[VIDEO] New Video Slams Romney and Gingrich on Abortion [This isn't the official one]

[Fredom101]

I'd say you would lose about 75% of the Republican vote in Iowa, then.

Fetuses scream when their heads are crushed, and attempt to avoid the vacuums used during an abortion. If that isn't human life, what is? Why not allow parents kill their children up until age 18?

I said it shouldn't be highlighted, I never said RP should reverse positions. I'm not going to argue about when it's a life. That's been beaten to death and nobody ever agrees.

Point is, our movement is 85% male and the less we can talk about abortion (which affects about 1% of the population vs. way more important issues like taxes & war that affect everyone), the better off we will be.

 

[Fredom101]

He's trying to get the republican nomination. This means, highlight some Christian values, pro-life stances, and limited government to get these social and fiscal conservatives on board. The race for the white house against Obama would be quite different im sure. As in highlighting foreign policy as opposed to pro-life

George W Bush was pro-choice and wildly popular among Christians. Again, not saying Ron should reverse positions, just saying highlighting a divisive issue like this alienates more people than it attracts.

 

[InTradePro]

Where does Perry stand on the abortion issue?

 

[InTradePro]

I put Bachmann and Santorum in it to get maximum bleed from Romney and Gingrich. Bach and Sant have no chance anyway.

+Rep for this.
Will share with pro-life people.

 

[yeshuaisiam]

Get this video spread to your Christian family and friends. Spread it on Catholic & Protestant forums.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Where I live, in CA, they would NEVER make abortions illegal so no one here has anything to worry about.

Right, no one has anything to worry about...except the babies getting their spinal cords snapped in half in the womb.

 

[Fredom101]

Right, no one has anything to worry about...except the babies getting their spinal cords snapped in half in the womb.

Dude, as a libertarian you should know that making a law against something in no way makes it go away. If you're anti-abortion, trying to change the laws is foolish. I'm anti-drug, but I know goddamn well that making more drug laws is the last thing that's going to stop people from doing drugs.

Same with abortions. I'm anti-abortion too but don't want to go changing laws. Most women are not with us on this and it's a divisive issue, that's my point, I never was making any claims on whether abortion is "right" or not.

 

[affa]

I disagree with Ron on abortion so this topic does nothing for me. I don't get the anti-abortion position but an RP presidency would simply mean it would be left to the states to decide. Where I live, in CA, they would NEVER make abortions illegal so no one here has anything to worry about.

The majority of people I know are pro-choice. I am of mixed feelings... well, to be straight up, I believe a fetus is alive. Absolutely. And therefore, philosophically, I'm pro-life. But I also recognize the absolute difference in opinion people have on this topic... to distill it to phrases, one side believes it is a murder of convenience, whereas the other doesn't view a fetus as 'life' and therefore views the issue as moral tyranny of a woman's rights. This is a difficult bridge to cross, because both sides are debating different things. Anyone pro-choice doesn't believe they're defending murder, because they don't believe it to be murder. Not dissimilar, in my opinion, to those on the right who defend murder when the victim is labelled felon or terrorist.

Add to the pot another issue -I know it's hard for those who are firmly on the pro-life side to understand, but a decision to have sex does not necessarily mean a person is ready or willing to bring new life into the world. This will always be a problem, regardless of legality. As such, abortions will always happen, regardless... and there is an argument to be made that a woman should be able to have one done safely without fearing criminal proceedings. Thus, many pro-choicers listen to pro-lifers and simply hear a moralistic call to go back to the age of coathangers and backdoor abortions. Understandably, this upsets people just as much as abortions upset the people on the other side of the equation.

Now, despite the fact that pretty much everyone I know is pro-choice, that's not where I stand. I'm vegan, and don't even kill insects. I have always recognized that to be morally and ethically consistent, I would need to also be on the 'anti-abortion' side of the equation. However, in recognizing that those who are pro-choice don't agree with pro-lifers on the basic principle that a 1 month old fetus is alive, I think Ron Paul has the best solution out there - don't make it a Federal issue. Let states decide. It's far easier to leave a state, than to leave a nation.

This still scares those who are pro-choice, however. They think of the 15 year old girl, stuck in some small town in a 'anti-choice' state, and worry for them. This is no different, really, from those who mourn the aborted babies in states that will still allow abortion. People endlessly want to get up in everyone else's business, because they think they know better.

See, everyone thinks they're on the 'right' side of this. Everyone thinks they are the 'moral' ones, that they are on the side of what is right and good. And that's why conversation breaks down. People tend to talk at each other, not with each other.

