Pro-Life Democrat Senate Candidates Email this article

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maranatha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maranatha

Guest
Abortion advocates are still upset with Democrat leaders who have coalesced behind two candidates for the U.S. Senate who oppose abortion. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has recruited Pennsylvania state Treasurer Bob Casey and Rhode Island Rep. Jim Langevin to run in Senate races in those states.
 
I voted the third option because if they vote pro-life and are trying to change the stance of the democratic party on life issue I will vote for them hands down.This is the ONLY way they will comprehend the truth about the stance of life in America.When they start noticing the life people are winning they will change.God Bless
 
As a Catholic, I am concerned with life issues first.

I am also aware of the importance of MAJORITIES in winning the battle politically for the right to life.

If, on life issues, a Democrat can ADD TO THE MAJORITY of voting pro-life senators to ensure that judges who view abortion as a states-rights issue get confirmed, then it may be the right thing to do, if my party, the GOP, fields a less pro-life candidate.
 
40.png
jlw:
As a Catholic, I am concerned with life issues first.

I am also aware of the importance of MAJORITIES in winning the battle politically for the right to life.

If, on life issues, a Democrat can ADD TO THE MAJORITY of voting pro-life senators to ensure that judges who view abortion as a states-rights issue get confirmed, then it may be the right thing to do, if my party, the GOP, fields a less pro-life candidate.
Click to expand...
Exactly IF the GOP fields a proabort candidate, then a prolife Democrat would be a welcome alternative. The sad thing is that prolife loses either way in this race. I would hate to see Sen Santorum unseated…although I keep wondering if he’ll be a presidential candidate. I’d rather see prolife Dems against proabort Republicans to swing the majority to the prolife side.

Lisa N
 
40.png
Richardols:
I’m rooting for Casey, a pro-life Dem like his Dad was.
Click to expand...
Just curious, simply BECAUSE of his party affiliation or because you believe he would make a better senator than Santorum? If so, why? From out here in the cheap seats it seems like Sen Santorum is really a great asset to the state and the party.

Shoot I wish WE had a choice of two prolife candidates in this state. We get to choose between prodeath and REALLY prodeath most of the time. The Democrat party runs everything.

Lisa N
 
im a bit of a populist and so my view of economic stuff is more closet to democrats than GOP, though dems are still wrong abouut it and so are GOP. socially though protecting the rights of ALL people is more important than economic issues. so if we had a truly pro life democrat i would vote for him unless there was a better GOP.
 
Lisa N:
Just curious, simply BECAUSE of his party affiliation or because you believe he would make a better senator than Santorum? If so, why? From out here in the cheap seats it seems like Sen Santorum is really a great asset to the state and the party.
Click to expand...
Santorum may be a good pro-life Republican, but I want pro-life Democrats in Congress, and at this point, it is more important to me that the Senate gets a pro-life Democrat than that a decent Republican retains his seat.
 
In my book Pro-life means pro-life all the way: No abortion! No capital punishment! No euthanasia! I find most of the members of all political parties are wishy-washy one at least one of these issues. If I could find person who is strongly against all three of these issues I would vote for him/her in a heartbeat. By the way I am an Independent (neither red or blue I guess that makes me purple)
 
Democratic Pro-life Rep. Jim Langevin vs. Republican Pro-abortion Senator Chafee.

Chafee dislikes Bush because he thinks Bush is too far to the right (especially on the issue of “women’s rights” i.e. the right of a mother to kill her child).

Any person who votes for Chafee over Langevin in 2006 is making the same “error” as those who voted for Kerry in 2004 (if both Chafee and Langevin are running in 2006).
 
