Abortion is a fiscal issue, that cuts both ways. Many aborted babies would require government support. BUT - It still should be stopped anyway. Having said that, there is a fiscal component to social issues to be sure. I agree.
BUT BUT BUT
Fiscal issues are MORAL!!! When you steal my property by way of taxation or regulation, then you are stealing my time and talent. Yes you see, there is the sanctity of life OUTSIDE the womb as well as inside the womb. Besides, if all adults are stripped of their liberties, who the heck is going to put money in the offering plate or have time for the pro life rallies? Think about it, fiscal issues are not only MORAL, they practically impact our ability to influence the social issues.
Too many understand less about the moral component of money than the atheist Ayn Rand. She understood that.
And another thing, for all of the Freepers who claim some combo of Reagan and Palin as their inspirations, many of them are downright hateful of those of us who actually agree with Reagan and Palin on how to fight these issues, how to priroritize these issues, and how to communicate these issues. Just sayin.....
We don't disagree.
I approach these issues first through my faith. For example, abortion is wrong because it is destroying life and we are not supposed to kill. I oppose homosexual marriage because GOD finds it an abomination and those who support it are raising themselves up as equal to, or greater than, GOD.
Our discussion has moved beyond the religious and has concentrated more on the secular & fiscal reasons for opposing these things. As you are pointing out money is a representation of goods and services and when you take it from me with no compensation you are stealing. If we are ever going to get fiscal conservatives to see how important social issues are they are going to have to learn the fiscal impact of these issues.