I've always felt that if, due to someone's beliefs, religious or otherwise, they feel that a real human life exists from the point of conception, then I can understand their need for that to be the overriding issue in a campaign.  If they feel in their soul of souls that abortion is killing something with a soul, I can entirely understand their need to fight against it.

So if someone tells me that their vehemently pro-life, I understand why they're a republican.  If they believe that abortions are ok under certain circumstances, then I have no idea why they would be a republican because logic defeats all of their  other issues.

I personally have always felt that abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest, and up to the point where the baby has a reasonable chance of survival outside of the womb with today's medical technology (just after 6 months today).  I personally, despite a woman's privacy, have issues with abortion after that time.  So I don't judge people on their views unless they start hurting people or inciting other to hurt people.

I suspect she'll be back onto something on Sunday or Monday in her solo rallies but perhaps, they are going to move onto something new after having exhausted talking about some 60s loser for an entire week.

Yeah, abortion seemed to dominate a good portion of her speech; if this is the new line of attack, I don't think it'll get McCain much traction

just be a way to pander to Casey Sr. in Johnstown?  I would imagine that her views on abortion are quite popular in this part of Penn.

Let's wait for her speech in SE Ohio and Richmond to determine whether this line of attack (which is weak in my opinion) is where McCain wants to turn for the next week.

As far as reproductive rights, I hope he notes that it's something that does not affect a man's body and should be up to women and their doctors

as far as immigration, I hope he says, as did Hillary, that if Mexico had a less corrupt government and a much less corrupt police, Mexico could surpass us in the standard of living department, and our government should be using our influence to push Mexico to reforms and honest governing.  

Then we'd need border control to keep in our great Mexican citizens, and not to keep out the hopeful.  

Getting awfully tired of hearing her chirpy voice echo over CNN.

But Obama has the correct answer to the abortion issue, it just wasn't the one that Rick Warren's audience wanted to hear. "From the moment of conception" won't get John a standing ovation among an audience of all Americans.

The rights position is based on their religious position, they have chosen to accept life begins at conception, some people choose life begins when the fetus is viable to live without the life support of the mother, some people choose at actual birth...the point is...everyone has a choice and it is between them, God and their conscience...the right wants to protect their right to choose life begins at conception but wants to denigh anyone who disagree's with them the right to choose different.  

Make no mistake..this is a religious belief and it is absolutely an attempt to force their religion on everyone...not unlike the days of the christian crusade, these people are extremist and they do not recognize your right to have freedom of religion, privacy, or choice...if they won this issue they would find another one...they will not stop they must be put down like all terrorist...we must counter attack and create laws that seal our rights of choice and forever gets them out of the passenger seat of trying to drive our lives.

We must create laws with teeth and enforce them to get the churchs once and for all out of politics...that is too much power for these  pastors and organizations to have and they are abusing it badly.  

Finally I agree 100% with Obama...we can certainly work to reduce unwanted pregnancy and that should be a common sense goal the whole nation can get behind...just my two cents on this topic.

First, let me say that I agree with your post.  But, I think the abortion issue is more complicated than you're making it.  Even though the idea that life begins at conception may have a religious basis, it is also a logical issue--it is arguable without a religious justification that life begins then.

The other prong of this view is that many of our laws have some sort of religious basis--that doesn't invalidate them.  Murder is illegal.  If you believe that life begins at conception, then abortion falls under extant murder laws.  So, it can be argued that it is NOT a case of attempting to force religion on people any more than arguing that murder laws, theft laws, etc. are.

This is what makes the issue tough for me.  Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-choice, and frankly, I believe in abortion on demand (I can't see any justification for believing there should be restrictions placed on it if it is going to be legal in any fashion).  But, I can very much understand where those opposed to it are coming from--I can't simply dismiss their views as a church/state issue.