McCain Poised to Flip on GOP Abortion Platform

[fated]

We can still write in Ron Brown...?

You shouldn't waste your vote.

 

[geocajun]

I don't know why this is such hard concept for people to understand but, I will say it one more time...


The ONLY way abortion could be made illegal is if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. It would then go to the states, where most states have made abortion illegal. Other than that, it would take a constitutional amendment (and if you read the constitution, you'll see that that isn't so easy).

Thats how our system works! Its shared problems between the federal government and the states. This is how it works.

Any questions?

All of the head slapping is unnessecary, there are lots of ways to end abortion and though you state in your post there is only one, you mentioned two. There are also other initiatives such as the 95/10 plan which doesn't have support from McCain for some strange reason (its a plan put forth by democrats).
McCain isn't pro-life. This was brought out in his 2000 run against Bush and his position hasn't changed since then. Just like his soft positions on gay marriage and embryonic stem cell research, he uses well qualified language in the hopes that people will just be confused by what he is saying and think that since he is republican that his position on the social distraction issues are standard republican stuff.

I call them social distraction issues because republicans don't care about any of these social issues - they are just useful to distract folks from them migrating money to the rich from the poor.

 

[Lisa0315]

Good post, Geo.

A soft position is far, far worse than a hard position on abortion or the rest. I HATE the fact that McCain is trying to dance around the issues and pretend he is this with one group and that with another group. He will not get my vote.

I would SETTLE for a candidate that would not allow any of my tax dollars to go to groups that perform abortions.

Lisa

 

[geocajun]

Can someone enlighten me?

I always thought the Republican platform was to overturn Roe v. Wade, thus throwing the issue back to States - which, as Geocajun correctly points out, makes it MORE difficult to outlaw abortion.

Now the article linked in the OP clearly says that the Republican platform is to outlaw abortion with no exeptions.

So which one is it?

I've always thought the republican platform was to make abortion illegal at the federal level. This idea of McCain's to make it a state problem and remove the federal government from protecting the unborn is new to me and I think new to the republican party.
But I could be totally wrong about that - I could have been confused all along and republicans at the federal level have always wanted to shirk off their legislative responsibilities to the states. All this time I've been watching them shirk their responsibilities off on the courts and I may have made a bad assumption.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Can we still all vote for Ron Brown?

Man, I wish we could just send out BIG ads that
the Christian candidate would be Ron Brown.

I mean, seriously, I do NOT like not one candidate running.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I've always thought the republican platform was to make abortion illegal at the federal level. This idea of McCain's to make it a state problem and remove the federal government from protecting the unborn is new to me and I think new to the republican party.
But I could be totally wrong about that - I could have been confused all along and republicans at the federal level have always wanted to shirk off their legislative responsibilities to the states. All this time I've been watching them shirk their responsibilities off on the courts and I may have made a bad assumption.

This is why the Supreme Court is SO important, and why so many made huge stinks about Catholics getting on.

We just NEED someone to bring it back to court
[without coercion]

 

[WarriorAngel]

And on that...
I think since it was a woman who brot this into the courts
[with a little help]
That it should be a woman who sues the abortion
industry for serious emotional distress and health issues
stemming from this 'safe' procedure.

This might get it back into court.

 

[geocajun]

This is why the Supreme Court is SO important, and why so many made huge stinks about Catholics getting on.

We just NEED someone to bring it back to court
[without coercion]

If the Supremes overturn Roe v wade, then the problem simply becomes a state issue. Not a single baby is saved by that. Are you following McCain's speeches? He doesn't want to make abortion illegal at all - he simply thinks that it should be a state issue and wants to return it there. Adult lives are protected by the constitution, but not the unborn. Even though murder is a crime at the state level, states couldn't make it 'legal' to murder people because of our constitution. That isn't the case with the unborn and McCain isn't at all interested in offering that protection to the babies and no amount of supremes can legislate such a thing.

 

[SolomonVII]

McCain Poised to Flip on GOP Abortion Platform


In '00 and '07, McCain Called for Exceptions in GOP's Platform on Abortion for Rape, Incest, Mother's Life


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4824779&page=1

I'm going to get to work a bit here.

I understand that the GOP stands for making abortion illegal or simply overturning Roe v. Wade...

Let me be clear that this is a platform I strongly agree with.

