Republican convention

[SamH]

Rich, every conservative with national exposure and a pulse has asked Akin to drop out, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee has pulled all funding.

I’m not sure how much more they could “insist”.

They could have hung him from a tree it wouldn’t have been enough for liberals so why bother trying?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Rich, every conservative with national exposure and a pulse has asked Akin to drop out, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee has pulled all funding.

I’m not sure how much more they could “insist”.

Akin was not the frontrunner before the primaries. I think a lot of McCaskill supporters voted for him because they knew she could win against him. She even spent a lot of ad time promoting his conservativism.

Unfortunately Todd believes the primary results make him the favorite.

I will have to hold my nose and vote for him. A vote for him is a vote against Claire.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Are those people running for Congress or the Senate? Akin is not a comedian who can get away with insensitive remarks. There is a difference expectation of responsibility. BTW, Mr. Romney has not withdrawn his opposition to Akin’s continuing to stay in the race.

:banghead: If Akin loses, the conservatives can flatten their foreheads cursing themselves why they didn’t insist on him leaving the race.

These people are public figures who have a platform

Romney has asked for Akin to quit. List of Republicans asking Akin to step out is extensive

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

They could have hung him from a tree it wouldn’t have been enough for liberals so why bother trying?

A tree decoration. Drat! Why didn’t Missouri Conservatives think of that??

 

[rlg94086]

I think this could also apply to Democrats.

I think its hysterical that the people who have a problem with the “inflexibility” on abortion in the Republican platform are Catholic Democrats.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I think its hysterical that the people who have a problem with the “inflexibility” on abortion in the Republican platform are Catholic Democrats.

Romney has a problem with the Platform plank as he admits of the classic exceptions, and Ryan is now in line with Romney. Some Catholic Democrats, those two.

 

[He_Man]

You mean that isn’t already standard practice?

BTW, it’s not one random dude or one random word. It’s a mindset. The only logical reason to divide rape (not false claims, but rape) into ‘legitimate’ and non-legitimate, is so that rape victims can be treated differently. Differently how? Just listen to Akin.

If my name was Todd Akin, you might have a point.

Show me where this mindset that offends you occurs outside the snippet he gave and we can talk. The reason this is a news story is because it ISN’T commonplace.

 

[He_Man]

Rich, every conservative with national exposure and a pulse has asked Akin to drop out, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee has pulled all funding.

I’m not sure how much more they could “insist”.

Apparently it’s too hard to say “kudos to Romney and the vast majority of conservatives for asking him to step aside.”

It’s much easier to take what he said and claim it is a mindset that all conservatives share, despite the evidence.

If half as many democrats stepped up and spoke out about offensive things from the left, regardless of who said them, I’d have a bit more respect for their consistency.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Apparently it’s too hard to say “kudos to Romney and the vast majority of conservatives for asking him to step aside.”

It’s much easier to take what he said and claim it is a mindset that all conservatives share, despite the evidence.

If half as many democrats stepped up and spoke out about offensive things from the left, regardless of who said them, I’d have a bit more respect for their consistency.

I’m one Liberal who is in full agreement wth Mr. Romney and the rest of those conservatives on Akin.

 

[bellasbane]

I think its hysterical that the people who have a problem with the “inflexibility” on abortion in the Republican platform are Catholic Democrats.

The Republican brand affects the way people view the pro-life movement, because many people (including some on this forum) believe the two are the same.

Failing to include language that makes an exception for the life of the mother (as the Catholic Church and Paul Ryan both do) on their platform leaves the GOP open to the valid criticism that the GOP is anti-women, which I believe hurts the pro-life cause.

The same argument is true of the Democrats, but with regard to the life of the child. The failure on the part of Democrats to even acknowledge that an unborn child has the right to life leaves them open to the valid criticism that they are anti-baby. This I believe hurts the feminist cause which seeks to elevate the status of women and change society to better reflect female priorities. You may not care about that, but I do.

 

[SamH]

The Republican brand affects the way people view the pro-life movement, because many people (including some on this forum) believe the two are the same.

Failing to include language that makes an exception for the life of the mother (as the Catholic Church and Paul Ryan both do) on their platform leaves the GOP open to the valid criticism that the GOP is anti-women, which I believe hurts the pro-life cause.
.

Are we going to pretend that if they did include that language that they still wouldn’t be criticized as being anti-women?

Please - give people some credit.

 

[rlg94086]

The Republican brand affects the way people view the pro-life movement, because many people (including some on this forum) believe the two are the same.

Failing to include language that makes an exception for the life of the mother (as the Catholic Church and Paul Ryan both do) on their platform leaves the GOP open to the valid criticism that the GOP is anti-women, which I believe hurts the pro-life cause.

The same argument is true of the Democrats, but with regard to the life of the child. The failure on the part of Democrats to even acknowledge that an unborn child has the right to life leaves them open to the valid criticism that they are anti-baby. This I believe hurts the feminist cause which seeks to elevate the status of women and change society to better reflect female priorities. You may not care about that, but I do.

I care about the fact that Catholic Democrats weigh the two platforms so differently.

Republican Party platform: 100% anti-abortion…not worded well, when it comes to difficult question of the life of the mother.

Democratic Party platform: Unequivocally pro-abortion in all cases and against limiting a woman’s “right to choose” to kill their unborn child.

Looking at those two, most people would see that the Republican stance is extremely close to Church teaching, while the Democrat stance is diametrically opposed to Church teaching. Weiging those two causes Democrats to? Condemn the Republicans as anti-woman and vote Democrat. Fail.

 

[bellasbane]

Are we going to pretend that if they did include that language that they still wouldn’t be criticized as being anti-women?

Please - give people some credit.

Yeah, well at least it will help on the abortion issue. The economic policies of the GOP are something else entirely.

 

[ProVobis]

Democratic Party platform: Unequivocally pro-abortion in all cases and against limiting a woman’s “right to choose” to kill their unborn child.

The U.S. Democratic Party

2008: “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to affordable family planning services and comprehensive age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre and post natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.” [74]

2004: “Support right to choose even if mother cannot pay. Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman’s right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” [75]

2000: “Choice is a fundamental, constitutional right. Democrats stand behind the right of every woman to choose. We believe it is a constitutional liberty. This year’s Supreme Court ruling show us that eliminating a woman’s right to choose is only one justice away. Our goal is to make abortion more rare, not more dangerous. We support contraceptive research, family planning, comprehensive family life education, and policies that support healthy childbearing.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Despite the language of the GOP platform, watch and see how many elected republicans will write a law which will ban all abortions and see how many politicians on both sides of the isle would vote for it.

Heck, you won’t even see a bill written to ban some abortions, never mind all abortions.

OH, and you could write such a law, what would the penalty be for those who violate it?

Will women who obtain abortions go to jail?

Jim

 

[bellasbane]

I care about the fact that Catholic Democrats weigh the two platforms so differently.

Republican Party platform: 100% anti-abortion…not worded well, when it comes to difficult question of the life of the mother.

Democratic Party platform: Unequivocally pro-abortion in all cases and against limiting a woman’s “right to choose” to kill their unborn child.

Looking at those two, most people would see that the Republican stance is extremely close to Church teaching, while the Democrat stance is diametrically opposed to Church teaching. Weiging those two causes Democrats to? Condemn the Republicans as anti-woman and vote Democrat. Fail.

I don’t see how failing to protect the lives of innocent women is in any way closer to Church teaching than failing to protect the lives of innocent children. I believe we need to affirm the rights of both.

 

[Corki]

I don’t see how failing to protect the lives of innocent women is in any way closer to Church teaching than failing to protect the lives of innocent children. I believe we need to affirm the rights of both.

How does the Republican platform plank as written fail to protect the lives of innocent women? Or even more so, how does the Democratic plank supporting unfettered abortion do anything at all to protect the lives of women?

As always, it’s important to read things in context. Here’s the portion of the GOP platform document that comes immediately after the excerpt quoted in the OP.

We have made progress. The Supreme Court has upheld prohibitions against the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion. States are now permitted to extend health-care coverage to children before birth. And the Born Alive Infants Protection Act has become law; this law ensures that infants who are born alive during an abortion receive all treatment and care that is provided to all newborn infants and are not neglected and left to die. We must protect girls from exploitation and statutory rape through a parental notification requirement. We all have a moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unplanned pregnancy. At its core, abortion is a fundamental assault on the sanctity of innocent human life. Women deserve better than abortion. Every effort should be made to work with women considering abortion to enable and empower them to choose life. We salute those who provide them alternatives, including pregnancy care centers, and we take pride in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.

Respect for life requires efforts to include persons with disabilities in education, employment, the justice system, and civic participation. In keeping with that commitment, we oppose the nonconsensual withholding of care or treatment from people with disabilities, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, which endanger especially those on the margins of society.

No one could read this **in context **and claim (with a straight face, anyway) that the platform is anti-woman or that it fails to affirm the rights of women.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

I don’t see how failing to protect the lives of innocent women is in any way closer to Church teaching than failing to protect the lives of innocent children. I believe we need to affirm the rights of both.

You have to be born before you can have rights/benefits.

And to be quite honest, I tire of hearing/reading about “rights” of groups. How about rights as Americans?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Despite the language of the GOP platform, watch and see how many elected republicans will write a law which will ban all abortions and see how many politicians on both sides of the isle would vote for it.

Heck, you won’t even see a bill written to ban some abortions, never mind all abortions.

OH, and you could write such a law, what would the penalty be for those who violate it?

Will women who obtain abortions go to jail?

Jim

Republicans have done it, but it can’t pass both houses because of the Democrats and Obama would veto it anyway. But, (as liberals point out) it’s really just symbolic anyway because no matter how many truly comprehensive bills prolifers pass, they would be declared unconstitutional unless the majority on the Court is prolife at the time.

It is true, though, that Repubs have passed bills limiting abortions in some states that have passed muster, but barely. Nebraska’s ban on partial birth abortion made it through the Supreme Court by one vote. All the Repubs on the Court voted for the ban, all the dems voted against it.

Women who obtained abortions never went to jail. The doctors or other “practitioners” are the ones who were prosecuted, if anyone.

 

[bellasbane]

How does the Republican platform plank as written fail to protect the lives of innocent women?

“…the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed”

A procedure that is necessary to protect the life of the mother may very well infringe upon the life of the child. The Catholic Church does not view this as abortion. However, the GOP platform does not make this distinction and as worded would criminalize these types of medical interventions.

But you have already heard this and don’t seem to think it’s a valid concern.

Or even more so, how does the Democratic plank supporting unfettered abortion do anything at all to protect the lives of women?

That’s not what I said. I said the Democratic platform does not protect the life of the child.