Originally Posted by fredchabotnick

My question is simply, seeing how he has gotten us into two wars, not properly equipped our troops with needed armor, and is more than willing to torture and use capital punishment (I'll leave arguments about Medicare spending and medication for the poor to those who understand it better than I), is this statement completely hypocritical?
Is this just a anti-abortion double standard where it's ok to kill anyone who has already been born, but not a fetus, or is there truly some disconnect that he can't see that supporting one would imply support for the other?
I just don't understand. In my mind, abortion, whether or not you support it, is not the cause of problems, it's an effect. And you don't treat effects if you want to cure a problem. There's so much effort in trying to prevent abortion, but can we have decent sex ed in this country to prevent teens from getting accidentally pregnant? No, of course not. Can we distribute birth control or teach people how to use them? No. What about setting up serious programs to allow people to pay for and provide prenatal funding, care, and adoption services for pregnant women who are not able to pay for the expenses (actual and emotional) incurred during pregnancy? There may be groups out there that do that, but I'm not aware of any. Just once, instead of seeing a protester yell at a woman choosing to get an abortion, I'd like to see someone offer to take the woman in, pay all costs, adopt the child, and not preach to them. WWJD? I believe the answer is not accuse them. That's just my feeling on it.
Also, while I'm ranting, instead of spending a ton of money on IVF, spend that money on adoption. This is a little off topic, but it ticks me off to see people have multiple children due to IVF and then thank God. Maybe God didn't want you to have your own kids...maybe you were supposed to foster or adopt, but no, you had to take matters into your own hands.

Stepping off the soapbox now, sorry for the rant.