Thompson - a major abortion blunder
posted by Matt Friedeman at
10:54 AM
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Previous Posts
- Pat Robertson's endorsement of Giuliani
- Brownback endorsement of McCain
- Endorsement City!
- Mississippi election predictions - got 'em?
- Beijing Olympics bans Bible
- If your kid is dumb as a rock here is what you mig...
- Stuart Kellogg's (Centurion Program) Question of t...
- Attaways, Outrages, Predictions
- John Fund of the WSJ looks at Mike Huckabee
- John Arthur Eaves on the program today
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
4 Comments:
The new Reagan, methinks not.
Larry,
From his comments, one can see that he is against the idea of the States conceding even more power to the federal government. It is a known fact that this concept was the foundation of the Reagan Revolution.
He said he is opposed to a FEDERAL law that would throw young girls in prison for having an abortion. Do you honestly believe this to be "a major abortion blunder"? If he is nominated, would you support a third party candiate and give Hillary a better shot at the White House over something trivial?
Some folks are really hard to please.
I am not opposed to Fred Thompson. I am just not supportive of him. If he is the nominee, he will receive my vote despite some of his stated policies. I am completely behind his stated desire for federalism.
The only time a 3rd party would be a serious consideration would be if Rudy gets nominated. I do not think I could pull the lever for him under any circumstances.
It really is not that I am hard to please, it is just that I would prefer a candidate that has beliefs closer to my own. Do you fault me for wanting a better person to lead this country into the future that includes my children and probably grands?
the question concerning holding women (or their parents) responsible who have abortions once abortion would be hypothetically outlawed has for some time been used as the wild card. it doesn't make sense to me why so many dodge what seems to me very clearly to be the obvious conclusion.
if abortion is the wrongful killing of a person, them it is murder... quite simple. if it is murder, then what's so scary about writing federal laws against it? rape isn't legal in some states because of "states rights" - in fact, michael vick is facing FEDERAL charges in relation to dog fighting! [although, i am all for reagan's understanding of states rights.] further, if it is illegal, then all who are knowingly and willingly involved should absolutely be prosecuted and, hence, jailed once convicted. even some dude who's "just sitting" in the getaway car at a gas station robbery would be prosecuted "to the fullest extent of the law".
it just seems that we're too afraid to speak what is the glaringly logical truth about the issue. now, granted, my hopes at making a white house run are now squashed, but that doesn't hide the fat elephant in the room (to bring into the picture a friedemanian image).
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home