"Republicans for Choice" Endorse McCain

[leesw]

Choice = Abortion

From Free Republic: Republicans for Choice endorsed John McCain. This is what they say. "Our first choice, Rudy Giuliani did not win. He ran a campaign with a risky strategy, didn't work, but our number two choice did win, John McCain. McCain came in second in a survey of our membership, Republicans for Choice."

They further say that "he [McCain] has time and again reached out and worked with people across the spectrum. We know we can work with him to create common ground on abortion that will allow moderate and conservatives to come together.... Republicans for Choice joins with Rudy Giuliani in asking our supporters to consider McCain as they go vote over the next few weeks." SOURCE

Hmmm...so all you "McCain is prolife" folks. I wonder why this group would endorse him? Apparently they think they can get a lot further with him on abortion than with Huckabee or Romney. And how in the world do you find "common ground" with someone on abortion of all things?!? McCain is such a liberal.

 

[PastorSBC1303]

First of all, anyone can come out and "endorse" anyone else. McCain does not have control of all of this.

Second, all you have to do is look at his record. It is consistently pro-life.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

McCain is such a liberal.

That is incorrect, leesw. While the group that endorsed McCain may be liberal, McCain is not liberal.

 

[Revmitchell]

Choice = Abortion

From Free Republic: Republicans for Choice endorsed John McCain. This is what they say. "Our first choice, Rudy Giuliani did not win. He ran a campaign with a risky strategy, didn't work, but our number two choice did win, John McCain. McCain came in second in a survey of our membership, Republicans for Choice."

They further say that "he [McCain] has time and again reached out and worked with people across the spectrum. We know we can work with him to create common ground on abortion that will allow moderate and conservatives to come together.... Republicans for Choice joins with Rudy Giuliani in asking our supporters to consider McCain as they go vote over the next few weeks." SOURCE

Hmmm...so all you "McCain is prolife" folks. I wonder why this group would endorse him? Apparently they think they can get a lot further with him on abortion than with Huckabee or Romney. And how in the world do you find "common ground" with someone on abortion of all things?!? McCain is such a liberal.

When a pro-murder group like this feels they can work to find common ground watchout. And McCain is a liberal. Here is yet more proof.

 

[Andy T.]

Second, all you have to do is look at his record. It is consistently pro-life.

Except when it comes to embryonic stem cell research.

 

[PastorSBC1303]

Except when it comes to embryonic stem cell research.

Has McCain spoken as to why he voted that way? It seems rather odd considering the rest of his pro-life record?

 

[Andy T.]

Has McCain spoken as to why he voted that way? It seems rather odd considering the rest of his pro-life record?

I haven't heard any explanation from him. Regardless, it appears that he is only pro-life to a point.

 

[saturneptune]

When a pro-murder group like this feels they can work to find common ground watchout. And McCain is a liberal. Here is yet more proof.

Which candidate meets your high standards and deserves your vote?

 

[saturneptune]

First of all, anyone can come out and "endorse" anyone else. McCain does not have control of all of this.

Second, all you have to do is look at his record. It is consistently pro-life.

Not that I am crazy about McCain, but you are correct.

Then you have Romney. He is neither pro abortion or pro life. He does not care. He says what gets votes at the time. They are called con artists around here.

 

[Martin]

The Dishonesty of the Political Right

McCain is pro-life, he has always been pro-life, and he will continue to be pro-life. Mitt, the flip, Romney has not always been pro-life and we have no guarantee that he will continue to be pro-life. Mike Huckabee is pro-life but probably could not win a general election. Ron Paul, who is still in the race btw, is also pro-life.

If conservatives don't get their act together Hillary Clinton will easily walk into the Oval Office for four, maybe eight, long years. Under another Clinton administration abortion "rights" would be strengthened. The number of murdered babies would grow. And you know who would be largely responsible for that? Professing Conservatives who allowed her to walk into the office.

We can't end abortion through politics, but that is no excuse for letting Hillary Clinton promote it for eight years.

McCain is not perfect, neither was George W Bush, but sometimes not perfect is better than the alternative. Christian conservatives need to stop listening to the false teachings of James Dobson, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter. We, as Christians, need to start paying attention to what is really important. And that is not politics or the so-called conservative social gospel. What is really important is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For it is only through the Biblical Gospel that people's hearts will be changed, people's eternal destinies will be changed, and sins like abortion will go away. If we are looking to any political leader to end abortion we are wasting our time and we have been greatly deceived. We need to look for a conservative candidate. We need to look for someone who is pro-life. We need to look for someone who is pro-family. We need to look for someone who is pro-defense. We need to look for someone who has courage and strong principles. What we should not be looking for is another Savior. Jesus is the only Savior and Lord. At the end of the day it is only Jesus who can change people. So what we need to look for is a consistant conservative who will do a good job in the office of president.
At this time John McCain is that man. He fits all of those categories and he is a conservative. To say otherwise is simply to be dishonest.

 

[Martin]

Has McCain spoken as to why he voted that way? It seems rather odd considering the rest of his pro-life record?

==It does not matter to these people. You see they don't need logic nor do they need context. All they need is an isolated "fact" to wave around and use as political mud. They don't care about the whole truth or getting the whole story. I guarantee you they don't even know why he voted the way he did. Don't take my word for it! One of them admitted as much when they said that they "haven't heard any explanation from him". Yet they still, not knowing all the facts, said that John McCain is "only pro-life to a point". That is an amazing statement. They don't know all the facts, they probably don't even know half of the facts, yet they are still willing to say that John McCain is not a pro-life conservative. What they ignore is that there are pro-life conservatives who don't see anything wrong with certain forms of embryonic stem cell research. In fact one of those is the current President George W Bush who, in 2001, allowed certain forms of this research to continue with Government funding. I wonder why these professing conservatives did not come out against Bush on that? Personally I thought Bush made the right decision. These are complicated issues that contain many ethical problems. Using them for political purposes is wrong. We should be searching for ways to end embryonic stem cell research and move to the proven methods of stem cell research.

McCain had his reasons for his vote and until these people understand his reasons they have no moral right to be critical of his vote. I may not agree with McCain's vote, but I am not going to say that one vote proves he is not pro-life. John McCain is pro-life.

 

[Andy T.]

==It does not matter to these people.

Martin, who are "these people"? You refer to me later in your post, so I guess I'm one of "those people". Has anyone told you that your posts recently have become very vitriolic? I noticed this, because it is normally not like you.

You see they don't need logic nor do they need context. All they need is an isolated "fact" to wave around and use as political mud. They don't care about the whole truth or getting the whole story. I guarantee you they don't even know why he voted the way he did. Don't take my word for it! One of them admitted as much when they said that they "haven't heard any explanation from him". Yet they still, not knowing all the facts, said that John McCain is "only pro-life to a point". That is an amazing statement. They don't know all the facts, they probably don't even know half of the facts, yet they are still willing to say that John McCain is not a pro-life conservative.

I never said that McCain was not pro-life. I said he was to a point. Why am I not allowed to think McCain is wrong on embryonic stem cell research?

What they ignore is that there are pro-life conservatives who don't see anything wrong with certain forms of embryonic stem cell research.

I realize there are those who think it is ok. I also realize they are wrong. Am I free to dissent here? Or are you the only one allowed to dissent?

In fact one of those is the current President George W Bush who, in 2001, allowed certain forms of this research to continue with Government funding. I wonder why these professing conservatives did not come out against Bush on that?

Actually, I did strongly disagree with what Bush did on the existing stem lines. And I heard many others voice their disagreement at that time.

McCain had his reasons for his vote and until these people understand his reasons they have no moral right to be critical of his vote.

Why do I have no "moral right" to be critical of his vote? It sounds like you want to take away my right to dissent. Scary stuff, man.

I may not agree with McCain's vote, but I am not going to say that one vote proves he is not pro-life. John McCain is pro-life.

I can say that he is pro-life like I did above. I can also say that he is not pro-life enough, if you will allow me the privilege to dissent.

BTW, I have never said I won't vote for McCain if he is the nominee. I haven't made up my mind (lots of things need to happen yet), but right now I am leaning towards voting for him. But I will hold my nose in the process.

 

[Andy T.]

So what we need to look for is a consistant conservative who will do a good job in the office of president. At this time John McCain is that man. He fits all of those categories and he is a conservative. To say otherwise is simply to be dishonest.

The term "conservative" can be a relative term. He may be conservative to you, but he's not necessarily conservative to me. Am I allowed to disagree, or does only your view of conservatism count? And I'm not even talking about the abortion issue per se - there are several other issues that call into question McCain's conservatism, IMO

Martin, it is not being dishonest to disagree with someone nor to say they are not conservative from one's own point of view. I suggest you ratchet down the rhetoric a few notches.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

Once Thompson quit, The National Right to Life Association endorsed Huckabee here with an updated statement. They also said:

"National Right to Life is also grateful for the strong pro-life voting record on abortion of Senator John McCain, and appreciates the pro-life position he has taken in his Senate campaigns and in this presidential campaign."

Compared with:

"National Right to Life also appreciates the pro-life position taken in this presidential campaign by former governor Mitt Romney."

Perhaps I'm reading into this press release, but it seems the NRtLA is saying that McCain is more trustworthy on life than Romney since he's got the record to prove it.

