I'm a one-issue voter

[nannygirl]

a question for you single issue voters.

when you candidate loses, or, worse yet, you candidate wins and is unable to stop legal abortions, do you then completely withdraw from the political process and refuse the benefits of government because the civil authorities are now out of step with the CC?

actually, that’s more of a rhetorical question. for anyone not a hermit, disappointed single issue voters no doubt avail themselves of the usual public services, benefits, protections, and other rights that government provides or guarantees.

as I see it, your protest vote is meaningless except, of course, to yourselves. that’s why its hard to take any of this single issue voting seriously. in most, if not nearly all, these protest votes don’t reach dog-in-the-manger status.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean…Are you saying that people whose candidate doesn’t win should no longer have any citizenship rights? In my estimation, the “government” doesn’t provide services. It uses coersion to get money from citizens to do things that citizens used to do all by themselves a lot cheaper. As it is now, I get very few “benefits” (actually I can’t even think of any) from the government because I’m middle class, but it sure does cost me a lot. But then, I don’t think the government should be in the business of taking care of me from cradle to grave. If they would just take care of the highways and maintain a military to protect us, that would be enough for me.

My candidate’s name probably won’t be on the ballot, but I’m writing in his name. It’s my right and my conscience and I will always vote against dismembering people in the womb.

 

[JKing]

This is getting really ugly. I would like to continue reading the discussion, but do not appreciate the personal attacks.

I don’t think I’m blind. I WISH I could bring myself to consider other issues. But as long as 3000 little kids have their arms and legs pulled out of their sockets; as long as young mothers are being deluded into thinking that it’s no big deal and then suffer for THE REST OF THEIR LIVES, for having had their children murdered; I cannot!

In fact, I think that anyone who can overlook this and worry about potholes or bailing out people who made poor decisions when taking out their mortgages, is blind. I have to vote life at every level. Politicians are supposed to be leaders and I refuse to be led–at any level–by anyone who can turn a blind eye to the genocide of a quarter of each generation. If they support abortion, they don’t deserve my vote.

The culture of death needs to be changed. I am working at the grass-roots level by raising kids who are pro-life and discussing it with whomever will listen. I support services for women in crisis, I pray, and I try to keep myself educated. But there is also a top-down approach to changing the culture. We have to keep a strong presence (majority if possible) in all levels of government. If the local town council is majority pro-life, do you think planned parenthood will get the zoning permit? If my state legislature is majority pro-life, when Roe is overturned and the states have contol again, will my state have legalized abortion or not? If the congress is majority pro-life will activists judges be confirmed? If the president is pro-life, will he appoint judges who support murder in the womb?

Thanks and God bless.

 

[estesbob]

Drop it, pal. You intentionally misstated my posiiton, again. I don’t want to discuss anything with you. You’d be better off arguing with yourself. Go figure.

Lets summarize your stance"\

Pro-life voters are fools
Pro-life politicians and those who work to end abortion are inept
Having been called on this nonsense you now declare you wont discuss it.

Figures.

 

[Wirraway]

Lets summarize your stance"\

Pro-life voters are fools
Pro-life politicians and those who work to end abortion are inept
Having been called on this nonsense you now declare you wont discuss it.

Figures.

no, I’m not going to engage in a spitting contest with you, and I’m going to ask you, once again, to stop intentionally misstating my position by misquoting or quoting out of context. This is the second or third time you’ve done this, so maybe you need to take a break.

If you need to talk to yourself, you can use the quote function.

Figures.

 

[vz71]

Coming in a little late on this thread, but I too am a single issue voter.

I cannot get past a piece of logic that simply says…what issue will you place before life?

Given that, until abortion is banned, I cannot look past the issue.

 

[JKing]

More food for thought on this discussion.

Archbishop Chaput’s latest column in the Denver Archdiocese newspaper.

archden.org/images/ArchbishopCorner/NewspaperColumns/ab_chaput_webcolumn.pdf

A good read and very appropriate.

 

[nannygirl]

no, I’m not going to engage in a spitting contest with you, and I’m going to ask you, once again, to stop intentionally misstating my position by misquoting or quoting out of context. This is the second or third time you’ve done this, so maybe you need to take a break.

If you need to talk to yourself, you can use the quote function.

Figures.

What exactly is your position? I’m having trouble figuring it out, too…

 

[Wirraway]

I’m not sure I understand what you mean…Are you saying that people whose candidate doesn’t win should no longer have any citizenship rights? In my estimation, the “government” doesn’t provide services. It uses coersion to get money from citizens to do things that citizens used to do all by themselves a lot cheaper. As it is now, I get very few “benefits” (actually I can’t even think of any) from the government because I’m middle class, but it sure does cost me a lot. But then, I don’t think the government should be in the business of taking care of me from cradle to grave. If they would just take care of the highways and maintain a military to protect us, that would be enough for me.

My candidate’s name probably won’t be on the ballot, but I’m writing in his name. It’s my right and my conscience and I will always vote against dismembering people in the womb.

police, fire, roads, defense, public health and safety, access to courts, various guaranteed civil rights, all all things the government provides or safeguards. that’s hardly cradle to grave.

I just don’t get these single issue voters. you live in a republic, there are hundreds of important issues. unless you exercise your discretion, fixation on any single issue to the exclusion of all others is going to buy you the worst kind of government.

you can call yourselves single issue voters, but you’re not by any means. you vote for someone based on his stand on abortion, and you’re also voting for everything else he stands for or opposes, all issues foreign and domestic, social, economic, and whatever. you might vote for an anti-abortion baptist who is a hawk on foreign policy and would vote war funding to invade iran and wants to turn the country into a protestant theocracy. an extreme example, possibly, but think this single issue stuff though.

 

[Wirraway]

Coming in a little late on this thread, but I too am a single issue voter.

I cannot get past a piece of logic that simply says…what issue will you place before life?

Given that, until abortion is banned, I cannot look past the issue.

abortion is not going to be banned anytime soon, that’s a fact of political life that’s you’ve got to come to grips with. given that, you’re willing to let someone else is make all the other public decisions for you? this country can take the wrong path in a lot of ways other than abortion, and that’s a consequence of single issue voting.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

The usual covoluted logic of those who support abortion on demand canidates raises it’s ugly head again. What you are saying is that since the Republicans have not been able to end abortion its ok to vote for those who want unlimited taxpayer funded abortion on demand. Of course Republicans cant end abortion beauce may , many Catholicsn use your logic and help elect abortion on demand canidatse who block every attempt to limit abortion in any way.

Ooh, look at how easily estesbob sets up his cute li’l strawman and knocks him over.

Impressive. Most impressive.

 

[mary_bobo]

My prediction, and I hope I’m wrong, is that a majority of Catholics will vote for the more pro-abortion candidate in November.

I am afraid you are right. I don’t think we folks who are concerned in pro-life issues are going to be well served in November. As a matter of fact, I think a lot of America as the framers saw it, will be down the tubes if the election goes as most pundits predict.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I just don’t get these single issue voters. you live in a republic, there are hundreds of important issues. unless you exercise your discretion, fixation on any single issue to the exclusion of all others is going to buy you the worst kind of government.

I’d say it has.

 

[Wirraway]

I’d say it has.

things could be a lot worse, far worse. you don’t have too look far historically or geographically to see that.

 

[nannygirl]

police, fire, roads, defense, public health and safety, access to courts, various guaranteed civil rights, all all things the government provides or safeguards. that’s hardly cradle to grave.

At 40% of my income, it SHOULD be cradle to grave. Europeans get a lot more for their money from their governments than we do. (That doesn’t mean I would like a European style government.) It seems that poor people and foreigners get something for nothing from our government. Us middle class only get the bill. I don’t want or need most of the things the government “provides”. I can’t afford it anymore.

I just don’t get these single issue voters. you live in a republic, there are hundreds of important issues. unless you exercise your discretion, fixation on any single issue to the exclusion of all others is going to buy you the worst kind of government.

We already have the worst kind of government. We have lost our freedom. Common sense has disappeared. People run for office to get richer and to ensure that they’ll have a fabulous pension and enviable health benefits for life. I could never vote for someone who really WANTS to be president; only someone who has been “drafted”- a true statesman. In my opinion there is zip difference between the 2 parties. I think they are both horribly corrupt and I can’t support either of them. I am voting for a person who believes that the constitution still means something. The federal government is way out of control.

you can call yourselves single issue voters, but you’re not by any means. you vote for someone based on his stand on abortion, and you’re also voting for everything else he stands for or opposes, all issues foreign and domestic, social, economic, and whatever. you might vote for an anti-abortion baptist who is a hawk on foreign policy and would vote war funding to invade iran and wants to turn the country into a protestant theocracy. an extreme example, possibly, but think this single issue stuff though.

What I am trying to tell you is -that is my starting place. I wouldn’t vote for any person just because they are against abortion if I didn’t care for them.

 

[nannygirl]

The culture of death needs to be changed. I am working at the grass-roots level by raising kids who are pro-life and discussing it with whomever will listen. I support services for women in crisis, I pray, and I try to keep myself educated. But there is also a top-down approach to changing the culture. We have to keep a strong presence (majority if possible) in all levels of government. If the local town council is majority pro-life, do you think planned parenthood will get the zoning permit? If my state legislature is majority pro-life, when Roe is overturned and the states have contol again, will my state have legalized abortion or not? If the congress is majority pro-life will activists judges be confirmed? If the president is pro-life, will he appoint judges who support murder in the womb?

Thanks and God bless.

Educating people to see what abortion really is has to be a priority. It sounds like you are doing your part.

When I speak to people about it, I always make sure that they know that the Supreme Court’s ruling made abortion legal for all nine months of pregnancy. Most people are very uncomfortable with that. Almost every single person I’ve polled about it thinks it’s only legal within the first 12 weeks.

 

[JimG]

Legal abortion was put in place by voters. Legislation passed by state legislatures elected by voters was overturned by courts. Voters don’t get a direct vote on abortion. But we can elect legislators and executives who will have the ability and willingness to nominate judges who aren’t already committed to the pro-abortion cause.

Sorry, I have to correct my own posting. I meant to say that legal abortion was NOT put in place by voters. Voters had pretty much voted into place legislatures which were more pro-life, with many states restricting abortion. It was courts which overturned voters and legislatures. That’s why voters are now stuck with trying to change courts–because we no longer get to vote on abortion.

I might add that being pro-life has generally helped candidates more than being pro-abortion when it comes to getting elected.

 

[jc-servant]

The usual covoluted logic of those who support abortion on demand canidates raises it’s ugly head again. What you are saying is that since the Republicans have not been able to end abortion its ok to vote for those who want unlimited taxpayer funded abortion on demand. Of course Republicans cant end abortion beauce may , many Catholicsn use your logic and help elect abortion on demand canidatse who block every attempt to limit abortion in any way.

Excuse you! I don’t support abortion at all. Why don’t you stop trying to put words into someone else’s mouth and actually read what is written instead of making the “usual” assumptions about someone simply because they are not a carbon copy of you.

 

[Wirraway]

…

We already have the worst kind of government. We have lost our freedom. Common sense has disappeared. People run for office to get richer and to ensure that they’ll have a fabulous pension and enviable health benefits for life. I could never vote for someone who really WANTS to be president; only someone who has been “drafted”- a true statesman…

do you really think this is the worst kind of government? there are many places where you’d be jailed for even making that statement. the cops aren’t going to beat a confession out of you and you can worship as you want, believe what you want, say what you want, protest all you want, vote your conscience or not at all.

the constitution ensures that the government functions by assuming that all politicians are ambitious and self interested semi-crooks. I don’t know what you mean by statesmen, all higher office seekers are extremely ambitious men and women, some of them are better than others.

if you think you’ve lost freedoms, to what year would you roll back the clock and p(name removed by moderator)oint as an ideal?

 

[estesbob]

Excuse you! I don’t support abortion at all. Why don’t you stop trying to put words into someone else’s mouth and actually read what is written instead of making the “usual” assumptions about someone simply because they are not a carbon copy of you.

Do you vote for people who do?

 

[estesbob]

police, fire, roads, defense, public health and safety, access to courts, various guaranteed civil rights, all all things the government provides or safeguards. that’s hardly cradle to grave.

I just don’t get these single issue voters. you live in a republic, there are hundreds of important issues. unless you exercise your discretion, fixation on any single issue to the exclusion of all others is going to buy you the worst kind of government.

you can call yourselves single issue voters, but you’re not by any means. you vote for someone based on his stand on abortion, and you’re also voting for everything else he stands for or opposes, all issues foreign and domestic, social, economic, and whatever. you might vote for an anti-abortion baptist who is a hawk on foreign policy and would vote war funding to invade iran and wants to turn the country into a protestant theocracy. an extreme example, possibly, but think this single issue stuff though.

So a “few” dead children is acceptable as long as the pot holes are filled? I guess that is what is called" collateral damage"