One Issue Voters

[Whowillgo]

I would like to know how others feel about the new tag called "One Issue Voters" as it relates to those of us that will not support a canidate that supports abortion. I personally feel that if Christians had taken a one issue stance in 1962 we would still have prayer in the schools or in 1973 we would not have legalized abortion. I am very curious how a person that proclaims the gospel of Christ and the moral standards of the Bible can put economy above morals. Evil feeds on compromise.

 

[Revmitchell]

The term is a pejorative that has no factual basis. No one votes solely on one issue. But in many cases on issue can be a deal breaker. Abortion should always be a deal breaker.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I would like to know how others feel about the new tag called "One Issue Voters" as it relates to those of us that will not support a canidate that supports abortion. I personally feel that if Christians had taken a one issue stance in 1962 we would still have prayer in the schools or in 1973 we would not have legalized abortion. I am very curious how a person that proclaims the gospel of Christ and the moral standards of the Bible can put economy above morals. Evil feeds on compromise.

I am curious how a different president in 1962 would have made a difference on prayer in the school. It was a Supreme Court decision stating that the NY State Board of Regents could not write a prayer and say everyone must say this prayer. I agree with the ruling. And there is prayer in school, before every test.

Save with abortion, Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not a Congressional decision, not a presidential decision. They had nothing to do with the decision. The only way it will be changed is if the Supreme Court turns over Roe v. Wade ... and that is not about to happen ... or if the Constitution is amenced ... and that is not going to happen.

No, I am not for abortion.

Know that these issues cannot be changed easily, and will not be changed than I have to look at other issues in deciding who to vote for. Many politicians use abortion to gain votes, but they know they can do nothing to change the matter.

 

[Whowillgo]

I am curious how a different president in 1962 would have made a difference on prayer in the school. It was a Supreme Court decision stating that the NY State Board of Regents could not write a prayer and say everyone must say this prayer. I agree with the ruling. And there is prayer in school, before every test.

Save with abortion, Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not a Congressional decision, not a presidential decision. They had nothing to do with the decision. The only way it will be changed is if the Supreme Court turns over Roe v. Wade ... and that is not about to happen ... or if the Constitution is amenced ... and that is not going to happen.

No, I am not for abortion.

Know that these issues cannot be changed easily, and will not be changed than I have to look at other issues in deciding who to vote for. Many politicians use abortion to gain votes, but they know they can do nothing to change the matter.

I am not saying a different President or a different situation would have changed Prayer in Schools or Roe vs Wade what I am saying is that if Christians would say no to issues as they come up we are a large enough group that our views would have made a difference. If we continue to say what difference would it make then we are doomed to looking back instead of forward. Maybe this year we should say no that is wrong.

 

[LadyEagle]

Well, those who say they are not one issue voters or that the economy matters more, are just making excuses and trying to salve their consciences.

The Democratic party platform states the quote in my signature line with the link provided. Just the pro-abortion plank alone in the Democratic Party should cause all Bible believing professing Christians to take a second look at the abominations they are voting for when they pull the Democratic lever in the voting booth. By your vote, you are helping to blaspheme Holy God and just as guilty as those who are sucking the brains out of infants in utero in 2008 or sacrificing their babies to Baal in the OT or strapping suicide bombs to their children in the name of allah.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I am not saying a different President or a different situation would have changed Prayer in Schools or Roe vs Wade what I am saying is that if Christians would say no to issues as they come up we are a large enough group that our views would have made a difference. If we continue to say what difference would it make then we are doomed to looking back instead of forward. Maybe this year we should say no that is wrong.

If I understand your comment correctly than I can agree. Regardless of what is legal, whether we consider the law moral or immoral ... but especially if we consider it immoral then we have a responsibility to teach our children that which we believe to be right both in our eyes and in God's eyes. It is personal choice that makes the biggest difference in all these matters. If abortion became illegal today abortions would not stop. I am not sure they would reduce in number. That is hypothetical and we cannot know for sure. What would happen is that many young women would be mained or die from back room abortions.

I am not sure what you mean by, "Maybe this year we should say no to that is wrong."

 

[SBCPreacher]

I have a priority of issues to take into account before I vote.

Number 1 is that they must be pro-life. If they can't pass number 1, then they don't get my vote.

Number 2 is that they have to be pro-traditional family (marriage between one man and one woman). If they can get past number 1 but not number 2, they they don't get my vote.

And on and on.

But what I usually find is that if they are pro-life, they are normally pro- the other issues that are important to me. If they are for killing unborn children, then they are usually for all those other things I'm against.

Party label means nothing to me (although I do wonder why a pro-life politician will align themselves with a pro-abortion party).

 

[Whowillgo]

If I understand your comment correctly than I can agree. Regardless of what is legal, whether we consider the law moral or immoral ... but especially if we consider it immoral then we have a responsibility to teach our children that which we believe to be right both in our eyes and in God's eyes. It is personal choice that makes the biggest difference in all these matters. If abortion became illegal today abortions would not stop. I am not sure they would reduce in number. That is hypothetical and we cannot know for sure. What would happen is that many young women would be mained or die from back room abortions.

I am not sure what you mean by, "Maybe this year we should say no to that is wrong."

What I am saying is that I believe it is time that we refuse to support a canidate that supports issues such as abortion. If we ever hope to regain some moral highground in this country then we must look ahead. Will a President who supports abortion appoint Supreme Court Justices that will overturn Roe vs Wade ? No. Yes if abortion became illegal there would be many that would still perform them but God doesn't deal in what ifs. He has taught us to maintain His standards regardless of what others might choose. My heart breaks for those that would choose the backroom abortions but I cannot compromise my obligation to the Lord over other peoples decisions.

 

[Revmitchell]

If abortion became illegal today abortions would not stop. I am not sure they would reduce in number.

Baloney. Shutting down abortion mills would put and increased end to abortion without doubt.

That is hypothetical and we cannot know for sure. What would happen is that many young women would be mained or die from back room abortions.

It is only hypothetical for those looking to make excuses for their poor support of candidates who support abortion. It is utterly ridiculous to say we cannot know if abortions would stop but we can know back alley abortions would carry on. The life of the child is more important than criminals who would maim themselves to murder another.

 

[Dragoon68]

... If abortion became illegal today abortions would not stop. I am not sure they would reduce in number. That is hypothetical and we cannot know for sure. What would happen is that many young women would be mained or die from back room abortions. ...

I don't agree with this line of rationalization! We, as Christians, have a duty to model our criminal and civil law around the principles of God's laws. Abortion is nothing less than murder. We need to keep saying that. It can't be sanitized to fit mankind's desires. Having solid laws against it would provide the basis for government to exercise justice. Doing that is its Biblical duty! The fact that some would still seek abortions in violation of law is no different than the actions of others who violate the other laws we have causing harm to themselves or others. A woman who would decide to have an abortion by "back room" means would bear the responsibility for her own possible injury or death. It is the unborn child - the powerless human being still in womb - that is to be protected and provided with the benefit of justice. The mother's and "doctor's" justice for committing murder might well be their own death. They are to be punished and served with the consequences of justice. Crime will never stop because of law but it will only grow without it and even flourish under cover of "law". The latter is the situation we have today!

Yes, this is an extremely important issue in itself but a person's stand on this one issue also reveals a lot about the basis of their value system. Do they believe God's word - really believe it - or do they tend to rationalize God's word to fit what they think is best. What is their value system - man's or God's? There is a correlation that can be discerned.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Baloney. Shutting down abortion mills would put and increased end to abortion without doubt.

Yes the abortion clinics would be shut down, but abortions would continue in back rooms. That was true before Roe v. Wade. My wife's secretary lost her mother when she was a toddler ... back in the 1930's ... from a blotched back room abortion. That is why I say that abortions would continue, but that many young women would be mained and/or die as a result of blotched ones.

