Republican National Coalition for life PAC views on Abortion

Jump to Last Post 1-10 of 10 discussions (84 posts)

88
Stacie Lposted 13 years ago
on a more serious note, it's is alleged by the writer that
"the Republican National Coalition for Life PAC, where they rate GOP candidates on their anti-abortion purity, and my jaw is on the floor at how many of these candidates support the cruelest and most extreme anti-abortion positions forcing a woman to give birth to a rapist's baby, even if the rapist is her father."
What do you think?
Read on...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article … sts_Babies
reply report
1. 59
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Your surprised that the Republican National Coalition for life is against abortion?
  
  That is called being consistent.
  
  Democrats might get further if they ever tried it.
  
  I don't mean being consistently wrong,
  
  That hasn't helped them at all.
  reply report
  66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Democrats are also against abortion, and they back much more effective measures to reduce the number of abortions by providing other alternatives--comprehensive sex education, more effective contraception and support for women who choose to have their babies and put them up for adoption.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So in this case you think that in the name of consistency, the child raped by her father should be forced to complete the birth?
  
  ...well, you are showing consistency
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Is the taking of a human life justified by a bad act happening to someone else?
  reply report
  59
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "So in this case you think that in the name of consistency, the child raped by her father should be forced to complete the birth?"
  
  No Ron, I think I was pretty clear with what I said.
  
  This group is showing consistency in its stance against abortion.
  
  Any hysterical thing you add to what I said is on you.
  reply report
2. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  As a father of five, I can't imagine anyone being in favor of killing babies as being anything BUT "radical".
  
  The right to LIVE is our most fundamental right, the right to NOT HAVE OUR LIFE TAKEN FROM US is the most sacred thing on earth. How defending it is "radical" or "extreme" or ... CRUEL????? It's CRUEL to defend someone from being killed? Or to make it law that life is to be defended, no taken lightly?
  
  You have one truly hideous view of life and "kindness".
  reply report
  66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What about teaching kids how to avoid pregnancies and more support for pre-natal care and adoptions?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What about it? Do you think it's the federal government's job to do that? If so, you're just another statist without a mind.
  reply report
  66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't say whose job it is. Actually, I'm not a big believer in federal government involvement in education. From what I've read "No Child Left Behind," a bipartisan approach, hasn't worked out very well. However, the social conservatives are the ones in many school districts who are opposing comprehensive sex education and promoting "abstinence only" training which research shows doesn't work.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  No Child Left Behind is the brainchild of one late Ted Kennedy. Basically, all federal influence should be abandoned in education. Let the locals deal with it, and ban all unions in education.
  reply report
  83
  psycheskinnerposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Quite. The US approach has lead to over 40 preganancies per 1000 teens. Not very effective.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It's not killing babies, it's aborting a fetus that can't survive on it's own. If it is a life it would be able to live without machines. It amazes me that the very people who fight so hard to make abortions illegal also fight the number one way to reduce the number of abortions. Comprehensive sex education and condoms. If it were the men who had to suffer thru an unwanted pregnancy and birth, it wouldn't even be up for discusion. The fact that most men still retain the belief that women are on this earth to serve and obey all men is a large part of the problem. What gives you the right to dictate what another human does with their body. Why not solve the problem by steralizing all men at birth? This would reduce the number of abortions and save a fortune on birth control. You seem to be ready to force a decision that doesn't affect you onto another at a moments notice. If it was your body being treated this way, I am sure you would be at the front of the line demanding that your rights be maintained. You don't seem to have the same concerns for other's right do you.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, what a load of garbage. It is required of ALL people that they learn to live responsibly. You know, not borrow too much, not break the law, not steal, not assault their neighbor, wife, or kids, not urinate in the grocery store freezer... the list goes on an on. So, why do you think we should EXEMPT sexual behavior from the list of things people actually have to learn to do with responsibility? Explain, please.
  reply report
  85
  kerrygposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Um, I don't know what post you read, but the OP I read was specifically talking about abortion in cases of incestuous rape. Do you seriously think it's "irresponsible" of a girl to get raped by her own father?
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  She probably led him on by dressing in skimpy clothes...
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, you're implying no guilt on the part of the one who committed the act? Just arguing (insanely) that I am somehow blaming victims of violence for being victims?
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Where did I state that I felt sexual behavior should be exempt from the list of things people have to learn to handle responsibly? How do you expect kids to learn about responsibility in regards to sexual activity when every church out there is fighting comprehensive sex education?
  
