Voting For A 3rd Party Is Voting For Obama.

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351344120' post='2498505']
It has nothing to do with him being Mormon. But he is not, I repeat NOT pro-life.

Say it became legal for mothers to kill their newborn babies for any reason. 1 out of 3 of these newborns were being killed. In poor neighborhoods or among the black population it was 3 out of 5 newborns were being killed. They could kill them for any reason. Not enough money to feed them, they were tired of hearing them cry, the smell of them made them nauseous in the morning, or it was effecting the mothers health (mental or physical). Now in this hypothetical situation each state would govern the time they could kill this newborn. Most choose that you had to do it within the first 24 weeks after they were born. Unless it was in the case of the health of the mother (mental or physical) then they could kill their newborn up to the 9th month. So if I am getting headaches from my newborn I can take him to any doctor and he will inject into his heart a medicine that will send the child into cardiac arrest and very quickly the baby will be dead. So let's pretend this is the law of the land.

Now pretending we have a current president who very much supports this and even wants the taxpayers to fund the killing of all these newborns. And in the pretend election there is a candidate who is running who also supports the mothers right to do this (has even run ads saying he supports the mother right to kill her newborn). He isn't quite as supportive of the government paying for it, but in his state he instituted the same thing, for the taxpayer to pay for the newborn to be killed by a doctor.

So now replace all the "newborn" with preborn or unborn and include the option of injection into the heart to having their limbs torn off, and this situation all the sudden goes from hypothetical to actuality. I cannot vote for anyone who supports abortion and will not do everything possible to stop this genocide. So yes, Romney is pro-abort and nothing short of it. Supporting these monstrous acts to stay legal makes him pro-abort (or "pro-choice") that is what it means. Pro-life means we stand up for life. It isn't just a pretty political title.
[/quote]


I guess you missed how it is now "legal for mothers to kill their newborn babies for any reason"

I take it you believe that Romney is a liar as he has promised to limit abortion.

I must assume that your stance which is contrary to what the U.S.C.C.B. promotes , is some how holier than limiting abortion to cases of incest and rape?

So you must be up for 4 more years of the same ?

I do know that Romney since 2006 has been against abortion, that in 2007 he vetoed the morning after pill being distributed without a doctors prescription. I do know that his Mass. health care plan was constitutionally legal as it was approved by the state and not government mandated, and the abortion inclusion in his plan was actually added by the courts in Mass. and not nationally government mandated nor was it part of Romney's original plan.

ed

[Aloysius]

it is NOT legal for mothers to kill their newborn babies. not at all. in fact, partial birth abortion is still banned and the ban is not under legislative threat currently.

Romney has been on and off in his anti-abortion stance even since 2006; as recently as this fall he has allowed for a "HEALTH of the mother" exemption (which is DIFFERENT than a "LIFE of the mother" exemption; "HEALTH of the mother" is able to be used to justify 99% of abortions) and specifically stated he did not foresee doing ANYTHING abortion related during his presidency.

Also, Mitt Romney was ON RECORD stating that he believed that the Massachusetts healthcare plan ought to be a blueprint for a national healthcare plan.
And it involved government mandates, including mandates that required all employers without exception to provide for contraceptives and sterilizations in the mandated health insurance that they had to provide.

[To Jesus Through Mary]

Al- I know killing newborns is not legal- it was a hypothetical situation I used to make a point.

Ed- I believe what Romney is saying in is ads in the battle ground states (which is one of the main factors that swayed my position). That is for the woman's right to choose. I do not believe there is any acceptable reason to take a human life. (Rape and incest make up less then 1.5% of abortions- even they are morally inexcusable). The "health of the mother" has been the wink-wink nudge-nudge of politics for the last 40 years. He is pro-abortion. His record proves it. He has said it. There is nothing short of it he is not pro-life.

To "limit" or "reduce" in political speech is the same "allowing to continue". That has been proved time and time again to be false. But let's just say he did mean it... it means he would allow it to continue in the cases of health. Doe vs. Bolton. I had a girl once who was 28 weeks pregnant and was offered an abortion at PP (they are in the same building as one of our crisis pregnancy centers) because she couldn't afford to buy a car seat (which is required in NY when you want to leave the hospital with your baby for the first time). Keep in mind the limit in NY is 24 weeks. It was due to the "mental distress" of the mother. I see first hand, more often then not this "health of the mother".

