GOP set to adopt official abortion platform without exceptions for rape and incest

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can you provide a link? Sounds interesting imo.
A link to what?
It's like, my opinion, man.

The other problem is so many of the Goldwater republicans still think the party is the same as when they were younger, and continue to vote for them.
Goldwater was a fucking crazy person who wanted to use nukes in Vietnam and seriously explored a preemptive nuclear strike against the Soviet Union.
Oh, and he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so he can attract racists.

I think Eisenhower Republicans is more appropriate (though I would imagine large chunk of those people are dead by now).
 
Goldwater was a fucking crazy person who wanted to use nukes in Vietnam and seriously explored a preemptive nuclear strike against the Soviet Union.
Oh, and he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so he can attract racists.

I think Eisenhower Republicans is more appropriate (though I would imagine large chunk of those people are dead by now).
That's the joke.

And you're looking for Rockefeller Republican.
 
What a splendid idea. I propose this design.
3ZYRH.jpg
hooooly shiiit....

I'd buy that shirt. Probably wouldn't wear it. But I'd definitely buy it.
 
Romney Endorsed by, Praised Dr. John Willke, Leading Proponent of Idea That Rape Lowers Pregnancy Risk

But this isn't the first time a member of the Republican Big Tent has asserted this, and in 2007 presidential candidate Mitt Romney sought and won the endorsement of the man who has since the mid-1980s promoted the scientifically baseless idea that rape doesn't lead to pregnancy, Dr. John C. Willke.

Hailing him as "The Father Of The Pro-Life Movement" and "an important surrogate for Governor Romney's pro-life and pro-family agenda," the Romney for President campaign in 2007 welcomed Willke's endorsement.

"I am proud to have the support of a man who has meant so much to the pro-life movement in our country," Romney said in a statement at the time. "He knows how important it is to have someone in Washington who will actively promote pro-life policies. Policies that include more than appointing judges who will follow the law but also opposing taxpayer funded abortion and partial

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-idea-that-rape-lowers-pregnancy-risk/261358/

GROSS

W T F !!! GOP

They sound more and more like a CULT with every update to this Akin story!
 
2012. A party wants to outlaw abortion entirely. They won't succeed. But what if they limit it even further and get others to compromise? This is the world we live in. Something we settled 40 years ago is no longer good enough and some people want to go in reverse. People wonder why I'm for progressive causes and a feminist, it's because people like this want my kind back in the 50s. They want backalley abortions that scar or kill women, they want the downtrodden and poor to be stuck with children with no way to climb up the social latter, and they want nothing more than to strip my rights away not to be pregnant with child. They want to cut young women's futures short, they want to make sure wives are forced to have that 4th or 5th child.

These people are disgusting, sexist pieces of shit who don't care about life. They cut pre-natal care, close down clinics, cut social services, cut health care, cut education, don't care for sex ed or more widely available contraception/birth control. Reproductive freedom is what keeps women from being shackled, and they want the shackles back the fuck on.
 
Just realized that the newly ratified GOP platform doesn't make exemptions for the life of the mother either.

Let that sink in please . . .

. . .

. . .


. . .

There are NO exemptions for the LIFE OF THE MOTHER!


There are NO exemptions for the LIFE OF THE MOTHER!


This is real life.

are these people high?

Is there a source on this specific claim, or is it just being implicitly assumed from the contents of the OP?
 
How can they call themselves "pro-life" when life apparently doesn't mean shit once you're out of the womb.

"There, we made sure you were born even if your parent(s) didn't want you"
"whats that? you want social services and healthcare? screw you parasite"

This shit is simply disgusting. This isn't just a war on women, it's war on common sense and decency.
 
How can they call themselves "pro-life" when life apparently doesn't mean shit once you're out of the womb.

"There, we made sure you were born even if you're parent(s) didn't want you"
"whats that? you want social services and healthcare? screw you parasite"

This shit is simply disgusting. This isn't just a war on women, it's war on common sense and decency.

The Obama campaign really ought to use that line.
 
How can they call themselves "pro-life" when life apparently doesn't mean shit once you're out of the womb.

This really sums it up, rather poignantly I feel. It horrifies me that there are millions of people who support such a political party.
 
Is there a source on this specific claim, or is it just being implicitly assumed from the contents of the OP?

Well the reporter said it in the clip here: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ommittee-approves-tough-anti-abortion-stance/


But yes, they leave out the exception for rape, incest AND the life of the mother.

"Faithful to the 'self-evident' truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed," the platform language declares. "We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children."

Their silence on this matter is deafening.
 
A link to what?
It's like, my opinion, man.

Goldwater was a fucking crazy person who wanted to use nukes in Vietnam and seriously explored a preemptive nuclear strike against the Soviet Union.
Oh, and he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so he can attract racists.

I think Eisenhower Republicans is more appropriate (though I would imagine large chunk of those people are dead by now).

That is not true "Although he had supported all previous federal civil rights legislation and had supported the original senate version of the bill, Goldwater made the decision to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964. His stance was based on his view that the act was an intrusion of the federal government into the affairs of states and that the Act interfered with the rights of private persons to do or not do business with whomever they chose." - Wikipedia

He voted against it because it went against his beliefs... Not that I agree with him but voting against the legislation actually hurt his campaign.

