* Kristen McQueary…
Yes, we all knew Rauner was pro-choice. But he said at one point he would not sign the bill into law. He could have made numerous arguments against crossing that bright line, such as: “Yes, abortion should be safe and legal, but taxpayer money should not be the source of funding. There are organizations in the private sector that help women cover the cost. Support those groups.”
Something like that. But he did not. Not even close. That’s why his pro-life backers feel egregiously burned. Rauner didn’t have to sign this bill. He did not have to cross that line. In doing so, he has risked losing his core base of support and his re-election chances. That’s how important public financing of abortion is to him. That’s why he is getting lit up.
Supporters of the bill say the opposite, that Rauner helped clear a pathway to re-election by attracting women voters — as if pro-life women voters don’t exist. They do. They deserve respect. And they’re steamed.
Since his election, Rauner rightly blocked bloated Democratic budgets and vetoed an income tax increase. He pushed for pro-business, pro-growth reforms. But then he got in bed with Democrats on an issue that is explosive to his conservative base. He’s poison to that base now and so is his money.
Worse for him and his re-election prospects, those Democrats who praised him Thursday are not going to be with him in November 2018. No way in hell are supporters of public financing of elective abortion going to be helping Rauner, a pro-business Republican, win another term. They’re going to light him up even worse.
* Dahleen Glanton writing in the Tribune…
Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion rights, you must admit that Gov. Bruce Rauner was courageous.
In signing the controversial bill Thursday expanding taxpayer-subsidized abortions for low-income women, the moderate Republican governor angered conservatives across the state —all the way up to Cardinal Blase Cupich.
But in refusing to veto the bill as he had promised, Rauner also did something else. He showed us what could happen when a politician refuses to allow politics to dictate his decisions. That’s something we don’t often see in Springfield — or Washington, for that matter.
Rauner deserves our respect for that.
* Chuck Sweeny…
So, if you’re a Democratic candidate who believes in unions, taxing the rich and empowering the working class, but are also a practicing Catholic who opposes unrestricted abortion rights up until the moment of birth, you will be ostracized by party leaders who will sic their militant faction on you and pronounce you guilty of being an anti-woman bigot and defender of the white, male patriarchy that must be destroyed.
And they’ll say that even if you’re a woman, even though they’ll deny such tactics to commentators like me.
And if you are Republican who supports any form of abortion rights, even very limited rights, you will be branded as being … well, Bruce Rauner.
The governor of Illinois is definitely an economic conservative who wants to smash the power of public employee unions in the state because he see those unions, rightly, as the foot soldiers and funders of the opposition Democratic Party. He supports smaller government and pro-growth policies designed to grow Illinois’ economy.
But because he was and remains a “liberal” on abortion and alphabet-lifestyle-group rights, he is scorned by the Christian radical right.
This hurts Republicans in Illinois because the religious right provides the foot soldiers, envelope stuffers and phone callers for the GOP, the same function performed by union members for the Democrats.
* National Review editorial…
Conservatives ought to have learned by now that those who are not with us on abortion are, in most cases, not with us at all, and that promises of neutrality on the life question cannot be trusted.
Rauner, we now learn, does have a social agenda, one that is obnoxious to many of the conservatives who took him at his word on the campaign trail. It is a social agenda that is morally repugnant both on the fundamental question of abortion and on the secondary question of public funding for it.
- plainfield liberal - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:45 pm:
The fact that people support candidates and the republican ideologies solely based upon the far-right GOP stance on abortion, this one issue, still manages to boggle my mind.
- Blue dog dem - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:45 pm:
This governor is definitly ‘NOT’ an economic conservative.
- Driveby - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:49 pm:
Actually, Rich, the point your article on it emphasized is the most important. His credibility is gone, and not just for pro-lifers.
- Aldyth - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:53 pm:
So, according to the National Review, the devastation wrought on human services in Illinois doesn’t count as a social agenda? Not until funding for abortion comes into the picture is there an actual social agenda? Good to know where National Review stands on concepts of compassion and helping those who need it.
- ZC - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:54 pm:
Everyone can go everywhere on this issue / evaluation, and frankly that’s fine, at least in my opinion.
I think it should be crystal-clear that “Abortion is different,” as a political issue. There is still nothing else quite like it.
I’m a flaming liberal Democrat today, but raised Catholic in Louisiana and I get nowhere labeling “the far-right GOP stance on abortion.” I know too many good people on every side of this issue, who have managed to construct all kinds of ideological rules for how to deal with it, and most of them I find defensible.
In particular, I can certainly see how economically conservative, socially conservative Republicans in the IL electorate could decide to tank Rauner over this vote, even if it helps ensure a pro-choice Democrat’s victory next November.
- The_Equalizer - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:55 pm:
To be fair to Rauner, he was going to get torched by one side or the other on his “no social agenda” status regardless of whether he signed or vetoed the bill. It was a no-win decision.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:55 pm:
===Since his election, Rauner rightly blocked bloated Democratic budgets and vetoed an income tax increase. He pushed for pro-business, pro-growth reforms. But then he got in bed with Democrats on an issue that is explosive to his conservative base. He’s poison to that base now and so is his money.===
Rauner was enabled by Raunerites in the destruction of social services that could very well be groups like Catholic Charities that encourage adoption… then wonder aloud why Rauner lied to Blase Cardinal Cupich, and Rauner is the sole sinner?
That “Statehouse Chick”… yes, Rauner was honest to his “no social agenda”, it’s the misleading promises to both sides that’s the failure.
Getting into bed with Rauner and ignoring the damage, some permenant, by Rauner to even conservative social service groups is the failure of alleged conservatives that now choose to be upset, but upset for the wrong reason.
- Come on Man! - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 1:56 pm:
I am an unapologetic pro-choice person. I think something my “tribe” misses in this debate is that Pro-Lifers truly believe murder is being committed and that to discount that whole sale as a salient point in their argument is problematic. We should trying to build bridges between the communities on other issues such as adoption rights and other family based issues.
- Amalia - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:02 pm:
grown women, men and live children are seemingly valued less than a days or a few weeks old fertilized egg as they push just this issue and not working for social services. THAT is shocking.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:02 pm:
From what I read, Rauner used vetoing HB 40 as leverage to keep the GOP with him on the budget. Two things are wrong with this, in my opinion.
First, he should have never backed Republicans into a corner to begin with on the budget and revenue, forcing a number of them to break with him/act before we hit junk status. Second, he should not use such a sensitive and meaningful issue as leverage. He should not have toyed with and misled many in his base. It just looks like he used GOP voters.
- Thomas Paine - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:05 pm:
Rauner has exposed the lie told by the GOP and their editorial board foot soldiers over-and-over that Theo GOP’s effort to overturn Roe v. Wade isn’t anti-woman, it’s a “state’s rights issue”. Really, SCOTUS just overstepped its authority back in the 70’s, they say, and we should repeal Roe so that each state can decide their own fate.
The minute the first state decides it’s gonna pass its own legislation that goes beyond Roe, the GOP and anti-choice activists go ballistic.
Ms. McQueary’s claim that the bill violates some conservative principle, or a long-standing truce is absurd, as The Washington Post op-ed here points out.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:07 pm:
Today there will be hundreds of guys given an ultrasound of a jellybean inside their wive’s uterus. That’s when they discover that their lives would forever change. Over the next nine months, they’ll be given many more pictures of that bean turning into the most important person in their lives.
This has been regularly happening for the past twenty years. Parents are watching and monitoring their children’s fetal development. I saw all my kids and even knew by their size when their conception occurred. Parents today get their pre-born children’s portraits made if they want.
Even parents dependent upon government health care often go as a family to the hospital to see their baby’s ultrasound. Ultrasound techs tell me that entire groups of families and friends fill their waiting rooms.
Surgeries are happening. Testing is being done. In-vitro fertilization monitors conception.
Once you’ve been through today’s pregnancy procedures, you are aware of human life before birth. Modern medicine is forcing our society to acknowledge the medical science of human life.
This won’t stop. The idea that your baby isn’t human by today’s legal standards is ludicrous.
We have experienced what older generations couldn’t. Rowe v. Wade is nearly 50 years old. Today we aren’t ignorant of the mysteries of the womb. Instead we lived it right up to birth.
Issues are no longer abstract when you personally experience them. Forcing everyone to pay for procedures to end a human life isn’t an abstraction to those who still carry those ultrasounds around.
- Mal - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:07 pm:
I’m more democrat if I had to identify with a party, but abortion is wrong. Especially abortion up to the 9th month is murder.
- Anonymous - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:08 pm:
Dahleen Glanton would not have called him courageous if he vetoed the Bill.
He did play politics and it was not a courageous move.
Dahleen Glanton shows her true colors
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:09 pm:
===The governor of Illinois is definitely an economic conservative===
No. Good try. No. The failure to pay bills, coupled with the debt, together, do not a fiscal conservative make.
This, however, is Raunerism. Keep up.
===…who wants to smash the power of public employee unions in the state because he see those unions, rightly, as the foot soldiers and funders of the opposition Democratic Party===
What’s missing is understanding Reagan Democrats and the going after the trades, competing Raunerism.
This is comically ignorant…
===But because he was and remains a “liberal” on abortion and alphabet-lifestyle-group rights, he is scorned by the Christian radical right.===
No. This is what the Right wants people to believe now, that’s it’s this new left agenda. No, the Raunerites were willing to hurt social services that also have in their mission(s) Right leaning thinking.
It’s that Diana Rauner runs the Raunerite social agenda, and up to HB40, Raunerites were fine hurting social services, as long as The Ounce got $5 million from the Pritzker family trusts so Diana could save face for the Raunerite destruction.
It’s like no one is willing to admit (except Rep. Breen) that conservatives purposely enabled Diana Rauner’s agenda that Bruce couldn’t defy.
===This hurts Republicans in Illinois because the religious right provides the foot soldiers, envelope stuffers and phone callers for the GOP, the same function performed by union members for the Democrats.===
Rauner shouldn’t have had them then in 2014…
Otherwise, isn’t this a cafeteria style of blindness others warn about?
- Chicago Cynic - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:18 pm:
“Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion rights, you must admit that Gov. Bruce Rauner was courageous.”
Excuse me? Because Rauner lied to everyone and then in the end came around full-circle he’s courageous? Not sure that means what Dahleen Glanton thinks it means.
He outsourced his administration to IPI and then spouted the IPI talking point promising a veto. He then purged some of the IPI crowd and said he was going to AV. He then purged some more and came back to the position he put on the Personal Pac questionnaires. Courageous? More like confused expediency.
- Anon E. Moose - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:19 pm:
VanillaMan,
So if life begins at conception, is the baby then 9 months old at birth? I’m just a little bit confused because in literally every way we calculate age, life begins at birth. But I’d love to be proven wrong.
- Annonin' - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:23 pm:
Wait we thought the Civil war was about states rights
More importantly will GOPies spend GovJunk cash in their campaigns, refund or donate to some cause — downtown studios for Salem broadcastin’
And will GovJunk spend any money from the tax hike he vows to roll back.
Opps vows that could a little strong
- PJ - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:25 pm:
===Forcing everyone to pay for procedures===
TSince when do we get to pick what our tax dollars are used for? A large chunk of my tax money goes to support the military industrial complex that wastes billions on unnecessary tech and has ended countless innocent civilian lives overseas.
Until I can dedicate that percentage of my paycheck elsewhere, I don’t care about what you don’t want to spend tax money on.
===Especially abortion up to the 9th month is murder.===
This isn’t legal in Illinois, has never been legal, and won’t be legal now. The misinformation campaign is in full swing.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:26 pm:
Medical science and knowledge of that science has always trumped legal definitions. In 1857 the Supreme Court shockingly claimed that African-Americans weren’t human. Be assured that one day we’ll look at Rowe v. Wade similarly.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:28 pm:
LOL
We also claim that the year is 2017.
You’re pre-historic argument is hilarious.
- Cubs in '16 - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:31 pm:
===So if life begins at conception, is the baby then 9 months old at birth?===
Technically, yes. But human traditions being what they are we celebrate ‘birth’ days; not conception days.
- Publius - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:33 pm:
Lately Rauner has successfully taken several very motivating issues away from the Democratic Party to use against him in the fall of 2018. The dems will have a tough time motivating the pro choice groups and lgbt groups to vote against Rauner.
Knowing that these issues would upset his base they are not upset enough at him to vote for a democrat. He will now be a one issue candidate, ANTI TAX increase . That thing democrats recently passed into law
This whole act by proft that he is mad at Rauner is a ploy to make democrats think 2018 is in the bag. This is their long game strategy. Make the right mad at us while we weaken the democrats base and then hammer them on tax increases.
As long as there is no gop primary for governor or if a staunch pro life third party pops up Rauner has paved a path to victory.
He will also have two years of giant check presentations to those social service agencies he almost choked to death. Rainer comes out like a hero. “Here is your money that Madigan would give you.” That is pretty much what he is telling them.
Wake up people he is setting you up for 4 years with a GOP house and senate where they will devastate the middle class.
- Arsenal - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:37 pm:
==To be fair to Rauner, he was going to get torched by one side or the other on his “no social agenda” status regardless of whether he signed or vetoed the bill.==
Only because he tried to play both sides. I really think that had he opposed Medicaid money for abortions from jump street, he still would’ve won “enough” pro-choice women.
- hisgirlfriday - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:47 pm:
@VMan - legal personhood and human life are different things. do you get that?
People who are pro-choice dont think that little bean on an ultrasound is some alien being. they just think the human with the womb it lives in has rights that supersede the human in bean shape.
the idea that legal personhood begins at conception means a woman with ectopic pregnancy, an embryo growing outside the uterus or in the fallopian tube, is committing murder if she takes abortive chemicals to save her reproductive organs and possibly life by terminating the ectopic pregnancy
- Swift - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:48 pm:
Keep in mind that along with state Medicaid money comes state regulations. Most of the stand alone abortion facilities won’t be able to come into compliance to receive Medicaid money due to the financial burden in becoming compliant to perform one type of procedure. There are going to be some court fights on this, but those looking to use Medicaid dollars for abortions are going to be limited in their choices.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:49 pm:
===This whole act by proft that he is mad at Rauner is a ploy===
Spoken like somebody who has not spoken to a single Republican legislator these past few days. The anger by some is very, very real.
- Amalia - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:53 pm:
and, yes, science is making inroads. pills which provide an end to a pregnancy.
- Alternative Logic - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:56 pm:
===The anger by some is very, very real.===
Whilst scars may remain; time, a common enemy, and enormous sums of money needed and delivered, heals all wounds.
- WSJ Paywall - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:57 pm:
=The dems will have a tough time motivating the… lgbt groups to vote against Rauner.=
This is definitely not the case. Gay politics are not in a good spot for Rauner right now.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 2:59 pm:
- Publius -
Thus ain’t 3-demential chess with Paul Caprio, Dan Proft, Rep. Breen and countless others playin’ opossum for an overall goal.
I don’t think you realize what signing HB40 really means in the politics.
It means that if Rauner is re-elected or a Dem defeats Rauner, the mere possibility of overturning this, legislatively, then having a governor sign that… is now at least 5 years away.
Five years.
Rauner, if he ever got control of the GA won’t sign that reversal, this is a core belief for Rauner, so much so he’s going against actual Republicans and conservatives.
Let’s say Republicans get control, but Rauner loses. No Dem governor will sign something less at this point. Rauner already paid the price go going this far left.
Just starting there, yeah, the anger is real.
I say the anger is misplaced and channeled to save face now, given the enabling and the real beef is Rauner promising to both sides. Raunerites knew who Rauner was, they just trusted his word.
===Wake up people he is setting you up for 4 years with a GOP house and senate where they will devastate the middle class.===
Wake up?
Trump in the White House, his midterm, the destruction Rauner caused with a 63% disapproval… where you seeing seats being picked up THIS cycle?
Maybe it’s you that’s dreaming?
- igotgotgotgotnotime - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:02 pm:
“In 1857 the Supreme Court shockingly claimed that African-Americans weren’t human. Be assured that one day we’ll look at Rowe v. Wade similarly.”
In the Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court held that African Americans weren’t considered persons under the law because they weren’t citizens when the Constitution was drafted. It did not hold that they weren’t human. That was trumped politically 4 years later. Medical science had nothing to do with it.
- Anonymous - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:05 pm:
Thank you, Vanilla Man
- Blue dog dem - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:06 pm:
OW. The 116th is ripe for a GOP takeover.
- Blue dog dem - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:07 pm:
…ooops. so is the 118th.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:09 pm:
Ya need 8…
Big ask right now.
- @MisterJayEm - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:12 pm:
I must confess that I still don’t understand the political logic of Rauner’s lying to everyone about this issue.
– MrJM
- Anon E. Moose - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:13 pm:
VanillaMan,
Not sure you answered my question. Any medical journals that say that a baby is actually 9 months old when it is born? Please try to stay on topic.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:15 pm:
==Medical science had nothing to do with it.==
Nothing to do with it?
Vermonters were told to arrest their black neighbors because someone claimed that they were fugitives under the Fugitive Slave Act. Suddenly, Vermont farmers who thought of slavery as an abstract evil that didn’t concern them - became fully aware of the evils of legally declaring humans as not humans.
When you are personally effected, your eyes are forced open.
Pro-choicers better begin opening their eyes and compromising or they’ll find this medical procedure outlawed again.
