• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jane Roe "Do not vote for Barack Obama, he murders babies" WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO

Yet, you wimps still refuse to put this up to a real vote in the states.

Grow a pair.

Exactly

They are too scared to let the people decide
 
Yeah ... abortion ... that's a winning issue for conservatives. :lol:

Looks like the Tea Party extremists have scuttled the rehubs chances of taking the Senate ... AGAIN ... primarily because of this abortion extremism.

It's a Democrat funding and running this ad genius.
 
What's wrong with letting each individual decide?

Let each state decide as they should.

Why?
Perhaps there are parents that do not want their children to grow up in a society where life is treated like a disposable product... a Bic lighter.

They just might want to instill such values as the sanctity of life. Perhaps they would want their children to be raised to know actions have consequences... that life is sacred. Perhaps they do not want to live in a state where the schools are passing out contraceptives like bon-bons, and abortions need no parental consent.

The citizens of those states should decide; their legislature can pass the laws. You see... that's how things work in America normally.

If they aren't interested in that, they can live in another state.
 
It's a Democrat funding and running this ad genius.


In January 2011, Terry announced his intention to challenge President Barack Obama in the Democratic Party primaries for the presidential election of 2012.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] His whole campaign strategy was based upon a commercialduring Super Bowl XLVI featuring graphic photographs of aborted fetuses;[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP] historically, the networks have refused all political and issue-related advertising during the Super Bowl, citing equal-time rules and the advertisement did not air.[SUP][20][/SUP]
The attempt to air the ads led to legal action[SUP][21][/SUP] and a statement by the Democratic National Committee that Terry was not a legitimate candidate,[SUP][22][/SUP] and thus should be forbidden privileges given others running.

Randall Terry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And Randall Terry continues on with his dog and pony show....
 
In January 2011, Terry announced his intention to challenge President Barack Obama in the Democratic Party primaries for the presidential election of 2012.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] His whole campaign strategy was based upon a commercialduring Super Bowl XLVI featuring graphic photographs of aborted fetuses;[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP] historically, the networks have refused all political and issue-related advertising during the Super Bowl, citing equal-time rules and the advertisement did not air.[SUP][20][/SUP]
The attempt to air the ads led to legal action[SUP][21][/SUP] and a statement by the Democratic National Committee that Terry was not a legitimate candidate,[SUP][22][/SUP] and thus should be forbidden privileges given others running.

Randall Terry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And Randall Terry continues on with his dog and pony show....

Typical of Libs.

The Libs once had a VP candidate who opposed the Iraq war. They ran him out of the party too. He lost the Dem nomination for his senate seat. His name... Joe Liebermann.

So... it is no surprise that when someone opposes a plank of the Dem platform... Abortion... he is persona non grata.

That Dem party has quite a small tent.
 
This is an outrage. And this piece from Lifesitenews.com will DEFNITELY turn the election.

I know how you value life PowerOb.

This thread has had some value... it's illustrated how callous some Libs are, how funny they think abortion is, and one poster didn't realize Roe has felt guilt about what she was suckered into by Feminist lawyers and has advocated against Roe v. Wade.

From some here I find it difficult to believe they have much compassion. It's almost as if they think abortion is like a toy you get in a Happy Meal. I also believe they don't know what Obama voted for, and they didn't watch the videos, for they are heart wrenching.

Jane Roe's video is simply gut wrenching and leaves you numb... How can you watch that and laugh? I can't fathom it. I can't imagine the guilt Jane Roe feels, and I understand why she does what she does. God Bless her.
 
It's nice to hear your parents managed to escape a murderous madman. The most innocent lives, those who have no voice often cannot. 50,000,000 have had no voice. You think they anted their lives to be terminated if they had a choice?
I think the analogy is fitting. You may not like it... OK.

Sorry but a zygote is not the same as my all but one of my mother's relatives being rounded up, thrown into a concentration camp and then exterminated with the knowledge they were dying.

If you chose not to have an abortion that is your right and your decision one that anyone would respect. I do not feel like my being pro-choice makes me in any way complicit to genocide. If. however, I had been in Germany in 1940 and I agreed with those who were exterminating Jews that is a crime against humanity. No matter how much you try to rationalize that a legal abortion equates to mass murder you will always be wrong.

Abortion will always be legal in the USA - it will never be a crime and no one will ever be accused of murder other than by zealots who believe that making a human being into soap is the same as aborting a 10 week old fetus.
 
Typical of Libs.

The Libs once had a VP candidate who opposed the Iraq war. They ran him out of the party too. He lost the Dem nomination for his senate seat. His name... Joe Liebermann.

So... it is no surprise that when someone opposes a plank of the Dem platform... Abortion... he is persona non grata.

That Dem party has quite a small tent.


Randall Terry is an extremist nut wad who only did this as a publicity stunt.
 
Yet, you wimps still refuse to put this up to a real vote in the states.

Grow a pair.

I find it outrageous that anyone who claims to love our Constitution believes that having a vote that would take away minority rights is the best decision? The genius of our Constitution is to protect EVERYONE'S rights even those who you utterly disagree with. That is what America is all about. Allowing a vote to determine a right is wrong....
 
I find it outrageous that anyone who claims to love our Constitution believes that having a vote that would take away minority rights is the best decision? The genius of our Constitution is to protect EVERYONE'S rights even those who you utterly disagree with. That is what America is all about. Allowing a vote to determine a right is wrong....

And I find it absurdly outrageous that anyone who claims to understand our Constitution doesn't think it applies to that defenseless child from being killed. That is among the most most basic Constitutional rights, the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
 
Last edited:
Let each state decide as they should.


The citizens of those states should decide; their legislature can pass the laws. You see... that's how things work in America normally.

