TexasCHLforum.com

pcgizzmo wrote: The problem is that you can't count on abstinence ...

chasfm11 wrote: Wait until the RFID chips that are planned to be implanted in all of us are implemented - you may have a lot of company. I think they are referenced around page 1,000 in the law and the implementation date is supposed to be March 21 2013. After so little pushback on the TSA atrocities, I was feeling like the American public might just roll over and take it. I guess we'll see.

mamabearCali wrote:I think Scott brown was elected to try and keep that from happening and Reid found a way around it. But I will gladly (figuratively) tar and feather Ms. Snow and her RINO tail every day of the week.

mamabearCali wrote:

C-dub wrote: No, but it is not a federal issue. As far as I know there are no federal laws for or against abortion or that even regulate abortions. Those are state issues and laws and when someone takes the new evidence all the way to the SCOTUS and they may reverse or limit the previous ruling if they agree to see the case.

Let me refer you to the HHS mandate which requires businesses even those run by staunch Christians to pay for abortifacients. So there are federal laws mandating that employers play for employees abortifacient drugs.

Roe V wade is a federal case that permitted abortion nationwide when before it was decided state by state. So at the moment it is a federal issue. It would seem to me to be a step forward to return the decision to the people.

mamabearCali wrote:

C-dub wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:As it was a federal court (the Supreme Court) that found it constitutional by the pnuembras and emanations, it is a federal issue. I would like to see the issue returned to thepeople in each state. That way the people can decide whether or not to stick their finger in the Almighty's eye. However I still want to know whether a president values human life or not. The one we have quite obviously (and not just on the abortion issue) does not. Does the man see value in the weakest and the smallest of us. I think that tells me a great deal about who the person is and whether it not I want him for president.

But that is a settled issue. It is legal and I cannot see it ever changing. I disagree with it, but that's irrelevant and a president's opinion on the matter should also be irrelevant. They can't change it's legality.

Once slavery was legal and no one could ever see that changing. Even Thomas Jefferson could not see a way out of it, but end it did.

mamabearCali wrote:

C-dub wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:
With all due respect, I have no more right to tell you that you must have an abortion than you have the right to tell me that I can't have an abortion. Therein is the essence of the matter and the government should have no part nor say, fiscally or physically, in these private and individual decisions.

We have been round and round here. I see abortion as murder, and murder of a child to boot. So yes, I think I have the right to plead with someone not to murder their child. The gov't tells us we may not place our already born babies out on the rocks to expose them to death....so yes the govt does intrude in private and individual decisions. The govt tells me I may not grow cannabis in my backyard, so the govt does intrude on private and individual decisions.

I agree with you, but the SCOTUS does not agree with either one of us.

So we give up? NO, when the otherside cheats and lies (because that is what happened in Roe v Wade) and millions are dying we must try to continue to win the argument. The argument was that it was just a blob of cells...not alive. We now KNOW for certain that is not true, and we can prove it. So we must do so as loud as we can for as long as we must.

mamabearCali wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:
With all due respect, I have no more right to tell you that you must have an abortion than you have the right to tell me that I can't have an abortion. Therein is the essence of the matter and the government should have no part nor say, fiscally or physically, in these private and individual decisions.

We have been round and round here. I see abortion as murder, and murder of a child to boot. So yes, I think I have the right to plead with someone not to murder their child. The gov't tells us we may not place our already born babies out on the rocks to expose them to death....so yes the govt does intrude in private and individual decisions. The govt tells me I may not grow cannabis in my backyard, so the govt does intrude on private and individual decisions.

mamabearCali wrote:As it was a federal court (the Supreme Court) that found it constitutional by the pnuembras and emanations, it is a federal issue. I would like to see the issue returned to thepeople in each state. That way the people can decide whether or not to stick their finger in the Almighty's eye. However I still want to know whether a president values human life or not. The one we have quite obviously (and not just on the abortion issue) does not. Does the man see value in the weakest and the smallest of us. I think that tells me a great deal about who the person is and whether it not I want him for president.

mamabearCali wrote:

C-dub wrote: It was one of the distractions that caused many people to be fooled into thinking it was a real issue.

I doubt it. There are many reasons we lost. The first being simple...everyone loves free stuff as long as you are not the one paying for the gravy train. Obama promised different constituents different gifts, now whether he can deliver or not is something else. I think a second reason we lost is the MSM constant adoring praise if the anointed one, and constant unflattering, most of the time unfair coverage of Romney. A third reason is that Obama is a personality cult, people I know who are every bit conservative as I literally closed their eyes, covered their ears and refused to believe what was plain before them. Finally I do think there was some election fraud, now whether it was enough to tip the balance, I don't know. But we will never find out because Holder is the AG.

baldeagle wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:If y'all think that will help the GOP go right ahead. However I think to do so will cut out the very heart and soul of the GOP and all they will get in return is contempt from those they wish to court.

There are many of us already who have nothing but contempt for the party of squishyness and cowardice.

If anyone thinks this election was lost because of abortion, I'd like to see the proof of that. I seriously doubt abortion was the issue that won the day.

chasfm11 wrote:

pbwalker wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

pbwalker wrote:Why can't we just stick to the issues anymore? Why all this birther stuff? Enough already...

You mean like you're a racist if you vote against Obama? You're a homophobe if you oppose gay marriage? You're a sexist pig if you oppose abortion? You're a right wing bigot if you don't think Catholics should be forced to provide contraception and abortion against their religious beliefs? Those kinds of issues?

That's just garbage argument to distract from the issues causing America's decline, IMO. The people who lob those attacks are the same ones who don't understand GDP, Debt Ceilings, Inflation, etc.

We have two good friends who are very intelligent. They can see the fiscal decline, the rapid growth of the Federal government and the decline of our Constitutional rights. But they voted for Obama. Why? Because everything they do is based on the litmus test of abortion. They are pro-choice and would never vote for anyone who wasn't publicly pro-choice. There is no reasoning with them. They loved the Ryan financial plans but won't vote for him because he had the audacity to state his personal belief about being pro-life. They are Jewish and are very concerned about our current governmental support of Israel. Even that wasn't enough to sway them. All the anti-Semetic direction doesn't seem that important to them, compared to abortion. They don't want to argue any points other than a woman's right to do as she will with her own body. The majority of their friends feel the same way.

If those of us who want a smaller Federal government keep getting sucked into the morality arguments, we are going to continue to loose Federal level elections. It seems just that simple.