I don’t favor that. It shouldn’t be paid for by people whose religious beliefs consider it for what it is.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:20 pm:
LOL
I don’t know about you, but I was birthed on my birthday and a fully alive human being before then.
Maybe you weren’t but all of us are fully alive months before our birth.
- anon2 - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:21 pm:
=== I’m just a little bit confused because in literally every way we calculate age, life begins at birth. ===
If life begins at birth, then the fetus isn’t alive until it is born.
- Arsenal - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:34 pm:
==The dems will have a tough time motivating the pro choice groups and lgbt groups to vote against Rauner.==
That seems like wishful thinking to me. Pro-choice voters have been going at full-tilt since January 21 and, if anything, feel like they just beat Rauner.
- ste_with_a_v_en - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:42 pm:
“the destruction Rauner caused with a 63% disapproval”
Still using outdated numbers?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:50 pm:
Funny, - Ste_with_a_v_en -
What are the fresh members?
Didn’t we go over this before? lol
- Blue dog dem - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 3:56 pm:
OW. Correct on the 8 need. The 116 & 118 changing really have nothing to do with Rauner. Just changing demographics.
- Demoralized - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:03 pm:
==It shouldn’t be paid for by people whose religious beliefs==
Ahh, the “religion should get me out of anything I don’t agree based on those beliefs” argument.
Any other things the government pays for that violate your religious beliefs? I mean, if that’s your excuse then why not go for eliminating your contributions to the government for all of it.
- wordslinger - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:07 pm:
–I must confess that I still don’t understand the political logic of Rauner’s lying to everyone about this issue.–
Lying is like breathing with this guy. Comes naturally, like Blago. He just lazily wandered into a trick bag. He had gotten away with plenty before. This is an issue you can’t weasel-word.
–But in refusing to veto the bill as he had promised, Rauner also did something else. He showed us what could happen when a politician refuses to allow politics to dictate his decisions. That’s something we don’t often see in Springfield — or Washington, for that matter.
Rauner deserves our respect for that.–
This person is seriously confused. Rauner’s signing of the bill was all about politics, a run to the middle before the general election. Where are the outraged Republicans going to go? Ives? Proft? Landslide losers.
–For more than 30 years, we had a pact in this state. Abortion would be legal and safe, but tax dollars would not fund it, except in cases of rape, incest and to protect the life or health of the mother.–
Did “we,” Katrina? “We” (whoever “we” are) had a 30-year “pact?” Is that how democracy works?
That one sets her hair on fire so often she must be Morrie’s Wigs best customer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FnAV1XbfKE
- Cheryl44 - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:19 pm:
It shouldn’t be paid for by people whose religious beliefs consider it for what it is.
Which is precisely my opinion about the money I get to donate to the war effort. Wanting them to spend all of my taxes at Planned Parenthood and NPR isn’t going to make the government have to do so.
- the Cardinal - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:41 pm:
Its not been about the act of abortion for decades its a wedge issue plain and simple, driven by those that need one (on either side) Rauner lost some more of his core voter but there is too much contradiction on the law books. Pro lifers that are pro death penalty and pro choicers that support the death penalty…then there is the legal issue of charging someone with a double murder if a female is pregnant. this bill is about who pays for other life style choices that’s the rub ? there are plenty of other things that we pay for that are life style choices as well my head hurts from all the spin.
- Anon E. Moose - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:43 pm:
VanillaMan,
You were a fully alive human being before you were born? How old were you? When did you become alive? Conception? I’ll await your LOL.
- PJ - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:53 pm:
===Which is precisely my opinion about the money I get to donate to the war effort. Wanting them to spend all of my taxes at Planned Parenthood and NPR isn’t going to make the government have to do so.===
Exactly. You realize how many religions in America decry acts of violence, right? There are literally millions of people who could rightfully claim that using their tax dollars to fund a war violates their religious beliefs.
But that claim isn’t validated, because governments can’t function under the condition of having each citizen select of menu of what they want to fund. That’s why elections exist.
Point being - the “tax dollar” thing is total crap. Vote. That’s the only voice you (or I) get in how our taxes are spent.
- pawn - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 4:55 pm:
I’m with you, Cheryl.
And I think it is gross how hypocritical so many have been with regard to the budget impasse and its impact on people’s lives. Actual born people.
- Amalia - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 5:17 pm:
it’s a times like this when I’m reminded of that painting from art history of the Annuciation, with a tiny cross with a teeny baby flying into the window. that’s not how biology works. not a mini fully formed baby at 4 weeks, size of a poppyseed, 6 weeks a pea, 8 weeks a raspberry. Enabling women to decide as soon as they know they are pregnant to decide how their pregnancy will be handled will both help with pre natal care as well as provide the best care for a woman’s body should she decide that a pregnancy will not continue.
- Last Bull Moose - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 5:28 pm:
We tax Quakers to pay for the common defence because it is a common defence. There is no way to exclude them.
We exempt Quakers from military service under the draft for religious reasons. We can divide them out.
Our founding fathers saw the recent history of religious wars in Europe and tried to keep the state out of religious issues. Now people want the state involved in moral issues that could be avoided. This is happening on both sides of the aisle. Both sides bother me.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 5:35 pm:
==VanillaMan,
You were a fully alive human being before you were born? How old were you? When did you become alive? Conception? I’ll await your LOL.==
Medical science states that at the moment of conception, a form of human life begins. Human life. Life. Human. A form of human life that every single person was at a point in their life.
This means that we should be as careful with this human life before birth, as we are careful with the same human lives when discussing capital punishment.
Legislate, regulate and recognize the need to compromise on situations where abortion is medically or ethically necessary.
We have generations of new parents who experienced their children’s lives before birth. This will continue to shape our society. Medical ignorance is no longer a viable excuse.
- pawn - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 5:55 pm:
Vanilla Man, then get your side to line up fully behind what it really takes to reduce the abortion rate: access to affordable and safe birth control, health care, good public schools, affordable housing and child care supports, SNAP and other food programs, etc. etc. My biggest problem is that the Venn diagram of those who are anti-choice overlaps significantly (though not totally) with those who would restrict, limit, and even eliminate access to those other elements. I’d just like to see a significant, meaningful effort by the anti-choice side to give a … hoot … about that life once it is born.
- Da Big Bad Wolf - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 6:55 pm:
No matter how upset some people feel about this, it will all blow over in a couple of months. I’m sure Rauner is counting on that.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 8:02 pm:
- Ste_with_a_v_en -
The July 18th - 20th.
http://bit.ly/2fLFp4A
We went over this, lol
- Anonymous - Monday, Oct 2, 17 @ 11:06 pm:
Last Bull Moose: “We tax Quakers to pay for the common defence because it is a common defence. There is no way to exclude them. We exempt Quakers from military service under the draft for religious reasons. We can divide them out… both sides [on the abortion issue] bother me.”
Your analogy fails. No one is forcing a religious person who is against abortion to get an abortion, just as we don’t force a Quaker to join the military and kill other people.
However, we force Quakers to pay taxes that fund the military to kill other people, which is something the Quakers are against. This is no different than forcing religious people who are against abortions to pay taxes to fund abortions for other people.
Therefore, the anti-abortion people are being treated no more unfairly than the Quakers under the pro-choice funding bill that was signed into law by Rauner. They have no more right to complain than the Quakers. This is a matter of simple logic.
As Jesus said in the New Testament after showing the pharisees a coin with Caesar’s head on it, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (money), and give unto God what is God’s (your personal behavior).”
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Oct 3, 17 @ 7:36 am:
==then get your side to line up fully behind what it really takes to reduce the abortion rate: access to affordable and safe birth control, health care, good public schools, affordable housing and child care supports, SNAP and other food programs, etc. etc. ==
What? You’ll continue to allow human lives to perish because you’re disatisfied over a social agenda? Wrong and unfair.
It’s as if plantation owners first demanded 40 acres and a mule from abolitionists before they’d consider freedom for their “human property”.
No way.
- Pundent - Tuesday, Oct 3, 17 @ 7:44 am:
=What? You’ll continue to allow human lives to perish because you’re disatisfied over a social agenda? Wrong and unfair.=
I think the point being made here is that your rant on “medical science” is rings hollow. The outrage that’s being expressed right now comes across as incredibly hypocritical. There’s no end to outrage that the right expresses over the fertilized egg. There’s no beginning to the outrage on the destruction of social services and well being.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Oct 3, 17 @ 7:56 am:
VMan:
Your passion is admirable. But your’s is an opinion. Don’t push it as if it’s fact. Many intelligent people have a different view.
- Educ - Tuesday, Oct 3, 17 @ 9:20 pm:
“Medical science states that at the moment of conception, a form of human life begins. Human life. Life. Human. A form of human life that every single person was at a point in their life.”
[citation needed]