Comments on: Obama: The more pro-life candidate?

By: CAM

CAM — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:07:22 +0000

Been awhile since I posted, but this Ministry is a true Matthew 25 Ministry: http://www.m25m.org/

By: Scroop Moth

Scroop Moth — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 06:41:14 +0000

The real vote on Alito was the cloture vote, and she voted to have “an up or down vote.” She has a 43% NARAL score and a 50% NRLC score. She represents herself as both pro-life and pro-Roe. She votes not to obstruct, if not always to please her anti-abortion constituents.

Report comment to moderator

By: Luke

Luke — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 06:03:48 +0000

“We’ve got it! We’ve got it! Nobody have sex until you can afford it! The problem is solved! How come nobody didn’t think of that before?”

Don’t forget the terribly effective and historically pertinent option of just going gay!

“And even if Republicans did beat Landrieu, they would not gain another vote to confirm an anti-Roe justice, because they already have her vote for anything that would criminalize abortion.”

Really? I didn’t know that about her, but the leadership is generally pretty good at keeping their anti-choice members off the judicial committee. Mary’s continued caucusing with the Dems, however, highlights just how far away the GOP is from controlling the chair of that committee. They are after all in a political climate where they can’t win a seat in Louisiana!

Also, anti-choice justices are usually not conservative in a vacuum, so there is no guarantee that Landrieu would vote for that confirmation anyway. I don’t know how she voted on Alito.

Report comment to moderator

By: RPN

RPN — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:58:20 +0000

What’s that smell?

Report comment to moderator

By: Xion

Xion — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:10:15 +0000

Liberal programs usually work by removing personal responsibility and make things worse.

The women’s movement wanted to have sex without consequences. So liberal laws now allow you to saw your kid’s arms and legs off.

This created a national baby sawmill.

To fix this new problem, once again the solution is to remove personal responsibility.

Obama’s idea is to have government raise your children for you. You’ll get an increase in your welfare check, free health care, free prenatal care, your own personal in home nurse, free daycare, free education. If you can’t afford a house, we’ll buy you one. If you can’t afford your kids, we’ll pay for everything.

Now, in the end will the abortion rate go down? Doubtful, since the desire to not have children is rarely based on economics. But since there is money to be made, the number of unwed mothers and out-of-wedlock kids will go up. Crime will go up. And responsible people who actually work for a living will need to carry $1 trillion more in taxes.

So then we will need more liberal programs to solve the problems these liberal programs created. And so on …

All this because no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions.

Report comment to moderator

By: Bob Buckles

Bob Buckles — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:09:23 +0000

#50 Random Name

Sometimes Tough Love is the best and only way to handle things.

I’m a grandfather who had to tell his son and daughter-in-law that if they had their children taken from them by the County that we would be good grandparents; we would visit them regularly, we would bring them Christmas and birthday presents, but no, we would not take them into our home and foster-parent them. (We had already had the whole family live in our house for 11 months.) He and his wife would have take care of them. We wouldn’t.

It all worked out for the best.

Report comment to moderator

By: Serious George

Serious George — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 02:45:30 +0000

If a couple of offhand lines in his Blueprint about contraception convey what Obama deems an appropriate amount of attention to the to the matter, you are probably correct about his take on the importance of the issue. So I take it you agree that Matthew 25’s suggestion that this is an important reason to vote for Obama is ludicrous, no?

Report comment to moderator

By: Anlir

Anlir — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 02:27:13 +0000

Abortion is far down the list if most American’s concerns these days. Things like jobs, mortgages, medical insurance, energy, the economy, and the war are far and away more important than abortion. I realize it’s a huge issue on here, but this site is over represented by the fanatical anti-choice movement, not regular Americans.

Barack Obama is giving the issue an appropriate amount of attention.

Report comment to moderator

By: Serious George

Serious George — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 02:02:19 +0000

When Obama comes forward and says that reducing abortions is a fundamental goal of his proposed administration and it’s policies, and that they these policies will be measured by this benchmark, he’ll have some credibility on the issue.

When McCain comes forward and says that reducing abortions is a fundamental goal of his proposed administration and it’s policies, and agrees to take whatever measures are necessary to do so, evaluating them by this benchmark, he’ll have some credibility on the issue.

When Matthew 25 can show that Obama has made reducing death by abortion at any stage a key part of his agenda and voting record, they’ll have some credibility on the issue.

Until then, continue blowing smoke and thinking wishfully.

Report comment to moderator

By: Scroop Moth

Scroop Moth — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 02:00:32 +0000

There is no way that Louisiana will flip . . .

And even if Republicans did beat Landrieu, they would not gain another vote to confirm an anti-Roe justice, because they already have her vote for anything that would criminalize abortion.

Report comment to moderator