McCain needs to lighten up on Pro-Life stance
If winning the election is important to you guys, we just need McCain to lighten up on the Pro-Life stance.
Tons of us Clinton supporters are ready to vote McCain, but this is a big issue for many of us.
Petition, call and lobby for McCain to back off this issue and we'll hand the election to you.
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.blogsforjohnmccain.com/trackback/1382
yes thats a good idea
That is a good idea. I do try to tell as many people as possible to remember that is just a threat by Obama to make us Unify. Roe vs Wade is established law and unlikely to be overturned. Women have to band together and make both Parties stop using Roe vs Wade to frighten their bases.
Settled Law
Plessy v. Ferguson ... (the case on which segration's constitutionality was based) ... Was handed down in a 7-1 decision, and remained the law of the land for 58 years ... personally, I'm glad the Supreme Court saw fit to overturn that injustice.
If you check abortion laws across the world, they were determined politically by the people. As a result, many seemingly more liberal nations have laws that are more restrictive of abortion (though it is still permitted at the very early periods). This is because the people were trusted with this decision.
The pro-choice movement has spread fear that the overturn of Roe v. Wade would result in the ban of abortions. That's just not true. The people would have the opportunity to speak and determine what is best for their communities, their wives, their sisters, their daughters and themselves.
McCain & Roe v. Wade
How many women have you known that have died or gone to prison because they had an abortion? Because Roe v. Wade is the law, your answer is probably zero.
McCain has repeatedly said that he wants to overturn Roe v. If elected president, he will nominate a Supreme Court justice that will tip the court and the guarantee of being able to have safe and legal abortions will be history.
For the 100 years that abortion was illegal in the US, many, many women died or were maimed from them. If abortion becomes illegal again, the same will happen. (Except this time, 20 years to life imprisonment for the survivors is a very real possibility.)
Which conversation does McCain want parents to be able to have?
(1) With their daughter about why she chose to have an abortion?
(2) With the ER doctor about how their daughter died from an unsafe abortion?
(3) With the district attorney about their daughter facing life in state prison for having an illegal abortion?
Sadly, according to his voting record, McCain is ok with options 2 & 3.
Being pro-choice is about trusting your mother, sister, girl friend, wife, daughter, granddaughter – the women in your life - to make the decision that is right for them.
Re: McCain & Roe vs. Wade
John N, your post shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what Roe vs. Wade does.
Overturning Roe vs. Wade does not make abortion illegal. It simply returns the issue to the states to decide for themselves what is appropriate regulation. Given public opinion, some states may most likely it illegal (with exceptions for rape, incest and the mother's health), most states would most likely keep it legal but limit it to the first 6 or 12 weeks (a regulation not permitted under Roe), and some states like New York and California would most likely keep the same liberal abortion laws they already have.
You are right it is a tragedy that thousands of women died from botched abortions, and states that make abortion illegal should take the next step to provide resources and services for young women who would otherwise choose a abortion.
However, you are also ignoring the point that there have been 48,000,000 abortions (according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute) since Roe. Should these be completely ignored?
Finally, the problem with your final premise "trusting women to make the right decision for them" ... is that philosophically, the TRUTH of whether a child at 6 weeks is a life does not change based on the circumstances of the mother. Either it is a life or it isn't. The fact that one woman desperately wants that child ... while another doesn't ... does not change the truth whatever it may be. Thus, as a democratic society, we have a duty to make those hard decisions. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court in Roe took away the right of the people to act in the several states.
Roe v Wade
I would love to see John or Sarah spell it out like that.
What pro-abortionists don't tell you
The death rate from your "safe", "sterile" abortions is still running 6%. Also 25% of all women who have abortions become sterile and are unable to have more children.
Re:Pro-choice
Your right, Okay Sarah Palin is Pro-choice and so is her daughter. They chose to keep their babies alive and do not tell of them as PUNISHMENT.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Not punnishment....blessings
From what I have heard neither Palin nor her daughter views the birth of her Down Syndrone child or the upcoming birth of her daughter's child as PUNISHMENT... but rather a blessing. But I don't expect you to understand that since you borrowed the phraze "punnishment" right from a speech by the demagogue, "the obamanation that causes desolation".
