Your Faith & Polictical Issues

[Iacobus]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 21 2004, 11:02 PM'] How can you say that Clinton is the result for the lowest abortion totals if it was during Reagans term that they started going down?  They are lower now than ever in the last 15 years! [/quote]
The number of abortions did go up during Regean. The peaked under GWHB in 1990. And have been on a steady decline senice than. Look at your numbers again, Zach.

Edited August 22, 2004 by Iacobus

[Colleen]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Aug 21 2004, 11:38 PM'] The number of abortions did go up during Regean. The peaked under GWHB in 1990. And have been on a steady decline senice than. Look at your numbers again, Zach. [/quote]
But the percentage of abortions has been decreasing since 1984.

[url="http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html"]http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abo...itedstates.html[/url]

[Iacobus]

[quote name='Colleen' date='Aug 21 2004, 11:48 PM'] But the percentage of abortions has been decreasing since 1984.

[url="http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html"]http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abo...itedstates.html[/url] [/quote]
But he said numbers.

[Aloysius]

percentages seem as if they'd be a more accurate assessment of the affectiveness of presidential policy (if you're claiming that the president is responsible for the number of abortions during his term, whcih i personally find ridiculous. it could have some logic with the argument of poor ppl being in a better situ so they don't feel they haveto or something, but if you're tryin to proove that percentages are more accurate)

percentage takes into account other factors leaving it more of a reflection of the policies

[qfnol31]

You're right, but the percentages are what count more than anything. I'm not saying that the fact that more babies aborted means nothing, but less women had abortions under Reagan.

Also, think about what you said Jacob. If they peaked under Bush, they probably started going down under him. If that's true, and he's had a great influence on his son, then logically wouldn't that mean that they would go down more under the current president?

[Iacobus]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 22 2004, 12:19 AM'] You're right, but the percentages are what count more than anything. I'm not saying that the fact that more babies aborted means nothing, but less women had abortions under Reagan.

Also, think about what you said Jacob. If they peaked under Bush, they probably started going down under him. If that's true, and he's had a great influence on his son, then logically wouldn't that mean that they would go down more under the current president? [/quote]
Yes, but Clinton mangaged to contuine the treand and put it to a new low.

[qfnol31]

I don't follow your logic.

[Iacobus]

I am not sure I follow Al's. His post seems self defeating. Or is it just me?

[qfnol31]

LoL, not the only one.

[Iacobus]

Good I thought I was nuts. But I do know I am tried and will reply to whatever your last post was tm sometime when I am on.

[William Putnam]

From my "tagline," it is obvious that I am at least a conservative! And since I support president Bush, it it also evident that I am also a Republican.

I used to be a Democrat. I ceased being a Democrat long ago, accelerated by their stance on abortion.

I did not leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left ME!

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+



[i]Thank God for Bush... a libral democrat did nothing, and would do nothing...
maybe even give in to terrorism... as they have with communists.[/i]

[JimFurst]

I used to concider myself to be liberal, but as I aged I realise I'm closer to being moderate.

I was born in the mid fifties and am older than most here. Back in "the day" (the 60's-70's) liberal was not a dirty word. It meant an openess to ideas,--- not seeing things as black or white---basically not having your mind made up first and then going to battle.

I am still oriented that way. I am pro-life, made a 180 from pro death penalty after my uncle was murdered, to anti death penalty after my emotionalism wore off. I think liberals leave the door open to consider all of the options before coming to a decision. Liberals can change their minds,---I have.

I guess many here will see this as quite flakey. Thats because the word has become associated with a sort of darkness. I just don't think its that way. Some in the first century might have thought Jesus' "table fellowship" was a liberal position. We don't give it a second thought today.

Times change and whats old is new again. We get very tied up with lables and definitions. Its all more complicated than Concervative=Good, Liberal =Bad.

Peace,

Jim

[cmotherofpirl]

William you have been missed, Jim welcome to Phatmass

[iwantacoke]

[color=purple]all I have to say is I am voting for Mickey Mouse!!!
I don't like Kerry or Bush!![/color]

[Socrates]

[quote]Yes, but Clinton mangaged to contuine the treand and put it to a new low. [/quote]

This stuff about abortion numbers under the different presidents puzzles me.
The implication seems to be that Clinton was somehow more pro-life than Republican presidents or helped lower the abortion rate.

If the number of abortions in this country got lower when Clinton was in office, Clinton himself (and his administration) had absolutely nothing to due with it!(unless their militantly pro-abort policies galvanized pro-lifers to greater action or something)

This crediting (or blaming) presidents for everything that goes on during their presidency is really moronic! Being against any restrictions on abortion is the one thing Clinton stood firm on throughout his term!!!