[paigeturner]

It is always of great interest to me when I “talk” to one-issue voters either online or IRL; I am especially interested when the one-issue is reproductive rights. I will hazard to guess that most people over the age of 16 know that Roe v. Wade was the Supreme Court decision on abortion. Many may not know that the decision was based on the right to privacy and may not know that the majority decision was written by a conservative republican, Justice Harry Blackmun in 1973, but most get the gist that Roe v. Wade is considered the most controversial landmark decision of the 20th century.

It is also interesting to me that what many don’t seem to know that a later case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services gave access to abortion to individual states in 1989.

Why is this important to discuss when making a decision to vote for a presidential candidate? Because, IMO it is irresponsible at best to base a vote for a presidential candidate based on his or her personal stance on reproductive rights; access to abortion is a state matter! The current state of the struggling economy, global unrest, poverty, education, violence, climate change, health care, etc. and the candidate’s plans to address those are far more important to me in choosing who to cast my vote for in the presidential election.

A candidate’s stance on reproductive rights is important for me to consider when electing a candidate at the state level. While I would still never vote based on that issue alone, I do consider it when deciding who best represents me and my views. My point is, if it is your goal to restrict women from gaining access to safe and legal abortions, do so at the state level. Work your governor and your state representatives. Find a candidate for your state’s highest court who shares your views. Do that and you’ll find me, in the trenches next to you, working to ensure that all women remain in control of their own reproductive rights.

[KarynB]

Paige - I was just about to write the "same post"! I don't understand why abortion is a deciding factor in an election - abortion is a legal act, written into law, and I don't think it's about to change any time soon. Shouldn't whether you are pro-life or pro-choice be a personal matter, and not how you cast your vote? I can see doing work in whichever camp you beling to - but why vote for a candidate based on that alone? Are you really voting "pro-life" - its not like that candidate is going to take that issue and tackle it legally. What about all the other issues?

The problem with the abortion topic is everyone can come up with reasons/stories/personal accounts/religious reasons which support their beliefs...can we ever really expect everyone to be on the same page about this? What good comes from attacking each other, or electing someone based on this alone?

[BethanyB]

I totally agree with the last two posters. I am a Christian who goes to church every Sunday, and I am also pro choice but I am certainly not voting for McCain/Palin for many reasons. Number one, being pro choice is not the be all, end all for me. Abortion is not going to be overturned anyway and I find it sad that so many people are voting based on this one thing that won't change.

Secondly, I am not planning on having an abortion. So if it's a sin, that is not something I will have to speak on when I get to Heaven. God allows us to make personal choices.

What I am concerned about is the gas prices that are so high that I can't even afford my gas hog mini van. And since the vehicle is only two years old, and no one is buying large mini vans right now, I could not even get rid of it because no one would give me what it was worth. I'm also worried about the taxes that have gone up so high that it's hard to make the mortgage payment. My township had the highest tax rate increase in the county. Being a teacher who has not seen a raise in two years because of contract negotiations, everything has been rising except my salary. THOSE are the things that directly affect me and my children.

There are Christians out there who are voting for Obama because he is the best candidate overall. I could never find a candidate who represented everything that was important to me. So I will vote for the one that represents my concerns the most.

[Mom2blessings]

Originally Posted by paigeturner

It is always of great interest to me when I “talk” to one-issue voters either online or IRL; I am especially interested when the one-issue is reproductive rights. I will hazard to guess that most people over the age of 16 know that Roe v. Wade was the Supreme Court decision on abortion. Many may not know that the decision was based on the right to privacy and may not know that the majority decision was written by a conservative republican, Justice Harry Blackmun in 1973, but most get the gist that Roe v. Wade is considered the most controversial landmark decision of the 20th century.

It is also interesting to me that what many don’t seem to know that a later case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services gave access to abortion to individual states in 1989.

