Replies

I got the exact very impression.

No, I think I have been fairly explicit in my position that, despite more than 40 years as a Republican activist, my loyalty, if that is the correct term, to the GOP is completely dependent on that party remaining pro-life.

I think... the GOP is completely dependent on that party remaining pro-life.

That's the problem.

You don't think. Hence your STUPID posts.

I'm sorry that both of you got that impression, ,but the truth is that I don't care what happens to the GOP, the Reform party, or Democratic party for that matter. (I voted for Bush/Cheney last year, by the way.) What I do care about is the pro-life cause, and whether it's being sold out to promote GOP candidates. I believe that our pro-life cause is bigger than the cause of a political party, and we should treat it that way. Politicizing abortion has done nothing for the cause.

The reality is that no politician is ever going to change the abortion laws in the year 2001 without public support for it, because that's what it will require to amend the Constitution.

You two talk up a good game about worrying that splitting pro-life votes is going to hurt the GOP. But pro-lifers need to get with pro-life union members, pro-life environmentalists, pro-life civil rights activists and stop limiting the success of the pro-life movement to the election of Republican candidates. If the movement is to be successful, we should encourage those Democratic-leaning pro-life union members, pro-life environmentalists, pro-life civil-rights activists -- and yes, there are many in all three categories -- to know that being pro-life doesn't mean being restricted to support and membership in the Grand Oil Party.

This isn't about the survival of the GOP or any other political party. This about how many pro-lifers cheapen the pro-life cause by tying it to the success of a single political party -- when the reality is that the abortion problem won't be solved in the political arena, but by changing hearts among those in the public.