You also tried the typical liberal tactic of "bait and switch" since you were unable to factually rebuttle my assertion that the abortionist argument on how safe abortions are since "Roe vs. Wade" became the "interpretated law of the land", refuses to acknowledge that 6% of pregnant mothers still die from abortions and 25% are made sterile. One very important point not made in my comment was that almost 100% of the babies die from abortion.
Oh by the way....it's not "pro-choice"...it's "pro murder".
McCain/Roe-Wade response
I'm black, a female and I'm voting for McCain BECAUSE he is pro-life and committed to that stance. I agree w/ the blogger who wrote:
"If so, what is the difference between a child that is still in the womb, at say, 8 months and 2 weeks, and a child that is born prematurely? Are you saying that the first child is not worthy of protection, and the second is?//You really want a President who tries to say there mere physical location of the baby should be the sole determiner of its protection under our laws?//Should we really be encouraging our presidential candidate to compromise on such a position, merely so can win a few votes in California? Really?"
Pro-choice says a woman and a man should have the choice...the right to end the normal development of a human being. Sorry, but we women were created in such a way that we are meant to nurture another human being for nine months, not end its life. I don't buy the "it's my body" argument. It's a separate human being within my body and we need to respect the fact that we were created for this marvelous task.
The "out of sight" factor is the problem. It numbs the conscience. Really, there is no difference b/w a 2 week old baby and a 37 week gestation baby except the location. Each needs to be fed, protected and cannot survive on its own.
Mccain and Palin: Thanks for being PRO-LIFE!
PROLIFE ALWAYS NO MATTER WHAT!!
I am for life every single time no matter what. The Lord created that baby in the woman's womb to be a viable, living being at the time of conception. No one has the right to take the life of an innocent child. Some people like to view a baby conceived out of a rape or incest as the devils seed. That couldn't be further from the truth.
God knows who you are, what you will be, and has your whole life planned out the day you were made. Just think if everyone who had thought about abortion or actually went through with having the abortion, the human life as we know it would not exist. We would be extinct.
Jeremiah 1:5
5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew [a] you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."
We have to vote for people that will stand up for the rights of human life. For those that cannot speak and would declare "I want life"! As a nation we have become complacent. We're told not to speak about politics or religion. Why? Because you might get offended. I say enough! We have to spread the "Word" and maybe we can get back to a more civilized society. So much hatred and bigotry and lack of moral standing.
Obama wants to allow for abortion up to and after the womans due date. How disgusting is that. Did you know that the lady that first declared a womans right to choose is now prolife. McCorvey has famously changed her mind about abortion and now the woman whose court case created current abortion law crusades against the practice. What does that tell you? We live in a flawed society that needs real "Change" not the change Obama spews.
Psalm 139:13-16
13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,
16 your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
Just reflect and observe the life that was given to you. You were put here for a purpose. Your mother chose "Life" for you. Be thankful and pursue happiness from every angle. Don't allow a man to dictate what you believe in. Have faith in the Lord our God.
Romans 3:22-24
22 This righteousness is given through faith in [a] Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Thank you Jesus for this day, thank you for giving me life and the knowledge and fortitude to claim your name victoriously! Thank you for allowing me to give life to four beautiful children. Thank you for giving me the wisdom to know that the life I was carrying was yours and you intrusted me with them. In Jesus name I pray.....Amen!
P.S. Just a thought that my Pastor put out.....You can't sell a kidney or any other type of organ because its ILLEGAL!! However, you have the "Choice" to kill a baby, a human life.
NO WAY Hillary Folks!
We welcome you to our candidate, but you will have to do the compromising on this issue, not us.
Pro Life....
McCain should take a "middle of the road" approach. Either extreme is not the answer, neither the far right fundamentalist christians or the far left socialist - liberals should make the decision for the rest of us.
Keep abortion legal, but set stricter limits , mandatory education classes for women about to go thru it so they can see what they are terminating and make abortion illegal after 6-8 weeks into the pregnancy when a heartbeat is detected. It would be a refinement of Roe VS Wade rather than overturning it.
