Jump to content

John McCain wants to overturn Roe v. Wade


Q Steph

Recommended Posts

  • Members

SPARTANBURG, S.C. (Feb. 19) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain , looking to improve his standing with the party's conservative voters, said Sunday the court decision that legalized abortion should be overturned.

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned," the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.

McCain also vowed that if elected, he would appoint judges who "strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States and do not legislate from the bench."

The landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade gave women the right to choose an abortion to terminate a pregnancy. The Supreme Court has narrowly upheld the decision, with the presence of an increasing number of more conservative justices on the court raising the possibility that abortion rights would be limited.

Social conservatives are a critical voting bloc in the GOP presidential primaries.

McCain's campaign also announced early Sunday that he had been endorsed by former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, who had been considering his own bid for the White House, and former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, who failed in his bid for the Republican nomination in 1996.

Keating told the crowd that McCain is the "only candidate who is a true-blue, Ronald Reagan conservative."

McCain was scheduled to attend a rally promoting an abstinence program Sunday evening.

McCain has strong name recognition and the largest network of supporters in South Carolina. That backing comes in part from his staunch support for the Iraq war, something on which he focused a day earlier in Iowa. But it's the same state that dealt a crushing blow to his presidential aspirations in 2000.

McCain is trying to build support among conservatives after a recent rebuke from Christian leader James Dobson, who said he wouldn't back McCain's presidential bid. Conservatives question McCain's opposition to a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He opposes same-sex marriage, but says it should be regulated by the states.

It's one matter if someone does not agree with abortion but I'm so sick of bastards like him deciding for everyone! McCain will never know what it is like to be a woman and faced the struggles of a pregnancy. Granted, men should have a say in the decision if it is their child, but ultimately it is a woman's body and therefore her choice. At one point, I considered him as someone I could vote for despite my Democratic allegiance. Never. I'll leave this country before I have to subject myself to the will of neo-conservatists who think their interpretation of "God said so" is gospel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I really don't want to get into a political debate here, but this is just one more reason for me to like McCain. In my opinion, the only time abortion should be legal is if the woman has been raped. Otherwise, it's my opinion that if you believe you're responsible enough to have sex, then you should be responsible for the consequences. Again, that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

He's just trolling to the extreme conservatives and religious radicals for votes.

Is abortion really that much of an epidemic in America? It seems to me that most women are choosing to carry their babies and raise them, despite how they were conceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just another man deciding what women should do with their bodies.

Abortion is not for me and I lose total respect for people who use it as a method of birth control, but it's not my desicion to make for anyone else. And I can't imagine us going back to those awful black-market dirty backroom abortions (I have a highly personal aversion to this)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love how men think they should decide what a woman can do with her body. :rolleyes:

Abortion is not as big of a problem as ultra-conservatives make it out to be. 1. Over 80% of women are on some type of birth control and 2. most women who want abortions can't even get them, whether due to financial reasons or restrictions set by the state.

I understand why people are against abortion. Their reasons are completely valid, so I'm not attacking anti-abortion advocates. I've never had an abortion, but have had 2 pregnancy scares before and the thought of having to have an abortion crossed my mind (and to be honest, it scared the hell out of me b/c if I had been pregnant, I would definitely have had an abortion.) I've also had friends who have had them, and trust me, they are not simple solutions. Having an abortion is a last choice. It's an operation and can have serious side-effects and complications.

All I'm saying is that if Roe v. Wade is ever going to be overturned, it would put a lot of women's health at risk. Just b/c it's illegal doesn't mean that women are going to find ways to have abortions. Only, instead of being in hospitals and under the care of doctors and nurses, they're going to be in unsanitary conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I like McCain but this just SCREAMS politics for me. He's pandering to the neo-conservatives (aka the Religious Right). I doubt there's much validity to what he's saying and that anything regarding Roe vs Wade would change if he became president.

I really don't like that he's doing this though. The one thing I've always liked about McCain is that he tells it like he is. If he continues with this pandering nonsense, I may end up turned off completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My feeling is if a woman can decide to terminate a pregnancy without the fathers approval, then a father should not be forced to pay for a child he did not want in the first place.

If a woman can term a pregnancy when the man wants the child, then a woman should have no claims to the mans finances should he NOT want the child.

Enough with the double standard already.

