Lest you think this is fiction - these signs started to appear in the Philadelphia area just before the election, paid for by Arlen’s former campaign manager. This particular picture originially appeared in the Philly Daily News.
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.
How dense can you get kid? -- States that decree early term abortion to be murder violate due process for the women so accused.
And when you insist that you have a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of that woman, Jefferson frowns.
Wow, it is clear you aren't Catholic. Atheist like your namesake?
I was confirmed Catholic, but soon realized that I didn't know it all. I'm agnostic, and you're getting personally offensive. Take such BS to the backroom.
How is a civil inquiry "getting personally offensive"?
In the context of the above you were getting offensive.
It's nice to see I struck a nerve.
-- Perhaps you can learn self control.
Abortion isn't a 'moral' issue to me, first and foremost.
It was the abortion issue hitting home on a cognizent level that was part of the process that I personally went through coming to faith in Christ.
I don't trust a single person that believes baby-butchering is an acceptable behavior. Not for a second...
You guess a lot.
"In the context of the above you were getting offensive."
Really? How? When is a civil question "offensive"? And since you answered, how can you argue that it is even an issue of privacy? As for "hitting a nerve", what are you talking about?
Lest you think this is fiction - these signs started to appear in the Philadelphia area just before the election, paid for by Arlen’s former campaign manager. This particular picture originially appeared in the Philly Daily News.
Gee, - sniffle- you're getting me all choked up at the sheer unfairness of life..
Since the GOP Platform is congruent with his post, why isn't the onus on you to answer that question?
You don't understand cr@pola...
And my feelings have little to do with the facts of baby-butchering abortion...
Those of *YOU* that make it up as you go are the really scary ones IMO...
So you can't (or won't) explain what offended you in the question I asked that you answered?
bttt - GREAT post.
Let's call murder something it isn't and make it legal, shall we? That sword would cut deep, wouldn't it?
Dear tpaine,
"'Do you accept the fact that the instant after conception, a woman still has basic human rights, and that her just fertilized human egg arguably does not?
"I accept the first clause, not the second.'
"Your rejection of the reality that the argument exists is irrational. We have no way to resolve it, so would you lose by default."
No, you are asserting the second clause as fact, that unborn human beings have no rights.
I don't accept your assertion. Rights inhere to humans. The unborn human has rights.
If you wish to deny that the the conceived human being within the woman is not an individual member of the human species, unique from any other human being that ever existed, that is a point of philosophy or theology that you may wish to debate.
If you wish to debate when a member of the human species is sufficiently cognitively or psychologically developed to be granted status as a person, that is a philosophical debate. Within that argument is the hidden assumption that rights are not inalienable and do not inhere to human beings.
If you wish to argue about when "ensoulment," if you believe in such a thing, occurs, that is a theological debate.
Similar philosophical and theological arguments were made about the humanity of Africans, to justify slavery.
From a scientific point of view, each human being came into existence at conception. Only pro-aborts deny the obvious. With these, there is no rational argument.
sitetest
I gotta come down with AFE on this one, Clorinox. Religion aside, a civil society depends upon the constituents thereof deciding upon rules and regulations, aka laws, by which they will abide. Society is allowed to say, "This is wrong, and you will be punished if you do it." Otherwise, I could decide what is good for me is killing you, and who are you to say otherwise? Carrying it to an extreme, of course.
I found a couple of your comments offensive, but I'm not inclined to hit the abuse button just because I disagree with someone.
Where are the lies?
All men are required to follow the dictates of the moral law, including men collectively grouped as states. You are right tho,it's all in the translation. Flawed translations of the scriptures and bad theology lead to the current state of affairs
Now you want an argument just for its own sake.
Cool off. Get some rest.
Ok, the VP only has a cold so I can get on with my day... :O
Be blessed and do unto others, and all that...
No, I simply want to underrstand why you claim that a question I asked you - that you answered - is "offensive"? Is religion a tabu topic here?
As for your weird attempt to tell me what to do, well, it is laughable. N.B. I find your odd psuedo-constitutional argument just as laughable. Is there ANY authority anywhere that makes the odd assertions regards the constitution that you do, or is that odd view unique to you?
So, if your child was dying, and the only chance of a cure was a treatment derived from fetal stem cell research, you would decline the treatment and let your child die?
And would you also decline a needed transplant, if one were available?
Howlin claimed at 271 that I had "trashed" the GOP. He later claimed I had said his sister had "lived too long" or some such nonsense. Neither is true.
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.