The problem with your approach is ...
That the "middle of the road" approach starts with overturning Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court should never have ventured into this area, and is best decided by the people through the political process.
If you overturn Roe, you simply return the matter to the states to decide for themselves. If they want it illegal then they can make that change ... If they want to limit it to the first 6 weeks they can ... If they want more liberal laws like I imagine New York and California would want they could take that approach as well.
However, the people can't speak until the Supreme Court gets out of the way ... and that can only happen if Roe is overturned.
Sorry Senator "Terminating" is "killing" in my book
I'm not a "far right fundamentalist christian" but I believe that life begins at conception, and abortion is fundamentally wrong.
RE: Terminating
You have a right to your opinion and I respect that.
I think the current law makes it too easy to get an abortion.
If it was made completely illegal, there would be many circumstances where you'd have illegal procedures by crooked doctors who may or may not be 'qualified'
As far as the moral standpoint, I don't like abortion either, but at the same time it is not fair to expect others to accept mine or anyone else's moral view. The whole separation of church & state thing.
Re: Terminating
As a democratic society, we make moral decisions. We regulate illicit drug use. We regulate polygamy (even between consenting adults ... and permitted by some religions). We regulate sex between adults and teenagers. We regulate business disclosures to shareholders. We regulate food and drugs ... sometimes keeping potentially life saving drugs from terminally ill patients until they are FDA approved.
As democratic society, we work together to make tough moral decisions. Given the amount of moral regulation in our society ... Determining whether a 6 week old fetus is a life and whether it deserves to be protected should not be considered beyond the realm of the people to decide.
I am Catholic, but...
I am Catholic; I believe life begins at conception. That said, I don't want the government involved in a decision that could become a medical issue. Even though that may be a rare circumstance, it could be a life or death decision for the mother (who may have other children depending on her). That decision should be made between a woman, her husband, her doctor, with guidance from God, and spiritual advice from clergy if she chooses.
I wish we would stop holding candidates hostage to this very personal issue. In the 35 years since the Roe v. Wade decision, we have had GOP Presidents for 23 of those years -- yet abortion remains legal, and probably will continue to be so. I trust McCain to do the right thing; I don't trust Obama for anything.
Yes, there are many Hillary Clinton supporters who will likely be coming over to support Mac. Many of them are tired of the Democratic Party blackmailing them for their vote with this issue. The HRC supporters I know are ready to put country first, and vote for Mac.
So should murder of an already living child
be a decision, as you said, "made between a woman, her husband, her doctor, with guidance from God, and spiritual advice from clergy if she chooses."
I'm sure you would say no, that should be a crime.
If so, what is the difference between a child that is still in the womb, at say, 8 months and 2 weeks, and a child that is born prematurely? Are you saying that the first child is not worthy of protection, and the second is?
You really want a President who tries to say there mere physical location of the baby should be the sole determiner of its protection under our laws?
Should we really be encouraging our presidential candidate to compromise on such a position, merely so can win a few votes in California? Really?
Abortion remains legal because of judges, plain and simple. Slavery was legal for many years, as was segregation. But, we as a culture rose up and overturned those immoral, unjust laws.
Polls show now that the majority of Americans consider themselves pro-life. When you "split the baby" (pardon the pun) down further, an overwhelming majority of Americans disagree with abortion for anything other than to save the life of the mother, rape, and incest -- a position which is considered to be pro-life.
Yet, some advocate McCain take a position counter to this growing trend.
The fact is that with one more supreme court justice, Roe vs. Wade, as it is now, is unlikely to be sustained. Heck, even the current court has allowed restrictions on partial birth abortion, which the previous one did not.
We are very close to an important victory, both culturally, scientically (there is no good reason to abort in 95% of cases, medically speaking), and politically. If elections are not held to uphold these principles, what are elections for? Simply to elect men to office, for no reason, other than we like them a little better?
It's time for us to put politics aside and stand up on our core principles. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The moment we compromise on life is the moment we lose.
FredFan4McCain...
You make good points, but you assume that there is universal agreement on when life begins.
And even though I believe that life begins at conception, I don't want the GOVERNMENT to tell me that I have no choice but to go through with a pregnancy that has become a life-threatening situation. The main reason I don't support universal health care is because I'm not willing to put medical decisions in the hands of bureaucratic lawmakers who screw up everything. This is no different.
You suggest I should have no worries in that regard, that the justices will still provide a loophole for rape*, incest, and the life of the mother. But what the government giveth, the government can also taketh away. Hence, here we are discussing overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision that allowed for abortion on demand for over 35 years.
Progressives use the same faulty logic in their desire to reduce violent crimes: they presume that if we ban all guns, crime will magically disappear! I don't like the fact that many young women use abortion as a birth control method either, but making abortion illegal is not going to change that sad fact. Prior to 1973, women still found a way to take matters into their own hands. The wealthier women leave the country, the poorer women take to the back-alleys and coat hangers.
This is a much more complex issue than some in the pro-life community seem willing to concede.
*I've also always been very curious as to why those in the so-called pro-life community are willing to allow a loophole for a pregnancy that is the result of rape. The unborn baby is blameless in that situation; why would you want to compound one crime (rape) with another (murder, by your own description)?
Also, why are so many in the pro-life community not more opposed to war? Pope John Paul II was consistent in strongly opposing both. Why not other evangelical Christians and the rest of the pro-life community?
If he did this
he'd lose the election.
How to 'have it both ways'
McCain CAN maintain his principles and win pro-choice Hillary voters.
If you believe that abortion takes a life, you shouldn't be negotiable on that point. Period. McCain has made it clear where he stands on this as a man and as a Senator, and at least half of Americans, by any metric, agree with him. an even larger percentage don't want their tax dollars spent to fund elective abortions, which Obama supports.
Presidentially, his most significant impact an abortion policy would be appointing "constitutionalist" judges - who would review hundreds of thousands of cases, only a HANDFUL of which would have anything to do with abortion. Legally and constitutionally, abortion is a state issue, it makes philosophical and legal sense for it to be decided at the level closest the the people.
McCain is also different from other pro-life candidates because as a multi-time adoptive father, he has actively supported the alternatives.
Hillary supporters who feel their "choice" is threatened should ask themselves if they really want to continue the charade that "women's issues" is merely code for "uterus stuff." Women are impacted by the economy, energy prices, education policy and a host of other issues on which McCain is clearly the more experienced, qualified candidate.
abortion philosophy
I read the one comment about what would happen if abortion became illegal in this country--women dying from unsafe abortions, etc. Do you realize that a life is killed in the womb when an abortion occurs? That little baby has no say in the matter. That baby has the right to live no matter the means he/she was brought into this world. Where does the right to kill that child come from? Convenience? If a woman chooses to abort the child, she should be arrested due to murder. If the woman dies why trying to abort, so be it. That was her choice. God will bless this land if abortion is overturned. If Obama gets in with his wild abortion stance, watch out is all I can say.
Preacher ! Oh preacher !
Preacher ! Oh preacher ! Will ou be my preacher ?
Sheesh. This is an elecion for PRESIDENT, not a Pulpit for Holiness !!
Hillay 2 MCain: beleve me, the rest of us Big Mac supporters FR, FAR outwigh these Head Cases. Stay with us. We are NOT weirded, really...
Without a Pro-life stance McCain Loses
If I and millions of other conservatives have to sit out in this election WE will..We refuse to compromise our principles even though liberals in the republican party like Dole are parasitic and seek to mislead the GOP!
Go right ahead and sit it
Go right ahead and sit it out if you like. Do something really REALLY self-defeating, I'd like to see that happen, know wha I mean? Frankly I'm good and sick of self-appointed "Christian" extremists invading the Republican party -- the party of liberty, strong national defense, and civil rights. NOT the party of Religion for Breakfast, Religion for Lunch, Religion for dinner, thank you.
John McCain is running for PRESIDENT, not for POPE / PASTOR / RABBI.
alienation
So, according to "Hill2012", it comes down to a question of who the Republicans want to alienate...the evangelicals like myself who have been loyal supporters of the Republican party for over thirty years....or the Hillary folks who got their "puppy feelings" hurt when the "Obamanation that causes desolation" didn't choose poor, mistreated, ole Hillary to be his running mate.... and will go back to voting Democratic as soon as they feel their candidate has been properly vindicated.
