Chase

Unfounded competitive speculation featuring the Litten evolutionary line here. Mods, if this qualifies as something obscure as Tier Discussion or something more than it does datamine material please move my post - I just wanted to be safe and keep the spoilers away from competitive savvy users who don't want to know everything yet.

...Because it's better with the lights off?

I sometimes just like to hear what people think about what's going on and -not- challenging them. So....here's my contract to the people of reborn. I solemnly swear not to challenge any opinions given on things I bring up in this threads. Facts are a different story - but I don't care if we have two differing viewpoints. I just want to see where everyone is. I don't know how to link threads, but I'd highly recommend reading and adhering to Kuro's debate etiquette thread. If you're lazy I'll probably do xem injustice in my three point summary and I'll deal with it. Try on your opponent's shoes and see it from their perspective. Feel for them. Don't use logical fallacies. Support your data with (hopefully credible) sources. I think I have this precursory spiel over with..so let's go around the Hill. What appears to be happening with the response to President-elect Trump from Democrats? It's first important to note that President Obama is being a very honorable person and "good sport" during this process. It can be pretty tough to about-face from a campaign that essentially made the President-elect out to be unfit to the position to being a proponent of him for the good of America - and Obama is being an excellent steward. This might actually pay off for Democrats in a way I'll get to later. Hillary Clinton's concession speech was not made the night of the election for obvious reasons. She had scheduled her victory party under an opulent ceiling made out of glass at NYC's Javitz Center - but when it became clear she would lose the race, giving the concession speech there would add insult to injury. Trump did indicate that the night of she called him on the phone to congratulate him and his voters - and after the sun came up she did publically concede at a different venue, wearing purple, indicating the sense that Red and Blue need to come together, and encouraging women to continue climbing. With Trump, Clinton, and President Obama leading the way, it would seem like the top officials on the left would be encouraging peace and cooperation. While the well wishes would continue from slightly begrudging, further left political figures in Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, it was most evident that there would need some "put-up or shut-up moments from Trump to win over all Democrats - notably retiring Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada - who wrote a statement appalled at some of his party members at how quickly people were trying to normalize the president elect, who represents the litany of "-ism" movements in America. On top of that, we've seen a full week of protesting in major cities that doesn't seemingly have an end in sight. After essentially getting run out of the capital last Tuesday, Democrats internally have begun to do some soul searching. They have opened up the race for their new DNC chairperson - and a battle between establishmentarian Democrats and grassroots movements led by Bernie Sanders has resumed. Lefty mega-doner George Soros also huddled with Democrats, hoping to form a resistance force to President-elect Trump. Republicans? It really depends on who you are when it comes to the Republican Party. If you were one of the proud Trumpers from the very beginning you're excited and probably getting a cabinet position. If you were unsure about Trump and supported him as candidates fell off the board, you're at least happy Hillary Clinton did not win the White House. If you were like me and were a NeverTrump Republican, well - you're only cautiously optimistic, and are probably not getting a cabinet position. In terms of things in the future, Republicans are excited about the possibilities and emboldened by things such as the initial stock market reception to Trump's victory, the inevitability that conservatives will retain the Supreme Court, and what appears to be four years of Republican majorities in Congress. There's good reason to believe Trump will get things done. There also is reason to be concerned by some of Trump's early musings as President-elect for some on the conservative side - which I'll touch on later as well. Some of the things that have come out of the Trump transition team have caused some worry from various factions of the Republican Party As far as party formation, Reince Preibus has been offered a job at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, and thus leaves his Republican National Committee chair vacant. Early indications are that Mitt Romney's niece, the chair of Michigan's GOP, is a leading candidate. Who is President-elect Trump taking with him to the White House? Mike Pence - Vice President of the United States - Former Governor of Indiana Reince Preibus - White House