A Conservative Republican Explains Why He Will Vote for Harris and Walz

[Postvieww]

Does any liberal actually actually think Kamala could match Trumps turn out at Madison Square Gardens? Let’s be honest here we are talking about New York! Kamala’s message is Trump bad , Trumps message is the betterment of the American people. We shall see which one worked best when Trump is sitting in the Oval Office.

 

[Truth7t7]

REAL Republicans will be voting Harris this election season.

Oh Sure, Smiles!

 

[Truth7t7]

We will be continuing to head to that socialist state. They will continue to cypher out the middle class and so on.

Russia's Putin is hoping for a Trump win to stop the war in Ukraine, if Kamala was to get in (Ugly Thought) it will be World War III, as NATO has Putin in a corner ready to push the red button

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Harris recently gathered with over 100 Republicans that support her. Trump has divided our party in a negative way. And only when he has moved on will we be able to recover from his conspiracy theories and major corporate tax cuts for the rich agenda.

The democrat party is for abortion up to the third trimester and some even advocate after birth, the mother can
decide to not resuscitate the child if she decides. Watch the video which includes the former Gov of VA,
Ralph Northam speaking on how a mother can decide to kill her unborn infant in the third trimester, and
even refuse to have the child resuscitated after birth if she decides. Scroll to about 2:19 in the video if
you don't want to watch the entire thing.

This is what Trump referred to in the debate between himself and Kamala Harris, which moderator
David Muir interjected that no child was killed after being born. However Trump referred to the
"statement" made by the former governor of VA, and never said that infants were put to death after
birth.

Also, in England, professors at Oxford U advocated for "post-birth abortions." This would
be the case where the parents felt the financial and emotional responsivity was too great
and that they should be allowed to end the life of a child born with a deformity or even
downs-syndrom.

 

[RileyG]

He's not a conservative, despite calling himself one.

A true conservative would never support taxpayers paying for male convicts to have a sex change operation, but
Harris does. Male convicts can then be transferred to a female prison when they request it because now their females in
name only. This is happening under the Biden/Harris administration. Also, no conservative would support Biden's EO
making illegal for a doctor to refuse sex change therapy.

Harris also stated that she will remove any exemptions for religious institutions like the Sisters of Charity
received via the US Supreme Court.

No conservative supports this unless they're lying about their positions.

Why is she obsessed with spreading her pro abortion and pro lgbt ideology? How odd.

SMH

 

[KathrynAragon]

Why is she obsessed with spreading her pro abortion and pro lgbt ideology? How odd.

SMH

And I think she is playing it down. I believe that's what actually motivates her.

 

[Job 33:6]

The democrat party is for abortion up to the third trimester and some even advocate after birth, the mother can
decide to not resuscitate the child if she decides. Watch the video which includes the former Gov of VA,
Ralph Northam speaking on how a mother can decide to kill her unborn infant in the third trimester, and
even refuse to have the child resuscitated after birth if she decides. Scroll to about 2:19 in the video if
you don't want to watch the entire thing.

This is what Trump referred to in the debate between himself and Kamala Harris, which moderator
David Muir interjected that no child was killed after being born. However Trump referred to the
"statement" made by the former governor of VA, and never said that infants were put to death after
birth.

Also, in England, professors at Oxford U advocated for "post-birth abortions." This would
be the case where the parents felt the financial and emotional responsivity was too great
and that they should be allowed to end the life of a child born with a deformity or even
downs-syndrom.

Deaths among infants and pregnant women have shown an increase following the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade. Research indicates that, overall, infant deaths rose by 7% in the months after the ruling, with higher rates of mortality among infants born with severe congenital conditions. This increase is thought to be partly due to restrictions that prevent abortions even in cases of significant fetal abnormalities, leading to more "frail" fetuses being carried to term. In Texas, similar restrictive abortion laws were linked to a 13% rise in infant mortality within the state.

Additionally, maternal mortality disparities are also notable. States with restrictive abortion laws tend to have fewer maternal health resources and higher maternal mortality rates than states that allow abortion access. Maternal deaths, including those occurring within 42 days post-birth, were found to be 62% higher in restrictive states. These states also suffer from "maternity care deserts" where pregnant women have limited access to necessary healthcare, which exacerbates risks for complications and mortality during pregnancy and childbirth.

These trends suggest significant impacts on maternal and infant health as abortion restrictions take effect across the U.S. following the Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

In short, abortion isn't a black or white topic. If a woman is sexually assaulted at knife point, and her baby is in the womb with anatomical abnormalities that will result in death upon birth (due to drug use of the rapist), and thus further result in the death of the woman,

Then you can be the one to tell that woman that she will die as a result of the actions of her drugged-out rapist, and that there is nothing she can do about it.

 

[KathrynAragon]

Deaths among infants and pregnant women have shown an increase following the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade. Research indicates that, overall, infant deaths rose by 7% in the months after the ruling, with higher rates of mortality among infants born with severe congenital conditions. This increase is thought to be partly due to restrictions that prevent abortions even in cases of significant fetal abnormalities, leading to more "frail" fetuses being carried to term. In Texas, similar restrictive abortion laws were linked to a 13% rise in infant mortality within the state.

Additionally, maternal mortality disparities are also notable. States with restrictive abortion laws tend to have fewer maternal health resources and higher maternal mortality rates than states that allow abortion access. Maternal deaths, including those occurring within 42 days post-birth, were found to be 62% higher in restrictive states. These states also suffer from "maternity care deserts" where pregnant women have limited access to necessary healthcare, which exacerbates risks for complications and mortality during pregnancy and childbirth.

These trends suggest significant impacts on maternal and infant health as abortion restrictions take effect across the U.S. following the Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

The thing is, I believe abortion FOR THE ACTUAL HEALTH oF the mother or baby should be legal, as should abortions for rape or incest even though I would not choose to do it. We are talking about less than 3 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions are not for those reasons.

 

[Job 33:6]

Further, the claim that the Democratic Party supports abortion up to the third trimester or after birth is often misleading. While many Democrats support abortion rights, the vast majority advocate for access largely within the framework established by Roe v. Wade, which protected abortion rights up to around 24 weeks (or the point of viability, when a fetus can survive outside the womb with medical support).

Most Democrats do not support unrestricted late-term abortion. In fact, third-trimester abortions are rare and typically only occur in cases involving severe fetal abnormalities or serious health risks to the mother. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), less than 1% of abortions happen after 21 weeks. The conversation around abortion after birth, or so-called “infanticide,” is even less substantiated and is not part of any mainstream Democratic policy. Infanticide is illegal across the U.S., and there is no party advocating for post-birth actions against a newborn.

The Democratic Party platform generally supports the legal framework for access to safe, regulated abortions up to viability and emphasizes reproductive rights as an individual choice in consultation with medical professionals, especially when complications arise in later stages

 

[Job 33:6]

The thing is, I believe abortion FOR THE ACTUAL HEALTH oF the mother or baby should be legal, as should abortions for rape or incest even though I would not choose to do it. We are talking about less than 3 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions are not for those reasons.

I know of women involved in violent rape cases, involving men on drugs. And I'll tell you, I would be the last person to tell these women to more-or-less "suck it up" and deal with whatever comes their way.

Anyone who's a parent knows how much danger and health challenges come in just normal everyday pregnancies.

Now, we introduce anatomical deformities and addiction, in combination with risks already inherent.

None of this includes all the other impacts. The woman losing her job or having to drop out of school. Or questions of if the woman is even mature enough or financially able to even take care of a child.

 

[KathrynAragon]

The thing is, I believe abortion FOR THE ACTUAL HEALTH oF the mother or baby should be legal, as should abortions for rape or incest even though I would not choose to do it. We are talking about less than 3 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions are not for those reasons.

Like I have said, the vast majority of abortions are not for the actual health of the mother or baby, or for rape or incest.

 

[KathrynAragon]

I know of women involved in violent rape cases, involving men on drugs. And I'll tell you, I would be the last person to tell these women to more-or-less "suck it up" and deal with whatever comes their way.

Anyone who's a parent knows how much danger and health challenges come in just normal everyday pregnancies.

Now, we introduce anatomical deformities and addiction, in combination with risks already inherent.

None of this includes all the other impacts. The woman losing her job or having to drop out of school. Or questions of if the woman is even mature enough or financially able to even take care of a child.

Like I have said before, the vast majority of pregnancies do not involve the actual health of the mother or child, or rape or incest. As for the other reasons, sex is unique in that it can include a pregnancy. Who doesn't know this? Oh and this involves not only the mother and father, but also a child.

 

[Job 33:6]

Like I have said before, the vast majority of pregnancies do not involve the actual health of the mother or child, or rape or incest. As for the other reasons, sex is unique in that it can include a pregnancy. Who doesn't know this? Oh and this involves not only the mother and father, but also a child.

I agree that the majority would not, but the reality is that some do.

And the rule is ideally for that minority, not for people who perhaps are abusing this freedom but only retained as as a last option to mitigate what would otherwise be of an even greater disastrous situation.

You would never hear politicians going up on stage supporting women who are getting three for or five abortions, simply due to careless sex and a lack of contraception. Rather, the rule is protected for the sake of those women in extreme situations.

And drawing that line can be complicated. Which is why it's important for the government to allow the people to make those decisions, rather than the government trying to control this in any and every circumstance, even at the expense of women in those harsh circumstances.

If one of my daughters for example, was raped, maybe by an illegal immigrant on drugs. And let's say that baby were to have anatomical damage and abnormalities as a product of those drugs, and/or my daughters life were in danger if she carried the child to term. Or even further, if she was not financially able to take care of a child (many people are already living paycheck to paycheck, imagine if you told them that they had to stop working, or had to pay for child care on top of that).

Personally, I would be furious if the government stepped in and mandated the decision for my daughter.

Additionally, history has shown that many women are willing to seek out more dangerous alternatives. Illegal abortions in unsanitary conditions. Throwing their babies in dumpsters. These are real things that happen, in dire circumstances.

And this is why we see women deaths and child deaths increasing with the end of Roe. V. Wade.

And I'm not saying that there shouldn't be some sort of control so that people aren't carelessly murdering their children. But what I am saying is that, this topic isn't black and white, and it's not something that should be outright banned.

 

[KathrynAragon]

I agree that the majority would not, but the reality is that some do.

And the rule is ideally for that minority, not for people who perhaps are abusing this freedom but only retained as as a last option to mitigate what would otherwise be of an even greater disastrous situation.

I don't think I am alone when I say that the actual health of the mother or baby, or in the case of rape or incest, abortion should be allowed, leaving about 97 percent of abortions illegal.

 

[Job 33:6]

I don't think I am alone when I say that the actual health of the mother or baby, or in the case of rape or incest, abortion should be allowed, leaving about 97 percent of abortions illegal.

I would agree. For the 3% or whatever that number may be.

 

[KathrynAragon]

At least 43 percent of women who have abortions have had more than one.

What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

The U.S. abortion rate has generally declined since the 1980s, but there have been slight upticks in the late 2010s and early 2020s.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[RileyG]

At least 43 percent of women who have abortions have had more than one.

What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

The U.S. abortion rate has generally declined since the 1980s, but there have been slight upticks in the late 2010s and early 2020s.

www.pewresearch.org

Sad.

 

[RileyG]

The thing is, I believe abortion FOR THE ACTUAL HEALTH oF the mother or baby should be legal, as should abortions for rape or incest even though I would not choose to do it. We are talking about less than 3 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions are not for those reasons.

People don’t believe in controlling their desires, unfortunately some people think that’s sex shaming because their entire lives revolve around who they sleep with (men and women)

 

[RileyG]

I would agree. For the 3% or whatever that number may be.

Which is why I think it should be extremely restricted. No unborn child should die because of an adult’s selfish decision.

SMH

 

[Job 33:6]

Which is why I think it should be extremely restricted. No unborn child should die because of an adult’s selfish decision.

SMH

The flip side of this, is that if you agree, you also think that abortions should be allowed, under some circumstances.