If they aren't interested in that, they can live in another state.

So if your state votes to ban Muslims from living in the USA or Blacks from getting paid to work or Gays from being allowed to have sex etc. that would always be OK? Really? Can you imagine if back in 1964 when the voting rights act was passed it had been put to a vote?

I don't understand people who claim to love the Constitution yet only love it when it can be used to defend their point of view. That is hypocrisy by any definition.
 
So if your state votes to ban Muslims from living in the USA or Blacks from getting paid to work or Gays from being allowed to have sex etc. that would always be OK? Really? Can you imagine if back in 1964 when the voting rights act was passed it had been put to a vote?

I don't understand people who claim to love the Constitution yet only love it when it can be used to defend their point of view. That is hypocrisy by any definition.

Abortion akin to the goop you just wrote... is just that... goop.
 
And I find it absurdly outrageous that anyone who claims to understand our Constitution doesn't think it applies to that defenseless child being killed.

An abortion is legal and will always be legal it does not violate anything in our Constitution. Your "interpretation" doesn't count nor make it illegal. Abortion is LEGAL. Abortion is LEGAL. Abortion is LEGAL.

Either one accepts all of the consequences of our Constitution or one doesn't have a right to whine about what they do not like. I hate that the Constitution allows almost anyone to have a gun but that's the way it is so my choice is not own one...your choice in abortion might be to not own one either but that doesn't make it illegal...
 
Without watching it at all....dumbest damn thing I've heard today. Doubt I'll hear anything dumber, but the day is young.

Didn't watch all 30 seconds of it? But want to editorialize on it? :roll:
 
Abortion akin to the goop you just wrote... is just that... goop.

Really? Goop? So everything that MLK fought and died for, every right that was granted to minorities in our Constitution is goop (what is goop btw?)?

Abortion is LEGAL. No matter how many posts people right here about abortion being "murder" it doesn't make it true just like no matter how many times Romney claims to be a "severe conservative" doesn't make it true either (no one is a bigger flip flopper today than Romney - just thought I'd throw that in for good measure :)
 
I'm very pro-choice, but it is the most persuasive anti-abortion ad I've seen to date and could really fire some people up.

Either a person believes in free speech or not. I don't like the ad. But there is every right to run it.
 
Looks like another Commi-Lib has joined in. Welcome.


You do know Obama's stance on this Trruth?
I doubt it.

Abortion Survivor
"... when he was in the Illinois state senate, Barack Obama voted to deny basic Constitutional Protections for babies born alive from an abortion... not once but our times..."





For all you callous, heartless souls laughing... is it still funny???


No it is sick and perverted to force a rape victim to bear the rapists child and then give him visitation rights. I'm sure glad I'm not a woman. What a frightening thought, and ALL of it mandated by the STATE. I want no part of this "smaller" Govt. Small as in being dictated to by pinheads who claim to speak for God..
 
Sorry but a zygote is not the same as my all but one of my mother's relatives being rounded up, thrown into a concentration camp and then exterminated with the knowledge they were dying.

It's life, just in a more fragile state. It's not the same as being murdered in a Concentration Camp, but what Obama supports is Mengele-like. You did see the video of the girl who survived an abortion? Who was discarded? Left to die. Obama believed she should be denied her right to life.

If
you chose not to have an abortion that is your right and your decision one that anyone would respect.
It is your right until the law is changed, and one day it will be. The Supreme Court will overturn it and send it to the states and their legislatures to decide... as it should be.

Abortion will always be legal in the USA - it will never be a crime and no one will ever be accused of murder other than by zealots who believe that making a human being into soap is the same as aborting a 10 week old fetus.
Callous to the core. I would say you are the pro-death zealot. Actively supporting killing the most innocent life for convenience sake.
 
Randall Terry is an extremist nut wad who only did this as a publicity stunt.

He is a pro-life democrat.

But... this thread has done much to shine the light on the left and their small tent.
 
No it is sick and perverted to force a rape victim to bear the rapists child and then give him visitation rights. I'm sure glad I'm not a woman. What a frightening thought, and ALL of it mandated by the STATE. I want no part of this "smaller" Govt. Small as in being dictated to by pinheads who claim to speak for God..

What's ironic about your opinion is that, like many lib's in your camp, you'd easily kill the rapists child, but if the rapist were convicted and sentenced to death, you'd fight for his life. :)

Somethings not right about that???


Tim-
 
What's ironic about your opinion is that, like many lib's in your camp, you'd easily kill the rapists child, but if the rapist were convicted and sentenced to death, you'd fight for his life. :)

Somethings not right about that???


Tim-

There is no child to klll only a clump of the rapists DNA. You fight for the rapists right to procreate and to visit the result of his crime. That is truly sick and perverted.
I hope the rapists out there are taking note of the Congressmen who favor "rapist rights" and knock up their daughters. It will serve those fathers right.
 
Last edited:
Didn't watch all 30 seconds of it? But want to editorialize on it? :roll:

There was a quote you know....and yes....I can extrapolate a bit based on the quote and the title of the thread and get a pretty damn good idea of the idiocy of the message.
 
There is no child to klll only a fetus. You fight for the rapists right to procreate and to visit the result of his crime. That is truly sick and perverted.

So much rich, creamy derpery.

A rapist doesn't have a right to procreate or to try to do so... hence laws criminalizing rape? Duh.

A convicted rapist shouldn't have visitation rights, and that has literally nothing to do with the topic at hand. To whatever extent state laws have this as an oversight, it is probably because this ridiculously rare scenario does not often present itself.


In the meantime, no one has the right to aggressively harm another... but you want to pretend mothers have the right to violently kill their offspring.
 
Back
Top Bottom