Chief of Staff - Former RNC chair Preibus was the first name to drop in the new White House. He goes from being the glue of the Republican Party to being the "establishment" representative of Trump's White House and official gatekeeper to the President-elect. CoS usually sets schedules, rides with the President everywhere, and gives clearances to people who NEED to talk to the President. Preibus has worried Trumpers most concerned with "draining the swamp" in D.C., but every other Republican - including myself - has been very appreciative of the Preibus pick.Stephen Bannon - White House Chief Strategist - Former Trump Campaign CEO/Founder of Breitbart News Bannon will be the "outsider" equivalent to Preibus, giving both the establishment, and supposedly average people a place at the White House. Strategists are usually the president's advice folks and also ride along with the President everywhere. They mainly serve as counselors to their bosses. Bannon is a pick anybody from the left to some on the right are not happy about given his ties to Breitbart News, a sensationalist right-wing news site that caters to White Nationalist, Masculine, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-gay conservatives. It's important to note that these are not Bannon's personal views, but he -is- also starkly opposed to normal Washington D.C. affairs, making it an attractive pick in "draining the swamp" but a scary pick for establishmentarians everywhere.Who else could there be? Rudy Guiliani - Possible Secretary of State - Former New York City Mayor Dr. Ben Carson - Possible Secretary of Education/Secretary of Health and Human Services - Former neurosurgeon Peter Thiel - Possible Secretary of Commerce - Founder of BitCoin (This would be an excellent pick.) Jason Miller - Possible Communications Director/Press Secretary - Former Trump Campaign Comms Advisor Sen. Jeff Sessions - Possible Secretary of Defense/Attorney General - Current United States Senator (Alabama) (AWFUL pick for either office.) Kellyanne Conway - Possible Senior Advisor to the President - Former Trump Campaign Manager (She deserves a spot. Kellyanne is a major factor in Trump's victory last week.) What would a Trump Supreme Court look like? This was asked of President-elect Trump - kind of - in his latest interview with '60 Minutes' - where he gave an answer that seemed to indicate he was "fine" with the decision on same-sex marriage as it is because the Court had already made a decision on it. LGBTQ people rejoi-...wait a minute. He would then go on to be asked about Roe v. Wade by the reporter, and Trump pivoted from his hunky-dory attitude on same-sex marriage to asserting, pointedly, that the Supreme Court Justices he appoints will be "pro-life". This would indicate that Trump's personal fish to fry is Roe v. Wade, even though that case has "tenure" on Obergefell v. Hodges and it would seem that in order to overturn that ruling, you would need Justices that would seemingly not be so bullish on the later case as well. To get to the math though, we know Donald Trump will get to appoint ONE Supreme Court Justice to fill the seat left by Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February this year, and it's most likely going to return the court to a 5-4 conservative tilt. Keep in mind, that this 5-4 conservative court upheld the Affordable Care Act - twice - and was responsible for making same-sex marriage legal. Why? Because Justice Kennedy is a centrist more than he is a conservative, meaning the margin would not be enough - likely at all - to overturn Roe V. Wade -or- Obergefell v. Hodges. However, the next two rumored Justices to leave the bench are liberal ones - 80-something year old Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg, and late 70 year old Justice Stephen Breyer, meaning that a retirement from one of them during Trump's presidency could potentially result in a 6-3 conservative tilt, while both retiring during a Trump presidency could result in an ironclad 7-2 tilt to the right. With a 6-3 court, the SCOTUS would only need an abortion case to come up through to pipeline to overturn Roe, or a same-sex marriage case to overturn Obergefell. Justices can leave at their own volition and serve to life. It's most likely at this point however, that Ginsburg and Breyer try to wait out Trump's first term, making the greatest likelihood an Obama even-steven Court following Trump's one appointment. What will Congress look like? At this point, our Senate Majority Leader won't change. It will be Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who looks like an absolute genius after successfully stalling out President Obama and Merrick Garland. The harder-right House members are also coming around to previous House Speaker Paul Ryan, who was in danger of being ousted after not being a pro-Trumper consistently. Democratic minority leaders will likely be different, as Harry Reid is retiring and I'm unsure about Representative Nancy Pelosi. Both the Senate and House are controlled by the Republican Party, meaning most legislation will have a conservative-tilt.

You ain't seen NOTHIN yet.

Alright. So, I actually went with Mirai Nikki (or Future Diary here in the States) because it's entire cast is pretty neat and I really like the story and I wanted to re-watch the series. Again. If I were to say I were most relative to any character out there personally - that person would be Minene Uryuu, the Ninth diary user. "But Hunter, Ninth is an atheist-" - aw shove it, alright? Yes, Ninth is notoriously an anti-theist character, but unless someone out there has an anime character carbon copy of oneself, then I still see Minene as relative to me. She's incredibly brash, she's competitive, and she's a younger character that is seen trying to be more of an adult than any of the other diary users. Her love interest (the Detective - I believe it's Nishijima) becomes valuable to her because that person sees through her "Badass terrorist" demeanor and more importantly cares about her after the fact - which is exactly parallel to how I develop interest in another person. I wait for them to prove interest in me first. Finally. She struggles with being belittled and with being alone - two of the greatest hindrances I have as a person. However, I also decided to have me put through the internet quiz world to see how the internet graded me. I tried to avoid "this answer obviously leads to Ninth" answers unless they were 100 percent true and were the best answer. I got First - Yuki Amano - the ....protagonist? How does one be a protagonist in a murder game? Get the most screen time?

I'm not going to pigeonhole myself into an "only post" scenario - but I'm not looking to quarrel with you, Evi. The biggest reasoning to live is because killing yourself doesn't address the problems you face and is - to be quite frank - a disservice to those just like you who need the solidarity and confidence of having allies in these trying times. If people in or very similar to your position were to take the easy way out, Amethyst would be dead, you would be dead, and every other trans person out there would be dead. All of the struggle of the past eight years of trying to legitimize trans people as human beings like everyone else would be for naught, and the only thing people would remember any of those people for is their cowardice and humiliating defeat they took. Why? Because some conservative Oompa Loompa and his merry band of traditionalists won democratic elections fair and square in this country, and the words that he said (doesn't matter if he has yet to -really- act on them, or if President Obama is still currently the President) deeply hurt people's feelings. I'm not going to take joy in having a worthy adversary off herself because of something that has not materialized yet. I'm not going to revel in losing people I call friends - people I LOVE - because of Donald John Trump. A man I didn't even vote for despite agreeing with him on several issues and appreciating his caring for "the forgotten man (as in humanity)" Take my hand - my conservative, white, masculine, perhaps over-privileged, perhaps deplorable, perhaps uncaring hand - and do what I know you are good at doing as a result of this election. Fight. With me this time. Or don't, but if we're going to not challenge your argument that a majority of America doesn't give a damn about the LGBTQ community, then you'll need SOME conservative out there to help you.

I feel like every time Kuro mentions me it's in a scolding or some such manner intended to use me as an example of heinous discourse. To which I say, I enjoy stirring the pot. Guilty as charged. --- In all seriousness though, thank you for the plug, and more importantly for the guidelines. Hopefully they get pinned or don't get carried away be the current or something. I'll be referring to them often.

See! It'a working already. Even if it's... at my own expense.

Yeah. I whiffed. In my defense. Cruz won Iowa (the first primary state), was a much better debator than Trump, and fared MUCH better than any other candidate the GOP offered in facing Trump. Everyone was wrong about "45". I fail to see how this is an insult. Unity topics? I'm more just exasperated. Surprise would be hugging it out and everyone being on board the Trump Train by noon yesterday.

No. I work with children for a living and I probably needed a patience test anyways. Half of us are not done gloating. The other half is still rightfully despondent. Some of us may be asking the wrong questions right now. Keep this in mind. Will y'all. Please. I wanna like all of you guys. ... and now the election is over. Time to you know, do the 'Murica and stop campaigning.

*sigh* This is going to be a rough, painstaking experience.

I'm trying here, Karpy. It -is- the day after Election Day. Every major city is outraged and is/was on the streets. I knew we wouldn't be anywhere close today. If anything this thread has been more effectual than the country right now at bringing left and right together. I'm committed and determined to excaberate this wedging. Even if it's quixotic or flawed as Kuro says. The conservatives need to be aware of emotional climates and implications. The liberals need to be open to scooting over and letting their deplorable fellow countrymen sit at the adult's table with them. Everyone needs to engage in discourse that is restorative and understanding and empathetic of one another.

The worry with Congress? Republicans won that too - so it's not a situation of divided Gov. Trump is going to be met with subtle checks by Speaker Ryan and Sen. McConnell, but not nearly as much resistance as he would get from Democrats Nancy Pelosi/Chuck Schumer. It will mostly be mundane stopping. Budget committee stuff. There actually is a bet Liberals can take solace in. Trump may be more moderate than people give him credit for. This is particularly specified to LGBTQ communities and women. This also means Trump may check Congress if it leans too far to the right. If Trump is telling the truth in his victory speech. He is the president for all people. That means a bit for liberals on the outside looking in.

