Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GOP to Pro-lifers: 'Thanks for Your Votes, Now Get Lost!'
NewsMax ^ | 11/15/02 | Limbacher

Posted on 11/15/2002 1:38:38 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection

Republican leaders are jabbing a thumb in the eyes of pro-lifers whose votes were largely responsible for the GOP victory in the November 5, elections, an angry Ken Connor charges.

Connor, president of the Family Research Council, ripped into the Republican congressional leadership for not standing firmly against the bankruptcy bill which contains Sen. Chuck Schumer's hostile pro-abortion amendment.

"The GOP is saying to pro-lifers, 'Thanks for your votes, now get lost!'" Connor said.

"Instead of rewarding pro-life Americans for giving their votes overwhelmingly to Republican candidates in last week's election, the GOP leadership is jabbing a thumb in their eye barely a week after the election at the behest of the well-heeled business wing of the party.

"Pro-lifers are asking themselves why they bothered when the GOP appears intent on sticking them with a gratuitous anti-life law that would expose peaceful anti-abortion protestors to financial ruin," Connor continued.

"Meanwhile, as GOP leaders ram through the Schumer amendment, pro-lifers are being told there is not enough time in the lame duck session to get a Senate vote on the bill banning partial-birth abortion the House passed last July.

According to Connor, The Schumer amendment "effectively says, 'If you are a pro-life protester and you wind up with a money judgment against you for engaging in what we regard as constitutionally protected speech and activity, you are not going to be able to discharge that debt in bankruptcy,'

"The effect of that is to create a disfavored class for purposes of punishing politically incorrect speech, because the only group that is being singled out for this kind of treatment is pro-life protestors.

"It's imperative that the GOP leadership put the same muscle behind the partial-birth abortion ban as they appear to be giving to the bankruptcy bill."

Once again, the GOP leadership is proving that they simply don't know who their real friends are.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gop; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last
To: Kerberos
Perhaps the Pro-Life group needs to form their own political party to promote their agenda.

The DemocRats would just looove that to happen.

Maybe they can call the party "Libertarians II".

21 posted on 11/15/2002 1:57:14 PM PST by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
One thing that strikes me as odd in this Partial Birth Abortion debate is this. If you honestly believe that PBA is the taking of an innocent life why would you want to wait? Does politics trump the innocent lives that will be lost while we wait? - Tom

Uhhh... "-Tom."

We've been trying for thirty years to reverse Roe v. Wade. If there were a magic wand to wave, somebody would have waved it by now.

Obviously, you have that magic wand. If you truly believe that partial birth abortion is the taking of innocent life, then why have you waited so long to wave it?

22 posted on 11/15/2002 1:57:32 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
I'd wait if I thought it wouldn't get through now, but would get through in a month or two.
23 posted on 11/15/2002 1:57:43 PM PST by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Disgusting, isn't it? That anti-choice forces believe they have a right to be equated with the mainstream GOP...

Government control of negative behavior is always a bad idea. Prohibition was stupid. (Certain) guns should be legal. Marijuana should be legal. Abortion should be legal. The government has no right to try to restrict foolish human behavior; it's going to flourish anyway, only less safely and more lucratively for criminals.
24 posted on 11/15/2002 1:58:01 PM PST by abraxas42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Is this supposed to be a surprise? This is how Republicans have always treated conservatives. They treat us worse than Dimmycraps treat blacks. We get all the rhetoric, they get all the action. They talk like Ronald Reagan, then they govern like Nelson Rockefeller.

If conservaties would support a genuinely conservative party, one devoted to the Constitution and limited government, we'd do ourselves a lot more good, IMO. It's time to stop being taken for granted.
25 posted on 11/15/2002 1:58:13 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify
The Schumer language was designed to hurt peaceful protestors. The change would have specifically affected those individuals whose peaceful, albeit unlawful, protests do not rise to the level of willful and malicious conduct, which currently can be discharged by a bankruptcy judge.

EXAMPLE: the individual kneeling on the sidewalk outside of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic who is sued in civil court for violating the FACE Act previously (because her kneeling is "physically blocking" access to the clinic -- and yes, judges have ruled for the pro-aborts when people have been praying on the sidewalk) may have discharged her lawsuit debts because her actions weren’t both willful and malicious. But under the Schumer language she would not be able to discharge debts from her Planned Parenthood lawsuit. This is a HUGE incentive for NARAL, PP, et al to sue EVERY protestor, and demanding the protestor pay NARAL's legal fees (as well as paying her own attorney)-- basically silencing the pro-life protests.

