"Personally, I believe abortion is wrong," Gov. Kathleen Sebelius wrote last week in her message accompanying a veto of an abortion-reporting bill. She also noted that abortions in Kansas have declined while she has been governor, and promised that "my administration will continue to work to reduce these numbers even more."
Sound good? Not to some pro-life supporters.
"Gov. Sebelius’ attempt in her veto explanation to portray herself as pro-life is outrageous," Kathy Ostrowski, legislative director of Kansans for Life, told The Topeka Capital-Journal. "She cannot reinvent the term, no matter how carefully she chooses her words."
But Sebelius’ spokeswoman responded that the governor wasn’t trying to mislead and has been very clear about her personal beliefs as a Catholic and her support for a woman’s right to privacy.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
64 Comments
What is this about Jessica’s Law that I caught the tail end off last night on TV?
So…
She thinks abortion is wrong, yet still supports it.
Sounds Pro-choice to me, not pro-life.
Kathleen: Your actions speak so loud, I can’t hear what you’re saying.
Why is this an issue? There are many people that are personally pro-life, but understand that they cannot assign their beliefs to another person. She personally is opposed to abortion, but understands that she must make decisions based on the welfare of ALL women in her state, not just based on her personal values. I think she should be commended for thinking beyond her own opinion. It’s called the big picture and many people can’t seem to see it.
Nicki,
Pro-choice means you support the woman having a choice.
Pro-life means you support the life of the unborn child.
It is an issue because people like the Governor want to claim they are Pro-life….and….Pro Choice.
They are opposites.
Interesting comment by Gov. Sebelius, interesting framing at least.
Looks like her statement won’t win her any support from the “All Uteruses Belong to the State” crowd, but it may help some people who have less rigid opinions see the other side.
I coulnd’t have said it better Nicki. The problem is that people can only see this issue in black and white with little tolerance for the grey, fuzzy edges.
The ironic part is that they’ll tell you they are Pro-Life but have no problem with the death penalty…
Personally I think abortion is killing of a human being, if left to be allowed to come to full term a human baby is born. It is just that simple and common sense, to say other wise is to deny the facts of the matter.Of course is it a human fetus that would develop into a human child.Now with that I am also am pro-choice, abortion is the symptom and not the disease. It is the result of many problems that need to be addressed before abortions will stop. Responsible sexually practices, education and a change in the very nature of the human being. As one of only a handful of species that has sex for other then offspring. And of those the only one for now that is thought to be self aware, it is only logical that we need to think of sex in a more intelligent way. But until we stop this “ostrich in the sand” approach to the subject. Abortion is a needed form of population control, it can not be outlawed nor forced away.
There has always been abortion.There will always be abortion.No matter what the all-utersus crowd says.Yes, it is sad.But you’ll never end it, just drive it back underground. Fewer abortions, more dead women. Quite a trade-off.
Yea bizsnype.
Most of the “uteruses belong to the state” crowd calling themselves prolife, but they sure abandon that philosophy when it comes not only to the death penalty but…
to pre-emptive war and the killing of innocent civilians as “collateral damage”.
Hey, what’s a few innocent deaths among prolife christians when our glorious leader calls them to war over oil. God’s will must be done, and clearly, god wants america to have cheap oil!!!!
Heheheheh. I wonder how much collateral damage the nathan type christians will inflict on you and YOUR family when the goal of DOMINIONISM is reached.
Remember the three kansas exceptions for the forced birth crowd. Rape, incest and MY DAUGHTER!
Just mail your checks to terry joe and fred so they can continue the march of dominionism.
Biznhype: The difference between an abortion and a criminal execution is innocence vs guilt. It is actually quite easy to make that distinction.
So, how ’bout them innocent iraqi’s huh?
They’d be safe if they werent guilty of… what?
Being muslim? Living in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Oh. I know. 9/11. Heheh. No proven link, but they must die anyway in our glorious march for bush domination.
Did I call it or what.
Predictably, outlander appears to let us know HOW he will execute that dominion theory over YOUR family.
This is the way it’s always been with Christianity. They will judge who’s innocent, and then of course they’ll feel free to execute those not – at no cost to their individual consciences.
Yeah, you called it, kfg.
Sigh.
Heheh. And the difference between susan “hypocrit” wagle and outlander and nathan would be…. what?
A vote for the “jim and susan show” is a vote for nathan and outlander’s preferred form of government. Stomp on anyone who doesnt share THEIR brand of church.
I cant wait until YOU ALL get the gay treatment from them. Public education will be the first to go when nathan, outlander, wagle and barnett are in charge.
And your family’s right to manage their own lives will be next. After all, only nathan’s christians know the true way.
Cant wait.
Consider a person who financially supports Gerard House and other birth services for women in crisis and helps women make the life decision but also opposes laws prohibiting abortion. Might that person be described as personally pro-life but also pro-choice?
I’ve worked for decades for choice, and am a volunteer escort at women’s clinics. I have listened to many women talk about abortion, and I have yet to find anyone who thinks abortion is a wonderful thing. I certainly don’t! But I’ve seen so many women who are, for one reason or another, not prepared to bring a child into the world. I’ve seen rape victims (my daughter was one) who couldn’t bear the idea of producing the child of the man who violated them so brutally. I’ve talked to women who were told by their physicians that trying to bring a wanted pregnancy to term could kill them. I’ve sat with women who lost their insurance partway into a pregnancy, and the costs of care and delivery would put them into bankruptcy. I’ve looked into the eyes of a nine-year-old girl who was molested by her Sunday school teacher, and who would never be able to have children if she tried to carry it to term. I’ve seen the horror of a woman knowing that she was carrying an ancephalic child that had no chance of survival, but would require many tens of thousands of dollars worth of care, and bring unbearable pain for all concerned in the few days that it’s heart still beat.Abortion isn’t pleasant, it comes with problems of it’s own, but usually it’s at least somewhat better than it’s alternative. No woman that I’ve seen has gone into it lightly. It’s not an easy choice to make, but it needs to be kept available as a choice of last resort between a woman and her physician, and the rest of you butt out- there’s enough pain there already!
Yeah jed, but those who disagree with you will be quick to point out that you use too many personal stories, and ask you for PROOF that those incidents ever happened. Putting you down is SO MUCH easier than listening to your first hand experiences.
And, as you mentioned, I dont know ANYONE who is “pro” abortion. If anyone asked me, I would advise against it.
It is because it is such a horrible and agonizing decision that I support choice. NO ONE should interfere with the decision process involved in something so wrenching and personal.
But when you are seeking dominion over everyone’s soul, I guess such things dont matter.
For some people, and you know who you are, there is NEVER enough pain in the world.
Pro life is really pretty much a misnomer. We should call these people what they really are. They are actually Pro-birth.
Once the child is born their part is done and they could care less what happens to it until it becomes part of the criminal system.
This is evident in the chopping of programs to help underprivileged children succeed and make something of their lives. It’s also evidenced in the current administration and Congress’ slashing of programs designed to get kids an education and by assigning a huge debt to them for current political gain.
No… Pro Life is a BS term no matter how you cut it.
Even if abortion is outlawed they will still occur. We’ll go back to the “good old days” where someone with lack of training does it in a back alley or some “chiropractor” does it in the back office.
It seems the women understand this more than many of the men. Focus on your own life, guys, and stop with the uterus envy.
Or some woman with a coathanger or bottle of bleach, Julie. But I have a feeling the pro-lifers would feel that any pain and death are well-deserved, no matter what.
It’s a sad, sad world we live in when others can tell us how to think and what we can do with our own bodies. If men could get pregnant, abortions would be available at the drive-thru at McDonalds.
FarmGal,I use personal stories because I’ve been there on the front lines, dealing with the people and listening to their stories. The abortion issue deals with real people and real lives. It’s considerably more complex than pictures of sweet babies and a bunch of made-up statistics and moral pronouncements by people who will never help solve the problems that brought women to the point of making such decisions. I want to keep it about the women! I want it personal!
I think most of us girls have at one point in our lives faced an unwanted/unplanned pregnancy either ours or a family member or a (close)friend. We’ve sat up for nights on end pondering what to do. We’ve had to (help) do some serious soul searching. We as women have faced the loss of children – abortion, miscarriages, SIDS, accidents, (heaven forbid) murder. We’ve bawled our eyes out over each and every one.Life IS precious. But whose “life” is worth more?
