Did you catch yourself when you said, "in their right mind"?
Makes perfect sense to ANY moral person that abortion is wrong but liberals are just NOT in their right mind.
Who could justify the murder of a child because it is inconvenient? Not a person with a conscience or values.
2007-01-24 15:49:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Both the Democratic Party and the Republics had partial birth abortion bills that were offered, the Republics bill purposely had no provision for the health of the mother even though they knew the court would throw the law out as unconstitutional. The Democratic Party had a version of the same bill that included the health of the mother and had IT been passed, the court would have upheld it. The GOP only wants to use the issue, they could give a damn about saving lives, the Democratic Party's bill would save more lives because it would stay a law.
There is no "Clinton Law" that you refer to, laws are passed by Congress, not the president, and the Republicans controlled Congress, not Clinton.
2007-01-24 12:27:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by egg_zaktly 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
Because sometimes those "minors commitiing murder" are afraid of what their parents will do if they find out they are pregnant. Not everyone comes from a safe home. And just because you think abortion is wrong doesn't mean that you should impose your morals on the rest of us.
2007-01-24 12:23:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by runner08 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
I think most would agree it depends on the definition of what a person is as to which side they fall on. I happen to believe a person is something that is conscious of itself and human. Present abortion law rightfully was decided that personhood - to be safe - is somewhat before consciousness. Namely the test is used of viability outside the womb. So I have no problem with it.
2007-01-24 13:09:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Partial birth abortions are only used when the mother's life is at risk. And, what I mean by 'at risk' is that she is going to DIE. You think that would be right to do?
And, in the case of minors. If the minor was old enough to make a discision about having sex because the parents didn't care enough to get involved in her life in the first place, then it is none of the parent's business if the minor terminates the pregnancy.
2007-01-24 12:19:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
4⤋
expensive Gummy undergo, you've requested questions that are deserving of an answer so enable me see if i am going to attempt this. earlier I starthowever i might want to like that you should take off your left leaning liberal glasses and attempt to seem at President Bush with the help of impartial eyes. initially it wasn't somewhat below President Bush that the authorities became the governmentstockholder of our economic establishments. That finished "bailout" become voted on by technique of the abode of Representatives and the Senate. Nancy Pelosi (Democratic Speaker of the abode) voted for it as did Harry Reid. (Democratic Majority chief of the Senate). maximum Democrats voted for it which includes Senator Barack Obama. Democrat. to say that this befell less than Bush makes it sound like he needed it and him on my own which ain't the case. The Democrats needed this component as a lot and probable extra that the Republicans. Are you searching with the help of impartial eyes Gummy undergo? the authorities encroachment on privateness become also given consent by technique of the congress and really placed into result once lower back less than the Democratic congress. the purpose is to snoop on widely used terrorists telephone calls. to finish that calls for a warrant signed by technique of a federal choose and they ought to exhibit probable reason. do not you want to understand at the same time as and the position an attack is coming??? they do no longer have a correct to snoop on YOU...except for sure you've reason to be suspect of terrorism. Are you nonetheless searching with the help of impartial eyes yet? for sure we've despatched money to Africa for help in curing and helping their aids epidemic. that's applaudable on our area. yet you've me at a loss for words. What help have we no longer given on the abode the front. i have not in any respect widely used each and all of us in a existence or lack of existence difficulty to be became out of a health center. no longer in present day cases. i trust that is a regulation that they ought to cope with if that's existence or lack of existence. for sure you'd be speaking about univarsal well being care and that i say enable the artwork places foot that bill. This usa can't have the funds for and could no longer be forced to pay for everybody's health center charges. So for the most area I actually have coach your liberal party heroes to be merely as accountable yet yet you lay the blame on the Republican via the undeniable fact that is what the Democratic party does. do not enable your self to purchase into those falsehoods. imagine!!! Take off the liberal eyeglasses and use your own eyes.
2016-12-03 00:27:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by saylors 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are not asking a question...your mind is already made up and you really don't want my opinion. Hope you never have a 16 year old that has a bright future and birth control didn't work or heaven forbid a 17 year old that left a disfunctional home and will be doomed to be low educated..low income...but then you would be complaining about welfare mothers..No one asked you to get an abortion....just MYOB
2007-01-24 12:20:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Frann 4
·
6⤊
4⤋
Presidents don't make laws. Congress does. So there are no "Clinton Laws" to reverse.
2007-01-24 12:47:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
how about a godless immoral party that wants to control your total life!
2007-01-24 12:17:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by adam p 3
·
9⤊
0⤋
By allowing no more partial-birth abortions, Democrats are afraid that they will eventually lose the convenience of using abortions for birth control purposes.
2007-01-24 12:18:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
8⤋