quote:
You're reading comprehension is exceptionally poor. I made no argument for or against abortion. I simply pointed out the extreme example you (poorly) chose to use.

No.
You discounted an assertion virtually guaranteed to be true regarding Duvall's decision.
You then said:

quote:
[Duvall] is pro-choice. It is not like the Republican Party has not been pro-life since the mid 70s. If he disagrees with their pro-life position then he is best served to move on. There is a party that is pro-choice. He will fit right in.

You made a definitive single position assessment as to whether Duvall should or should not remain Republican.
Let's think about that.
Shall we?

First, you made an assertion regarding Duvall's position on abortion, but what do you actually know of it?
What is Duvall's position regarding late term abortion?
What is his position regarding abortion for sex selection?
What is Duvall's position regarding a 20wk cutoff?

Now then.
Regarding a litany of GOP tenets:

What is Duvall's position regarding government spending?
What is Duvall's position regarding increased taxes?
What is Duvall's position regarding Obamacare?
What is Duvall's position regarding government regulation?
What is Duvall's position regarding expansion of energy independence?
What is Duvall's position regarding IRS targeting?
etc.

Based on one single issue, you said "there is a party that is pro-choice," and Duvall should join it because "he will fit right in." That is dense.

quote:
Noticed you avoided the question of how many abortions are the direct result of rape.

Didn't avoid it. Frequency is not relevant. As with elective late-term abortion, if it ever happens, then it happens too often. Simple precept. As for the comparison, if I had to guess how many abortions are the direct result of rape in this country, I'd say at least as many as there are late-term abortions. It's an educated guess, but a guess none the less.

What is no guess is that someone like Aiken, Murdock, papasmurf, or you should not be allowed to prevent a rape victim from terminating the resulting pregnancy so she'd not relive the episode virtually every waking moment for 9 months (even assuming no associated life altering medical complications with the process).

This post was edited on 3/16/14 at 2:12 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Wolfhound45

Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan

Member since Nov 2009

120000 posts

Posted on 3/16/14 at 2:17 pm to NC_Tigah

Your reading comprehension has slightly improved. He stated the position of the Democratic Party. Choice. Period. He will fit right in. Why is that so hard to understand?

quote:
What is no guess is that someone like Aiken, Murdock, papasmurf, or you should not be allowed to prevent a rape victim from terminating the resulting pregnancy so she'd not relive the episode virtually every waking moment for 9 months (even assuming no associated life altering medical complications with the process).

Wow. Nice work. Considering I offered no opinions on abortion and yet you make a dramatic statement about my supposed position. You must be clairvoyant. What is that like?

The rest of the stuff you wrote was pretty good. Congrats.

ETA: Had to offer you props on that well built strawman. My bad for not mentioning it earlier.

The faux outrage is also pretty cool as well.

This post was edited on 3/16/14 at 2:32 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by VOR

Member since Apr 2009

63721 posts

Posted on 3/16/14 at 3:19 pm to NC_Tigah

quote:
Frequency is not relevant. As with elective late-term abortion, if it ever happens, then it happens too often. Simple precept. As for the comparison, if I had to guess how many abortions are the direct result of rape in this country, I'd say at least as many as there are late-term abortions. It's an educated guess, but a guess none the less.

You are correct, sir.

1 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board