  What I was talking about is the mind set that prefers to keep kids in the dark and feed them religious crap instead of useful information that could save their life.
  To your comment below about saving a life by outlawing abortion...Go to your local fertility clinic, pick up an egg, drop a load of spem into a bowl with the egg and try to claim it on your taxes. Life doesn't begin with conception, it begins at birth.
  
  I have another question for you...If the fetus whose life you save is born gay, will you still fight for it's rights?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The answer is beyond your intellectual capacity. That's the only reason you could possibly make this argument. Your "public education" version of "comprehensive sex education" is "here's how to be irresponsible and not suffer the consequences" which, of course, is a lie with consequences that are destroying our society.
  
  Your simple-minded nonsense is neither accurate, nor useful in any way in solving any problems anywhere.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I thought this was a discussion, I didn't realize you planned on preaching to the masses. Your insults don't affect me in the least as I simply consider the source, A narrow minded holier than thou know it all who appearantly knows nothing.
  
  You may claim to hold some truth but I doubt you would recognize the truth if it slapped you in your ignorant face. In the future simply state you can't answer the question rather than make an assumption about another's intelect based upon one or two statements. Your little tirade is however amusing to watch.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You said: What I was talking about is the mind set that prefers to keep kids in the dark and feed them religious crap instead of useful information that could save their life.
  
  And then you had the nerve to call me "narrow minded" and "holier than thou".
  
  All the incivility is on your part. My determination that you can't engage in a useful conversation on the topic is derived from your inability to be civil in the first place. It's too bad if you suddenly grow sensitive and whine and cry about the consequences of you failing at even the most basic forms of civility.
  reply report
3. 60
  dutchman1951posted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I think the choice is personal, the Womans, and her partners if he is involved. It is not the Goverment's choice at all. never should be.
  reply report
71
Cagsilposted 13 years ago
It would be nice if people, in certain aspects learned how to not step on the rights of others. Abortion is a private and personal matter. It should never be in the hands of any government official.
reply report
1. 66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Amen. Spoken like a true libertarian.
  reply report
2. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  What about the one who is being killed? Who defends that life? It is not a "personal and private" matter to kill another human. That kind of thinking is beyond all bounds of any worthy civilization.
  reply report
  66
  Ralph Deedsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  In many if not most cases the "one being killed" is a microscopic zygote or early embryo. I could support limitations on late term abortions, but I object to fanatics equating abortions of zygotes or early embryos to baby killing or child murder.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You did not in any way address the question.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  wehold, How personal is the Army of God's continued campaign of killing of abortion doctors? This is a very public preacher who recruits mental rejects to kill in god's name and glorifies those who carry out that which he is too much of a coward to do himself. These recruits are no different that those who blow themselvews up in search of virgins and their god's praise.
  
  Ralph, perhaps all we need to do is find a goat herder to write the next chapter in the bible. You know how much stock christians place in the intelligence of primitive goat herders. Shucks, goat herders 2000 years ago had more smarts that the present day scientists do today. (according to the religious people of this country.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I know precisely nothing about "army of god", and if whoever it is believes they have a right to kill someone, they're daft.
  
  And, lastly, there's nothing about my position that has ANYTHING to do with religion. It is not doctrinal and I don't quote Biblical injuction or anything else. It is purely an intellectual argument, based upon science and reason.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I find it to be rather interesting that your arguement has nothing to do with religion when it is almost word for word what I hear on a daily basis in the bible belt. I will admit to making an assumption about the basis for your arguement being religion. Perhaps in the future you could mention that an opinion is your own when it ,s a mirror image of the religious crap most apponents to abortion mutter. This might reduce the number of assumption people make about your non sense.
  
  Provide me with the link that proves life begins at conception and don't quote the bible you claim not to be using.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Perhaps in the future, you could gain a brain? How DARE you demand that someone say "my opinion is my own"? Of course it's my own. The arrogance and outright vile bigotry that brings you to assume that one's opinion is not his own is completely unacceptable to a civil society. I'll even bet you think you're superior because of your own prejudices.
  