You might think pro-lifers don't have the right to pray outside abortion clinics, and that's fine. But this language would in fact affect these protests, not just violent protestors or those laying in front of clinic doors. A really good legal analysis by Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon is here: Legal Analysis

26 posted on 11/15/2002 1:59:05 PM PST by justanotherfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
One thing that strikes me as odd in this Partial Birth Abortion debate is this. If you honestly believe that PBA is the taking of an innocent life why would you want to wait? Does politics trump the innocent lives that will be lost while we wait? - Tom

Unfortunately even when the PBA bill is passed it won't stop the "procedure" from happening at all. All a doctor has to do is say the health of the mother is at risk, and they can legally continue this slaughter of innocent lives. Bush knows this, and knows that this bill won't save one live, but I can't understand why he is waiting since over 75% of Americans are for this ban.

27 posted on 11/15/2002 2:00:06 PM PST by SwordofTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Because the LEADERSHIP in the GOP was not the basis for its defeat, and only an aggressive Anti-Abortion sub-caucus prevented the GOP LEADERSHIP from forcing this detestable legislation through. So the upshot is clear, and really inarguable: The GOP can't take much credit for it's defeat.
28 posted on 11/15/2002 2:02:53 PM PST by Paul Ross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
He is just another meathead suitable to ignore.
29 posted on 11/15/2002 2:03:04 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cacophonous
Maybe you missed this thread from 11/07/02...

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's (R-Miss.) promise to pass a partial birth abortion ban is being praised by conservatives. During an interview with American Family Radio Wednesday, Lott said, "I will call it up, we will pass it, and the president will sign it. I'm making that commitment - you can write it down."

Lott Committed to Passing Partial Birth Abortion Ban

30 posted on 11/15/2002 2:03:18 PM PST by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: justanotherfreeper
Thanks for the info. Sounds like there isn't going to be an amendment after all.
31 posted on 11/15/2002 2:05:05 PM PST by Trust but Verify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: abraxas42
Disgusting, isn't it? That anti-choice forces believe they have a right to be equated with the mainstream GOP...

LOL! The pro-life forces are the mainstream GOP! Without them, Democrats would win every election.

32 posted on 11/15/2002 2:06:05 PM PST by SwordofTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
I'll believe it when I see it; Lott makes a lot of promises, and even more "compromises" that wind up screwing conservatives (and this one will kill more babies).

But I hope I am wrong, and if so will gladly eat a main course of crow and humble pie for desert.

33 posted on 11/15/2002 2:06:44 PM PST by Cacophonous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: All
My LAN keeps going down and I hurried this. As a consequence I forgot my normal "title meta". I simply wanted to bring up partial birth and create discussion as to where it's was heading.
34 posted on 11/15/2002 2:07:36 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Well, my understanding of what happened was that they thought they had enough votes to pass the bill with the pro-abortion provision in it. They brought it to the floor, and came close, but fell short a couple of votes, so Democrats and Republicans were released to vote against the bill.

Then, they passed a version without the provision, but it cannot pass the Senate.

35 posted on 11/15/2002 2:08:15 PM PST by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Your post is so filled with falsehoods I suspect your agenda. Such "conservatives" as you would produce a party capable of getting as many votes as the Libertarians i.e. not enough to elect an alderman in Chicago.

These "conservatives" have no clue about politics or how to effectuate change. They can and should be ignored since they are clueless lamebrains.

Too bad your candidates didn't win on Nov. 5.
36 posted on 11/15/2002 2:08:41 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The window of opportunity for the GOP to put up or shut up will last about 18 to 20 months, and won't begin in earnest until January.



37 posted on 11/15/2002 2:09:11 PM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kerberos
Then the GOPers would accuse them of electing Democrats.

EVERY vote belongs to the GOP. Then the GOP can crap on them. And then the GOP can dare them to leave, but then rail on them for not voting...

The GOP has a habit of expecting loyalty but not returning it.

38 posted on 11/15/2002 2:09:45 PM PST by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Nicely said.
39 posted on 11/15/2002 2:09:50 PM PST by Cacophonous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SwordofTruth
Why don't you learn a little about which you speak. Bush has not stopped this ban. Dasshole has.
40 posted on 11/15/2002 2:10:31 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson