Posted on 10/04/2007 10:19:26 PM PDT by Soft Bigotry
After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous.
The other issue discussed at length concerned the advisability of creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans do indeed abandon the sanctity of human life and other traditional family values. Though there was some support for the proposal, no consensus emerged.
Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent or the other leaders gathered in Salt Lake City, I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
HILLARY? - We would for sure get two more very liberal replacements.
RUDY, MITT, or THOMPSON? - All three have said they would look for Judges in the likes of Alito, Scalia, and Thomas.
Four years of the most conservative President we could imagine is not going to overturn Roe vs Wade - but appoint two more Ginsburg’s and it will dash all hopes for the next 20 years.
Not hardly. He is a devout Christian who wants a sure enough pro-lifer on the ticket.
I just don’t think it’s that simple. I don’t know that I agree with Dobson, but I sure am never going to diss such a great man as casually as you.
But if life, marriage, taxes, guns and the rest aren’t the edges to the “tent,” where are they? It’s a real question. IF we simply vote for ANYONE who has an “R” after his name, then where are the edges of “R”?
Dobson: "You're welcome my Queen! May I kiss your feet and grovel in the mud before you?"
Aw gee, and I was really pulling for Peltier!
If Rudy gets the nomination then Hillary wins automatically by default, so you had better do everything to shoot down Rudy now while there is still time instead of trying to guilt Christians into whoring their principles.
The MSM is in overdrive to demonize Dobson and split the Republican party. And FReepers are falling for their game. Shame.
I’m trying to figure out if those who are expressing hatred for Dobson are either:
1) just naively duped by the MSM attacks against him
2) prejudiced to hate high-profile Christians
It’s really boggling that so many are falling for the MSM’s attempts to split the Republican party.
To prevent duplication, please do not alter the title. Thanks.
Perot is directly responsible for the gift of eight disasterous years of Clinton.
I have met and admire James Dobson. But, as an evangelical Christian, I will work tirelessly against anyone, or any group that seeks to divide the conservative vote.
Life is full of choices, it is the way mankind was created. To make the best choices means we don’t always get a full plate. Certainly we want everything according to our beliefs, but at the time we pull the lever, the choice should be for the one who will provide the most - who fundamentally is a strong leader, grounded in Christian values - even if they aren’t referred to as such.
Conservatives should work both sides of the street - for the best conservative candidate and against the liberal candidate. Whoever wins the primary should receive our full endorsement and efforts. Hilary must not move into the WhiteHouse.
That’s the who reason they push Rudy on us. They know the GOP will lose it’s Christian base. It’ll completely destroy the GOP.
Agreed. It is simply a matter of more Republicans willing to sacrifice principles for the false hope of some "media savvy" electable candidate.
[...] will result in conservatives being on the endangered list, sooner, rather than later.
No, I don't believe that is true. Conservatism is ingrained in American culture. The forces that are bending the Republican Party to the left will certainly cause losses in elections this year and in years to come, but Conservatism will survive. Whether that is because Republicans reject this silly foray into Globalism or because the Conservatives reform under a new banner remains to be seen.
I don't think Dobson can endorse a candidate as such and it may have something to do with a tax-exempt status.
I have heard that elsewhere, and it may be true- I know that Dobson makes no bones about whom he rejects (Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson so far, I believe) which is what would be expected IMO. One could further expect a rejection of Paul. Huck is probably safe as a minister, though he is unpalatable to me... but other than that Dobson is pointing to a candidate or two by the attrition of the others.
I expect that Evangelicals will wind up in the Huck/ Tanc/ Hunter area with a pretty heavy lean toward Hunter.
What that group is left with is an empty shell and empty shells aren't known for their winning ways nor advancing their causes.
Exactly so, and it is nearly there now... Ever so close to the tipping point. The difference now is that there is less desire in Conservatives to fight for it anymore, at least not with the Republicans. It could be third party time.
And Dobson is being slammed by FReepers because he’s said he’s not voting for Rudy.
It’s a sad day for FR.
I listened to the exchange with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (FRC) on yesterday’s Hugh Hewitt show. As an evangelical Christian that has supported Focus on the Family and several of the other organizations that were represented in the SLC meeting, I will use whatever influence I have (including monetary) to let the leaders of these organizations know that if they do not support the Republican nominee in a potential contest against Hillary Clinton (or Barack Obama, or John Edwards), then I will not support their organizations.
“So, I guess you intend to help Hillary”
All you have is scary tales? Vote for the liberal or the liberal might win! “Republican Party! Because we’re (not quite) as liberal as the Democrats.”
Conservatives DO NOT vote for Pro-abort, Pro-Gay, Pro-Illegal Alien LIBERALS! It matters NOT what letter follows their name.
Should the Republican party decide that it is “safe” to nominate and run a POS liberal fitting the above description, they DESERVE to lose and I do not believe that it is a lesson they or ANY political party would soon forget.
Apparantly ‘06 wasn’t enough for them. Maybe they really ARE the stupid party.
GREAT POST!
We must ensure that we do NOT end up with the following choices:
Candidate A --UNACCEPTABLE (Rudy)
Candidate B --MORE UNACCEPTABLE (Hillary)
The operative word above is UNACCEPTABLE. If you want to unite the Party and ENERGIZE the base, Candidate A must be at least ACCEPTABLE.
“Dobson is being too much of a purist if supporting a 3rd party....remember Ross Perot in the ‘92 elections gave us Bill Clinton. A little history lesson here is in order. GOP may not have the most stellar candidates for Dobson but better stay with it to help keep out the HildeBeast Reich.”
If I had a crayon I’d write on the screen so you pro-lib repubs could understand it; CONSERVATIVES DON’T VOTE FOR LIBERALS! I am a Christian CONSERVATIVE. I could no more vote for a pro-abort, pro-gay politician than I CAN SPREAD MY F&$@ING WINGS AND FLY!
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.