The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
ITT the abortions of strawmen
Salvation122
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
How well is McCain doing with the fundies? He's been cozying up to them a lot in the past few years but I have no idea if it's actually had any effect on how the Christian Right view him.
He's not prolife enough, but if he's the one who will save us from Rudy/Obama/Hillary, I will vote for him.
Let me make this crystal fucking clear: you are the reason there will be no substantive change on abortion in this nation, ever.
Salvation122 on
0
Posts
Awesome!
Well I guess not for anti-abortion people...
???
527 heaven
As long as the republican party is relying on the irrational religious vote, they'll always posture like they're really going to ban abortion this time, nationwide, for real, and then when they get elected they'll do some little shit to appease the people who boosted their corrupt asses into office and not actually address the "issue".
They do this because if there ever actually is a nationwide ban on abortion, suddenly some 50%+ of American voters will actually have rights that they used to take for granted removed from them, and the political pendulum swings back the other way.
But hey, if you can find a time in history (any example, really) when Americans had civil liberties that were enjoyed by the mainstream suddenly removed and just fucking put up with it, feel free to pull out examples.
Not to mention the president really has fuck all to do with the abortion issue aside from appointing Supreme Court justices and hoping for the best. He can't enact any law to change it (legislative) and he can't revoke Roe v Wade (judiciary). So really, anyone who bases their presidential vote on abortion is, in my opinion, a bit of a fucking retard.
My whole point was that this time, because SCOTUS seats WILL be up for nomination again, evangelical are still going to come out in huge numbers to vote for a prolife candiidate in the general election. I just wondered why I was being cursed at for stating that fact.
527 heaven
Quite a few (stupid) people will vote one way or another based solely upon a single issue. [For the sake of this discussion, I shall use the examples of abortion and gay rights.] These people will only ever vote for someone who shares their given view on the issue. They will vote this way in perpetuity, or they will not vote at all. They will not vote for those that hold conflicting views.
Politicians, contrary to popular belief, are not stupid. At the very least those running the parties are not. They cannot afford to be. There are approximately 17.8 metric fucktons of dollar bills riding on them not being stupid. They will therefore do what they can to both hold on to voters and to expand their voting base. This should be intuitively obvious.
What is not intuitively obvious is that those goals are better served by keeping highly divisive issues with a great deal of emotional involvement around for as long as they possibly can. Pro-life voters, after all - at least those who are rabid about it - are not going to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Nor will those who favor gay rights vote for someone who desires a constitutional amendment against homosexual marriages. If these issues were ever actually resolved, those voters might be attracted to the other party. Therefore, as long as there remains a sizable number of people who will always vote based upon a given issue, it makes absolutely no sense to take anything more than token action on that issue.
Um, the Patriot Act. Jose Padilla.
527 heaven
- "Proving once again the deadliest animal of all ... is the Zoo Keeper" - Philip J Fry
Thank you. That's all I am saying.
527 heaven
Yeah, the Patriot Act totally affected a sizable chunk of the population, right?
How many times a day do you or anyone you know deal with the Patriot Act? Jose Padilla is a guy. We're talking about half the population. Banning abortion would go over about as well as Prohibition.
There will be zero meaningful movement on RvW during our lifetimes for precisely the reasons I just described. While the judiciary retains a degree of independence from the national party system I find it flatly impossible to believe that they are fully removed from it, and believe that they will more or less keep the status quo around because it is to the benefit of both parties to do so.
If you think so. I just think it will be unavoidale for there to be movement towards it being challenged and overturned if a prolife canidate wins the whitehouse. Obviously they will pick 1 if not 2 SC justices.
527 heaven
The government can at anytime retract your U.S citizenship, and hold you as an enemy combatant for YEARS without access to a lawyer. Maybe "half the population" is not concerned, but I think they should be.
527 heaven
So if the GOP wins you think a prolife prez would pick prochoice justices just to keep abortion as a future campaign issue?
527 heaven
Except you then probably haven't listened to the experts on the Supreme Court who, all that I have heard, agree that whoever gets elected is very important in large part because of who they will appoint to the supreme court. Someone like Huckabee will probably appoint a religious fundamentalist type, and that person will tip the scales on overturning Roe V Wade. That is what is going to happen, now if individual states dare ban abortion I don't know but that Roe v Wade won't get overturned because they can't use it as an argument I find very doubtful, if those voters are getting duped they would turn their heads just as easily.
- "Proving once again the deadliest animal of all ... is the Zoo Keeper" - Philip J Fry
They would still have the obsession over "the gays trying to destroy traditional marriage, and our children, ect." Though I do admit they would lose me @ that point.
527 heaven
If the GOP wins, they'd pick Republican justices, who would act pretty much the same way as a Republican senator or president in that position.
What kind of fantasy world do you live in that Supreme Court justices are immune to the same political bullshit that everyone else who lives in DC and gets paid a government salary puts up with?
They don't have to deal with re-election always in the back of their minds, so I thought that would cut out much of the "political bul****". Enlighten me if this is not true. Why does everyone curse in their responses to me? :P
527 heaven
We curse a lot. Nothing personal.
Also this is the reason SCOTUS will never overturn Roe v. Wade. Stop deluding yourselves.
Lots of people who call themselves pro-life are actually pro-choice and don't realize it. I guess because they can't read, or something.
Are you seriously saying that women who disagrees with you are mentally deficient?
Is that in my post? Where is that in my post?
So the fact that there are women that believe humanity starts at the beginning of development rather than birth, the development of cognizance, or any other equally arbritrary standard amazes you the same way that a person advocating the annihilation of his own people does?
What?
Stockholm Syndrome is a psychological disorder holmes
In fairness, I often find the same thing.
Its a known condition, not a 'deficiency'. You should probably try knowing what things are before posting about them. Also, don't lie about my posts.
But srsly, I hear you. I remember someone linking an article in the last thread about an abortionists experiences with Pro-Lifers seeking to terminate. "My Abortion is the Only Righteous One," or something like that. Great article, and lots of unexpectedly funny bits.
From your article:
" according to Scalia, "Clarence Thomas doesn't believe in stare decisis, period. If a constitutional line of authority is wrong, he would say, let’s get it right."[9]
"Of the Court's current members, Justices Scalia and Thomas seem to have the most faith in the determinacy of the legal texts that come before the Court. It should come as no surprise that they also seem the most willing to overrule the Court's past decisions."
Scalia and Thomas are the justices that are always pointed to as models for the type of justices that a prolife prez should nominate.
And for the partial birth decision, yes there are still the same number of abortions, they just rip of pieces off and bring them out of the uterus instead of delivering most of the way and then crushing the head while still inside of the mothers body.
It was considered important because it was the first restriction placed by the SC on abortioin since RvW, or at least that's the argument. It also signaled how close we were to a winning challenge if we can just get 1 or 2 more justices.
527 heaven