Replies

Okay, I am going to TRY to engage you on a dialogue. Somehow, for four years, you've managed to log none of my posts on anything and have oversimplified misrepresented my (oft-stated) position, so let me give this a try. Then at least we'll know each other better, if we both give it an honest go.

Where, anywhere, did I say I was a one-issue voter? But are there not single issues that are "trump" issues for you? Let me try you on a few.

Would you vote for a GOP candidate who was economically tight, governmentally small, pro-second-amendment, tough on crime, for tougher borders, Constitutionalist... but felt that rape should be legal?

How about a GOP candidate who was economically tight, governmentally small, pro-second-amendment, tough on crime, for tougher borders, Constitutionalist... but felt that child molesting should be legal?

Or a GOP candidate who was economically tight, governmentally small, pro-second-amendment, tough on crime, for tougher borders, Constitutionalist... but felt that slavery should be legal?

Okay now, one more.

If you said "No" to each of the previous, then you are going to have to explain something to me. How is the position that government has a role in preventing the poisoning, butchering, dismemberment of living children whose greatest crime is that they are imperfect or inconvenient ethically less clear or imperative than the other "single-issue" concerns (rape, child molesting, slavery) that I mentioned above?

Please think it through, and give a thoughtful answer. I am interested and will listen. Otherwise, no need to bother.

Dan

As one who will not vote for a pro abortion candidate in any case, let me point out where you are wrong with your examples. The pro abortion cause has enough support that it will be continually defended to the extreme and a pro abort president advances that cause tremendously. BC undid all the government prohibitions against aid to foreign agencies that promoted abortion; the military was commanded to do abortions in military facilities, etc. The other examples you give are not of such stature even though some of them do have academic and liberal support. A pro rape president could not advance that particular cause, even given the NOW position on the subject, at least not this year or next year.

Where, anywhere, did I say I was a one-issue voter? But are there not single issues that are "trump" issues for you? Let me try you on a few.

I have agreed and disagreed with you in the past, to the best of my recollection, but we haven't had that many exchanges. Perhaps I only bother to respond when we disagree.

Since you said that Rice's position on abortion would eliminated her as someone you would vote for, that seemed to me to be a single issue position. Perhaps you disagree with her in other areas but just didn't state them. However, you then list a series of absurd single issues, mixed with some normal ones, and ask how I would respond to candidates with those positions. The whole exercise seems to concentrate on single issues while denying they are such.

I detest abortion just as you do. However, just as murder has always been left to the states to deal with as they see fit, only recently becoming a federal crime in certain cases, I think it should continue to be that way. I see no federal role for it and I think the Supreme Court was wrong in Roe versus Wade, even though that did not federalize murder.

I have not recently seen Condaleeza Rice's stand on abortion but I thought it was the same as mine. Therefore, a candidates position on abortion should be a concern for us when voting in state elections but of no concern in national elections, unless they are attempting to further erode states' rights.