Nevada GOP drops Pro-Life Platform

[jbauer]

When was the last time an "average voter" gave two $hits about what was in or not in a party platform?

 

[Slutter McGee]

I do not think they could still be considered "Paul people" if they are pro-death since Ron/Rand are pro-life.

They are not pro-death. They are just pro-choice. Just like you are not anti-women or anti-choice. You are pro-life.

Both sides have good arguments. Stop insulting the opposition with stupid statements.

Slutter McGee

 

[jbauer]

No, it's not. That's utter BS. You do understand why some libertarians don't want to give the power to the State (a State which they don't trust) to come in and tell families what they can do with the pregnancies, right? Each pregnancy is different, and there are some real reasons on why abortions are sometimes necessary. If you don't like abortions, don't get one, but don't be a Statist about it and tell me what to do.

If you want to stop abortions by public awareness campaigns, please knock yourself out. Don't make laws which ruin people's lives. There's nothing libertarian about putting a mother to death for having an abortion to save her life.

So could you please tell us when a "person" crosses the imaginary and subjective boarder when their own individual liberty and rights kick in?

 

[jbauer]

They are not pro-death. They are just pro-choice. Just like you are not anti-women or anti-choice. You are pro-life.

Both sides have good arguments. Stop insulting the opposition with stupid statements.

Slutter McGee

So by calling the KILLING of a child a "choice" you are able to sleep at night?

 

[Philhelm]

I'm not gay and I'm not a fetus, and I'm certainly not a gay fetus. However, on this day, I am a victim of armed theft on a massive, massive scale.

 

[kahless]

They are not pro-death. They are just pro-choice. Just like you are not anti-women or anti-choice. You are pro-life.

Both sides have good arguments. Stop insulting the opposition with stupid statements.

Slutter McGee

So I should spin the death option as choice instead of the ugly fact that it still death. Talk about being brainwashed.

I think Ron says it best:

Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the “right” of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the “property rights” of slave masters in their slaves.

A case in point is a young libertarian leader I have heard about. He supports the "right" of a woman to remove an unwanted child from her body (i.e., her property) by killing and then expelling him or her. Therefore, he has consistently concluded, any property owner has the right to kill anyone on his property, for any reason.

Such conclusions should make libertarians question the premises from which they are drawn.

More
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ife-Platform&p=5493213&viewfull=1#post5493213

 

[kahless]

I'm not gay and I'm not a fetus, and I'm certainly not a gay fetus. However, on this day, I am a victim of armed theft on a massive, massive scale.

It is only a matter of time before women start having abortions based on discovering the fetus has the gay gene. By then a large segment of the Republican party will probably transform themselves to being pro-choice since they are a party of spineless cowards with a history of transforming themselves to emulate the Democratic party. They will therefore lose again on this issue if the Democrat party transforms themselves to be pro-life to stop gay abortions.

Just like the Dems in matter of a few years went from anti-war to savage pro-war advocates.

 

[lib3rtarian]

So could you please tell us when a "person" crosses the imaginary and subjective boarder when their own individual liberty and rights kick in?

When the fetus is viable. i.e. able to survive on its own outside the womb. Till then it's an parasite (should the mother wishes to think that way) living off the host (mother). The mother has full control till then. If a parasite invades a host, the host has full authority to evict the parasite.

 

[dannno]

Some of us don't like the idea of the state investigating a woman's uterus, as in, it may be wrong or it may be ok to abort a fetus, but either way it is a private matter for the mother that doesn't concern the state.

 

[Origanalist]

Shake my head. "Parasite". "able to survive on its own outside the womb". That covers years after the baby is born. What disgusting terms to use for human beings.

And it didn't "invade". It was put there.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

It is only a matter of time before women start having abortions based on discovering the fetus has the gay gene. By then a large segment of the Republican party will probably transform themselves to being pro-choice since they are a party of spineless cowards with a history of transforming themselves to emulate the Democratic party. They will therefore lose again on this issue if the Democrat party transforms themselves to be pro-life to stop gay abortions.

Just like the Dems in matter of a few years went from anti-war to savage pro-war advocates.

