Lil Red Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 for teh lulz? i'm afraid we passed that point awhile back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1351956088' post='2503464'] for teh lulz? i'm afraid we passed that point awhile back. [/quote]Maybe because its a worthwhile discussion to have. I think the majority of PM posters want to help in-womb persons who don't have the ability to voice their opinion. We're here discussing options on how best to help morally and effectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southern california guy Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1351945431' post='2503420'] In a predominately Democratic state that wanted it. Majority wins. You are aware Romney made attempts at restricting paying for abortificant contraception but it was unsuccessful after legal challenges. [/quote] The abortion coverage under Romneycare was not because of a predominantly Democratic state. I never heard about him trying to restrict abortifacient contraception. Could you give me a link to information about that? Here is a quote from the story I linked to. [color=#0000CD]“One of the crowning moments of Mitt Romney’s tenure as governor of Massachusetts was the creation of Commonwealth Care, a state-run, state-subsidized [/color][url="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/politifact-can-t-get-its-story-straight-romneycare-and-abortion_617326.html#"][color=#0000cd]health insurance[/color][/url][color=#0000CD] program for people making up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level. Although private insurers provide the coverage, the state helps pay the bills and determines what services must be covered.[/color] [color=#0000cd]“That list includes abortion. And the co-pay is…$50.[/color] [color=#0000cd]“…Romney’s campaign counters that the decision about what services to cover was ultimately left up to the independent Commonwealth Care Authority.[/color] [color=#0000cd]“But Romney was well-represented: Of the six policy-making members of the authority’s 10-member board, half are appointed by the governor, and half by the state [/color][url="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/politifact-can-t-get-its-story-straight-romneycare-and-abortion_617326.html#"][color=#0000cd]attorney general[/color][/url][color=#0000cd]. Half of the ex-officio members also are appointed by the governor, including the chairman — the governor’s secretary of administration and finance — and the state insurance commission.[/color] [color=#0000cd]“Although Romney shares responsibility with the state legislature and the program’s board, Commonwealth Care was his pet project, and he takes credit for it."[/color] I think that we have to bet that Federal healthcare under Romney will be similar -- regardless of what he saying now. [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1351945431' post='2503420'] Are you aware of the platform of the Democrats and their actions to defend and implement tax pay abortion, free access, and defend Roe V Wade? [/quote] Romney does not intend to overturn Roe V Wade. He did not change his position from "Pro-choice" to "Pro-life". He has always argued that while he considers abortion murder, he supports abortion in cases of rape, incest, and threat to the mothers health. He also includes "..threat to the mothers life" but that is not the official LDS Church policy. I was shown the official LDS Church policy and it merely stated "..threat to the mothers health". "Health" is a clever choice of words because it keeps the policy vague and open to interpretation. [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1351945431' post='2503420'] Are you aware that Obama supports all that and with Obama holding the Presidency, the Democrats are in a more solid political position to continue to defend free, easy, legal abortion as an ideology? [/quote] I am very aware of Obama's position. But Obama is a Democrat, and I would much rather see a Pro-choice Democrat as President than a Pro-choice Republican. I feel that we have weakened or possibly destroyed the Republican Party's Pro-life stance by supporting Pro-choicer's -- like Romney. I would consider voting for Obama to prevent a Pro-choice Republican, like Romney, from winning. And then pushing very hard for a Pro-life Republican candidate in the next election. The Republican Party has become corrupted to the point that we are now arguing over which candidate is [b]LESS[/b] Pro-choice, rather than which is Pro-life. Edited November 3, 2012 by southern california guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now