However, one could rightly tie the platform to some sort of long term plan. Which, currently, McCain's positions could be the definitive in an interim step, without being nearly as divisive.

Unfortunately, it seems, some of our Christian brethren, lack a long term perspective on work that needs done, or, at least, that is what the party seems to be implying here.

I would say you could have an additional interim step including parental notification and full disclosure of the procedure. As well as sex discrimination, counseling, and genetic discrimination regulations.

These platforms would likely appeal, immediately, to more moderate voters, and quickly erode the issue.

Any thoughts?

Conservative thinking understands that social change is perpetuated from the people as a grassroots phenomena. Progressives have a fundamental difference in that they see change as being imposed from a central authroity. From a conservative point of view then, overturning Roe vs Wade will have the effect of bringing the decision down closer to the grassroots, and allowing cultural differences between regions to help decide the matter locally.

For at any time in the conceivable future, urban culture that dominates is very much decided against the inherent value of the unborn. Teh imposition form a central authority will always be 'my body, my choice'.

Now for many Christians, idealism triumphs. It is black or white, all or nothing at all. Hot or cold both are better than lukewarm, and if the leap of faith does not get you to the moon, then the problem is a lack of faith rather than a lack of a proper plan.

 

[scraparcs]

If the Supremes overturn Roe v wade, then the problem simply becomes a state issue. Not a single baby is saved by that. Are you following McCain's speeches? He doesn't want to make abortion illegal at all - he simply thinks that it should be a state issue and wants to return it there. Adult lives are protected by the constitution, but not the unborn. Even though murder is a crime at the state level, states couldn't make it 'legal' to murder people because of our constitution. That isn't the case with the unborn and McCain isn't at all interested in offering that protection to the babies and no amount of supremes can legislate such a thing.

There is hope that some states would make abortion illegal. While I know there are states that would surely 'protect abortion rights', others would make abortion illegal. So it might help some...not much, but a little bit.

 

[D'Ann]

Very true Lel.

Also, I'll take that over what the democrats are offering. If a democrat should get into office, that president will be able to pick other supreme judges that are liberal and pro-abortion.

Maybe giving this over to the states is a better idea. As you pointed out, Lel, I think there are many states that would make abortion illegal, which is better than what we have now on a federal level. It could be a temporary bandaid while we await a good person to take this job in the next future election. This election is just a nightmare as far as I'm concerned. I never thought that I would see the day that there would be not one good candidate.

 

[SolomonVII]

Very true Lel.

Also, I'll take that over what the democrats are offering. If a democrat should get into office, that president will be able to pick other supreme judges that are liberal and pro-abortion.

I can understand pro-life Democrats that would want to change their parties position form within. With Barrack Obama at the helm, even partial birth abortions are given the green light though.
there should be no mistaking being pro-life with giving a vote to Barrack Obama. He is not moderate at all on this issue. Suffice it to say that anyone who would support Obama is just paying lip service to the pro-life side.

Maybe giving this over to the states is a better idea. As you pointed out, Lel, I think there are many states that would make abortion illegal, which is better than what we have now on a federal level.

I agree. I think that is the gyst of the OP argument as well, on serveral levels. It is an incremental, stepping in the right direction approach to a point where people understand that fetuses are fully endowed with humanity. We, as a society, are no where close to that point right now.

It could be a temporary bandaid while we await a good person to take this job in the next future election. This election is just a nightmare as far as I'm concerned. I never thought that I would see the day that there would be not one good candidate.

A good president is a good communicator. At best, his opinion may sway attitudes. However, the primary role that a president can play in terms of policy is in the appointment of Supreme Court justices.

Is there any indicaton that John McCain would favor justices that are radical pro-choice?
Is there any indication that Barrack Obama would not?

 

[longhair75]

A few facts about the Roe V Wade decision as regards to politics.

The decision came about in 1973, during the presidency of Richard Nixon (R)

Concurring opinions were:
Chief Justice Burger, presiding. Appointed by President Eisenhower (R)
Justice Douglas, appointed by President Roosevelt (D)
Justice Brennan, appointed by President Eisenhower (R)
Justice Stewart, appointed by President Eisenhower (R)
Justice Marshall, appointed by President Johnson (D)
Justice Blackmun, Appointed by President Nixon (R)
Justice Powell, appointed by President Nixon (R)

Seven concurring judges, five appointed by Republicans and two appointed by Democrats.