ETA: an updated candidate comparison here.

 

[tinytim]

Has McCain spoken as to why he voted that way? It seems rather odd considering the rest of his pro-life record?

Pastor, what was his explanation?
I would really like to know, it might put my mind at ease to vote for him...

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

From McCain's official position:

Stem cell research offers tremendous hope for those suffering from a variety of deadly diseases - hope for both cures and life-extending treatments. However, the compassion to relieve suffering and to cure deadly disease cannot erode moral and ethical principles.

For this reason, John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes. To that end, Senator McCain voted to ban the practice of "fetal farming," making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. Furthermore, he voted to ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals. Finally, John McCain strongly opposes human cloning and voted to ban the practice, and any related experimentation, under federal law.

As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.

Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, Senator McCain believes clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.

From a 2005 statement:

“It’s a very complex scientific issue,” McCain (Ariz.) told NBC’s Tim Russert earlier this year. “But for us to throw away opportunities to cure diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s and many others I think would be a mistake.”

Source

 

[tinytim]

Thanks Ivon, That helped

And thanks for the chart link in your previous post from the right to life organization... looking at the chart I learned something...

Both Hillary and Obama support human cloning! This may not be news to others, but it is to me...

 

[Martin]

The term "conservative" can be a relative term. He may be conservative to you, but he's not necessarily conservative to me. Am I allowed to disagree, or does only your view of conservatism count? And I'm not even talking about the abortion issue per se - there are several other issues that call into question McCain's conservatism, IMO

Martin, it is not being dishonest to disagree with someone nor to say they are not conservative from one's own point of view. I suggest you ratchet down the rhetoric a few notches.

==O, just way, I am only just getting started :laugh: .

On my blog I posted an article by CNN's Roland Martin. In that article, Martin talks about how silly many conservatives are acting. McCain is no less a conservative than George W Bush yet these conservatives who hate McCain just love Bush. It makes no logical sense.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

In that article, Martin talks about how silly many conservatives are acting.

You only like him because his name is Martin!

j/k

 

[Martin]

Martin, who are "these people"? You refer to me later in your post, so I guess I'm one of "those people". Has anyone told you that your posts recently have become very vitriolic? I noticed this, because it is normally not like you.

=="Those people" refers to conservatives who claim McCain is not a conservative. I used someone's comments, maybe they were yours I don't know, to show how things are being taken out of context (etc). That has always been a beef of mine when it comes to politics.

As for my posts being "vitriolic", I am sorry I am being read in that way and I will try to watch how I word things in future. It is certainly not my objective to be "vitriolic". :wavey:

Part of the problem right now is that I am so very frustrated with the "conservative establishment". Not because I disagree with them, I agree with them on 99.99% of the issues, but because they don't seem to understand that keeping Hillary and Obama out of the White House is the most important objective we can hope for in '08. McCain will not be a great president. The most we could hope for out of him would be one term. But at least he would keep the democrats from taking the whole thing and running as far left as they can.

McCain is not my favorite candidate. However, as far as I can tell, he is my only choice. Huckabee would be nice, Paul would be nice, but reality has to set in at some point. I opposed McCain in '00, so in '12 I might be willing to support Romney.

I never said that McCain was not pro-life. I said he was to a point. Why am I not allowed to think McCain is wrong on embryonic stem cell research?

==I was refering to a larger group and not one person individually. As for embryonic stem cell research I believe McCain is wrong as well. I pointed that out. However I don't think his position on that limits his pro-life position in any way.

I realize there are those who think it is ok. I also realize they are wrong. Am I free to dissent here? Or are you the only one allowed to dissent?

==You are certainly allowed to dissent. I am as well and that was what I was expressing. As I pointed out in my post, I dissent as well. I am as conservative as anyone else. I have no time for abortion or any such thing. However I think we have to be careful when dragging these difficult issues into politics.

I did strongly disagree with what Bush did on the existing stem lines. And I heard many others voice their disagreement at that time.

==We agree on that. However I, personally, did not hear many voices disagreeing with Bush on that. At least when compared to the number of conservative voices coming out against McCain as not being pro-life enough.

Why do I have no "moral right" to be critical of his vote? It sounds like you want to take away my right to dissent. Scary stuff, man.

==I did not say that. Go back and re-read what I said carefully. I was talking about people who have not taken the time to read his reasons (etc). We should dissent with knowledge and not out of political design.

I have never said I won't vote for McCain if he is the nominee. I haven't made up my mind (lots of things need to happen yet), but right now I am leaning towards voting for him. But I will hold my nose in the process.

==As I have said in this post, and others, McCain is not my perfect candidate. But, as I see it, he is the only thing standing between the Democrats and the White House.