Religon an polotics
They don't belong together. I am pro-life and I feel a woman made that choice when she decided to have unproteced sex. In my opinion the choice has been made. That being said, I think religon should not be political. This is not the only issue for the presedency. How can our elected officials serve us instead of themselves?
I still think everyone looks at the abortion issue incorrectly
After reading all of the comments I was amazed that it took me until the very end to finally see someone that agrees with my viewpoint. Instead of leaving abortion completely legal and pushing for the "right to choose" why aren't we talking about the "right to choose" birth control methods or abstinence. If you don't want a child I'm pretty sure science has discovered what causes them.
I'm not saying that you should be stuck with a child you don't want, there are so many people that want to adopt it's not even funny. Don't give me some crap about "I'm a woman and I have the RIGHT to be pregnant or not". To which I say, "You've also got the RIGHT to take birth control or not have sex".
You don't even need religion to make a choice here. You wouldn't walk up to someone on side of the street and take their life from them, you know why? Because it's wrong, plain and simple. What if that person held the next job up the ladder in your company, if he were gone, he wouldn't be holding you back anymore. Nope, still wrong. People try to use the excuse that they don't want a child to hamper their life or hold them back. To that I say give it up for adoption!
VOTE McCAIN-PALIN
There is a choice all women have
Leave your legs closed, or open them, but if you choose OPEN then accept the responsibility that goes along with it. Man or woman up. THAT is the problem today--people taking responsibility for their own actions---it is too easy to just take the easy way out and liberals want the world to be that way. I don't.
Message to Clinton supporters
NEVER!
WE WILL NEVER GIVE UP OUR PRO-LIFE STANCE! NEVER!
MCCAIN
PALIN
08
THE TICKET TO ABOLISH ABORTIONS!
I disagree, respectfully
Senator McCain is a man of integrity and says what he feels and believes in. The innocent and unborn need to be protected and McCain being Pro Life is important and shows the man has true character. Why should he back off on an issue that is THAT important, that would make him like Obama which he is NOTHING like. If he did that he would be slapping God in the face too.
Lighten up on pro life stance to win Hillary voters? NO THANKS!
the lives of the unborn CANNOT be compromised.
one reason there is such ENERGY for Palin-McCain is because of Sarah Palin's STRONG PRO LIFE STANCE. Come with us and join the CULTURE OF LIFE!
Hillary supporters WE Welcome you! :)
who are WE ?
Lighten up on pro-life ?
this IS why we're here.
Palin's not only a prolife supporter/endorser,she's living it.
A better understanding of the ENTIRE roe v wade "ruling",knowledge of abortion procedures and that it is "allowed" right up to the 9th month hence the "necessity" for a partial birth procedure might help you reach an understanding of why abortion is wrong.(partial birth abortion is NOT an emergency procedure as it takes more than 24hours,so what kind of an emergency treatment takes this long ?)-- face it,roe v wade was based on a lie,"norma" never even HAD her abortion...regrets her involvement as their stooge,and then these reproductive rights groups continued to lie in regard to fetal growth and development.
The Constitution of the United States of America says absolutely nothing about abortion or the right to one. Common sense would also illustrate this .
A right was buried so deep it took almost 200 years to find it ?
Supremes definitely "overextended" themselves in their legislation on a life or death issue and they had all the medical resouces at hand fully illustrating that a "fetus" is human, with distinct and individual DNA,a seperate "entity",developing in it's mother.etc.
It's not a choice,it's an abortion.
Lightening Up On Pro-Life
If McCain lightened up on "Pro-Life" he may gain some supporters who were for Clinton, but for every ONE vote gained by a Clinton supporter, he'd loose at least 4 of his base voters.
Not worth it.
ABORTION
No Presidential candidate should ease up or take lightly genocide or the shedding of innocent blood!
Why Can't Abortion be Permitted to Save the Life of the Mother?
