Donald!

[oldhat]

What Trump said does logically follow. If SCOTUS strikes down Roe v. Wade and state legislatures outlaw abortion, abortion becomes a crime. Of course, the laws could be written in such a way as to punish only the doctors who perform abortions or some other subset of the people involved in the actual act. But he was merely articulating the principle that crime should be punished.

This reminds me of the inconsistency inherent in the position of people who say they are pro-life "with exceptions." If a fetus is a human being, then deliberately killing it is wrong, regardless of the circumstances of of its conception. The Catholic church, at least, is consistent on this point--its position is that deliberately ending a life is wrong, period. (That includes capital punishment and euthanasia.)

The Catholic position on abortion isn't one I agree with, but, as I say, it's logical. And in this case, so is Trump.

[jp1]

Getting a supreme court that will overturn Roe v Wade does seem to be a republican party goal and if/when that happens it shouldn't be a shocker to anyone that a number of states will outlaw abortion outright. Make it illegal. Openly saying that isn't a winning proposition with a majority of americans, so no one has openly said it until Trump did. He only walked it back because he quickly realized that his 'state the obvious things plainly instead of just dog whilstling them like every other republican' method of campaigning had gone too far on this issue. Or maybe it was intentional to say it and walk it back since he'd gotten the message to his supporters regardless of the walk-back. After all, no one really believes that a politician means it when they walk back a statement. A walk back is equivalent to a non-apology apology where someone says something like "I'm sorry if so and so was offended by what I said." instead of a real apology.

[peggy]

Oh peggy, lots of hyperbole here.

Its not "what every Republican thinks" since even Donald's campaign walked that back pretty fast, within minutes agter he uttered it.

"Voting for this platform" is more misleading talk since the current national election year platform hasn't even been penned. When I read over the last platform of 2012 at www.gop.com I see no reference to abortion penalties. Really I cant even find anything specifcally about abortion law. There is " we oppose FDA approval of RU486 ..." But thats not what you are talking about.

But yes, you are right that if I vote Republican I may be endorsing some things
i dont really like. Thems the breaks in a system with two big bad two parties.

Curious if you, peggy, endorse each and every idea in the Democratic Party platform?

Its not "what every Republican thinks" since even Donald's campaign walked that back pretty fast, within minutes agter he uttered it.

"Voting for this platform" is more misleading talk since the current national election year platform hasn't even been penned. When I read over the last platform of 2012 at www.gop.com I see no reference to abortion penalties. Really I cant even find anything specifcally about abortion law. There is " we oppose FDA approval of RU486 ..." But thats not what you are talking about.

But yes, you are right that if I vote Republican I may be endorsing some things
i dont really like. Thems the breaks in a system with two big bad two parties.

Curious if you, peggy, endorse each and every idea in the Democratic Party platform?[/QUOTE]

Do you deny that overturning Roe V Wade is a huge part of EVERY republican politician's platform? If you do then you haven't been paying attention. Ask them. Each and every one will tell you that yes, they are fighting to overturn this. What do you think overturning it means? It means making it against the law. People don't picket PP and republican governors/legislatures don't de-fund it for fun. Look at republican run states and see how difficult they are making it for women to get abortions. This is huge.
The only reason Donald walked it back was because of the backlash he got from his own base. Funny thing is, all those rabid anti-choice people also criticized him. Why? They want to outlaw it, yet they don't want people to follow the logical result of that which is punishment of the criminal, namely the woman. They realize, of course, if the truth of this is out there, most would not be anti-choice. And they would lose all their good christian crusaders who would balk at the thought of charging these poor women with murder. So they perpetuate the idea that we will criminalize this but only punish those evil mind controlling (apparently) doctors who 'force' this on stupid little women who are really too stupid to know what they are doing. Ha! You believe this? Cause that's what they want you to do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-constituents/

For the record, here is where all the republican candidates stand on roe v wade. They all want to overturn it, some with exceptions for rape and mother health, and many for no exceptions. Donald is for exceptions and Ted is against any exceptions. From the article:

"The Roe v. Wade question is critical, because it is all but guaranteed that should a Republican become president, he will appoint only Supreme Court justices who can be counted on to vote to overturn Roe, which would allow states to ban abortion completely. Right now there are four Supreme Court justices ready to overturn the decision; if the right justice (or two) retires, it would be gone."

Perhaps the questions you should ask your candidate is, what punishment for the woman? Murder is murder, and there will be punishment. We know where Donald stands, even if he walked it back due to backlash. Where does Ted stand?
This is important iris, since all of these republicans are advocating a huge number of women, teenagers, poor, sick, raped...be charged with murder. You can't trivialize this. This isn't a minor component of their platform. And for someone like Ted Cruz, bringing the country under 'gods law' IS his platform.

By the way, poll the republican candidates, state and national level, and ask them if overturning roe v wade is part of their platform and each and every one will say yes.
then poll democratic candidates, state and national level, and ask them if taking away peoples guns is part of their platform. I don't think you'll find one who says yes. Better regulations, yes. Confiscation, no. And really, this lie is well past it's shelf life.
You deny what republicans actually say, on record, and make up what you think democrats might say.
If you want, i could find hundreds of links to republicans saying they will overturn roe v wade, but I think you know they are out there. Now you find me links to democratic pols saying they want to take everyone's guns away.

[iris lilies]

I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

[peggy]

Getting a supreme court that will overturn Roe v Wade does seem to be a republican party goal and if/when that happens it shouldn't be a shocker to anyone that a number of states will outlaw abortion outright. Make it illegal. Openly saying that isn't a winning proposition with a majority of americans, so no one has openly said it until Trump did. He only walked it back because he quickly realized that his 'state the obvious things plainly instead of just dog whilstling them like every other republican' method of campaigning had gone too far on this issue. Or maybe it was intentional to say it and walk it back since he'd gotten the message to his supporters regardless of the walk-back. After all, no one really believes that a politician means it when they walk back a statement. A walk back is equivalent to a non-apology apology where someone says something like "I'm sorry if so and so was offended by what I said." instead of a real apology.

You know, I thought it was funny that Trump 'suddenly' has an 'emergency' meeting with McConnell and other GOP leaders. Trump isn't using the approved dog whistles and code words, as you pointed out. He is laying out the game plan in simple to understand words that even the most uninformed can figure out.(he does talk at a 6th grade level after all) This is a danger to the GOP. Can't have folks actually understanding what they are voting for. Gotta wave the flag and utter 'Freedom' and 'Patriot" and "Family values' to walk it back. Gotta talk about 'Making America Great Again'...you know, back when women were murders for having an abortion.

[peggy]

I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

Really? Then why are the GOP in the senate refusing to even give Obama's nomination a hearing? Why are they balking at a very centrist nomination? They loath the though of giving up the advantage they have enjoyed for 30 years, which brought us Hobby Lobby and Citizens United, among others.

The people did have a voice and they choose President Obama. He is the President, now. He gets to choose.

[iris lilies]

Peggy, i thnk its silly for Republican Congress to say upfront that they wont consider anyone put forward by Presdient Obama.

But neither will I accept, without looking int it, that his candidate is hinky dorky foe Repubs. Yes, Ive heard that he is cnsdiered "moderate" and etc. Perhaps he is, but just because the New York Times says he is amoderate that we shpuld all,acept dowsnt mean
I will accept their word on it. kinda like the NYT endorsng Kasich as the guy I should vote for. unh-hunh.

[jp1]

I dont buy that every
Supreme Court nominee is guaranteed to act in a certain way. Case in point is Justice Roberts who cast the deciding vote on the ACA's mandated tax penalty.

While you're right that it's unlikely that a republican president could find another jiggery pokery pretzel logician like Scalia, they would undoubtedly try. The long term goal is undoubtedly to get the supremes to reverse roe v wade. Thankfully Scalia died before they were able to do it so they've been set back significantly in this goal.

[Ultralight]

So, Trump has said what every republican thinks, which is why the party fears him, actually.
Women who have an abortion, in his, or any republican Presidents world, would face criminal charges. Stands to reason, doesn't it? If abortion is outlawed, against the law, as the republican platform calls for (actually a huge part of the republican platform) then the woman is a criminal and should face charges.
Isn't this so? Murder is murder, if abortion is murder, then the woman is a murderer. right?

So, you who support the republican platform, what punishment should the woman face? 'Cause of course, you know abortion won't stop just because you make it illegal. If you vote Republican, you vote for this platform. So it would be nice to know up front what punishment you all have in mind for this criminal act.

Excellent article on this issue here: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...sense-20160331

[Tenngal]

is having an illegal abortion not punishment enough? If it were a man's body, we would not be having all these discussions.