Are Democrats REALLY this deluded?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Also why are people who are against abortion, pro death penalty?

Because both stances are about preserving life.

[Perd Hapley]

Do you seriously think that anybody who holds views on abortion other than 'ban it entirely' must be evicted/excluded from GOP circles?

That's not what I said.  If Charby, and others like him, are so upset by the "far right" that they've considered leaving the party, maybe they should just leave the party.  He's upset that some of us have principles about the murder of small children, and find that to be a more important issue than fiscal policy. 

What are we supposed to do?  Put money ahead of innocent people's lives? 

Do we really want these people in our party, if they have such an attitude?  We don't need to kick them out, but I'm tired of them.  Let them leave. 

[red headed stranger]

I agree.  And they are deluded about many different things.  To the point where they don't represent their members all that well any longer.
What was it that has been said of the Repubican Party?  "I didn't leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me."
Are the Dems saying something similar amongst themselves right now, I wonder?

I think that the far left of the Democratic party has spoken.  They helped get Obama elected and they are reminding him to "dance with the one who brung him."  A lot of the people who would have been Nader or Green Party voters went ahead and voted for Obama this time, and they want their agenda pushed through. 

One thing that has confused me is why there are not more Republican social conservatives that are outspoken on the abortion issue.  At this point a Republican candidate cannot win an election, without the support of the Pro-Lifers.  However, I have seen few meaningful moves from the Republicans towards a tightening of restrictions on abortions. There have been a number of times since 1995 where the Republicans have had a lot of power in Washington, but they haven't addressed the Abortion issue in a meaningful way.  I think a lot of these Republican politicians are cynically paying lip service to the issue while having no intent to push for an issue that is #1 for a significant number of their constituents.  Perhaps pro-lifers need to hold their congresscritter's feet to the fire and tell them to honor their promises or pro-lifers will go back to being the "silent majority" and stay home on election day. 

[MicroBalrog]

What are we supposed to do?  Put money ahead of innocent people's lives?

Do we really want these people in our party, if they have such an attitude?  We don't need to kick them out, but I'm tired of them.  Let them leave.

As I have explained previously on the forum, there can be a variety of legitimate disagreements between people on abortions. Even if one accepts that the foetus is a child from day one, which many people do not, there can be a serious argument on this issue without calling absolutely everybody who disagrees with you a baby killer. Would you like it if I referred to (for example) people who support the war on drugs "homicidal maniacs" (as some newspapermen in America do) or to people who enforce laws I disagree with as "modern-day Gestapo"? Or to Bush as a fascist? No? Thought so.

Please don't refer to me as someone who wants to murder your children. We can legitimately disagree on issues without calling people murderers.

[KD5NRH]

Many, many fine upstanding people came from a single mother, these people were adopted out:
<SNIP>
Jesse Jackson - minister
<SNIP>
Malcolm X - civil rights leader
<SNIP>
President William Clinton - politician

You really should learn to trim your lists.  One could use the above as an excellent argument in favor of abortion.

Who's to say your planned parenthood mother isn't aborting the person who finds a cure for cancer, aids or becomes a President.

For a second there I parsed that as suggesting that the kid might find a cure for becoming President.  I was really hoping it was something that could be aerially dispersed over certain areas.

[MicroBalrog]

Technically speaking, Alexander The Great was only adopted by at an advanced age. In the ancient world it was common to adopt people for political purposes even when they were already adults, and there is at least one example of a person being adopted by a 'parent' half their own age. I am not sure that counts.

[Perd Hapley]

As I have explained previously on the forum, there can be a variety of legitimate disagreements between people on abortions. Even if one accepts that the foetus is a child from day one, which many people do not, there can be a serious argument on this issue without calling absolutely everybody who disagrees with you a baby killer. Would you like it if I referred to (for example) people who support the war on drugs "homicidal maniacs" (as some newspapermen in America do) or to people who enforce laws I disagree with as "modern-day Gestapo"? Or to Bush as a fascist? No? Thought so.

Please don't refer to me as someone who wants to murder your children. We can legitimately disagree on issues without calling people murderers.

I didn't call anyone a murderer.  I never said anyone wants to murder my children.  And you're not in a position to explain anything to me about this issue. 

[Jamisjockey]

Okay this dead horse is suffering from a case of violent thread veer.