Why is this important to discuss when making a decision to vote for a presidential candidate? Because, IMO it is irresponsible at best to base a vote for a presidential candidate based on his or her personal stance on reproductive rights; access to abortion is a state matter! The current state of the struggling economy, global unrest, poverty, education, violence, climate change, health care, etc. and the candidate’s plans to address those are far more important to me in choosing who to cast my vote for in the presidential election.

A candidate’s stance on reproductive rights is important for me to consider when electing a candidate at the state level. While I would still never vote based on that issue alone, I do consider it when deciding who best represents me and my views. My point is, if it is your goal to restrict women from gaining access to safe and legal abortions, do so at the state level. Work your governor and your state representatives. Find a candidate for your state’s highest court who shares your views. Do that and you’ll find me, in the trenches next to you, working to ensure that all women remain in control of their own reproductive rights.

I work on a state level, personal level, and at a federal level at times.

If it were "legal" to torture a 5 year old for medical research, would you fight against that? Would you vote for a president that would support that? I see this as no different. I do not see one bit of difference. So is it okay to torture a child in the womb if the mother wants it? Is it okay to bring physical suffering to an unborn baby...is that her right?

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. If it's not right then I have a moral responsibility to vote against people who support this. As a Christian I believe I will have to answer for the things I support or don't support. I know not everyone believes this way, but since I do I act on what I believe God's word teaches me in the Bible. Do I harbor ill feelings towards those who disagree with me? No. Do I think they are wrong? Absolutely. But then, they think I'm wrong also.

I read that another poster said that this would always be legal. I sat in a foster parent class in Feburary of this year with a lawyer that said he is 100% convinced that it WILL be illegal in the next 20 to 30 years. I have absolutely no way of knowing if this is true but their are lawyers who still believe this.

I believe that if I vote for my pocketbook over the life of a child, I WILL have to answer for that.

But make no mistake, I do NOT judge other women for their choices. I disagree with them...strongly. Again, I'm not angry nor I do not intend to sound argumentative.

I wish you all well and I have enjoyed reading your points of view, even if I don't agree with them.

[Mom2blessings]

Originally Posted by paigeturner

It is always of great interest to me when I “talk” to one-issue voters either online or IRL; I am especially interested when the one-issue is reproductive rights. I will hazard to guess that most people over the age of 16 know that Roe v. Wade was the Supreme Court decision on abortion. Many may not know that the decision was based on the right to privacy and may not know that the majority decision was written by a conservative republican, Justice Harry Blackmun in 1973, but most get the gist that Roe v. Wade is considered the most controversial landmark decision of the 20th century.

It is also interesting to me that what many don’t seem to know that a later case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services gave access to abortion to individual states in 1989.

Why is this important to discuss when making a decision to vote for a presidential candidate? Because, IMO it is irresponsible at best to base a vote for a presidential candidate based on his or her personal stance on reproductive rights; access to abortion is a state matter! The current state of the struggling economy, global unrest, poverty, education, violence, climate change, health care, etc. and the candidate’s plans to address those are far more important to me in choosing who to cast my vote for in the presidential election.

A candidate’s stance on reproductive rights is important for me to consider when electing a candidate at the state level. While I would still never vote based on that issue alone, I do consider it when deciding who best represents me and my views. My point is, if it is your goal to restrict women from gaining access to safe and legal abortions, do so at the state level. Work your governor and your state representatives. Find a candidate for your state’s highest court who shares your views. Do that and you’ll find me, in the trenches next to you, working to ensure that all women remain in control of their own reproductive rights.

I forgot one more thing...Roe v. Wade was NOT just about privacy.

Incidentally, Jane Roe's REAL name is Norma McCorvey and today she is pro life and DEEPLY regrets the part she played in legalizing abortions. I don't know if I'm allowed to post websites so I won't bother, but it's called Roe No More if anyone is interested.

