Posted on 01/27/2010 10:48:00 AM PST by AJKauf
Visualize for a moment what would happen if San Francisco hosted a rally on the hot-button topic of abortion. How many people would you expect to show up to support each side?
Well, considering that San Francisco is the city that regularly votes in overwhelming numbers for Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer, two of the strongest abortion advocates in Congress, and that San Francisco is perceived as being among the most liberal cities in the nation, you would likely anticipate the pro-choice side to vastly outnumber the pro-life side at any rally.
You couldn’t be more wrong.
Because when the anti-abortion group Walk for Life staged a march in San Francisco last Saturday, January 23, they turned out an overwhelming and jaw-dropping 40,000 pro-life activists, who were met by a well-advertised counter-protest which managed to draw no more than 80 (that’s eighty, eight-zero) pro-choice advocates. 40,000 vs. 80 is a 500-to-1 pro-life advantage, something that seems inconceivable in the sex-positive liberal stronghold of San Francisco. How did this happen?....
(PHOTOS at link)
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
I know someone who has a son or son-in-law on the police force in SF. Apparently the police see the same faces protesting at any rally. It’s their hobby to hold signs and act crude.
Also, as to the big crowd, well they bus a lot of people in, and have been doing it for several years. The first year, it was about 5,000, if I remember correctly. Now, 35 or 40K? Wow.
BTW, when this West Coast Walk for Life first got started, Free Republic was the only place that I saw actual pictures of the event and descriptions of what really happened. I was so grateful.
I was happy to see the author acknowledge their own “nuanced” opinion on abortion.
To all similar thinking people, and our libertarian conservative friends, let’s at least agree to NOT disagree that the core legal issue is that the Federal Constitution is completely mute on abortion and any implied abortion right.
In that regard, the “pro-choice” people took the Roe-v-Wade route because (a)they could not get popular consent, the people’s consent to change a majority of the state’s to change their abortion laws in favor of the most liberal abortion standards in some states, and (b)in as much as (a) was true, they could not get a “pro-choice” amendment to the Constitution passed, so they used some activist judges to illegally circumvent both (a) and (b), and dictate what the pro-choice crowd wanted by judicial fiat.
Once we end THAT charade, the reality of the true majorities on this issue will be reflected in the states; where it belongs in our federal Republic.
EWTN covered both the March for Life in Washington DC and the West Coast Walk for Life the next day. EWTN usually re-airs live events like this later in the same day, in general in the early morning hours right after midnight, perfect for recording and watching at your leisure.
As information...
Pro-life Bump!
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.