Do you suppose maybe someone neither Catholic nor Evangelical might exercise enough synaptic links to recognize that he or she was also once only a few cells in stature? That had his/her mother decided to have a doctor chop him or her up in fetal stages of his/her life, his / her life would have ended? (violently and painfully, I might add.

The abortion crowd showed its true nature in the flap over a simple pro-choice superbowl ad celebrating a mom who chose LIFE. I’m really tired of the liberal/abortion$$$/Planned Parenthood stance that anyone who might not agree that sex should be recreational and resulting children should be killed in the womb MUST be silenced.

You stated that “Only Catholics & evangelicals believe life begins at conception.” I am sure a lot of other non-Catholic/non-evangelicals as myself will disagree with that statement. There is no question as to when human life begins. We can test it scientifically and it begins at conception.

Roe v. Wade (http://supreme.justia.com/us/410/113/case.html) really doesn’t have anything to do with privacy. If you murder someone in your bedroom, you aren’t protected by the right to privacy.

The Supreme Court declared abortion legal because a fetus is not a person. By looking at a strange collection of 19th century writings the majority justices were persuaded that “that the word ‘person,’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.” Thus the fetus was just a thing in the woman’s body and thus covered under the right to privacy. It is a basically a rewrite of the Dred Scott decision; a fetus is not fully human, just as blacks were not fully human, and thus is not protected under the law.

You can not hide behind science, abortion is a moral issue pure and simple. I think it is a cop out to try to say a baby is not a baby. We should discuss this as adults and look at abortion as part of homicide law–when and under what circumstances does one human have the right to take the life of another and when is it murder?

I do not call myself pro-life because I think it is confusing. I support war, self-defense, and capital punishment. Thus, I am not against killing people. I am against murder. I do not believe someone has the right to take the life of someone else just because someone is inconvenient. And if someone is not woman enough to handle the biological fact that if she has sex she may get pregnant, then she should go have her uterus removed.

When Perry took office he was very much like his friend and predecesor George W. But he seems to have had a political awakening in the last couple of years and with that the enthusiam of a new convert. He regularly attends Tea Party rallies and has given talks that indicate a passion, not just words, for conservatism. I think he will help us stand up to the Federal Government. He pledges to sue the Feds if the unconstitutional health care bill passes. And if it comes to a shooting war, well, he’s got guns and he knows how to use them.

1) Belabors Hutchison’s stance on abortion.
2) Indulges in assumption that pro-choice=liberal. Pro-choice Repubs will tell you that they feel that way because it’s true conseravtism.
3) I don’t care what Rush Limbaugh called something.
4) If the “terrorist bill of rights” is that bad, why does Dick Cheney support Hutchison?
5) Why isn’t Cheney’s support of her mentioned in the article?