GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-13-2012, 17:40   #1
Trew2Life
#the struggle
 
Trew2Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: terra nullius
Posts: 1,167
Is This a Pro-Life Statement?

"In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents' decision."

I thought the Romney's were supposed to be pro-life? The language used in this 'Gestational Carrier Agreement' between Tagg Romney and the surrogate mother isn't 'pro-life' language.

This is the last thing the GOP nominee needs with less than a month to the election.
__________________
Excuses are tools of the incompetent used to build monuments of nothingness. Those who use them seldom amount to anything.
Trew2Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:43   #2
G36's Rule
Senior Member
 
G36's Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 14,879
What office is Tagg running for?
G36's Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:48   #3
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


Yes, that's a pro-life statement. Most people who identify themselves as 'pro-life' DO, in fact, support abortions in limited circumstances, such as immediate risk to the mother's health, serious genetic defect, rape or incest, etc.

Only the absolutists at the radical fringes of the argument believe in either "no abortions-PERIOD", or "unlimited abortion on demand, even partial birth abortions during the eighth month".

Like it or not, most of America, to include most Republicans AND Democrats, are more moderate than those at the ragged fringes.
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by tsmo1066; 10-13-2012 at 17:51..
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:49   #4
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by G36's Rule View Post
What office is Tagg running for?
Please read the article. Mitt paid for the surrogate contract.

And the language is not pro-life language.

I've said it before. Mitt is not a man of strong guiding principles.

Last edited by Jonesee; 10-13-2012 at 17:52..
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:53   #5
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post

And the language is not pro-life language.
That's your private opinion, but it isn't shared by the majority of those who identify themselves as 'pro-life'.
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:54   #6
G36's Rule
Senior Member
 
G36's Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 14,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
Please read the article. Mitt paid for the surrogate contract.

And the language is not pro-life language.

I've said it before. Mitt is not a man of strong guiding principles.
Who signed the contract?
G36's Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:55   #7
RustyL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 547
O can't use this against him if that is what you are worried about. O is good with killing a viable livable child through a botched abortion.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Trew2Life View Post
"In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents' decision."

I thought the Romney's were supposed to be pro-life? The language used in this 'Gestational Carrier Agreement' between Tagg Romney and the surrogate mother isn't 'pro-life' language.

This is the last thing the GOP nominee needs with less than a month to the election.
RustyL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 17:58   #8
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
The language is not pro-life. The centrists may accept it but no one that is part of the pro-life movement will accept. Nor would the Catholic Church.

Spin it as you wish. But the language is not pro-life.

The language specifically allows abortions.
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:02   #9
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
Mitts campaign staff did not deny it. Their stance is it was an oversight.

Last edited by Jonesee; 10-13-2012 at 18:08..
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:02   #10
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
The language is not pro-life. The centrists may accept it but no one that is part of the pro-life movement will accept. Nor would the Catholic Church.

Spin it as you wish. But the language is not pro-life.

The language specifically allows abortions.
Wrong again. 51% of all Americans identify themselves as "pro-life" (Gallup). That does not mean that 51% of all Americans agree that abortions should NEVER be acceptible, even in cases of rape, incest, serious genetic defect or immediate risk to the mother's life.

You are taking the viewpoint of pro-life ACTIVISTS and trying to extrapolate that to everyone else who opposes 'abortion on demand'. That's like taking PETA's viewpoint on animals and trying to apply it to everyone who identifies themselves as being an animal lover.
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:05   #11
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmo1066 View Post
Wrong again. 51% of all Americans identify themselves as "pro-life" (Gallup). That does not mean that 51% of all Americans agree that abortions should NEVER be acceptible, even in cases of rape, incest, serious genetic defect or immediate risk to the mother's life.

You are taking the viewpoint of pro-life ACTIVISTS and trying to extrapolate that to everyone else who opposes 'abortion on demand'. That's like taking PETA's viewpoint on animals and trying to apply it to everyone who identifies themselves as being an animal lover.

