Mike Pence's Solid Record of Pro-Life Creds

[roamer_1]

Reagan signed an abortion bill into law.
Facts for all.

FACT: CA was going to have abortion, with or without Reagan.

FACT: The bill Reagan signed severely limited the scope of legal abortion, in spirit, only allowing abortion in cases where the life of the mother was critically at risk. Thus the limiting of scope was by design, a hail mary attempt to prevent the wholesale slaughter which would accompany open abortion.

FACT: The bill that Reagan signed required a panel of doctors to sign off on the fact of the mothers real and immediately threatened life, thus proving it's intent toward therapeutic and necessary abortion. That the panel of doctors rubber-stamped abortions after the fact, does not nullify the intent of the law, nor Reagan's intent.

FACT: Reagan deeply regretted signing that bill - not for his intent, but rather that he didn't see the unforeseen consequences which did inevitably occur. How the law was abused directly caused both Reagan and the Pro-life movement to become adamantine against pleas toward 'life of the mother'.

FACT: Conservatives, and especially Pro-Life folks know the facts as listed above, and your sullying of Reagan's name and his intent, even if only by omission, is nothing more than a transparent and offensive attempt to raise up your candidate at the expense of Reagan and his good name.

Beware: The stench of such an attempt is long in the nostrils.

[Vulcan]

FACT: CA was going to have abortion, with or without Reagan.

FACT: The bill Reagan signed severely limited the scope of legal abortion, in spirit, only allowing abortion in cases where the life of the mother was critically at risk. Thus the limiting of scope was by design, a hail mary attempt to prevent the wholesale slaughter which would accompany open abortion.

FACT: The bill that Reagan signed required a panel of doctors to sign off on the fact of the mothers real and immediately threatened life, thus proving it's intent toward therapeutic and necessary abortion. That the panel of doctors rubber-stamped abortions after the fact, does not nullify the intent of the law, nor Reagan's intent.

FACT: Reagan deeply regretted signing that bill - not for his intent, but rather that he didn't see the unforeseen consequences which did inevitably occur. How the law was abused directly caused both Reagan and the Pro-life movement to become adamantine against pleas toward 'life of the mother'.

FACT: Conservatives, and especially Pro-Life folks know the facts as listed above, and your sullying of Reagan's name and his intent, even if only by omission, is nothing more than a transparent and offensive attempt to raise up your candidate at the expense of Reagan and his good name.

Beware: The stench of such an attempt is long in the nostrils.

We said roamer.  Those who try to draw a comparison between President Reagan and lifelong liberal Donald Trump clearly know little about either.

FACT: President Reagan signed that bill 14 years before he would become president, and as you said, he regretted it.

Lifelong liberal Donald Trump supports abortion still.




 

[Cripplecreek]

Not really concerned one way or the other with Pence. The problem is still there and Pence doesn't fix it or even slap any lipstick on it.

Plus, the last VP I voted for ended up calling me a traitor.

[roamer_1]

Not really concerned one way or the other with Pence. The problem is still there and Pence doesn't fix it or even slap any lipstick on it.

Plus, the last VP I voted for ended up calling me a traitor.

Yup. The puke sandwich now has chocolate sprinkles!
whee.

[TomSea]

Yup. The puke sandwich now has chocolate sprinkles!
whee.

The puke sandwich didn't sign into law abortion, if Cry Baby Sore Losers are saying Trump doesn't compare to Reagan,

Yeah, maybe that's so, Trump did not sign into law what many would call "murder".

I defended Romney per those who doubted his pro-life credentials and I will defend Trump, doesn't mean he was my first choice.

Sore losers who's best weapon is denigrating folks mercilessly are just trying to deny the truth per any comparison when any comparison is made between presidential candidates including between Romney  and Obama.

Get over it! Reagan signed abortion into law.

What a load, Roe v. Wade was years away and Catholic Clergymen tried to talk him out of it.

Oh, but the Donald says now he's pro-life, not signing into law abortion and he gets it.

What a riot!
Any rationale person can see that. 

[TomSea]

We said roamer.  Those who try to draw a comparison between President Reagan and lifelong liberal Donald Trump clearly know little about either.

FACT: President Reagan signed that bill 14 years before he would become president, and as you said, he regretted it.

Lifelong liberal Donald Trump supports abortion still.




