I’m not a huge fan of SNOPES because they’re very biased, which makes it all the more telling that EVEN SNOPES says it’s false that abortion rates fall under Democratic presidencies. Why would they? Democrats, as a party, do everything in their power to promote abortion as a positive good, to fund Planned Parenthood, which is making millions upon millions committing abortions.
Someone was DRAFTED…THIS YEAR??? As in you have a family member whose number was called and he was forced to enter the military under threat of legal punishment?
The draft ended in the US in 1973.
Easy, Under the current political climate abortion can’t be changed. If the Republic platform threatens other lives by over looking the poor and disenfranchised, starting wars I’ll vote Democrat to save what lives I can.
I’ve seen independent reviews showing little to no bias. Can you cite something that says they are? Not a claim or just an assertion that they’re biased for disagreeing with someone. An actual review of some of their claims and why they’re wrong? Genuinely interested.
Just last year Alabama passed a law almost totally banning abortion. It has yet to be implemented but it’s still a major stride.
Had I the time or interest, yes. I have neither at the moment and a large part of that is because it really isn’t pertinent to what I said: they say this simply isn’t true that abortion rates fall under Democratic presidencies.
You missed the point, try again.
The Catholic is still a registered democrat but voted for Trump in 2016 and voted mostly for republicans since. Voted for some democrats in smaller offices.
That’s what Jesuits call ‘a leap of faith’.
My! France has laws against female head coverings, too, I think. Do you think that would apply in the US where nuns would come under the law?
Adding a Minimum work requirement for the able-bodied that do not have children hardly qualifies as not caring about the poor. And why single out white women here, I’m confused on that. Either way, you have seriously underestimated the vast gulf between the party platforms, I think. They are so different that people aren’t likely to waffle back and forth between them. The Republican Party hasn’t changed that much and the democratic platform is now radical.
Well, it seems like the official unofficial stance of the Catholic Church is that one should be part Democrat and part Republican, which has shown as 53% identify as democrat and 47% identify as republican. On abortion, the Church has a clear stance that under no circumstance should a woman have an abortion, which would favor a republican’s view. The Catholic Church also opposes the death penalty, which does favor the democratic party. With many other issues that go between the two parties, it seems best fitted to not identify 100% with either party, but to be more independent or moderate.
What?!?! DJT is actually the only president we’ve ever had that didn’t need to “evolve” wrt gay rights!! He supported gay rights back in the 80’s! You can look that up for yourself! And while he was running for president he invited Caityln Jenner to use the Women’s bathroom in trump tower and he also carried a rainbow flag out onto the stage at his rallies.
He’s won many an award for helping the African American community and you can see pictures online of him being hugged by people like al sharpton And Jesse Jackson, while being presented with awards by them. The black community LOVED him until he put an R next to his name!
The democrats just love people who don’t bother to look into anything and believe ridiculous lies like this. They bank on the ignorance for votes.
That, however, is NOT the Republican Party platform. They endorse restrictions on abortion, but, leave open approval for a large number of abortions in the (health/welfare of the mother/child clauses).
Also entropic pregnancy.
I believe you mean “ectopic”, and, direct abortion is not morally permitted for ectopic pregnancy either.
Children in the womb of their mother are completely innocent and defenseless human beings - who deserve the safe womb of their mother - in whom to grow toward birth, and a full human life.
All persons, and nations, have the right of self-defense. The taking of the enemy’s life in a just war is not murder, as abortion is, but is legitimate and moral self-defense, as abortion is not.
You would rather permit (and subsidize!) the murder of the innocent children, in order to minimize (in the short term) the danger of war? Appeasement - giving in to the dictators in all they ask in order to postpone confrontation and conflict, is foolish - it only encourages and enables them to continue in their plans. The appeasement of Hitler only made the final stopping of him much more costly in lives and in every other way. Iran and North Korea are potential catastrophes that must be confronted with strength now - better than much more blood later.
Are you peaceful with the mind of Pelosi - “Abortion is holy ground!” Listen to that for a while.
Im gonna straight out say that it doesn’t matter who this man was, the carless act caused this mad to send innocent people to fight. Instead of a thank you, we got a “we are ok” not thinking about how many families are loosing their child for this act. Its easy in your side to see this and say “they are serving our country. Yes lets fight” But when your child is being sent, is it that easy? All of my sons friends and my son are upset with this decision he took upon himself. Yes. Abortion is bad. But isnt it worst making carless decisions that make my son have to fight for a mistake made? Whether or not you think it was a mistake that is up to you. But, the way it was done, we can all agree that it was impulsive. Soldiers are not pawns. They are fathers, brothers, sisters, mothers and children. I have a chance of loosing my son. Is that less of importance then abortion? Is my living son less of importance then an unborn child? That is up to you to decide.
Im sorry I used the wrong term. He was called to serve