Comments on: Food For Thought on the Abortion Ban

By: Marin

Marin — Tue, 25 May 2004 20:55:37 +0000

i am for Bush, and the abortion ban. abortion is murder, anyway you look @ it, and the ONLY exuse for abortion would b if the mother and the baby’s physical life were in danger. other wise you are murdering someone, so they took a breath of air, and that makes them a human, so, as long as they havent you can kill them no problem. or, you can kill the with in the first 3 months, no no no, abortion is murder… weather the person has taken a breath or not, they are a person, and should be treate as such.

By: bob

bob — Fri, 05 Mar 2004 02:22:42 +0000

Well the 5th commanment say the should not kill.
What is the diffence the baby is 95% out of the woman but the head so that means the head of the babby is going to kill the woman?
fetus in english means little one mmmmm
When the woman go to the doctor and if she wants to keep it he tells her the babby is well but when she wants to kill it he calls it a fetus
well we all are going to be judge is it going to be up or down for you ?

By: josh

josh — Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:16:16 +0000

if he wasn’t such a perfect candidate in every other way i would share your suspicions. sincerly. but he is not selling out. the only evidence i can give of that is the way that he has never wavered on any other issue nor taken even one corporate dollar in his entire political career. all of the other candidates that currently hold office have both wavered and taken corp. donations within this campaign. some within days (did you see kerry vote against the $87 bil? would he do that if kucinich wasnt in the race? would gep?).

By: greg

greg — Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:32:13 +0000

First of all, I’m not blaming Nader for 2000, which is why I said this :

I don’t want to get into a “blame Nader” thing here…

Even without Nader’s spoiler vote, Gore got more votes in Florida. That said, I think Nader’s popularity in 2000 was build on the big lie that there’s no difference between Republicans and Democrats. It’s complete bullshit and this partial-birth ban is a perfect example of why. If Democrats were in charge of Congress, this never would have made it through committee, and if Gore was President, he would have vetoed it. Both parties may be full of what Bill Maher calls “soulless cash whores”, our whores would have different priorities that would ultimately lead us in a better direction than Bush has.

Secondly, Kucinich’s “seeing the light” on abortion stinks of shameless political maneuvering. As far as I can tell, this was his very first “pro-choice” vote in all his years as a Congressman. Considering that it happened during a presidential campaign is no coincidence. I’m not saying that the other candidates aren’t also guilty of sudden reversals, but it really punctures a hole in Kucinich’s “more liberal than thou” myth. For a candidate that likes to pretend that he’s above the kind of selling out that defines modern politics, Kucinich has shown that he’s as guilty as anyone else.

By: josh

josh — Thu, 23 Oct 2003 16:10:45 +0000

two things:
to bring nader up is just tired. all together now… nader was A factor, not THE factor, indeed not nearly the largest factor.

and kucinich. yes, he certainly has voted entirly wrong on reproductive rights in the past. i remember katrina vandenhuvel talking about him on radio nation over a year ago (little less than a year before he declared his candadicy) and he was saying that his daughter was changing his mind or somesuch.

i’ve seen him speak on this matter. he’s the only candidate for universal healthcare. that means pre and post natal care for every woman. this means dependable birth control available to all women. he would allow for more and more comprehensive sex education. he would back family planning with $. all of these things would boost a womans standing in society not to mention make abortions LESS NECESSARY. this to me seems logical. treating the desease rather than the symptom.

he’s also the only candidate that has sworn to make upholding roe v wade a litmus test for judicial appointees. even good ol joe hasnt taken that stand yet.

and, sure bill vetoed that legislation twice. didnt he do that in between throwing all those single mothers off welfare? what a friend to women!

By: Kynn Bartlett

Kynn Bartlett — Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:09:10 +0000

Another great post on Republicans and abortion bans can be found at alas, a blog. Read it, it’s good for you. :)

–Kynn