PRO-LIFE WARNING TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

A 2004 pro-life thread brought back to life | 11-13-04 | Vicomte13

[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.

[Spiff]

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?

Just a fertilized egg?!

Here's my approach - the truth:

According to the latest Centers for Disease Control Abortion Surveillance report, 77% of abortions are performed after 7 weeks of gestational age of the child.

This is a child at 7 weeks, after which 77% of all abortions are performed:

This child is NOT just a fertilized egg. She is as human as you are.

This is a child at 8 weeks, after which 60% of all abortions are performed:

This child is NOT just a fertilized egg. He is as human as you are.

This is a child at 11 weeks, after which 22% of all abortions are performed:

This child is NOT just a fertilized egg. He is as human as you are.

These children are NOT just fertilized eggs! Each child can feel pain. Each child has a beating heart. Each child has brain function. Each child can move independantly. Each of these children have a right to life! These children are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Why do you insist upon denying these children their humanity and thus their right to live?

Hear the words of the Lord, Jesus Christ:

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MATTHEW, CHAPTER 18

5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.

6 But whoso shall offend• one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MATTHEW, CHAPTER 25

31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right• hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right• hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom• prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited• me: I was in prison•, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done• it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left• hand, Depart• from me, ye cursed•, into everlasting fire, prepared• for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred•, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or thirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least• of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting• punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

I urge you strongly to reconsider your position on this.

[cpforlife.org]

I was quoting HIS posts illustrating his hypocracy. How would that prove his point?

I thought I was clear. Was it not?

[Cold Heat]

He took offense to what you posted as much or more than how it was said.

This entire thread has been a continuous flamer. He was correct, and you did take the time to review his posting history and find some hyperbole to toss back at him.

I sure would not have done that.

But what the hell do I know about civility.

[A Jovial Cad]

*I can't believe I just wasted my time on this post*

I can't believe you just did either...(snicker)...
But, in any event, it's still a futile enterprise, marked with the scent of desperation, sputtering, and dodgy backtracking.
So you know how to use the "search" function here at FR: good for you. But, once again, you refuse to answer the question: just what kind of so-called "Christian" uses the phrase "Screw"--in any of it's scummy variants--in a public forum that can be seen by the world? Perhaps, in your vision of Christianity, such a legitimate question is seen as "whining"; I doubt that any genuine Pastor, Reverend, or Priest in the world would share that extraordinary view of how Christians are supposed to deport themselves in public with such language, which pretty much says it all. You can't answer the question, so you're reduced, pathetically, to digging up the questioner's previous posts and pinging others to share your impotent rage at having been so cornered, and made to look ridiculous.
However, in every post of mine you "researched" (in an attempt to change the subject) did you even *ONCE* run across a similar employment by *me* of such guttersnipe vocabulary? That'd be a big Negatory, as you well know...
You are now acting precisely like a liberal: you can't HONESTLY answer the simple question put to you without admitting my original premise, so you try to divert the subject elsewhere, and in a smarmy, juvenile fashion, at that. Once again, I ask you: how many so-called "Christians" have you ever run across who are comfortable with the use of the word "Screw" in daily--and highly public--discourse? Met many lately? Me neither...(snicker)...

[Cold Heat]

There you are, I thought you had gone.(we all should)

I apologize for forgetting the courtesy ping.

[Syncro]

Look man, I appreciate it, but I have issues with these translations. I bought into this once before and got burned.

So you just gave in?

For example, a word in Hebrew cannot possibly mean the exact same thing as a word coined in English many hundreds or even a couple thousands of years apart.

Well of course not, that is why I told you to look it up. Then the light bulb would go on.

Although I understand the argument, don't ask me to buy it hook line and sinker. I cannot imagine words like these to be identical in meaning. And close gets you no cigars when dealing with religion.

Calm down a little and don't assume I am trying to put something past you. Of course they are not identical in meaning. If you would have looked it up (in as many Hebrew translations as you would like) you would see that it is murder² in the Hebrew. Even to the illegal killing of the innocent.

These translation bots and what not for religious text give you the closest word in English. The precise definition always varies and Hebrew is not the most descriptive of language.

Sorry, I don't know what a translation bot is, but I assure you that is not my source. Hebrew is a very concise and accurate language. Just the fact that it has no vowels is an indication of that.

That word may very well mean kill without permission, or without blessings of the elder which is a far cry from murder in the legal sense.

Well again, if you would have looked it up you would know what it means. And it DOES not mean what you infer. It is MURDER SQUARED as I said above. The worst kind of murder.

It is this sort of thing that really gets me going. So best to leave it be for this topic.

Gets you going? Leave it be for this topic? I don't know what that means unless it means that it upsets you and I should not answer you.

I am a FReeper! :-)(am am naturally divisive and impossible)And, it is late.

I don't see the majority of FReepers being naturally divisive and impossible. Maybe in your circles. Oh and if it is so late, sweet dreams.

:>)

[Syncro]

He took offense to what you posted as much or more than how it was said.

And cpforlife.org just posted an article by someone else. And "he" put it on cpforlife.org and actually called him un-Christian. So cpforlife.org merely pointed out his hypocrisy.

Most FReepers won't take a personal insult lying down. That is just the way we are.

But what the hell do I know about civility.

Well, yea...

[Cold Heat]

OK!

Here ya go, and I'll say it once.

My God, and I asked him this question, regards killing of any kind as a sin. The Commandment in my view and in his, (cuz he told me), is correct.

Thou shall not kill period.

He says he meant it. I for one believe him!

Now leave me alone...........pretty please!!!(sheesh!)

[A Jovial Cad]

*There you are, I thought you had gone.(we all should)*

Agreed (with the "we all should" go point)--it's a futile, fruitless flame-war among folks who should be allies. But as long as he's going to keep posting bilge to me, I'm going to keep responding.

*I apologize for forgetting the courtesy ping*

Don't worry about it, FRiend. I keep being amazed that those who perpetuated this destructive (to conservative unity) thread continue to have the audacity to respond, and keep it going. You're doing just fine, IMHO. Thanks.

[MHGinTN]

And you 'high brow' post is on topic how?

[A Jovial Cad]

*And you[Sic] 'high brow' post is on topic how?*

And your (it's "your" not "you" in this grammatical tense) "low brow" question has what to do with what? It's "on topic" because I made it so...that's called "asking a question" in the common vernacular that should be familiar to even you...(snicker)...

[MHGinTN]

Snicker? Eating a candy bar, Bub? ... Your condescending disdain is familiar, but your chosen moniker leaves little to guesswork when your posts spittle forth. [The missing "r" is due to arthritic hands. Want another candy bar?]

[Syncro]

My God, and I asked him this question, regards killing of any kind as a sin. The Commandment in my view and in his, (cuz he told me), is correct.

Thou shall not kill period.

He says he meant it. I for one believe him!

Well, good me too. You are indeed blessed to have God speak to you personally.

You do realize though, that "kill" means murder...to dash in pieces actually, kinda like cutting a baby in pieces.

Sorry to be so graphic, but that is what it means.

Now leave me alone...........pretty please!!!(sheesh!)

I am sorry you take my comments to you personally. I see words on a screen, and comment on them. I realize it is a person typing them, but I try to stay objective.

I am not doing anything to you so if you don't want your posts replied to, don't post them. This is an open forum, and to infer that I need to "leave you alone" is counterproductive to this reasoned discourse IMO.

[A Jovial Cad]

*I was quoting HIS posts illustrating his hypocracy*

LOL...what a deal..."quoting" my "posts" in order to "illustrate" what? My "hypocracy"? LOL...what's a "hypo" and how can it be a part of a "cracy"?

No, here's the REAL DEAL: you couldn't answer a simple question, so, like most those without a coherent answer to a straightforward question, you went trolling...just like a typical leftist. There was not the LEAST bit of "hypocrisy" (FR provides a spell check, BTW, before posting; it might behoove you to use it) in any past post of mine and the ones I put forward for public consumption tonight: NOT ONE SPECK OF IT. I didn't use the language I condemned in this thread in ANY of those "examples" from my past posts you provided--as you well know. But what you counted on is something someone on the losing side of a debate should NEVER count on: you rolled the dice and hoped I wouldn't refute the nonsense, in detail, as I have. My friend, I'm tireless when it comes to bait-and-switcher's such as yourself who try to "debate" in such a scummy manner: I'll match you post for post, reply for reply, until the Sun rises in the West or until the thread is yanked, either/or. Because, though I don't mind disagreement, I DO mind subtle deception employed on behalf of an argument, as you've done here. To read your "reply" to me--without checking every thread you posted from your "research"--implies that I used the same language I've condemned in this thread, and that is exactly what you intended. It's nonsense, of course: I used no such language in any of those "examples" you provided, and have never in any FR thread anywhere in my time here. So this "illustrating his hypocracy[Sic]" nonsense is exactly that: NONSENSE.
'Tis passing strange that a so-called "Christian" doesn't even have the moral decency to debate honestly...mighty strange indeed.

[ApesForEvolution]

Original Hebrew Text: Thou Shalt Not Murder

Which only makes sense if you've ever read God's judgments on man while in the earth, against insipid wickedness...

[A Jovial Cad]

*Ping* to post 1,714.

[Cold Heat]

See, ya missed the whole point of why I argued the murder thing.

The poster was letting me know that the death penalty was not murder and therefore was OK and righteous in Gods eyes.

I cannot even recall what I said to start it, but I do not believe the death penalty is proper and I don't think it will be around much longer. Perhaps no longer than abortion on demand.

But that was the issue and that is why the post to me about the word "Murder".

You see, that changed the commandment to "thou shall not murder" and therefore justified the death penalty.

So there ya go!

[ApesForEvolution]

Which only makes sense

>>>

My apologies, I just realized that 'sense' in the RINO-RAT Death Culture is a premium commodity and not found among them very often...

[lara]

Wow. Some of your posts were great, but you lost me with this one. Why would you want to see the dems back in power? I was once a democrat and I don't ever want to see them in power again.

[lara]

Never mind. I now see you just want strong opposition to keep the Republicans in line.