|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-28-2012, 02:36 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Spence, have you been painting inside with the windows shut? You need to open the windows a crack. Not once, not twice, but three times, Obama blocked proposed bills that would have required doctors to care for babies born alive, regardless of perceived viability (and that's what the law you cited called for...unfortunately, viability is very subjective). The 3 proposed laws stated specifically that care would be required for babies that were born, and outside the womb. That's not remotely close to abortion.
|
Actually he only voted against the legislation once.
Quote:
If you read the factcheck link I posted earlier, they say that the 3rd time the bill was proposed (and blocked by Obama), there were no discernable differences between the bill Obama blocked and the one passed by the US Senate.
|
Yes, there were similar provisions, but remember that this was all going on at the same time. Obama felt the issue was better handled at the Federal level so the State amendment wasn't used to challenge Roe V Wade in the State courts. I don't believe the refined state amendment (with wording to protect the right for the abortion in the first place) wasn't even added until 2003...after the Federal bill was already signed into law.
Quote:
And the bill passed by the US Senate, last time I checked, had no impact on a woman's right to abortion.
|
Exactly why Obama supported the Federal legislation.
Did you notice how your hero Newt was claiming that Obama "voted to legalize infanticide" in that recent debate?
-spence
|
|
|
|
02-29-2012, 07:37 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Actually he only voted against the legislation once.
Yes, there were similar provisions, but remember that this was all going on at the same time. Obama felt the issue was better handled at the Federal level so the State amendment wasn't used to challenge Roe V Wade in the State courts. I don't believe the refined state amendment (with wording to protect the right for the abortion in the first place) wasn't even added until 2003...after the Federal bill was already signed into law.
Exactly why Obama supported the Federal legislation.
Did you notice how your hero Newt was claiming that Obama "voted to legalize infanticide" in that recent debate?
-spence
|
"Actually he only voted against the legislation once."
He blocked it 3 times, twice in committee.
'Did you notice how your hero Newt was claiming that Obama "voted to legalize infanticide" in that recent debate? "
No, I didn't notice. But good for Newt, he's stating precisely what happened.
Again Spence, I'm sorry if Obama's actions here are self-explanatory in their monstrocity. Don't blame me for what he did, and don't pretend it didn't happen.
|
|
|
|
02-29-2012, 07:41 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
'Did you notice how your hero Newt was claiming that Obama "voted to legalize infanticide" in that recent debate? "
No, I didn't notice. But good for Newt, he's stating precisely what happened.
Again Spence, I'm sorry if Obama's actions here are self-explanatory in their monstrocity. Don't blame me for what he did, and don't pretend it didn't happen.
|
Interesting...so Obama doesn't vote to make something illegal that's already illegal, while publicly supporting other efforts to make it illegal...and this is voting to legalize it?
In the other thread you described yourself as "rational".
What gives?
-spence
|
|
|
|
02-29-2012, 08:10 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Interesting...so Obama doesn't vote to make something illegal that's already illegal, while publicly supporting other efforts to make it illegal...and this is voting to legalize it?
In the other thread you described yourself as "rational".
What gives?
-spence
|
Spence, here's as simple as I can boil it down
(1)The proposed bill would have stopped something from happening
(2) Obama blocked the bill.
(3) Because the bill was blocked, the situation that the proposed bill was trying to prevent, continued to take place.
Regardless of his reasons, the act of blocking the bill is what allowed the practice to continue. I would never say that Obama likes or celebrates denying medical care to living babies. I'm saying that his actions allowed that, precisely that, to continue. And he knew his actions would cause that to continue.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 PM.
|
| |