That’s good, but my point is that I don’t think you will find a Democrat in a prominent leadership role espousing such restrictions on abortion and on Planned Parenthood as you have stated. Planned Parenthood has essentially taken ownership of the Democratic Party. Democrats have often fought against parental notification laws.Yes, for starters, legislation should be enacted to make sure gay marriage is not coupled with coercing churches, synagogues, mosques, or temples opposed to same-sex marriage to marry couples in religious ceremonies or church settings. Also, compulsory gay adoption from Catholic agencies which are morally and religiously opposed to gay marriage should be banned. For me, this is an issue of religious liberty. Otherwise, allow gay marriage for those gays who want it. One should not legislate morality for the whole society on this issue, in my view. If one wishes to do so, then adultery and premarital sex should also be illegal.
Abortion should not be on demand for minors without explicit parental consent. No agency, such as Planned Parenthood, or a woman’s personal physician, should promote abortion, under penalty, without presenting all other options first; but unnecessary medical procedures, even non-invasive ones, such as sonograms, should not be forced upon any woman without her consent. One is entitled to continue religious protest against the legality of abortion in front of clinics, but these protests must be peaceful without coercion. However, women of legal age should have the option to terminate their pregnancy so long as abortion is legal.
If you can make that happen, I will vote for you for President!Yes, for starters, legislation should be enacted to make sure gay marriage is not coupled with coercing churches, synagogues, mosques, or temples opposed to same-sex marriage to marry couples in religious ceremonies or church settings. Also, compulsory gay adoption from Catholic agencies which are morally and religiously opposed to gay marriage should be banned. For me, this is an issue of religious liberty. Otherwise, allow gay marriage for those gays who want it. One should not legislate morality for the whole society on this issue, in my view. If one wishes to do so, then adultery and premarital sex should also be illegal.
Abortion should not be on demand for minors without explicit parental consent. No agency, such as Planned Parenthood, or a woman’s personal physician, should promote abortion, under penalty, without presenting all other options first; but unnecessary medical procedures, even non-invasive ones, such as sonograms, should not be forced upon any woman without her consent. One is entitled to continue religious protest against the legality of abortion in front of clinics, but these protests must be peaceful without coercion. However, women of legal age should have the option to terminate their pregnancy so long as abortion is legal.
Just look at what PP did to the Komen Foundation.That’s good, but my point is that I don’t think you will find a Democrat in a prominent leadership role espousing such restrictions on abortion and on Planned Parenthood as you have stated. Planned Parenthood has essentially taken ownership of the Democratic Party. Democrats have often fought against parental notification laws.
I would vouch for your approach but find me a Democrat in any significant role that is for the limitations you suggest.Yes, for starters, legislation should be enacted to make sure gay marriage is not coupled with coercing churches, synagogues, mosques, or temples opposed to same-sex marriage to marry couples in religious ceremonies or church settings. Also, compulsory gay adoption from Catholic agencies which are morally and religiously opposed to gay marriage should be banned. For me, this is an issue of religious liberty. Otherwise, allow gay marriage for those gays who want it. One should not legislate morality for the whole society on this issue, in my view. If one wishes to do so, then adultery and premarital sex should also be illegal.
Abortion should not be on demand for minors without explicit parental consent. No agency, such as Planned Parenthood, or a woman’s personal physician, should promote abortion, under penalty, without presenting all other options first; but unnecessary medical procedures, even non-invasive ones, such as sonograms, should not be forced upon any woman without her consent. One is entitled to continue religious protest against the legality of abortion in front of clinics, but these protests must be peaceful without coercion. However, women of legal age should have the option to terminate their pregnancy so long as abortion is legal.
There must be other Democrats in Congress who believe as I do. We must unite and negotiate on these issues. I know this sounds idealistic, but I can’t help it: I’m a child of the '60s.That’s good, but my point is that I don’t think you will find a Democrat in a prominent leadership role espousing such restrictions on abortion and on Planned Parenthood as you have stated. Planned Parenthood has essentially taken ownership of the Democratic Party. Democrats have often fought against parental notification laws.
I don’t even think it’s about news outlets that make the biggest noise. I know many liberals and the “right” to kill their unborn is sacrosanct to them.It is true Akin made a blunder, much like everyone does. But his blunder was repeated almost daily on NPR, even as the Benghazi email affair broke on Fox News. No mention of Benghazi for that entire week., but Akin’s misstep was repeated every single day.
I really don’t know how we can overcome an electorate which makes its decisions based on which news outlet makes the biggest noise. Perhaps there should be an exam before being able to register.
o.k., Conservatives, let’s see here just how far left the GOP has gone:Bozell said Republicans should get no support from conservatives until they “re-earn it” by agreeing to a list of commitments. The group said conservatives are working together on a “No Excuses” pledge that it will use to hold GOP lawmakers accountable for policies such as not raising taxes, banning earmarks, and defunding Obamacare.
