Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
I read the MTP thing over and over, and I gotta say, it isn’t setting off my warning alarm. I have no problem with someone saying what he did, which is that RvW is a dead issue. It’s never going to be dumped. It’s “settled law” and is such an emotional trigger no one is going to touch it.
What he DID say is that the issue should be sent back to the states, which is precisely what would happen if RvW went down.
Russert was doing what all MSM folks do—trying to back a Republican into saying something rather foolish, seeing how RvW is never going anywhere and is only a diversionary tactic.
Republicans HAVE to frame this debate—we can’t let the left do it anymore.
If you ask people “What about RvW?” you will see an unalterable block saying leave it alone.
But if you ask “Should states get to decide?” I am betting you would get a huge shift to our side.
I want abortions to end. I am not for jumping off a bridge and saying “Well, at least I stood by dumping RvW!” when I could be marching forward in severely cutting down on the abortions in this country—which is the whole point of being against elective abortions.
So Steele is a politician? Yes—this isn’t a surprise.
We have to consider the time and media landscape in which we actually live if we’re going to affect change, and not pretend we can make our own rules about how we appear in a medium controlled by leftists.
Yeah, that sounds like an esoteric line of reasoning, but it immediately brings to the fore the reality that aborting a pregnancy ought ONLY be to save a woman's like since any abortion of a living unborn is killing at least one of the two alive individuals involved int he medical procedure.
“It’s never going to be dumped. It’s ‘settled law’ and is such an emotional trigger no one is going to touch it.
“What he DID say is that the issue should be sent back to the states, which is precisely what would happen if RvW went down.”
These two paragraphs are mutually contradictory.
To “send Roe back to the states” is to overturn it.
Roe holds that there is a federal constitutional right to procure the killing of one’s unborn baby. To say that it is an issue to be decided at the state level is to say that Roe is wrong. To actually “send Roe back to the states” is to overturn, vitiate, vacate Roe.
I understand what you're saying about asking folks, “Should Roe go?” vs. “Should abortion be sent back to the states?”
The problem is that your solution is factually... challenged. Not your fault - I get what you're trying to say.
But it isn't consistent with reality.
I agree about not letting the Left frame the question, but by letting all the lies about Roe go by, that's effectively what we're doing. The solution to the Left’s lies about Roe is not to accept their lies, but rather to tell the truth about Roe and legal status of abortion in the United States.
If you tell me that this isn't working, I'll respond that accepting the Left’s lies about abortion isn't going to work, either.
If I'm doomed to failure (and sometimes, those who do what is right are thus doomed, at least in the short run), I'd rather fail faithful to the truth, rather than fail compromising with lies.
sitetest
Then the pro-life movement is dead.
I want abortions to end.
BS. Just explain how that can be done without overturning Roe v. Wade.....
Crickets