Let's put this myth to rest once and for all: The Republican Party is NOT the "pro-life" party.

One last time: this is NOT about me... or them. It's about the Republican Party PLATFORM.

I don't understand how some posters expect to make a meaningful contribution without reading the OP. How do they expect to even know what the discussion is ABOUT?

 

Your recent posts, and even more so Fox Hastings' (who goes on about "anti-choicers") have referred to people (you say they, not it) and not about a platform.

 

I have no idea what you're discussing with other posters. I'M talking about the topic of this thread which is described on the OP. If you can't focus on the OP, then you should practice more concentration skills.

And the Republican Party platform is not established by an "it". It's established by a "THEY". Read the OP!!!

 

Yes, I have...you simply can't/won't understand it......if it's beyond your comprehension there is nothing I can do to help you.
I'll try again but with no hope...

If one thinks abortion is ONLY "murder" if they woman had consensual sex and then take away her rights ( WHICH IS PUNISHMENT) it's obvious they only want to punish women who had consensual sex.

How egotistical/tyrannical to think THEY decide which fetus should be "murdered"

AGAIN should read my posts before commenting....I told you I have had years and years of listening to Anti-Choicers ....I know what they "think", since they EXPRESSED WHAT THEY THOUGHT

Unlike you I don't make things so personal and I always have a POINT!

 

I addressed that and moved on. The platform is what it is because they want to win votes. It doesn't need to be consistent, because different parts of it are meant to appeal to different voters. Votes drive politics.

 

I understand that you want to project a motive onto them so you can vilify them and don't have to make any effort to actually understand them. There you go. I can pretend to mind read too.

They think it's homicide either way. The question is whether or not it is culpable homicide (murder) or if they have an excuse. Weighing competing concerns, they then view the woman being forced to have a rapists baby as a valid excuse. If you don't agree, that's you not agreeing with them. It isn't them not thinking this.

You see it as punishment. Not them. And your chanting it religiously doesn't make it so.

It isn't a matter of who. It is a matter of if the circumstances amount to murder. Another example would be if somebody kills in self defence or kills in war. Both are homicide. Neither are murder, because another concern takes priority in the circumstances.

You have demonstrated here that you DON'T listen. So I find it unlikely that you have previously. We have some pro-life people in this thread right now. So why not ask them what they think instead of trying to tell them what they think?

That's just laughable, shouty person.

 

Nice dodge in your avid , strenuous defense of Anti-Choicers....and your aversion to the topic.


I should have known that anyone who doesn't think taking away women's rights is punishment wouldn't understand much else..

 

We should be nice to Anti-Choicers because they want to kill women by denying them their rights?

 

And the pro-abortionist just want to kill babies....you know what happens in an abortion.............two can play your game.

 

Yup. That's what I have been trying to tell him. Disingenuously projecting a motive onto others that they never themselves stated and very well may not hold is a game all sides can play, and such false mind reading never leads to constructive conversation, as comfortable as it may be for the speaker.

"You hate women!"
"You hate babies!"
Blah blah blah. This goes nowhere.

Instead of telling others what they "really think", why not actually try to understand one another? You can still disagree.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
We should be nice to Anti-Choicers because they want to kill women by denying them their rights?

OF COURSE you could NOT answer the question.....

 

Which is EXACTLY what this thread was intended to do before you tried to change it into something personal.

If you had read the OP, you would have known I'm talking about one Party's political platform. And you keep talking about yourself. If you disagree with your Party's platform, then say it! Tell those who DO agree with it. THAT's how we can understand one another. Not by acting as if you are obligated to agree with everything in a party's political platform. Because you're not!

 

So, the Republican Party is not made up of millions of THEMS
Irony!

 

Why should we be nice the pro-abortionist just want to kill babies....you know what happens in an abortion

OF COURSE you could NOT answer the question..................two can play your game.

 

Irony would be if you read what you quote before responding, instead of ALTERING it.

 

So where did I go wrong?

How is it not about them and on the same hand ABOUT the Republican Party?
Even if the word platform is used to spin it, it still leaves the Republican Party as the descriptive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

oxHastings said: ↑
We should be nice to Anti-Choicers because they want to kill women by denying them their rights?


OF COURSE you could NOT answer the question.....

..
There are no "pro-abortionists".

Pro-Choicers do not "want to kill babies"

THERE, I answered your question now answer mine: We should be nice to Anti-Choicers because they want to kill women by denying them their rights?

I'll answer for you since you seem to need help, the answer is "NO".

 

I think you strayed from that quite some time ago, and even if that's your intent, and you are talking about a platform and not people, I did address that. Platforms are not individual human beings who you would expect to be consistent. Political platforms are what they are because they are designed to win votes. Platforms don't need to be consistent, and often are not, because different parts of a platform appeals to different people to win their votes. That's how politics works.

Now, even if you are talking about a platform (and I don't think you still are), Fox here isn't. He's talking about "Anti-Choicers".

No I don't. Where are you getting that from?

It is you who are making this personal, not me. You say "your platform" as you presume that I'm Republican. I'm not. I've given no indication that I was. I've even talked in third person about these people and written in this thread multiple times that I am pro-choice.

No. To actually understand each other, we need to listen to each other, and not purport to mind read and tell each other what the other thinks and believes.

 

So you agree with me that the Republican platform is hypocritical nonsense meant to fool their followers.

There are many things in the Democratic platform I disagree with, but this is not a significant problem. It's a fundamental issue in the Republican Party.

Bottom line, my case is made: the Republican Party is NOT the "pro-life" party. That is just a slogan to fool gullible followers. And, therefore, we don't know WHY they oppose abortion except, as you state, because their position is pure demagoguery. Most likely (I haven't heard an alternative explanation) to cater to those whose religious belief is that women who have sex for any other reason than to procreate should be punished.... and they couldn't care less abut the child who suffers the punishment with her.

The myth has been laid to rest.

 

NO NO NO if you get to assign labels and motives to my side then I get to do so to your side.

So answer my question

Why should we be nice the pro-abortionist who just want to kill babies?

 

It is the party that supports what "Pro-life" people want, which makes it the "pro-life" party. "Pro-life" meaning not wanting to kill the unborn prior to birth, and not being a general statement about never killing anyone.

It's that too. So is everything else in the Republican and Democrat platforms. Very very few of these politicians are actual ideologues. They are all about their own self interest, meaning votes. Perhaps Bernie Sanders is a rare exception. So of course the Democrats had to stop him, as that made him more of a threat to them than the Republicans.

That's still projection on your part. The politicians are selfish, not necessarily malicious. They want votes, and found something they can say that wins them votes, full stop.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑

..
There are no "pro-abortionists".

Pro-Choicers do not "want to kill babies"

Duck and Dodge because you couldn't address the post... I already answered BUT YOU CAN'T

 

Just like you there are if I declare there are. That's all it takes.

 

Ya, you betcha ! Why do you think you are The Ruler of the World ?.....because you CAN'T answer those INCONVENIENT questions ???

Have you ever heard the phrase "delusions of grandeur " ??

 

[

Remarkable when people can't recognize mirrors.