Congressman Paul Ryan Latest to Call For Truce on Pro-Life, Social Issues

  • Thread starter Thread starter juliee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

juliee

Guest
Congressman Paul Ryan Latest to Call For Truce on Pro-Life, Social Issues

Washington, DC – Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin became the latest potential presidential candidate and Republican with a national profile to call for a “truce” on social issues. He joins Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Mississippi Gov. Hailey Barbour, who called for Republicans to back down on pro-life issues.

LifeNews.com/nat6697.html
 
juliee said:
Congressman Paul Ryan Latest to Call For Truce on Pro-Life, Social Issues

Washington, DC – Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin became the latest potential presidential candidate and Republican with a national profile to call for a “truce” on social issues. He joins Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Mississippi Gov. Hailey Barbour, who called for Republicans to back down on pro-life issues.

LifeNews.com/nat6697.html
Click to expand...
They are evidently worldly cowards.
 
Ryan and others can say this all they want, but I won’t go along with it. Any politician who is pro-abortion is a politician I will oppose for that reason alone.
 
Back down? Amazing?

Life issues trump quality of life issues.

Or is he really saying - let us go after the Dems where it hurts, the economy as our focus to win.
 
buffalo said:
Back down? Amazing?

Life issues trump quality of life issues.

Or is he really saying - let us go after the Dems where it hurts, the economy as our focus to win.
Click to expand...
I like your explanation better, and knowing Haley Barbour, I think it is more on target. I don’t think they are saying that they will not still support those issues, they are saying let’s not let the Dems use that weapon to haul in the godless among us.
 
I’m honestly glad the Republican party is having this conversation in the open, because it’s been going on “underground” for years now, to the profit of exactly nobody. I’m glad that prominent pro-life Republicans are asking these questions, questioning core GOP strategy, and weighing transcendent values against transient (but critically important!) short-term political gain.

However, I respectfully hope and pray that the party roundly rejects the proposal of a “truce.” It is politically expedient, and that’s not a bad thing, but it is utterly, utterly inhuman, and that is.

And then I hope we can rally 'round the pro-life colors again in 2012. Just don’t look for voter enthusiasm from this pro-lifer if one of the “trucers” is the party nominee.
 
Anybody remember the Gospel from yesterday? 😉

Those calling for a truce to win elections are correct about one thing: it will work. Dividing the conservative base by pulling abortion off the back burner before November could indeed hurt our chances to get in our desired candidates.
 
buffalo said:
Back down? Amazing?

Life issues trump quality of life issues.

Or is he really saying - let us go after the Dems where it hurts, the economy as our focus to win.
Click to expand...
After reading the whole article, it really seems that Ryan is saying that abortion is not going to be the decisive issue in November, and that Repubs should emphasize the economy, which will be.

He’s not saying “let’s go pro-abortion” or even “let’s not care about abortion”, and certainly isn’t saying Repubs should declare a truce with Dems on it. He’s just saying that’s not what’s on everybody’s mind, and that the strategy should be to emphasize what IS on everybody’s mind; the economy.

The title of the article is a bit misdirecting in that regard.
 
CDNowak said:
Anybody remember the Gospel from yesterday? 😉

Those calling for a truce to win elections are correct about one thing: it will work. Dividing the conservative base by pulling abortion off the back burner before November could indeed hurt our chances to get in our desired candidates.
Click to expand...
So what is it about a candidate that makes him or her desired?
 
In between the fact that a lot of pro-life people think the Republicans care about social issues only at election time *and *the fact that many people are currently very energized about economic issues, I can understand this strategy…

BUT!!! I think this is the wrong tack to take. It seems to me that they should instead be putting the two issues together by showing how good, moral, upright living in *all *areas leads to the best life for all. That when people are undisciplined in morality, from envious and greedy to sexually immoral, this leads to bad consequences for society.

This seems like a pragmatic political solution to me: they see what is happening with the Tea Party and that they themselves might lose power in their own party. That comment about the man who lost to O’Donnell’s having been robbed… that just showed how far away from the people they are: what do they think an election is all about, anyway???

The Republicans are disgusting me more and more the more they talk, that’s for sure.
 
miguel said:
So what is it about a candidate that makes him or her desired?
Click to expand...
Pro Life record, fiscally sane, some measure of leadership ability. Paul Ryan is a prime example: 100% Pro-life rating, a fiscal plan that is forcing the mainstream media to address the problems he points out. and the guts to go at it.
 
miguel said:
So what is it about a candidate that makes him or her desired?
Click to expand...
At this point in time it is fiscal responsibility and accountability. Candidates who are perceived this way by the voters will be the candidate who wins IMO. Of course pro-life is extremely important but that is not what is on the voter’s minds right now. And you sure aren’t going to get candidates from the Dems who believe in either of these issues.
 
St_Francis said:
In between the fact that a lot of pro-life people think the Republicans care about social issues only at election time *and *the fact that many people are currently very energized about economic issues, I can understand this strategy…

BUT!!! I think this is the wrong tack to take. It seems to me that they should instead be putting the two issues together by showing how good, moral, upright living in *all *areas leads to the best life for all. That when people are undisciplined in morality, from envious and greedy to sexually immoral, this leads to bad consequences for society.

This seems like a pragmatic political solution to me: they see what is happening with the Tea Party and that they themselves might lose power in their own party. That comment about the man who lost to O’Donnell’s having been robbed… that just showed how far away from the people they are: what do they think an election is all about, anyway???

The Republicans are disgusting me more and more the more they talk, that’s for sure.
Click to expand...
In some ways, open talk about a truce on “social issues” is more honest than pro-life pretensions at election time. If a politician isn’t serious about restoring 14th Amendment equal protection of the laws to unborn persons, this pro-lifer wants to know. Come voting time, the more clarity the better.
 
CDNowak said:
Pro Life record, fiscally sane, some measure of leadership ability. Paul Ryan is a prime example: 100% Pro-life rating, a fiscal plan that is forcing the mainstream media to address the problems he points out. and the guts to go at it.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link, CDN. It’s worth discussing the basis of his “100% pro-life” rating. None of these demonstrate an intention on his part to restore 14th Amendment equal protection of the laws to unborn persons. These Constitutional protections were removed from unborn persons by the Roe v Wade decision. This is why it is legal to kill them. While his positions on these side issues are consistent and arguably the preferred positions to take, none of these positions directly attack the bottom line legal problem…the problem that must be addressed before justice is restored to unborn persons. I picked a few of his votes from your link for comment.

**Vote 1: **Should partial-birth abortions be banned, except to save the life of mother?
Any woman seeking a late term abortion can still get one. She just can’t use this gruesome procedure. The partial birth abortion ban act states explicitly that only born persons are Constitutionally protected. The GOP platform has promised for years to work for legislation that restores 14th Amendment protections to the unborn. Is this pro-life or Congressional (i.e., legislative) affirmation of the Court’s Roe v Wade jurisprudence?

**Votes 8-9: **Should federal employees’ health insurance plans be prohibited from covering abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest)?

Are babies conceived in rape or incest not entitled to equal protection of the laws? This is not a good sign that restoring equal protection of the laws is his intent.
Votes 13-14: Should the federal Bureau of Prisons be prohibited from paying for abortions, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape?

See above.
Votes 16-17: When an unborn child is injured or killed during the commission of a violent federal crime, should that unborn child be legally recognized as a victim of a crime?

So unborn victims should be protected if they are killed by someone other than their mother, but not protected from being directly killed by their mother? Again, this is not a good sign that restoring equal protection of the laws is his intent.
 
I guess they don’t want to tick off those people who are for Republicans solely for the selfish reasons of accumulating wealth. Sort of ignores the fact that the pro-life movement has been solidly conservative for decades.

Manna trumps Jesus’ teachings in the election business.

Peace
 
portarica said:
I guess they don’t want to tick off those people who are for Republicans solely for the selfish reasons of accumulating wealth. Sort of ignores the fact that the pro-life movement has been solidly conservative for decades.

Manna trumps Jesus’ teachings in the election business.

Peace
Click to expand...
The GOP knows pro-lifers won’t vote Dem. And they know pro-lifers won’t hold them accountable for false promises. This is classic codependence. The alcoholic keeps drinking. And the spouse stays hoping he’ll change. He won’t change. He’s being enabled.
 
juliee said:
Congressman Paul Ryan Latest to Call For Truce on Pro-Life, Social Issues

Washington, DC – Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin became the latest potential presidential candidate and Republican with a national profile to call for a “truce” on social issues. He joins Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Mississippi Gov. Hailey Barbour, who called for Republicans to back down on pro-life issues.

LifeNews.com/nat6697.html
Click to expand...
I think we have had a “truce” on these issues for over 50 years. Isn’t enough, enough?
 
Surrendering pro life principles for the greater sake of the party is how Democratic pro life politicians became marginalized in the Democratic Party, eventually losing the influence they had to reorient the party towards a greater pro life position. I would hope that Republican pro life politicians would not walk down this same dead end road. Pro life voters need to hold the politician’s feet to the fire on this issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top