I would vote for the pro-Roe Republican, because voting for the Libertarian is a sure way to put the Roe Worshipping Dem in power. With the RINO, you have the push of the party on him to vote against kid-killing. Even if he never votes to ban it, he'll vote for more restrictions. And It was a morally evil policy that allowed the states to decide who was a person and who was a piece of livestock. Why is this argument any less wicked?
That's a good and reasonable response.
And It was a morally evil policy that allowed the states to decide who was a person and who was a piece of livestock. Why is this argument any less wicked?
Morally speaking, it is about the same, which I mentioned in my initial post in this thread. Ideally, any state that permitted wide-scale murder in the form of abortion would be subject to intervention just as if they tried to reinstitute slavery.
Unfortunately, that is not the sitation we find ourselves in. We actually have a Federal government that forces states to permit abortion. The best we can manage are delaying tactics like parental notification or information laws.
If the issue were left to the states, we would see a quick, remarkable decline in abortion availability. At least thousands of human lives that would have been destroyed while we fought the issue at the Federal level would have a chance to live. We would still have a lot of convincing to do in pro-choice states, but we have that same burden now, only in Washington D.C. instead of Albany or Sacramento.
Where is the evidence that the GOP has ever successfully pushed a pro-abort RINO to cast a single pro-life vote?