What would you do if you saw someone dying on the street? Most of you would stop to help, many of you would stop and look and perhaps move on. What if helping that person meant you would be in danger and might die? What if you and your sister were in a car accident and both of you were injured. Your sister is in worst shape than you, but if you go to help her you may die. What would you do? Do you know what would happen to you legally if you stopped and looked but did not help in the first example, or if you did not go over to help your sister in the second example? Probably nothing. Very few if any states have what's called "good semaritan law," which is a law that says that you must help someone who is in trouble, or sick or dying. No state has a law that says that you must help someone else even if it means you will die in the process. Most people think that not forcing people to die to save someone else is reasonable and as far as I know there is no movement in any State to change these laws to force people to help others even if you may die in the process. But that is what pro-life requires from every girl or woman who gets pregnant: she must have that baby even if her own life is in indangered by the pregnancy. This is a requirement that is not imposed on any other citizen in any other circumstance, but the pro-life movement demands this sacrifice from women (usually young girls who may even be too young to vote--teenange pregnancy can be very dangerous to the mother). Why doesn't the pro-life position grant pregnant women the same right all citizens have?
Do we even know what we are arguing about?
Does the law even define when it is "tissue" and when it becomes a "baby"? Why was it legal to have a partial birth abortion at 8 months, however, if a woman gives birth at 8 months and decides against having a baby and smothers it that would be murder? Why is it only the woman's right to choose? If I recall correctly, it takes two people to conceive a child. Scott Peterson murdered his wife and unborn child and was charged with a double homicide. It was pretty obvious that he didn't want his unborn child, why the double homicide for him if Stacey Peterson, the child's mother, could of had an abortion with no legal ramifications. I believe that life begins at conception but that the mother does have a choice. She has the choice of abstinence, she has the choice of protected sex, and she has the choice of adoption. No one has the RIGHT to kill an unborn child!!! What we need now are clear laws and definitions so we, as caring, concerned Americans, will know exactly with what we are working. I would just like to say that I applaud each of you, pro-life or pro-choice, for having an opinion and having the guts to support your beliefs.
I challenge each of you to go to this website for some facts on abortion:
abort73.com
Legal Rights for the Unborn?
The law does define viability; it is Roe v. Wade and it defines the point where the fetus can survive independent of the Mother though it may still be in the womb. It may not be a correct definition but it does recognize a difference between an unborn child and a born child. Born children, children who survived at least 6 or 7 months in the womb and were born, are registered at birth, are citizens, have a social security number assigned, etc. Birth triggers a number of legal events that give the newborn certain rughts as a citizen; not all rights, he or she will have to wait until 18 or 21 for all of those. The question is whether a baby in the womb is the same as a baby that has been born. A baby who has been born, for example, must have a passport to travel to another country. A baby in the womb does not. Babies born in the USA are citizens. Babies conceived in the USA but born elsewhere are not. These are perfectly reasonable and necessary distinctions between the unborn and the born because the law recognizes that there is a difference between the two stages. If the unborn is equal to the born then they would need passports, they would be citizens if conceived here even if born in Mexico. I do not know if this distinction should or should not permit abortion: that is what we are discussing here, but it is important to recognize that there is a distinction.
As for the only choices a woman can have (abstain, protected sex, adopt), how does that address a raped woman? It seems her only choice is to keep the child or adopt. Since she had no choice in the conception as do most other woman, indeed as her conception is not only not her choice but most cruel, is it fair to say that she truly has the same choices other woman have? Also, in the case of a dangerous pregnancy that may kill the mother: Why is it that the baby's right to life supercedes the mother's right to life, or did the mother lose her right to life once she conceived the baby?
RE: Legal Rights for the Unborn
Thank you for the clarification on the differentiation between the born and unborn. I've never been able to get a straight answer for that question.
After hearing your thoughts on the legal issues involved with citizenship and passports there does need to be a legal difference between a child which is unborn and a child which is not. However, they should both be legally viewed as a human life. In a later post, you mentioned women who drink or use illicit drugs while pregnant. I most definitely think there should be legal ramifications for those actions. Instead of imprisonment, why couldn't we have programs designed to help these women with their dependence in the same way other facilities help people with the same problem?
