Can we support a pro-abortion candidate

[arunangelo]

Can we support a candidate who does not recognize all human beings as human beings?

We have human rights because we have human life. In other words if we did not have life in the first place, our rights would not be an issue. Therefore, if anyone accepts or promotes laws that allow destruction of human life-especially lives of the most helpless and innocent unborn babies, any talk about any other issue related to helping human beings and protecting their rights and well being becomes a mute issue. Furthermore, abortion is the worst crime because a helpless unborn innocent human being is murdered by a physician who is supposed to a healer and the mother who is supposed to protect and nurture the baby. How can anyone support a candidate who supports and promotes such a terrible crime and is unwilling to call victims of such a crime human beings: after they survived botched abortions)? Would not supporting such a candidate be similar to supporting a Nazi candidate?

[catalyst]

In my stated opinion / position, the woman has the right to terminate her pregnancy. If the fetus can survive outside the mother's body, I favor rendering medical support.
I am not in favor of refusing support if survival is reasonably possible. I am also NOT in favor of anyone dictating to a woman what she must do with the insides of her body. I realize that you claim that a woman should be forced to do as YOU decide with regards to pregnancy; however, I disagree with good reason.

In my opinion, killing an innocent human being because it is "unwanted" is wrong, regardless of its age.
I am still interested in what your "good reason" is.

Here is good reason for abortion, Fisherking. For EXAMPLE: A woman is pregnant. She collapses at work. She is rushed to hospital and it is found that she has an eptopic pregnancy. The woman is given the choice that if she aborts the pregnancy and SOON, ONE life will be saved, albiet hers only, however, if she chooses to continue with the pregnancy, BOTH the foetus and she will surely die as the foetus as it will not survive in the fallopian tube anyway and the tube would eventually burst, and obviously the "mother" wouldn't, as the result of the burst would poison her body and in turn kill her. Certainly, she is GIVEN a choice (as the choice MUST be given if the patient is conscious and lucid enough to reply).

She is given a 2 hour timeframe to decide. In your eyes, should she continue the pregnancy?

[TheoCurious]

Can we support a candidate who does not recognize all human beings as human beings?

Answer: You betcha we can! Barack Obama is the winner! I want to thank all the one-issue voters who had the decency to stay home so the rest of us could elect a President who actually cares about what happens to babies after they are born.

[McCulloch]

Can we support a candidate who does not recognize all human beings as human beings?

Answer: You betcha we can! Barack Obama is the winner! I want to thank all the one-issue voters who had the decency to stay home so the rest of us could elect a President who actually cares about what happens to babies after they are born.

Unfortunately, the president does not make the laws. He is only part of the process.

[mrow]Ballot Measures[mcol]Yes [mcol]No [row]Arizona Proposition 102: Ban on Gay Marriage [col]56% [col]44% [row]Arkansas Initiative 1: Ban on Gay Couples Adopting Children[col]57%[col]43% [row]California Proposition 8: Ban on Gay Marriage[col]52%[col]48% [row]California Proposition 4: Abortion Limits[col]47%[col]53% [row]Colorado Amendment 48: Human Life from Moment of Conception[col]27%[col]73% [row]Florida Amendment 2: Ban on Gay Marriage[col]62%[col]38% [row]South Dakota Initiative 11: Abortion Limits[col]55%[col]45%

From CNN 9:22 a.m. EST, Nov 5 '08

[Goat]

I thought this might shine some light on the deal.
I know we ain't supposed to debate slippery slopes, but danged if Colorado aint doing it...

From:
Ammendment declares fertilized egg a person in the eyes of law even before implantation in the uterus

Sorry bout the cut and paste, just laying groundwork for discussion...

Here's the proposed state amendment: Section 31. Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of Article II of the state constitution, the terms "person" or "persons" shall include any human being from the moment of fertilization.

A proposed amendment to the Colorado state constitution that would define a human egg as a "person" from the moment of fertilization would go far beyond its intended purpose of outlawing practically all abortions.

...Should a woman who suffers a miscarriage be charged with negligent homicide because she failed to protect a fertilized egg she may not have even known she carried?

Should a man who fertilized an egg be entitled to file a civil lawsuit against a woman who miscarries, charging her with the wrongful death of his week-old fertilized egg?

And we see an inch is indeed equal to a mile.

FYI. That proposition was very soundly defeated, 78% to 22%

[TheoCurious]

Unfortunately, the president does not make the laws. He is only part of the process.

[mrow]Ballot Measures[mcol]Yes [mcol]No [row]Arizona Proposition 102: Ban on Gay Marriage [col]56% [col]44% [row]Arkansas Initiative 1: Ban on Gay Couples Adopting Children[col]57%[col]43% [row]California Proposition 8: Ban on Gay Marriage[col]52%[col]48% [row]California Proposition 4: Abortion Limits[col]47%[col]53% [row]Colorado Amendment 48: Human Life from Moment of Conception[col]27%[col]73% [row]Florida Amendment 2: Ban on Gay Marriage[col]62%[col]38% [row]South Dakota Initiative 11: Abortion Limits[col]55%[col]45%

From CNN 9:22 a.m. EST, Nov 5 '08

I actually LIVE in Arizona, so I am more than used to crushing defeats and bittersweet victories. As a state, Arizona was about as wrong as it could be this election. Not only did McCain carry the state, but Arizonans voted for the pointless anti-gay initiative AND, perhaps worse than that, reelected a little Hitler-in-training commonly referred to as Sheriff Joe Arpaio. At least Joe's Magical Fascist Kingdom is limited in size to a single Arizona county. He'll never achieve anything more than what he's already got. That's a sign of our society's progress. Sarah Palin was as close to a modern-day George Wallace as we'll ever see.

[McCulloch]

Sarah Palin was as close to a modern-day George Wallace as we'll ever see.

I think that Sarah Palin's contribution to the historical record will be summed up in the one question, "What was McCain thinking?"