You know. I was thinking about this earlier. As a conservative under an increasingly liberalized America for eight years there WERE times where MY livelihood felt like a dying breed. I remember personally wondering if - after the Mayor of Houston initially mandated all preachers in the area to submit their sermons weekly for review - America was slowly beginning to actively "crusade" against practicing faith in general out in the open for the sake of people groups that share her leftist ideology. I remember dreaming of being jailed in the same manner as the apostle Paul for the sake of sharing the Gospel in the open and having to prepare my heart for it - even if American liberalism never got to that point. I remember being told that because I was male, I didn't have a voice at all when it comes to defending the rights of the unborn. I remember being told that because I was white, I didn't have a voice at all when it comes to relationships between African Americans and the police. I remember sitting with people who lived in rural areas, talking about city slickers and trying to convey their liberal lifestyle to a group of people that weren't hateful, but were being left behind and were getting whiplash as to how all of a sudden they were viewed as the enemy by an entire political ideology. As someone's spent a lot of time observing the Trump voter in their natural habitat - they aren't all that different from the liberals on this board that are hurting. I wasn't all that different either. --- The deck is stacked pretty highly - to be quite honest - against liberals after yesterday's Republican wave. It would be much more reliable to claim the system of checks-and-balances was in effect if Democrats flipped the Senate to check Trump, or if Hillary were to win the presidency and had to deal with a mostly GOP controlled Congress. This means that conservatives need to ACTIVELY seek to take care of their liberal friends if they truly do deem their lives important. If there's anything I've learned from being Tye-dyed by the Obama Administration and liberalism in America, it's that whitewashing and beating liberals over the head with conservative takeover is only extracting cold revenge and not pushing America forward. The public opinion is the strongest bet for the left right now. Luckily for them, they start with the advantage there - but with conservatives jumping on board our expectations of the Trump Administration would be simple. Don't damage America. For anyone. If conservatives want to avoid being oppressed when Democrats return to the workbench - because I have a feeling it will be 'Morning in America' again for the left eventually - we would be prudent to do better than leave our brothers, sisters, and distinguished relatives in the ravine while it's our turn to influence America's direction. --- As a conservative, I've already had some stark differences with other notable right-wingers. We should lessen prison populations, not increase them. We should lessen sentencing for petty crimes. We should have MORE programs in place for rehabilitation that could be used in place of jail time. We should do more to help our education system from the public level -and- the private level. From being on this board, there are a few stances I have come to grips with through talking with many of you. We need to make sure transitional therapy is VIABLE and UNQUESTIONABLY available in America. We need to make sure that we don't take a step "backwards" when it comes to same-sex couples. I won't call it marriage - but in terms of benefits given by being in a marital relationship - every type of pairing out there needs to be exactly the same.

I didn't say it was gonna happen overnight. Some of us have clearly made more progress than others in coping or getting the celebration out of the way. This is expected. It's a growing process. These discussions NEED to happen. Bridges need to be crossed. If not - we won't improve standings at all.

Yeah, you know, dropping the "F" bombs - despite possibly reaching some people where they need it - aren't going to get people who are genuinely concerned about Trump's behavior and rhetoric to get off of the ground. What will, is that the victorious side opens their ears and accepts the task of working together to make America work out in the end. It's a demonstration of unity to take the other side's worries and grievances into account. We need to be uplifting - even if being real is the best way for some of them to come around - first and foremost.

If we -want- to talk about results, here goes. Latinos broke for Trump more than they did for Romney, netting Donald about a forth of all Hispanic voters this cycle, for whatever reason. African Americans that were enthusiastic about Obama did not appear to be enthusiastic about Clinton and didn't come to vote in nearly the same numbers. Millennials - another critical Obama coalition group - didn't come out for Clinton and in many areas were actually more enthusiastic for Trump. Essentially, the voters that Clinton was banking on winning this election on greatly underwhelmed in turnout. White, working class and rural, voters turned out for Trump in droves. This includes Democrats that are typically blue voters due to being a union worker. This is the major reason Trump won Wisconsin, Michigan, and normally-very-evasive-for-GOP Pennsylvania. The reason? The very Bernie Sanders-esque protectionist trade stance that they didn't really lose when Clinton beat him in the primary. Trump Democrats, if you will. The "silent majority" really did belong to Trump at the ballot box. (If you're going to argue about the popular vote, you're unfairly giving states like California and Washington state too much credit for populace and devaluing lesser populated states, which is why the Electoral College exists.) When he claimed there were "hidden Trump voters", he was right. We aren't pollsters. (As far as I know) we are not Democratic strategists and news analysts. We're not pundits. It's not our job to dwell on what happened - but those are the straight facts. --- While I believe the argument that will be posited by feminists well beyond this election (America is too sexist to elect Hillary.) is untrue, it's not to the point where I think it's okay to turn a blind ear to women. At the end of the day, America was too against Hillary to elect Hillary - regardless of how you personally feel about her record and how deserving she was of the presidency. However, this doesn't mean it's okay to re-enforce divide over sexism or any other -ism. This is the time to prove those feminists wrong by being compassionate, open-minded, and uplifting to other women where they truly are deserving of being given pedestals. Even though Hillary lost, she is a champion for women anyway. She was the first female Democratic nominee for president. That should give other women out there hope. I'm all for discourse - but please recognize complaints that need to be put in the air is a form of healing. It's still very much up to President-elect Trump and us to provide our friends reasoning to come around.

Many of you know that I am a conservative American. While there are things such as Republicans holding the pen and paper that give me piece of mind than the alternative, the prospect of this particular Republican president scares me. Ultimately, I didn't cast my vote for Number 45. The reason isn't because I'm a dirty traitor to my conservative roots and friends, but because it is absolutely appropriate to worry about my liberal friends - many of whom has been put under unfair crosshairs by 45's retinue. Being a friend should always supercede being affiliated with a part of the political spectrum after the votes are tallied. Partisanship with your circle does nobody any good. I have a desperate plea to Americans who are both cheering the results of tonight's election and those who are going to lengths of great despair regarding it. Go to bed, get the well deserved rest you earned by watching the results and especially if you took part in the process, and remember that when you wake up we aren't Conservatives and Liberals, nor are we Democrats, Independents and Republicans, but we are Americans - and because of the people before us we were able to make significant strides. Not every hero is a President, and not every President is a net-positive, but with the valiant opponent's concession phone call we know have no other choice but to self-implode or thrive on our own power. 45 may not agree with you. 45's running mate may support methods that you are genuinely non-agreeable with or share your hopes and dreams for America, but 45 isn't going to be the dictator of your life. Not here. Not ever. If he tries, then his stay at 1600 Pennsylvania will be short and unceremonious - because we the people have the power to make it so. To the victorious - Enjoy your victory and take heart in your representation that you and others like you have rightfully earned, but do so in grace. If you're in this group I very likely have a similar outlook on life as you do - and to be personally represented through the Senate majority despite a terribly divisive campaign on both sides is indeed something to take joy in. I may not share that same sentiment with the new Executive, but your time to make the statement of YOUR relevance has come, and now it's time to stretch out to our friends who are now frightened of the prospect of under-representation. Their concerns are real, and they as people matter just as much as you do. Part of the healing process is on the part of the victorious candidate and his supporters. You as voters make up the climate that they live as just as they made up the climate we lived in for eight years prior. To the heartbroken and weary - I am offering myself as a ally, and I wish you all ample time to grieve. Your candidates, both the loser of the Democratic Primary, and the loser of tonight's national race, fought with incredible resiliency. Ladies, one day you WILL break that glass ceiling - because your candidate proved it was within reason and history favors the progressive. I hope you come to understand, as an opponent, that we too didn't want to be ignored and steamrolled. The visceral anger you may have seen from most of us isn't reflective of our souls but of our desire to be heard along with you. Conservative lives matter. Jobs matter. Feeling safe about our freedom to put our beliefs into practice and speak without consequence matters. As do all of you. In the coming days, I hope you, my friends from the left, tell me what I can do to help you. I'm not asking anyone to be happy or upset with the results. I'm asking that we do as our forefathers, mothers, and distinguished others have done. Take a breath, and move forward. Thank you, Reborn, for being a community that has been accepting of me despite my tendency to disagree and disagree often. Thank you for your willingness to participate in discourse with me. Thank you for giving me refuge. Give me the ways I can do the same for you. - A conservative.

Let's talk about some exit polling because that's more fun, alright? Starting with LATE DECIDING or ELECTION DAY voters, here's -roughly recently- how things looked nationally from Fox News' Data Deck. Clinton - 42% Trump - 42% Johnson - 8% Stein - 4% The two major party candidates being neck-and-neck with late deciders isn't uncommon, but what's really weird is the 12 percent showing among third partiers - particularly with Johnson when we're talking about playing "spoiler" to a Donald Trump in places like Utah or other western conservative states. Third Party runs usually just lay down and die, but both Johnson and Stein overachieved here. That's good news for the Libertarian Party if it -does- want to use a potentially earned 10 million dollars in funding for the next campaign cycle and official status as a "minor party." Now we're going to talk about voters indicated that they DISLIKED BOTH CANDIDATES on their ballot - how did those votes fall? Trump - 45% Clinton - 27% Johnson - 18% Stein - 5% Now, I -believe- the majority of folks that disliked both major party candidates identify as independent, were going to vote third party anyway, or were very much undecided until today - but even still. I have to wonder if this is Fox News being 'Faux News' and pulling some shenanigans to please them viewers or if Clinton really struggled to pull in undecided voters. Johnson pulling that large a number from this category isn't all that shocking - and it's probably just voters who turned in their ballots today, but it's pretty noteworthy for the L.P. trying to get that big 5 percent and some damn recognition. Biggest number here - if it's not being manipulated somehow, is that it's possible Trump struck a chord with late deciders who really didn't like anyone. Potentially a product of the re-opened probe into Clinton e-mails, but....I don't really understand this data. Independents USUALLY lean leftward - making this a minor coup for Trump. Now, according to Fox, which could mean absolutely nothing, the majority of exit polled voters claimed that CHANGEBRINGER was the most important quality for the new president to have. Trump - 82% Clinton- 13% I don't think these numbers are fabricated that much - and I also don't think that all change is necessarily good change - but we are following eight years of a Democrat in the oval office, and if change -really- is a big deal, that's probably the most positive sign for the Trump camp out of the exit polls to draw from. Hillary doesn't seem to be trusted to be different at the very least. --- Statewise though, we all know that early voting is a huge deal - and that's where Clinton likely breaks the glass ceiling. She seemed to be polling exceptionally well in Nevada, and the Trump campaign actually filed a lawsuit for the election operations holding polling places open too long in the state. It appears though, that Trump is having to combat a massive uptick in Latino early-voting, and that it's Clinton's battleground state to lose. Hillary also appears to be reaping the benefits of a MASSIVE Latino vote in Florida - which is very much good news for her considering traditional voting patterns and Trump's rhetoric. Florida is one of the states Trump might have needed to win. However - where Hispanics have been running up the score on Trump, African Americans are not exactly game for helping Clinton as they've helped Obama, and in a state like North Carolina where white voters are doing better this time around as opposed to when R-Money was running in 2012 - Trump might get a critical battleground in North Carolina after trailing there for essentially forever. If he splits North Carolina and Florida, he doesn't have to work nearly as hard as people might think to get the "W" nationally - only having to flip states like Michigan and Pennsylvania and run the table elsewhere. However, Michigan and Pennsylvania are slightly blue states, and voter turnout in Detroit, Flint, and Philadelphia might be enough to give Clinton the expected victory tonight in a close race.

Just a bit of advice is all --- Where did she. where did.... *sigh*

As a Pro-Lifer and considerably an evangelical, I can confirm Squirtle here in that the topic of discussion doesn't necessarily concern religious liberty much at all. From the context given by LifeNews, it would appear that Clinton is talking about abortion under the idea that it's a women's health issue. This matters, because her statement (while agreeably wrong) isn't necessarily a part of her platform. It's a personal opinion on how she feels religious circles and the culture should view those aformentioned "women's health issues". There's a better way to posit pro-life arguments than deferring to religious reasoning. It's still very much up in the air what it takes a human to begin being a human - and when a human is a human, that's when the rights posited in the Declaration of Independence (most notably LIFE, out of that, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) kick in. Your pro-life argument shouldn't center on Scripture unless it's with another believer, where your opponent values the Scripture's doctrine and thus is willing to look into it. That's why it's tricky to say religious liberty is involved with many -other- issues out there. --- At the end of the day, I believe Clinton doesn't ACTIVELY have an agenda to back up that personal opinion. She's merely speaking to it in context.

I don't mind talking about religious freedoms, but if we're going to make statements about how they are attributed to the candidates you have to quote the politician as to what they specifically say about them. I'm not sure Clinton inherently wants to rescind religious freedoms so much as she might support legislature that could potentially give the side-effect of rescinding one's right to free exercise.