Posted on 04/29/2014 2:38:18 PM PDT by NYer
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 28, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Republicans should abandon the unborn for electoral victory, one of the nation's leading abortion supporters wrote on Sunday.
Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, wrote in a column for MSNBC that "many in the GOP are beginning to understand the severe cost of an agenda so far out of step with most Americans." That "agenda," says Hogue, is "dangerous state laws that severely limit a woman's constitutional right to access legal abortion."
Calling pro-life policies representative of "a deep-seated, regressive perspective on women’s roles and real lives in the GOP’s anti-abortion policies," Hogue praised a Republican state representative in Oklahoma who voted against a bill that she wrote would "would restrict access to emergency contraception."
Hogue also cited a statement by former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele and the decision by the Nevada Republican Party to drop abortion from its platform as evidence that some in the GOP understand that "elected politicians should not be making the most deeply personal decisions for their constituents."
Hogue's op-ed includes at least one factual error: She accused former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee of saying "that contraception is for women who 'cannot control their libido.'" In fact, Huckabee said that Democrats “insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government.” Huckabee said it was Democrats, not Republicans, who believed women were subject to uncontrollable lust.
In her column, Hogue says that "those who would put obstacles in the way of women seeking abortion care are the ones on the fringe." Hogue's evidence is a poll in January 2013 showing that approximately 70 percent of Americans want Roe v. Wade to continue being the law of the land. That same poll showed that a majority of Americans want restrictions on abortion, something NARAL says it supports on its website.
Hogue's comments led to a backlash among pro-life political leaders on both principles and political tactics. According to Republican National Committee spokesman Raffi Williams, "standing for life is a principle, not a political calculation. NARAL telling the Republican Party we should stop protecting the life of the unborn is like Donald Sterling offering advice to the NAACP.”
“Pass,” he concluded.
Justin Higgins, a political activist and pundit who runs JHPolitics.com and covers national politics as well as Virginia politics, told LifeSiteNews.com that "NARAL and the pro-abortion lobby are misconstruing the impact of being a pro-life politician."
"Here in Virginia in 2013, Ken Cuccinelli didn't lose because he was pro-life. He lost because he ignored the issue while pro-abortion Democrats defined his position. The fact is that NARAL and their allies are the real radicals on the issue," said Higgins. "They point to a poll that shows a majority of Americans supporting Roe, but the same poll shows almost 70 percent of Americans want some limits on who can attain an abortion, and they reject NARAL's abortion-on-demand philosophy."
"Being pro-life is a winning position, if you're willing to stake out your ground and show yourself to be more mainstream than the abortion lobby suggests," Higgins concluded.
Sean Trende, Senior Elections Analyst for Real Clear Politics, said the political calculation is in favor of Republicans keeping the pro-life movement relevant within the party. "Most people don’t vote on abortion-related issues. Those that do, tend to skew Republican," Trende told LifeSiteNews.com. Furthermore, said Trende, "the 'abortion gap' tends not to be a 'gender gap.' Religiosity is a much stronger predictor of attitudes on abortion than gender."
Looking at presidential politics, Trende said that "Mitt Romney won more votes from white evangelicals than Obama won from blacks and Hispanics combined. Any plan to move away from white evangelicals has to include a realistic means for [Republicans] to replace those votes."
A spokesperson for the campaign of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY, Allison Moore, told LifeSiteNews.com that while "winning elections is very important for Mitch McConnell, some things are even more important. He has a deep held conviction that innocent life should be protected and will never compromise that conviction to score cheap points."
In her column, Hogue concluded that "the wind is at the backs of those of us who stand up for women." With a majority of women in favor of abortion restrictions, and a growing number of young people in America self-identifying as "pro-life," 2014 and 2016 could be harbingers of doom for the GOP, or a time of continued growth among support for the unborn and others harmed by abortion.
But Race42016.com founder and editor Kavon Nikrad agreed. "Gallup's most recent survey shows that 46 percent of American women are pro-life; and these women overwhelmingly support the Republican Party. Any overt effort by the GOP or its candidates to appeal to pro-choice women on this issue would almost certainly result in defections by the Republicans Party's most loyal supporters, resulting in electoral disaster."
"Rather than choosing to abandon one of its most deeply-held principles," Nikrad said, "the GOP would be better served by doing a better job explaining to women voters what it means to stand for life."
Ping!
Great Idea! Republicans will become the party of Death, High Taxes and Big Government! Wait, they already did and that’s what we are trying to change.
And what gain is an election, when one has lost their soul?
Can we start with her kids or future kids? How about post-term abortion? She’s a good candidate.
Sadly, many in the GOP would agree.
Even many FReepers argue that social issues are not worth it. Better to focus on the fiscal policies and better to settle for a McCainiac or a Mittens than Obama.
Trouble is... that doesn’t work. Holding your nose as you vote for a candidate does not win elections.
Only when we make social issues of prime importance - will we win elections.
Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]
It would be nice if there were politicians that ran their campaigns based on integrity and character instead of bowing to the highest bidder
Why are these pro-infanticide pieces of excrement always so gag-a-maggot ugly?
This is just cheap posturing, not to be taken seriously.
There’s an ongoing meme that the GOP has lost it’s way and trying to fnd a new one. So Lib orgs are jumping on the bandwagon to put forward their pet issue as the one that will lead the GOP back to major victories.
The truth is that the GOP could go fullup abortion on demand without apology and orgs like NARAL would just find another issue to support the perception that the GOP is anti-woman and recommend that the GOP liberalize on it towin elections.
Their features are a reflection of their souls (or lack thereof). Red England women are major supporters of infanticide, and they are a homely bunch, by and large.
The party is moving in the Rand Paul/Mitt Romney direction.
Romney came out against the pro-life platform in August of 2012, and his man Rand has come out for a more pro-abortion position, as he runs.
If I were running, I’d do it.
I’d pledge to support abortion. I’d say that any woman who is either a liberal or registered as a Democrat can get a free ride to the abortion clinic, her abortion paid for, etc on the taxpayers’ dime.
I’d go even further an say that if a woman has two abortions in her life, the taxpayers will front the cost of tubal ligation to prevent further abortions. Heck, if the Democrat-registered women want, let’s give out free hysterectomies.
Prevent Democrats from reproducing and in 20 to 40 years, we’ll have a firm control on the problems in this country.
If Republicans would only become just like Democrats, indistinguishable on every issue, Democrats would never lose, and Republicans would make sure of it, kinda’ like the GOPe does now.
This is just cheap posturing, not to be taken seriously.
There’s an ongoing meme that the GOP has lost it’s way and trying to fnd a new one. So Lib orgs are jumping on the bandwagon to put forward their pet issue as the one that will lead the GOP back to major victories.
The truth is that the GOP could go fullup abortion on demand without apology and orgs like NARAL would just find another issue to support the perception that the GOP is anti-woman and recommend that the GOP liberalize on it towin elections.
The only abortion I support is if liberals aborted themselves, right now
It’s called “dancing with the Devil” and it never ends well for anyone but the Devil.
Moloch is still around.
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.