Adam

Fighting for what you believe in is never wrong.

I agree with you- I think he is a good person and his only failure in this case was eloquence. As someone who has trouble gettibng across the thought "The sky is blue", I can't attack him for that. Well stated. I believe that it starts somewhere in between, but our primitive science has no way of determining when it begins and that renders opinions meaningless speculation. I will not condemn either side for their meaningless speculation, unless they try to force it on others. I hope we never find out.......

No, making things up, when you don't have an answer, then faking that you are right, is cowardly and weak. It takes a heck of a lot more guts, to admit that you don't know. And the fact is that nobody knows, and never will know.

Not really. It is analytical. Neither side can prove their point scientifically, that's why they really can't condemn the other side, as they wish to. I am not for abortion, but I don't think making it illegal is the right way to go. OK, it seemed that way. I think abortion is used too often by lazy people who didn't take care of business as they should have beforehand. Problem is that if you create a law, you need to create too many loopholes. I admit that I don't really know the difference between agnostic and athiest, but I laugh at the crazed religous zealots who mock them- I find that kind of ironic. Not really. I choose to look at things analytically, instead of emotionally. Yelling and screaming at the other side seldom resolves an issue.

Point one- couldn't agree more. Point two- also agreed, and I think time as president has pushed him more that way. Point three- Disagree- politics in general suck, they are the art of fooling people. There is no such thing as evil Point four- neither is really that bad Point five- Yes. Point six- good Point seven- true. Money is an advantage, but so is a vote

I didn't see anywhere that I stated I was pro abortion, nor did I see a spot where I was name calling. You can't prove that it is a human life, and at what point it becomes one.

Sorry, it does not meet the definition of a hate crime, and I can't see any situation with an abortion where hate is involved. You could easily argue lack of respect for human life, but not hate.

Um, no.

I would accept him walking off the screen and retaking the presidency as a happy ending.

Start celebrating early that week- its a win/win proposition.

I would prefer Mayan 12/21/12

I can't wait until this election is over so the stupidity we are hearing now dies down. The current state of the country: "We did build that"- the American people. After the election is over, I will have to see that upcoming Lincoln movie. It is a shame that we don't want to create politicians like that anymore.

Very true, and with social media, it actually is crazier than 24/7 at times.

Both sides may do it, but it doesn't make it right- to me, it doesn't justify it, it makes it get progressively worse over time. The Romney tax thing makes me sick.

Fixed- and I wish it WOULD BE fixed!

Notice that Geico has removed those commercials?

Show me proof of when human life starts.

Agreed on that point- you summed up what both sides do to prove their point, perfectly. On that note, I am calling it a night. Tomorrow is going to be a loooong day........

Believe is one thing, fact is another. Neither side has facts. Believe is very dangerous There is no potential life to have the faux debate about with the vasectomy.

Although there is an issue I have with people on both sides wanting government interference on what they want, then they slander the other side for what they want the government to do, there is some real hypocrisy elsewhere in this issue. Both sides are just so insistent on when life begins, they feel that their lack of knowledge is somehow better than somebody else's lack of knowledge. The billboard I brought up (which I guess is supposed to be anti abortion) is an example of the debate being taken way too far. Those people are clearly fundamentalists who don't want to engage in discussion, they just want the government to asserts their will on others. I get what you are saying, but I don't think the situations equate.

Not really. Neither side can prove when life begins- we have no comprehension of that. I can't argue or refute either side, and I know that- I would just be BSing my way through it, like everyone else does. As far as hypocrisy, I grow tired of that word, we are all hypocrites, although some refuse to admit it. Whether for altruistic reasons or selfish reasons, we all adjust what we do.

I am as anti abortion as the next guy, but it is impossible for it to be murder. There is no proof of when life starts. Whether you want big government involved in subsidizing social issues, or spending everything on the military (and I think you know, I don't actually mean YOU), you are bringing the country to ruin. Do you have an opinion on that billboard I posted about, several days ago? No. And I don't even think punishment is the correct term for it. Removing someone who is a danger to others isn't punitive.

What she needs is for big government to step in and prevent the abortion. If they leave that decision to her, she will make the wrong one, apparently.

WWE

I just saw bits and pieces on the internet. No context or anything (although I can't imagine a context that would justify that). I hate to see a primary winner bow out and someone who didn't get the vote, on the ballot.