Results 1 to 30 of 97

Thread: So, what next for Americans

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: So, what next for Americans

    Quote Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost View Post
    Don, may I ask what I hope is a constructive question? - in no way do I mean to belittle anyone's beliefs here.

    It strikes me that the biggest impediment to putting a decent and humane bill on abortion is the polarisation of the issue in the States. The left defends Roe versus Wade (a truly awful ruling, it seems to me) because the opposition will brook nothing less than the complete outlawing of abortion (understandable if one accepts their premise that abortion is murder).

    Do you think it is possible that a Democratic president with a very strong mandate plus a compliant Congress might be able to address this issue thoughtfully? Perhaps to propose a bill (maybe even a Constitutional Amendment) that would set a limit of (ideally) 12 weeks for abortion (with slightly longer limits for serious medical issues) or even the European standard of 20 weeks? Would there be a possibility of bi-partisan support for this (since really important bills usually need this)? Or would opening the can of worms result in ignominious defeat?

    Perhaps the Democratic party is too far gone on the pro-choice defensive, but I seem to recall President Clinton putting it very well: "Abortion should be legal, but very, very rare."

    Am I too optimistic?
    It all sounds very good. "Legal, Safe and Rare" is what allowed people who were pro-life to hold their noses and vote for Clinton. Obama voted against the born alive act and against the partial birth abortion ban. He is of the opinion that the unborn are not human beings and have no rights if they are nto wanted by their mother. He has no desire to limit in any way the method or frequency of abortions because he believes that it is the same thing as having a tumor removed - does anyone have a moral problem with how many growths you decide to remove?

    He ran on a platform of wishing to end the old cultural wars that have plagued us for so many years - people interpreted that in their own way - what he meant was that he was tired of not winning outright and his resolution of those old conflicts would be the total allowance of abortion without any compromise. Under his plan - even in comparison with other pro-abortion politicians - the life issue is further muddied until even after the birth of an unwanted child it doesn't receive human rights based on the mothers feelings.

    The legislature was always capable of dealing with this issue until it was polarized and hijacked. I hope some moderates learned their lessons well from the Roe debacle.

    "I don't want my daughters punished with a baby" would be his response to "legal safe and rare"
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 11-06-2008 at 17:05.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO