Posted on 11/13/2004 6:05:41 AM PST by cpforlife.org
PRO-LIFE WARNING TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
We believe that abortion is infanticide, and that a holocaust of infants is taking place. We do not believe that there is any other issue on Earth that compares with abortion in moral import. And therefore, there is no policy or combination of policies you Republicans can offer, including perfect tax policies, tort reform, and every other thing that is near and dear to Republican hearts, that matters a damn if abortion is overlooked and allowed to slide by.
We know that this issue has to be settled in the Supreme Court, nowhere else. And we know that the opportunity to put new justices on the court comes once in a decade, maybe, and that the current opportunity to alter the complexion of the court is not going to come again for a generation. Therefore, the real possibility exists that abortion can finally be seriously curtailed, soon, by the Supreme Court changing Roe v. Wade or eliminating it...IF, and ONLY IF, we can get pro-life judges on that court.
To do that, we have trusted the Republicans for years. We just came out and voted for you again this time, in unprecedented numbers, because we are not stupid and we know what is at stake. Not just evangelicals either. The religious CATHOLIC vote went Republican in 2004, and they didn't do it because of trade policy or even gay marriage. Their issue is abortion.
And the overriding issue is abortion.
So, if the Republicans allow Senator Specter to get the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and he blocks pro-life nominees, or if the Republicans do not use the nuclear option to override Democrat filibusters of pro-life nominees, THIS TIME there is no place for Republicans to hide. WE KNOW that you have the power, now, because WE just voted to give it to you. We understand that you can block Specter. And we understand the nuclear option.
And therefore, we most certainly will understand that if you allow the pro-life judges to be blocked, that it will be your political CHOICE to have done so. You CAN put pro-life judges on the bench, if you expend a lot of political capital. This will offend some people - a lot of people. And that is the price you HAVE to pay to get our votes next time. You have to be willing to bet the whole house to end infanticide.
If not, we will not vote for you. We won't go running to vote for the Democrats: they're pro-abortion. We won't go out and form a third party: we're not stupid and know that won't work. We'll just stay home, just like we did in 2000. Except that in 2000 it was out of frustration and neglect, and the lack of belief that anything will change. There was no organized campaign to keep the pro-life vote home in 2000.
This time, it's different. We understand the system, and we know that you have the power. And we demand that you use the power straight down the line to fill the high court and the appellate courts with judges who will protect the lives of babies. Period. This is not negotiable. At all. This is why we voted for you. You have nothing with which to bargain with us, and if you screw us, we will stay organized and we will stay home purposely to destroy the Republican party. Because if you do not protect the babies when you have the power to do it, you are no better than the Democrats...and worse, you will have lied to us.
This means, in effect, that all of those things YOU care most about: taxation, immigration, trade and business policy, deregulation - all of those core issues that come as an economic package, are held hostage to our issue: babies. If you will not protect the babies, we will stay home and let the Democrats destroy everything that YOU believe in.
This is called "Chicken". It is called a "Mexican Standoff". And since we are fired up by the certitude that we are doing God's work in defending babies, we cannot be bought, and you cannot win so much as an election for dog catcher in this country without us.
Therefore, the solution is simple and obvious: give us what we voted for you to do. Give us pro-life judges. Use all of your power to do it. Sweep Specter out of the way: is he worth losing all the rest of your agenda? - because we really will stay home and throw the country to the Democrats if you're no better than they are on abortion, just to punish YOU for having betrayed us. When the filibusters come, and they will come, use the nuclear option to override them. That will poison the Senate, yes. So what? We are talking about babies here. And with our votes, militantly mobilized because we are winning, alongside of yours, in 2006 and 2008 and beyond, even if the Senate is poisoned, you will be able to replace it with a more Republican one.
That there is even a debate going on as to what to do with Specter is alarming, but we have had our hearts broken before, so we'll sit and pray and trust President Bush and Senator Frist and the Republicans to do the right thing.