He is not pro-life. So morally, how could I vote for him? Yes he is less evil policies then Obama, but they are [i]still[/i] evil. I have spent a great deal of time thinking this over and praying about it. I just don't know how I could justify it. I really don't like Obama's agenda. I really don't. I find them morally reprehensible. So it just left me with the question, do I vote for the lesser of two evils or do I step up and bite the bullet and vote for someone I know is not going to win and participate in no evil?

From Mklobe's post
[quote]
In the final analysis, our vote effects us much more (personally and spiritually) than it effects the ACTUAL outcome of an election.[/quote]

[kujo]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351363001' post='2498667']
Al- I know killing newborns is not legal- it was a hypothetical situation I used to make a point.
[/quote]

Obama could be in favor of making all 12 year old girls get gang-raped by socialist Muslims before being spoon-fed the HPV vaccine during their sex-ed class.

It's not true, but it's a hypothetical situation I am using to make the point that you should all vote for Romney!

[To Jesus Through Mary]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1351363185' post='2498673']
Obama could be in favor of making all 12 year old girls get gang-raped by socialist Muslims before being spoon-fed the HPV vaccine during their sex-ed class.

It's not true, but it's a hypothetical situation I am using to make the point that you should all vote for Romney!
[/quote]

Wut? Dude- my "hypothetical situation"- which became a reality when you changed the words of newborn to unborn- was used to bring into reality the evil that we are dealing with. Despite what you think "that this doesn't effect our daily lives"- 1 out of 3 pregnancies will end in abortion- 3 out of 5 in the area I work. I have held way to many woman after the abortion to deny the very real reality of how it effects lives. And so many it doesn't effect you directly now but it will in the future. You can keep killing off your future workforce and not think it will effect the economics of this country. It is easier for us to ignore when the unborn are killed because most don't see it day in and day out. It would be a lot harder for us to ignore this issue if these babies were outside of the womb. (thus the reason for my hypothetical situation)

Edited October 27, 2012 by To Jesus Through Mary

[kujo]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351363730' post='2498688']

Wut? Dude- my "hypothetical situation"- which became a reality when you changed the words of newborn to unborn- was used to bring into reality the evil that we are dealing with. Despite what you think "that this doesn't effect our daily lives"- 1 out of 3 pregnancies will end in abortion- 3 out of 5 in the area I work. I have held way to many woman after the abortion to deny the very real reality of how it effects lives. And so many it doesn't effect you directly now but it will in the future. You can keep killing off your future workforce and not think it will effect the economics of this country. It is easier for us to ignore when the unborn are killed because most don't see it day in and day out. It would be a lot harder for us to ignore this issue if these babies were outside of the womb.
[/quote]

I'm sorry, do I know you? Are you aware of my life, the things I've been through? Do you know whether or not I know someone, or LOVE someone, who has lost a child, willingly or otherwise?

Oh that's right. You're a person on the internet, which means you have a Ph.D in all things.

[Aloysius]

perhaps I missed the context of Ed's post being within the context of your hypothetical; Ed's post sounded to me like he was basically saying Obama had made that legal... I know he has in the past been pretty virulently in favor of late term abortions which is what I thought Ed was referencing, but I think I missed a couple steps.

[To Jesus Through Mary]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1351363858' post='2498696']
I'm sorry, do I know you? Are you aware of my life, the things I've been through? Do you know whether or not I know someone, or LOVE someone, who has lost a child, willingly or otherwise?

Oh that's right. You're a person on the internet, which means you have a Ph.D in all things.
[/quote]

Kujo- I can only going off of what you posted previously and in another post you said to someone else that abortion doesn't effect our daily lives and then went into something about the economy. And yeah I am just some person on the internet. I do not claim to know you. I was actually going to put in the post "or perhaps it does effect you directly" but thought if it did, that would be far to personal. So I changed the wording. I will be more careful about using such direct language in the future, especially about something so sensitive. I was trying to defend and explain why I used the example I did and why it way off course from what you posted.

