guliani’s position on abortion. Yes, he doesn’t want to make them universally illegal. But that doesn’t mean he’s the biggest pro-abortionist the world has ever seen, and people think he’s going to start violating the hyde amendment and lying about the type of judges he would appoint, and that’s simply untrue. If he’s going to lie about that stuff, why wouldn’t he just lie and say he’s a pro-lifer? It doesn’t add up.
I’m not saying you should get behind someone who goes against what you believe in. But let’s not go crazy either. Rudy is more moderate than a lot of conservatives might want on some issues, but let’s face it, he’s not going to start appointing activist judges and requesting federal abortion funding.
So this one issue nullifies every other conservative belief I have?
That’s precisely where we differ. I don’t admire someone who is pro-legal-abortion.
I kind of figured that :p
But the point I’m trying to make is, there’s a difference between someone who is pro-family but doesn’t want abortions to be illegal, and being a fanatical pro-abortionist as many are falsely making Rudy out to be.
That implies you are OK that he is pro-legal-abortion.
fanatical killer vs. a non fanatical killer? HUH?
#^$@#$!@#&^@$#$
Vote for Rudy because he only wants to kill babies if they aren’t wanted!
Ok, so there’s absolutely no middle ground? Either you support abolishing all abortions in all forms in any cirumstance, or you’re a bloodthirsty baby killer? Is that correct?
Once we establish and admit the truth about abortion, which is that it’s killing a human being, and is done almost exclusively for birth control purposes, then we might be able to negotiate in good faith for a real solution. Under what conditions is it right to kill a defenseless human being? Who gets to decide?
Correct. Last I checked, there’s no middle ground when it comes to murder, is there?
It’s pretty obvious do not know when life begins.
So, that’s the truth, then? The irredeemable scientific truth is that a fruit sized lump of cells with no cognitive thought and is biologically more primitive than a fish is more important than the woman who is actually a human being? It has the potential to be a human, yes. But if that’s murder, then when does it end?
Is birth control murder too? Is condom use sinful? Are women and families better off breeding uncontrollably like farm aminals?
No. The truth is, it’s not fact. It’s your opinion. I don’t like abortions either. I would rather see adoptions than abortions. But the choice should be the woman’s or the family’s, not the state’s. Fine, describe to me the gory details of a partial birth abortion, but don’t mention the fact that they are the vast minority of abortions, and are usually done due the fetus being malformed or the mother’s health being in jeopardy.
I’m not telling you your opinion is unequivocally the wrong one. But to tell me I’m wrong and that it’s an utter absolute fact that the potential for human life is the equivalent of human life when in reality that is based on your own personal moral or religious beliefs, makes you sound extreme.