Gary Johnson Thread

[JimR-OCDS]

Here’s his position:

That right must be respected and despite his personal aversion to abortion, he believes that such a very personal and individual decision is best left to women and families, not the government. He feels that each woman must be allowed to make decisions about her own health and well-being and that the government should not be in the business of second guessing these difficult decisions.

I call that pro-murder of unborn babies. Sure, he wouldn’t personally do it. But he’s fine with someone else doing the deed. People are free to see it otherwise if they feel compelled to do so.

What you call it doesn’t make it so.

Jim

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

What you call it doesn’t make it so.

Jim

I suppose it’s possible that he doesn’t recognize that there is an unborn baby inside the womb and this is why he thinks that it is a decision best left to women and families.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I suppose it’s possible that he doesn’t recognize that there is an unborn baby inside the womb and this is why he thinks that it is a decision best left to women and families.

Do you understand that he personally opposes abortion ?

OH and BTW, a fetus isn’t a baby, it’s in its early stages of development toward becoming a baby.

Use of such terms only provides fodder for those who support abortion

Jim

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Do you understand that he personally opposes abortion ?

Yes. I understand that he personally opposes abortion. Many pro-abortion people do.

OH and BTW, a fetus isn’t a baby, it’s in its early stages of development toward becoming a baby.

Use of such terms only provides fodder for those who support abortion

So you suggest that an unborn baby is something that is only potentially a baby even though it is in fact an unborn baby. Got it. We disagree on this fundamentally. If the pro-abortionists want to use me as an example of fodder, have at it. I can’t deny what is in a woman’s womb: an actual baby waiting to be born. The fact Johnson thinks whether that unborn child can live ought to be left up to the mother and her family is unconsciable.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Yes. I understand that he personally opposes abortion. Many pro-abortion people do.

.

It’s not possible to oppose abortion and be pro-abortion at the same time. The two terms are opposite of each other.

Jim

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

It’s not possible to oppose abortion and be pro-abortion at the same time. The two terms are opposite of each other.

Jim

Exactly. Thus the reason he is pro-abortion.

 

[ProVobis]

IMO a vote for a 3rd party candidate is a non-vote. They have zero chance of winning. It may serve the purpose of assuaging one’s conscience I suppose. To vote is to participate in the election, and the third party choice can certainly not do any damage since he will never win the office.

Yes, but if you live in states like New York, Illinois, or California and when you realize Trump’s winning your electoral votes is not that much better than a third party candidate, then it would be more than okay to vote your conscience IMO.

 

[jediliz]

sounds like he’s another “i’m personally pro life, but I can’t force that view on everyone” so that is NOT pro life. A TRUE pro life candidate (we have none in this race) would be 100% pro life and that means being for removing ALL tax payer funding of planned parenthood and being for overturning Roe vs Wade.

Gary Johnson is NOT for those

 

[ProVobis]

sounds like he’s another “i’m personally pro life, but I can’t force that view on everyone” so that is NOT pro life. A TRUE pro life candidate (we have none in this race) would be 100% pro life and that means being for removing ALL tax payer funding of planned parenthood and being for overturning Roe vs Wade.

Gary Johnson is NOT for those

But the Libertarian Party is all about protecting life, liberty, and so forth. Ron Paul was its main advocate. Is Gary a contradiction of this position?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

But the Libertarian Party is all about protecting life, liberty, and so forth. Ron Paul was its main advocate. Is Gary a contradiction of this position?

The Libertarian Party is not pro-life (not for protecting unborn life):

1.5 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

Source:
lp.org/platform

 

[Alex_H]

**What Abe Lincoln Prophesied About Trump and Hillary **

A message from our nations sixteenth President, Abraham Lincoln.

 

[oneofmany]

What happened to the Hillary and Trump thread?

 

[ProVobis]

The Libertarian Party is not pro-life (not for protecting unborn life):

Where does it say BORN only? Maybe you’re confusing it with the 14th amendment?

We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.
…
they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life—accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others;
…
People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others.
…
No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government.

As Ron Paul was asked about it, he explained his position was against all violence, and abortion is violence.

But I agree that the wording of the platform does appear to be contradictory. At least we know the government will not fund abortions or anything else relative to that.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Where does it say BORN only? Maybe you’re confusing it with the 14th amendment?

It doesn’t. However, when the platform says “leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration”, presumably they are not referring to an unborn person considering this issue, but to the born person. It seems to me that it advocates for the rights of the born to conscientiously consider whether or not to terminate the unborn person - no consideration in the platform for that unborn person having any right to being born in the first place. I’m disappointed that the platform doesn’t advocate for the rights of the unborn. Other 3rd parties do consider the life of the unborn directly even though they agree with the Libertarians on limited federal government. They could have advocated for the unborn more directly but chose not to do so.

…I agree that the wording of the platform does appear to be contradictory. At least we know the government will not fund abortions or anything else relative to that.

When I look at a potential presidential candidate worth considering, I look at the party platform and the candidate’s position regarding. Gary Johnson’s position is very similar to that of the ‘party line’ which to me is not all that encouraging as there is no room for the rights of the unborn in their platform and as you say, the terminology appears contradictory. In my opinion, it’s the party’s attempt to have it both ways.

I do view the Libertarian platform on abortion as better than that of the Democrats, but worse than that of the Republicans.

Democrat Party

Securing Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice
Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion—regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. We will continue to oppose—and seek to overturn—federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment. We condemn and will combat any acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation of reproductive health providers, patients, and staff. We will defend the ACA, which extends affordable preventive health care to women, including no-cost contraception, and prohibits discrimination in health care based on gender.

We will address the discrimination and barriers that inhibit meaningful access to reproductive health care services, including those based on gender, sexuality, race, income, disability, and other factors. We recognize that quality, affordable comprehensive health care, evidence-based sex education and a full range of family planning services help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions…

Women and Girls
We believe the United States must continue to be a strong advocate for the rights and opportunities of women and girls around the world. Elevating their status is not just the right thing to do—it is also a strategic imperative that advances American interests in prosperity and stability. When women and girls are healthy, educated, and able to participate economically, their families and communities prosper, poverty decreases, and economies grow. And when women participate in conflict resolution and post-conflict processes, it improves the likelihood of securing sustainable peace. Democrats are committed to advancing the rights and opportunities of women and girls as a central focus of American diplomacy, development, and defense efforts and will continue to support the United States National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security. We will work to end the epidemic of gender-based violence around the world. We will urge ratification of the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
We will support sexual and reproductive health and rights around the globe. In addition to expanding the availability of affordable family planning information and contraceptive supplies, we believe that safe abortion must be part of comprehensive maternal and women’s health care and included as part of America’s global health programming. Therefore, we support the repeal of harmful restrictions that obstruct women’s access to health care information and services, including the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars American assistance to provide safe, legal abortion throughout the developing world…

Appointing Judges
We will appoint judges who defend the constitutional principles of liberty and equality for all, and will protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion, curb billionaires’ influence over elections because they understand that Citizens United has fundamentally damaged our democracy, and believe the Constitution protects not only the powerful, but also the disadvantaged and powerless.

Source:
demconvention.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Democratic-Party-Platform-7.21.16-no-lines.pdf

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Republican Party

The Fifth Amendment:
Protecting Human Life
The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property” deliberately echoes the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their Creator” with the inalienable right to life. Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.
We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.
We oppose the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood, so long as they provide or refer for elective abortions or sell fetal body parts rather than provide healthcare.
We urge all states and Congress to make it a crime to acquire, transfer, or sell fetal tissues from elective abortions for research, and we call on Congress to enact a ban on any sale of fetal body parts. In the meantime, we call on Congress to ban the practice of misleading women on so-called fetal harvesting consent forms, a fact revealed by a 2015 investigation.
We will not fund or subsidize healthcare that includes abortion coverage.
We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.
We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from individuals with disabilities, newborns, the elderly, or the infirm, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide.
We affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women who face an unplanned pregnancy. In order to encourage women who face an unplanned pregnancy to choose life, we support legislation that requires financial responsibility for the child be equally borne by both the mother and father upon conception until the child reaches adulthood. Failure to require a father to be equally responsible for a child places an inequitable burden on the mother, creating a financial and social hardship on both mother and child.
We celebrate the millions of Americans who open their hearts, homes, and churches to mothers in need and women fleeing abuse.
We thank and encourage providers of counseling, medical services, and adoption assistance for empowering women experiencing an unintended pregnancy to choose life. We support funding for ultrasounds and adoption assistance.
We salute the many states that now protect women and girls through laws requiring informed consent, parental consent, waiting periods, and clinic regulation.
We condemn the Supreme Court’s activist decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt striking down commonsense Texas laws providing for basic health and safety standards in abortion clinics.
We applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for leading the effort to add enforcement to the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act by passing the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which imposes appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery whether the death of the infant is intended.
We strongly oppose infanticide. Over a dozen states have passed Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Acts prohibiting abortion after twenty weeks, the point at which current medical research shows that unborn babies can feel excruciating pain during abortions, and we call on Congress to enact the federal version. Not only is it good legislation, but it enjoys the support of a majority of the American people.
We support state and federal efforts against the cruelest forms of abortion, especially dismemberment abortion procedures, in which unborn babies are literally torn apart limb from limb.
We call on Congress to ban sex-selection abortions and abortions based on disabilities discrimination in its most lethal form.
We oppose embryonic stem cell research.
We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
We support adult stem cell research and urge the restoration of the national placental stem cell bank created by President George H.W. Bush but abolished by his Democrat successor, President Bill Clinton. We oppose federal funding for harvesting embryos and call for a ban on human cloning.

Source:
prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL%5b1%5d-ben_1468872234.pdf