Posted on 12/13/2001 7:50:35 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
We have a WINNA! for best RINO spin in support of a pro-choice Republican president!
Get a clue here. In a two party system, it is the one-issue people on the edge who are devisive. Basically, the US is split 50/50, with each side having a 5 - 10% one-or-two-issue voters who would rather bring down the party closest to their ideology to the benefit of the opposing party. That is why I encourage Jesse Jackson and Nader - divide and conquer is the name of two party politics.
Now for the "anti-Christian attitude" - how is it being anti-Christian to, in reality, do what I can to get people into office who are more likely than the Democrats to oppose abortion? Or would you rather disagree with all those 90% of the people to the left of you and see your thoughts COMPLETELY marginalized?
And by the way, even if we were a minority, our God has a way of evening the score with people and nations who ignore Him. Do you realize what this sounds like? This is from today's transcript "Fight them, Allah will torture them, with your hands, he will torture them. He will deceive them and he will give you victory. Allah will forgive the believers, he is knowledgeable about everything."
What God to do pray to anyway? Not the benevolent Christian God, that's for sure. I don't remember Jesus saying anything about "evening the score with people and nations who ignore Him."
Does it feel wierd to take comfort in thoughts that your God will punish people who don't feel the same way you do? I would have thought the lessons of September 11 would have tempered such zeolotry.
On the contrary, it is Christians who hold regularly "hold their nose" and vote for pro-choicers like GW Bush who are responsible for the continuing slide into the New Dark Ages. A Christian who votes for a pro-choicer, is an accomplice to murder.
Your continued support of an ever-leftward moving Republican party is killing this country by playing into the ratchet effect of elections between communists and socialists.
(And Bush and the Republican party are definitely pro-choice.)
82% of Americans favor some form of legal abortion. 17% are opposed to all abortion.
The numbers have been essentially the same for 20 years.
But Bush opposes abortion, and supports the traditional family, and he still doesn't get your vote. Than being the case, why should he every do anything you want him to, unless of course, if feels that way himself. You will object to my characterization of his position, but those are the facts. You are letting your disagreement about tactics, something you know little about, obscure that fact that your goals are his goals.
The point being, Republicans didn't even try to pass a ban on Partial Birth Abortion period! Now we are even farther from it then we were before Jumpin' Jeffords.
Yes, you have a perfect right to stand there, and watch your neighbors house burn down, and listen to his children scream as they burn to death. If is a free country and a free choice. It also shows the kind of person you are.
Because they have learned over the years, and know what they are doing. Either one of these would be good for you to accomplish.
Yes and you have the perfect right to go into the burning building, knowing you are giving your life for your brother, but since you are here accusing me of being a traitor I can see you never moved a muscle other than your mouth. Stick your phony righteousness where the sun don’t shine.
I'm not really sure we disagree. Bush would obviously put better people on the court than 98% of the Democrats who ran for President last time, and probably better than most electable Republican candidates. That IS what we're talking here, isn't - electable? If it isn't, then it is a wasted protest vote.
How long is enough? Abortionist allow a few inches of the baby's head inside the womb before they kill it. Does the Senate need 2 years?
"It was just few months, during which Bush was trying to set up his administration."
That didn't stop him from passing some of his agenda items, why did it stop him from doing what Karl Rove is concerned about?
"Jeffords jumped when they began to push a conservative agenda (the judges)."
John Breaux by himself would negate that along with several other DemocRATS.
"2) We lost a lot of Pro-Life votes in the last election. I don't think that we would have had the votes even if the Republicans had voted on it."
I wonder why we lost Pro-life votes? Could it be partially because of the very excuses/reasons that you are using now?
"Can you name 51 Senators who would vote for it? Keeping in Mind that the Democrats would put a lot more pressure on any democrat who voted pro-life, since clinton isn't there to veto it."
It takes leadership, the power of the Bully Pulpit and cajones to pass things that, at the momemt, may seem politically impossible. I don't think that I could accurately name the number of Senators who would vote one way or another and I doubt if you could either.
"I think that the heart of your complaint is that the Republicans didn't make it their #1 vote."
No need for hyperboli. My gripe is they didn't even try.
That has to be one of the grossest mistatements I have ever heard concerning Washington DC politicians.
If it was not a crime, and advanced the pro-life cause, by advancing the political coalition, absolutely.
Nice try at distorting the facts. By the same survey you chose to quote from, 73% of respondents feel that abortion should be illegal in some cases. This survey asked about abortion in the positive sense, so it is likely that the pro-abortion count reflected by it is exaggerated. Most neutrally oriented surveys show a slight plurality on pro-life side.
The country is very evenly split on this issue, regardless of how the pro-abortion crowd attempts to spin it.
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.