Mike, I'll pray for......oh never-mind. You are 100% correct in saying some people use "I'll pray for you" as a political weapon when losing an argument and yes, unfortunately, it happens on both sides of the aisle. Personally, I find the comment to be condescending, an overt attempt to manipulate or both. Regardless, attempting to sway ones opinion by claiming to pray for them is as ridiculous as claiming Jesus was a Democrat/Liberal or a Republican/Conservative. We can neither force someone to pray or not to pray. Most of us would not attempt to do either. If I believe someone will pray that I turn from the word of God or promote what I believe to be unGodly therefore evil, I do nicely ask that the person not pray for me. ...

Republican Weiner? Really? Oh come on. Editing by Greg McCune - FAIL!!! Yes, I know Reuters made the original "mistake" but one would think Townhall would either call them out on it or correct their headline.

Today's column should be required reading for every Republican in office or considering a run for office.

I take the same position as DHE. I am a concealed carry permit holder, multiple gun owner but I do not, will not, and do not want to hunt. I do not oppose hunting for others, I choose not to engage in the sport/activity or to be around it myself. I am also very pro-life, going as far as to say abortion for rape should be illegal. After all, it is the only crime where we execute the most innocent victim. I didn't realize there was a requirement for hunters to be pro-life or pro-choice. Why would you feel there should be one for non-hunters? Is a deer at any part of its life the same as a human baby?

Exactly. Sanger was a promoter of abortion and considered it a viable option until medical science could perfect a method of birth control that was reliable 100% of the time. Yet, she went even further. If science could find a fool-proof form of b/c, Sanger believed abortion should still be available in cases where a woman changes her mind, a pregnancy becomes difficult physically for the mother and most disgustingly, if a child is born with physical deformities or illness that child could be "dispatched". These are the type of people liberals look up to and rely upon to give historical credibility to their arguments. And yet they wonder why conservatives believe liberals simply are supporters of evil or are themselves just as bad.

When will defenders of abortion quit with the lie that Sanger was not a supporter of abortion? After giving such unqualified assurances to women during the 1920s, Sa n g e r flatly con trad icts h erself in My F ig h t fo r B irth Co n tro l in 1 9 3 1 . Now she admits tha t the “ne ed for re liable me thods ha s be en fa r gre a te r and more ext ended than the ability on the pa rt of the medic a l profe ss ion or sc ienc e to supply them” and tha t “biologis ts and bio-chemis ts a re now at work perfecting the science of contraception” (MF 341, 343). So birth control offe rs no absolute “ c e rta inty” afte r a ll. So wha t happens when contraceptives fail and women are faced–to use...

So abortionists would have someone to look up to?

This isn't much different than what was taking place in Kansas when their attorney general went after PP. PP was performing abortions on children as young as 10 years old and not reporting to authorities these cases of clear child sexual abuse. When the state attempted to get the records of these children, PP refused to turn over records arguing the child had a "right to privacy". Our wonderful Sec. of Health defended PP in these cases when she was their governor. Oh, and she just happened to be one of the largest recipients of political contributions from abortionist Dr. Tiller. Remember him? He's the guy that bragged being one of the few people who would perform an abortion during the 8-9th month or a pregnancy? Planned...

You are seriously deluded. I can't believe someone has to explain the difference between murder and death by natural causes to someone. Or, that a person would use the natural process of death as justification to murder another human being. Murder requires intent and an actual act that ends with the death of another human being, that is a crime. What you are using to defend a murder is actually cases of natural death.

Wrong, absolutely wrong. Planned Parenthood wrote the FBI a letter a week after our investigation, only after they realized that Live Action had conducted the sting.They say this themselves. As much as they may pretend, Planned Parenthood was not attempting to help send human traffickers to jail; they were attempting to pre-empt the release of Live Action’s footage.........more at link Lila Rose, President and Founder of Live Action who produced the latest videos http://biggovernment.com/lrose/2011/02/09/top-six-planned-parenthood-deceptions-in-order-of-increasing-absurdity/