Replies

The problem becomes when some of the advocacy groups morph a candidate into something they clearly aren't. A good example is evangelicals were told the President was staunch pro life. Yet other than his signing of parital birht aboriton bill, his agenda had been almost void of pro life actions and agenda points. He has made statements the country is divided and not ready to debate this issue. So where's leadership and the bully pulpit? I'm not advocating that he be foolish in using those tools. But it's what his campaign team sold to the evangelicals during the election so they would not go third party or stay home.

Matter of fact, I don't believe it's really a function of his office. I really believe that manny of these moral issues need resolved in the church first and then as the membership embraces them (not just in words but in actions) the culture will begin to change. Until the church really cleans up the morass in their own pews, the culture will not advance toward a more faithful and pro life stance. I agree, the change must be in hearts and minds, and not always legislated. Howerver, the President can be more favorable in admonishing people of faith to clean up their acts through the bully pulpit. But like to many ministers today, we don't want to insult the flock.

There is separation of church and state somewhere. I'm not sure where, but somewhere. And the church is not a political party in America. Citizens of America are proud to vote in elections even if they make the wrong choice. The pride stems from the voting itself. It is difficult enough to get to the polls from work, and amazing to think that religious people have the luxury to boycott voting.

Bush has done several other important things to help the pro-life cause. His first day in office, he restored Reagan's Mexico City policy, which clinton had reversed, and thus blocked support for third-world abortions. He installed a pro-life team at the UN which has strongly reversed clinton's policies there. So far he has not caved in on judicial appointments, as his predecessors did when the Democrats shot down their first nominations. He has addressed the national March on Life by phone, which even Reagan refrained from doing. He supported the unborn child protection act. And numerous other things.

IF he succeeds in appointing pro-life Supreme Court Justices, a matter that he was forced to delay into his second term, then there's a real chance to reverse Roe v. Wade.

Nobody's perfect, but Bush has actually DONE more to reverse the momentum toward abortion than even Reagan managed to do. Most importantly perhaps, he has presided over two elections that saw increasing numbers of pro-life senators elected. I'm very worried by the Specter business, but I'm willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt for a while longer yet, until I see how judicial appointments go.