Posted on 12/04/2011 7:50:15 PM PST by Notwithstanding
The Gingrich campaign contacted me directly last night about the comments that he made to ABC News. The campaign sent me the following statement from Newt Gingrich. (Which is also on their website).
I am very glad that the Gingrich campaign was quick to respond to the fallout from the ABC News interview and that they came out with a strong pro-life statement which reaffirms the scientific fact that life begins at conception....
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicvote.org ...
Typical, you’re pushing Tapper’s mischaracterization, blossoming it into a full blown lie.
Masturbating to manufacture a new person with the help of lab techs. Isn’t that special.
Honestly, I think that you might want to look at how MISCARRIAGE is defined.
“does an embryo which can by its makeup only survive for two weeks, and its parents never knew it existed briefly in the fallopian tube, have a soul?”
Does a 2 year old, who can only survive for two weeks, because of _______________, have a soul?
Regarding a “brief existence,” you might be interested to read this: “Heaven is for Real: A Little Boy’s Astounding Story of His Trip to Heaven and Back” by Todd Burpo. This child described meeting his sibling in heaven...who had earlier been miscarried. His parents had never told him about this.
I’m a 66 years old man. Your ‘correcting me’ is flawed in several ways, not the least of which is the dehumanizing of embryonic aged humans. Tell me, what is the first organ that the newly conceived human makes to sustain his or her life? When you get that right, you will understand how your ‘teaching’ is in error. [Here’s a hint: the morulla-aged human being differentiates two sets of cells, with one set aimed at building the first organ for survival —which organ combines the work for life in a water world, while the other set of cells —that will form the body of an air-world destined baby— will build organs for more differentiated survival work in the air world.]
Clinton and others have tried to use “life of the mother” concern as a scarecrow to keep people from recognizing that pre-Roe law universally allowed saving the life of the mother, and was never classified as abortion, either by the Church OR in civil law.
Where the Catholic Church takes a more pro-child position than pre-Roe American law is when the mother and child are in jeopardy, such as in pre-eclampsia, or cancer. Thirty-nine years after Roe, both pre-eclampsia and usually cancer are treatable without risk to the child's life, and so the pregnancy can continue to birth.
From a realistic standpoint, the only "conservative" standing between Romney and the nomination is Gingrich. If we all start having second thoughts about him, then the nomination will fall to Romney by default. Maybe it is you who needs to start thinking twice about Gingrich.
The Perry machine has blown a rod and I don't see the AAA truck anywhere near him. Newt has literally 10 times the support that Perry has right now. I realistically don't see that turning around. Money and organization can only buy you so much support. You can't buy a 30 point poll swing.
It appears the synthetic BS is intoxicating and highly addicting, but has no basis in reality.
LOL!
Switch to decaf my friend. First of all, a troll, concerned or otherwise I’m not. What I am is a pissed off conservative Catholic, tired of being sold out by the RINOs and the CINOs in our party.
Newt is a convert to Catholicism, as such he knows the “rules” for the club. And what he said prior ran counter to those rules and he got called on it. I don’t give a damn if it was MSM who called him on it or not; whether they have their typical liberal MSM agenda of protecting Obama is of no concern to me. The fact is he said it.
I for one am not going to sacrifice the sanctity of human life for political expediency. I’d rather see the whole thing crash and burn than do that. Romney’s no friend to pro-lifers either. Now, Gingrich having corrected himself, I think he’s worthy of the benefit of the doubt. In point of fact I’m supporting his candidacy.
So, is my agenda clear now? No more being told to get in the back of the bus and shut up by the RINO pro-choice wing of the Republican Party. A candidate wants my vote he/she is going to have to earn it. It doesn’t come automatically anymore.
Best Regards
Oh, I’d vote for Rick or Michelle before Newt or Slick Mitt. But if the choice is only between Newt or Slick Mitt, I prefer Newt of the two.
TAPPER: Abortion is a big issue here in Iowa among conservative Republican voters and Rick Santorum has said you are inconsistent. The big argument here is that you have supported in the past embryonic stem cell research and you made a comment about how these fertilized eggs, these embryos are not yet “pre-human” because they have not been implanted. This has upset conservatives in this state who worry you don’t see these fertilized eggs as human life. When do you think human life begins?GINGRICH: Well, I think the question of being implanted is a very big question. My friends who have ideological positions that sound good don’t then follow through the logic of: ‘So how many additional potential lives are they talking about? What are they going to do as a practical matter to make this real?’
I think that if you take a position when a woman has fertilized egg and that’s been successfully implanted that now you’re dealing with life. because otherwise you’re going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult questions
TAPPER: So implantation is the moment for you.
GINGRICH: Implantation and successful implantation. In addition I would say that I’ve never been for embryonic stem cell research per se. I have been for, there are a lot of different ways to get embryonic stem cells. I think if you can get embryonic stem cells for example from placental blood if you can get it in ways that do not involve the loss of a life that’s a perfectly legitimate avenue of approach.
What I reject is the idea that we’re going to take one life for the purpose of doing research for other purposes and I think that crosses a threshold of de-humanizing us that’s very very dangerous.
Gingrich is saying above simply that there is a difference between an implanted zygote and one that is not implanted.
He is then saying, "If you take the position that an unimplanted zygote is to be seen as a fully human life, then what are you prepared to do about all those zygotes that do not naturally implant? The number is seen as being as high as 80% of all fertilizations. Will there be funerals? Will there be names? Should there be autopsies?
I think he is then saying that those that are not implanted and being naturally passed through the system are even ineligible for stem cell research.
He would conduct such research on stem cells in placental blood.
