IF the economy is the #1 issue in America why would you vote for McCain? He stated not long ago (Sept 15,2008) that the fundamentals of our economy is good:blink:. Seriously? Then just today or yesterday, he said the problem with the economy is corporate greed and would have a commission (much like the like 9/11 commission) study it. WTF?! So basically he is saying he doesn't want to deal with the economy! AND lets not forget his TOP economic advisor stated just a few months ago in JUNE/JULY of THIS year that there was nothing wrong with our economy and that the American people were a bunch of "whiners". Does this sound like a person who is for the people? It is just infuriating to me that this race has become "tight"! I mean it's pretty bad when Karl Rove says the McCain campaign is lying and running a bad campaign!! UGH I will never understand what people see in McCain!

Well.....Guess I'm good for a rant anytime!...Makes me actually miss teaching High School delinquents!...Besides I'm pissed at husband today! :cool2:

Joy

It would be more logical to pay for birth control meds than for abortions.

Am I being unclear in this thread? That is my exact point! Let's be proactive, not reactionary!

Ditto - RSG! I think McCain is a wee bit more "leftist" of the Republicans and thought if he'd chosen a different VP, I would've had to think before I voted. But I will not, n-o-t vote for Mrs. "I'll get back to ya" Palin. The fact that McCain might've thought that all women will just vote for any ol woman is nutters!

Edited October 2, 200817 yr by SickNTired

I am pro-choice but no pro-abortion.

That's really a play on words.

We call someone who is in favor of people having the choice to own guns, pro-gun. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of people having the choice of medical suicide, pro-euthanasia. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of companies having the choice to drill for oil, pro-drilling. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of companies having the choice to cut down trees, pro-logging. Not pro-choice.

Virtually everything we do is a choice, so saying you're "pro-choice" means nothing. We're all "pro-choice" -- we want to be able to choose what we eat, what we wear, where we live, what we buy, etc. The big question is what choice are we saying we're in favor of?

If you are in favor of abortion being legal, you are pro-abortion. Period.

I certainly cannot and will not speak for RSG but I know that I believe the choice should be available for women. HOWEVER, I do not believe it should be used as a birth control method when we have too many other options available.

I would prefer women not have to choose abortion. However, I do not want the 40%+ of Senators that are over 65 to decide this very personal decision for me or any other woman when they probably have the money and connections to get one for any female relative of theirs if it's illegal.

The thing that bothers me so about extremist pro-lifers is that under no circumstance should you have an abortion but 1) we give them zero support after the baby has been born; 2) they're OK killing people with bombs; 3) they think that being born into extreme poverty or abuse is better than being aborted and I think that's worse. (And no, I am not calling any LBT'er "extremist")

I've always believed that the woman that WOULD have an abortion, probably should. What kind of life would that child have with a mother who didn't want him/her?

(I'm sure there are tons of scenarios where the woman almost had an abortion, didn't and the world turned out fine...but I've seen too many cases where that's not true.)

I also wish it weren't part of politics at all. I am more conservative with politics, but feel that marriage and abortion are too personal a choice and should be left to the individual - not the government.

I also wish it weren't part of politics at all. I am more conservative with politics, but feel that marriage and abortion are too personal a choice and should be left to the individual - not the government.

Amen, sugah!!

re: insurance, bc and abortion

My assumption here is that most insurance companies believe that a woman will shell out the $30 for pills monthly so why should they bother. Also I know DH's insurance did not cover pills but did cover IUD's and other non oral methods. As for covering the abortion, a $300 fee is much less expansive than hospital cost for childbirth and insurance coverage for the child.

The thing that bothers me so about extremist pro-lifers is that under no circumstance should you have an abortion but 1) we give them zero support after the baby has been born; 2) they're OK killing people with bombs; 3) they think that being born into extreme poverty or abuse is better than being aborted and I think that's worse.

I think I could reasonably and properly be categorized as an "extremist pro-lifer", and I'm here to tell you your "facts" are wrong. Pro-lifers provide a tremendous amount of resources and support for women after their babies are born. I assume your reference to "they're OK killing people with bombs" is a reference to war, but I'm not sure -- but if it is, not all pro-lifers are pro-war. I hear this all the time with the death penalty issue as well, and not all pro-lifers are pro-death penalty. And finally, yes, I do believe being born into poverty or abuse is better than being dismembered. Cuz to me, that's more extreme abuse than anything else I can imagine.

