Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lily_Bernans said:
The Republican Supreme Court that upheld Roe v. Wade believes the same as Hillary Clinton, that the unborn person does not have rights under the US Constitution.

So Democrats and Republicans agree on something I guess. 🤷
Click to expand...
And you love to harken back to the Republicans on the High Court in 1973 while totally ignoring the decisions of the Democrats on the Court now - including their upholding the most heinous of procedures - Partial Birth Abortion and the Democratic Party litmus test that will be aggressively seek to install judges who are pro-death, pro-abortion, anti religious freedom [and specifically anti-Catholic] …

Hillary aside - the Democratic Platform is decidedly and unabashedly pro-death, pro-abortion and with your votes for their democratic candidates - so are you actively promoting their pro-abortion, pro-death socialist world view
 
Hillary Clinton should name the hypothetical abortion restrictions she supports.

“The majority of late-term abortions are done on healthy babies developing normally through uncomplicated pregnancies. Does Mrs. Clinton support a ban on those abortions? Does Mrs. Clinton support a law prohibiting abortions for sex selection? These abortions primarily affect female babies. What about abortions to reduce triplets to twins?”

Read more at: nationalreview.com/article/431443/hillary-clinton-abortion-restrictions-abortion-demand
 
_Abyssinia said:
It’s possible that Roe v Wade could have been reversed if Democrats had allowed the nomination of Robert Bork to go through: lifenews.com/2012/12/28/roe-v-wade-could-have-been-reversed-if-robert-bork-had-been-approved/

Although you can never guarantee a Republican president would nominate a justice who would reverse Roe v Wade, it’s a different party on abortion presently than it once was, and that reflects the fact that the Republican Party adopted a pro-life platform in 1980, nearly seven years after the Roe v Wade ruling. Whereas, Hillary Clinton has a litmus test on Roe v Wade.

As I’ve commented before to you, this is not the 1960s or 1970s. Did Eisenhower or Nixon have an abortion litmus test with their Supreme Court Justices? Neither may have had any knowledge of what was coming down the road before the Supreme Court, what would turn out to be, Roe v Wade. Who knows whether they would have changed their Supreme Court nominations if they knew that case was coming. I suspect despite what their personal positions on abortion were, that back then, abortion would not have been something that was looked at in regards to the Supreme Court justices views, correct me if I am wrong. This US presidential election could decide how long Roe v Wade stands.

You are wrong, the Roe v Wade ruling that was upheld did not claim that the unborn was a “person”:

prolifewisconsin.org/proLifeIssues.asp?article=Personhood+%26+the+Roe+v.+Wade+Decision&aid=274&id=7

Hillary Clinton calling the unborn “person” is at odds with the Roe v Wade ruling that legalised abortion. Calling the “unborn” person is at odds with believing that the unborn does not have constitutional protection, which it would if the baby is declared a person, it would have protection under the fourteenth amendment, per above excerpt from the decision on Roe v Wade.
Click to expand...
I doubt that Bork would have made a difference. Five Republicans and two Democrats upheld Roe v Wade. Even if you take the two Democrats out of the equation and put them in the minority, there are still five Republicans who voted to uphold. Two Borks wouldn’t have made a difference.

Given that one cannot tell how a justice will vote, I don’t think the presidential election will have any effect at all on Roe v Wade. It’s going to be around a long time no matter who is elected:

thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/274885-trump-surrogate-roe-v-wade-wont-be-overturned

cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/04/01/chris-collins-abortion-intv-camerota-newday.cnn

quora.com/Will-the-US-Supreme-Court-ever-overturn-Roe-v-Wade
 
Peter_J said:
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but are you in fact saying no rights at all, as in the
Unborn Victims of Violence Act is unconstitutional??
Click to expand...
No, I’m not saying that’s unconstitutional, though it seems at odds with Roe v Wade to me. But then I’m no lawyer.

I personally believe that anyone who harms a pregnant women and causes the death of the child she’s carrying should be tried for murder.
 
YADA said:
And you love to harken back to the Republicans on the High Court in 1973 while totally ignoring the decisions of the Democrats on the Court now - including their upholding the most heinous of procedures - Partial Birth Abortion and the Democratic Party litmus test that will be aggressively seek to install judges who are pro-death, pro-abortion, anti religious freedom [and specifically anti-Catholic] …

Hillary aside - the Democratic Platform is decidedly and unabashedly pro-death, pro-abortion and with your votes for their democratic candidates - so are you actively promoting their pro-abortion, pro-death socialist world view
Click to expand...
I’ll harken back to only 1992 and PP v Casey, when the court passed up its best chance to overturn Roe v Wade, again a Republican court.

No candidate is against religious freedom; you keep taking that out of context.

Democrats aren’t pro-death; the women who decide to have abortions are pro-death. Please stop trying to pass the buck to people who have never had an abortion. Thank you.

If abortion is murder, then women who make the decision to abort are murderers; if they aren’t murderers, then abortion isn’t murder.
 
JimG said:
10 times Hillary Clinton revealed how extreme she is on abortion.
Click to expand...
Talking points, taken out of context. I noticed the “Sign the Petition, We Dislike Hillary Clinton!” all over the site! LOL Of course they are going to distort what she said. Almost anyone’s words can be turned against them if presented out of context.

I respect anyone’s right to disagree with her and not vote with her, but these Websites really shouldn’t take anyone’s words out of context, not Hillary’s, Trump’s, Cruz’s, Sanders’, or Kasich’s. No one’s.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
Talking points, taken out of context. I noticed the “Sign the Petition, We Dislike Hillary Clinton!” all over the site! LOL Of course they are going to distort what she said. Almost anyone’s words can be turned against them if presented out of context.