Barbara Ann:
In my book Pro-life means pro-life all the way: No abortion! No capital punishment! No euthanasia! I find most of the members of all political parties are wishy-washy one at least one of these issues. If I could find person who is strongly against all three of these issues I would vote for him/her in a heartbeat. By the way I am an Independent (neither red or blue I guess that makes me purple)
Click to expand...
You cannot compare Abortion to Capital Punishment. Capital Punishment is akin to war and matters of self-defense. It is the legitimate temporal authority’s right and responsibility to protect their citizens. War and Capital Punishment have been legitimate ways of defense allowed by the Catholic Church for centuries. Pope John Paul II has said it’s his prudential judgement that in modern times, Capital Punishment is no longer necessary and therefore should not be used. He is probably right, but this “recent” declaration is not a change of the teaching of the Catholic Church on Capital Punishment. It did not take away the state’s authority in such matters. It may have raised the bar, but the bar should have always been very high.

In matters of war, the Catholic Church is not privy to all information in matters of foreign policy and therefore it is up to the leaders of the nation to make the correct decision in war and peace. The same is true for each application of the death penalty.

You do not attack a peaceful country, nor should you put to death a criminal who’s continued existence (in jail) is in no way a threat to society.
 
40.png
Hildebrand:
You cannot compare Abortion to Capital Punishment. Capital Punishment is akin to war and matters of self-defense. It is the legitimate temporal authority’s right and responsibility to protect their citizens. War and Capital Punishment have been legitimate ways of defense allowed by the Catholic Church for centuries. Pope John Paul II has said it’s his prudential judgement that in modern times, Capital Punishment is no longer necessary and therefore should not be used. He is probably right, but this “recent” declaration is not a change of the teaching of the Catholic Church on Capital Punishment. It did not take away the state’s authority in such matters. It may have raised the bar, but the bar should have always been very high.

In matters of war, the Catholic Church is not privy to all information in matters of foreign policy and therefore it is up to the leaders of the nation to make the correct decision in war and peace. The same is true for each application of the death penalty.

You do not attack a peaceful country, nor should you put to death a criminal who’s continued existence (in jail) is in no way a threat to society.
Click to expand...
I agree that abortion outweighs capital punishment but not by much. I like the opening of the Didache (non-canocal) becasue it puts it susinctly: “There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways.”

I support JPII and the Way of Life.
 
Let me illustrate the problem.

During the Clinton Administration, both the House and Senate passed a bill to outlaw (or at least dramatically reduce) that grisly crime, partial birth abortion. The President vetoed it.

During the early years of the Bush Administration, the House passed basically the same bill and sent it to the Semate. Sixty senators, more than enough to pass it, signed on as co-sponsors. And the President promised to sign it.

But it never came to the floor – it was blocked in committee. During that time, the Democrats were the Majority Party in the Senate, and the committee chairmen refused to let it out of any committee.

A couple of years later, the House passed the bill for the third time. It got to the Senate (now controlled by Republicans) was voted out from Committee, went to the Senate floor, was voted on and passed handily. The President signed it into law.

The problem the Democrats have is their senior leadership – they are virtually all of them, to a man and woman, pro-abortion. The Democrats need a paradigm shift here – they need to rise up against their pro-abortion leaders and tell them in no uncertain terms their positions on THIS issue are unacceptable.
 
vern humphrey:
The problem the Democrats have is their senior leadership – they are virtually all of them, to a man and woman, pro-abortion. The Democrats need a paradigm shift here – they need to rise up against their pro-abortion leaders and tell them in no uncertain terms their positions on THIS issue are unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and no one can tell me Senator Reid of Nevada is pro-life. He may be “personally pro-life”, but publicly he is the pro-abortion head of the Senate Democrats.

The Democrats don’t mind real pro-life Democratic senators (as long as they represent a swing state or a Republican state) because the pro-life senator’s first vote is for a pro-abortion leadership. The Democrats DO mind real pro-life Democratic governors in executive positions of power. The governors are the leadership. That is why they want Casey to run for the Senate, not governor.
 
40.png
Hildebrand:
The Democrats don’t mind real pro-life Democratic senators (as long as they represent a swing state or a Republican state) because the pro-life senator’s first vote is for a pro-abortion leadership.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right – let us support pro-life Democrats who will vote AGAINST their pro-abortion leaders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top