Ronald Reagan Was A SOCIAL Conservative

[Zathras]

I have been reading the replies on this thread, and I fully agree 100% with MrsSmith's responses. The issue of abortion will never end until abortion gets outlawed, and those millions of children that get dismembered and killed each year before they're born have a right to live.

The whole point of starting this thread was to prove that social conservatives can win elections, and win in landslides, like Reagan did TWICE. I will never support Flip Romney, because he's lying about being pro-life. He funded Planned Parenthood in Romneycare after his so-called "pro-life" conversion. Abortion is a no-compromise issue for me, and I'm NOT going to compromise this year for Flip Romney, just to beat Obama.

Hopefully, either Santorum or Newt can overtake Flip in the SC primary, before it's too late.

[MrsSmith]

Abortion is a paradox. If it is murder then it is always murder and is always immoral. But by what twist on morality could the state force a women or girl who has been raped to carry to term the child of her rapist? It doesn't matter what the incidence is, if it's one thousandth of one percent, you still have the paradox.

So are you pro forcing a rape victim to carry her rapist's child to term?
Are you for charging women who have abortions, or cause the abortion of their fetus with murder?
Or are you simply looking for a platform of self-righteousness?

If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, the resulting child is 1/2 the rapist's...and 1/2 hers. Regardless of the father's actions, the child is HER child. Does it undo the harm when a mother chooses to murder her own child? Does the rapist in some way "win" if the woman chooses life for that child? Are there any other crimes for which we murder the child instead of bringing the father to justice? If your father raped someone NOW, would murdering YOU do anything to remove the harm? Then how can murdering any other child, including the one conceived in rape, do anything to remove the harm? In fact, how much can the mother grow by accepting a life that came from an act done to hurt her? By accepting and bearing that child, she can choose to find him/her of healing value, the fact that a wonderful blessing came from this horrible, painful incident. And if she just truly cannot find the blessing in the child, there are thousands of willing couples that would be thrilled to find the blessing and love that innocent child.

Every time a mother makes the choice for or against abortion, she is choosing for 2 humans, 2 lives, 2 futures...not just for herself. It is heartbreaking and sickening to see such large numbers of humans that are unable to grasp the simple fact that an unborn child is just as human as the mother. It is sickening to see so many people somehow believe that when mom wants the baby, he/she is obviously and instantly a baby, a human, a person, the moment the pregnancy test comes back positive...but if she didn't want it, then he/she is suddenly, instantly, obviously not a human, not a person, and it's perfectly fine for Mom to have it removed from her body just as she would a cancer or her appendix.

In no other measurement of humans do we remove the personhood of the human due to dependency, size, age, development, or any other reason. Any division of humanity into Person/NonPerson is false. All humans of all ages, sizes, dependencies, or stages of development are Human...and therefore Persons.

[Novaheart]

If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, the resulting child is 1/2 the rapist's...and 1/2 hers.

And the law forbids her from killing a child.

[Novaheart]

In no other measurement of humans do we remove the personhood of the human due to dependency, size, age, development, or any other reason. Any division of humanity into Person/NonPerson is false. All humans of all ages, sizes, dependencies, or stages of development are Human...and therefore Persons.

Throwing an egg at a passing car is "throwing a deadly missile" or perhaps vandalism. Throwing a baby chick at a passing car is animal cruelty.

[MrsSmith]

Throwing an egg at a passing car is "throwing a deadly missile" or perhaps vandalism. Throwing a baby chick at a passing car is animal cruelty.

I'm sure you can tell the difference between an egg and a chick...just as we can tell the difference between a human egg and an embryo. Losing an egg in a period is not murder. Deliberately destroying a human after conception is.

[Novaheart]

Deliberately destroying a human after conception is.

Ah, then you also oppose contraception. Good luck with that, you and Jay Sekulow need to have a policy chat.

[MrsSmith]

Ah, then you also oppose contraception. Good luck with that, you and Jay Sekulow need to have a policy chat.

I have absolutely no problem with condoms, diaphragms, foams, and any pill that stops ovulation. I also have no problem with the family planning method endorsed by the Catholic church, with abstinence, and with any other method of contraception. Where the problem arises is when dishonest people call abortifacients "contraceptives." I have a problem both with murdering humans, and with tolerating liars...especially murdering liars.

[Novaheart]

I have absolutely no problem with condoms, diaphragms, foams, and any pill that stops ovulation. I also have no problem with the family planning method endorsed by the Catholic church, with abstinence, and with any other method of contraception. Where the problem arises is when dishonest people call abortifacients "contraceptives." I have a problem both with murdering humans, and with tolerating liars...especially murdering liars.

When men can get pregnant, I'll be interested in the opinion of the Catholic church on contraception.

[Rockntractor]

When men can get pregnant, I'll be interested in the opinion of the Catholic church on contraception.

When men can become pregnant gay marriage may gain relevance.

[Novaheart]

When men can become pregnant gay marriage may gain relevance.

With each day that goes by, the Catholic church becomes less relevant.