We know from past writings that abortions have been conducted since ancient times. in the past regnancies various methods were used , including the administration of abortifacient herbs, the use of sharpened implements, the application of abdominal pressure, and other techniques. If you go to a local library with an archive of newspapers from the 1800's advertisement for abortion was a fairly common sight in the classified ads page. Abortions were illegal, but still advertisements were in the papers. It seems enforcement of abortion laws were lax.

The first recorded evidence of induced abortion, is from the Egyptian Ebers Papyrus in 1550 BC.[3] A Chinese record documents the number of royal concubines who had abortions in China between the years 500 and 515 BC.[4] According to Chinese folklore, the legendary Emperor Shennong prescribed the use of mercury to induce abortions nearly 5000 years ago.[5]

Many of the methods employed in early and primitive cultures were non-surgical. Physical activities like strenuous labour, climbing, paddling, weightlifting, or diving were a common technique. Others included the use of irritant leaves, fasting, bloodletting, pouring hot water onto the abdomen, and lying on a heated coconut shell.[6] In primitive cultures, techniques developed through observation, adaptation of obstetrical methods, and transculturation.[7] Archaeological discoveries indicate early surgical attempts at the extraction of a fetus; however, such methods are not believed to have been common, given the infrequency with which they are mentioned in ancient medical texts.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_abortion#Prehistory_to_5th_century



Also abortions are legal in many countries around the world, including Canada. Women would travel to have abortions.

Hereis a link to a chart showing abortion laws around the world:

http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache...ions+legal+countries&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

You, I, many of us may be against abortion, but even when illegal they will continue to be performed.

 

[Revmitchell]

Yes the abortion clinics would be shut down, but abortions would continue in back rooms.

The lack of legitimate abortion clinics would greatly diminish abortions. That is a fact.

That was true before Roe v. Wade. My wife's secretary lost her mother when she was a toddler ... back in the 1930's ... from a blotched back room abortion. That is why I say that abortions would continue, but that many young women would be mained and/or die as a result of blotched ones.

Such statements ignore the true impact of shutting down abortion mills. And we do not need to legalize something just because a few would hurt themsleves doing it. It is the whole situation ethics thing. Add to that the life of the child carries more weight than all the women who will subject themselves to ungodly behavior.

We know from past writings that abortions have been conducted since ancient times. in the past regnancies various methods were used , including the administration of abortifacient herbs, the use of sharpened implements, the application of abdominal pressure, and other techniques. If you go to a local library with an archive of newspapers from the 1800's advertisement for abortion was a fairly common sight in the classified ads page. Abortions were illegal, but still advertisements were in the papers. It seems enforcement of abortion laws were lax.

This is not relevant to whether we should have the slaughter of unborn children legal.

Also abortions are legal in many countries around the world, including Canada. Women would travel to have abortions.

More invalid excusesthat ignore the fact that millions of lives would be saved when we do finally end this holocaust.

Hereis a link to a chart showing abortion laws around the world:

http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache...ions+legal+countries&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

You, I, many of us may be against abortion, but even when illegal they will continue to be performed.

Again you continue to work to diminish the fact that millions of lives will be saved by shutting down abortion mills in this country. Which works against any credibility that you or anyone who expresses these same sentiments actually are against abortion.

 

[carpro]

I would like to know how others feel about the new tag called "One Issue Voters" as it relates to those of us that will not support a canidate that supports abortion. I personally feel that if Christians had taken a one issue stance in 1962 we would still have prayer in the schools or in 1973 we would not have legalized abortion. I am very curious how a person that proclaims the gospel of Christ and the moral standards of the Bible can put economy above morals. Evil feeds on compromise.

Those here who claim to be Christian and say they are pro life, but support abortion and vote for those who do, are either lying about being pro life or deluded about being a Christian.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Those here who claim to be Christian and say they are pro life, but support abortion and vote for those who do, are either lying about being pro life or deluded about being a Christian.

