D
dvdjs
Guest
In effect then, the populace doesn’t view abortion as murder. The pro-life agenda includes working to change that opinion.The reason is that the populace doesn’t support it, and won’t.
In effect then, the populace doesn’t view abortion as murder. The pro-life agenda includes working to change that opinion.The reason is that the populace doesn’t support it, and won’t.
Which of course is why abortion has been legal for so long.Not necessarily, but the attitude of the populace is a very good indicator of what will happen politically.
It is not the best indicator, however, of what will happen in the SCOTUS.the populace is a very good indicator of what will happen politically.
Are you saying that wanting murderers punished supports abortion?That’s about as lame a support for abortion as any of its supporters have ever invented.
Clinton and Obama are “why abortion has been legal for so long”. But you know that.Which of course is why abortion has been legal for so long.
How did Clinton and Obama get their jobs? The populace supported them. At least more than the alternatives.Clinton and Obama are “why abortion has been legal for so long”. But you know that.
I’m saying posing bogus arguments in its favor supports abortion.Are you saying that wanting murderers punished supports abortion?
That is the most bogus argument I have ever heard in my life. I believe that murderers should be punished. There is nothing immoral about that position. Nothing in Church teaching supports the contrary position.I’m saying posing bogus arguments in its favor supports abortion.
None of which means the populace supports punishing women for having abortions. Did Clinton or Obama support doing it? No.How did Clinton and Obama get their jobs? The populace supported them. At least more than the alternatives.
Then the first abortionist prosecuted would wind up in the SCOTUS probing the Constitutionality of such a law that seem on its face to be so incompatible with equal protection. What would the argument be in defense of not prosecuting co-conspiring mothers?But even if 100% believed it was murder, it doesn’t mean people would support punishing women for having abortions.
That is about as “lame” a perspective that has ever been invented. Do you really see this as an argument for abortion?That’s about as lame a support for abortion as any of its supporters have ever invented.
How am I defending abortion, I am just pointing out reality. I am not beholden to any political party. I agree that if the republicans came out for punishing women it would be bad for them politically. But I cannot think of one reason why murderers should not be punished, except that it would harm republicans. That is just not a good enough reason for me. Nobody has been able to pose a better argument why they should not be punished.None of which means the populace supports punishing women for having abortions. Did Clinton or Obama support doing it? No.
If you’re going to defend abortion, come up with better arguments.
Did they see it as murder? Did they see it as unlawful?Did Clinton or Obama support doing it? No.
Just responding to the inquiry.Did they see it as murder? Did they see it as unlawful?
I realize that whataboutism is hard for some to resist, but this one makes no sense at all.
What punishment would you suggest??Notice how silent they get when they are asked why they shouldn’t be punished. They cannot give a coherent answer to that question.
Our society slowly changed to not only allow abortion, but now to aggrandize it, with hollywood leftists holding woman who have had multiple abortions out as heroes.But I cannot think of one reason why murderers should not be punished, except that it would harm republicans.
Do you have examples of this? I missed it.hollywood leftists holding woman who have had multiple abortions out as heroes.