LIBERALS!! How about a trade! Can we make abortion illegal if we legalize gay marriages?

I am against both, but I would much rather have gay people getting married than see thousands of children killed every day. How about a trade. We make "civil unions" accessible to anyone who wants it, where you get the same advantages as a married couple.

In return, any abortion that does not physically put the mother's health in danger is outlawed. Even in the case of rape, the mother just brings the child to term and then can give it away for adoption, if she wants. It is pretty much proven that the trauma of an abortion is worse than the trauma of carrying a baby conceived from rape, anyway. (not that I would know, but I have heard studies on this)

Good parents are waiting years to adopt babies, when we could be having thousands a day! Now, whether or not homosexual couples can adopt a baby still has to be worked out, but that is an issue for another day.

LETS DO IT!

OK SO WE LET HOMO'S GET MARRIED AND THE ABORTION CLINICS CLOSE. IT MAKES ME WONDER SOMETIMES WHY DOES A MAN WORRY ABOUT WHAT A WOMAN DOES WITH HER BODY. EITHER WAY I AM WITH ALLOWING A CIVIL UNION BUT MARRIAGE BY CHURCH IS RESERVED FOR THE STRAIGHT. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT THEN YOU'RE A STRAIGHTPHOBE.

Pro-choice, we have no right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body,

Gay marriage, because they are people too who deserve the same rights.

No dice.

Let's not do it.

You answer is adoption. There are tens of thousands of children in the foster child program that have no chance of being adopted. Your answer is to totally overwhelm state programs. Where is the money going to come from to fund these programs?

Come back to me when you have a trade involving the Democrats being able to keep the senate if Ted Johnson kicks the bucket.

Civil Unions are not marriage, so no trade!

I have say, I disagree with your premise that there is less trauma associated with carrying a baby to term and giving it away-many women plan to do that and when it comes down to. can't give the child away after carrying it for 9 months...how about civil unions & 1st trimester abortions only unless it endangers the life of the woman?

Lets NOT and NOT even say we thought about it for a moment.

Sorry! Looks like they're going to get gay marriage without the trade! Sooner or later the Supreme Court will be called upon to enforce full faith and compliance clause of the Constitution making all states recognize those legal marriages from other states.

It would be a great way to split the feminists from the gay rights advocates. But you would do better offering to trade a less passionate issue like restoration of school prayer, capital punishment, or repealing the assult weapons ban for same sex marriage. But apart from Nat Hentoff your offer wouldn't be getting any takers.

interesting proposal.

however i'd decline it. my reason? time is on the side of the liberals, eventually homosexuals will be allowed to have civil unions/marriages and since abortion is already legal.

so, no deal but kudos on coming up with a pragmatic view on these issues.

why should we give away one right, to get another we already deserve?

if you don't like abortion don't have one, if you don't like gay marriage don't marry a gay person. leave the rest of us alone.

and there are amny kids waiting for adoption, because no one wants them. no one wants older kids or children of certain races. so lets just quadrupled the numbers.

and as far as it goes with rape, until you are raped adn forced to be pregnant you don't get to have an opinion. ask any female how hard it is to be pregnant, how much is costs, and hoe many lifestyles changes you must make. why should a woman get raped and then raped again for 9 months straight?

(you may hate hippies like me, but i still love you)

Fist we will give you a break on all thise sperms you wasted when you visited Rosie Palms. Potential humans.