Why voting for Hillary is Evil and Ungodly at any Cost

Obviously.

 

See I was with you until you said this because the same thing applies to Donald Trump and his wickedness. The single greatest evil of our day remains what it's been always: the rejection of Christ and people thinking they don't need Him.

We cannot place our rankings over God's.

 

You can't if abortion is the ONLY thing you consider.

If you are pro-life (both born and unborn), there are more issues to consider.

Sure, if you live in a binary universe where unborn children are the only persons of value and born persons are irrelevant.

Nice callback to where I let you win yesterday - the issue yesterday is that the message coming out of Trump's campaign was contradictory. It's an assessment that those of us in the communications and marketing field would make about a candidate's "brand" or message, not a strict philosophical definition.

You were obviously going to seize upon the technical philosophical definition of the word and refuse to comprehend the point I was actually making, so I let you have it so we could actually move on to relevant discussion.

 

I was shocked at her flippant response as to why Roe v. Wade should not be reversed.

"We have come too far to have that turn back now."

Translation: "We have killed too many babies we might as well keep doing it, even up to the day before they were born."

 

I abhor abortion. But I thought she said also that she doesn't believe that the government should be making these decisions, and that it's something that the woman and her family should be deciding.

My POV on this is that a lot of conservatives readily don't want the government to interfere with their right to bear arms. But they can't seem to visualize why a woman might not want the government telling her what she can do with her body.

There are a lot of parents who don't want to be told that they have to immunize their children or that they have to get certain viral shots for their daughters because they believe that issues of health should be between them and their families and not the government's dictating.

But then again, she can't have it both ways. You can't mandate that I have to have health insurance and then pick and choose when you think it's government overreach to mandate something else like no abortions.

 

I don't want to have the abortion debate, but let me make some quick points:

1. In today's day and age, we all know where babies come from. If a woman gets pregnant there is no excuse for it. She and the father need to accept the personal responsibility. If the government says you can't abort the baby that is a part of taking responsibility of your actions. (I don't know why this needs to be explained.)

2. Scientific knowledge about keeping premature babies alive is progressing rapidly. They can be saved at an earlier and earlier age. This should make all abortions abhorrent, but especially partial birth abortions.

3. The Declaration of Independence guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In light of #2, the developing fetus is LIFE, and therefore should be afforded the same protections as a baby out of the womb. Therefore, the woman DOES NOT have the right to make the decision to end another person's life, just as a person does not have the right to murder someone.

 

In normal elections, it is a deal breaker for me as well. This is not a normal election.

Maybe you have, but I have not.

The likelihood that a Republican nominating Supreme Court Justices overturning Roe v. Wade is extremely low. Republican nominees (when they were a majority of the Court) have had several opportunities to overturn Roe v. Wade over the years. They have not.

It would hope that it will change, but even an overturn of Roe v. Wade will not stop abortion. It takes a comprehensive plan.

Yes, I agree. But I'm sure you will say that I don't.

You don't understand my reasons? Fine. But I am considering a huge number of factors in this election to which I am steadfastly opposed to Mr. Trump. Don't confuse your inability to understand my reasoning as some sort of contradiction on my part.

The Bill of Rights is not just a political issue either.

 

That's quite childish to keep throwing back the same refuted accusation.

I will attempt to bow out of this accusational thread with this statement:

There are people who are strongly pro-life who will cast a vote against Mr. Trump toward the person most likely to stop him - Ms. Clinton. Doing so is not a statement of approval for her position on abortion. These same people with continue working within political, legal, social, religious and moral realms with the goal of ending abortion.

Those who disagree with that position are entitled to their opinion and are free to express their views.

On the Day of Judgement, all will be revealed and everything will be taken into account by the Righteous One Who looks at things from a comprehensive view and knows the thoughts and intentions of all. He will judge righteously.

I have conferred extensively with that Judge prior to writing this post, and I am satisfied that I am responding in faith to the calling I have been given. I entrust myself to that Judge and am convinced that I have nothing to fear from Him, although some unappointed lesser judges who, at present, strongly disagree with my position and may well continue their written missives against me. They will also face the Righteous One and need to feel confident that they are acting in an appropriate manner.

 

If those 30 or 40 million aborted babies were alive today, most of them would be from backgrounds more likely to vote for the Xitch. So, if about half would be old enough and otherwise eligible, hat would add about 6 million more votes for her, and 3 or 4 million for Trump. Quite an irony-- more babies born alive means more support for abortion..

 

The problem with voting for Hillary despite being pro-life is that she will appoint justices that could overturn the ban on partial-birth abortions. It was decided by a hair, 5 to 4, and her appointee could overturn it.

Hillary acted like she was "pro-choice" until at least the moment of birth - for the life and health "of the mother". RvW is more famous, but Doe was decided the same day and it did allow for abortion throughout the pregnancy for any reason. This country has the most liberal abortion laws in the first world.

During the debate, she indicated support for partial-birth abortion and PP. Keeping government out of the abortion business then expecting the taxpayers to fund PP some more needs to stop. She is an extremist on this issue and made no bones about during that last debate.