Political Suicide....Has The GOP Written Off The Women's Vote?

A radio talkshow host has a priest, a minister, and a rabbi on his show, and the topic of conversation is:
"When do you think life begins?"

First the radio talkshow host asks the minister, and the minister's response is "I believe life begins when the heart starts beating."

Second the radio talkshow host asks the priest when he believes life begins, and the priest responds: "I believe God has assigned the new life a soul at the moment of conception."

Last to answer the question is the rabbi. The host asks him: "You are older than all of us and in your infinite wisdom when do you believe life begins?"

Stroking his long beard and seeming deep in thought the rabbi leans forward to speak into the microphone and says:

"When the youngest leaves the house."

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by windword

 

Dear windword,

We seem to be finding more and more things to agree about.

Who hasn't seen the posters of mutilated fetus' that protesters wave in front of clinics

Abortion doctors are their staff are being murdered, threatened and publicly shamed. Women who visit these clinics are accused of murder and pelted with hatred.

Absolutely bad stuff, you're right.

But I still have two questions:

1.) Would a non-invasive, external ultrasound be acceptable? Would that solve the problem?

2.) Why does showing a woman an ultrasound, sometimes lead to a changed mind? Was it a surprise to her?

With respect,
Charles1952

Perhaps the bigger point, and what others in the thread have been trying to say:

Do you really feel comfortable with government legislating medical procedure, that for all intents should be a decision between a doctor and patient?

Do you really want to open the door where a government body will make medical decisions with your personal doctor simply a yes man to such laws?

Look further down the line, these things always start with something controversial or "for the children".

The GOP is filled with miserly religious phonies. They are all morally outraged at abortion, want to end it, but have no answers for how to deal with population beyond 'YOU'RE NOT USING MY $! If they can't afford 'em they shouldn't have had 'em or should give them up for adoption".

Both of which are more soft headed the Rick Santorum's youngest child. Do we need more people on the planet?

What a congregation of brain dead louts

Derek

reply to post by windword

Dear windword,

Thank you very much for making your position clear. So, it's not about invasiveness. Your objection is to anything that might persuade a woman to change her mind about getting an abortion. Watching a film, going to a counsellor, having a discussion with the doctor that might change her opinion.

I don't see abortion as something that needs to be guarded that jealously, for a variety of reasons. You do. We disagree. OK.

With respect,
Charles1952

********************************** Concerning politics**********************

I don't think it's easy to assign blame to one party in this situation. It's interesting to me that since the 2006 elections, Republicans have controlled one house of Congress for one year. I can see where they might think things aren't their fault.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by windword

 

Dear windword,

Thank you very much for making your position clear. So, it's not about invasiveness. Your objection is to anything that might persuade a woman to change her mind about getting an abortion. Watching a film, going to a counsellor, having a discussion with the doctor that might change her opinion.

I don't see abortion as something that needs to be guarded that jealously, for a variety of reasons. You do. We disagree. OK.

With respect,
Charles1952


********************************** Concerning politics**********************

I don't think it's easy to assign blame to one party in this situation. It's interesting to me that since the 2006 elections, Republicans have controlled one house of Congress for one year. I can see where they might think things aren't their fault.

Of course it's about the invasiveness! It's a sort of rape! It's a vaginal probe that is not medically needed and is forced. It's expense is placed upon the patient and is restrictive.

It's also about forcing and foisting other opinions as fact. Abortion is not murder and it's not wrong. Enacting laws that enforce a certain moral opinion is strategic. It's about forcing a woman to an education on someone else's morality.

Why is it so important that a woman see things your way, understands your opinion, before they have their sought after abortion?

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
But I DO judge the nation's moral climate that has made this decision okay. We should ALL be outraged at the idea that women are killing their unborn babies in large numbers. It should be OUTRAGEOUS that MY position is the minority one, and apparently the unpopular one here on ATS.

Morals? As in religious morals. America is a secular country.

No we should not be outraged that women want right to their body.

Ethically - - not bringing another human into this world is the most unselfish and logical decision/choice any woman can make.

There is not one unselfish reason to have a child.

On the other hand - - Abortion can be an unselfish act.

I don't usually share this with too many people, but I can tell what is going to happen in the future with 100% accuracy. No parlor tricks here, just 100% actual fact:

The debate over legal abortions will be a major campaign issue in the 2016, 2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036, 2040, and 2044 election campaigns for all parties involved. While the current laws about it will remain pretty much unchanged. for the next 30 years (at least).

reply to post by Flatfish


While I don't agree with the policies enacted by the GOP in those states.. you make a serious flaw in believing that all women support the right to "choose" .. many do not. There is a larger percentage of women that are Liberal as compared to Conservative, but the voting spread is not that severe. In other words, it really won't have much effect on the number of women who vote Republican.

reply to post by Rockpuck


The GOP has no need to win when Obama is carrying out what they want anyway. Maybe the current crop of candidates is a temperature check.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Flatfish

 

While I don't agree with the policies enacted by the GOP in those states.. you make a serious flaw in believing that all women support the right to "choose" .. many do not. There is a larger percentage of women that are Liberal as compared to Conservative, but the voting spread is not that severe. In other words, it really won't have much effect on the number of women who vote Republican.

I never said that I believed all women support the right to choose, because I don't. Actually I believe they're probably split pretty much down the middle on that issue, just like most of the rest of America. I myself, have mixed feelings when it comes to abortion and I think there are valid arguments made on both sides of the issue. I don't think anyone "likes" abortions, (or DNCs as they're known to people who can afford private insurance) and I don't believe there is such a thing as someone who is "pro-abortion." I really think it's probably a very negative experience for anyone who is compelled to undergo the procedure.

