Posted on 02/06/2007 10:43:27 AM PST by ElkGroveDan
“Murder and graffiti are two vastly different crimes,” Rudy Giuliani once said. “But they are part of the same continuum, and a climate that tolerates one is more likely to tolerate the other.”
Good point, Rudy.
Now, what about a climate — not to mention a Republican presidential candidate — that not only tolerates, but allows unelected judges to legalize the practice of delivering a child until only its head remains within its mothers womb so the child can be killed by sucking out its brains?
What about a climate where same-sex couples are given the same legal status as married couples, whether the resulting arrangements are candidly called “same-sex marriages,” or are semantically papered-over with terms such as “civil unions” or “domestic partnerships”?
Apply the Giuliani Continuum to fundamental issues such as marriage and the right to life, and where does it lead?
Not where conservatives want America to be.
Rudy Giuliani’s observation about the “continuum” running from graffiti to murder was quoted in a piece in the winter edition of City Journal by Steven Malanga. The title of Malanga’s piece neatly encapsulates his argument: “Yes, Rudy is a Conservative — and an electable one at that.”
I believe Malanga is wrong on both counts. Rudy is neither conservative, nor electable — at least, not as a Republican presidential candidate.
As Malanga seems to define it, a politician dedicated to good police work and free-market economics qualifies as a conservative. “Far from being a liberal,” Malanga writes of Giuliani, “he ran New York with a conservative’s priorities: government exists above all to keep people safe in their homes and in the streets, he said, not to redistribute income, run a welfare state, or perform social engineering. The private economy, not government, creates opportunity, he argued; government should just deliver basic services well and then get out of the private sector’s way.”
But that’s not enough. While advocating law and order, self-reliance, and capitalism is laudable, it does not entitle a politician to a free pass for advocating other causes that are deeply destructive of American society.
While it is always wrong to take an innocent human life — whether on a New York sidewalk or in a mother’s womb — Giuliani is highly selective in applying this principle. In 1999, when he was pondering a run for the U.S. Senate, he was asked whether he supported banning partial-birth abortion. “No, I have not supported that,” he said, “and I don’t see my position on that changing.”
“I'm pro-gay rights,” he also said. Indeed, his position is so radical in this area that as New York City mayor he promoted a city ordinance that removed the distinctions in municipal law between married and unmarried couples, regardless of their gender.
“What it really is doing is preventing discrimination against people who have different sexual orientations, or make different preferences in which they want to lead their lives,” Giuliani said, explaining the ordinance to the New York Times. “Domestic partnerships not only affect gays and lesbians, but they also affect heterosexuals who choose to lead their lives in different ways.”
In other words, preserving a legal order that prefers traditional marriage and traditional families is “discrimination.”
Giuliani’s positions on abortion and marriage disqualify him as a conservative because they annihilate the link between the natural law and man-made laws. Indeed, they use man-made law to promote and protect acts that violate the natural law.
Given his argument that there is a “continuum” between graffiti and murder, you would think that Giuliani would understand the importance of the link between the natural law and the laws of New York City, let alone the laws of the United States. At the heart of Rudy’s “continuum” argument, is the realization that when society refuses to enforce a just law it teaches people to disrespect the moral principles underlying just laws.
The late Russell Kirk argued in The Conservative Mind that the first canon of conservatism is “[b]elief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience. Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems. … True politics is the art of apprehending and applying the Justice which ought to prevail in a community of souls.”
It is simply not justice to take the life of an unborn child. Nor is it justice to codify same-sex relationships so that, by design of the state itself, a child can be denied a mother or a father from birth, which is one thing legalized same-sex unions would do.
By advocating abortion on demand and same-sex unions, Rudy is doing something far more egregious than, say, defacing a New York subway train. He is defacing the institution that forms the foundation of human civilization.
That is not conservative.
Rudy will not win the Republican nomination because enough of the people who vote in Republican caucuses and primaries still respect life and marriage, and are not ready to give up on them — or on the Republican party as an agent for protecting them.
