View Poll Results: Choice vs. Life

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am pro-choice.

    10 38.46%
  • I am pro-life.

    16 61.54%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Fred Thompson

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I said in another thread that I stand behing Thompson on his approach and stance towards the 2nd Ammendment and immigration.

    However, he is "pro-life", which is disheartening, as this is a big issue for me, not as big as the two in the previous statement, but enough to possibly change my vote.

    I'm wondering how many firearms owners, not just any person though, I'm talking about the people who really believe in the 2nd ammendment, not those who pick up a gun for personal protection, then don't really follow those rights politically, are pro-life.

    It seems a little conflicting for him to support such an important right, yet take choice away on another front, well, at least to me it does.

    I'd like to know how many people here are pro-choice, or pro-life, and would it make you look at him differently?

    I know this topic can be very controversial, so try to keep the flames down...

    Would like to get a lot of votes on this one!

  2. #2
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    I would say I am pro-choice, but with conditions. I have heard the arguments of "what if the woman was raped" and such, and I have to say, there are a LOT of willing adopters out there looking for children if you can't/won't care for your child.

    OTOH, the population of this planet is ballooning out of control. We are consuming resources at a rate too fast for the land we live on and we are quite literally, sucking it dry. I think it would be a good thing to have a few less people in the world than what we have now. I would like to be able to walk out my front door without seeing another human being once in a while. That is the other side of it, and ultimately I feel stronger about this side of the discussion, and why I voted for pro-choice. That and I think the government has it's nose into too much of our damn business already, this is just another extension of that......telling us what we can and can't do, rather than leaving that up to the moral compass of the people themselves and letting the people take care of those who don't have any morals to guide them......

    Now, I'm voting for Ron Paul until I can't, but if he doesn't make it into the general election, then I'm thinking I'm voting for Thompson, but I don't know for sure, yet.......

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,436

    Post imported post

    Last Friday my wife and I went with our daughter and her husband to the Dr. office and saw the sonogram that showed the sex of our grandson who will be born next April.

    Such a beautiful fragile helpless little being.

    One of the main reasons I carry a gun is to protect the innocent.

    No one is more innocent than such a smallhelpless little being.

    I can see it as nothing less than what it is to kill such a helpless little person.

    I am very sorry for anyone who has had their conscience seared with a hot iron and refuses to see it for what it is.

    To quote Forest Gump "And that's all I've got to say about that."



    Tarzan


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Hampton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    428

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    I said in another thread that I stand behing Thompson on his approach and stance towards the 2nd Ammendment and immigration.

    However, he is "pro-life", which is disheartening, as this is a big issue for me, not as big as the two in the previous statement, but enough to possibly change my vote.

    I'm wondering how many firearms owners, not just any person though, I'm talking about the people who really believe in the 2nd ammendment, not those who pick up a gun for personal protection, then don't really follow those rights politically, are pro-life.

    It seems a little conflicting for him to support such an important right, yet take choice away on another front, well, at least to me it does.

    I'd like to know how many people here are pro-choice, or pro-life, and would it make you look at him differently?

    I know this topic can be very controversial, so try to keep the flames down...

    Would like to get a lot of votes on this one!
    Whose choice? Do you believe in equal protection under the law?
    When does a man get to opt out of unwanted parenthood? Don't give me the argument that a man can keep his pants on or use birth control (condoms). That's what they used to tell women.

    Anything that is entirely a woman's choice should be entirely her responsibility.

    Understand that I am seperating my personal beliefs from my belief in equal protection. I personally believe that anyone who is a participant in the creation of child has a responsibility to that child. My 3 sons and 3 daughters are examples of such.

    Equal protection under the law says that all should have the same choice.


  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    The "disheartening" (but certainly not at all unexpected) poll results show only one reason most so-called "gun owners" would be on the other side in Civil War II or Culture War I.

    -- John D.


    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    glocknroll wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    I said in another thread that I stand behing Thompson on his approach and stance towards the 2nd Ammendment and immigration.

    However, he is "pro-life", which is disheartening, as this is a big issue for me, not as big as the two in the previous statement, but enough to possibly change my vote.

    I'm wondering how many firearms owners, not just any person though, I'm talking about the people who really believe in the 2nd ammendment, not those who pick up a gun for personal protection, then don't really follow those rights politically, are pro-life.

    It seems a little conflicting for him to support such an important right, yet take choice away on another front, well, at least to me it does.

    I'd like to know how many people here are pro-choice, or pro-life, and would it make you look at him differently?

    I know this topic can be very controversial, so try to keep the flames down...

    Would like to get a lot of votes on this one!
    Whose choice? Do you believe in equal protection under the law?
    When does a man get to opt out of unwanted parenthood? Don't give me the argument that a man can keep his pants on or use birth control (condoms). That's what they used to tell women.

    Anything that is entirely a woman's choice should be entirely her responsibility.

    Understand that I am seperating my personal beliefs from my belief in equal protection. I personally believe that anyone who is a participant in the creation of child has a responsibility to that child. My 3 sons and 3 daughters are examples of such.

    Equal protection under the law says that all should have the same choice.
    I'm not sure what you are trying to say...

    To me, it seems like you are saying I support this so I can opt my way out of parenthood...but I might just be reading it incorrectly.

    I support it for the women that want a choice. To use it recreationally is a gross misusage, don't get me wrong, but there are times when I believe it is a viable and considerable option. And all the situations I can think of where it is viable, have a lot of contingencies around them, its not an easy subject, or really no right answer, at least I believe so.

    Rape, molestation, so many other things where the woman may want it as a choice... There was a cop that came into where I was working... He told us that a 9, yes NINE, year old girl was pregnant...by her boyfriend... who happened to be in his 20's... I don't know if such a person at that age even has the capacity to grasp the seriousness of the situation, and there are others that are better to use, but I just thought it was such a horrible story.

    I don't want you to think that I am pro-choice so I can throw my ideals at a woman and force her to have an abortion, thats ridiculous. Some women, although not the marjority I would think, want to have a choice. And I wouldn't want anyone to deny them that liberty.

    BTW, it is nice to see this hasn't gotten out of hand yet!! (flames) :P

  7. #7
    Regular Member UtahRSO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    146

    Post imported post

    tarzan1888 wrote:
    Last Friday my wife and I went with our daughter and her husband to the Dr. office and saw the sonogram that showed the sex of our grandson who will be born next April.

    Such a beautiful fragile helpless little being.

    One of the main reasons I carry a gun is to protect the innocent.

    No one is more innocent than such a smallhelpless little being.

    I can see it as nothing less than what it is to kill such a helpless little person.

    I am very sorry for anyone who has had their conscience seared with a hot iron and refuses to see it for what it is.

    To quote Forest Gump "And that's all I've got to say about that."



    Tarzan
    Well said, Tarzan.

    My wife has described the "little bubbles bursting" feeling of new life within her. I've felt our children kicking her tummy before they were born, and cried with joy to see them as they enter the world.

    I am pro-CHOICE. I believe a woman should have the CHOICE whether to become pregnant or not. But if the woman has the CHOICE to do the thing that caused her to become pregnant in the first place, then her choice was made at that point. Abortion-- killing that little child within--should not be an option.

    I recognize very, very few exceptions, and those are extremely sad choices.



    UtahRSO

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Back in college I was quite conflicted on this issue and thought about it for several years and had many discussions taking each side of the debate at different times. At some point I had a discussion about it with my mother and I was leaning pro-choice at the time. I expected her to be pro-choice herself. She said something very simple to me (paraphrasing as memory allows):

    "I agree that every woman should have a choice. Once she lays down and spreads her legs she has made a choice. What happens after that is not a choice, it is a consequence. This country is having a lot of problems today because people are unable to distinguish between the two."

    I thought about that for a long, long time - actually several years. I have never heard anyone say anything more enlightened, common sense and clearly moral on the issue and now agree with her opinion as stated. Obviously, given that viewpoint, abortions would be legal in the cases where sex was not consentual as in those cases there was no choice. I also am in favor of choice where the life of the mother is endangered.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Okay, how about this situation...

    Say a couple, married, or whatever, are both using a form of birth control...not wanting children, and are doing everything in their power to avoid conception, but by chance, one comes along.

    Obviously with sex, and birthcontrol on both sides, this is still a consequence, but they did take measures, say they even bought the day after pill, and it didn't work on top of all the other measures. Would abortion be cowardly?


  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    Fred has a strict constitutionalist view on abortion: as a person/Citizen he opposes it but politically he understands it as a state's right issue.

    Small government = state's get to decide on things that aren't in the Constitution as "God given rights"

    Personally I don't agree with him on his abortion views (I feel there are very limited circumstances that abortion should be allowed), but that is outweighed by his positions on the war against extremist muslims, immigration, small government, and Constitutional rights (including the 2nd amendment).



  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    Okay, how about this situation...

    Say a couple, married, or whatever, are both using a form of birth control...not wanting children, and are doing everything in their power to avoid conception, but by chance, one comes along.

    Obviously with sex, and birthcontrol on both sides, this is still a consequence, but they did take measures, say they even bought the day after pill, and it didn't work on top of all the other measures. Would abortion be cowardly?
    Yes, it would be cowardly as long as there are thousands of couples out there looking to adopt an otherwise healthy baby.

    I don't have a problem if you don't want to raise the baby: deal with the conseqences of your actions as far as childbirth and then let someone else raise it, but to kill it because you aren't ready or don't want to deal with the "inconvenience" is (to use a gun analogy) like cleaning a gun, having an "accidental"/negligent discharge and pretending it never happened.

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    MarkNH wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    Okay, how about this situation...

    Say a couple, married, or whatever, are both using a form of birth control...not wanting children, and are doing everything in their power to avoid conception, but by chance, one comes along.

    Obviously with sex, and birthcontrol on both sides, this is still a consequence, but they did take measures, say they even bought the day after pill, and it didn't work on top of all the other measures. Would abortion be cowardly?
    Yes, it would be cowardly as long as there are thousands of couples out there looking to adopt an otherwise healthy baby.

    I don't have a problem if you don't want to raise the baby: deal the the conseqences of your actions as far as childbirth and then let someone else raise it, but to kill it because you aren't ready or don't want to deal with the "inconvenience" is (to use a gun analogy) like cleaning a gun, having an "accidental"/negligent discharge and pretending it never happened.
    Sure there are many couples out there that want to adopt...

    But many people don't want to have a child, then have it arbitrarily given to someone by an agency, and they don't know what type of family it is going to.

    Also, I don't think it is someones responsibility just to have the child because someone else wants one.

    Furthermore, some people don't have insurance, or the means to pay for delivery, or a lot of the other costs associated with birth... and do take all the precautions to not have a child, but things happen.

    People are willing to adopt, but how many are willing to reimburse the family for medical costs?



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    tarzan1888 wrote:
    Last Friday my wife and I went with our daughter and her husband to the Dr. office and saw the sonogram that showed the sex of our grandson who will be born next April.

    Such a beautiful fragile helpless little being.

    One of the main reasons I carry a gun is to protect the innocent.

    No one is more innocent than such a smallhelpless little being.

    I can see it as nothing less than what it is to kill such a helpless little person.

    I am very sorry for anyone who has had their conscience seared with a hot iron and refuses to see it for what it is.

    To quote Forest Gump "And that's all I've got to say about that."



    Tarzan
    I was going to write something along these lines, but it wouldn't have been nearly as good as Tarzan's. I just don't understand how someone can talk about 'rights' and 'self defense,' but then turn around and say that's perfectally accepable to kill a totally innocent life purely for social convenience.

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    Yes, it would be cowardly as long as there are thousands of couples out there looking to adopt an otherwise healthy baby.

    I don't have a problem if you don't want to raise the baby: deal the the conseqences of your actions as far as childbirth and then let someone else raise it, but to kill it because you aren't ready or don't want to deal with the "inconvenience" is (to use a gun analogy) like cleaning a gun, having an "accidental"/negligent discharge and pretending it never happened.
    Sure there are many couples out there that want to adopt...

    But many people don't want to have a child, then have it arbitrarily given to someone by an agency, and they don't know what type of family it is going to.

    Also, I don't think it is someones responsibility just to have the child because someone else wants one.

    Furthermore, some people don't have insurance, or the means to pay for delivery, or a lot of the other costs associated with birth... and do take all the precautions to not have a child, but things happen.

    People are willing to adopt, but how many are willing to reimburse the family for medical costs?

    Reimbursing medical costs has to be a lot cheaper and easier than going to China to adopt.

    The point I was trying to make though was that Fred's view on abortion is just a small part of his overall policy portfolio, and his view on abortion is one of "leave it alone for the states to decide".

    Or to put it another way: Fred thinks life begins at conception and therefore abortions are wrong (his personal opinion), but he acknowledges it as not an issue the Federal Government should be involved in, so his opinion on it is irrelevent.

    As President he would not be involved in abortion issues because that is not in his remit, he would be involved in the defense of our nation from terrorists and illegal immigrants, and he would be involved in defending and protecting out constutional rights.

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I am glad to here he leaves it to a state issue.

    Might still be supporting him after all then...

    If it was left up to the states you know there would be at least one state that allowed it, and everyone would flock there... like same sex marriages.

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Troy, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    544

    Post imported post

    I am pro choice. I think it's morally reprehensible, but there shouldn't be a law based on morally charged beliefs. America is all about freedom, and if people want to have abortions, I won't stop them.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    842

    Post imported post

    I wish I liked popcorn...

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    I'm pro-choice, obviously. That means, though, that I'm not shoving abortion down anyone's throat; I'm just giving people the option.

    1) Exceptions for rape are impractical legally. A woman must only claim that she is raped in order to have an abortion.
    2) Fortunately, real rape pregnancies are rare. But it is still incredibly unjust to force a woman to carry a fetus/infant to term when she had no part in wanting to do that.
    3) While population control is a weak argument, it does make no sense to increase the nation's poverty by forcing women to give birth to children that they do not want in the first place... before encouraging people who want kids to engage in family planning, let the people who already want a small family to have abortions.
    4) The point at which life begins is very important here. While it's easy to say that a "cute little baby" is "alive", it's much more difficult to say that for a little clump of cells during earlier parts of a pregnancy.
    5) A woman's control over her body is a valid topic here. While many conservatives wish to argue otherwise (for good or for bad), a person should have control over what he or she does with his or her body without harming others.
    6) A sticking point is that a fetus cannot voice its opinion over the abortion. Nonetheless, it is just as arbitrary to think that a fetus would choose life than it is to think that a fetus would choose death. Therefore, as the fetus's opinion cannot be known either way, I feel that the responsibility for deciding whether or not to have an abortion should go to the other person who has a stake in it: the mother.
    7) A second sticking point is late term abortions. To me, if a woman wants the fetus removed from her body, it's not necessary to kill the baby in order to do this. If, at the time a woman decides to have an abortion, the fetus is capable of being supported and living outside of the womb, then I don't think it would be an unnecessary violation of the woman to remove the fetus at the expense of charity and care for it rather than just killing it through an abortion.
    8) A decision to have sex is not a decision to have a child. I'm sorry. This is an opinion that was lost when we decided that it was legal for people to have sex outside of marriage.
    9) It seems that letting states decide about issues is an excuse to passively let constitutional rights be infringed. I believe that a woman's freedom and liberty are curtailed for the better part of 9 months by a pregnancy, so I definately can see a role for the national level of government to protect the ability to have an abortion. As I've said before, I don't pick and choose the rights that I want. I want the Supreme Court to uphold this right across the country just as I'd want the court to uphold the first and second amendments across the country. I'll support states' rights, but not states' ability to pick and choose which rights to allow.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    I personally believe that abortion is wrong and I don't support it, but I also think that it is a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor, not a decision that should be made by the federal government. I personally think that it is wrong, butI don't like to press my personal beliefs on other people, especially through legislation.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    I personally believe that abortion is wrong and I don't support it, but I also think that it is a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor, not a decision that should be made by the federal government. I personally think that it is wrong, butI don't like to press my personal beliefs on other people, especially through legislation.
    While you and vmathis12019 have a good take on it, how do you respond to the accusation that abortion is an infringement on the life of the fetus, especially in late-term abortions?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    I don't have a response to that, because I don't have all of the answers to everything. I do think that it's clear from my last post that I find abortion to be fundamentally wrong. But that doesn't mean thatI think the government should be forcing my opinion on everyone else.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    I don't have a response to that, because I don't have all of the answers to everything. I do think that it's clear from my last post that I find abortion to be fundamentally wrong. But that doesn't mean thatI think the government should be forcing my opinion on everyone else.
    Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. But the people who want to ban abortion are going to say that abortion is something that the government has the right to ban because it infringes on the life of a fetus.

  23. #23
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    I personally believe that abortion is wrong and I don't support it, but I also think that it is a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor, not a decision that should be made by the federal government. I personally think that it is wrong, butI don't like to press my personal beliefs on other people, especially through legislation.
    While you and vmathis12019 have a good take on it, how do you respond to the accusation that abortion is an infringement on the life of the fetus, especially in late-term abortions?
    I would say once you are "vested" in the pregnancy, it should only be terminated for health reasons... the woman has already had a couple months to make up her mind, and if she hasn't figured out shes pregnant by then... well, shes an idiot.

    I think anything 1st trimester is fine.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    imperialism2024 wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    I personally believe that abortion is wrong and I don't support it, but I also think that it is a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor, not a decision that should be made by the federal government. I personally think that it is wrong, butI don't like to press my personal beliefs on other people, especially through legislation.
    While you and vmathis12019 have a good take on it, how do you respond to the accusation that abortion is an infringement on the life of the fetus, especially in late-term abortions?
    I would say once you are "vested" in the pregnancy, it should only be terminated for health reasons... the woman has already had a couple months to make up her mind, and if she hasn't figured out shes pregnant by then... well, shes an idiot.

    I think anything 1st trimester is fine.
    As much as I am against abortion all together,I think this is a very realistic way of looking at it, and about as good of a compromise as anyone can expect.

    I'm not sure how I feel about 1st trimester, but anything past that is a human being with rights, in my opinion.

  25. #25
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    I am pro life. No matter what the situation, it still does not justify the murder of an innocent child.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •