Abortion.

Hobbes

This isn't question the right or wrong of abortion/roe v wade (better suited for Humanities).

I am curious. If abortion was to be banned in the USA has the republican party given a plan of what form of punishment to give the woman if she gets an abortion (not just the doctor).

Or for that matter what plan they have for paying for orphans that are born through unwanted pregnancies?

Rough figures I can find is 840,000 a year (CDC). Or if I go the pro-life websites then it is 1,485,714 a year (52 million since 1973).

Has this ever been mentioned by McCain or republican party?

Pocono Joe

Here in America there is a long waiting list for couples wanting to adopt, even for children with disabilities.

Hobbes

Ok I can find that the USA is the highest in adoption rates but figures there are approx 131,000 a year. Even if that was to double it would still be way below the other figures. That figure would also dramatically decrease year on year with the large influx of available children.

jank

Its funny in a way. Republicians go on about small governement and induvidual responsiblity so much so its a fulcrum of their mandate yet when it comes to abortion (or same sex marrage or any other social taboo) they choose to ignore these GOP ideals.

The US was more or less colonised by white people seeking religous and economic freedom. We know cause they harp on about it so much but when it comes to freedom of others to choose what they want to do with their lives that may not live of to their godly view of the world then its their duty to stop these acts being carried out. Why is this?

TBH i think alot of republicans who say that they are pro life are just cossying up to masses which is expected of course but the strange thing is there is only a small minority of people out there are real pro-lifers yet this issue is always on the platform.

Way more amercians support the right to choose then not so why is this always on the table. I think this issue is a smoke screen to rally the troops and to paint others as liberal nut jobs.

mumhaabu

Abortion is murder and the Republicans are damn right on this one, I am all for personal liberty and taking a life is the same whether it be a fully grown adult or a foetus. It is murder and those responsible should be punished accordingly. With modern contraception there is absolutely no excuse and this is where personal choice comes in.

Obama is in favour of Abortion while McCain is against it, They are two vastly different candidates and if Barrack Hussein Obama is elected it will be a truly sad day for America and our Western way of life.

Hobbes

It is murder and those responsible should be punished accordingly

So your saying death sentence for any woman who has an abortion?

mumhaabu wrote: »

Obama is in favour of Abortion while McCain is against it

As I understand it Obama doesn't want to change Roe v Wade. Basically what it is now. This thread isn't to discuss if Abortion/womans rights to choose is correct/incorrect.

irish_bob

theres an ol saying in america , republicans stop caring about the baby as soon as its born

jank

irish_bob wrote: »

theres an ol saying in america , republicans stop caring about the baby as soon as its born

LOL I like that. Anyway as mentioned before its not Obama's job to make it illegal or legal. Its the supreme court's job as it is they who interpet the consituation.

Abortion is murder and the Republicans are damn right on this one

But what about small government. Im serious, I would like someone to make sense of this for me!

Sand

But what about small government. Im serious, I would like someone to make sense of this for me!

Youre confusion is arising from the belief that pro-life Republicans view abortion as a victimless personal decision with no impact on any other person - such as the decision to worship as a Catholic or a Muslim or whatever.

Small government by definition shouldnt get involved in those sort of private decisions.

But small governments still uphold the basic rights of all, the most basic of which is the right to life.

Pro-life advocates might recognise a womans right to control of her own body, but they would also recognise an unborn childs right to life. In a conflict between the two, the right to life would be deemed more urgent and necessary. Where that right to life actually kicks in is a matter of debate - some would say conception, others at some point during the pregnancy. Legislating to protect the right to life, to prevent what they would see as murder of a human being for no other reason other than not to inconvenience another human being wouldnt be hypocritical with the small government agenda.

If you were looking for an example of hypocrisy between the small government ideal and the legislation for private morality then the whole civil union/gay marraige debate would be a better one. Theres no victims involved, no serious role for government and yet the Republicans legislate for increasing the centralised power of the state to serve some talibanesque "morality" agenda.

jank

If you were looking for an example of hypocrisy between the small government ideal and the legislation for private morality then the whole civil union/gay marraige debate would be a better one. Theres no victims involved, no serious role for government and yet the Republicans legislate for increasing the centralised power of the state to serve some talibanesque "morality" agenda

Spot on. I was going to mention this aswell.
Abortion is a contentous issue, I recognise that.

Bush is very pro life yet the Roe vs Wade ruling still stands. OK he appointed some conservative judges in view maybe in the future to challenge this but I cant see it happening ever!

Is the amercian consitution like ours, in that a general vote can change it?
Also can each state make its own law regarding abortion? I presume not if its a federal law which i think this is?

oscarBravo

Let's be very clear about this: this isn't a thread for discussion of abortion. The next person to try to start an abortion debate in this thread will be permanently banned. There will be no more warnings.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

if roe V wade is over turned, it won't make abortion illegal though will it? it will just leave it up to each state to legislate for itself.. I'm pro-abortion but surely this is something better left up to the states rather than the federal government.

Pocono Joe

Please don’t ban poor SxyDubGrrl93 for life. Give em another chance (that’s what compassionate conservatives would do).

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

surely compassionate conservaties = liberals?

oscarBravo

It would be nice to keep the thread on-topic, while we're at it.


/gently pokes Mord with a very sharp stick

Fratton Fred

Isn't this just cheap vote grabbing?

its smacks of desperation to me.

