Abortion and Bush

Pengwuino

As usual, SOS comes out firing with the insults.

I'm not concerned with the first part, the second part is what i was concerned about, i should have made that clearer. The executive branch (ie The Presidency) enforces laws, they don't rule on their constitutionality, thus the poll answer is illogical. And actually, come to think of it, the 2nd and 3rd choices are equally illogical. The President is simply there to have an opinion in this arena of government. This is entirely a judicial problem.

So please, next time read the poll choice before replying. The Presidency is not our entire government.

russ_watters

I like the wording. I voted for "What will you be for halloween?" and the answer is: drunk.

My opinion on the debate (but not abortion itself) is that it is more trouble than it is worth. Ie, there are more important things to do in this country than argue about an issue that changes very little over time and has very little impact on most peoples' lives.

Pengwuino

This country is a one issue country it seems. I wonder how few people in the bickering community knew her stance on absolutely any other issue outside of the real political community.

Skyhunter

Who said the Presidency was the entire government besides you?

You are not concerned with the first part?

Do you mean whether or not abortion should be legal?

The government is interconnected. You can't isolate the President from the judiciary, especially right now when there is a vacant seat on the SC.

You do know who appoints Supreme Court Justices?

And who consents to the appointments?

I think you were trying to insult anyone who is pro-choice, and then deflect a rebuttal by declaring that the whole poll is irrelevant.

Kerrie

Actually, it has an impact of about 51% of American lives-those of women at least those who are able to conceive a child. And we can't forget the men who it affects also-those who could become fathers. In general, I do believe it matters to many where a president stands on the issue, it's a very deep core matter of a what a person believes should they be in such a situation, and makes them feel more at ease with who they "select".

Informal Logic

If there was a ruling that required people to have abortions under various circumstances, I could understand the fervor. In other words, those who are pro life are free to be pro life and be at peace with themselves in their decision. Why do they need to impose their belief on others? Other than that I do not feel I (men) should have any say in the matter because it is a woman's issue.

BobG

You're single? It's hard to imagine that a married couple wouldn't know how the other wants to handle kids. If they can't agree on something that big before marriage, they're going to run into some big problems later on.

What happens if one changes their mind about how many kids to have? Or about whether to have kids at all? It should still be just the wife's decision since it's a "woman's issue"?

Kerrie

i agree that it's more then a woman's issue-her decision can affect that man for the rest of his life regarding the child. he doesn't have the option to NOT pay child support unless she agrees to him signing over his parental rights. ultimately, the decision affects the woman and child the greatest.

russ_watters

What I meant was Row v Wade is more than 30 years old and very little has changed in the interim. While abortion may be important to some people, the debate has accomplished very little. I was talking about the debate, not abortion itself. I know it matters to some people as a "benchmark" issue, but because of what I said above, I consider it a fairly useless benchmark issue. There were probably people who voted for Reagan or Bush Sr soley beacuse they were pro-life or Clinton soley because he was pro-choice, but the issue barely even came up in their presidencies.

There is a disconnect between the effort spent on the issue while campaigning (a lot) and effort spent on the issue while in office (virtually nothing). That's all I'm saying.