Posted on 11/11/2012 8:55:29 PM PST by SquarePants
First off, let me say this. I am completely, unabashedly and unapologetically pro-life. That being said, I was somewhat dismayed by the reports of the 2012 election featuring the largest gender gap in history. Given multiple national polls showing that people do not support abortion, it remains an issue, and it remains an issue that the GOP does not handle well.
I remember watching the VP debate between Biden and Ryan, and being hugely disappointed in how Ryan handled the abortion question. You can watch a video of it below, but, if I may paraphrase Ryan's answer in general terms, he stressed how important his faith was in coming to his pro-life position. Biden then rambled on about how much he supports a woman's "right to choose." The net result is that Biden generally came across as a rational, compassionate, caring sort - which is not what he is at all, while the impression of Ryan that the underinformed voters ultimately got was that he would be the sort of person who might just be capable of supporting any sort of position informed by his religious views.
Of course, Senate candidates Akin and Mourdock also had cringe-worthy comments on the abortion issue as well. Arguably, poor handling of "women's issues" cost the GOP two Senate seats and possibly the Presidency. So what's the problem? Why does the GOP insist upon conveying the most important message of civilized society - the message that every life is valuable - in such consistently inarticulate fashion? What kind of an approach would serve to neutralize the issue at the voting booth, and bring election results in line with national polls on the matter?
Well, as to why the GOP is so incompetent at communicating the value of life, I'm not really sure. They certainly know it's an issue that will be raised by Democrat candidates and the progressive, state-run media. They certainly have the time and resources to prepare for it. Honestly, I have no idea why the GOP can't positively deliver the pro-life message, but I do know what their message should be.
The GOP message should be, "The abortion issue has nothing to do with religion. Mine or anyone else's. The senseless and societally counterproductive promotion of abortion as an acceptable solution to the problem of unwanted pregnancy has led to a culture where the value of a life can be quantified, and that's wrong. Abortion is a human rights issue, and a civilized society has several undeniable obligations. Primary among them is the right to life. This is not an opinion informed by my religious beliefs. This is an opinion informed by common sense. Every life has value, and a civilized society protects life. It's that simple."
The GOP needs to stop hinging their abortion discussions on religion, and their public policy positions on faith. Frankly, it makes the pro-life position look fanatical, when it is anything but. The GOP needs to have confidence that their position is informed by reality, and by the conviction that a society is judged, ultimately, by how they treat the least among them. And most Americans support candidates who promote the future of our nation and stand up for using our government programs in the manner they were intended - which is to protect and provide for those who cannot protect or provide for themselves.
If they were smart, the GOP would position themselves to call out the pro-abortion Democrats for the hypocritical simultaneous support of the contradicting position on Human Rights. Real concern for human rights and promotion of abortion can't exist together. That's not fanatical. That's Realville, USA.
Ultimately, it’s not a matter of how you say it. You either want to allow abortions, or not. Truth be told there are a whole lot of people that would have voted Republican if it wasn’t for abortion. Millions. It would have made the difference for Romney. I know a lot of people say that abortion is central to the leftist agenda. But there are a lot of women who think that they want to have the abortion option, so they vote Democrat. For pro-life Dems, I think it’s a side issue. They’ll not vote Repub because of their pro-life view because their main issue is redistributive socialism & minority empowerment. We need to put everything we have into fighting what they are in the process of doing to this country, as far as ultimately true socialism (govt owned business as in communism) and full redistribution of wealth (via wealth taxes [a percent a net worth due each year]). We will never get to the point where we can outlaw abortion. But are we going to let that issue sink us anyway?
Try reading this vanity, there's info in it you may find useful -- though I bet you already know it?
(Vanity) This is no Fluke, It's More Like a Hydra
Cheers!
I really hate to say this, but young women today don't have a choice women a generation or so had, and that's the right to say "No" to premarital sex. These days, with few exceptions, a woman either gets dumped for refusing premarital sex, or else she agrees with her boyfriend to have sex while they're "dating" in the hopes that the sexual relationship will eventually lead to courtship and marriage.
So, these women are hollering about "the right to choose" (contraception, abortion) because they no longer have the original choice of saying "No" and still being able to get married.
Women these days -- especially young women -- have no idea how truly enslaved they are.
Republicans have made that case for decades--and failed to compel a majority of people in this country. The bottom line is that unintended pregnancy = slavery in the minds of a lot of women. And none of that is new thinking. I wonder how in heck the GOP ever thought they would defeat that kind of logic?
The abortion issue has nothing to do with religion.
_____________________________
Ridiculous! Where does the entire notion of right and wrong come from...if not from God and His wisdom?
I think it has to be done outside of the political realm. Never rely on politicians to do what you want, they will let you down every time.
I think it’s much simpler and frivolous than that. I can’t say I know what’s going on at the high school or college age anymore, but with my middle age, unmarried college friends, the argument appears to be: “A kid with some random guy (who will just bail) will end my career, keep me from going on that vacation to Peru, and make me lose my single and gay friends. Oh, and my dog/cat/fish/bird will no longer be my child, and fluffy deserves more. And I won’t be able to live in that expensive apartment in the city and I’ll have to move to the *gasp* suburbs and drive a minivan.”
Seriously, that’s pretty much it: Lifestyle trumps all.
I really hate to say this, but young women today don’t have a choice women a generation or so had, and that’s the right to say “No” to premarital sex.
________________________________________
You mean the poor thing is a **victim**?
THIS woman says that’s utter nonsense. I happen to know there ARE young women who say “NO” and several of them have now got wonderful husbands. Perhaps the young men are really seeking morally decent women? Ohhh wow...what a shock!! Not...
> Personally I think the GOP aught to stop speaking about abortion, get themselves elected and then DO something about abortion.
I agree. And during interviews and debates answer all abortion question with: “Sorry, abortion is not a political issue to me.”
That's great. I said "with few exceptions" and you have just met those few.
For girls with morals, the dating landscape is a minefield. How can such a girl find a like-minded morally decent man? She is very lucky (and blessed) if she does!
This article is based on the premise that the “gender gap” is related to abortion.
I have seen evidence of a “gender gap.” I’ve never seen evidence that it’s caused by the Republican stance on abortion.
Here’s another gem from Mother Theresa:
“Mother Teresa of Calcutta in the 1980’s was contacted by Harvard University because they wanted her to give a commencement speech. She refused. The University contacted her again explaining to her that they would be willing to not only pay for her trip from India to the United States, but would also be willing to donate 1 million dollars to her favorite charity. She decided to take them up on their offer.
During the commencement, when it came time for her to deliver her speech; she approached the microphone and said, “Love God, Love Neighbor” – she then sat down to which the whole place erupted in applause and all those present took to their feet – this ovation last more than 3 minutes.
After she had spoken at Harvard, she was boarding a plane back to India, a woman reporter approached her with the question, “Mother Teresa, do you think there will ever be woman president in the United States?” Mother Teresa responded immediately and without missing a beat, “NO,” she said, “you already aborted her.” Very sober and strong words from a future saint about our American way of life.”
The words SEVERAL and FEW do not equate.
...and blessed...
______________________
BINGO! Gee, imagine that....God IS involved in people’s lives.
The leftist agenda, boiled down to its essence, is the supremacy of the state over God. The power to determine when life and the rights of man begin, and end, is everything.
I have a modest proposal. Agree to government funded abortions, and raise the ante by offering a bounty. Give every unmarried woman who has an abortion $5,000. If the woman is a minority or on welfare, increase the bounty to $10,000. Let’s see what the liberals say to that.
Problem with states like that is that God does push back against them. They end up wallowing in self-pity because they will never believe the cause.
Yes, that is a very good point. I can’t think of many visible pro-life women politicans. I’m not even certain that there are any.
It does seem to be men only, are almost all men...and they are arguing for women to give up a right already granted them, which seems like a difficult sell. It’s the old how do you close Pandora’s box once it has been opened, or how do you put toothpaste back in the tube.
It is almost like men arguing that women should give up their right to vote, which is not going to happen. I don’t believe it’s a winnable argument at this point, especially not when the other party is just waiting to demagogue the *** out of it as soon as it is even mentioned.
Thanks for the link. I do seem to remember reading this before. LOL.
Of course I have been aware of Sanger and Eugenics for years.
Sarah Palin.
Michelle Bachmann.
They are pro-life visible women politicians. And they are viewed as the ‘uncle Toms’ of the abortion issue. They aren’t going to persuade anybody who isn’t already pro-life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.