Now, IF your 25 year old relative dies, would you approve an autopsy even though many of the cells are still living? Is that similar to studying a zygote that has passed through unimplanted and the cells of which will die?
If your 25 year old relative had not left paperwork but had spoken to you approvingly of organ donation, would you permit his organs to be used? Is that similar to using cells from an unimplanted zygote that definitely, absolutely is dying?
These are the kinds of questions that get Gingrich in trouble. They are exactly the questions that had me at the "implantation life" stage for a while.
I don't think they are questions that mean you are not pro-life. I think they are natural questions for anyone who reflects on the nature and destiny of unimplanted zygotes.
All the others, she’s already successfully under minded Except Paul and Romney.I did not mind when she under minded any of the candidates. What I cannot stand is when she undermines them.
Before I throw support to a sometime conservative I want to see how the votes go in SC & FL. Right now everyone seems to be excited about Newt but he is hardly a solid conservative and as he has just shown on abortion there are some caveats in his Pro-Life views. Also, I believe that Pery has gotten a lot more endorsements among his peers than Gingrich.
Also, how much difference is there between Gingrich and Romney. They both supported the personal mandate in healthcare. They both are establishment candidates and Gingrich is the consummate inside the beltway politician. The only big difference I see between Romney and Gingrich is Romney actively supported a pro-abortion agenda and Newt did not.
The Perry machine has blown a rod and I don't see the AAA truck anywhere near him. Newt has literally 10 times the support that Perry has right now.
Again, no votes have been cast and at this point last time around McCain was in 4th place. If Gingrich gets the nomination I will vote for him in the general election. I won't do that for Romney. I intend to support the conservative running (Perry) not the sometime conservative (Gingrich) that everyone thinks is going to win debates.
I think Gingrich can win in the general election, but don't think it will be easy. Gingrich plays right into all the stereo types that obama wants to run against. He's the inside the beltway politician who after he left office made millions peddling influence. He's the rich guy who spent $500,000 on his wife at Tiffany's. Also, the expectations are so high for Gingrich in debating that if he stumbles at all it looks like a win for obama.
Xzins - nice points.
Gingrich is being bashed because he is willing to discuss the details of everything. That means he discusses things that can’t fit nicely into a platform or an ad.
This is the exact opposite of Romney, who never expresses his candid thoughts about anything and is unwilling to discuss hard details of anything because he might actually reveal something about how he really views the world.
Happily, this is backfiring on Romney. And I think Gingrich’s rise is in part due to his willingness to reveal how he views the world.
Gingrich is wonky, but he really is a conservative wonk. And that means that his proposals once in office will be based not on polls, but on ideas that have been well thought out.
For a guy who is supposed to be the smartest guy in the room it's stunning he doesn't see where this leads. Welcome to a brave new world where we will create zygotes for the production of medical cures and once that is the norm why not take the next step and then manipulate genetic codes so we get the workers/drones we want.
Now, IF your 25 year old relative dies, would you approve an autopsy even though many of the cells are still living?
There is a world of difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. I don't see how harvesting adult stem cells, from cord blood for example, diminishes the special significance we need to give to life. A zygote has the potential to grow into a human being and we shouldn't tamper with this potentiality.
You backgrounder research on FR has been thorough, whomever did it. You have the words down, but I suspect you are not what you are trying to portray yourself as on this thread. Time will tell, if you stick around after the elections.
My post above shows that Gingrich was talking about the distinction between an implanted and an unimplanted zygote. There is a distinction. The first is absolutely developing. The unimplanted is definitely destined immediately to cease functioning.
The idea that Gingrich and Romney somehow support the same thing regarding mandates is not correct. Romney supported an entire system of RomneyCare that was financed by a state requirement to purchase a state approved health plan.
Gingrich's idea of mandates (and this started during the Hillarcare debate when she was pushing single-payer) was that every individual in America who used a hospital should be required to prove that he had insurance or had posted a bond before entering that hospital.
Gingrich's thought was, "If you're going to run up a bill, then YOU should pay for it, and not dump it off on the taxpayer or on other patients of the hospital who paid their own bills."
Personally, I STILL agree with the above. If you're going to take your car to the mechanic, then you should pay the guy who fixes your car. You should not have a law protecting you that allows you to stiff the mechanic. Nor should the taxpayer have to pay to fix your car. YOU should have to pay to fix your own car.
And that's what Gingrich has repeatedly explained. But, we get these soundbites that say "Romney mandate = Gingrich mandate", and it's a huge disservice to the fight against Obama and Romney.
You are a trip. Once again Newt says something totally inconsistent with Conservative orthodoxy and has to "clarify" his remarks to quiet the base. He did it over the Paul Ryan comment, He did it over the "Era of Reagan is Over" comment, he did it with the Cap and Tax issue. I guess it must be a slow day at the Newt campaign office this morning so you are here again defending this RINO with charges of people lying again. Predictable and also laughable. I guess that is all you are left with when you have to defend a lifetime, inside the beltway hack.
BTW, I think I asked you before and got the sound of crickets. Did Newt return his money from Fanny and Freddie after he chastised all the others that took money from them to return the money to the gov't? I can't seem to find where he did.
Try to run on banning IVF, I bet the polling on that is in the single digits. I believe IVF is evil, but not voting for Newt is not going to end it, but voting against him will lead to increasing planned parenthood.
I am talking about your dead 25 year old relative. Would you let them harvest organs or not?
How is that different than a dead human just hours old after conception?
An unimplanted zygote is dead. It is not going anyplace.
Wm, there is a HUGE difference between an implanted zygote and an unimplanted zygote. One has a future and the future for the other has stopped as of the moment in time that the implantation did not occur. It’s life is over.
How is donating that organ different than donating a kidney for the dead 25 year old?
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.