2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Plantae]

Plantae, you are assuming that everyone automatically sees pro-life as a bad thing.

You've misread my argument. My personal views on abortion aren't set-in-stone and in fact may be more aligned with Romney than Obama. I don't believe that the terms pro-life and pro-choice adequately represent such a complex topic as abortion, which contains many more nuanced positions. I'm aware that most Americans are for a ban on some abortions. There's nothing wrong with a purely pro-life stance. But it's far from a logically unassailable position.

Abortion is one of those things where people have strong opinions about and are unlikely to change their minds, so its pointless to beat this subject like this.

The original argument at least was about how important the candidate's views on abortion are to this election, not which position is "right." One can have a rational philosophical discussion about this subject and come to the conclusion that some arguments are better than others.

I would rather abortion not exist, it hurts me in the core of my being for personal reasons that are nobodys business but mine.

This is precisely the problem. Abortion is both a personal and a policy issue, and what is "right" for one person should not be construed as being "right" for all people.

More education is needed, as well as more consequence. People need to start being responsible for their actions and not use abortion as a form of birth control.

This is an acceptable position as long as you also support contraception. If you don't, it's the equivalent to shooting yourself in the foot logically. I can't think of a single rational philosophical argument in existing literature that supports a pro-life position that doesn't allow for contraception; these arguments can all be reduced to absurdity.

Plantae, you make it sound like you want Ryan and Romney to have the same stance on abortion as what you think is the "right" one.

That's not it at all. The issue of the discussion was whether Romney and Ryan differed on their views in the first place, and how this might affect policy and public opinion.

Also its a bit of a pet peeve of mine for politicians and you guys to lump all women up in the same category as if we all have the same views on everything.

No one is lumping women into one category here. But the statistical truth is that the majority of unmarried women do support abortion rights and the majority of married women don't. There are obviously many exceptions.

There are more of us than you think so trying to guess which way the "women vote" is going...

There is more than enough data to make this a predictable quantity. It's not a guess. It's a hypothesis.

Plantae's argument has holes in it large enough to drive trucks through.

Funny. Ryan used this same phrase to address a potential "health of the mother" exception. But I'll agree that we have nothing more to gain by continuing to discuss the topic of Ryan's and Obama's personal views on abortion.

However it is worth noting that the Democratic Party is now adopting the radical abortion views Obama parroted in 2003.

I can't imagine any way in which support of existing legal precedent (Roe v. Wade) could be considered "radical." The Roe v. Wade decision, notably, still allows for state-based restrictions on late-term abortions. I don't see any statement in the Democratic Party Platform that disagrees with this.

As for the "regardless of the ability to pay" line, I would note that many states already provide funds for abortion. This should not be read as an endorsement of federal funding for abortion, which is again banned by existing legal precedent.

The health care law does not provide federal funds for abortion either. Obama reaffirmed this when he released Executive Order 13535 to uphold the principles of the Hyde Amendment.