I respect anyone’s right to disagree with her and not vote with her, but these Websites really shouldn’t take anyone’s words out of context, not Hillary’s, Trump’s, Cruz’s, Sanders’, or Kasich’s. No one’s.
Click to expand...
I think it was mainly about Hillary Clinton’s talking points on abortion. Does she suport any restrictions on abortion whatsoever?
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I’ll harken back to only 1992 and PP v Casey, when the court passed up its best chance to overturn Roe v Wade, again a Republican court.

No candidate is against religious freedom; you keep taking that out of context.

Democrats aren’t pro-death; the women who decide to have abortions are pro-death. Please stop trying to pass the buck to people who have never had an abortion. Thank you.

If abortion is murder, then women who make the decision to abort are murderers; if they aren’t murderers, then abortion isn’t murder.
Click to expand...
It’s the Democratics who are enabling the killing of the unborn and giving their defacto blessing to killing babies in the womb …so absolutely the Democratic Party is the party of death …if the Democratic platform said that it’s a man’s right to choose where and with whom to engage in sexual relations where the other party was voiceless they would be the party of rape …even though it would be the man’s choice to force that issue.

And this does not account for the social pressure and outright corrosion women feel to kill their children. The democratic party is waging a war on the unborn
 
JimG said:
I think it was mainly about Hillary Clinton’s talking points on abortion. Does she suport any restrictions on abortion whatsoever?
Click to expand...
I suppose that if a woman does not want an abortion, she cannot be forced to have one by her physician or the government. Or has it come to this? Must the options also be explained to her? If so, I would guess Hillary supports this.
 
JimG said:
I think it was mainly about Hillary Clinton’s talking points on abortion. Does she suport any restrictions on abortion whatsoever?
Click to expand...
No Hillary does not and neither does the Democratic Party… In fact they celebrate all and unlimited abortions at NARAL Pro-Choice fundraisers called Gala Balls …

Pro death, pro abortion your support at work via your Democratic votes and candidate support
 
YADA said:
No Hillary does not and neither does the Democratic Party… In fact they celebrate all and unlimited abortions at NARAL Pro-Choice fundraisers called Gala Balls …

Pro death, pro abortion your support at work via your Democratic votes and candidate support
Click to expand...
The National Abortion Rights Action League certainly supports Hillary enthusiastically, endorsing her early on, even with the original 3 Democratic candidates in the primaries.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
So do you believe in religions in which the man is total boss, in which the woman has no say? Those are the religions Hillary is talking about.
Click to expand...
Can you tell us specifically, what religion says that " the man is total boss, in which the woman has no say?"
 
JimG said:
The National Abortion Rights Action League certainly supports Hillary enthusiastically, endorsing her early on, even with the original 3 Democratic candidates in the primaries.
Click to expand...
Planned Parenthood has also endorsed Hillary Clinton: lifenews.com/2016/01/07/planned-parenthood-caught-selling-aborted-baby-parts-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president/

They have already run ads in support of Clinton but none mention abortion by name: lifenews.com/2016/02/18/planned-parenthood-runs-three-ads-for-hillary-clinton-none-of-them-mention-abortion/
 
YADA said:
It’s the Democratics who are enabling the killing of the unborn and giving their defacto blessing to killing babies in the womb …so absolutely the Democratic Party is the party of death …if the Democratic platform said that it’s a man’s right to choose where and with whom to engage in sexual relations where the other party was voiceless they would be the party of rape …even though it would be the man’s choice to force that issue.

And this does not account for the social pressure and outright corrosion women feel to kill their children. The democratic party is waging a war on the unborn
Click to expand...
What you say is accurate, but some people refuse to let the facts get in the way of their oppinions
 
carpenter383 said:
What you say is accurate, but some people refuse to let the facts get in the way of their oppinions
Click to expand...
Democrats aren’t “enabling” anything of the kind. The women make the choice to have an abortion. People, and I’m speaking in general, not of you in particular, need to look at the facts without being so emotional.

Suppose a man who wasn’t paid enough at work, was overlooked for a promotion and raise, and had a wife who degraded him all the time, and all the while he was trying to house, clothe, and feed this wife and his four kids, who were very badly behaved because the wife let them run wild all day. Suppose the wife picks one too many fights, and the man kills her. Would society say, “Oh, well, he was a victim,” and let it go? No. He’s be arrested and charged with murder. So why shouldn’t a woman who kills her defenseless, unborn child be charged with the same? She should be. And abortion will flourish until she is. Flourish.
 
carpenter383 said:
What you say is accurate, but some people refuse to let the facts get in the way of their oppinions
Click to expand...
gopchoice.org/

Republicans who support abortion have even formed a party within the Republican Party, Republicans for Choice. They are as much a part of the “culture of death” as any Democrat ever was.

In actuality, neither party is, but if you insist on calling the Democrats that, please look at the facts and see that the Republicans are as well. I don’t think we can blame all Democrats or all Republicans. Blanket statements are almost always wrong.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
Democrats aren’t “enabling” anything of the kind. The women make the choice to have an abortion. People, and I’m speaking in general, not of you in particular, need to look at the facts without being so emotional.

Suppose a man who wasn’t paid enough at work, was overlooked for a promotion and raise, and had a wife who degraded him all the time, and all the while he was trying to house, clothe, and feed this wife and his four kids, who were very badly behaved because the wife let them run wild all day. Suppose the wife picks one too many fights, and the man kills her. Would society say, “Oh, well, he was a victim,” and let it go? No. He’s be arrested and charged with murder. So why shouldn’t a woman who kills her defenseless, unborn child be charged with the same? She should be. And abortion will flourish until she is. Flourish.
Click to expand...
Kind of amazing how many times I’ve heard this same “stuff” on this forum lately. I wonder if people are just copying off each other or something. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top