That is not the question.
Then in your mind what is the question?
“....Could you explain why you believe it’s a red herring?”
Yes, because that assumes that anyone who rejects single issue advocacy is doing so out of “party” loyalty. Saying “party over principle” is a way to attempt to cheapen what are very legitimate reasons to be skeptical of single issue folks. Another “red herring” is the notion of putting “money over morality.”
To fully answer this might require a full fledged article, which I might just do in fact. But pro life conservatives often clash around the edges with single issue pro lifers. And it has nothing to do with one side being morally or ethically superior. Sometimes, even in the Bible, practicality IS the high road. Sometimes it is the low road, but my point is, it is neither necessarily - but to term it “party versus principle” is to assume it is.
“....Could you explain why you believe it’s a red herring?”
Yes, because that assumes that anyone who rejects single issue advocacy is doing so out of “party” loyalty. Saying “party over principle” is a way to attempt to cheapen what are very legitimate reasons to be skeptical of single issue folks. Another “red herring” is the notion of putting “money over morality.”
To fully answer this might require a full fledged article, which I might just do in fact. But pro life conservatives often clash around the edges with single issue pro lifers. And it has nothing to do with one side being morally or ethically superior. Sometimes, even in the Bible, practicality IS the high road. Sometimes it is the low road, but my point is, it is neither necessarily - but to term it “party versus principle” is to assume it is.