This really sums it up, rather poignantly I feel. It horrifies me that there are millions of people who support such a political party.
The Democratic Party officially supported slavery... You do not have to 100% agree with your party's platform.
 
I'm starting to think what's going on here, is that the GOP's core is comprised of such pure sociopaths that they absolutely and positively do not care about any collateral damage caused by their efforts to gain control. Therefore, they are currently doing everything in their power to manipulate and pander what they see as a big, uneducated, highly religious American demographic. They do not care if what they have to do in order to get those people on board wrecks society and cause decades of progress to be erased.
 
The Democratic Party officially supported slavery... You do not have to 100% agree with your party's platform.

I'm trying to understand what parts of the GOP platform that don't involve slashing social programs they a.)say they support and b.)actually follow through on. I mean, if you're following the Republicans because they're the party of fiscal conservatism or small government in people's personal lives they may say they're still for those things but every action they take suggests otherwise.

EDIT: Whoop
 
Best tweets:

Laura Bassett ‏@LEBassett
This Hannity interview feels oddly like an intervention. The Senate race is Akin's cocaine, and he's snorting it out of the carpet.
 
Truly revolting -- and hypocritical. They're singling out Akin for pretty much being on-message. The GOP makes me physically ill.
 
Please explain the relevance of this statement to the current discussion.

I would like for nobody else to reply to this quote until this is done.


I am saying that back in the day, not all Democrats were pro-slavery... You can be in a party but not agree 100% with the party platform.

I know liberal Republicans for instance.

You can belong to a political party with questionable positions and just choose to not hold them.
 
I'm trying to understand what parts of the GOP platform that don't involve slashing social programs they a.)say they support and b.)actually follow through on. I mean, if you're following the Republicans because they're the party of fiscal conservatism or small government in people's personal lives they may say they're still for those things but every action they take suggests otherwise.

EDIT: Whoop

Is the Democratic Party any different? What happened to being anti-war? Not all politicans have to follow their party's agenda.

Politicians can make claims and go back on their claims. Just like a political party can set an agenda but the members of said party can disregard the agenda.
 
Dear lord must every thread about how shitty republicans are get derailed with "but they freed the slaves once?" What a shit talking point.
 
I am saying that back in the day, not all Democrats were pro-slavery... You can be in a party but not agree 100% with the party platform.
We are talking about contemporary platforms in the curret political climate, not historical positions when both parties were very different. Bringing up slavery is nothing but a distraction without any relevance to the discussion.
 
This makes no sense...

Republicans must be thinking they are losing the Religious Right vote, and they are trying to score some points.
 
Dear lord must every thread about how shitty republicans are get derailed with "but they freed the slaves once?" What a shit talking point.

They really shouldn't be claiming Lincoln too hard anyway.

Abraham Lincoln said:
I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
 
You're going to have to be a wee bit more specific here.

Well given how liberal is defined in the United States... Anyone you consider a liberal and add the Republican Party to their voter registration card.

In the North in more liberal states, they are more common.

Kind of like how in the south conservative democrats are more common than in the North.

That is not to say that liberals only exist in the North and conservatives in the south... Just demographically the South is typically more conservative from what I have been told.
 
I am saying that back in the day, not all Democrats were pro-slavery... You can be in a party but not agree 100% with the party platform.

I know liberal Republicans for instance.

You can belong to a political party with questionable positions and just choose to not hold them.

"I don't agree at all with these crazy people. I'm not like them. But I'll stay and support them."

Please let us know what the Republican parties stance is on the hot button issues right now.
 
I like how the republicans are all about freedom from government and liberty until you are a woman.

How many times have we heard about the evil socialist government getting in between you and your doctor? Can they not see the irony of banning medical procedures?
 
Well given how liberal is defined in the United States... Anyone you consider a liberal and add the Republican Party to their voter registration card.

In the North in more liberal states, they are more common.

Kind of like how in the south conservative democrats are more common than in the North.

That is not to say that liberals only exist in the North and conservatives in the south... Just demographically the South is typically more conservative from what I have been told.

I think he meant explain the ideologies. Im curious to hear what you are getting at as well.
 
Well given how liberal is defined in the United States... Anyone you consider a liberal and add the Republican Party to their voter registration card.

In the North in more liberal states, they are more common.

Kind of like how in the south conservative democrats are more common than in the North.

That is not to say that liberals only exist in the North and conservatives in the south... Just demographically the South is typically more conservative from what I have been told.

No one. Absolutely no one. I would not consider nor do I know anyone that is liberal that is registered as a Republican. What positions would one have to hold to be a liberal Republican? I mean are you talking liberal for a Republican? Or are you talking a liberal who is also a Republican.
 
Is the Democratic Party any different? What happened to being anti-war? Not all politicans have to follow their party's agenda.

Politicians can make claims and go back on their claims. Just like a political party can set an agenda but the members of said party can disregard the agenda.
So let me get this straight. The agenda that the GOP has been pushing, stalling on several milestone bills, etc. Would suddenly be overturned?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom