Regarding the Santorum/Casey race, I agree with everyone who said to go for the lesser of two evils: out of the two, Casey is the clear "lesser". I voted against Santorum yesterday, and I'm glad to have him out. Since moving to PA lin February, I've probably written Santorum at least three letters of protest concerning his stance on women's issues.
I also think that, considering how Planned Parenthood has gone into near-extinction in the past few years along with the ridiculous and prolonged battle over whether to allow emergency contraception without a prescription, the (thankfully defeated) insanely extreme abortion ban legislation in SD, pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control, etc., any woman of child-bearing age who didn't get out and vote in this election should be ashamed of herself.
I also think that as pro-life candidates go, Casey is fairly moderate and practical. He's interested in reducing the number of abortions by pouring money into family planning and contraception, which is more of a compromise position and makes a lot of sense (as opposed to people like Santorum, who are against abortion AND against contraception and sex ed, thereby increasing the number of women who are forced to seek abortions). I consider myself pro-choice, but I can understand where he's coming from and mostly support it.
He's also for allowing same-sex domestic partner benefits and gay adoption (although he opposes gay marriage).
Let's just remember what we got rid of: " I'm not a believer in birth control...I don't think it works. I think it's harmful to women" Sen. Rick Santorum, CNN 7/28/05.
jrhampt wrote: He's interested in reducing the number of abortions by pouring money into family planning and contraception, which is more of a compromise position and makes a lot of sense
I am pro-choice and I am 100% behind this. I believe abortion should be legal, but I still hate it, and I'd be ecstatic to see its practice reduced through family planning and contraception. Thank god Santorum is gone, though. Even someone who doesn't support gay marriage but can get behind adoption and partnership benefits is a million times better than some ignorant piece of garbage who compares homosexuality to "man-on-dog."
That's the way I feel, too. I'm a bit cautious in my support of Casey's pro-lifeness only because I understand that he believes pharmacists should be allowed to not fill prescriptions if they have moral objections (?)...might have to check on the source of that one. Overall, though, I think his position is quite reasonable, and I wish more people felt this way instead of always feeling they have to go with either extreme. It's as though most pro-choice people are afraid to even suggest that abortion is anything less than completely normal and happy, when, in fact, yeah, it's undesirable. And then you have the pro-lifers who want to shoot abortion providers and take away all contraception.
Let's just remember what we got rid of: " I'm not a believer in birth control...I don't think it works. I think it's harmful to women" Sen. Rick Santorum, CNN 7/28/05.
wow - that's just plain scary. has this guy been living under a rock?
__________________
"Fashion can be bought. Style one must possess." ~ Edna Woolman Chase
Let's just remember what we got rid of: " I'm not a believer in birth control...I don't think it works. I think it's harmful to women" Sen. Rick Santorum, CNN 7/28/05.
D: wow - that's just plain scary. has this guy been living under a rock?
Yeah, I can't believe he's been in office for 12 years. Seriously.
I also can't believe that Tom Coburn got elected last time around (favorite Coburn quote of all time: "Lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they'll only let one girl go to the bathroom. Now think about it. Think about that issue. How is it that that's happened to us?").