Pocahontas? So What?

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You said the following two things.

(1) only about 1 million of those (unborn deaths) is due to the choice of the woman.

And then,

(2) Not a single real piece of evidence that republicans value life more than democrats

Your side advocates for the right to slaughter a million unborn babies every single year. My side opposes that. And you don't concede, that means my side values life more than your side.

I also posted a study which says that conservatives are also more charitable (not by much at all) than liberals.

That's quite a bit of evidence that my side has more empathy for the voiceless and the vulnerable. Which is why I like my side.

Again a simpleton response. There are another other 9 million babies that aren't born. A variety of health care issues that would help those unborn are ignored or negatively impacted directly or indirectly by republican supported policies. I think women are smart enough to make their own decision. Looking at the posts and responses of people in this forum only reinforces that I should trust women and their doctors, not the crowd who voted in Captain Traffic Cone.

The tendency of conservatives to be more charitable is directly related to tithing. Muslims would come out as one of the most charitable sub-groups in a such type of analysis.

Your side is delusional if it thinks there is evidence that it has more empathy for the voiceless and vulnerable.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Again a simpleton response. There are another other 9 million babies that aren't born. A variety of health care issues that would help those unborn are ignored or negatively impacted directly or indirectly by republican supported policies. I think women are smart enough to make their own decision. Looking at the posts and responses of people in this forum only reinforces that I should trust women and their doctors, not the crowd who voted in Captain Traffic Cone.

The tendency of conservatives to be more charitable is directly related to tithing. Muslims would come out as one of the most charitable sub-groups in a such type of analysis.

Your side is delusional if it thinks there is evidence that it has more empathy for the voiceless and vulnerable.

"Again a simpleton response"

I am a very simple guy.

"There are another other 9 million babies that aren't born"

You are talking about natural miscarriages and abortion, as if they are the same thing. Natural miscarriages do not happen because of a legislative mandate. Abortions do. We can't legislate who has miscarriages. Jeez.

"A variety of health care issues that would help those unborn are ignored or negatively impacted directly or indirectly by republican supported policies."

I notice that despite your opinion that there are a variety of such issues, you didn't specify any. I'm not sure much helps the unborn more, than being protected from slaughter. For example, availability of prenatal vitamins, doesn't do an aborted fetus a lot of good that I can see.

"I think women are smart enough to make their own decision. "

See, there is the dishonest framing of the issue again. My opposition to abortion, doesn't mean I think women are stupid. My wife is ten times smarter than me in every imaginable way. And I don't think she has the moral right to elect an abortion. But I know she's smarter than me.

Liberals FRAME this as about how conservatives view women - again, they like to gframe things in a dishonest way. It's not. If it was, why are so many women opposed to abortion? The only issue, is the rights (or lack thereof) of the fetus.

Pro-life folks are pro-life, because they have empathy for the fetus. But I have never, not once, ever - heard a liberal say "I respect that pro-life people have empathy for the fetus, but I think it's misplaced empathy". Liberals never say that, because as usual, the truth makes there side look evil. So they say we are opposed to women's health. It's obviously dishonest, but it sounds better to liberals, than admitting the ugly truth about what the two sides actually believe.

Liberals do this (demonize the opposition) all the time. If you think white cops are usually heroes, you hate blacks. If you are anti-abortion, you hate women. If you want secure borders, you hate Hispanics. If you think the bill of rights applies to bakers who are opposed to gay weddings, you hate gays. If you are worried about jihadists, you hate Muslims. If you think Social Security needs to be fixed, you hate old people. If you think there are limits to how much we can spend, you hate poor people. It never ends. Never.

"The tendency of conservatives to be more charitable is directly related to tithing. "

I thought you said Christians didn't care about the poor? So why do they tithe? You can't have it both ways! Which is it?

"Your side is delusional if it thinks there is evidence that it has more empathy for the voiceless and vulnerable"

Pretend you are an unborn baby with some health issues. God asks you whether you'd prefer to be placed in the womb of the head of the RNC or the head of the DNC. You going to claim that you wouldn't have a very strong preference?

I provided factual evidence that Republicans have more empathy (the issue of abortion, and charitable giving) You have provided zero evidence that I am wrong. You have slogans like "big business", and "profits before people". Bumper sticker slogans that dishonestly demonize conservatives. That's 90% of what liberalism is - dishonestly distorting what it is, that conservatives actually believe.