 

[StilesBC]

The majority of people I know are pro-choice. I am of mixed feelings... well, to be straight up, I believe a fetus is alive. Absolutely. And therefore, philosophically, I'm pro-life. But I also recognize the absolute difference in opinion people have on this topic... to distill it to phrases, one side believes it is a murder of convenience, whereas the other doesn't view a fetus as 'life' and therefore views the issue as moral tyranny of a woman's rights. This is a difficult bridge to cross, because both sides are debating different things. Anyone pro-choice doesn't believe they're defending murder, because they don't believe it to be murder. Not dissimilar, in my opinion, to those on the right who defend murder when the victim is labelled felon or terrorist.

Add to the pot another issue -I know it's hard for those who are firmly on the pro-life side to understand, but a decision to have sex does not necessarily mean a person is ready or willing to bring new life into the world. This will always be a problem, regardless of legality. As such, abortions will always happen, regardless... and there is an argument to be made that a woman should be able to have one done safely without fearing criminal proceedings. Thus, many pro-choicers listen to pro-lifers and simply hear a moralistic call to go back to the age of coathangers and backdoor abortions. Understandably, this upsets people just as much as abortions upset the people on the other side of the equation.

Now, despite the fact that pretty much everyone I know is pro-choice, that's not where I stand. I'm vegan, and don't even kill insects. I have always recognized that to be morally and ethically consistent, I would need to also be on the 'anti-abortion' side of the equation. However, in recognizing that those who are pro-choice don't agree with pro-lifers on the basic principle that a 1 month old fetus is alive, I think Ron Paul has the best solution out there - don't make it a Federal issue. Let states decide. It's far easier to leave a state, than to leave a nation.

This still scares those who are pro-choice, however. They think of the 15 year old girl, stuck in some small town in a 'anti-choice' state, and worry for them. This is no different, really, from those who mourn the aborted babies in states that will still allow abortion. People endlessly want to get up in everyone else's business, because they think they know better.

See, everyone thinks they're on the 'right' side of this. Everyone thinks they are the 'moral' ones, that they are on the side of what is right and good. And that's why conversation breaks down. People tend to talk at each other, not with each other.

+1

I started out vehemently pro-choice years back. I've softened my position considerably. I don't consider myself either pro-life or pro-choice, because belonging to one of the camps basically forces one to ignore the other side via cognitive dissonance and a host of other psychological biases.

 

[Shane Harris]

Dude, as a libertarian you should know that making a law against something in no way makes it go away. If you're anti-abortion, trying to change the laws is foolish. I'm anti-drug, but I know goddamn well that making more drug laws is the last thing that's going to stop people from doing drugs.

Same with abortions. I'm anti-abortion too but don't want to go changing laws. Most women are not with us on this and it's a divisive issue, that's my point, I never was making any claims on whether abortion is "right" or not.

Abortion is a huge issue for republican women, many of whom I know are single issue voters such as my mom for whom it is the most important issue. Your comparison of abortion to drug laws is not accurate. Drug laws protect you from yourself. Whereas abortion, in the eyes of any rational person IMO, is an act of aggression against another person. Are you saying that states shouldn't make murder, assault, manslaughter, etc. illegal just because people will still do it? (State) Government does have a place in protecting our right to life, IMO.

 

[Publicani]

I could do a RP only version also I spose.

You should. And you should distinguish RP position from others. Others want the federal gov to interfere. Which guarantees that during next election cycle, abortion will rule. RP wants to take that possibility away from the federal government.

 

[Fredom101]

Abortion is a huge issue for republican women, many of whom I know are single issue voters such as my mom for whom it is the most important issue. Your comparison of abortion to drug laws is not accurate. Drug laws protect you from yourself. Whereas abortion, in the eyes of any rational person IMO, is an act of aggression against another person. Are you saying that states shouldn't make murder, assault, manslaughter, etc. illegal just because people will still do it? (State) Government does have a place in protecting our right to life, IMO.

Your contention was that California should make abortions illegal, and I disagree with this.
Isn't your goal to see that fewer babies are aborted? If so, making a law against it certainly won't help. Your best bet is to live your life the best way you see fit, and if you want to influence others, go have conversations with them. But making a law against it is foolish at best, and at worst you will have a big black market in abortions.

 

[Joe3113]

Love the video. Great first draft. I would make the following changes:

1) Get it down to 1:00. Even if it's not a commercial, people have short attention spans. Morel likely to go viral if it's short.
2) I understand the 'maximum bleed' concept, but the fact is that Bachmann and Santorum aren't going to be around to dilute the establishment vote after the first few primaries. Get them out of there, have Ron present the moral alternative on his own. The video will be more relevant for a longer period of time.

Good points.