Posted on 07/28/2004 10:36:27 AM PDT by Coleus
According to the National Right to Life Committee, Stephen Lynch only votes pro-life about half the time. In 2003, he voted the right way on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban and its hostile amendments, but in 2002 he voted in favor of the sham substitute to the PBA Ban that would have allowed late-term abortions so long as the woman's "health" (including emotional and mental "health") was at risk, which basically wouldn't have banned a single abortion. In addition, Lynch voted (i) in favor of the sham substitute to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (it would have denied that there were two victims when someone kills a pregnant woman and her baby, and would not have charged someone with murder if the unborn baby dies but the woman lives), (ii) in favor of funding for the UN Population Fund (that carries out coercive abortions in places like China), (iii) in favor of Jim Greenwood's "clone-and-kill" sham substitute to the Weldon-Stupak Human Cloning Ban, (iv) in favor of a hostile motion to the Abortion Non-Discrimination Act (the Act prohibits states from discriminating against doctors, hospitals and HMOs that refuse to carry out or pay for abortions), and (v) in favor of the sham substitute amendment to the Child Custody Protection Act, which amendment would have allowed an adult sibling, grandparent, minister, rabbi, pastor, priest, or other religious leader to transport minors across state lines for abortions in violation of state parental notification laws. Here is Lynch's voting record as per NRTL:
http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/bio/keyvotes/?id=4040
However, after looking at the voting record of the supposedly pro-life Congressman Richard Neal of Springfield, it is clear that Lynch has the least pro-abortion voting record in the Massachusetts congressional delegation (Neal only votes for final passage of very popular pro-life bills, and one cannot count on his support on any important vote), so I thank you for calling to my attention Lynch's abortion position.
BTW, if Boston was kept wholly within a single congressional district, I think either Ray Flynn or Stephen Lynch would be elected to Congress over ultra pro-abort Michael Capuano from Somerville, who would be out of a job (Capuano won the primary because of his support from ultraliberals in Cambridge and surrounding townships). And if the suburbs south of Boston were kept together, the congressman would likely be either a pro-life Democrat or a pro-life Republican. So I stand by my assertion that splitting Boston up into two congressional districts ends up helping the pro-aborts.
Sorry for the double post, I tried to stop the first one in order to correct a typo in the final sentence, but both of them got posted. The second one is correct.
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.
**"Kerry is the first Roman Catholic from a major political party to seek the presidency in 44 years. "**
Kerry is a CINO -- Catholic in Name Only!
He wouldn't say the other night -- I think it was on Hannity and Colmes. But you could pretty much tell that he would be voting for Bush.
Mayor Flynn should have said "faithful Catholics" -- of course the liberals can just shoot back by pointing at all the "pro-choice" "Catholics" in the Democratic Party.
Former Mayor Flynn of Boston, is not happy with the Democratic Party, Even in the 2000 Presidential race, I saw Flynn on the TV saying that he had not left the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party had left him.
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.