Care to back that up with scripture?

Is being pro-abortion the unforgivable sin?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Again you continue to work to diminish the fact that millions of lives will be saved by shutting down abortion mills in this country. Which works against any credibility that you or anyone who expresses these same sentiments actually are against abortion.

No, I was responding to your absolute statement that if abortion was illegal there would be no more abortions. That simply is not true.

I re-read your statement and I believe you let your emotions run faster than your fingers. Abortions would, in all likelihood, reduct in number. That is a hypothesis, and probably would turn out to be true. But abortions would not end.

 

[Revmitchell]

I re-read your statement and I believe you let your emotions run faster than your fingers.

Of course you do.

Abortions would, in all likelihood, reduct in number. That is a hypothesis, and probably would turn out to be true. But abortions would not end.

It is a fact. the fact that abortions will still happen minutely compared to the millions that happen now is irrelevant to the need to make it illegal.

 

[Whowillgo]

No, I was responding to your absolute statement that if abortion was illegal there would be no more abortions. That simply is not true.

I re-read your statement and I believe you let your emotions run faster than your fingers. Abortions would, in all likelihood, reduct in number. That is a hypothesis, and probably would turn out to be true. But abortions would not end.

I agree that abortions will not end but is that the issue with a believer, I do not believe drug use will end but do we sanction legalization of drugs to prevent those who choose to use them froming buying on a street corner. Isn't it time that Christians took a stand regardless of the world view and voted for the future of our belief system. We allowed prayer to end in the schools and what happened teen prenancy increased 500 percent, so what do you do with these babies we then legalized abortion, when abortion did not handle all of the problem we then made it legal for a minor to obtain birth control pills without the parents consent, when that still left a gap we now allow minors to obtain the morning after pill without consent. In New Mexico a 13 year old girl can go to a public health clinic in the schools and receive the morning after pill. When will it stop ? When we who serve the Risen Savior quit rationalizing.

 

[JustChristian]

I have a priority of issues to take into account before I vote.

Number 1 is that they must be pro-life. If they can't pass number 1, then they don't get my vote.

Number 2 is that they have to be pro-traditional family (marriage between one man and one woman). If they can get past number 1 but not number 2, they they don't get my vote.

And on and on.

But what I usually find is that if they are pro-life, they are normally pro- the other issues that are important to me. If they are for killing unborn children, then they are usually for all those other things I'm against.

Party label means nothing to me (although I do wonder why a pro-life politician will align themselves with a pro-abortion party).

By pro-life do you mean against abortion or pro-life?

 

[tinytim]

My answer is in my signature line...

Everyone is a one issue voter...

Would you vote for someone that was in the KKK if they agreed with you on every other issue?
If not that just made you a one issue voter...

Would you vote for a person that embezzles money?
What about kills kittens in a microwave.

NO?

Why not?
But a baby is not as important as a kitten?

Hmmm...

Hypocrites! You destroy human life while saving animal life.

I am a one issue voter, and proud of it...

For instance, Jay Wolfe is running against Rockefeller here in WV for Senate this yr.
Wolfe agrees with me 99% of the time...
But I refuse to vote for him, because I saw him show himself at a state convention for our denomination because he lost a vote.
He destroyed a lot of churches here because he would go to one church, pull them out of our convention, and then move his membership to another, and do the same thing...
When our convention chose to stay with ABC, he absolutely showed himself in the business meeting, and the moderator had to have him removed!

Because of that Issue, I said I would never vote for him... and I am sticking to my guns...
The guy is a jerk, and very unethical...and has no integrity.

So what if he is prolife? If he is unethical, he is worthless.

 

[SBCPreacher]

By pro-life do you mean against abortion or pro-life?

Definitely against abortion. But, before I tell you I'm pro-life, what is your definition of pro-life?