That's really a play on words.

We call someone who is in favor of people having the choice to own guns, pro-gun. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of people having the choice of medical suicide, pro-euthanasia. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of companies having the choice to drill for oil, pro-drilling. Not pro-choice.

We call someone who is in favor of companies having the choice to cut down trees, pro-logging. Not pro-choice.

Virtually everything we do is a choice, so saying you're "pro-choice" means nothing. We're all "pro-choice" -- we want to be able to choose what we eat, what we wear, where we live, what we buy, etc. The big question is what choice are we saying we're in favor of?

If you are in favor of abortion being legal, you are pro-abortion. Period.

I get your point, Gadget, but I think it's a little black and white. I would actually have to put myself in the pro-choice camp. As a Christian, I think abortion is a sin.....but my deal is that I don't think the federal government should legislate the issue. I think it should become a states' rights issue. I think I would not support abortion in any way, but I don't want the fed sticking their fingers into my (or any American's) life any more than they already do. Ironically, that's one of the reason's I'll probably vote McCain.

"they're OK killing people with bombs"

KillingAbortion centers and/or doctors, Gadget.

Wow - thinking being born into an abusive situation is OK. Would you have been OK with Jeffrey Dahmer's mother having one? Gah.

Ahh, remember when the Republicans used to want the government OUT of folks' bidness?

...but I don't want the fed sticking their fingers into my (or any American's) life any more than they already do.

Plain, buddy, your choice of words is most interesting considering the topic. Horribly tacky, I know, but that's why ya luv me!!! Ha!

The thing that bothers me so about extremist pro-lifers is that under no circumstance should you have an abortion but 1) we give them zero support after the baby has been born; 2) they're OK killing people with bombs; 3) they think that being born into extreme poverty or abuse is better than being aborted

Well, this is kind of fuzzy logic as well. 1)There are very few mothers that have ZERO support today. Look at WIC and welfare. Is it a great system? Hells naw! But they're not exactly left to their own wits and devices (and if somebody was driven to have a better life, they could, uh, not have any more kids, and start work / school as soon as the baby started school...but that's off point). 2) This is a bit disingenuous. Pro-lifers are not automatically pacifists. There's a difference between a baby and a terrorist, IMO. But as a country, we'd better be on the lookout for...baby terrorists!! 3) - nothing wrong with being born into extreme poverty. Both my parents were. Growing up, if they didn't grow or shoot their food, they didn't eat....and there were plenty of times they went without. There were some abuse / alcohol issues with their parents. My parents are first gen college grads. They were ignorant of scholarships, and so worked full-time to go to school. My point is, in America, most everybody has a chance. Being aborted is zero chance.

If I wrote much more, I'd have to publish this post as a novel, eh?

2) This is a bit disingenuous. Pro-lifers are not automatically pacifists. There's a difference between a baby and a terrorist, IMO. But as a country, we'd better be on the lookout for...baby terrorists!!

:w00t: Will you all pay attention!?! I am talking about pro-lifers that bomb abortion clinics and/or kill the doctors performing them! How is that being pro-life? I neva eva said they were pacifists!!!

30 minutes til the debate!

Plain, buddy, your choice of words is most interesting considering the topic. Horribly tacky, I know, but that's why ya luv me!!! Ha!

OMG......I've been one-upped.....

KillingAbortion centers and/or doctors, Gadget.

OK, then, emphatically NO. And pro-lifers are NOT in favor of bombing abortion centers or killing abortionists.

Wow - thinking being born into an abusive situation is OK. Would you have been OK with Jeffrey Dahmer's mother having one? Gah.

No, I would not. To pre-emptively abort a child because he might become a serial killer is a ridiculous proposition.

Ahh, remember when the Republicans used to want the government OUT of folks' bidness?

I do want the government out of folks' business. The reason I'm pro-life is because the unborn are human beings and don't have a voice (or a choice!); when someone attempts to kill another person, the government has a right to intervene.