[alinev]

I am so sorry that the issue of life/choice still has so much sway. Wouldn't the answer simply be to make the subject moot? Why can we not muster the technology or the will to make true "family planning" a reality. The decision to bring a human being into the world should not have to be made after birth control is absent or fails. Why can we not as a nation end what seems to be a solvable situation?

[BethanyB]

It was me who said that Roe vs. Wade would never be overturned. And I truly believe that. I also said I was a Christian and do not believe that abortion is right and I am pro life. However I do not feel that because I am pro life I need to vote for someone who I feel will not do a good job with the issues that meant the most in my life.

So for those of you who are voting for McCain and Palin because they are pro life, what do you expect to happen when they get into the white house? You know that they personally cannot change that ruling.

[paigeturner]

Since you quoted me, twice, I guess I should respond. To answer your questions of my views:

Yes, I would work to keep the torture of a five-year-old or any person illegal. In fact, I’ve worked to fight against the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo bay and elsewhere. To me there is no parallel between the two. BTW, being pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. When I found myself in a crisis pregnancy at the age of 18, I made a different choice; but I would never force my views of what is right, wrong and viable on another woman. I also don’t believe that first trimester abortion is torture to an unborn fetus and YES I do believe it is a woman’s right and is a choice between a woman, her doctor and her god. The beauty of choice is that you never have to have one if you choose not to.

Question back at you: Where in the bible does it talk specifically about abortion? And, if you follow ALL the teachings of the bible, do you also believe in stoning a woman to death that has sex prior to marriage? (OK, I feel ridiculous even typing that statement…but still)

I also don’t vote for my pocketbook over the life of a child. I am for health care for all children, a stance that many on the right do not believe in. I work towards better early education and intervention. I volunteer my time and my money at the local level to build houses for those that can’t afford them.

I also understand that Roe v. Wade was a very complicated and controversial case but feel free to educate me. And frankly, I could care less that Ms. McCorvey changed her view; that is her right. Had she not come along, another Jane Roe would have as more women became butchered by back alley abortionists.

[alinev]

Can anyone tell me why we cannot direct all of the passion felt on both sides of this issue to address the basic question of "how do we end unplanned pregnancy?" Why does this idea does not seem to get much play considering all of the drum banging for pro life / pro choice?

[Janeytwo]

Hey Alinev

[quote]how do we end unplanned pregnancy?" [quote]

I understand your concerns in asking this as I have a 12 year old daughter.

But the truth is we will never end unplanned pregnancy.

All we can do is educate our children, encourage them so that they will have a great sense of self-esteem which will hopefully carry them in times of trouble. And not just pregnancy but drugs, drinking, you name it.

If I were to pray for any one thing it would be the end of the stigma surrounding unmarried women. And I would submit that anyone who argues that stigma is a think of the past is a person with their head buried in the sane (not meaning you - don't take it that way).

For the sake of our daughters and ours sons as well we must find a way to end that much at least. We must find the courage to stop pretending that "just say no" is an answer. Otherwise as parents we only have ourselves to blame.

Wishing you peace today,

[pgakaa]

I am voting for McCain/Palin for a variety of profound issues on which many will doubtlessly differ. It is icing on the cake for me that McCain has adopted a child and that Palin decided not to abort a child she knew would be a special needs child. That is a mark of character.

[Mom2blessings]

Originally Posted by paigeturner

Since you quoted me, twice, I guess I should respond. To answer your questions of my views:

Yes, I would work to keep the torture of a five-year-old or any person illegal. In fact, I’ve worked to fight against the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo bay and elsewhere. To me there is no parallel between the two. BTW, being pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. When I found myself in a crisis pregnancy at the age of 18, I made a different choice; but I would never force my views of what is right, wrong and viable on another woman. I also don’t believe that first trimester abortion is torture to an unborn fetus and YES I do believe it is a woman’s right and is a choice between a woman, her doctor and her god. The beauty of choice is that you never have to have one if you choose not to.