I understand its a womans body...but it takes two to tango. I am not saying abortion should be outlawed because I do not think it should be, but I am saying more thought needs to be put into ALL aspects of the situation, NOT just the side of the mother.

And I do not think it is wrong for people to be for or against it and I think it is pretty sad that peoples religous beliefs are called into question because of how they feel, whether they are for or against it.

I do believe it is a choice, but it should be a choice that BOTH in the situation help decide.

Call me stupid, but I think that is fair. This uborn...whatever you want to call it (we were all "it" to and we are humans) should be given a chance if a parent wants to raise it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can't believe I'm saying this but I totally agree with you on that point kwing. I've always felt that the man should have at least some say on what happens. It's not right that they can be totally shut out if the woman chooses to terminate, but if the woman decides to keep it, then they have no other choice BUT to be involved. Of course they should be involved and help financially support their child, I do not quibble there. But they also should have at least a little bit of say in whether the fetus that is 1/2 made up of their DNA gets the opportunity to develop into a full-grown, healthy baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Your last paragraph convinces me that Roe vs. Wade probably won't be overturned for a while, because of the threat of resorting to back alley abortions.

I think the ultra-conservatives and the religious fanatics should be worried more about the unwanted kids languishing in foster care, waiting to be adopted, or worse, in abusive foster parent situations. We need to be concerned about the children already here than the ones who aren't yet. Too many kids in this country are not having the life they deserve, but do you see anti-abortionists speaking up for them, worried about their rights?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I bet he'll be showing up spouting that message on ABC soon. AMC will probably have him on to "preach" to us soon too. :rolleyes: I'm not going to say a word. But you can all thank AMC for making this subject my passion. As long as their is breath in my body, Roe will not go down with a fight. It's already become my passion, and my cause. :D My body is my body, and no man in Washington who doesn't give a damn about me or why I choose to do what I want with my body, is going to tell what decision I must make about my body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm personally pro-choice, because just beign pregnant is not enough of a reason to brign a child into this world. I see too many bad situations for kids to think anything else.

McCain's never had my vote. Guess that's not changing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • As always, really interesting to get your impressions! I was only watching sporadically during this period (whereas I was transfixed during the Marian storyline), but if I remember correctly 1996 was a pretty rough transitional year. It came at a period where P&G was playing musical chairs with its executive producers--ATWT was hit especially hard by this. The current executive producer, Michael Laibson, is out in November 1996, replaced by Paul Rauch, who stays for nearly 6 years. While Rauch has a few really bad ideas that cause long-term damage to the show, those don't really kick in until 1999, and his first couple of years are very strong. So once you get to 1997, you should see the show rebound significantly. 
    • Haha love a little drunk posting

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I’m up to April 01, 1996. I think I’m starting to understand what many have said.. things are different. I miss the community vibe of Springfield, when you had people working at the hectic newspaper, the choatic diner, the rich were coming in for coffee, or the TV network was abuzz about the latest scandal. Things have become a little more tunneled into their own storylines. Right now, for me anyway, there isn’t a strong desire to see what happens next, ever since the Brent/Marian story ended. It was a darker, more suspenseful storyline that really got me intrigued and waiting to see what happens next, while everything else was just a nice view of midwestern families living their dramatic lives. And I love that too, when the characters and storytelling is strong, but right now, some things are a little stale. In these last 5 weeks, we had two bigger events: Nick and Susan’s wedding:  it was sweet, but I really found it weird they played music over their vows instead of being able to hear them. Then, they leave town immediately after and for good? We really didn’t get a ton of time with them - one minute Susan is in a hospital bed, post-coma, celebrating the new year, and now she’s married and gone. I’m having a hard time with the revolving door of characters since my early ’95 watch. This year we’ve lost so many characters, gained so many characters, and to what end? Henry’s funeral:  this was so sad, considering the real actor passed. I’m curious what other fans thought about the funeral. Granted, when an actor passes, you don’t have much time to plan ahead, so you need to insert it into whatever storylines are happening at the time.  But sadly, this funeral happened when everyone was hating each other. Vanessa was upset with Matt because the Amanda secret came out and he kept it from her. Quint showed up, with his very young affair no less, which made both Nola and J upset. Amanda was there which upset both Blake and Ross. Roger insisted he give a speech which upset everyone. Vanessa was mad at Quint for bringing his young girlfriend, and then Dinah was so upset about her grandfather, which was emotional, but everyone is currently at odds with Dinah. The flashbacks were effective, and the most emotional scene was Vanessa’s breakdown when reading Henry’s letter to her.  Otherwise, it was a pretty hateful funeral, which felt icky. Otherwise, my quick pros and cons currently happening… Pros: Alex and Hawk are great and funny. He gets under her skin and it’s hilarious to watch her react, but she needs him. They were in LA trying to get dirt on Amanda’s former life and Hawk was living it up with young gorgeous women and all the spending money at his disposal.  Generally, the Amanda and her secret storyline is interesting and I really like the actress. Alex vs. Amanda is entertaining. Tina came onto the scene around the time Nadine died, but she’s been given a backstory which is interesting to me now. She’s a prostitute, who means well, and is trying to take care of her daughter, Dahlia. She grew up with Frank, who has a soft spot for her. Marcus, in a new storyline he desperately needed away from Dinah and his dad, has taken a strong liking to Dahlia. She sings well and he plays saxophone well, so their music is endearing. Sadly, Tina got involved in a robbery gone-bad, where they held up a Spaulding board of directors meeting. She flees, but Frank catches her outside and is forced to arrest her, while Cleary (she’s back!) arrests the main bad guy involved and saves the Spaulding family. I’m curious to see where this one goes, but curious, was Tina actually on the show before this or is she a brand new character? Cons: The Dinah/Hart/Roger storyline is pretty stale now. I need something new. Lucy and Alan-Michael are barely on since Brent left, which is sad. You spend an entire year on a storyline that builds their relationship, brings strife and wedges, and now that they’re finally able to be together in love with no obstacles, you never show them? I want to see them happy! Oh and Lucy and Bridget/David haven't had a scene since Marian tried to get 'a room at the boarding house, which is weird because we haven't seen Bridget react to Lucy being alive. I don't even know if Lucy even lives at the boarding house or with AM, but it's sad pretending like Lucy/Bridget/David were never close friends. Reva/Josh, which is hogging airtime, is a serious whiplash. One week Josh loves her, she hates him; the next week, she loves him, he hates her. He’s always lying to Annie, but now he’s marrying her again, the second wedding in 4 months. I’m also very tired of Marah, her angst over everything, and their overwhelming concern over her. As much as I don’t like Buzz, it is funny watching Reva work at the diner, but I’ll never side with Alan so watching him have feelings about Reva/Buzz or Reva/Josh does nothing for me. Finally, the other small B storylines are only on like once a week which isn’t enough:  Gilly/Griffin/Viviane, Michelle/J, Blake/Ross/Rick, Rick/Abby, Holly/Fletcher and the baby. Something that just popped up out of the blue is David Grant leaving Springfield out of nowhere. He professed his love to Bridget, who turned him down, so he decides to leave when Griffin gives him a job opportunity. Sadly, another character written out for many new characters being introduced. Makes me wonder who is making these calls - the producers, the network, the writers, the fans?
    • OH. The AMC/OLTL Crossover with helicopter, down in the woods, 2 very pregnant, both give birth, only one baby lives. We are on the same page!!!
    • Backtracking because BTG has been distracting me from keeping up with GH. Why is Carly always involved with a paternity lie? Lulu is Dante's (wife? if Im correct) so she has the right to tell him about his son. If anything, she's in a better place to reveal paternity drama than Robin was. As for Robin...I'm conflicted about whether it was HER place to tell AJ he was Michael's dad. Being with a man who's pretending to be someone else's baby daddy is wild. Dante was snoring blaming everyone  but Rocco, however he was right about Jason. A convo isn't enough, neither is trying to be your son's friend. Adolescents need a disciplinarian. At least Lulu made Rocco and Danny scrub the house. 
    • May 2025: Stephanie Sloane interviews Kirsten Storms about all of Maxie's romances in the past 20 years: https://www.swooon.com/gallery/general-hospital-maxie-romances-spinelli-johnny-nathan-kirsten-storms/
    • I saw a new BTG promo during Watson tonight (Sunday May 11).   I don't remember what I saw (and I wouldn't say here on the nonspoiler thread anyhow). I know only that it was different from the "next on BTG" preview at the end of Friday's episode. If anyone catches the new promo, please post it on the spoiler thread.
    • I hope GH gives Lesley an on screen memorial I'd love to have Scott, Robert, Holly, Rose Kelly, Mike Webber, Blackie Parish  & Claudia Phillips return for the episodes
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy