Coulter Tears Into Liberal Gun Hypocrisy: Why Can't We Publish List Of Women Who Get Abortions?

Coulter Tears Into Liberal Gun Hypocrisy: Why Can't We Publish List Of Women Who Get Abortions?

www.mediaite.com

Sean Hannity continued his pushback against gun control advocates with Ann Coulter tonight. They focused on how strongly liberals work in the wake of every mass shooting to crack down on guns. Coulter suspected many of them would rather forget the Second Amendment, while continuing to explain her issues with the NRA’s armed guards proposal.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I said this when this list came out on ATS. I asked, if gun owners can be listed like this, why not post the people that commit murder on a daily basis? Why don't we show the doctors that engage in late term abortion? And the women that use abortion as birth control?

If guns are such a big issue because we need to protect the children, then why isn't abortion? I honestly think that mainstream Republicans are starting to understand what's going on. I've gone from yelling at the TV while watching Fox News to, at times, nodding my head in agreement. Conservative Republicans are starting to wake up.

www.mediaite.com (visit the link for the full news article)

I said this a week ago!

I'm 100% pro-gun rights, but a retaliatory argument based on publishing medical information is idiotic.

Originally posted by stupid girl
I'm 100% pro-gun rights, but an argument based on publishing medical information is idiotic.

Just as publishing those who choose to exercise their 2nd amendment right is idiotic.

Yeah I don't understand how anybody could think she makes sense with this. Her argument is really idiotic.

Your medical files are your own personal, private property. Getting an abortion does not make you a potential danger to society in any form what so ever. Therefore it's nobody's damn business what you choose to do in that situation.

Guns however, create a circumstance where you can turn into a public threat. It's not likely in most cases, but it is certainly a possibility, therefore the requirement for registration and identity.

So yeah...Coulter is still a moron, she looses on this.

~Tenth

Originally posted by stupid girl
I'm 100% pro-gun rights, but an argument based on publishing medical information is idiotic.

Exactly. Gun permits are public information, medical records are NOT, nor is it "murder".

That coulter woman is the most evil, moronic, useless piece of human flesh that ever existed. Disgusting to the core. It's just a darn shame her mother didn't carry through with aborting her

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Yes getting an abortion is just a danger to the child that you're about to murder.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Yeah I don't understand how anybody could think she makes sense with this. Her argument is really idiotic.

Your medical files are your own personal, private property. Getting an abortion does not make you a potential danger to society in any form what so ever. Therefore it's nobody's damn business what you choose to do in that situation.

Guns however, create a circumstance where you can turn into a public threat. It's not likely in most cases, but it is certainly a possibility, therefore the requirement for registration and identity.

So yeah...Coulter is still a moron, she looses on this.

~Tenth

Even worse, she CLAIMS to know laws and touts herself as a legal authority. She knows good and well that gun ownership is public knowledge and subject to open records and medial histories are not. She's being intentionally deceptive.
I agree, she's a total moron and definitely loses.

Originally posted by Vidpci

Originally posted by stupid girl
I'm 100% pro-gun rights, but an argument based on publishing medical information is idiotic.

Just as publishing those who choose to exercise their 2nd amendment right is idiotic.

You'll get no argument from me there.

Originally posted by Vidpci
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Yes getting an abortion is just a danger to the child that you're about to murder.

You can't have an abortion after a child is born. Before it is born, it's a fetus, not a child. There's also a limit on how far along you can be when having an abortion.

In coulter's case, we should extend that limit to ...however old she is, 60 maybe? She certainly looks it.

Originally posted by Vidpci
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Yes getting an abortion is just a danger to the child that you're about to murder.

I thought this was about guns?

reply to post by kthxbai


I like how you call child murder "medical history".

Classy, truly.

reply to post by stupid girl


Technically it's about both guns and abortion is it not?

Those are the 2 points that were raised here.

Originally posted by stupid girl

Originally posted by Vidpci
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Yes getting an abortion is just a danger to the child that you're about to murder.

I thought this was about guns?

It was tacky and insensitive for that paper to publish the gun records, but it is legal

It would be nice if gun owners (who have no criminal records, we know because of the background checks) could have their privacy. I don't like that their names and addresses were published the way they were.

However, their names being legally published does not give the right to the psycho-woman to publish confidential medical records and she darn well knows it.

Originally posted by Vidpci
reply to post by kthxbai

 

I like how you call child murder "medical history".

Classy, truly.

Abortions are medical history. Child murder is something totally different and doesn't apply to abortion. You may not like it, but it's the law, so you have to learn to deal with it.

reply to post by Vidpci


I have a simple for your abortion problem: If you're so against them, don't get one.

reply to post by kthxbai


I said in my OP that I have an issue with late term abortion and women that use it as birth control. If you think that aborting a 7 month old fetus is right, or that women can walk around and murder a fetus at whim because it's their womanly right, them I'm sorry, we're at a cross roads.

At the end of the day, these women (and doctors) stop human hearts from beating on a daily basis. Yet gun owners need to be thrown out to the wolves. How does that make sense?

reply to post by Vidpci


That's an emotional response to an emotional topic and is not based in any sort of fact.

It's an invalid opinion within the context of this conversation.

Again, you aren't a danger to society for getting an abortion, you CAN be if you buy a gun. It makes complete and utter sense to have a registry for gun owners.

People's personal decisions when it comes to pregnancy are not of my, or your concern.

ETA: I certainly do not condone late term abortions. There are reasonable limits.

~Tenth

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Yeah I don't understand how anybody could think she makes sense with this. Her argument is really idiotic.

Your medical files are your own personal, private property. Getting an abortion does not make you a potential danger to society in any form what so ever. Therefore it's nobody's damn business what you choose to do in that situation.

Guns however, create a circumstance where you can turn into a public threat. It's not likely in most cases, but it is certainly a possibility, therefore the requirement for registration and identity.

So yeah...Coulter is still a moron, she looses on this.

~Tenth

So you are arguing that any circumstance in which, even if the probability is low, you can turn into a public threat, is cause to publicly register with the government?

How is that not a 4th Amendment violation of privacy?

That was Coulter's point. People should not be put on a public registry for exercising their Constitutional rights.