• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Progressives Once Again on the Wrong Side of Progress

friday

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
801
Reaction score
196
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
“I believe that involuntary servitude, as it exists in different States of this Confederacy, is recognized by the Constitution. I believe that it stands like any other admitted right and that the States where it exists are entitled to efficient remedies to enforce the constitutional provisions. I hold that the laws of 1850, commonly called the ‘compromise measures,’ are strictly constitutional and to be unhesitatingly carried into effect…I fervently hope that the question is at rest, and that no sectional or ambitious or fanatical excitement may again threaten the durability of our institutions or obscure the light of our prosperity”

- Franklin Pierce, 1853 (from his inauguration speech)

Franklin Pierce was one of the three Northern Democrat pro-slavery Presidents leading up to the civil war. Fillmore, Pierce and Buchanan put policies in place that expanded slavery and prepared the country for the South to leave through their inaction. They considered slavery to be a constitutional right, argued that it was the law of the land, and called those who opposed it fanatics. They praised their compromises considering peace and tranquility to be of more value than the freedom of the black man. Their goal was to provide compromises between the North and South in hopes to keep everyone calm and sedated in the face of the greatest horror in America’s 19th century.

But where is the so-called “Progressive Party” in the face of the greatest horror of the 2oth and 21st century? Where does the Democrat party stand on the 1.3 million unborn babies who are killed in the womb without enjoying the rights provided to them by the fifth amendment to the Constitution?

“The Democratic Party stands behind the right of every woman to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of ability to pay… We believe it is a fundamental constitutional liberty that individual Americans — not government — can best take responsibility for making the most difficult and intensely personal decisions regarding reproduction.”

- Democrat Party Platform, 1996

This “progressive” stance on abortion is now to become the focus of the debate on a national healthcare program that forsakes the constitution and forces citizens of the United States to buy health insurance from government approved corporations. What stands in the way now is whether our government, once of the people, will now be of the corporations AND Planned Parenthood. Will our government force all Americans, regardless of conscience, to pour our tax dollars into the coffers of the abortion factories? Once again, it is Democrats alone who will decide.

“The men who have brought us this [anti-abortion funding amendment] don’t single out a procedure that is used by a man, or a drug that is used by a man, that involves his reproductive health care, and say they have to get a special rider…There is nothing in this amendment that says if a man some day wants to buy Viagra, for example, that his pharmaceutical coverage cannot cover it…”

- Senator Barbara Boxer

While Harry Reid is comparing passing this universal healthcare bill to ending slavery, and the progressives are comparing killing the unborn to taking sexual performance enhancement drugs, hopes are beginning to slip away for a conscience protection in this bill. Unlike Pierce, who believed the people of the various States had the right to choose whether slavery was constitutional, Reid and Pelosi will make every American pay for abortion. Had Pierce commanded that the North fund the slave trade, those radical, regressive, and uncompromising abolitionist pests may not have waited for the South to secede or Lincoln to lead them.

So what will be the result when Pelosi finds Rep. Stupak’s price? Already Senator Ben Nelson’s vote on abortion was bought for $45 million, and there are more stimulus pork bills on the horizon. What will happen when you and I are forced to pay for abortion or face jail for tax evasion? Will Americans stand once again for true progress? Will we once again rise up for the rights of those who have no voice? Or will we choose to be as silent as those who have no choice.
 
So which is it, the poor, innocents with no rights or just your money?
 
So what will be the result when Pelosi finds Rep. Stupak’s price? Already Senator Ben Nelson’s vote on abortion was bought for $45 million, and there are more stimulus pork bills on the horizon. What will happen when you and I are forced to pay for abortion or face jail for tax evasion? Will Americans stand once again for true progress? Will we once again rise up for the rights of those who have no voice? Or will we choose to be as silent as those who have no choice.

Blood money,... blood on their hands.
 
The Democratic Party today is not the same one as the 19th century. FDR completely changed the party, just like Teddy changed the Republican party.
 
There are many nations in Europe that have Universal Health Care and make it work the only difference is they will admit it has a lack in the amount of time someone may have to wait to see a doctor but what that usually amounts to is people over reacting to every little bug that they end up with.

As for the primary topic of Abortion, it should not under any circumstance be covered under insurance with UNLESS their is proven and recorded evidence that the mother's life is in danger if the unborn's is to be born or if both mother and unborn are in danger at birth due to complications. Otherwise it is not under any way should be covered under any insurance as it is something that is not being done for "medical" purposes but on a "I want it done" thought.

Abortion is not a form of birth control it is a form of saving a life by removing an unborn fetus that until the Third Trimester is not (in my mind) a living organism and even if it was a living organism it matches the same description as a parasite which is something many do not think about...because to think such would make the person "inhuman" or at the very least "immoral".
 
Then the unborn should rise up and fight for their rights. LONG LIVE THE FETAL REVOLUTION!!

Seriously though, I find it just as odd that the republican party, which is supposedly for smaller government, and less government interference in peoples' lives, does a complete 180 in that respect when it comes to abortion.
 
Then the unborn should rise up and fight for their rights. LONG LIVE THE FETAL REVOLUTION!!

Seriously though, I find it just as odd that the republican party, which is supposedly for smaller government, and less government interference in peoples' lives, does a complete 180 in that respect when it comes to abortion.

Is it interfering in someone's life to fight for their fifth amendment rights and prevent their execution without due process?
 
Unlike Pierce, who believed the people of the various States had the right to choose whether slavery was constitutional, Reid and Pelosi will make every American pay for abortion.

Too bad, but we don't get to pick and choose which laws we'll allow our taxes to be spent on.

While pro-lifers find it abhorrent to be forced to support abortion through their tax dollars, non-interventionists find it equally abhorrent to be forced to support these constant wars we're always fighting with their tax dollars.

Should their be an opt-out provision on tax forms where taxpayers are allowed to choose one budget item they don't want their taxes funding?
 
Is it interfering in someone's life to fight for their fifth amendment rights and prevent their execution without due process?

A pre-viable fetus has no such rights.
 
Is it interfering in someone's life to fight for their fifth amendment rights and prevent their execution without due process?
Irrelevant banter. The Vth does not apply, educate yourself about the Constitution.
 
Is it interfering in someone's life to fight for their fifth amendment rights and prevent their execution without due process?

Well that's the big argument with the abortion issue. Does a fetus deserve the full protection of the constitution? Everyone's got their opinion on that, but there's no right answer. Hence why abortion will always be a controversial issue.
 
Too bad, but we don't get to pick and choose which laws we'll allow our taxes to be spent on.

While pro-lifers find it abhorrent to be forced to support abortion through their tax dollars, non-interventionists find it equally abhorrent to be forced to support these constant wars we're always fighting with their tax dollars.

Should their be an opt-out provision on tax forms where taxpayers are allowed to choose one budget item they don't want their taxes funding?

I like the idea of an opt out option on our tax bill. Let's tell the lawmaker what we will and won't spend money on.
 
I think the primary reason why the Republican Party does an about face when it comes to the idea of abortion is because they are heavily entrenched with the Religious Right. When you have groups such as the Christian Coalition paying millions a year to ensure they have some say in the Republican Policy holdings on capital hill it is self evident why they are very much against abortion and stem cell research.

To go against the CC and other groups on the issues would mean losing funding in political campaigns something they can not do and maintain the party line. What I find funny is that when it comes to Abortion they are against it but when it comes to Capital Punishment its ok to kill someone. In my mind the Republican Party and the many groups that support it live by a double standard.

Then again I will not say that the Democrats don't either as they are suppose to be for the poor yet they allow the poorer to get poorer because they open our borders to illegals that continue to throw our economy into disarray.
 
Then the unborn should rise up and fight for their rights. LONG LIVE THE FETAL REVOLUTION!!

Seriously though, I find it just as odd that the republican party, which is supposedly for smaller government, and less government interference in peoples' lives, does a complete 180 in that respect when it comes to abortion.

I am no longer a Republican, But I have a take on this....

And I have stated it consistantly,...

"While I most certainly am for smaller less intrusive government,... I believe the government still has a legitimate role to play in the protection of innocent people who can not defend nor fend for themselves.-- Don't you?" Post #21

Just my 2 cents on it.
 
I am no longer a Republican, But I have a take on this....

And I have stated it consistantly,...

"While I most certainly am for smaller less intrusive government,... I believe the government still has a legitimate role to play in the protection of innocent people who can not defend nor fend for themselves.-- Don't you?" Post #21

Just my 2 cents on it.

What party would you most closely associate yourself with?
 
What party would you most closely associate yourself with?

Funny you should ask,.. I've been seaching for one. And if you clicked on the hyperlinks, you know I even toyed with the idea of starting one myself.

As lame as the idea is,.. it's more appealing to me than re-investing in the GOP.
 
As soon as the Religious Right eases up on preventing teenagers and the poor from getting easy access to birth control is as soon as I will ease up on my vehement defense of abortion.

Most abortions are unwanted pregnancies. If conservatives want fewer abortions then they should promote more birth control. More birth control = fewer unwanted pregnancies = fewer abortions.

This is really common sense on the most basic of levels and I just have absolutely NO idea how people can be against both abortions of unwanted pregnancies and birth control that would prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. Especially when it deals with what other people do with their bodies.
 
As soon as the Religious Right eases up on preventing teenagers and the poor from getting easy access to birth control is as soon as I will ease up on my vehement defense of abortion.

Most abortions are unwanted pregnancies. If conservatives want fewer abortions then they should promote more birth control. More birth control = fewer unwanted pregnancies = fewer abortions.

This is really common sense on the most basic of levels and I just have absolutely NO idea how people can be against both abortions of unwanted pregnancies and birth control that would prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. Especially when it deals with what other people do with their bodies.

For the record, I am a Conservative,... I am not religious and I do not oppose preventive birth control, sex ed or any of that.
 
Funny you should ask,.. I've been seaching for one. And if you clicked on the hyperlinks, you know I even toyed with the idea of starting one myself.

As lame as the idea is,.. it's more appealing to me than re-investing in the GOP.

Well there is the pro life party you might be interested in.

And sorry I'm posting from a bar in El Paso after 12 hrs on the road so links are well not that easy right now. I promise to look later.

FYI I am pro choice.
 
Well there is the pro life party you might be interested in.

And sorry I'm posting from a bar in El Paso after 12 hrs on the road so links are well not that easy right now. I promise to look later.

FYI I am pro choice.

That's fine,..I'm also "pro-choice."

I just think there should be consequences for some of the choices people make,... Like the "choice" to kill a child, for example.

I never read about the "pro-life party" but it doesn't sound like anything I would be interested in. Maybe though,... it depends on their platform.
 
Last edited:
For the record, I am a Conservative,... I am not religious and I do not oppose preventive birth control, sex ed or any of that.

That may be you, but there are many religious conservatives who want to outlaw birth control as well as abortion. Until this country promotes more birth control I cannot, in good conscience, advocate prohibiting abortion.
 
That may be you, but there are many religious conservatives who want to outlaw birth control as well as abortion. Until this country promotes more birth control I cannot, in good conscience, advocate prohibiting abortion.

Jeebus Funking Chirst,...

As if the rights of prebirth children are contingent upon whether or not we as a country are more willing to promote birth control.

If you think abortion should remain legal,... If you deny that a human in the fetal stage of their life is a "person",... fine.

But to say,... "I'm not supporting any laws against abortion,... unless or until we start promoting more birth control?"

Come on,... man?

Use your head.
 
Jeebus Funking Chirst,...

As if the rights of prebirth children are contingent upon whether or not we as a country are more willing to promote birth control.

If you think abortion should remain legal,... If you deny that a human in the fetal stage of their life is a "person",... fine.

But to say,... "I'm not supporting any laws against abortion,... unless or until we start promoting more birth control?"

Come on,... man?

Use your head.

Why not use yours Chuz? Why should everyone else have to do all the work?

If you outlaw abortion, but don't increase the effectiveness of sexual education and make birth control more available to all, there are only two outcomes. 1. The abortion rate won't change at all, women will just get them illegally and be frequently injured or killed in the process, which is bad. 2. Fewer women will get abortions, but far more unwanted children will be born, most likely living in poverty, being abused, and straining our already screwed up welfare system, which is bad.

Better yet, why not leave abortion alone, and simply focus on better sex education and wider availability of birth control measures. If you reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies, you'll reduce the abortion rate for sure. And I guarantee it's a better way to go about it, seeing as how you're curing the disease, rather than just fighting the symptoms so to speak.
 
Jeebus Funking Chirst,...

As if the rights of prebirth children are contingent upon whether or not we as a country are more willing to promote birth control.

If you think abortion should remain legal,... If you deny that a human in the fetal stage of their life is a "person",... fine.

But to say,... "I'm not supporting any laws against abortion,... unless or until we start promoting more birth control?"

Come on,... man?

Use your head.

On another note, I've seen that giant Jesus statue before (or a very similar one anyway). It's creepy as hell.
 
Why not use yours Chuz? Why should everyone else have to do all the work?

If you outlaw abortion, but don't increase the effectiveness of sexual education and make birth control more available to all, there are only two outcomes. 1. The abortion rate won't change at all, women will just get them illegally and be frequently injured or killed in the process, which is bad. 2. Fewer women will get abortions, but far more unwanted children will be born, most likely living in poverty, being abused, and straining our already screwed up welfare system, which is bad.

Better yet, why not leave abortion alone, and simply focus on better sex education and wider availability of birth control measures. If you reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies, you'll reduce the abortion rate for sure. And I guarantee it's a better way to go about it, seeing as how you're curing the disease, rather than just fighting the symptoms so to speak.

Short (as always) on time.

If and when you accept the fact that life begins at conception and/or you become aware (convinced) that elective abortions are a crime against a child,....

It becomes a human rights issue.

Human rights are not negotiable.

"Reducing the rate" is of one mindset,... that's for people who have a gut feeling that an abortion unjustly kills a child,... but don't want to (or can't) buy into it completely.

"Overturning Roe" is the other mindset,.... it's for people (like myself) who are convinced (as I am) that elective abortions unjustly kill a child.

There is no middle ground compromise.
 
Back
Top Bottom