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.
40,000,000 fewer liberals isn't such a bad thing.
I'll take the undeleted nature of my posts as a semi-validation then. Thanks for your enormous efforts here to use rational, empirical data to argue against the indefensible.
I'm glad that your math skills stand the test of public scrutiny. That alone shows something.
Let's find judges without opinions?! Good luck finding 9 Mr. Spocks to fit that bill!
Judges are human. They're all opinionated. We need to find judges who are opinionated towards a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution. A judge like that would have to overturn Roe v. Wade.
We're NOT demanding activist judges. That's a red herring if I've ever seen one. Roe v. Wade would not OUTLAW abortions. It would merely overturn the court-sanctioned legalization of abortion, return power to the states and then we can fight this battle where it belongs, in the legislatures. If that's not constructive interpretation of the Constitution, you tell me what is?
How could a true conservative oppose that?
BTW, do you consider Rhenquist, Scalia, Thomas and Bork to be "activist judges"?
Shows how little you know.
The pro-life movement is the heart and soul of the Republican Party, its majority, and is the most coherent and organized political bloc in the United States of America.
Call us all 'nutjobs' if you will. But you're only demonstrating your gross ignorance.
The point is that 70% plus view Roe as essentially correct.
That is why it will not be overturned and people should not expect that to happen in the near future.
This is the root of my argument.
Liberals who are allowed to live can grow up. Ronald Reagan was a Union President who signed into law a California abortion bill that paved the way for Roe/Wade and Doe/Bolton. He grew up. The 40,000,000 never had a chance, nor can we ignore the damage to the mothers, the fathers and the overall economic, social and spiritual health of our nation.
Words that would make Margaret Sanger proud.
"The point is that 70% plus view Roe as essentially correct."
Wrong. Roe is ABORTION ON DEMAND FOR ANY REASON EVERYWHERE IN THE US. 60% OPPOSE that view.
Thanks for the post. Life is the standard of all value. We are battling for life on many fronts.
The bible had plenty of infanticide in it. Every society from the beginning of time has this problem. This issue is insolvable and will never go away. Ever.
"This issue is insolvable and will never go away. Ever."
True. Also true of murder, rape, arson, etc.
Thomas is the only one who is true to that mode of thought.
Opinions are like ********, everyone has one.
Bork would have been in that mold. But he was Borked!
As will any more of them.
Unfortunate, but a fact.
Opinions on abortion are the least of my concerns in getting a judge through the congress.
Wow.
As it is currently interpreted, yes. The SCOTUS has that responsibility, and excercised it. You just disagree with the outcome, so you have whined about it for 30-odd years. Ergo, my statement that you too would like activist judges, so long as they are on YOUR side.
"So killing babies to protect the Constitution, you can live with that? 4,000 dead babies TODAY. You can live with that, right?"
First, you and the other zealots wave around figures like that constantly. Do you really believe anyone on either side hasn't heard them yet? And what effect have they had, other than to satisfy some urge you have to repeat them?
And second, once again, not everyone in the US considers all fertilized eggs to be "babies". This is obvious if your numbers are accurate. Might it be time to try another approach?
George W. Bush:
I believe that life is valuable, even when it is unwanted, even when it is physically imperfect. I believe our society has a responsibility to defend the vulnerable and the weak. And I believe our nation should set a goal: that unborn children should be welcomed in life and protected in law. This is the ideal: a generous society that values every life. I know there are many steps on this road. A democracy is ruled by consensus, not by edict. Laws are changed as minds are persuaded.
Source: www.georgewbush.com/News
“Parental Notification Law” Jun 7, 1999
No, that is not what the poll said.
Dear Cold Heat,
"That is a obvious answer. They would fall into the restriction category, of course.
"The point is that 70% plus view Roe as essentially correct."
Ground out to pitcher. Hope you do better next time.
Your first sentence contradicts your second.
In reply to this question from WhistlingPastTheGraveyard:
"Of the three choices ('Generally available' - 'Available, but under stricter limits' - 'Should not be permitted'), which one would those repondents who favor abortion only in cases of rape, incest and life of the mother fall in to?"
you answer:
""That is a obvious answer. They would fall into the restriction category, of course."
Yet, in your next sentence, you lump the "restriction category" in with the group that views Roe as essentially correct.
ROTFLMAO!
C'mon, you can do better than that. Folks who want to restrict abortions to those exceptions are nearly as far from the holdings of Roe as I am! LOL.
But nonetheless, Roe, according to the Supreme Court, permits virtually no limits on abortion. Not on partial birth abortion, not on third trimester abortions. Not on abortions for sex selection. Not on abortions for eye color selection (we're getting there, have no fear).
Thus, 70% don't essentially agree with Roe.
Less than 40% essentially agree with Roe.
Most folks think the law ought to be significantly stricter than Roe.
And that's why it is necessary to overturn Roe, to permit the issue to become one that can be resolved by the PEOPLE, not the COURTS.
Sorry to see that someone who claims to be a conservative is such a judicial activist.
sitetest
Are you for mass marketed youth-rejuvenating/prime-health human immortality or, are you for human death?
Hardly obvious. However, yours shows well, particularly when you and others accuse dissenters of everything from "baby butchering" to being DU plants, to trying to get them banned. Worried about countervailing opinions?
Yeah it is. The options "Available, but under stricter limits" and "Will not be permitted" are BOTH made unavailable by Roe/Wade and Doe/Bolton. That your cognitive skills make it hard for you to grasp that may be so, but the FACTS remain FACTS. Just like the FACT that undoing JUDICIAL ACTIVISM is NOT the same thing as JUDICIAL ACTIVISM.
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.