  And no, I have no need of "providing you a link". For pity's sakes, what kind of arrogant and stupid hypocrite are you? You asked me for MY opinion ,and the demanded I cite someone else for my opinion. I am more than fully capable of forming, holding and defending a fully valid opinion without falling back to some "source". I am highly offended at your nonsense ,as should be anyone who has the misfortune of reading it.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Had I known you were a tea bagger I wouldn't have bothered responding to you in the first place. I have no interest in anymore of your opinions as I prefer to deal with reality and appearanlty you are unfamiliar with the concept.
  My apologies to Stacie for helping take this post off subject.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, without any knowledge at all, you decide to publicly broadcast my supposed sexual fetishes (just your imagination), and then on that basis, declare me unfit for conversation.
  
  Actually, the problem is that you can no way win any debate with me, as you have neither intellectual consistency nor clarity of mind equal to the task.
  
  You can TRY, but I suspect it would be the largest challenge of your entire life, and one you'd lose instantly, but just not be aware of having lost for quite some time. Which is to say little of my own abilities, as being rather slow of wit and of course, heavily burdened with my overwhelming ignorance, blah, blah blah, of which you will certainly do your best to convince the audience.
  
  I don't debate or argue with people who hold the same opinions I do. I have no need of "affirmation" of what I believe. I have come to it honestly, and as such, you cannot defeat it.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  All the incivility is on your part. My determination that you can't engage in a useful conversation on the topic is derived from your inability to be civil in the first place.
  
  Definition of CIVILITY
  1archaic : training in the humanities
  2a : civilized conduct; especially : courtesy, politeness b : a polite act or expression
  
  Here are some examples of civility on your part.
  
  You have one truly hideous view of life and "kindness".
  
  If so, you're just another statist without a mind.
  
  Wow, what a load of garbage
  
  Just arguing (insanely) that I am somehow blaming victims of violence for being victims?
  
  The answer is beyond your intellectual capacity.
  
  Your simple-minded nonsense is neither accurate, nor useful in any way in solving any problems anywhere.
  
  Perhaps in the future, you could gain a brain?
  
  For pity's sakes, what kind of arrogant and stupid hypocrite are you?
  
  Actually, the problem is that you can no way win any debate with me, as you have neither intellectual consistency nor clarity of mind equal to the task.
  
  If you are unwilling to task your intellect to decide that question, then how DARE you have to gall to demand that your opinion, derived without thought, be considered above debate or above question.
  
  You have a truly warped view.
  
  These comments are from just one blog you honored with your presence. Perhaps in the future you might learn the definitions of the big words you like to use. But then again you are the only walking example of human perfection in America...according to your opinion. You might have a future in comedy if you could manage to be as funny as your ignorant.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  "So, without any knowledge at all, you decide to publicly broadcast my supposed sexual fetishes (just your imagination)"
  WTF are you talking about? I checked your page and the several posts you have about the tea party led me to believe you are a tea bagger.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The term "tea bagger" is about a sexual fetish.
  
  Please refrain from any further accusations of this kind. I said this nicely. Next time there are consequences.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Consequences...what are you, a playground bully that never grew up. What are you going to do, report me to your imaginary friend in the sky? Tea bagger is also a derogitory slang term for those who buy into the tea party crap. If you don't like the language I use don't respond to me. As a matter of fact the less you respond to anyone with your childish antics the better this site wilol be for the decent people on it. I have seen nothing from you other than attacks on everyone you respond to. It is hilarious that you think this is what a discussion or debate consists of. You take you consequenses and shove them. I ignore insults and most coments from all tea baggers I come in contact with.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The term teabagger was used by early tea party activists to describe themselves. It was only after they learned of the double-meaning that they dropped using it. Actually, I'm not sure why teatards choose to take it as an insult. It's the other type of teabaggers who should be insulted.
  
  You threatened "consequences" toward another hubber; care to elaborate?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  For anyone who manages to follow this to this point, I'm just commenting that I gave them the rope and they gladly dashed in to prove how uncivil and uncouth both of these twits are.
  
  There is no intellectual or emotional maturity difference, between these two and and 2nd graders on the playground at school, arguing over who is the best at something. Both think that the more creative the profanity or otherwise vile language, the more credibility they have.
  