Screw us, though, and we will turn on you and your whole agenda will go down the drain with the blood of the babies you wouldn't put your power on the line to save.
The easy solution, the win-win solution, is to BE as pro-life as you campaigned as being. Just do it.
I apologize for the length of this post. But it needed to be said. The Republicans do not seem to get it. They need to understand that we are more committed to saving babies than we are to the fortunes of the Republican Party. That Specter is still in play demonstrates that too many of them do not take this seriously.
Rather than test us, what you guys should do is simply cave, now, and give us what we want. Do that, and you wont hear from us again - there will be no creeping theocracy in America - because this is about the only religious issue that Catholics and Orthodox and Evangelicals AGREE on.
Because unlike you, I do not consider ther prolife cause to be a be-all and end-all of the American political process.
"Be selfless. Do it for the babies."
Wow, more hyperbole. Get this...no matter WHO is on that comittee, not one additional baby will live. The two events are far removed from one another.
We all have issues, you included.
While I haven't seen you use the word "butcher," I've seen plenty else.
Feel free to point out examples. Or not.
I can agree with that, totally.
No. I believe that ANY enhancement of individual rights and liberty is a GOOD thing, and all Roe did was enhance those rights contained in the 4th Amendment to cover individual privacy. Jettison Roe and along with your hated abortion (which wion't go away in the abscence of Roe, BTW) the right to individual privacy also goes. No deal, and you can gloat all you want and call me names like a schoolkid now.
Read it again FRiend. This entire thread argues for using the process to defend the babies, babies that CANNOT defend themselves. They have no guns, we do. We need to speak up for them. That you read into that ONE post something that wasn't said reveals your agenda. I posted that and the rest of the posts. Three or four posters you select and try to tar everyone with your misrepresentation of what they say.
Now read this exchange:
LOL
No one on this thread who has said that this is a Holocaust(or worse) has been able to merely answer straight out. According to any law in the US, were Jews being dragged off the street and executed we'd be empowered to stop it with lethal force.
So, if this is WORSE(lol) than that, certainly they support killing abortion doctors, nurses, those financing abortions(meaning the fathers or families) Right? Bring the troops home, Fight the war on abortion!
Even where it's illegal, abortion does not go away--fact is, it will likely never go away though we can REDUCE the demand and limit the time frame in which they occur.
93 posted on 11/13/2004 7:43:23 AM PST by Skywalk (Transdimensional Jihad!)
Dear Skywalk,
I certainly support the criminalization of committing the crime of abortion. It is murder for hire. Abortionists are serial- and mass-murderers. Although I am reluctant to prescribe the death penalty in general, for these, it is the appropriate punishment. I wholly endorse laws that prescribe, in every case without exception, execution for those who regularly perform abortions.
But there is a difference between public application of law and private action in lieu of law. One is justice, the other is vigilantism. I generally oppose vigilantism. I do believe in trying to change unjust laws, to make them more just. We have a political system that permits this.
Germany under the Nazis did not have such a political system.
To suggest that we pro-lifers, to be consistent, must go out and become vigilantes is to elide over several issues. As long as the potential for peaceful change is available in our country, we may not justly take arms against the law.
There were once laws that, as interpreted, permitted white men to kill black "property," usually with complete impunity. Nonetheless, this horror did not provide license to seek private retribution against the killers, or against those who, in law, protected them.
As long as we have a political system which permits peaceful change, we may not legitimately act as vigilantes, as to do so would be to become revolutionaries. If we were, in large numbers, to resort to violence, it would mean two things: First, that we had rejected the legitimacy of the American state; second, that America would become engaged again in civil war.
Failing to accept the delegitimation of the American state and wishing to avoid civil war do not make pro-lifers inconsistent, only prudent, cautious, and rational. It is not our goal to replace one evil with another.
sitetest
148 posted on 11/13/2004 8:16:18 AM PST by sitetest
Long Cut says:
"No. I believe that ANY enhancement of individual rights and liberty is a GOOD thing, and all Roe did was enhance those rights contained in the 4th Amendment to cover individual privacy. Jettison Roe and along with your hated abortion (which wion't go away in the abscence of Roe, BTW) the right to individual privacy also goes. No deal, and you can gloat all you want and call me names like a schoolkid now."
Good. You are now OUT OF THE CLOSET. You support ABORTION OD DEMAND. Do tell, since the GOP is pro-life and this website's missions statement includes the phrase "Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family ...", what is your intent here?
The Bible was not written in King James English.
In the Hebrew text, the literal meaning is 'Don't murder'.
Which makes perfect sense, since the same text spells out capital punishment for a number of crimes.
Use your head.
When folks like you hand out advice about appropriate behavior it's just bizarre.
Thank you! And BTTT!
No.
That's all anyone needs to know.
So, why do you hang out on a pro-life conservative website?
One of the sillier statements I've seen around here.
Any efforts to overturn it would be met with the most severe resistance and would turn back the clock more than twenty years.
There were far more women who voted for Bush this time because they felt less concerned that Bush would overturn Roe or take what they see as a basic right away. Most have no problem with further restrictions on abortion however, and voted for Bush for this reason.
IMO, their numbers are what put Bush back in office for another four years, not the evangelicals who seem to be claiming that distinction.
You point to this legal decision as if it is the cause of all abortions performed.
In the simplest of terms, it is NOT.
The cause is in the sociology of a society where women override their moral beliefs in order to achieve a right to control their own corporal bodies.
A right that is difficult if not impossible to legally deny.
This is why Roe evolved and why it will remain as settled law.
Just because there may be no speed limit on a highway, is not direct cause for people to travel at over 100MPH.
With the same logic employed, Roe can remain law while abortions decline to a rarity.
Attacking Roe will be to no avail. It would not change anything except calmity in governance and interstate cooperation would be thrown out the window.
Which brings us right back to the reasons Roe was created to begin with. The arguments made by the abortion foes on this thread are circular in nature. They do not address the real causal relationships of social morays to the creation of Roe.
If you overlook these relationships, you aggravate the problem, rather than mitigate it.IMHO.
By way of answer, I joined following 9-11 bwecause of tyhe overwhelmingly pro-military, pro-Defense, and pro-America attitude here. I stayed because I met many fine people who supported America's fighting men and women in our cause, and did so without any reservations. I liked participating in discussions of military matters and hardware with which I am familiar.
I also liked discussing the RKBA, as I am a longtime supporter of the 2nd Amendment and a gun fancier.
Too, I am a lifelong Republican, and a strong supporter of the President. That's just a few of the reasons I'm here.
However, I feel NO need to march to YOUR fanatical drummer. I DO NOT support giving the government any more powers over individual rights than it already has, no matter how much some zealots claim that, just this once, it's okay and won't, honest, EVER be abused.
You see, you're falling into your own pit again...you assume that your one "obsession issue" is what makes or breaks a conservative and a Republican. I can't say I'm sorry to disappoint, though.
News flash - one can be a Republican and a conservative and not support EVERY single plank. If you disagree with that, ask the Congress and President about the principle of limited spending and limited government.
I am definitely in favor of pro-life dog catchers. Problem is, I never get a pro-life voters guide to tell me how my dog catcher views the issue.
So, like Long Cut, you oppose the GOP Platform. You want to KEEP Roe -v- Wade as the (imposed by fiat) Law of the Land. Is that correct?
Are you opposed to abortion? To what degree?
Do you agree that the law -- abortion on demand - is the part most out of sync?
As my previous post says, because I AM a conservative. I'm just not prolife (as YOU define it).
And as much as you will deny it, the two are not mutually exclusive. You and your buds don't get to tell me what movemwent or philosophy or party I can support and vote for.
First of all, it's a misrepresentation, because no one here has advocated or defended killing babies.
There is no real difference between the position you just stated and that of William Jefferson Clinton, who infamously said that abortion should be 'legal but rare'.
Abortion would end in no time if it were not for Republican enablers like you.
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.