The real question is: If you consider yourself a pro-lifer, & if others you've had online or offline pro-life convos with haven't mentioned what follows, maybe you need to begin to realize how anemic their political advice is...
RUSH: ...yet we want to do something about abortion prior to that then it's about changing minds and hearts. There are several ways of going about doing that, and one of the ways is not wagging your finger in people's faces and telling them they're sinning or telling them they're wrong, you're just going to seal their resolve against you. I think we're in the process of changing minds and hearts. I think abortion figures are falling. I think as generations grow and change, there's a greater repugnance attached to the whole practice.
Rush is just plain wrong on this. In fact, Ronald Reagan himself proved him wrong. Reagan came out with a book during his presidency called Abortion & The Conscience of a Nation.
Now, was that, as Rush claims, wagging his finger in people's faces and telling them they're sinning or telling them they're wrong? (A BIG NO!!!). Did Reagan, by doing that, just wind up seal[ing] their resolve against pro-lifers? (Another NO!!!)
Rush goes on to say: I think we're in the process of changing minds and hearts. What? Wasn't that what Reagan did through the advent of that pro-life book? Wasn't Reagan changing minds & hearts?
(Rush needs to repent over this oversight)
And, Miss Didi, before you cited the above, you also cited this from Rush--also wrong:
RUSH...We've talked about abortion on this program countless times, the sanctity of life and how it is the root of many things. But in terms of electing a president, there are a couple things the president can do about abortion, one of them substantive, the other is somewhat ephemeral. The substantive thing that a president can do about abortion is to nominate judges, primarily Supreme Court justices. That's it. Now, a president can lead, a president can try to inspire and motivate, change hearts and so forth, but, in a substantive way, there's not much a president can do about abortion...But I also don't want anybody to misunderstand what a president can actually do about it and how far a president can actually take the issue. It's about judges...
Besides the example of what Reagan did above, there's at least another avenue in which pro-life presidents have attempted to make a difference, and that's through cutting off some of the funding of the abortion industry. We've had examples where the POTUS has, thru the Mexico City policy, directly taken on the funding of the international abortion industry.
Reagan established the policy in 1984; Bush reinstated it in 2001 after Clinton rescinded it in 1993. Here's a White House press release on the subject:
MEMORANDUM FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Restoration of the Mexico City Policy
The Mexico City Policy announced by President Reagan in 1984 required nongovernmental organizations to agree as a condition of their receipt of Federal funds that such organizations would neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations. This policy was in effect until it was rescinded on January 22, 1993. It is my conviction that taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortions or advocate or actively promote abortion, either here or abroad. It is therefore my belief that the Mexico City Policy should be restored. Accordingly, I hereby rescind the "Memorandum for the Acting Administrator of the Agency for International Development, Subject: AID Family Planning Grants/Mexico City Policy," dated January 22, 1993, and I direct the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development to reinstate in full all of the requirements of the Mexico City Policy in effect on January 19, 1993. (Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010123-5.html )
I believe a POTUS can also reduce the amount of funding of the domestic abortion industry as well, since it accumulates funds from so many different "Title" programs & other Uncle Sam donations of our tax $.
It may be an issue that will some day go back to the states.
Some states will do it, others will stop or limit them in the future in my opinion.
The President can talk about the issue, but he couldn’t do anything beyond appointing the right justices to slide the social engineering back the other way.
I do not believe in abortion either, but it is through one on one talks with people, not laws and harsh protesting where hearts and minds will change. All that does is make people did in harder for abortion.