Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Pro-life) candidate at odds with (Michigan) abortion foes
Grand Rapids Press ^ | March 26, 2006 | Steve Harmon

Posted on 03/26/2006 9:57:14 PM PST by AFA-Michigan

GRAND RAPIDS -- Jerry Zandstra, the Cutlerville minister running for the U.S. Senate, risks losing Right to Life's support for a surprising reason: He supports a ballot initiative that essentially would ban all abortions.

The proposal would change the state constitution to define life as beginning at conception.

Led by the new group Michigan Citizens for Life, the direct approach to banning abortions is at odds with the more incremental strategy of Right to Life of Michigan, which opposes the initiative.

Rather than try to directly ban abortion, Right to Life of Michigan wants to put its resources into electing a U.S. senator and governor who oppose abortion, said Paul Miller, chairman of the group's PAC.

"This petition drive is not going to affect whether abortions will be done in Michigan -- even if it passes -- because Roe v. Wade is not going to be overturned any time soon," he said.

"It just seems to be an unwise use of resources. It doesn't seem to have a whole lot of good thought and planning behind it."

Zandstra believes Right to Life's vision is clouded by its sense of ownership of the abortion issue.

"I think they see Citizens for Life as a competitor," he said. "But nobody owns the issue. It seems a little odd that one organization would claim a monopoly on the life issue."

Because all three Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate oppose abortion, none received a Right to Life endorsement. Instead, they met Right to Life's criteria, which means they can appear on Right to Life's campaign materials.

But if someone loses that status, one of the other candidates can emerge with an endorsement. Right to Life's PAC board will make a decision before April 12, its next board meeting, Miller said.

"Somebody knowing that the petition drive would be detrimental to our cause yet continues to pursue that, it has to be weighed as to whether to support Mr. Zandstra," Miller said.

Citizens for Life formed a campaign finance committee a year ago. The group raised $1,825 through 2005 and had $778 at the end of the year. Not exactly a formidable presence compared to Right to Life, which in the most previous election cycle spent $140,000, according to campaign reports.

The petition drive is gaining momentum, said Citizens for Life Chairman Cal Zastrow, of Bay City.

His group has drawn dozens of church groups and religious organizations statewide and is in the midst of collecting the 315,000 signatures required by July 10 to get on the ballot.

"We've literally just taken off," Zastrow said.

He said his group had the same agenda as Right to Life of Michigan, and questioned its decision to consider cutting off support from Zandstra.

"They should endorse him," he said. "I love Jerry. For a politician to come up to me and read my petition and base his decision solely upon the language of the petition, that's a man of principle.

"Jerry is not a politician extending his finger in the wind and wondering who am I going to get mad or not."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: abortion; constitution; michigan; righttolife; zandstra
Right to Life of Michigan requires candidates to endorse a Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- defining life as beginning at conception -- as a condition of receiving their endorsement. In this case, a candidate for U.S. Senate may lose their endorsement because he supports a Human Life Amendment to Michigan's state constitution.
1 posted on 03/26/2006 9:57:18 PM PST by AFA-Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

While I can understand some tactical opposition to the SD law (since its questionable weather the SC would overturn Roe v Wade at this juncture), opposing an amendment to a state constitution that defines life starting at conception seems wrong. Can the SCOTUS even overturn a state constitutional amendment?


2 posted on 03/26/2006 10:12:31 PM PST by MrBlueSky2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrBlueSky2005
Can the SCOTUS even overturn a state constitutional amendment?

Yes
3 posted on 03/26/2006 10:16:41 PM PST by jf55510
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

So if he's for banning abortion, he loses the Right to Life endorsement?

America Through the Looking Glass.


4 posted on 03/26/2006 10:18:43 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

I think you want this on the ballot, for political reasons. It will help bring out all the pro-life voters in a critical election year in Michigan.

I still think Stabenow can be beaten (by Bouchard), and Granholm is definitely in trouble.


5 posted on 03/26/2006 10:19:14 PM PST by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan

Also, you force the powers of evil to spend money trying to defeat it, instead of spending it on Granholm.


6 posted on 03/26/2006 10:20:23 PM PST by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jf55510
Can the SCOTUS even overturn a state constitutional amendment? Yes

Upon thinking about it, I suppose it does make sense they would be able to. I dunno though...if all the amendment says is that life begins at conception, it seems like a difficult thing to oppose.
7 posted on 03/26/2006 10:36:38 PM PST by MrBlueSky2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; ...
Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

8 posted on 03/27/2006 6:07:07 AM PST by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at www.KnightsForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrBlueSky2005

There is precedent. Last I checked, part of the state constitution term limited US Congressmen and Senators from michigan. SCOTUS says it's unconstitutional, and it's not enforced.

However, while an amendment like this can energize the pro-life base, it will kick the other side into overdrive as well. The last thing I want is Stabenow and Granholm back because the pro-abortion groups got worked up. It looks good in theory, but I'd proceed with caution on this.

MGY


9 posted on 03/27/2006 6:13:32 AM PST by TitanicMan2003 (This just in... Yasser Arafat, despite the rumors, is still dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; ...


10 posted on 03/27/2006 6:48:58 PM PST by Coleus (What were Ted Kennedy & his nephew doing on Good Friday, 1991? Getting drunk and raping women)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson