Liberal Party makes support for decapitating babies mandatory

This entry was posted in Fake conservatism, Left-wing extremism, State politics. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Liberal Party makes support for decapitating babies mandatory

  1. Not Trampis says:

    This is par for the course.
    Being anti-abortion is not popular and so loses votes.

    Until people realise this and they to change it it will be always thus.

  2. Boambee John says:

    Non Mentis

    You seem to be remarkably – relaxed – about the whole abortion issue.

    Which bits do you like most? The full term abortion of a healthy baby? The “lifestyle” abortions of the inconvenient results of laziness or carelessness? The “lifestyle”(or is that cultural) preferential abortion of female babies? Or the partisan belief that the abortion issue brings in votes for the so-called “progressive” left?

  3. Bluey says:

    God forbid someone in either party stand up for something they claim to believe in.

  4. Cassie of Sydney says:

    How long before the practice of Christianity is banned in the state of Victoria? And watch the Victorian Liberals support the banning.

  5. C.L. says:

    Matthew Guy will decide who prays in Victoria – and the circumstances under which they pray.

  6. Not Trampis says:

    Only a primary school drop out would say that.

    I can think of three reasons for an abortion. A woman who has been raped, incest is involved and where the unborn child is attacking the mother and must be put down otherwise the mother will die.
    women having abortions for lifestyle reasons is appalling.

  7. Buccaneer says:

    And yet, the vast majority of abortions are performed for lifestyle reasons. Most folks I speak with who have seen an ultrasound (regardless of their politics) have no appetite for abortion for lifestyle purposes or post 12 weeks without serious health related reasons.

  8. Boambee John says:

    Non Mentis

    I can think of three reasons for an abortion. A woman who has been raped, incest is involved and where the unborn child is attacking the mother and must be put down otherwise the mother will die.

    Pretty much what most people understand as the way to go. Unlike the raving maniacs who support abortion up to the time of birth or for “lifestyle” reasons. I very much doubt that the judges in Roe vs Wade expected this extent of “mission creep”, and they might well have voted differently if they had.

    women having abortions for lifestyle reasons is appalling.

    Nice to see you acknowledge this, but you said above that “Being anti-abortion is not popular and so loses votes”. So you refused to acknowledge the ghastliness of “lifestyle” abortions, so that you could claim that all abortions are popular, now you are (perhaps) realising how stupid your blanket approval is.

  9. Lee says:

    Being anti-abortion is not popular and so loses votes.

    Perish the thought of someone putting his or her principles ahead of “popularity” or losing votes!
    This is why I admire people like Bernie Finn and Craig Kelly; they know the flak that they will cop – even from their own “leaders” (“Concertina” Scummo and Guy) – in standing up for their principles and beliefs.

  10. C.L. says:

    I can think of three reasons for an abortion. A woman who has been raped, incest is involved and where the unborn child is attacking the mother and must be put down otherwise the mother will die.

    None of them valid to a Christian.
    Regarding these customary cliches, the fact that abortion defenders feel compelled to rely on them proves the insipidity of their argument. Hard cases make bad law and even worse medical ethics.

  11. Chris M says:

    Thank you CL 4.43pm

    Exactly right. And what a hideous mess the Vik Left-Liberals are. They serve no useful purpose to mankind yet there are no calls for abortion because we are not them.

  12. NoFixedAddress says:

  13. dover_beach says:

    None of them valid to a Christian.
    Regarding these customary cliches, the fact that abortion defenders feel compelled to rely on them proves the insipidity of their argument. Hard cases make bad law and even worse medical ethics.

    Indeed. The incest cliche is strange given that the people that raise it never argue for the criminalization of incest. Why is that?

  14. Boambee John says:

    Dover

    Indeed. The incest cliche is strange given that the people that raise it never argue for the criminalization of incest. Why is that?

    Those polls that Non Mentis perpetually babbles on about probably show some sympathy for this reason for an abortion, so they use that as a cynical way to claim support for every case of abortion. Also, they are leftists …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.