How can being pro-life and pro-gun compatible, especially in a possible VP?

Question

This stance is illogical but not unusual for a politician?

Answer 1

While I understand some people may have very strong views on abortion.  What I don't understand is these very same people, are opposed to s*x education the only proven way to minimize or eliminate the need for abortion.  

Again they seem to have no qualms about the death penalty.  If they hold such great regard for life as they claim how could these views be so disjointed.

My long held feeling is, that as much as they claim, abortion is not the issue for them.  The issue is s*x, and women's equality.  Even if they are women and they can't admit it they want to keep the traditional roles of wife an mother.  They just want to keep women in "their place" bare foot and pregnant with no real power in our modern society.

Answer 2

Not illogical at all. Being anti-abortion, the killing of the most innocent class of people ever, does not mean one is a pacifist as to self-defense, eating meat, or defending one's country.

Answer 3

She had to ask what a Vice President does.

"But in other interviews, Palin didn't say that she just wouldn't take the job -- she also admitted that that she didn't know "what exactly that the VP does every day."

I'm not exactly surprised that she needs to work the bugs out.

Answer 4

Pro life on abortion issues.. Meaning that she does not agree with taking a unborn live baby part of the way out of the mother, Leaving the head in so as not to hear it scream, and while it is flailing and writhing they sucks it brains out. Hmmmm

as verses Our  Constitutional right to bear arms.  The Second Amendment is one of our most cherished. The right to keep and bear arms is what keeps government subservient to its citizenry. Without the right to bear arms, we would have anarchy in the streets, the criminals would still have guns, and violent crime would escalate.

Let`s take a look at Australia several years ago when they gave up their legal guns..

I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!  In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not! and criminals still possess their guns!)

I see a mega difference between the two. How about you?

I will defend my right to Bear Arms to the Death and so will most Americans. Otherwise we are not a free nation.... We are subject to any tyranny who steps in and takes over.. Not gonna happen here..

Peace and Blessings from Texas <><

Answer 5

Babies ought to have a chance at this world. I'm glad I was born. Most people are- more people choose to live than commit suicide.  

Guns.... look what is going on in Iraq. Any country actually where some faction gets armed.  If the Iraqis hadn't of been armed, do you think this thing there would have gone on so long?

Here in America- we are supposed to be a ready and armed populace, ready to defend OURSELVES. Not be big whiny babies and expect the government to take care of us.

WE are to be the government, remember?  We ought to be all armed and able and ready for anything.   That means fighting off anyone who wants to change us.

Answer 6

It's illogical to you because your taking the illogical stance in equating owning a gun with being mandated because of that ownership to kill someone... Guns don't kill people, People kill people. Blaming guns for the killing going on in the world would kinda be like  Rosie O'Donnell blaming the inventor of the spoon and fork for her being fat..  So unless you want us to live in a communist dictatorship I would quiet down some... Hope this helps...God bless you !

Answer 7

She disappoints me and leaves me even more confused about my stance on the coming presidential election.

Answer 8

pro life on abortion issues, and the constitutional right to bear arms.

So whats the question?

Answer 9

pro-life because the MURDER of babies is cruel and wrong and a sin against God.

pro-gun because guns are used to protect life and for hunting for food to sustain life.

Answer 10

They have bears in alaska.

Answer 11

my favorite is when people are pro life, saying every life is precious, but are also for the death penalty

Answer 12

I'm even more confused about the pro-life and pro-death penalty stances she takes.  

Answer 13

So saving the lives of defenseless babies, and at the same time owning a gun for self-defense and hunting, are incompatible?

No, they're not incompatible.