  Thanks for rushing for the last word in the thread. You did yourselves proud.
  report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  And each is a very accurate and dispassionate response to things so stupid they cause pain in anyone who has the capacity to think.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Don't actually you mean anyone who has the capacity to think like you do? It seems a little childish to state that anyone who disagrees with you is incapable of thought. A lot of people on here that have responded seem quite capable of intelligent and rational thought. The fact that they don't agree with you makes them idiots in your opinion. You mention debating and discussing but all you do is preach from you pulpit of hate.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Note, nowhere do I say that "anyone who disagrees with me" is incapable of thought. I simply state that certain things hold a level of obviousness that there is NO rational excuse for being unable to grasp them.
  
  Being a former liberal, I was told the exact same thing, and I set about to prove the accuser wrong. Now I'm not a liberal anymore, and behold... I had been laughably stupid, because I had failed to do the most natural thing in the world... think things through. Not "think about them", but "think them through".
  
  You live a short circuited world, because you've been told what to think, and never taught HOW to think. You have accepted an array of premises which are not true, and in fact, conflict with the reality you see before you, but not thinking, you never notice.
  
  I know it well, because I used to be there. You have a LOT to unlearn. Better get busy.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You make assumptions based on who knows what and attack everyone you reply to based upon this. Again, anyone who disagrees with you lacks the ability to think in your opinion. Every comment you have made is nothing more than an attack on those who disagree with you. I would like to know what the basis for youre conclusions are. Where do you get off telling me that I have no ability to think and that I am simply accepting what I have been told as gospel? Keep your teabagger crap to yourself and I won't bother wasting anymore of my time arguing with a child. As a matter of fact you should log off your computer and go tell your mommy you've been a bad boy.
  report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  It's pretty obvious to me that you have remained pain free during this waste of time. You claim I have been told what to think and then decide to tell me what I should really be thinking based on your warped sense of reality.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Well, first off- It's NOT your life. You have no right to interfere in what another person does with that regards. It's NONE of your business.
  
  Stick to your own life. Stay out of others.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  So, when I see thugs cornering someone to do violence, it is my job to look the other way, after all, it's not MY business to defend anyone's life. Nor, apparently, the government's. Whoa, that means murder should be legal.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That is not the same thing. A person's rights are involved, a living and breathing full grown adult. It should be common sense to NOT have an abortion, if at all possible. I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice.
  
  I would rather a women get to carry full term, whenever possible, but not at the expense of their own life. I do have a higher ground to hold people to. Yes, make no mistake. But, up to the point of choice.
  
  Don't be dumb or act stupid please. That's ridiculous and you're extreme view invades right to choice.
  
  You over step your authority as a living human being, living an active life. No one is stopping you from not having one. It is a choice, an option.
  
  So give it a rest. I understand it's killing something. I also understand your view of conception is life, but choice remains with the living person of mature(hopefully- some are not) adult to make that decision. NOT have it made for them by someone else. That's an invasion of the mother's right to life and choice.
  
  And, Yes, I know right to life should apply to a baby, but it cannot, because it invades the right to life and right to choice of the mother....*1* right of life versus two rights of the mother's...remember, no one has a right to choose about being born. And, it never should.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Your argument boils down to "how dare you disagree!". Which, is, well, unconvincing. You say that a "full grown adult" has the right to not have his life taken. But how and when does he acquire that right? Certainly not by government giving him a right to live. If the right to live is merely a grant of privilege by government, then we have no right at all to live our life. it's just granted to us at whim by a body granted the power of life and death over us.
  
  So, it cannot be that our right to life is a gift of governance, it must be inherent, or else it be no right at all. To which I ask you to task your intellect and explain how there is ANY possible moment in the development of a human, whether it is the moment the umbilical cord is cut, or the moment the brain shows function, or the moment he can speak his name, or any other "moment" when a being goes from having no beingness, to being endowed with the right to live.
  
  If you are unwilling to task your intellect to decide that question, then how DARE you have to gall to demand that your opinion, derived without thought, be considered above debate or above question.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You said something here, I did not say. Please re-read what I posted. I said, a full grown adult will make the decision on abortion or not. I did not say anything about a person has the right to not have his life taken.
  
  You are now talking about "Capital punishment", or the death penalty, and your argument is OFF topic of this forum.
  
  You want to talk about "Capital Punishment", then look for my solution to that topic within my hub about it.
  