Question back at you: Where in the bible does it talk specifically about abortion? And, if you follow ALL the teachings of the bible, do you also believe in stoning a woman to death that has sex prior to marriage? (OK, I feel ridiculous even typing that statement…but still)

I also don’t vote for my pocketbook over the life of a child. I am for health care for all children, a stance that many on the right do not believe in. I work towards better early education and intervention. I volunteer my time and my money at the local level to build houses for those that can’t afford them.

I also understand that Roe v. Wade was a very complicated and controversial case but feel free to educate me. And frankly, I could care less that Ms. McCorvey changed her view; that is her right. Had she not come along, another Jane Roe would have as more women became butchered by back alley abortionists.

Sorry about quoting you twice. I didn't even realize who I was quoting. I did not intend to pick you out at all, and I'm sorry if my posts made you feel that way.

Pro-choice people in general (not you in particular, though you have mentioned this in your posts) often use the "botched back alley abortion" reason for making it legal. What I find missing from this argument is the "lighted botched abortion" women who are suffering horribly from the effects of abortion. The temporary fix of an abortion will not take care of the needs of these women. There are very real, lasting, effects of abortion but rarely do we hear about these. They are both physical and emotional.

My "theological" view (and the one that most Christians take) is that the punishment for our sin has been paid. We do not need to be stoned for our sin today. The moral law (and there is a difference between the ceremonial laws, and moral laws) still applies...the punishment does not. Jesus told the woman who was living with a man, "Go and sin no more". He said he who is without sin, cast the first stone. This is a topic that could go on all night.



As to where the Bible says abortion is wrong, the first place I'd point out is the 10 commandments. Thou shalt not murder. Since babies are people, the deliberate killing of them for a nonjudicial reason would be considered murder. The second verse is this:

"If men strive, and hurt a women with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life" (Ex.21:22-23)


I could quote you some of the research of doctor's that have researched pain in our unborn (if you are interested, look up Dr. Paul Ranalli) but the bottom line is they doctors CANNOT know what it's like for a baby for an unborn baby. They have extensive research that indicates that babies DO feel pain, especially by 20 weeks and beyond. They used to say circumcisions did not hurt newborn baby boys, but as a mom of 2 boys who were circumcised, I can tell you that is most definately not true. If a baby is born at 28 weeks, does he cry when he has his foot pricked? What if you (collectively...not you specifically) ripped his arm off? The debate could go on forever.

You sound very active in a lot of good causes! Just the kind of person I like I strongly believe in being active and helping other's as well. I have volunteered at an abused women's shelter, done foster care for 2 years, volunteered at the nursing homes and have my senator's on speed dial, lol. Right now I'm in a battle with my board of commissioners to have public smoking banned, except in desigated smoking areas (my 5 year old was burned on the face, right next to his eye, this year at the county Fair by a smoker in the middle of a crowded walkway to the young children's rides. I wanted to lose my religion and BOP her upside the head...Instead, I'm trying to change the rules.) I frequently send email's to China about their treatment of prisoners and lack of human rights. My husband jokes and tells me that I've made enemies all of the world and one day they are going to assasinate me, lol. Meals on Wheels is something I've been considering volunteering for recently. We'll see if I can find time for that with 7 kids!

I did not mean to imply anyone else here is voting for their pocketbook...I only meant that I could not look at money as being a more important cause than life.

Last but not least, my comments about Norma McCorvey was only intended for those who might be interested in this topic and would like to find out why she changed positions so drastically.

Please do not take my comments personal. That's hard I know, when I quoted you! I think I answered you because you are pretty elequent and I think your answers/reasons for supporting abortion are pretty common. So even though I quoted you particularly, I was only meaning to answer the pro-choice community in general!

Thank you for taking the time to read my posts.

