V
vern_humphrey
Guest
You noticed that, too, eh?
Here’s the secret, liberals make rules for** other** people.
- Status
Here’s the secret, liberals make rules for** other** people.
M
mapleoak
Guest
We have an obligation to cast our vote such that the greatest proximate potential gain can be had. A president exercises a great deal of power for or against the pro-life cause by his ability to appoint judges. We ourselves have little control of who the appointees are. A president does not have much other power other than the ability to sign or veto bills. Therefore a president who may not be entirely ‘in-line’ entirely on pro-life issues, but who has the reasonable presumption to appoint the appropriate judges, may indeed take a morally sound vote cast. Consideration for the influential power a president may possess however over other bodies should not be underestimated.
M
mapleoak
Guest
Ya! so long is doesn’t affect me, eh!You noticed that, too, eh?
Here’s the secret, liberals make rules for** other** people.
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
I am with you. I came to this realization a few years ago. This is not a popular view on this board and many will point out the great strides made in the law to reduce abortions in the form of little nibbles around the edges of the issue that actually have no effect on the murder of the innocents.
F
Fitswimmer
Guest
The dirty little secret is that BOTH parties want control. The Republicans want to control when life begins and when it ends, and the Democrats want to control everything in the middle.
F
Fitswimmer
Guest
Not really. There is no candidate that speaks effectively to ALL the issues that matter to me.
I want the unjust war in Iraq to end
I want health care reform
I want the death penalty abolished
I want economic policies that show a preferential option for the poor
AND I want an end to abortion.
You tell me…is there an American political party that will do ALL these things??
O
onaquest
Guest
I’m sleeping a little easier knowing there is a third party candidate I can vote for. He spoke at our Pro Life banquet. It may seem like my vote is meaningless voting for someone who can’t win but I still like knowing I have the option to vote my conscience.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
There will never be a political party that meets your desires – until you get to work, recruit and support candidates who reflect your thinking.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Nope, not that I know of. That’s why I asked. I appreciate your disappointment with the Republican Party on abortion, even though I do believe there has been some minor progress.
You and I probably disagree on the ways to reform health care and on economic policies that “show a preferential option for the poor.” While my views are not necessarily 100% in line with the Republican Party on those issues, they are closer than the other viable option and certainly better on life issues than the other viable option.
Of course, viability is not important to some, and I understand that. I personally disagree with the assessment that God doesn’t want us to take a practical approach to politics. If my party platform supported a clear evil, I would be forced to go with a third party. However, that is not the case, so I take the good with the bad. When voting, I don’t go party line though, I will look at each individual and vote according to my conscience.
M
mapleoak
Guest
Which great strides in the the law are you referring to?
F
frankadams
Guest
Sadly, I believe you are correct. The “gains” of the Republican administrations (23 out of 35 post-Roe years) don’t seem to have saved any lives, and have been mostly symbolic. And even more sadly, abortion numbers have been generally higher during Republican administrations.
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
The partial birth abortion ban, for one. No discernible effect, but great fanfare. Only nibbled around the edge…symbolism over substance.
F
frankadams
Guest
You are right. There is little else in the Democratic platform that champions “personal autonomy” and “freedom from government interference in one’s decisions about what to do with one’s own body.” If they were consistent, they would be marching for assisted-suicide rights and the legalization of all recreational drugs. They highlight these things in the abortion debate because they help their cause when it comes to abortion, but most of them don’t really champion personal autonomy. It is transparent hypocrisy of the worst kind.
F
frankadams
Guest
You are right. There is little else in the Democratic platform that champions “personal autonomy” and “freedom from government interference in one’s decisions about what to do with one’s own body.” If they were consistent, they would be marching for assisted-suicide rights and the legalization of all recreational drugs. They highlight these things in the abortion debate because they help their cause when it comes to abortion, but most of them don’t really champion personal autonomy. It is transparent hypocrisy of the worst kind.
M
mapleoak
Guest
The partial birth abortion ban is not a great stride in law protecting the unborn. Neither is it evidence that a ‘real’ law protecting the unborn would have no effect.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
Inconsistency is the hallmark of the Democratic platform.
They are all for freedom from government interference in connection with suicide and abortion, but not with home schooling or carrying a gun for protection.
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
Ah, and that’s the point. Posters here on this board have fanfared the partial birth abortion ban as a major stride and proof of the Republicans’ pro-life intentions. I say it’s mere symbolism over substance.
R
robben29
Guest
It’s all about the judicial appointments.
F
frankadams
Guest
And yet a Republican-dominated Supreme Court made Roe law. And Reagan and Bush 41 both nominated justices who voted to uphold it.
R
robben29
Guest
At least there’s hope for it. There’s not even the slightest hope for a Democrat to appoint a pro-life judge. They’re dedicated to doing the opposite.
- Status