[kujo]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351364364' post='2498715']

Kujo- I can only going off of what you posted previously and in another post you said to someone else that abortion doesn't effect our daily lives and then went into something about the economy. And yeah I am just some person on the internet. I do not claim to know you. I was actually going to put in the post "or perhaps it does effect you directly" but thought if it did, that would be far to personal. So I changed the wording. I will be more careful about using such direct language in the future, especially about something so sensitive. I was trying to defend and explain why I used the example I did and why it way off course from what you posted.
[/quote]

S'all good.

The reason I said that this issue doesn't really affect people nearly as much as they think it does it because no President is going to do anything to change abortion in the next 4 years. It's just not going to happen. I'd like the next president to get us ready for the zombie apocalypse but if I actually used that metric as a serious reason as to why I vote for this candidate or that, I'd be insane.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1351364634' post='2498722']I'd be insane.[/quote]

you aren't already?


you know i kid.

[kujo]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1351365251' post='2498736']

you aren't already?


you know i kid.
[/quote]

Insane in the membrane, sis. And proud of it

[To Jesus Through Mary]

I see your point- but they both will end up with promoting abortion. Which I believe is such an evil I can vote for neither. The lesser of two evil thing, have never worked out in the past. I think it would be insane to think it would now.

And maybe, just maybe- if the Republicans looses enough votes they will stop taking for granted the social conservative. Not likely- but maybe.

[kujo]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351365284' post='2498738']
I see your point- but they both will end up with promoting abortion. Which I believe is such an evil I can vote for neither. The lesser of two evil thing, have never worked out in the past. I think it would be insane to think it would now.

And maybe, just maybe- if the Republicans looses enough votes they will stop taking for granted the social conservative. Not likely- but maybe.
[/quote]

God, I [i]wish[/i] Republicans would stop taking the social conservative vote for granted. In fact, I think that they should just form their own party and let the adults do the governing while they whine and moan about moral issues.

[To Jesus Through Mary]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1351365356' post='2498741']

God, I [i]wish[/i] Republicans would stop taking the social conservative vote for granted. In fact, I think that they should just form their own party and let the adults do the governing while they whine and moan about moral issues.
[/quote]

[southern california guy]

[quote name='To Jesus Through Mary' timestamp='1351344120' post='2498505']
It has nothing to do with him being Mormon. But he is not, I repeat NOT pro-life.

Say it became legal for mothers to kill their newborn babies for any reason. 1 out of 3 of these newborns were being killed. In poor neighborhoods or among the black population it was 3 out of 5 newborns were being killed. They could kill them for any reason. Not enough money to feed them, they were tired of hearing them cry, the smell of them made them nauseous in the morning, or it was effecting the mothers health (mental or physical). Now in this hypothetical situation each state would govern the time they could kill this newborn. Most choose that you had to do it within the first 24 weeks after they were born. Unless it was in the case of the health of the mother (mental or physical) then they could kill their newborn up to the 9th month. So if I am getting headaches from my newborn I can take him to any doctor and he will inject into his heart a medicine that will send the child into cardiac arrest and very quickly the baby will be dead. So let's pretend this is the law of the land.

Now pretending we have a current president who very much supports this and even wants the taxpayers to fund the killing of all these newborns. And in the pretend election there is a candidate who is running who also supports the mothers right to do this (has even run ads saying he supports the mother right to kill her newborn). He isn't quite as supportive of the government paying for it, but in his state he instituted the same thing, for the taxpayer to pay for the newborn to be killed by a doctor.

So now replace all the "newborn" with preborn or unborn and include the option of injection into the heart to having their limbs torn off, and this situation all the sudden goes from hypothetical to actuality. I cannot vote for anyone who supports abortion and will not do everything possible to stop this genocide. So yes, Romney is pro-abort and nothing short of it. Supporting these monstrous acts to stay legal makes him pro-abort (or "pro-choice") that is what it means. Pro-life means we stand up for life. It isn't just a pretty political title.
[/quote]

I agree with you on the second part. But Romney's position on abortion has everything to do with being a Mormon. His position is the official Mormon churches policy on abortion. It is spelled out explicitly in the "Church Handbook of Instructions" that the members get when they become a Bishop. I was shown this by the Bishop of my Ward in Logan Utah.