How Conservatives Are Messing Up Politically

"A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll in late August found 54 percent describing themselves as pro-choice and only 38 percent as pro-life, roughly the same percentages as a decade ago"-------------------------------------------------------------

But what should a Christian voter do. Be a "realest" and vote for pro-abortion candidates and support their nomonees, or stick to their guns on the issue of state supported murder?

 

The political mistake is those who are in charge ignoring the soul of the GOP (read their main supporters) in order to play politics and act as if it is the Democrats fault we have abortion in America. The GOP has nobody to blame but themselves if they don't want to get serious about the SC. They are in charge. They need to either lead or get out of the way. We have compromised quite a bit for the past four and a half years - we will not compromise on the next 30-40 years of our nation's future when this is one of the major things we have been working for. we should fight with every last bit of political capital we have for the war on terror and for the courts. But, Bush and the weak spines in the moderate wing of the GOP aren't up to making a real change on the court. They seem to want the status quo.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Bunyon,

I bet if you look deeper into those polls, you will find that the majority of Americans are not completely pro-choice. In fact, the majority are with most right wing Christians who might make some exceptions, but who generally find abortion morally reprehensible and think it mostly should be illegal, or at least heavily restricted from what it is right now. I only remember this because I remember another thread some time ago which discussed the polling data on this issue, and that was the major conclusion that was buried in the data.

Point is: You gotta learn to not always accept the general outcome of polls and dig deeper for what is really being said, and, this whole idea that America does not want to see abortion done away with or that the majority of Americans are strictly pro-choice is just another copout on Bush's part to roll over and play dead (read loser) and not do anything substantive about it.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Roberts is pro-life. Miers is pro-life. What more do you want? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe Roberts is pro-life because I believe I have actually read stuff from him indicating as much. I am curious how you came to this conclusion on Miers, however. What more do I want? A non-consensus nominee who is not hand picked by the losers. I don't want to get along with the losers. I want to continue to defeat them.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Roberts is pro-life. Miers is pro-life. What more do you want? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe Roberts is pro-life because I believe I have actually read stuff from him indicating as much. I am curious how you came to this conclusion on Miers, however. What more do I want? A non-consensus nominee who is not hand picked by the losers. I don't want to get along with the losers. I want to continue to defeat them.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]

 

In the end I believe we will find that it's not Robers and Miers views on abortion that led to their nominations by GWB, but their support of increasing the size and power of the federal government in areas like removing the Posse Comitatus Act, Eminent Domain, Executive Orders, etc.

 

I feel personally that I can have no part in an abortion, unless it is truely for the mother's life, which is rare. That means I cannot vote for a candidate who supports it even if I agree with 90 percent of everthing else he believes in. To me it is no different than if I found the ideal candidate who stood for 99% of everything I think he should, but who plans to shoot someone for no reason. That little fact prevents me from voting for him no matter how close he is on my political points.

 

She is a Christian and a member of a solidly pro-life church.

You know as well as I do, Joseph, that a SCOTUS nominee who came right out and stated publicly that he/she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade at the earliest opportunity would have as much of a chance of being confirmed as you or I would. Meaning no chance. </font>[/QUOTE]Bill Clinton claimed to be a Christian and was a member of a solidly pro-life church. You really think you can draw that big of a leap from that? I am a member of a Church that is fairly solidly pre-mill. I think you know where I stand.

Joseph Botwinick

 

In general.

 

Would you allow for bad decisions in those areas if in return Roe v. Wade was overturned, Jonathan? </font>[/QUOTE]I would.

Joseph Botwinick

 

She is a Christian and a member of a solidly pro-life church.

You know as well as I do, Joseph, that a SCOTUS nominee who came right out and stated publicly that he/she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade at the earliest opportunity would have as much of a chance of being confirmed as you or I would. Meaning no chance. </font>[/QUOTE]Bill Clinton claimed to be a Christian and was a member of a solidly pro-life church. You really think you can draw that big of a leap from that? I am a member of a Church that is fairly solidly pre-mill. I think you know where I stand.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]

 

It really matters not what I think in the end...because she will be confirmed regardless. I hope you are right and that she won't be another liberal like O'Connor, Souter, and was it Kennedy (weren't they all appointed by Republicans with the promise that they were conservatives)?

Joseph Botwinick