|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:59 am
I really think that most people, if they really understood the issue and the current laws, would realize that they're at least partly Pro-Life. I think that many people vote for Pro-choice candidates because they support a few abortion cases and don't want those banned. But the fact is that most Pro-Choice candidates feel that to not be attacked by the rabid Pro-Choice advocacy groups they must vote down any and all restrictions on abortion. On the other hand, Pro-Life candidates in politics rarely if ever actually try to ban all or most abortions. Instead they try to take small steps to ban the extreme cases, or to regulate abortion for the sake of the woman's health, or information. Some of them may actually oppose abortion, but many of them only want a reasonable level of restriction. However if they vote for any restriction at all, they are generally labeled as enemy's of abortion rights.
I don't think abortion should necessarily be the deciding issue for voters, but if you take it into account, I really think most average people should try to vote Pro-Life as those candidates are more likely to bring the laws around to a reasonable medium and closer to what the average American believes. Either that or we need to get the candidates to realize that the average American is actually in support of some restriction on abortion and that the crazy people at NARAL, etc are so extreme that they actually think things like laws dictating that abortion clinics meet reasonable standards to operate are anti-choice. So we need to stop letting those organizations set the standards for what Pro-Choice candidates do, or start electing Pro-Life candidates, even if people are somewhat Pro-Choice.
Anyone who supports restricting abortion at all, putting in place laws to ensure that it's done safely, laws for parental consent or informed consent. Anyone who supports allowing some entity aside from Planned Parenthood to collect actual data so that we can really know how safe abortions actually are. Anyone who opposes elective abortions and only wants them for health reasons, rape or incest. All of these cases are more Pro-Life than the current laws and state in this country, so they ought to be voting for the Pro-Life candidates, rather than the candidates who continue for fight all regulation.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:21 am
Heh - you didn't vote in your own poll. *grin*
I've only voted for Pro-Choice candidates, but I would vote for a Pro-Life candidate, if I liked their other opinions (like Ron Paul, I like Ron Paul).
I'm not sure I agree that Pro-Life politicians are more likely to get the laws to a good compromise, though. For one thing, some politicians claim to be Pro-Life to get votes, but don't have any desire to change laws at all. Others are very extreme, and would put too many restrictions in place, if they could.
It's really up to a give candidate, and their personal opinions. I don't think a particular "side" in this issue has better candidates than the other (personally, I think just about all the presidential candidates, except for Ron Paul and Stephen Colbert, suck).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:49 am
In regards to the poll. I don't believe that abortion is a political topic, I believe it is a legal, human rights topic. I do not think that human rights should be decided by politicians who may or may not have their own agenda, and who may or may not have any actual legal expertise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:07 pm
WatersMoon110 Heh - you didn't vote in your own poll. *grin* I've only voted for Pro-Choice candidates, but I would vote for a Pro-Life candidate, if I liked their other opinions (like Ron Paul, I like Ron Paul). I'm not sure I agree that Pro-Life politicians are more likely to get the laws to a good compromise, though. For one thing, some politicians claim to be Pro-Life to get votes, but don't have any desire to change laws at all. Others are very extreme, and would put too many restrictions in place, if they could. It's really up to a give candidate, and their personal opinions. I don't think a particular "side" in this issue has better candidates than the other (personally, I think just about all the presidential candidates, except for Ron Paul and Stephen Colbert, suck). And some politicians also say one thing and do another. Infact it seems like most are like that now a days. And some come up with some pretty rediculious laws. I dislike most of them (though it doesn't matter cause I being the whole voting thing is rigged anyways).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:15 pm
Beware the Jabberwock In regards to the poll. I don't believe that abortion is a political topic, I believe it is a legal, human rights topic. I do not think that human rights should be decided by politicians who may or may not have their own agenda, and who may or may not have any actual legal expertise. But like it or not, the laws, and the interpretations of the constitution are being made by politicians. That is one thing I've never ever understood is where some of those judges think they found a constitutional right to an abortion. I suspect they were high, as it was during the 70s ^_^ But presidents appoint judges, and honestly the supreme court judges vote based on their politics as much as they do based on the actual constitution. One thing I do agree with is that people who believe that abortion is wrong according to their religion, rather than seeing it as a legal contradiction of human rights, should not be making a political issue of it. I take it into account in politics because I do feel that it's a legal and (unfortunately) political issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:19 pm
WatersMoon110 Heh - you didn't vote in your own poll. *grin* I've only voted for Pro-Choice candidates, but I would vote for a Pro-Life candidate, if I liked their other opinions (like Ron Paul, I like Ron Paul). I'm not sure I agree that Pro-Life politicians are more likely to get the laws to a good compromise, though. For one thing, some politicians claim to be Pro-Life to get votes, but don't have any desire to change laws at all. Others are very extreme, and would put too many restrictions in place, if they could. It's really up to a give candidate, and their personal opinions. I don't think a particular "side" in this issue has better candidates than the other (personally, I think just about all the presidential candidates, except for Ron Paul and Stephen Colbert, suck). Heh. But the reason that I think having more Prolife candidates would bring us closer to reason is that I don't think that currently they'd be able to get through even a fraction of the laws they'd like to. Even the extreeme ones always start with the most reasonable restrictions and laws. The moderate ones would keep them from going too far all at once anyway. But currently even reasonable laws get voted down way too often because too many candidates are afraid to do anything that they extreemist feminist groups would label as Anti-Choice since they know those groups have the power to hurt them politically. I'd love to see some moderate candidates stand up and say "I'm Pro-Choice, but I believe in reasonable restrictions and will be putting them into effect." Most of them are just too chicken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:35 pm
elffromspace Beware the Jabberwock In regards to the poll. I don't believe that abortion is a political topic, I believe it is a legal, human rights topic. I do not think that human rights should be decided by politicians who may or may not have their own agenda, and who may or may not have any actual legal expertise. But like it or not, the laws, and the interpretations of the constitution are being made by politicians. That is one thing I've never ever understood is where some of those judges think they found a constitutional right to an abortion. I suspect they were high, as it was during the 70s ^_^ But presidents appoint judges, and honestly the supreme court judges vote based on their politics as much as they do based on the actual constitution. One thing I do agree with is that people who believe that abortion is wrong according to their religion, rather than seeing it as a legal contradiction of human rights, should not be making a political issue of it. I take it into account in politics because I do feel that it's a legal and (unfortunately) political issue. Quote: The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of Canada and eight puisne judges appointed by the Governor in Council from among superior court judges or from among barristers of at least ten years' standing at the Bar of a province or territory. The Chief Justice is sworn as a member of the Privy Council of Canada prior to taking the oath of office as Chief Justice. The judges must devote themselves exclusively to their judicial duties. No judge may hold any other remunerative office under the federal or provincial government, nor engage in any business enterprise. They must reside in the National Capital Region or within 40 kilometres thereof. A judge holds office during good behaviour, until he or she retires or attains the age of 75 years, but is removable for incapacity or misconduct in office before that time by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons.
Anyway, basically what I'm trying to say is that here, we have a mixture of judges with a mixture of political views, as not all judges retire at one time, allowing for all of them to be replaced by a person with a certain political viewpoint. All of our judges are appointed, none are elected into office.
That said if a politician changes a law which is found to be against human rights, then a court can over turn it. Say you do manage to elect all pro-life politicians and abortion was made illegal. The courts would then simply say "You can't do that, it's violates human rights." and over turn it.
You have to work with the law, otherwise it'll screw you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