Julie, RD,You are quite right. Before Roe v.Wade, I had a semi-relative who was a chiropractor here in Wichita whose practice was almost exclusively abortions. He did between 2-3000 a year between 1949 and 1973, and there were three others of his profession doing about the same. He is the reason I am so adamantly pro-choice. I really don’t want his kind back in business!
Julie
“We’ve bawled our eyes out over each and every one.Life IS precious. But whose “life” is worth more?”
That is why I support a woman’s right to choose. None of us can decide whose life if worth more.
Let it be between the woman and her god. Unless some here think they are god…
Jed is right! This is personal. This is about personal choices. The option for abortion is there – not everybody takes that particular option.Some pregnancies happen to couples who have been planning/trying for years. Some happen to couples who weren’t planning on it but welcome it none the less. Some happen to couples that wed in haste (because of the pregancy) and repent at leisure – making everyones life hell. Some happen to couples that never marry but raise the child.Some happen to teens that are experimenting with the forbidden pleasure and now have to face the consequence. Some happen to girls/women that are raped (sometimes brutally). Some happen to little girls that are abused by a trusted adult or family member.Some happen to adults that are not mentally able of raising a kid (ie mental illness). Some happen to drug addicts. Some happen to prostitutes or strippers.All babies and children deserve to be loved and cherished. Most that I know are loved. Some aren’t loved (they’re barely tolerated) and it’s sad – they try so hard to “earn” their parents love but never get it.Raising your kids is great be they natural or adopted. Abortion is tough but it is the women’s choice – it it’s not legal they’ll figure out something else (and probably hurt themselves badly with wire coathangers or bleach).
From Wikipedia:”Thou shall not murder”Killing an innocent human being is a capital sin.”Thou shall not commit adultery.”Adultery is defined as cohabitation with a married woman (Rashi).
It seems like I was taught in Sunday school that God is Love and the 6th commandment meant not killing any human whether they were guilty or not. But that must have been the liberal interpretaion of faith — something not in fashion today.
My sister, unlike her brother, is a very devout Christian had this to say about the dominionism movement:__________________________________I read the article from the link you sent to me. I would really like to read this book. You know I have a stance I personally take on folks like the Christian Nationalists. I have come to really scrutinize their motives as those agendas really line up against what is written in the Bible. I believe that how this starts is that someone can be marginalized because of their Christian faith and then it becomes political and those that are hearing “God” tell them to continue this what I like to refer to as a “reverse witch hunt”, they gain political power and I believe they lose the vision of what they are doing. It does not help when these men of God are supported by right-winged undercurrents within the government. I think a lot of these politicians jump on this “right” course because it is the “flavor” of the term and they see it as a means for publicity, support and power. I don’t believe I have read those instructions in the Bible before.I agree with the portion of the article that parallels this movement with the Islamic movement, building their doctrine on the Bible and advocating “their” cause for all that identify as Christian, naming it Christianism, very good point. I am often appalled at what is presented as the blanket “Christian” belief.I would love to read this book. I will look for it, now that I have time to read something I choose. Thanks for sending me the article…let me know what you think!!__________________________________
I personally believe that dominionism adherents are shameful disgraces to real Christians. There needs to be a litmus test that helps identify the nuts. My offering on this latter: “Do you believe you can, or are entitled to, force your faith on others?” From what I’ve read, though, lying is justified to further the dominionists’ agenda. These are really toxic people.
I thought a conversion to Christ required by definition that it be voluntary.
What dominionists are claiming is Christianity is completely unrecognizable to me.
On the lighter side: On the “Thou shalt not commit adultery” commandment – is one absolved if you don’t share the same mailbox with said woman & what if she isn’t married? :) I had a devout Christian friend who justified his premarital sex life using the mailbox defense — it was hysterical.
DD,Also on the light side, I’ve always wondered why they call it adultry- it always seems so utterly juvenile!
How dare Sebelius sound pro-life?
I think this frame is a bit disingenuous. It seems to me that the Governor has recognized the need to find a common sense approach at reducing abortions, a position that almost all Kansans can agree with. This should be recognized as a positive contribution, not belittled.
He was sharing a ‘box’ with her though :-}}
Jed & Brian,Yes and in spite of himself, I think my friend enjoyed that sinning quite a lot. Not that he could ever admit it, though.:-)
“common sense approach at reducing abortions”
jdog, values boy didnt endorse it, so it must be wrong. It isnt ideologically pure, and terryjoefred wouldnt like it.
SO GLAD we have values boy! And you are surprised by the biased headline?
Welcome to the WE blog where the editors never met a conservative values boy they didnt shill for.
heheh. fair and balanced.
Farm Gal,Back when I worked at the Eagle, the reporters, while certainly not unanamous on anything, tended toward the liberal. Editors, on the other hand, were definitely conservative, and the publisher was way to the right of Attila- to the point of often driving a war-surplus amphibious troop carrier to work!
Jed,doesnt look like much has changed.
And I did mention church related advertising dollars…
the more things change, the more they remain the same
That was also my experience as a reporter
Jed,Until he went to prison on an income tax rap. Then he had to sell all of his military toys because he was a felon.I remember it well. And ever publisher from then on was about the same – a middle-aged white guy in a suit more interested in the advertising section than the news room.
“a middle-aged white guy in a suit”
when did john moore become a we editor?
heheh
Is that why the WE is pimping values boy? He wears the correct suit to fit into the christianist bigot club?
Gittin’,Yeah! I’d forgotten about that, and it happened while I was there!
One more post on the mailbox theme and then I quit on that one. From one of the more obscure John Prine songs – “Iron Ore Betty” WARNING: Values Boy and other squimish readers – Avert your eyes…
I’m goin’ steady with Iron Ore Betty,She’s goin’ steady with me.
We get our mail in the same mailbox,We watch the same TV.
I’ve got rug burns on my elbows,She’s gottem on her knees.
I’m goin’ steady with Iron Ore Betty,She’s goin’ steady with me!
Pro-life is a term used to describe a person who doesn’t support abortion.
Pro-choice is a term used to describe those who support a womans right to choose to have an abortion.
They are not meant to be taken literally. The comments about pro-life people who support the death penalty make as much sense as me saying you are not pro-choice because you are against school vouchers…
The point is that they are terms used to describe views on abortion.
I could care less how much of a grey area you are in.
Make up a new term for all I care.
I am just saying that you are either pro-life or pro-choice. Trying to say that privately you are pro-life yet you still support a womans right to choose is: PRO-CHOICE!
It is not something to be ashamed of unless you are trying to pander to the pro-life crowd when you are pro-choice.
When I say I am pro-life it is a term used to describe my stance on abortion not an all encomposing statement about my view on all life.
We can debate killing and life if you would like to. I am just clarifying the terms.
Some cry hypocrisy when the governor says that she is personally “pro life” but politically pro choice.
A fair charge. If you deal in absolutes.
There is another fair charge and cry of hypocrisy to be made. Some have already made it. I’d add this.
Unless you are for and demand societal health care for all prenatal women you are not “pro lfe”. You are leaving a woman to her own devices. One of which is the right to choose abortion in the face of medical expenses she cannot pay. Deny her choice with yours and you would seem to become the “responsible” party.
Unless you are for and demand societal food and housing for all you are not pro life. You ARE FOR a woman and child on the street hungry and homeless. Maybe because you want her that way so she will work for you out of desperation to feed her child who has lost its importance to you by virtue of its birth.
Unless you are for societal paid day care for children you are not pro life. You ARE FOR children left alone while their mothers work any job you will give them to keep them and their child fed.
THe hypocrisy of many if not most of the “pro lifers” is that they discuss the 1st or 2nd or 3rd trimester. They wash their hands of the 1st or 14th or 21st or 65th year and all the years in between. Some of them do get concerned again if you are brain dead or seek end to a life of pain. But for the most part their “pro life” sentiment extends only to emergence of a “person” dependent on another person whose choice they’ve denied into society where their rules would say “You’re on your own kid!”
You tell ME who the real hypocrites are.
JR,Nathan’s piece makes me think of the ’60’s radicals who screamed that “anyone who isn’t with us is against us!” An interesting side for him to align with.
JR,
How do you define “pro-life?”
I simply defined it as a term to describe a position regarding abortion.
Again, it can have several meanings. We are talking about the one dealing with abortion, not the one you are.
You seem content on making the term it’s self an absolute statement.
I don’t.
I am not anymore a hypocrite than your fantasy imagination can make me one.
“Pro-life is a term used to describe a person who doesn’t support abortion.”
So, if I just choose to neither support nor oppose abortion where does that leave me?
Pro-choice is a term used to describe those who support a womans right to choose to have an abortion.”
Sounds like a person can be both from the descriptions above. Add to that the situation where a person counsels a woman to seek alternatives (adoption etc) while not trying to criminalize abortion and I think you really can be both.
Nathan – do you financially support any of the alternatives? i.e Gerard House etc?
I have dontated money to Guide dogs of America and still support Paws with a Cause.
Unfortunately, my part-time job and being a full time student prohibits me from further donations to the many things I think are worthy.
Nathan once again demonstrates that the rabid, fundie, pro-lifers don’t understand that not everyone feels it necessary to force their personal beliefs on everyone else against their will. It is clear that Sebelius is personally pro-life or anti-abortion but that she also understands that her personal views do not allow her to make that decision for an entire state. Is the concept of minding your own business hard to grasp?
Scott,
All I am saying is that what you just described is Pro-Choice.
Both entrenched sides strongly dislike people who are in the middle on the issue (and yes, Nathan, it is possible). I think it is, in part, because both liberals and conservatives are using the social issues to drive their parties. They want one issue voters on abortion. Then, they appear different even when the differences can seem pretty cosmetic right now. True believers can’t accept more nuanced stances because they are not as easily controlled as hardliners.
Nathan – when I was a full-time grad student I found money to contribute to a St. Anne’s pregnancy crisis home in Los Angeles (Catholic Charities). Just meant I had to do without some things I didn’t really have to have and could live without.
Nathan,Even when I had no money, I always found time for volunteer work and making in-kind donations of my work. Currently, I’m volunteering for several causes.
I know a guy who regularly pickets Tiller’s clinic. I challenged him to write a check to support alternatives instead of only cursing the darkness. He refuses to support them.
I submit that I do more to decrease abortion than he does.
If you guys want to change the meaning of the terms go right ahead.
I am not saying there is no middle ground.
I am not saying people can’t have views on both sides of the issue or they can’t be privately against abortion and still support choice.
I am talking about the definitions of terms.
If pro-life doesn’t mean you oppose abortion then what should people who are pro-life call themselves?
The term pro-life is simply a term adopted by those to state that they hold a view that abortion is wrong and they don’t support it.
The term pro-choice is simply a term used to describe those that do support a womans right to choose.
If you want to make up a word for people in the middle, I don’t care.
You can’t be both. They are mutually exclusive terms.
That has been all I have been trying to say…
If you are going to call people that support a womans right to choose “pro-life” then what do you call people who don’t support a womans right to choose?
Because right now, most of the people who don’t support a womans right to choose call themselves “pro-life”
They are just terms describing a stance on abortion, not absolute statements about ones character, values, or morals.
It is that simple.
If you are going to call people that support a womans right to choose “pro-life” then what do you call people who don’t support a womans right to choose?
Uh… anti choice? Or maybe even rabidly anti choice? Anti freedom? Taliban??
“Pro-Life” – support life options; for example by writing checks to birth clinics, shelters, etc.
“Pro-Abortion” – support abortion; for example by writing checks to Tiller, etc.
“Pro-Choice” – support leaving the decision to the parties involved.
By these definitions I am both pro-choice and pro-life. However, I do not qualify as ‘pro-abortion’ because I will not support that.
Still waiting for your check Nathan.
I’d like to propose a new term: Anti-sex.
Pro-life means that you don’t support abortion in any case whatsover, because the killing of a fetus amounts to murder. You also support the outright banning of IVF, where multiple fetuses are created only to be discarded. I have great respect for this position, although I disagree with it. It’s consistent.
Pro choice means you support a woman’s right to choose an abortion, whether you personally approve of it or not. You might support restrictions on the time frame, but not on the reason for obtaining one.
Anti sex means you support a right to a woman’s abortion, but only she was forced to have sex. Those slutty girls who have sex with–gasp–no intention of getting pregnant are SOL. You also see no problem IVF, because killing fetuses is a “cluck-cluck, how sad” kind of issue, but it’s ok if the goal is to make a woman a mother! There’s no nonprocreational sex involved, so it’s cool.
Thoughts?
“only IF she was forced to have sex”"see no problem WITH IVF”. I seem to be omitting a lot of words today.
I don’t think it’s wise to sterotype people one way or the other. We have many layers to our beliefs. It’s no secret that I don’t support abortion, if a woman came to me with that on her mind I would try to help her find other alternatives, and I would never help her obtain an abortion, but if that’s what she wanted to do, I certainly wouldn’t expect her to put her life at risk. The issue is just not black and white, and both sides have merit. To say prolifers are anti-sex or suggest that they hate women and want to punish them… blah, blah, blah…is just not true and SO unfair. I know many prolifers who support alternatives to abortion with both time and money (myself included). I know many prolifers who have adopted “hard to adopt” and older children.I guess what aggravates me is the superiority and indignity expressed by those who are prochoice toward prolife folks. They see themselves as caring, sensitive, life affirming, etc. but don’t have any problem with denying another person life because he or she is unwanted, unplanned, inconvenient, not perfect, whatever. I don’t know many prochoice people who are adopting “hard to adopt” kids or helping a woman find the resources she needs to carry to term. For many of you, it’s just as simple as flushing away the “problem”, thereby absolving yourselves of any responsibility for helping another in her time of need. Life is not so black and white, guys, and yes, there are things worse than abortion. I don’t think abortion should be outlawed, but don’t ever place me in the prochoice box, because I truly value innocent human life, and I would never support or condone anyone’s abortion. I think we all agree that anything that would reduce abortions is a good thing. But the prolife movement is not evil, and neither is the prochoice agenda. There are no monsters on either side.
Damoon – I agree with much of what you say. However, although I would be called ‘pro-choice’ I HAVE “helping a woman find the resources she needs to carry to term”.
Yhe only ‘monsters’ in my opinion are those who resort to violence and those who would ‘turn away’ a woman in ‘trouble.’
One thing that I HAVE seen is a self-described “Christian” family turn their backs on a daughter in her worst hour of need. THEY are the ones driving her to an abortion.
It should come as no surprise that the hag is reaching out to the pro-life crowd now. She ticked off a lot of people with her petty, evil pro-wetback and anti-gun nonsense abd this is just a lame attempt to balance the scales. Governor “leadership” is just about done as a political force.
Viva La Raza Blanco!!!
Ben,
I have seen people who are not Christian do the same.
Nathan – so have I. My point is that the “holier-then-thou” crowd ain’t holy.
This title is absolutely misleading. The Governor in her veto message didn’t claim to be pro-life – that was Kathy Ostrowski’s claim about her.
I believe that most people, whether they call themselves pro-life or pro-choice, can agree that abortion is something that we should work to prevent. Most people agree that there should be fewer abortions.
What separates people into these two camps is the way they think this goal should be accomplished. Those on the pro-life side think it should be done by creating laws restricting access to abortion. These laws of course include South Dakota-style bans, but also a number of little-noticed laws such as targeted regulation of abortion providers and parental consent.
Those on the pro-choice side believe that the number of abortions can be reduced through preventative measures while keeping them legal and accessible. These include not only such obvious items as sex education and increased access to family planning services, but also more broad policies that take into account the top two reasons that women report for deciding to terminate a pregnancy: lack of healthcare and financial instability.
Personal beliefs about the “morality” of abortion aren’t what separates us into “pro-life” or “pro-choice”; our differing opinions on how best to reduce them do.
For a comparison, we can look at Kansas based groups working on either side. Kansans for Life, the most politically active pro-life group, consistently supports legisation restricting access to abortion while consistently opposing preventative measures. The main three pro-choice groups, NOW, ProKanDo, and Planned Parenthood, consistently oppose legislation that restricts access and consistently support preventative measures.
For example, while Kansans for Life was supporting a bill targeting abortion providers for regulations that don’t apply to any other physicians, the pro-choice groups were working on the Abstinence Plus Education Act.
The point is that the debate is over the approach. Calling Sebelius a liar for taking the pro-choice approach to reducing abortions simply misses the point, as do most debates over abortion.
I think biggest difference between the two camps is that the prolifers believe that the unborn child is a living human at every stage, and many on the prohoice side believe that a human isn’t human until it’s viable outside the womb or takes it’s first breath. That has a big influence on the approach to dealing with the issue.You make a lot of good points, Juner
I think those complaining about the governor’s comments are just looking for an excuse.
I’m am personally opposed to large SUVs. However, I support people’s right to buy them.
There is nothing inconsistent about that position, anymore than there is abotu the guv’s.
Cheers.