In response to:

Romney and the Rapist

OldSchool97 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 4:45 AM
Anyone who's ever driven a car knows you can't turn around unless you stop, and you can't stop unless you put on the brakes. Romney wasn't my primary pick, but he's the first press on the brake pedal.
Beethovens10th Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 11:57 AM
If Obama is the .45 slug to the brain, Romney is the inoperable malignant brain tumor. I refuse to accept this false dilemma.
justme16 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 6:59 AM
I believe, that "in the case of rape, or incest" it is the woman who for obvious reasons should be afforded the opportunity of that choice. While I don't personally support abortion, who am I to make such a decision for anyone else. To eliminate the option is to demonstrate absoulute dominance and calousness regarding same. However, to use abortion as a means of "birth control" or "gender selection" is absoultely NO choice. We the people need to stand and protect the innocence in as many situations as possible. The innocence of rape, and the innocence of the child. IT IS A CHILD, not a worthless piece of meat. After all regardless of the situation what we are acutally talking about is only NINE MONTHS of what? Inconvenience?
justme16 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 7:02 AM
The bottom line is that if one doesn't want to have a child and the resulting responsiblities, then wouldn't it be prudent to NOT do the things that cause said child to be conceived in the first place? The same logic can be applied to gambling in Vegas. If one doesn't want to lose their money and suffer the consequences and inconveniences of fiscal hardship wouldn't it be prudent not to gamble in the first place? Or can the "right to choose" irrationalization be applied there as well, and could one then lobby to "get their money back" when they lose? After all it's their money, and no one should tell them what to do with it? Hummmmm go to vegas and see how that one flies.
Jay Wye Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 9:38 AM
an embryo is not a child. it's POTENTIAL child.

MYOB.
Lars795 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 6:23 AM
Actually one can turn a car 180 degree's without stopping, it is just more difficult.
cambeul41 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 7:20 AM
Depending on how fast you are going, how fast you turn, and what you are turning toward.
willi4 Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 7:53 AM
And frightening. Which is something Americans have lost their ability to handle. Messy? You bet. But if the tree is going to fall, I would rather cut it down and attempt to lay it where I choose instead of risking life and limb, and even the house during the next storm. America (the tree, the car) is coming down. I would rather have a say in the when and where than wait for our enemies to be there waiting for our weakest moment. Hell awaits America unless we fix this and other divisive issues. Fed crash means war between the inner cities and the rest.
Matt in N.C. Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 6:05 AM
Agreed. Another RINO suit hardly inspires confidence. The choice between tapping the brake and stomping the accelerator isn't wonderful. But it's the choice we have; and because we're headed for the cliff, it's a no-brainer.
I have a friend who suffered through a horrific gang rape nearly twenty years ago. There were three perpetrators but one in particular served as the ringleader and principal conspirator. He was in his early thirties when he planned the crime and convinced a twenty-one year old and a nineteen year old to join him. His victim was only sixteen years old.

After raping a girl only half his age, the principal rapist let the others have their turn. Then he raped her again. In between his two assaults upon her he slapped her around viciously and poured alcohol...