  The Right to Life isn't portrayed as it should be. The Right to Life is about living life with regards to those who are born into this world. Please remember I said "born". That is a completion of the pregnancy. Not before then. Government is forcing accountability up to a point, for which, leaves the door open for abortions(btw which is the topic).
  
  Even government realizes that society/humanity isn't ready to make the step of never requiring or having a need for the service. It isn't civilized enough(which my death penalty hub addresses).
  
  Exposed your argument to this question above.
  The right to life is misperceived due to too many misconceptions. Government has legalized "capital punishment", however, it's not used properly.
  You make no sense, and I find your tone, lacking due your inability to not notice or read what was said.
  
  You overlooked to realize I said- NO ONE has the choice to be born. We are born. It's not a choice. I didn't make the choice to be born. Therefore, you cannot give the choice to the child to be soon growing inside a woman, and take her right to live her life how she wants?
  
  No. Abortion give her an option. If you don't like it too bad. Get on with your life.
  
  But, please...do try to stay on topic.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You understood nothing of what I said. I never mentioned capital punishment. I have no idea how you strayed that far from the topic.
  
  You are pretending that "born" is the exact moment you go from non-existence to "endowed human" status. Such intellectual fiction is laughably absurd. Is it the moment that the cord ceases pulsing? Is it the first breath? Is it the first cry? I don't actually care which one you choose, the fact is there is no material difference between that moment and the moment preceeding it.
  
  None of those events, or moments, nor any of the ones preceeding it, made that child any less of a child, nor made a non-human into a human, and that can be proven both rationally and scientifically. Ergo, the idea that humanness and rights magically spring into being at some arbitrarily chosen moment is intellectual sewage. It is utterly without rational merit.
  
  If government imposes that moment, then government has been empowered to grant your right to life and to withhold it when it sees fit, based on arbitrary and irrational criteria. Which, of course, violates not only the letter, but every rational intent of the Constitution and in fact, of the term "cvilization" itself.
  
  Sorry, your argument is vapor, is smoke in the wind. You need to do exactly what I said and start applying some intellect to the political positions you've chosen emotionally.
  reply report
  61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Our constitution gaurantees us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now explain again how a government doesn't give us the right to life/ Try thinking prior to opening your mouth.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Nope, the Constitution does not gaurantee us anything. It constrains the government FROM TAKING OUR RIGHTS AWAY. Your comprehension of the Constitution and associated documents is apparently nil.
  
  Perhaps you'd be enlightened if you read my hubs on the Constitution, and see where my pen name comes from.
  reply report
3. 61
  Stump Parrishposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Or church group.
  reply report
71
Cagsilposted 13 years ago
And btw- Abortion is legal. If you didn't happen to know it. It is federally legal for a doctor to give a woman an abortion.

It's a legal medical service provided to women who get pregnant.

So, both ways, it's none of your business. You are not involved in the process and should not be. So, in other words, butt out.
reply report
1. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Slavery was once legal, too. But I rather doubt that you accept "legal" as the definition of "moral and right and good". Even though you're trying to argue exactly that.
  
  "My vice is legal, but yours is too evil to be."
  reply report
2. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  The taking of a human life none of my business. Ergo, nobody is allowed to defend the life of another person. Not even the government.
  
  You have a truly warped view.
  reply report
76
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
Why is it that so many of those who are most vociferous on this topic will never be in the position of having to have an abortion themselves? You talk about being pregnant and giving birth as if it were a piece of cake. Walk a mile in my shoes with my swollen belly and ankles, or puking daily for 3 months... then see what you say.

BTW, why do the same people who denounce abortion favor capital punishment? Is that not killing also? And don't give me that bullshit that everyone who gets the death penalty is guilty and deserves to die.
reply report
73
Diane Insideposted 13 years ago
So you do no have a right to life until you are 24 weeks old in the womb.
reply report
1. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  That's when the "LiberalFairy" comes by and sprinkles magic dust on you and you are then human and posses your "liberalfairy" given rights.
  reply report
59
Doug Hughesposted 13 years ago
Weholdthesetruths argues against any and all abortions and the sanctity of life from conception. I don't agree but I understand.
But in a previous post he wrote...

"The man is a tyrant, worthy of death...
If I were president, I would order his assassination."

Birdbrain pronounced this about Hugo Chavez. The murder of a civilian head of state which we are not at war with is acceptable - but all life is sacred from the point of conception. Anyone want to reconcile these?
reply report
1. 60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  American zygotes are sanctified life forms. Foreigners are alive but can be squashed like bugs if needed.
  
  Clear?
  reply report
  59
  Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Ron - I'm having trouble with specific applications.
  
  Americans can decide what foreigners live and die - and can snuff them with impunity - even heads of state. But if a 'baby' was planted against her will - maybe by a family memeber and is only hours or days old - it's immoral for the woman (or underaged girl) to take a pill that will wash out the bastard fetus that's only the size of a pinhead?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, us arrogant Americans even decide when other nations have too many people and we bomb them into the stone age, wipe out their armies, and force them to surrender, for having picked their nose in the wrong way.
  
  I suspect satire like the above is lost on you, so just understand that while you're desperately seeking simplistic sound bytes in a personal attack mode, some people never think that small.
  
  I would have had Hitler assassinated, had there been the opportunity, before the day I sent troops to England and before we had to engage in a bloody island hopping war in the Pacific and drop a nuclear bomb on Japan.
  
  And, before you go prattling on about hindsight, it isn't hindsight at all, but a very principled analysis of WHAT PEOPLE DO and certain behaviors that are easily recognizable. Before Chavez gets the chance to spark a war in South America, I would have him shot, if it could be done. Chavez displays every personality trait of a tyrant, being no better than a good number of well known murderous tyrants from the last century.
  
  And before you go running around like Chicken Little squawking nonsense, assassination is one's 'last resort'. But if you're not willing to do it, then you have no business being president. Your job is to defend the interests of the nation and of the people. Further, it is the job of the president to be that kind of responsible when it comes to international affairs. There are many things which could have been done and could still be done, to topple Chavez from power, but we haven't had a president with any guts or principle in too long for any of them to have been done.
  
  The current one fawns over Chavez like a star-struck groupie over a famous rock star, mostly because they're near indistinguishable in lust for power.
  reply report
  79
  Shadesbreathposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, you have it right.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Watch FoxNews and learn sumpthin' why dontcha?
  reply report
2. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I'm sorry you're so small minded and unable to expand beyond kindergarten politics.
  reply report
  60
  Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  You'll run out of people to insult soon
  
  Then you'll have to invent lots of pen names, start your own topic and then you can really insult yourself and perhaps see how you feel.
  
  Having a strong opinion is fine but having a 'I know I'm right and those who disagree are stupid' isn't.
  
  I suspect if someone fired a similar insult back you would head for admin and get them banned. This is why I've bitten my tongue.
  
  Why is it always the right wng conservatives that behave this way?
  
  Way to go.....
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't report anyone. I have used the "report" one time, and it was when someone posted not just profanity, but vile, ugly, truly hideous nonsense.
  
  I note your effort to falsely accuse me. Yet another dishonest person shouting I'm defective. Sigh. Are there actually ANY adult liberals left, or has it become the world of children?
  reply report
  60
  Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  and what exactly have I accussed you of?
  
  You seem to write at length about the importance of your own contribution and the accuse anybody who disagrees with you as being intellectualy deficient.
  
  Bit vain of you don't you think?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Please point to any mention of "my contribution".
  reply report
76
lovemychrisposted 13 years ago
That's right. this current crop of so called religious moral people....repubs!.....are really really against "change". The "change" which President Obama champions; Race and Gender!!

Obama is for women and people of color, and poor and struggling people.
Repubs are for rich white people--preferably men, and keeping the old status quo of the past 30 deadly, immoral, horror-driven, greed-mongering, war-profiteering years.

Out with the old, in with the new.

These republibaggers are going to be handed such a defeat, they will be forced to acknowledge their insanity and warped view of the world. IMO

Privacy is so important. The 4th amendment is the most important one in my opinion. What we do in our private lives is no one's business, unless we choose to make it so.

Take that away, and what is the point of any other rights?

These repubs want too much gvt intrusion into our private lives.
They want to tell everyone what to do....except for the crooks and thieves of big business and banking....them they give free reign.

I really can't stand them.
They do not deserve another go at governing...they messed the last one up so much, it's lucky we are still here.

Farewell repubs....don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!!!!