While I have noticed that many have chosen to make this thread about the abortion issue, that was not my intention when I presented the OP. I was really trying to focus on the issue of a woman's Right to Privacy as well their right to have equal access to healthcare. I guess the best way for me to say it is; that not being a woman and never having to face the decision of whether or not to abort a pregnancy, I can't begin to imagine what women go through when faced with making that decision. What I do know is that it would be a cold day in hell before I supported any legislation that would give another individual the right to decide what I did with respect to my body and/or healthcare.

Whether or not we agree on current abortion statutes was not intended to be the issue. On the other hand, if I'm not mistaken, the entire foundation for the Supreme court's ruling in the Roe v. Wade decision was based on a woman's "Right to Privacy," was it not? This thread is about the fact that the right-winged religious ideologues are making yet another attempt to trample on that very Right, it's just a different approach, that's all.

Originally posted by ILikeStars
reply to post by Flatfish

 

I'm absolutely convinced that the GOP has absolutely NO intentions of taking control of the white house next election. I don't believe for one second they intend of taking ownership or sharing any responsibility for our current state of affairs. Go ask them. None of it is their fault.

The GOP will not be running the white house in 2013.

Anyone want to make any bets?

I wouldn't bet against that assumption. At this point in time, I don't see how it's even plausible anymore. And to think it's always been the Democrats who were known for snatching defeat from the hands of victory.

Not sure about the GOP, but Santorum sure in hell has.

If I didn't know better, I would think Santorum somehow warped out of a black and white television fixed on the Leave it To Beaver program and landed into the 21st century.

This man has not the slightest clue as to what it is to be an everyday American in 2012. No clue at all. He's a far right robot who only sees women holding a roast after they've waited all day for hubby to come home. Their main duties include baking and babies.

What's the most amazing is some of the hypocrisy going around in the GOP party. Many states, 28 i believe, have passed this same exact legislation in their states that Obama has done...some with the excemption...some without.....and many of these states passed these laws with Republican majorities and governors.

Mike Huckabee, who has came out in strong opposition to this....actually signed a similar bill into law when he was governor!!!!

reply to post by caladonea

I think not only has the GOP written off the women's vote...but also the gay vote...and the poor (in money) peoples vote...as well as the senior citizen votes.

Or most of the unemployed, as they are consistently called lazy and worthless.....leeches on the system.

All the polling that I've been seeing is showing that the vast majority of Americans support Obama's move on contraception.....average around over 60 percent for to 30 against.

reply to post by David9176

Sorry to intrude, but I had to look this up for another thread. The 28 state thing? No, it's not the same as Obama's. There aren't exemptions in those regulations except for a very narrow one that affects some churches, but no hospitals or other institutions.

All of the laws in the 28 states have at least two ways of getting out of providing contraceptives, either don't provide insurance for prescription drugs, or don't provide insurance at all. (The institutions could give money to their employees so they could buy their own.) Those exemptions will be taken away under Obamacare. And the vast majority of those 28 states have additional exemptions that apply, in addition to those two.

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

 

With your words, you have given the state untold powers, and if you were a judge you would have set precedent that would have had moral and social consequences in the future that span way beyond the rights to abortion. These rights will stem into bodily privacy rights, that go far beyond what you CAN imagine. It doesn't matter if the argument was BASED upon saving lives, the precedent sticks "in certain situations, where the interest of life is in question, humans do not maintain a right to bodily privacy." Think of what that means for tracking chips, implanted listening devices, and implanted recording devices. The future is coming soon, and technological advancement is a beautiful thing...however, it can be twisted, even over an issue as tiny as abortion.

Look further in, be forward looking. There are consequences far greater than those you can see today.

Oh, and I still don't agree with the abortion argument, but I settled that in my last post. This post is just to give you a tiny glimpse at how precedent speaks. A TINY glimpse.

Come on with the fearmongering! If they want to implant us, they aren't going to only selectively implant girls who are looking to get an abortion. An abortion is far more invasive than any vaginal ultrasound, btw. If abortion is a tiny little issue to you I'd hate to know what is important. Do you abhor the idea that a pregnant woman is given knowledge about what she is going through? Let's just put blinders on her so she does not have to know the reality of what is happening to her and, dare I say, the baby, inside of her. If she sees what is in there she might willingly change her mind.

I beginning to wonder if the GOP isn't deliberately alienating as many voters as possible prior to the upcoming Presidential elections

No, they are crazy. They have been pushing this stuff since they day they took the house, and a lot of the newly elected were either in the Tea Party, or under the influence of the Tea Party.

reply to post by David9176

All the polling that I've been seeing is showing that the vast majority of Americans support Obama's move on contraception.....average around over 60 percent for to 30 against.

If you're interested, I'd like to point you to some polls that don't agree with the ones you've seen. www.lifenews.com... provides a collection of several polls including CNN, Pew, and Rasmussen.

The CNN poll shows 44% supporting the new regulations, with 50% opposed. Women are 47%-46%, a surprising tie.

Democrats back the controversial Obamacare mandate on a 70-26 percentage point margin while independents oppose it 47-44 and Republicans oppose it 85-12. Voters in every part of the nation are opposing the mandate except for those living in the Northeast.

Pew showed 44% supporting and 49% opposed.

Rasmussen showed 39% supporting and 50% opposed.

In summary, women seem split evenly on this issue, which is a gain for Republicans since women tend liberal. Republicans are more solidly opposed to the regulations than Democrats are for it. And Independents are tilting Republican on this issue.