 

So you say but any idiot can see that saying things on a talk show is extremely different than signing abortion into law.

But we have to couch the argument, 14 years prior now.

[TomSea]

I agree with the points, it doesn't compare,

Fact: Reagan signed abortion into the law.

Fact: Trump just talked about it on talks shows.

[roamer_1]

The puke sandwich didn't sign into law abortion [...]

But he did pay for abortions by way of his long support of Planned Parenthood and support of liberal pro-choice candidates.

Yeah, maybe that's so, Trump did not sign into law what many would call "murder".

NO ONE in their right mind would call abortion murder when the life of the mother is truly at risk.
It is no longer the sanctioning of taking a life, but rather the question of which life to take, or to let both die. In that case, the choice very legitimately lies foremost in the hands of the mother, extending to the husband and their families. Thus has always been the case.

The reason the Pro-Life movement is against a 'life of the mother' clause is because of the abuse the clause engenders - Even as 'Life of the Mother' was abused in Reagan's legislation.

[roamer_1]

Yes because liberals interpret it to include health of the mother which they then interpret to mean she is feeling sad about the pregnancy.

Right. But by the same token, it has long been held, both in romance and in fact, that among the most virtuous acts a woman can possibly do is utter the words, "Don't worry about me, save my baby!"

To have authority to say those words, she must inherently have the choice at her command.

And likewise, for the many times that things won't work out alright: No woman should be accused of murder for enduring the trauma of ending a tubal pregnancy, as a very good instance.

Genuine 'life of the mother' is where all the gray area exists. When it quits being a choice to end a life, and becomes a choice of which life to end is where the line would naturally be drawn.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I agree with the points, it doesn't compare,

Fact: Reagan signed abortion into the law.

Fact: Trump just talked about it on talks shows.

Denigrating Reagan is a crappy way to elevate Trump.

[Vulcan]

Denigrating Reagan is a crappy way to elevate Trump.

I get that, most would.   Sadly, some don't. 

Ronald Reagan was the conservative many of today's candidates wish they could be.

Lifelong liberal Donald Trump doesn't compare and never will.  So they feebly attempt to tear down Reagan. 

[Smokin Joe]

Not really concerned one way or the other with Pence. The problem is still there and Pence doesn't fix it or even slap any lipstick on it.

Plus, the last VP I voted for ended up calling me a traitor.

That is it in a nutshell. Since then, though, I realized the VP is just an understudy, waiting in the wings, without any real power to change much of anything except by casting a tiebreaker vote in the Senate.  It still has to get past the fellow in the oval office.

Unless someone has a reason to expect the death or resignation of the person at the top of the ticket, the VEEP is fundamentally irrelevant in terms of changing policy or law.

[Smokin Joe]

Right. But by the same token, it has long been held, both in romance and in fact, that among the most virtuous acts a woman can possibly do is utter the words, "Don't worry about me, save my baby!"

To have authority to say those words, she must inherently have the choice at her command.

And likewise, for the many times that things won't work out alright: No woman should be accused of murder for enduring the trauma of ending a tubal pregnancy, as a very good instance.

Genuine 'life of the mother' is where all the gray area exists. When it quits being a choice to end a life, and becomes a choice of which life to end is where the line would naturally be drawn.

Ectopic and tubal pregnancies are not going to go full term, anyway. The life of the mother IS at stake. The baby will not survive if the mother does not. At that point it is a medical procedure to salvage as many lives as possible.

[Smokin Joe]

I agree with the points, it doesn't compare,

Fact: Reagan signed abortion into the law.

Fact: Trump just talked about it on talks shows.

But Teddy Roosevelt never talked about it on talk shows. (just as relevant as pointing out Trump didn't sign it into law--neither had the opportunity. )
Trump's "outsider" status was originally touted as a 'plus'. Now we see why, he never did anything.

Therefore, the only metric we have is his stated intent. Now, if that just stabilizes enough to find out what side of an issue he is on...

 

[LilLamb]

Or one can be a Ted Cruz supporter, Cruz has never had to lead and deal with government decisions, he hasn't done nothing for the pro-life movement in realistic ways.

Pence is proven, if one is going to use some bakery story, the issue is life; Pence towers over any of the others in this.

Side with the baby killing left, if people must.

We don't know how Trump will govern, we know the Veep has a proven track record, way better than Ted Cruz's which is just words.

While Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas he -
Authored an amicus brief for 13 states, successfully defending the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. The ban was upheld 5-4 before the U.S. Supreme Court;

Authored an amicus brief for 18 states, successfully defending the New Hampshire parental notification law. The law was upheld 9-0 before the U.S. Supreme Court [note: this brief was awarded the Best Brief Award from the National Association of Attorneys General for U.S. Supreme Court briefs written in 2005-06];

Successfully defended Texas's Rider 8, which prohibits state funds for groups that provide abortions, winning unanimously before the Fifth Circuit court of appeals.

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Senate/Texas/Ted_Cruz/Views/Abortion/

[LilLamb]

This thread has gotten me so angry I can't go to sleep. We just keep going down this same road with Trump supporters, misrepresent and belittle two honorable men, Ronald Reagan and Ted Cruz. That is how you get Trump elected in their playbook. We have to tear them apart to build Trump up. It sickens me.

[GtHawk]

You point out my words while someone who calls anyone who votes for Trump a fool or a sucker.

I still will not regress to name-calling like you calling me a jerk but have it your way.

Now tell you what Pence is going to do?

If Pence is elected, Planned Parenthood will be defunded. The Pro-Life movement takes baby steps, clinics closed down, states putting laws into effect and so on, decreasing abortion, etc. Those who don't know the pro-life movement seem to expect a magic wand to be waved and all abortions made illegal.

Sorry but I see this as wishful thinking at best, unless you think that a President Trump has any more right to rule by decree than obozo. Even if Trump is elected, and even if somehow he does try to see PP defunded, it is still Congress that holds the purse strings no? I would bet dollars to donuts that :
A. The Republicans will not hold on to a majority if Trump is elected.
B. There wouldn't be a majority of Republicans with the cajones to vote to defund it.
C. The Supreme Court, I doubt any liberal would retire under a Trump presidency, and with only one hopefully Conservative appointment(if he doesn't nominate his sister) would nullify any defunding.
I expect nothing from a Trump Presidency other than disappointment as he practices his art of the deal trading away the Conservative advantage just like everyone since Reagan has! You point out that Trump doesn't have a political record, but what he does have is an ethical record and that's what so many CONSERVATIVES judge him by, his deeds, not his political promises.

[Vulcan]

But we have to couch the argument, 14 years prior now.

14 years before he became president is relevant.  At the time Reagan was elected he was staunchly opposed.

Conversely, lifelong liberal Donald Trump supports it still and is asking for pro-lifers' votes in spite of it.

Sadly, there are those like you who are willing to cede to his request.

You're supporting a pro-abortion candidate while boasting that his VP pick is not.

[GtHawk]

While Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas he -
Authored an amicus brief for 13 states, successfully defending the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. The ban was upheld 5-4 before the U.S. Supreme Court;

Authored an amicus brief for 18 states, successfully defending the New Hampshire parental notification law. The law was upheld 9-0 before the U.S. Supreme Court [note: this brief was awarded the Best Brief Award from the National Association of Attorneys General for U.S. Supreme Court briefs written in 2005-06];

Successfully defended Texas's Rider 8, which prohibits state funds for groups that provide abortions, winning unanimously before the Fifth Circuit court of appeals.

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Senate/Texas/Ted_Cruz/Views/Abortion/

You can't talk facts with faithful, if someone responds with facts they plug their ears and go lalalalalalalalalalalala, and then repeat the same talking points ad infinitum. How many times have you read the Reagan comparison, or the Cruz? If Trump says it, it is the truth and good and rightno matter how ridiculous and patently false. I saw this first with the Kennedys, then got sucked into it myself with the governator in California(oh how he screwed us), I watched the democrat sheeple worship bathhouse barry, and now I see people whom I would have considered intelligent and rational exhibit the same fawning, unquestioning worship of Trump. I get it to a degree, after eight years of Lord Foul people want to be winners, want America to be strong and strike back at the insults from the world. But Trump aint that guy, he may not have a personal political record(but he sure knows how to be a politician), but he certainly has an ethical record that we can see, and that record says he will always put himself and his glory above all else, and no matter how hard his supporters try to cajole, or shame me into voting for him it isn't going to happen, that's why I came here from TOS.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

This thread has gotten me so angry I can't go to sleep. We just keep going down this same road with Trump supporters, misrepresent and belittle two honorable men, Ronald Reagan and Ted Cruz. That is how you get Trump elected in their playbook. We have to tear them apart to build Trump up. It sickens me.

