Posted on 03/05/2007 1:11:47 PM PST by meg88
Today I have seen the future and that future is President Rudy.
It's not that I'm voting for Rudy, but the vacuum to be filled has been filled.
Consider this:
Rudy Giuliani and Tony Snow are the only guys who have had to have fire marshals bar people from entering due to overcapacity in a very big room.
In the green room, Giuliani's speech was the only one to cause everyone to sit down, shut up and watch.
More and more, the conservatives at CPAC are realigning. You have the Brownback folks, the Mitt folks, and the people who are headed quickly to Rudy. And you know what? They are more or less cheerful in doing it.
They've found the guy who knows he needs them to get in the door. They know the calculus Rudy has made -- the conservatives aren't selling out their principles; Rudy is telling them he won't impose his social view on them, but he'll keep them safe.
After all, abortion is not an issue when a terrorist has killed you.
Look for all guns to turn on Rudy now. He's been the frontrunner all along and now the rest of the pack realizes it.
The reception he got at CPAC should worry them.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
I hope to attend a Rudy rally sometime in the future and get his autograph on my copy of his book, "Leadership".
Absent the proof that a nascent soul and spirit is or is not in the conceptus, why would you assume they are not there?
This is true, and I applaud your concern for the unborn. But in all due respect, President Bush hasn't done much to push the pro-life agenda. And there's a limit on what we can do within the legal system. Unfortunately, this is a life-style issue that individuals must make for themselves.
All scripture about God's soverignty. Predestination of salvation and predestination of birth.
I do not look at Rudy as a liberal, but as a conservative who will bring us together on the subjects of Homeland Security, the War on Terror, lower taxes, and economic development.
I haven't traced your posts through this thread, so I may be missing your intended point. However, the ultimate argument against abortion is religious. It has to do with whether we consider men and women to be created in the image of God, or simply "products of conception." If we are the latter, then there is really no reason why human beings would ever be worthy of special protection. If the former, there is no "dividing" point that I can think of where one would cease to be a blob of cells and become an image bearer of God, so we cannot protect any human being on that basis, either. Likewise, if we are created as image bearers of God, it is jejune to talk about when the foetus is "inhabited" by a soul or spirit. We don't kill it because we respect the activity of God in creating one who bears His image, and we don't look for some unquantifiable line where it would suddenly be "inspirited" or whatever we would call it. If I am scratching where you don't itch, please forgive.
I could look at Ann Coulter as my wife who will bring me years of marital bliss.
But it doesn't make it so. That's what dreams are for.
DISCLAIMER: I obviously was just using an analogy that people could relate to. I am completely happy in my marriage, and have no desire to replace my wife with any other woman, no matter how attractive that woman may be. My wife is the only woman I want or dream about, ever.
:-)
btt
I agree with you 100 percent. I posted that I am totally against abortion. I only posted the thought as it relates to God's soverignty in bringing life into the World. To put it an entirely different way, since God knows what lives will be born and which ones will not, He could with hold a spirit from those that are doomed not to be born. To me, all scripture about His soverignty suggests this. I can't think of any scripture about the souls of unborn except perhaps when Job or Solomon talk about the stillborn as fortunate.
Maybe He could. I don't see any reason to speculate that this is so, or not so. The whole subject of how God deals with children, born and unborn, is sheathed in mystery. I only say this to avoid giving an argument to those who would abort on the basis that the child is not yet "quickened" (old language which picks up on this idea), and thus should not be recognized as alive.
I think it far safer to just say that the unborn are created by God and thus worthy of respect. Moreover, they are created by God in His Own Image, and thus worthy of special protection and respect. This is consistent with scripture AND is consistent with our legal code, since the preamble to the Declaration of Independence (which states that all our rights flow from the fact that our Creator has endowed us with them) has been incorporated into our US Code of Justice.
thanks DoP
I continue to agree completely. It is only speculation on my part. As far as application is concerned, lets treat the womb, not the woman's choice, as sacred.
Do you have a valid source for this statistic? Over 2000 killed each year by PBA? Please don't give me some "right-to-life" source either. I want something legit.
bump
The measure of a civilization I was once told, was how well it protects those that are most helpless.
These are not "attacks," they are simple, irrefutable facts of Giuliani's liberal record. All the spin in the world from the pro-Giuliani supporters aren't going to change that.
If these attacks continue and increase then I expect what you say will become true. But the conservatives need not marginalize themself.
Marginalize, how? That's what primaries are for. Why even have primaries then, if we're supposed to get behind someone blindly?
This makes the chance of a strongly conservative VP likely.
Giuliani is not going to choose a conservative VP anymore than he promises to appoint "strict constructionists" or leave social issues alone. He will choose another liberal Republican.
When faced with the choice of Rudy or Hillary, these voters are going to vote for the Democrat everytime. You cannot out-Democrat a Democrat.
The only thing Rudy has going for him is post-911 name recognition. I admire the job he did in NYC, which was unprecedented, and is more suited to his style of leadership. But that's it - if Giuliani wanted to make himself useful, he should have cleaned up NOLA after Katrina. The man doesn't respect basic constitutional liberties or right. And this coming from someone who used to be one of his supporters.
No matter who's President, the WOT is going to have to be addressed. Even Hillary would have to deal with the WOT, unless she wants to see pitchforks and torches outside the WH.
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.