I can’t make it happen alone; I need the cooperation of both Democrats and Republicans. But that’s my social agenda for 2016 under the Make-It-Happen platform! Seriously, this can be accomplished with enough will.If you can make that happen, I will vote for you for President!
I hope so, they have put plenty to death.The Church has always held the death penalty is permissible,
3,000,000 more votes for McCain than Romney, 10,000,000 less for Obama this time.From the OP:
o.k., Conservatives, let’s see here just how far left the GOP has gone:
Both Romney and Obama LOVE and support BIG government……neither supported a balanced budget……Both supported the NDAA (Nat’l Defense Auth Act) and the Patriot Act, putting individual civil liberties at risk…neither supports the constitution in that only Congress can declare war……both support gun control measures…… both support universal healthcare……both support global “free trade” NOT fair trade…….both supported TARP and the auto bailout……I could go on, but you get the picture.
The thing is, we are so far from true conservatism, and have been since the beginning of the Bush years, we are now a minority destined for extinction. And who was our choice prior to Romney? The other liberal, McCain. Who can tell the difference anymore?
You may have to go down alone fighting because I’m not sure the American populace agrees with the entire Catholic position on abortion and no right to choose whatsoever in any case. And it’s beginning to look it is starting not to on the SS marriage issue either.We have to agree there are issues where one cannot compromise, abortion is the main one. There is no compromise which I can keep my integrity as a Catholic. I shall go down alone and fighting is need be.
I heard a lot of Independents did not vote. Even Nate Silver said he was not voting!3,000,000 more votes for McCain than Romney, 10,000,000 less for Obama this time.
Rush is saying there might be a rush in judgment in all this analysis. I’m trying to check his website to see if there are any essays on this but those figures jumped out at me.
But if Romney had 3 million less than McCain and Obama got 10,000,000 less votes this time, I can’t believe so many people sat this election out. That seems incredible.
Because those 13,000,000 realize that neither canidate really represents them3,000,000 more votes for McCain than Romney, 10,000,000 less for Obama this time.
Rush is saying there might be a rush in judgment in all this analysis. I’m trying to check his website to see if there are any essays on this but those figures jumped out at me.
But if Romney had 3 million less than McCain and Obama got 10,000,000 less votes this time, I can’t believe so many people sat this election out. That seems incredible.
Well it was a total landslide based on how we elect a President. But that aside, regarding rallying, all we liberals kept hearing for months was the Tea Party and conservatives and Republicans were more motivated.It was a loss by what 2%. Hardly a landslide. I think the right is forgetting how hard it is to unseat an incumbent. And I’m not sure why the tea party is complaining, I didn’t see them out much doing anything to rally people up.
I think the very existence of the Tea Party motivated liberals more than conservatives.It was a loss by what 2%. Hardly a landslide. I think the right is forgetting how hard it is to unseat an incumbent. And I’m not sure why the tea party is complaining, I didn’t see them out much doing anything to rally people up.
Demographics, the thing that was key to Obama’s reelection could be what saves traditional marriage at the ballot box in America. 59% of Latinos in California voted against homosexual marriage. African Americans are overwhelmingly against. States where homosexual marriage passed, Maine, Washington and Maryland, are liberal and do not have large diverse populations, if they did I doubt homosexual marriage would of passedYou may have to go down alone fighting because I’m not sure the American populace agrees with the entire Catholic position on abortion and no right to choose whatsoever in any case. And it’s beginning to look it is starting not to on the SS marriage issue either.
gallup.com/poll/154838/pro-choice-americans-record-low.aspxEvangelicals care just as much about abortion as ever, and the national trends are running towards more support for abortion restrictions, and greater identification as “Pro-Life”. Sonograms are undermining the Democratic position. So are demographics: the only group that majority-identifies as “Pro Choice” is women of childbearing age. Meanwhile, our fastest-growing demographic is retirees
sba-list.org/movement/polling-pro-life-trendsGallup’s 2012 poll also shows a shift across political lines. 47% of independents describe themselves as pro-life, putting the number of pro-choice independents at an all-time low of 41%. This number has dropped 15 points since 2001, while the number of independents identifying as “pro-life” has risen 17% in the same timeframe. Similarly, never before have there been fewer pro-choice Republicans, with just 22% of GOP voters describing themselves as such. The number of pro-choice Democrats is also at its lowest point in almost a decade, at just 58%
I agree and seeing the lines in states like FL and OH, I think trying to change voting regulations also did. And they were expecting a midterm electorate like in 2010 and it just didn’t pan out that way.I think the very existence of the Tea Party motivated liberals more than conservatives.
None of that convinces me the majority of Americans accept the Catholic position of no choice whatsoever in any cases. Let alone that most Americans I don’t believe focus as much on one issue in voting like so many Catholics do.
Right, this would seem to be the logical explanation.Because those 13,000,000 realize that neither canidate really represents them