Liberals: why does being against the killing of innocent babies make you a "Bush-lover?"?

Question

Why is it that when you pose a pro-life argument, you are automatically accused of George W. Bush "worship" by liberals!? I don't get it. The pro-life movement was around long before he was! Whichever liberal makes the most rational case gets my vote for best answer (in other words, there will probably not be one)..

i really appreciate some of these answers...

dude, when liberals are nice to me, i feel bad for saying mean things..

Answer 1

Well I don't actually prescribe to the concept but I know that the extremists on both sides love to try to be acidic in their comments, that said I think it because our side believes that your side has been manipulated by this administration for votes. By using what are referred to as "wedge issues" we feel they have managed to use your position for political, rather than ideological, gain. There is some evidence that this is true, one of the former staff members has written a book describing the inner workings of the faith based initiatives program and said as much, that Rove was particularly disinterested in the pro-life or Evangelicals agenda and much more interested in their vote. This means that you were paid lip service and with token gestures (Terry Shiavo, Snow Children Etc.) that they knew they wouldn't proceed on a national level. This ensured your support without actually giving you what you were seeking, this insured (at least in their mind) that you would be a continuous voting block for them allowing them to retain power for years, I don't think it was a good strategy but I do think that was the strategy. Hope this gives you a little insight to a different perspective.


Earlier poster states "My friend, this is the politics section of Y!A. Not the laws and ethics part. You need to move your question. "
How wrong you are , whenever politicains begin to use social differences for political gain, rather that geunine ideology, it's become political.

Answer 2

Its not that its someone who is pro-life, that gets accused of GWB worshipping. Its how MOST (not all) pro-lifers go about it. It goes back and forth between some pro-lifers and pro-choice. Being called a GWB worshipper for being pro-life is just like pro-lifers (most not all pro-lifers) call pro-choice anti-american satanic liberals.. one group says one thing to the other and in return the other group says something to the other. its a back and forth name calling.
To me just because someone is pro-life does not mean they have to be a con. just as a pro-choice does not have to be a liberal.
I am pro-choice, and the only time I say anything to anyone putting them in the same cat as bush, is how the person spouts off believing any and everything that bush has to say and thinks he can do no wrong. For instance if Bush can to someones house and has a ss agent shoot a family member and tells that person that the family member that was shot was linked to al quada, even tho you know it is not true you take bush for his word.. (and for the ones who did not notice that was just an example).
But then you can ask the question why does anyone label another person? no matter what that label is?

Answer 3

First of all being someone who is Pro-Life (as I am) does not make you a Bush "lover". President Bush supports Embrionic stem cell reserch (it supports the death of babies). And to what I read about children. Life starts in the womb. And if you believe that it does not then let me ask you this. In Science there are 4 conditions to make somthing alive. And if it fails even one then it is not considered alive. Can you tell me what they are?

And for those of you who think that the woman deserves the choice. She gets the choice. If she doesn't want the child then put it up for adoption or don't have sex in the first place. They get the choice. It is up to them if they would like to murder the baby or give it to someone who will care for it.

And I also agre that if a woman is attacked and raped and the baby is killed in the process then the attacker should be charged with 1st degree murder.

Answer 4

I live in a small liberal College town. I don't know a single Republican. People I associate with are mostly anti abortion or pro choice when faced with exigent circumstances. No one is an abortion advocate.

I suspect many of the so called liberal voices on YA are activists with a well financed agenda.

Go big Red Go

Answer 5

You sure assume an awful lot. First of all by your standards I would be a liberal although I am middle of the road. I am Pro-life and I am a registered Democrat. So don't be so quick to judge others. By the way I am in no way shape or form a Bush lover.

When you assume you make an *** out of U and ME.

Answer 6

No I agree with you.
It seems many people cannot separate rationally.

I don't agree with your stance on a woman not having a choice to make her own decisions but I don't think it has anything to do with GW.

I want to ask you one question though......Do you think that a woman or teenage girl would wake up one day and say " You know today would be a good day to have unprotected sex and get pregnant so I can have an abortion ".

It doesn't work that way. Most women agonize over the decision.

I found out I was pregnant when I was 19. I had given up my virginity at 18 to a man I truly loved and we were engaged and when I told him I was pregnant he booked. Nice?
Anyway I had to make a decision. Luckily for me I came from a really wonderful family who emotionally supported me and I decided to keep my child because I feel abortion is wrong for me but I would never ask or expect a woman to do what she felt she couldn't. Someday she will have to answer to whatever is in control of everything and that's hers to deal with.
I do think it's a shame that abortion even exists but to make it illegal is not going to stop it.
It always has existed and always will!
I am glad the morning after pill is available. The statistics on whether or not it has affected women have later term abortions I do not know. I am not sure if it has been available long enough to know the statistics but it is certainly better than a fetus of any viability.

To go back to your original question ......I think there is a lot of personal attacks on both sides. I think actually more people are more moderate and thoughtful than they can communicate adequately here. At least I hope so!

Answer 7

Lets create a culture based on personal responsibility supported by a government that creates opportunities and provides a basic set of safety nets for those who are most vulnerable. We don't have to rely on old rancid ideas like religious fundamentalism or the welfare state to remake our culture. There are better ideas out there. Brooks talks about many of them. Clinton implemented many. The parties can let go of their extremist fringes if they successfully grab the middle. The party that does that best will win this election. Will the winner consolidate their win by shifting their platform to the center? I think both parties are afraid to do that. We'll see.

Answer 8

Liberals are "pro-life", too.

The subtle difference is that some understand that abortion, like prostitution and drug abuse, is not going to go away simply because it is illegal. What WILL happen is that it will be driven underground and become far more dangerous, particularly for poor women.

I agree with the statement that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. The alternative , at least for the unlucky, is slow, hideous death by toxemia.

There's my answer, and I didn't accuse you of anything at all.

Answer 9

Because the right wing has hijacked the issue and is using it to gain votes. The only time I see Republicans getting worked up about human life is when the life has not yet been born, or if they think the life involved is good for a few votes. Otherwise, everything they do shows their contempt for human life.

Answer 10

I'm a Liberal and I'm pro-life, so obviously I don't see any connection between being pro-life and being a Bush lover... since I think Bush is an idiot. :)

Oh, and to answer the Question about "Conner's Law", I am in favor of it. If a mother is assaulted and her unborn baby is killed because of that, the attacker should be charged with murder... even if the mother survives.