You are so wrong about me.
I am firmly pro-choice. But I work with contracts very day. The contract overrides all else and all other intentions of the parties.

The contract specifically allows abortions. That won't square with the right to lifers and the Catholics and evangelical supporters within the party.


My point is Romney does not have strong unwavering principles on key issues.

Last edited by Jonesee; 10-13-2012 at 18:07..
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:08   #12
Flying-Dutchman
Senior Member
 
Flying-Dutchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trew2Life View Post
This is the last thing the GOP nominee needs with less than a month to the election.
Thank you for your concern about Romney’s campaign but Obama is an extreme pro-abortion politician.

Mitt Romney is so squeaky clean they have to really dig to find something.

We would be in much better shape if they placed that kind of effort into Obama’s past. We cannot even get someone to leak his Columbia transcripts like Bush’s grades were leaked.

As for Abortion; 55,000,000 abortions since Roe V Wade is a disgrace but it is not a Federal issue and therefore not an issue Romney needs to address. The States should handle health and welfare.

January 1st 2013 is the fiscal cliff. We have big worries especially with do-nothing Obama.
Flying-Dutchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:09   #13
G36's Rule
Senior Member
 
G36's Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 14,879
And the contract says the family has the right to make the choice. Nothing there says they have to abort.
G36's Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:10   #14
Cali-Glock
Mountain Man
 
Cali-Glock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California Sierra Mnts
Posts: 11,767
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmo1066 View Post
Yes, that's a pro-life statement. Most people who identify themselves as 'pro-life' DO, in fact, support abortions in limited circumstances, such as immediate risk to the mother's health, serious genetic defect, rape or incest, etc.

Only the absolutists at the radical fringes of the argument believe in either "no abortions-PERIOD", or "unlimited abortion on demand, even partial birth abortions during the eighth month".

Like it or not, most of America, to include most Republicans AND Democrats, are more moderate than those at the ragged fringes.
Patently false.
__________________
1 Corinthians 2:2
I may be from Cali, but I ain't no yankee!

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one." - Mal Reynolds
Cali-Glock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:12   #15
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
You are so wrong about me.
I am firmly pro-choice. But I work with contracts very day. The contract overrides all else and all other intentions of the parties.

The contract specifically allows abortions. That won't square with the right to lifers and the Catholics and evangelical supporters within the party.


My point is Romney does not have strong unwavering principles on key issues.
The contract allows abortion in the case of serious genetic defect or abnormality.

Most "pro-life" people would agree with that stance, just as most would agree with abortion in the event of a risk to the mother's life, or in cases of rape, etc.

Being 'pro-life' doesn't mean no abortions EVER...unless you're an activist at the radical fringes of the argument. The 51% of Americans who identify as "pro-life" aren't on those radical fringes, just as the vast majority of "pro-choice" Americans do, in fact, oppose many forms of abortion, such as late-term, partial-birth abortions, etc.
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by tsmo1066; 10-13-2012 at 18:14..
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:14   #16
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali-Glock View Post
Patently false.
So you are saying that 51% of all Americans oppose abortion in ALL cases, with ZERO exceptions?

That's Malarkey (to use Joe Biden's term).
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:15   #17
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by G36's Rule View Post
And the contract says the family has the right to make the choice. Nothing there says they have to abort.
Correct. Abortion is contractually allowed. See we agree.


So an anti abortion presidential candidate paid to contract for "services" that allowed an abortion.
(as an "oversight")

And he also banned assault weapons in Mass. But really is a 2nd amendment supporter... (I know, another oversight)

And he also created the healthcare plan that Obama used as a pattern for Obamacare. (He didn't mean that either, another oversight)

He may be better than O, but..
He isn't a principled man.

Last edited by Jonesee; 10-13-2012 at 18:22..
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:17   #18
G36's Rule
Senior Member
 
G36's Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 14,879
This whole thing is asinine. Mitt didn't sign the contract, and the contract merely states a right if certain conditions are present.

Nobody but a loon would try to attach any significance to it or try to tie Mitt to it.
G36's Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:18   #19
G36's Rule
Senior Member
 
G36's Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 14,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
Correct. Abortion is contractually allowed. See we agree.
So you agree it is meaningless and not tied to Mitt?
G36's Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:25   #20
tsmo1066
Happy Smiley
 
tsmo1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 7,255


This whole smear attack is like trying to claim that someone isn't a Christian if they believe that killing is acceptible in cases of self-defense because the Ten Commandments say "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

This contract allows for abortion only under very specific circumstances - circumstances that even most people who identify themselves as 'pro-life' would agree with.

Lots of desperation and fear in this attack...but no substance.
__________________
Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. - Benjamin Franklin
tsmo1066 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:25   #21
Jonesee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by G36's Rule View Post
So you agree it is meaningless and not tied to Mitt?
The article said he paid for it.

The campaign did not deny it. They would have denied it if they could have.

I think dad helped son out, like any good businessman he wanted to make sure he was getting a quality product and put it in the contract.

I would too. Really I would.

I've stirred this GNG topic enough. I will leave it the pros here now.

Last edited by Jonesee; 10-13-2012 at 18:34..
Jonesee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:34   #22
Flying-Dutchman
Senior Member
 
Flying-Dutchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
The contract specifically allows abortions. That won't square with the right to lifers and the Catholics and evangelical supporters within the party.

My point is Romney does not have strong unwavering principles on key issues.
And Obama changed his stance on Gay Marriage.

The Rev. Billy Graham just endorsed Romney so he is OK with the Evangelicals.

The Democrats would like to distract you with the old divisive issues like Abortion while the Country crashes and burns.

Social issues are not Romney’s pet projects. He wants to fix the County.

Romney is the hardworking “grownup” who wants to fix the economy; let’s give him a chance for 4 years and see what happens. We know what is happening with Obama.
Flying-Dutchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:35   #23
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesee View Post
The language is not pro-life. The centrists may accept it but no one that is part of the pro-life movement will accept. Nor would the Catholic Church.

Spin it as you wish. But the language is not pro-life.

The language specifically allows abortions.

I know there are a lot of Catholics in the world, but really, in the grand scheme of things, what rational person joins hands with an organization that has


  • systematically created an environment where YOUNG BOYS are sexually molested for decades, maybe even centuries
  • Said it is "ok" for GAY PROSTITUTES ONLY to use condoms (current Pope)
  • For eons (and up to the later part of the 20th century) refused to apologize for putting Galileo on trial (apology issued in 1992), only about 170years after they lifted the ban on Galileo's Dialogue


I am pro-life. I don't believe in taking the lives of other people, but you can bet your bottom nut-dollar if someone is trying to take my life, or rape/kidnap my kid I have no reservations about ending theirs.

Likewise, if my unborn child had (the worst most severe form of) spina bifida, I would have few, if any reservations on terminating that pregnancy.

Fortunately, you don't speak for an entire nation, or for all conservatives, or even for all Christians.

Last edited by Gallium; 10-13-2012 at 18:35..
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:48   #24
Spiffums
I.C.P.
 
Spiffums's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,097
Most "Pro-Life" people are against abortion as a form of birth control. As a limited medical procedure, it is accessible in our modern age.

And why do you care what Mitt does? Abortion is between you and GOD. The procedure should be available and you make the choice.......and you live with the fall out from that.
__________________
Internet Celebrity Personality
Spiffums is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 18:48   #25
frank4570
Feral human
 
frank4570's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cul Va
Posts: 16,679
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmo1066 View Post
Like it or not, most of America, to include most Republicans AND Democrats, are more moderate than those at the ragged fringes.
Quoted for truth.
__________________
Fear your government.
"Rats aren't creepy, experimenting on them IS." Emilie Autumn.

For too long people have said "screw NY, IL, etc" or "that'll never happen here." Yes, it will eventually. If we dont start standing up together now, it will never stop.-ilgunguygt
frank4570 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:20.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,199
348 Members
851 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42