The article you linked, which is dated today (Friday, 3/26/03) says "the two chambers now must iron out their differences and then send the measure to President George W Bush," not that it's on his desk yet. On the other hand, CNN's article (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/25/fetus.rights.ap/index.html) doesn't make that point, simply citing it as passed.
Either way, it is worth noting that the vote was largely along party lines (with some crossover), with PA's two Republican Senators (Santorum and Specter) voting "Yea." (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00063) So, uh, I hope that anybody who reads this and is upset remembers it on election day.
Nono, he's "too liberal" because he voted the same as Kerry X number of times -- which is ridiculous since Kerry is arguably more republican than our current president :P
what really bugs me about those commercials, though, is the implication that our senators should be completely partisan. You know, I'm glad that the senate can agree on things 70% of the time, that means they're doing something. As a card carrying democrat, I really hate having the party line shoved down my throat from both directions, but I digress.
True. However, it's not as if those kinds of commercials are known for being particularly enlightening, productive, or comprehensive ever. Stupid politics.
It'd be neat if politicians ever had an actual basic logical debate. Every now and then I start worrying that I'd be better at it than them, which is REALLY a problem because you'd think the people running this country should be better able to analyze / defend their positions than some weird under(formally)educated 20 year old :P
Totally random, but did you ever get the SASE that I sent to you for that Be Seen postcard? I emailed you about it but maybe I have the wrong email address =))
Why the hell do you think it is ok to kill an unborn child? That is awful! They've done nothing, but have to go through the pain of it all. If you don't want a baby, then don't have sex. It's not hard. I can understand rape victims and other circumstances where the woman would be hurt, but NOT just because 'she doesn't want it'. Give it up for adoption. I know you'll make some kind of comment on why I didn't post my name, but maybe it's because I don't want you and your friends running my journal over with your smart lil comments.
Now, on this topic, I am of two thoughts, a man or woman who hurts or mame's a pregnant woman resulting in death or injury to the baby should receive a separate charge. A woman who choses not to carry a child and aborts for her own reasons does not deserve to be charged. I am very much pro choice, but the first is not pro choice on the mothers part, rather on the assaulter against someone who will find it difficult to protect herself in that condition, and that is wrong.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
beeporama.livejournal.com - (no subject)![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 05:30 am (UTC)Either way, it is worth noting that the vote was largely along party lines (with some crossover), with PA's two Republican Senators (Santorum and Specter) voting "Yea." (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00063) So, uh, I hope that anybody who reads this and is upset remembers it on election day.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 05:44 am (UTC)A pox on both their houses.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 07:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 08:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 08:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-03-26 08:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-01 04:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-02 01:37 pm (UTC)*huggles* =))
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-07 08:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-07-20 01:09 am (UTC)Now, on this topic, I am of two thoughts, a man or woman who hurts or mame's a pregnant woman resulting in death or injury to the baby should receive a separate charge. A woman who choses not to carry a child and aborts for her own reasons does not deserve to be charged. I am very much pro choice, but the first is not pro choice on the mothers part, rather on the assaulter against someone who will find it difficult to protect herself in that condition, and that is wrong.