CPT. SURF

mumhaabu wrote: »

Obama is in favour of Abortion while McCain is against it, They are two vastly different candidates and if Barrack Hussein Obama is elected it will be a truly sad day for America and our Western way of life.

I believe that the days that people like you influence voters are gladly coming to a close.

George Bush has been President for eight years, six of those years with a Republican Congress. Absolutely no change or talk of change in abortion laws in the Congress during that time.

Good day sir.

Nevyn

jank wrote: »

LOL I like that. Anyway as mentioned before its not Obama's job to make it illegal or legal. Its the supreme court's job as it is they who interpet the consituation.

McCAin has already stated he will appoint pro life judges with the aim of getting roe v wade appealed or crippled.

This has already happened with the passing of the partial birth abortion bill in 2002 which was ratified in 2007.

jank wrote: »

Bush is very pro life yet the Roe vs Wade ruling still stands. OK he appointed some conservative judges in view maybe in the future to challenge this but I cant see it happening ever!

I can if they get they're way.

They already passed the gobal gag ruling the first day Bush took office and are working towards lack of funding for all contraception choices never mind abortion.
http://www.globalgagrule.org/

jank wrote: »

Is the amercian consitution like ours, in that a general vote can change it?
Also can each state make its own law regarding abortion? I presume not if its a federal law which i think this is?

There was never a vote on abortion which is why it is one of the reasons it is so contentious.

mordyboots wrote:

if roe V wade is over turned, it won't make abortion illegal though will it?

It will.

mordyboots wrote:

it will just leave it up to each state to legislate for itself.. I'm pro-abortion but surely this is something better left up to the states rather than the federal government.

Currently that is the state of play even with Roe v Wade in place.

http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/campaigns/know-john-mccain-122.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzounY4E1-A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M0Cd27qY

So they are cleary pro more babies and more children but what are they doing about health care and child care ?

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/18/schip/index.html

Morning Edition, October 3, 2007 · President Bush on Wednesday vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children's health insurance, after saying the legislation was too costly and had strayed from its original intent.

George Carlin said it best tbh, the republican want to know you when you are unborn and when you are old enough to go go to war, if your born you're fúcked.

Nevyn

CPT. SURF wrote: »

I believe that the days that people like you influence voters are gladly coming to a close.

George Bush has been President for eight years, six of those years with a Republican Congress. Absolutely no change or talk of change in abortion laws in the Congress during that time.

Good day sir.

Seems you missed the gobal gag ruling and the partial birth abortion bill.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (Public Law 108-105, HR 760, S 3, 18 U.S. Code 1531)[1] (or "PBA Ban") is a United States law prohibiting a form of late-term abortion that the Act calls partial-birth abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the term "partial-birth abortion" in the act pertains to a procedure that is medically called intact dilation and extraction.[2] Under this law, "Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both." The law was enacted in 2003, and in 2007 its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031105-1.html

Dont you know what your own congress and courts have been doing ?

CPT. SURF

Thaedydal wrote: »

Seems you missed the gobal gag ruling and the partial birth abortion bill.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act



http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031105-1.html

Thats a limit on a type of abortion silly.

Nevyn

You said no change or talk of change in abortion law, I'd say a whole new law restriction the types of abortion is change.

Notatoxford

Not only do I think abortion is murder I also think the Irish government should investigate abortion clinics abroad, find out the personal details of the Irish women that used them and then trial them for murder upon their return.

Dudess

Lol - it's always those with crude, misogynistic tendencies who get on their high horses and call abortion "murder". Interesting coming from someone who refers to the vagina as "gash" and asked where the "rape option" was in the chocolate or sex poll in the Ladies' Lounge...

Notatoxford

Dudess wrote: »

Lol - it's always those with crude, misogynistic tendencies who get on their high horses and call abortion "murder". Interesting coming from someone who refers to the vagina as "gash" and asked where the "rape option" was in the chocolate or sex poll in the Ladies' Lounge...

Well if you don't like what post I woman then you can always click ignore.

jank

Notatoxford wrote: »

Not only do I think abortion is murder I also think the Irish government should investigate abortion clinics abroad, find out the personal details of the Irish women that used them and then trial them for murder upon their return.

Riiiiiight! How about the Irish Government put a camera in all our houses so they can monitor our activites. 1984 style!

Dudess

mumhaabu wrote: »

Obama is in favour of Abortion while McCain is against it, They are two vastly different candidates and if Barrack Hussein Obama is elected it will be a truly sad day for America and our Western way of life.

How? Sticking in the "Hussein" is just being emotive. And what's so "un-western" about abortion?

bonkey

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Isn't this just cheap vote grabbing?

Generally, I'd tend to agree with this.

Most US candidates that I recall speaking on the issue tended to be either explaining why you shouldn't vote for the other guy because of his stance, or saying that what the other guy said about your stance wasn't true.

I honestly can't remember the last time I heard a US Presedential candidate say "vote for me because this is my stance on abortion".

I've seen them say to vote for them for their vision of the economy, foreign policy, military matters, education, health care, political reform and so on....but when it comes to social issues, they tend to stick to answering questions when they have to, and explaining on occasion why you don't want to support the other guy.

Personally, I find distasteful the notion of voting for someone because they might have the opportunity to do an end-run around seperation of powers by choosing SCOTUS nominations in order to effect (or avoid effecting) the Court's declarations on such an issue.