Cracking down on illegal immigration is “morality” gone wild. It’s a mentality of “wait, someone is breaking the law — we can’t let that happen — we must punish.” They aren’t willing to look at the reason people are breaking the law.

I really like Obama. He’s by far the least “politically corrupt” candidate in the field right now. I just have a hard time supporting some of his platform. Specifically, I think support for pro-choice is completely morally wrong and although I haven’t studied his healthcare plan extensively, from what I have read, it still feels like universal healthcare which I’m not convinced is the proper solution.

I think that, if we are going to change the selfish tendencies of this nation, it won’t be with a Republican in the White House. All their exclusive party planks are inherently selfish – tax cuts, cracking down on illegal immigration, etc.

If we want a leader who will get us to look outside ourselves, it should be the one who has done so for a living – a community organizer.

You can’t legislate a cultural change like an awareness of others; it has to grow from within, with people of ideas, people of words, and people of action. Generation X and the Millenial Generation are fishing for something like this and for someone like Obama to channel their good intentions. Let it happen.

By your own acknowledgment (or rather Hillary’s), nobody likes abortion. They all know it’s wrong. They can’t bring themselves to acknowledge that it’s murder, but they know it’s bad. There is no question whether it takes/ends a life. There is no other purpose for it (except where you cited lds.org above — which I am fine with and which can be easily legislated).

So your arguments are flawed in that regard. However, I’m not saying that providing better healthcare is’t a step in the right direction for reducing abortions. But I think the ideal (with regard to abortion) can much more easily be achieved than we all think. We just need a new Martin Luther King Jr.

I firmly believe (or rather hope) that abortion is the new slavery. That we will some day realize how immoral it is and we will look back at this time in our history and wonder what we were thinking.

PS. I’m not a huge fan of handguns either. But rifles are crucial for many in America that live off the land (like Janet). I would probably support legislation eliminating (or at least severely limiting the availability of) handguns.

I don’t accept Clinton’s excuse–I simply cited it as an example of how the pro-choice camp thinks.

There are a lot of pro-choice/anti-choice arguments out there: whether we should have access to guns–they kill people too (you’re pro-choice); whether we should be conscripted to kill based on the judgement of our elected officials–this kills people too; whether we should be compelled to pay taxes to prevent the deaths of poor, disabled, and otherwise disadvantaged Americans by way of starvation, inadequate healthcare, exposure, etc. (I’m on the anti-choice here). Both sides of each argument think they’re right, and each side has an argument that they believe should be exclusively compelling.

In the last three examples, your conservative friends are on the side that allows more death.

So get involved in the process and try to get the laws changed. I think it would be easier to reduce the rate of abortions through national healthcare (among its many other benefits) than to get Roe v Wade overturned. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t keep trying, but we should also accept that there is a reality in which we have to work to bring to pass the ideal.

Being pro-choice is trusting the individual to make the right decision for herself and her family, and not entrusting that decision to anyone wearing the authority of government in any regard.

Like I said before… why is abortion acceptable? Just because it is legal and cultural doesn’t make it right. It shouldn’t be a choice. That is my point. It should be as much a choice as killing a newborn. If you make the choice to kill a newborn, you chose to go to jail for a very long time. Those choices are the same and should be met with the same consequences.

The fact that you accept Clinton’s “excuse” scares me. Even in her quote, she admits (although with spin) that abortion is a bad thing. The fact that nobody wants to be pro-abortion is a sign that everyone knows that it’s wrong, but is unwilling to do anything about it.

I think that the view of the pro-choice group (again, not shared by myself) was adequately expressed by Hillary Clinton when she said, “I have met thousands and thousands of pro-choice men and women. I have never met anyone who is pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is trusting the individual to make the right decision for herself and her family, and not entrusting that decision to anyone wearing the authority of government in any regard.”

Don’t ascribe to the other side a label of irrationality that you would reject yourself. Just because you support the war in Iraq doesn’t mean you’re pro-dead soldiers, or even more apropos, pro-dead civilians, because civilians, like fetuses, are the innocent victims.

I understand you are anti-abortion. But you support candidates that are pro-choice (which we all know is a spin word indicating pro-abortion). I can’t bring myself to do that.

Nobody thinks abortions are GOOD, they just think it’s the better of two bad options.

I disagree. If you listen to the Left, it’s about the woman’s right to chose. As far as they are concerned, the fetus has no right to life/choice. They are placing the (all too often selfish) desires of the mother before the fetus.

If the Left changed their tone to be more inline with what you say, I’d be much less reluctant to support a Democrat.