I'm trying to imagine that. Makes ones head spin. What a conundrum we have isn't it. I for one am sick and tired of holding my nose when I vote Republican. If a strong conservative candidate does not step up to the plate, I'll have a tough time with my vote, and I'm not holding my nose any more.
There are lots of unprovable assertions in your reply.
It tracks crimes by computer so that criminals can be caught more easily, among other things.
Giuliani's welfare policy wonk has been working for other cities as well, helping them do what Rudy did here.
I thought you meant in 2000, when he was very ill. You don't know much about NY. Have to go now . . .
He beats Hitlery and that's a great plus. Who else could beat her among the Pubbies? Or Obama? Answer: no one, hence we should vote for the guy in spite of his negs as a conservative. There can be nothing worse than another Clinton in the WH, nothing!
Wouldn't bother me in the least. If the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate Rudy, they're the ones who should have a bothersome conscience.
I don't believe we can successfully legislate the morality issues of abortion, a marriage amendment, the definition of obscene art, etc., for various reasons, one being that there are more important battles to fight at this point in our nation's history and we have to win those battles first or we won't survive. For me, econonomic, security, and crime issues come first.
Absolutely!! Your so right. I know that "any" nation that sheds "innocent blood" such as unborn babies is under a curse. There are NO exceptions. I struggle so much with people's understanding of these basics. It's true tho, God would NOT accept an imperfect sheep and he will not now accept imperfect people. By that, I mean a God fearing people. It always comes down to "the people". As probably you know and I know, " Under a Godly leader the people rejoice, and under an UNgodly leader, the people groan", however, people get "the Government they deserve". A lot of waking up needs to be done and soon. CO
That's the exact stupid a$$ argument that GOT Nancy Pelosi the power.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1780421/posts:
As James Lilek wrote, "And none of the objections obscure the central appeal of the Rudy candidacy: He'll nuke 'em if he has to. That won't be the central theme of his campaign, of course, but it's the unstated strength of his candidacy. "
Nixon would not have taken that check, either. It would not make political sense to someone who is not already Arabist.
I'd rather vote for and see a good conservative Republican candidate lose in the general elections than vote for an "electable" candiate who is wrong on life, guns and marriage. Rudy will never get my vote. You pick sides in a battle based on values and beliefs, not winnability.
BINGO! Exactly right, my friend.
I am not blaming JulieAnnie for that. I like his attitude toward terrorism, but he doesn't get a big shiny medal for that. Every American should be against Islamofascism. He gets a good conduct medal, not a MOH.
I do like Duncan Hunter as well, from what I know of him... but will he able to overpower candidate Hillary Clinton? I guess we'll find out in the coming months.
Will be interesting to see how things shake out over this "eternity" until November 2008...
To my good friends here, who feel they cannot support Rudy because of positions he has taken on the issues important to social conservatives, specifically abortion and gay marriage..while I completely agree with your views on these issues, I would suggest to you that it will be a little difficult to hold next year's massive pro-life demonstration in DC if the mall is contaminated by a dirty bomb. It will be hard to demonstrate against the UN, if all of mid-town Manhattan is contaminated in a NBC attack.
Excellent points, Ken...
Thanks for the ping! Those words are so true!
Well, count my vote for Anybody But Rudy, and I do vote in primaries too.
Earlier tonight I watched him try to wiggle out of his unqualified support of partial birth abortion and his radical anti-2nd Amendment positions of a few years ago. He didn't say anything that convinced me he is NOT still a northeastern RINO social liberal and dedicated gun-grabber. If he is the GOP nominee I'll either skip over the presidential section of the '08 ballot or vote for a 3rd party nominee.
I don't care what other qualifications a man or woman has or doesn't have, if they support legalizing the cruel murder of partially born babies, i.e., fully developed live babies as they leave the womb, they don't have the character or human decency to be a county dogcatcher, nevermind chief executive of the USA.
So...Reagan overturned Roe v. Wade?
abort it.
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.