Replies

Thank you. I don't need a lecture from you or from her

You're willing to lecture her about her stance. Why dish out what you're unwilling to take?

I also think people with her "style" (the non-compromising schtick is nothing new)

It's compromise that's made the pro-life movement fail. The appoinments of the Ginsbergs and the O'Connors. Liberals have tried appeasement time and time again. They wanted to appease the nazis and they wanted to appease the commies and we saw the results of appeasement.

We learned that you don't give Czechleslovakia to the Nazis in exchange for "peace in our time." And having learned that lesson, I'm unwilling to give liberals just a few dead babies in exchange for peace between parties.

You're not for compromise any more than she is. You're attacking her way of doing things and you want her to change. Well, that's not compromise. That's insisting on having things your way and your way, as I see it, is wrong.

First of all, I am commenting on the article which is why they are posted to begin with. I do not care for the author's use of inflammatory terminology or her style. It has a tendency to turn off even many of those who might agree with her basic positions. Therefore, she is not going to win converts or resonate with anyone who might disagree with her.

Furthermore, I don't need YOU to tell me how to respond to the article. I call them as I see them.

I am twice your age, got involved in the pro-life movement in college 24 years ago and frequently addressed the issue in my Liberal arts classrooms where I was the ONLY, and I do mean the only pro-life, conservative Republican and have been involved one way or another ever since.

I know all about how most of those in power have appeased and undercut the movement and I don't need a history lesson from you. I have also known people in the grass roots who have been unwilling to compromise about anything pro-life for the past 25 to 30 years, and thus it is nothing new. I resent the author trying to present it as such, and would wager that if she has been involved that long, she was probably unwilling to compromise years ago and thus her plea is disengenuous.

The issue is not one of compromise anyway. We have been unable to promote anything but teeney weeney incremental steps for the past 15 years and haven't come close to getting even those compromises the author so dislikes on the table.

The REAL issue is when will we get legislators, who are willing to actively promote the pro-life agenda?