Guess you need another reminder that we don't want you anymore.

well OK....you are going to get it!!!
reply report
1. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  LOL. This is so funny... Everyone in the whole nation knows Democrats are on the way out... in so many ways.
  
  For a giggle on how absurd this person's posting is... http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ … san_trends
  reply report
  60
  Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  LOL????
  
  And you accuse others of being childish?
  
  Shouldn't you be out voting against a national health care program where the poorest get the same treatment as the wealthiest?
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I don't want "poor people's health care".
  reply report
  60
  Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I know you don't
  
  your belligerence can't see anything except what YOU want.
  reply report
  61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, that's it. I must be one hell of an evil, monsterous, baby beating, wife abusing, child molesting, poor person bashing, rich, evil, capitalist, redneck, racist, bigot, homophobic, nazi, warmonger, pile of human debris for thinking that I don't want a health care system based upon the lowest denominator to exist. Just like I don't want a job that pays minimum wage, nor drive a car called a Trabant.
  
  Or, you could be just a gratuitous flamer without any reason other than your own emotionally warped need to hurt others.
  
  Looking back, I'd say the second alternative is probably dead on right.
  reply report
  60
  Joe Badtoeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I think you've kind of described yourself and your attitude perfectly with that response
  
  My work here is done.
  reply report
  59
  Jim Hunterposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  They already get the same treatment.
  
  That right was created in 1986 and signed into a law by a Republican.
  
  Just like the "Obama tax cuts for the middle class" were signed into a law by a Republican.
  
  What have the Democrats done for us, besides triple the deficit in 3 short years?
  
  Oh yeah, they gave us "Obama care" that no one wants.
  reply report
2. 60
  couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Question for lovemychris:
  
  Isn't the current congress the one who gave a big favor to banks?
  reply report
76
lovemychrisposted 13 years ago
Sorry--they just got there-they aren't going ANYWHERE.
In fact, once people realize just how much they really don't want to go backwards, the Repub party will cease to exist.
The far left Dem party will cease too.
People do need to realize that this country exists for everyone.
We can't be led by extremes.
The gvt is a behemoth, not a little piece of everyone's pie.

The left are angry, the right are angry.
I am just grateful we have a sane, calm man in charge.
He really does know that he governs for everybody.

Take your special interests and forget it.

Liberty and Justice for all is a BIG undertaking. But I think Obama has that in mind!!!

NOT like the past 30 years, which was a complete gift to monied special interests.

Go Obama!! Vote Democrat!!
reply report
1. 61
  weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, yeah, the Party will save us. may it rule forever!
  
  Sheesh.
  
  Do you get paid for this? I'd hate to think you actually waste your time dreaming up this ludicrous nonsense.
  reply report
2. 60
  couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this
  I think most presidents hold the ideal of taking care to include the rights of all peoples. It's congress that's so messed up. President Obama is no different (ok, maybe he travels a lot more, but I'm not really counting the $ he spends on himself personally). He has his good side and his bad. He's an excellent speaker and a learned man. I'm not too sure about the whole Chicago thing, though. Wasn't he groomed for office by George Soros? Any thought on this?
  reply report
76
Mighty Momposted 13 years ago
Now, now Lovemychris,
The use of so many exclamation marks in your post just proves WHTT's point that us liberals are all childish.
I know you would have used heart-dotted "i's" if such an option was available. Coloring your post with unicorns and rainbows, too.
Yes, I know how liberals like you think (correction, "think" implies an education and maturity level that you obviously have not reached. Let me rephrase that: how you liberals react).

Do you know why I know these things, lovemychris?

Because I'm one too!!!!
reply report
76
lovemychrisposted 13 years ago
I'm excited!
We are seeing the backlash that was to be expected from the ugly, mean hissy-fit the losers have been having since Obama won the election.

Ahahaha! it's funny to watch!!
While Obama and the Dems go on calmly governing, the Repub babies cry and stomp their feet. Or, as Bob Cesca at Huffpo put it: "You are sticking your fingers in your ears and going "Lalalalala".

AHAHAHA. Apt description.

Think the Tighty-Righty Rabid Brigade is gonna "sweep" the November elections do you?

Think Again.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Republican National Coalition for life PAC views on Abortion

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Republican National Coalition for life PAC views on Abortion

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies