#197 G Alston:
“South Dakota, 2004. Red State. Abortion ban vote on state ballot. Failed. Same state, 2008. New attempt. Failed.
I have no assertion. Just facts. Ain’t that a bitch?”.
No, not really, because you’re still striving mightily to argue past the point.
Abortion BAN…Failed…Red State. Yeah, I get it.
That’s a whole different kettle of fish than restrictions on abortion, including no federal funding for “abortion as birth control”.
Heck, even YOU conced that:
“And by the way if states wanted to ban late term stuff I think almost 99% of the country agrees with that. I certainly do, and I’m pro-choice.”
So what do we really have left?
“The problem is that this is rarely what is sought. See above re SD ban.”
Yeah-yeah..South Dakota…Red…no ban. You said that. We get it.
But you’re on to something in the “bait and switch” tactic, except that you,too, seem to have it exactly backwards.
When the initiatives came out for parental notification,(did they even ask for permission?), before performing a medical abortion procedure on a female minor…the wailing began, the coat-hangers came out, and the resistance to the assertion of a little thing like common-sense parental responsibility and authority was couched as forcing women into back alley abortions.
And when late-term and “partial-birth”, (thirty-seconds-from-murder),abortions are the targets to be banned or curtailed, the exact same political hot-buttons get pressed by the exact same people and for the exact same reasons…and with the exact same results.
But what is it you say:
“Can you get the “ban it all” people to STFU long enough to get sensible debate re late term to happen?”
No. In point of fact, I don’t think I can. And I wouldn’t even if I could, because they have as much a right to have their POV heard as do those hysterical baby-killing kooks over on the other side of the issue.
And anyway,when they get their absolutist turn-back-the-clock and undo-what-has-been-done agenda defeated at the ballot box, the issue gets refined a little more sharply.
Now could YOU get YOUR crew of militant 8-80, taxpayer-subsidized, “suck it out a second before it pops out on it’s own” folks to likewise STFU and stop trying to have THEIR morality, (or lack of same), imposed upon us by every and any judge that they can buy, browbeat and/or befuddle?
Not likely, huh?
So where does that leave us?
Take the hint…keep the wages of private sin from being deducted out of the public purse.
“They didn’t have F-22’s in Washington’s day. In fact, the civilian arms and military arms in that day differed only in the fact that the military owned cannons.”
What history books have YOU been reading?
Private citizens and groups of citizens owned cannon, fella.
Heck, the US Navy had the devil of a time recruiting manpower because all the experienced seamen in New England had runn off to sea in Privateers, which were privately owned warships.
Which means that they mounted privately-owned cannon…or does someone somewhere expect us to believe that they engaged the Royal Navy with nothing more lethal than harsh language?
“You already can’t own tanks or RPG’s.”
Sure you can…here’s a link to a lady who has her own 57mm Recoilless Rifle:
http://wethearmed.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=01a25da6fe2cb3cff461fb22687c304a&topic=1879.0
(How cool is THAT?)
“Realistically you couldn’t defend yourself against the military no matter how many automatic weapons you owned.”
Really Alston? That insurgency thing in Iraq these past 6 years…have you heard anything about it?
At all?
“This I agree with. Silent Spring was a lie. This ought to be corrected. Environmentalism was once a good thing; now it’s promotion of junk science. See? I’m not always against you.”
Good…you may then have ONE cookie.
