Reply #22: I don't have one. [View All]

[ventvon]

Most people don't believe anything until they see it.

Like Albert Einstein said, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former."

Most people in this country actually want the option to have a "safe" abortion available. Democrats are so caught up in intellectualism and policy, that they fail to see things in the simple terms, and so they go over the heads of most people in this country, because most people are simpleminded.

Ain't that right Frank? “There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.” – Frank Zappa

So, democrats need to talk more often about the fact that the country is split 50/50 on abortions. The problem for Democrats is that the opposing forces are more mobilized, organized, and determine to end "safe" abortions, because making them illegal will not stop them from occuring.

There will just be more "unsafe" abortions occuring.

Whenever there is a discussion of abortions, pro-choice people need to discuss history. What it was like before Roe v. Wade and how outlawing abortions would bring back the days of women dying in the allies. Democrats need to talk about "personal responsibility," and also hijack the promotion of abstinence as a method of preventing unwanted pregnacies instead of just pushing condoms. That would win you the support of a lot of Christians right there.

If anyone thinks it's stupid to promote responsible behavior, then they don't have a clue what it takes to win votes, or what it means to be pro-choice. There's nothing wrong with an informed and responsible choice.

Being pro-choice will not sell to anti-abortion people if they see the people who are making the choices as being "irresponsible" because they will see them as making the "wrong" choice. Making an irresponsible choice.

So, if Roe v. Wade is overturned, the horror of the results of it will probably eventually get it overturned again (then it will be legal again), but Democrats need to change their argument.

If one side is "anti-abortion", anti-the practice, then you being "pro-choice" is irrelevant to them because they are anti-"abortion" so if anyone chooses to have an "abortion" that's not a worthy decision on their part.

So, you have to compromise, meaning you have to show that you want to prevent abortions, not simply promoting the choice to have one anytime they get ready.

You do that by fiercely promoting abstinence as a means of creating a responsible society with less unwanted pregnacies, which means less abortions. This "shift in the discussion" is a pro-stable-families theme. If you don't support the teaching of abstinence as a way of taking the focus off of "abortions", then never go into politics, you don't have a future there.