This is 2004, not 1970. I could not vote then. R v W had not been decreed. Today, the Republican Platform is prolife.
We in the Republican party have worked for at least the last 20 years to elect pro-life candidates. This year, we turned out in record numbers to vote for a President we believe to be pro-life, and sent prolife Senators from South Dakota and Oklahoma, pro-life Representatives from Texas to increase our Party's dominance in the House and Senate with pro-life legislators.
I think actions speak louder than words.
Given the vote on the Schumer Amendment, in particular, along with the ratification of Roe during the 2000 campaign by the "Republican" Senate, I guess I'm not as revved up as once I was over placing my faith in the "personally opposed, But" party.
You do what you gotta do, Hocndoc. I promised cpforlife an article which will explain the fact I understand perfectly even if I'm not going to stop reminding folks which party actually was responsible for making abortion part of the governments population control programming.
You hear a lot of talk about Orwell but no one ever thinks THEY could possibly be the one being wholly deceived by some dumb slogan.
I know the Democrats certainly don't believe they're being played for self-terminating suckers just because it's important that the party of Dysgenics consider it the zenith of empowerment to off one's own.
I guess it just seems hard to believe that -- after nearly two generations of over 40 million dead, abortion's being made the "litmus test" (of the left, anyway) which practically decides elections and appointments in advance and having sat through hours upon hours of the most eloquent defenses of life the Party's got to offer -- we still have consistently pro-abort First Ladies.
Makes no sense, does it? A House Divided from the top down.
Anyway ... please don't take what I say personally. It's just something to think about and keep in mind as you get screwed over again and again and again and again and again and again and again ... despite all the "Parental Consent" and other fairy tales of the mainstream media to the contrary.
As the Texas Legislative Director of NRLC confirmed to me in person ... he was a part of that utterly misleading campaign because at least it "gives the impression" the bill does what it says ... when, in fact, it requires no such thing as parental notification, much less consent.