As I have said on NUMEROUS occasions, there are ways to get what you want in the social scheme of things, and this continual parade in front of judges is not it. Try winning elections. It’s called social EVOLUTION versus social REVOLUTION. Evolution is a one way road. Revolutions always come back around. As long as the voting populace has had the option of VOTING for or against a topic, they are far more likely (lefties excepted) to accept the outcome. The people of this country absolutely HATE being dictated to by a bunch of unelected people with lifetime appointments.

————————

Reproductive Freedom is defined by the action of a woman freely choosing to have an abortion, and then getting it done in a regulated clinical environment.

Today, that is a daily reality for hundreds, if not thousands of women in America – thanks to Roe vs Wade and the protections that followed.

If the abortion procedures were to lose legal protections from the Federal Government, it is entirely possible that there will eventually be women in many states who would no longer be able to legaly aquire an abortion.

And yes, massive civil disobediance would be highly possible in the unlikely banning of abortion nationwide. I see no other way for women to protest the lose of their right to reproductive freedom.

Maybe, to get their point across better, they would perform the procedure themselves with coat hangers in the offices of politicans and in the churches.

Modern day sit-ins, so-to-speak.

No- that is a fallacy of logic. He supports who ever he votes for not whoever wins the election that he doesn’t vote for. If I abstain my vote, then who do I support?

No one- because they are all crooks and liars.

“Now regarding abortion, there would be riots in the street and massive scale civil disobediance all over the nation if a womans reproductive freedom was taken away.”

Pure idiocy. There would be no civil unrest, because America is so complacent it doesn’t even care to vote let alone protest. Sure, you’d get a speed bump about it in the history books as a few extremist radical groups would protest, but other than that you’d get Jack.

Just a note- you should study up on Roe v. Wade, as it does absolutely nothing to insure “reproductive rights”. (what ever that gob smacked politically charged bullshit term is supposed to mean).

“I believe that a H.Clinton presidency would revive the Religious Right and would energize the Right in ways not seen in over a decade.”

Yes, and that spells trouble for your side because they are an abject failure of both policy and strategy. They don’t win because of what they do, they only win when the other side allows them to do so.

Yes, the Democrats and Republicans- proof that the laws of physics aren’t absolute as they can both blow and suck at the same time.

It’s possible that the some in the Far Right might forfit this election with that purpose in mind.

Now regarding abortion, there would be riots in the street and massive scale civil disobediance all over the nation if a womans reproductive freedom was taken away.

It’s just not going to happen.

The current status quo is advantagous to all sides on the political spectrum. The Right uses anti-abortion rhetoric to get anti-abortion voters to elect their guy or gal. The Left uses the situation to recruit their own voters to retain the womans right.

Nothing is going to change. Why do you think it’s gone on like this for so long? Both sides political power-brokers love keeping the issue alive.

My mom and her friends are my link to the religious far-right. She’s one of those hardcore “born-again” christians and does not support Guiliani in any way and would rather vote 3rd party or just might leave that question black on the ballot.

How is it that all of us that oppose abortion would all of a sudden support it? Why on earth would we quit fighting against legalized murder of innocent babies?

It sounds to me like he is trying to stay relevant…

No, he isn’t. He is looking to support a third party pro-life candidate. Just because he doesn’t support a Republican candidate does not mean he supports a Democratic candidate by default.

He did say that he fears that if Guiliani or one of the other three got into office, he was afraid that the pro life position would fizzle and die. As a result, he said that if Hillary won the likely outcome would be the pro-life movement would be energized against her.This is no way means he supports Hillary though.