No gay gene will ever be discovered, because there is none. Homosexual behavior is not genetic or in-born, that's secular social liberal dogma. And to flip it around, we might as well declare someday a homophobic or gay-bashing gene will be found, and many Democrats will probably transform themselves into being defenders of gay bashing because, hey, it's genetic.

As for abortion, it's one thing to de-emphasize it or other issues for situational campaign purposes, and another to drop a platform position altogether, and make your abandonment of principle visible for all to see. Democrats will not abandon use of it as a wedge issue, they will simply indicate Republicans, once elected, will vote the way most Republicans do nationally on the subject. Certain Nevadans need to understand it's a culture war because two sides are fighting it, and that the war will not end when they unilaterally disarm.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Some of us don't like the idea of the state investigating a woman's uterus, as in, it may be wrong or it may be ok to abort a fetus, but either way it is a private matter for the mother that doesn't concern the state.

With respect, some of us don't like the idea of the state not protecting innocent human life. "It's a private matter for the mother" presumes the child is not human, the very point at issue. Innocent human life requires legal protection, which makes it a legitimate function of the state to so provide.

 

[muzzled dogg]

You can be pro life without endorsing the government's responsibly to do anything

 

[IndianaPolitico]

Don't we have better things to do then spending time trying to support legislation that puts more people in jail? Hey I'm all for stopping abortion but I am not at all about doing it by legislation.

If the platform supported legalizing murder, you would be ok with that too?

 

[dannno]

With respect, some of us don't like the idea of the state not protecting innocent human life. "It's a private matter for the mother" presumes the child is not human, the very point at issue. Innocent human life requires legal protection, which makes it a legitimate function of the state to so provide.

I think there are reasonable arguments on both sides, but I think you are net worse off with it being illegal. People will still find ways around it and sneakier women won't get caught and women who have a legitimate miscarriage and try to abide by the law will end up having their uterus' investigated by authorities.

 

[otherone]

So could you please tell us when a "person" crosses the imaginary and subjective boarder when their own individual liberty and rights kick in?

When one can handle one of these:

 

[euphemia]

Unfortunately when states give up a position on something, the federal government takes it as an opportunity to take it over. While this is simply a party platform, it does seem to acknowledge the right of the people of a state to make an informed decision abut it.

 

[Quark]

If we are to assume the GOP is only welcoming to conservatives, then this is a bad thing. If were are trying to return the (classical) liberalism the GOP once had to it, then it is a good policy, as libertarians and classical liberals are split on this matter. It depends on too many premises which all cannot agree on. The first: when does life become human? The second: are rights obtained through sentience? There are many other questions as well. I am pro-life because I believe life begins at conception, and don't believe sentience is the only factor to which rights are derived. However, I would never want the state to be responsible for preventing abortions. A. They're inefficient, and B. It asks for overreach that is greater than this issue.

 

[jkr]

planet murder wins again...lemme guess, they still support zero dark raids, killing animals mental handicap & quadriplegics, and the imprisonment & torment of the poor?

we are all democrats now...


or

how bout everyone kiss my fucking ass

LEAVE
ME
ALONE

 

[Smart3]

Shake my head. "Parasite". "able to survive on its own outside the womb". That covers years after the baby is born. What disgusting terms to use for human beings.

And it didn't "invade". It was put there.

Not by choice.

No gay gene will ever be discovered, because there is none. Homosexual behavior is not genetic or in-born, that's secular social liberal dogma. And to flip it around, we might as well declare someday a homophobic or gay-bashing gene will be found, and many Democrats will probably transform themselves into being defenders of gay bashing because, hey, it's genetic.

As for abortion, it's one thing to de-emphasize it or other issues for situational campaign purposes, and another to drop a platform position altogether, and make your abandonment of principle visible for all to see. Democrats will not abandon use of it as a wedge issue, they will simply indicate Republicans, once elected, will vote the way most Republicans do nationally on the subject. Certain Nevadans need to understand it's a culture war because two sides are fighting it, and that the war will not end when they unilaterally disarm.

Anyone who defends the notion of a gay gene is either an idiot or a homophobe - or both. Homosexuality is biological in origin - an immutable characteristic. And like all immutable characteristics - protected under the Constitution/BoR.

You can be pro life without endorsing the government's responsibly to do anything

People allow their emotions/religion to corrupt their libertarianism when it comes to abortion.