When I was speaking of women's choice I was talking of women who satisfied their own pleasures with wreckless abandon not women who were raped or whose lives are in danger. My apologies, I should have clarified that further. As terrible as rape is, I know there are families out there who would be more than happy to have that child regardless of the events of its conception. I believe, as difficult as it may be, that a woman stil has the choice to put an innocent child first, and give it life. As for the women whose own lives are in danger, I'm not able to answer that question with 100% certainty but the least that can be done is allow for the woman and her doctor to decide in such cases.
My beliefs on abortion are based on the life of the unborn child. The child, in any of the above mentioned cases, is the only innocent party in any situation. They had no choice in their conception! As the rest of our laws were made to protect the innocent, why should we have laws to protect the unborn? I believe that the majority of people today have the wrong mindset. A lot of people are so focused on themselves that they cannot see the hurts and needs of others. It would go a long way to change our country if people would realize that there is something bigger than themselves out there, in this case, the life of the unborn.
A Pregnant Woman's Right to Life
Thanks for taking the time to read and to respond to my postings, Horsemama87. The distinctions between the unborn and the born are legal distinctions; we agree that the the unborn's life is human life. All citizens have a right to life, but no citizen has a right to demand that someone else die so he or she can live. All citizens have the right NOT TO sacrifice their own life to save someone else's; everyone can choose whether they want to give their time, their blood, or their organs to save someone else's life. But there is no law that makes it a crime if you refuse to give of yourself to save another's life, even if that other person is a family member, or your own child. Yet, under the GOP platform pregnant women lose that right and if they may die as a result of the pregnancy, then they MUST die. This position cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny as the unequal treatment of pregnant women who live's are in jeopardy due to a pregnancy do not have equal protection under the laws: they are the only group of people who must sacrifice their life for someone else's life. I appreciate that you agree that such women should be able to choose an abortion under such circumstances. Pregnant women have a right to life; I wish the GOP platform would acknowledge that.
Re - McCain needs to lighten up on Pro-Life stance
I guess if a person doesn't believe a baby is a viable human being from conception, that person could lighten up on a pro-life stance
However, if a person really believe in his/her heart that all babies are babies at conception, and are a gift from God and are precious In His sight as I do, then, that person cannot possibly lighted up on their pro-life stance.To abort a baby would be murder IMHO.
Anti-Abortion and a Nation of Laws
I hear what you are saying, NKAREN, you feel it in your heart. But we are a Republic and as such we are governed by laws, not the gut instincts of you or any person. The issue then is how does one convert this true feeling in your heart to a law that makes sense alongside our established laws. As I discussed in an earlier post, we have no "Good Samaritan Laws" punishing people who do not help a stranger in need and we certainly have no laws that requires that a person give up his life for another person in need; we do not even require a mother to give her kidney to her son if he needs it. People choose whether they want to help another, give a kidney or other organ, or even fall on the live grenade to save his buddies at arms. But if you were to follow the pro-life position to its logical conclusions, a pregnant woman must give up her life for the life of the baby she is carrying. Unless you want to make it a crime for a parent to not give his or her kidney to his needy offsping, this dmeand made on pregnant women is inconsistent with our laws. Who will tell the dying mother that she must die and that her right to life is unequal to and less than the right to life of her fetus? Along other lines, if the unborn child's rights are equal to a born child's rights and harm to the unborn child is murder, then a pregnant woman should be arrrested for, say child abuse, if she smokes or drinks while pregnant. Do you really want our police force arresting pregnant woman? Should we establish a "Vice Sqaud" as the Islamists do to beat and arrest women who do not conform to their sense of proper behavior? Also, as I said in another post, if the unborn's rights are equal to the born, then the unborm child conceived in America would be an American citizen even if born in another ocuntry. You think we have immigration problems now, just wait until that law passes! Anyway, denying abortion under every circumstance and calling it murder even if the mother is aborting the pregnancy to save her own life doesn't make sense against the other laws we already have in place. A Republic requires reason, internal logic and concsistency to remain true and strong. I would be interested in knowing the system of laws that is consistent with the GOP's platform on abortion and the Constitution.