http://www.naral.org/elections/election-pr/pr08…

ElZagna:

i believe life began 4 billion years ago, and hasn't stopped since. conception is merely a continuation of the process. personally, i have little objection to abortion in the first two to three months, and grow more concerned further on as the central nervous system develops and response to the outside world increases. you're right about the pro-life 'exception' for rape/incest: if you follow their argument, then the conceptus is as “human” as any other embryo/fetus. i see it, basically, as a “health of the mother” issue (with the possible emotional/physical trauma involved in such situations), though i don't know what a die-hard pro-lifer would say.

Let me state at the outset that I am strongly pro-choice. So with that out of the way…

Palin's opposition to abortions “even in the case of rape or incest” is often seen as some extreme right wing position that reasonable people would reject. Even many who are pro-life / anti-abortion run from such a position, however it seems to me to be the only reasonable position to take if you are pro-life.

Those who are pro-life almost always base their position on the assumption that life begins at conception and that aborting a fetus is therefore taking the life of an innocent human being. While I don't agree with the assumption, understand the position. But here's where I have a problem: How is the life of an unborn child conceived by rape or incest any less innocent than the life of an unborn child conceived in any other way?

I realize that this is a bit off topic, but I would really like to hear what moderates think about this. I like to think that moderates are more inclined to think through a position than to rely on their group's talking points.

You might want too be sure to wipe your shoes when you leave though.

In the interim, I will dedicate myself to the same degree of critical investigative journalism as you expended and post this link that shows Palin speaking at a woman's reproductive rights organization meeting…….go figure

http://alaskaprochoice.org/

They have. That gives them license to go after Biden.

The democrats never cease to amaze me when it comes to the presidential election.

Already their is a story floating in which Biden helped his lobbyist son get money for his firm. In fact there is a whole host of smut going around on Biden and his son and the democrats fell right into the goose and gander smut slinging.

Palin has one troopergate item in a couple years……….Bidens got 33 years worth of smut floating around him. i wonder whose going to look the worst in about 6 weeks.

DLS, 2/3 of Americans support Roe v Wade. McCain would appoint judges to overturn it, Obama to leave it intact. In a democracy, the majority gets to decide. Plus, this is not a black or white issue. On the anti-abortion side, it's not homogeneous as the faux term “pro-life” would indicate, but runs the gamut from pro-sperm (anti-contraception, which is FAR from the mainstream American viewpoint), to pro-zygote (against an anti-implantation drug like RU486), to pro-fetus (favoring contraceptive choices but against abortion), to anti-late-term-abortion (restricting only “partial birth” procedures).

Plus, Palin doesn't support equal pay for women? Good luck with that anti-woman woman on the ticket. Clinton supporters are sure to flock to her, right?