IKR! and on this issue?  Trump says planned parenthood does wonderful things and abortion is just a small part of what they do.  That small part is butchering babies and selling their parts for money.

First-it's damn lie.
Second-that's like saying aside from the murders and rapes Ted Bundy helped a lot of people at the suicide hotline.  John Wayne Gayce entertained hundreds of children as a clown.  What ever good a psychopath does is a footnote to the crimes, and PP has the blood of millions on its hands.  It is quite possible they have exterminated more people than the Nazis and Stalin combined since RvW.

and to turn it around and say Trump detractors are siding with PP, and Reagan is complicit is flipping sick.

We should all be angry that the GOP voters have left us this Pro-Choice No-Choice Sophie's-Choice

[musiclady]

Denigrating Reagan is a crappy way to elevate Trump.

Continuing to do it after the facts have been clearly presented is morally abhorrent, IMO.

This is desperation turned vile.

I wonder if he actually thinks that continuing to repeat the same false parallel with Reagan really helps his Trump cause.

There is something sick going on here.....

[musiclady]

This thread has gotten me so angry I can't go to sleep. We just keep going down this same road with Trump supporters, misrepresent and belittle two honorable men, Ronald Reagan and Ted Cruz. That is how you get Trump elected in their playbook. We have to tear them apart to build Trump up. It sickens me.

But it does make you understand how desperate they are.  They continue to denigrate and deceive about both Cruz and Reagan in a vain attempt to make their corrupt and degenerate candidate seem somehow better.

All it does is make them look bad.   But the truth always wins out in the end.

And lies about Reagan will fall into the ash heap of history, while the truth about him remains.   

But it is a sorry situation that on a conservative website, that anyone's goal is to smear Ronald Reagan to support his avidly pro-abortion candidate.

We shouldn't have to put up with this garbage.

[TomSea]

IKR! and on this issue?  Trump says planned parenthood does wonderful things and abortion is just a small part of what they do.  That small part is butchering babies and selling their parts for money.

First-it's damn lie.
Second-that's like saying aside from the murders and rapes Ted Bundy helped a lot of people at the suicide hotline.  John Wayne Gayce entertained hundreds of children as a clown.  What ever good a psychopath does is a footnote to the crimes, and PP has the blood of millions on its hands.  It is quite possible they have exterminated more people than the Nazis and Stalin combined since RvW.

and to turn it around and say Trump detractors are siding with PP, and Reagan is complicit is flipping sick.

We should all be angry that the GOP voters have left us this Pro-Choice No-Choice Sophie's-Choice

And Trump made it clear, Planned Parenthood would never perform any more abortions.

Nonetheless, where personal attacks and being selective with what Trump said is occurring, to merely point out that Planned Parenthood is against Trump just like the severe detractors here who name call with such words as "vomit sandwich" are both "against Trump" is stating a fact.

[TomSea]

Presidential candidates are compared, Bernie to Hillary,  Cruz to Trump.  Cruz to Walker. That's how people make up their minds.

Those who don't want Reagan's record on life issues as Governor of California to be discussed and rant at others "how dare one compare Trump to Reagan" just have crappy arguments that don't hold up.

Politicians are compared all the time.

[TomSea]

While Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas he -
Authored an amicus brief for 13 states, successfully defending the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. The ban was upheld 5-4 before the U.S. Supreme Court;

Authored an amicus brief for 18 states, successfully defending the New Hampshire parental notification law. The law was upheld 9-0 before the U.S. Supreme Court [note: this brief was awarded the Best Brief Award from the National Association of Attorneys General for U.S. Supreme Court briefs written in 2005-06];

Successfully defended Texas's Rider 8, which prohibits state funds for groups that provide abortions, winning unanimously before the Fifth Circuit court of appeals.

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Senate/Texas/Ted_Cruz/Views/Abortion/

Cruz has to defend some of these cases as was part of his job as solicitor general, a worker for the government. Not because he was elected to do so by his constituents.

If we are saying Cruz did the above as a government worker, then we can't let him back out on his statements per immigration under Bush.

In 1999 Memo, Ted Cruz Took Milder Tone on Immigration
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/19/us/politics/in-1999-memo-ted-cruz-took-milder-tone-on-immigration.html?_r=0