Dissenting opinions were:
Justice White, appointed by President Kennedy (D)
Justice Renquist, appointed by President Nixon (R)

Two dissenting judges, one appointed by a Republican, One by a Democrat.

The current U.S. Supreme court (that has refused to revisit Roe V. Wade) is made up of:

Chief Justice Roberts, presiding. Appointed by President G.W. Bush (R)
Justice Stephens, appointed by President Ford (R)
Justice Scalia, appointed by President Reagan (R)
Justice Souter, appointed by President G. H. Bush (R)
Justice Thomas, appointed by President G.H. Bush (R)
Justice Ginsberg, appointed by President Clinton (D)
Justice Breyer, appointed by President Clinton (D)
Justice Alito, appointed by President G.W. Bush


There are seven judges currently serving who were appointed by Republicans, and two judges appointed by a Democrat.

It would appear that the Republican leadership really have no interest in overturning Roe V. Wade.

LH75,
(Registered Republican in Nebraska, the reddest of the red states)

 

[InTheCloud]

In my opinion the Reeps estance is that Roe vs Wade should be overturned an that abortion politics should belong to the States. The dictating a national policy on abortion is wrong for both prolife Reeps and pro abortion Dems.
But I do agree. Many Reeps prefer Roe not to be overturned. The reason. It allows them to bring the Christian sheep in without movilizing the feminist against them becasue the latter will feel safe.

 

[PolskiKrol]

I and my friends are writing in Brownback on principle

 

[Lisa0315]

I and my friends are writing in Brownback on principle

I haven't decided what I am going to do yet, but I will probably do something similar.

Lisa

 

[D'Ann]

I'll have to check out Brownback politics... maybe I'll join the 2 of you in doing that too.

 

[geocajun]

Very true Lel.

Also, I'll take that over what the democrats are offering. If a democrat should get into office, that president will be able to pick other supreme judges that are liberal and pro-abortion.

Maybe giving this over to the states is a better idea. As you pointed out, Lel, I think there are many states that would make abortion illegal, which is better than what we have now on a federal level. It could be a temporary bandaid while we await a good person to take this job in the next future election. This election is just a nightmare as far as I'm concerned. I never thought that I would see the day that there would be not one good candidate.

One thing that always proves to be true to me in these discussions, is that I can watch "pro-lifers" bend their desires in order to justify their voting republican.

Suggestion for you D'Ann - read up on the "95/10" plan. Also read up about pro-life democrats. We're growing in numbers. There are many states which will make it impossible to make abortion illegal under the McCain plan. What is needed is a plan which makes the lives of the unborn as protected as the lives of the born, and the republicans are just using pro-lifers to hurt the poor by making themselves richer by dangling the pro-life carrot and not doing anything else. Time to wake up. Republicans aren't pro-life.

 

[geocajun]

In my opinion the Reeps estance is that Roe vs Wade should be overturned an that abortion politics should belong to the States. The dictating a national policy on abortion is wrong for both prolife Reeps and pro abortion Dems.
But I do agree. Many Reeps prefer Roe not to be overturned. The reason. It allows them to bring the Christian sheep in without movilizing the feminist against them becasue the latter will feel safe.

curious, do you apply the same standard to murder of the born?

 

[D'Ann]

One thing that always proves to be true to me in these discussions, is that I can watch "pro-lifers" bend their desires in order to justify their voting republican.

Suggestion for you D'Ann - read up on the "95/10" plan. Also read up about pro-life democrats. We're growing in numbers. There are many states which will make it impossible to make abortion illegal under the McCain plan. What is needed is a plan which makes the lives of the unborn as protected as the lives of the born, and the republicans are just using pro-lifers to hurt the poor by making themselves richer by dangling the pro-life carrot and not doing anything else. Time to wake up. Republicans aren't pro-life.

Thanks Geo. I honestly don't know what to think anymore when it comes to politics and politicians. It's like this whole world is going to the dogs and I feel as if none of the politics or politicians are trustworthy... none of them care about the unborn babies... I hope and pray that you are right Geo... I hope and pray that there is a growing in numbers of democrats who are also pro life. That gives me hope.

God Bless