i can only hope this is indicative...

[caspian_x]

Dear Hillary and Barack,

Please keep up the bickering.

Gratefully yours,
Republicans everywhere

The Gallup Poll: Giuliani Has Uniquely Broad Based Political Appeal

Net Favorable Ratings for Potential 2008 Candidates
(percentage favorable minus percentage unfavorable)
Feb. 9-11, 2007

Net
Favorable
Among
Own Party

Net
Favorable
Among
Independents

Net

Comments

[coffeejedi]

Noone really knows what Obama stand for, people are getting behind him because its a vote in favor of multiculturalism, which I certainly support, but beyond that, what? I'll wait for him to come out a bit stronger on some issues before I pass judgement

[caspian_x]

Gulianni seems to be alright.

Wow I think that's twice we agreed in one day! That's what I like to hear. For the record, I still like McCain, but I just don't know that he could overcome the backlash against Republicans there will be in 08. I still hate Giuliani's stance on abortion and am not too fond of his gun control ideas, either (although he favors letting states decide for themselves, which is a step in the right direction). But I can't argue with his toughness on crime, reduction of government (something BOTH sides should like to see nowadays), and tax cuts.

Gore...I...I...let's just leave it at where we agreed twice in one day. ;o)

[coffeejedi]

Oh and to Rudy's credit, his position on abortion is just about equal to my own. I don't like it. Not one bit. I think its sad, and inhumane. But in a world of scarce resources, class division, and increasingly expensive healthcare, I believe that a woman should have the right to choose. By all means, lets try to fix the problems of society, and offer alternatives like adoption (which is another very muddled system that needs fixed), but don't tell the poor 15 year old girl who dreams of growing up and becoming a doctor that her entire future (and fragile adolescent emotional state) could be in jeopardy because of a stupid mistake, while her boyfriend gets off scott-free. I'm opposed to late term or so-called "partial birth" (there's an inacurate, non-medical, and purposely inflamatory phrase for you) abortions; but if the descision is made immediately, there are things like the "morning after" pill that I have no qualms about.

[caspian_x]

Thanks for sharing your views. Really, I'm always interested to hear people's views on this subject. My question to those views (and we don't need to get into an abortion debate here, so feel free to simply reply with "Another time"...or "Never" I suppose), would be: if it's inhumane, why should it be a valid choice? I mean, I agree, a 15 year old girl should not have to give up her life for a stupid mistake. So why can't she carry it to term, deliver, and give it up for adoption? Why does that ruin her life?

[coffeejedi]

Because its set her a year behind in school, and made her a social outcast. The changes to her body and the hormones are putting her through some things that she's just not ready for yet emotionally. And to follow that up with giving away the child? I think that would be more mentally scarring.
And, for those 9 months, while she gains the weight and has to deal with the pain and the morning sickness and everything else; the guy has exactly what negative effects? Considering he was the one who probably pressured her into it, its such a double standard.
I believe that if we allowed teens better access to sex ed, and fostered a culture where sex wasn't this evil taboo, our hypothetical girl could go to her parents, say "I made a mistake" and the whole thing could be handled long before the that fertilized clump of cells could even begin to form even the most rudimentary semblance of a nervous system.

[caspian_x]

While I agree that those effects are negative, unless we're talking about rape it was still her choice and I don't think it's acceptable to take a life to escape those consequences. And from there, it all comes down to whether you view it as a life or not.

I'll agree with you that the adoption system needs work and that the father should have much more responsibility: financial, legal obligation to help the mother during pregnancy and after (if wanted), etc.

At the end of the day (again, unless we're talking about rape, which accounts for far less than 5% of abortions), those effects are negative, but it was her choice. As a society, to allow someone to end a life to avoid consequences of their own actions is morally reprehensible.

[coffeejedi]

I guess it comes to down to when "life" starts then. I think that abortion is ok up to the point that a brain develops (which is pretty early actually iirc). So I'll give you that short amount of time to make your descision.

I apply that logic to the other end of the life spectrum as well. If you have brainwaves, you're a person. No brainwaves? Just meat. If my mind stops thinking, don't keep my body around like some twisted undead puppet, pull my plug.

In the end of the day, I think that we have to approach this issue, like others, with as much rationality as possible. We can't let one group's idealogies or religion hold sway over other people. And, as someone who supports smaller government, I believe that these descisions should be put into the hands of the individual families and medical professionals involved, not politicians.

[caspian_x]

Well I gotta say that's a more logical dividing line than, say, by trimester or viability but still somewhat fuzzy. How much brain development? How do we tell? Brain waves? What if we can't tell? And why does brain waves suddenly make it valuable, when left on its own it would develop brain waves the next day? Ethically, how can we draw this magical arbitrary line

[ubersaurus]

You put that better than I could :P I figure if there's no nervous system, it's not much more than a parasitic clump of cells

[caspian_x]

Sorry, but I have to comment on the partial-birth abortion thing. It may be a non-medical term, but it's fairly accurate. In most cases the body is completely delivered except for the head. A sufficiently powerful sneeze would change the situation from the doctor being allowed to kill it, to being required by law to protect it. It's ridiculous and I think a term (even if it's inflamatory) that conveys the ridiculousness of the procedure is appropriate.

[ikkarus01]

I completely agree with everything you've said here. And you've said it with far more political acumen and far less histrionics than I could have.

Except for the bit about Gore. Not to say I don't like Gore. I do. I just can't honestly claim to have been a Gore supporter back when it actually mattered. I picked him over The Other Guy, but mostly because The Other Guy sucks and not because I thought Gore was the bees knees.

[coffeejedi]

Wow, political acumen? Me? Damn. Thanks :D

[ikkarus01]

If you moved to New Jersey and ran for something I would totally vote for you.