[alinev]

JaneyTwo -

I have to repectfully disagree. In principle, we may never end "every" unplanned pregnancy because it is the ultimately the result of human behavior. We can however focus our energies on dramatically reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies. No woman should have to live in fear of having to make a difficult decison. Why start by the development of user-proof contraception a priority, making birth control free and readily available, paying for education, education, education and lastly stop denying that sex happens. We need a national change of attitude about the realities and responsibilities of reproduction.

[coachmur]

Bethany B, just FYI in post #18 you said you are "pro choice" but after reading your next post I think you meant "pro life". Just thought I would let you know that.

As to the question of where in the Bible does it specifically say abortion is wrong, the first time would be in Exodus Chapter 20 where it says, "thou shall not KILL" The NIV actually says "murder" instead of kill. Murder is defined as a premeditated and deliberate act. Abortion definately fits the criteria. I also think that as humans we can justify anything that we want to, whether it be right or wrong. All of the arguing will not prove anything. We can argue till we are blue in the face and spout our beliefs on these forums but few if any of us will ever admit that the other is right. What I would challenge each of us to do is to get down on our faces, before the one and only true God and ask Him to show us the truth. His word is clear if one only takes the time to study, and learn the truth. That would be the best thing any of us could do. Let us all stop doing what "we" think is right and all start doing what God says is right.

Right and Wrong is so clear if only we would open our eyes and our hearts to the truth. There will come a day when we stand before God and be judged according to the deeds we have done while we were here on earth.

In regards to paigeturners question about stoning the woman caught in adultery you are misquoting God's word if you think that Jesus wanted her stoned for her sin. That is actually an awesome passage of scripture. You should read it. It is John 8:1-11. Basically what happened was that some men who were teachers of the law and Pharisees brought this woman in before Jesus because she was caught committing adultery. They made her stand in front of everybody, telling them what she had done and asking Jesus, or actually telling Jesus that the Law of Moses said any woman caught in that sin should be stoned, then they asked Jesus "what are you going to do about this?" They were looking to trap Jesus because the Romans did not allow the Jews to carry out death sentences, so if Jesus had said to stone her, he could have been in conflict with the Romans. If he had said not to stone her, he could have been accused of being unsupportive of the law. Jesus put the ball right back in their court by saying to them "if any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her". Because none of them (or none of us, for that matter) were without sin they all just had to turn and walk away until only Jesus and the woman were left. Jesus then said "woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "no one sir, she said" "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." so as you see, Jesus did not condemn her to death by stoning, but he also did not condone what she had done. Praise God we are not living under the law because Jesus went to the cross for us and took our punishment upon Himself. His life was the atonement for our sin unlike in the Old Testament times when a person sinned they had to go out, kill the best calf or lamb, gut it out, build a fire, and make a sacrifice to God. That would be difficult for me even though I live on a ranch full of fat calves, and a few fat lambs and I might add that I am a great shot with a pistol and a rifle but I daresay it would be next to impossible for those of you who live in cities. Most of you probably would have no idea where to even begin such a project, lol. The bottom line is "yes, we are all sinners, we all make bad choices, but God is always there ready and willing to forgive us. We only need ask Him.

Well, there is your sermon. Good thing it is Sunday, LOL.

[EZ2Luv]

I am a Christian and I am votinfg for McCain/Palin, but because I am prolife does not mean that is the ONLY reason why they will get my vote.

I am not about to list the reasons cause I son't feel like debating. Most people have their minds made up and nothing will change them.

I just wanted to say one thing about abortion. Isn't it something when a woman miscarries at 12 weeks to a baby that is wanted there is all kinds of greif and sadness, because she lost her "baby", yeet is the baby is aborted because it is not wanted it becomes "just cells" Why is one a baby cause it is wanted and one just some cells cause it is unwanted? Sad sad sad, abortion is murder in the womb

That is all I have to say. I am so grateful that abortion was not as easy to obtain when my bmom was pregnant with me or she would have been in front of the abortion clinic waiting for them to open.

EZ