Can this little guy ever be a willing participant in abortion?
Posted on 03/19/2012 11:23:44 AM PDT by Fred
Rick Santorum could be the worst thing to happen to the GOP — ever. Worse even than George W. Bush. And that’s saying a lot. Bush did so much damage to the GOP brand, he almost destroyed the party forever. It was George Bush who brought us Barack Obama. Few Americans voted for Obama, they just voted for ABB (Anyone But Bush).
Now the GOP has a golden opportunity. Obama has wrecked the U.S. economy from sea to shining sea. He has turned off voters by the millions. By historical standards, based on the current disastrous economic and unemployment numbers, Obama is virtually unelectable. Obama is a magician. He has made voters forget Bush in only three years. That's a pretty darn amazing trick.
The proof is in the recent polls. This has been perhaps the worst month for the GOP in modern political history. The message is no longer jobs, rising gas prices, chronic long-term unemployment, or crumbling real estate.
The message is about women’s health, the right to use contraception, Planned Parenthood funding, Rush Limbaugh’s use of a crude term to describe a young female law student, and whether Republicans like sex, or hate women. It just doesn’t get any worse than this. And in recent polls, Mitt Romney is leading President Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Laws are always based on morals. Social conservatism is about limiting what the state can do or does to the populace. it’s the dims who try to thrust there values on us the unwilling.
Examples are everywhere except the libs point the finger at conservatives and the media plays right along.
It's not my sole issue. This topic was about people who want to make it a non-issue.
George Washington sounds like a bible-thumping extremist to me! What’s he doing trying to enforce his morality on the rest of us? He needs to read the Constitution. Besides, didn’t anyone tell him this election isn’t about social issues?
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
The problem with Santorum is not his social conservatism, it's his fiscal big government spending-ism. Plus he just isn't enough (IMHO) of a fighter - a warrior. We need someone who will not only REFUSE to compromise with the left (which includes RINOs) but ENJOYS refusing to compromise! Root has it wrong. Liber(al)tarians have it wrong. It's the WHOLE PACKAGE of conservative or actually Constitutional viewpoint that is needed. Plus fire - fire and courage to fight what is clearly becoming a communist coup.
Even the least religious among our founders warned that America would die without religion.
Oh, he’s a homo. That explains his hatred of social conservatism.
Who wants to make abortion a non issue. In my opinion life is fundamental to freedom. I object to having the Federal government tell me what I can read, watch, or listen to.
BS. Nonsense. Historically inaccurate. Porn, obscenity, abortion and sodomy were all illegal for the first 175 years of our country - STATE laws. Until leftist dominated SCOTUS decisions FORCED every state to all legalize them; or rather by force prevented all the states from making their own laws against those immoral practices.
You liberaltarians ignore history and reality and are part of the problem.
Can this little guy ever be a willing participant in abortion?
It wasn’t meant to you in particular. It was meant for those whose main fixation is abortion, to the expense of everything else.
(And yes, they do exist.)
Sounds like you’re the one painting people with a broad brush. You social liberals are funny.
(Palin_Rubion2012, please see after the linebreak.)
Two different arguments.
I agree abortion is wrong.
Where I disagree is that it’s the role of the Federal government to deal with the problem. I think Roe v. Wade should be repealed because this is a state issue, not because I want the Federal government deal with it the way I see fit.
I also know that if it did go back to the states, most would ban it. (California, New York, Massachusetts, etc... wouldn’t though)
And I’m willing to take 80% of a loaf rather than none. That way we can focus our energy on the few remaining holdouts.
The point was to illustrate that many social conservatives aren’t, as you say, just wanting to end the federal government’s funding/pushing of immoral issues. No, they don’t mind that the federal government has the power to push issues like that. They just want the issues to be *THEIR* issues.
And post #74 clearly shows that.
I’m amazed that so many people want our politicians to dictate want is and is not moral to the nation. *POLITICIANS*, for Pete’s sake!
That’s just the same as asking the Devil himself to dictate your morality.
When I saw the second plane hit the World Trade Center, I cried and thanked God that Bush was our president. I realized at that moment that politics is a matter of life and death.
************************
Exactly right. Some issues must be dealt with by the government.
George Washington is one of my heroes.
Seeing as the right to life was actually mentioned in our founding documents, I think that’s more than enough prerogative to consider abortion a federal issue. You would always have the issue of people crossing state lines to do it, which would make any particular state law ineffectual. If it took a constitutional amendment, that’s fine.
And in the case of marriage, it’s just stopping the government from being involved. If two same-sex people, or three, or four, want to claim they’ve been married, that’s up to them, but there shouldn’t be any government recognition of it. And marriage/divorce/custody is far too legally complicated an issue to have different rules set up in different states.
>> “The church can’t throw abortion doctors in jail and stop states from redefining marriage as two women and one cow or whatever they think up.” <<
.
Churches should throw no one anywhere; its not their purpose, but the institution of marriage was declared and defined by God, and for a governmental entity to attempt to redefine it in any fashion is a clear violation of the first amendment, in as much as it totally obliterates the free exercise clause.
.
~John Adams
Republicans Should Avoid Social Issues
_______________________________________
I’m noticing this is a lib who wrote this. This falls in line with some crapola from Forbes from yesterday that said Santorum should not speak out about porn.
Since when do idiot leftists dictate to us conservatives which issues we can and can not talk about?
The more these “concern trolls” warn us against speaking on the critical social issues of the day - the more we must speak out about them.
And - as an added bonus - notice how the libertarians on this thread are getting their knickers in a knot as they agree with the enemedia and are arguing against SoCon values.
And BTW - I agree with your prognosis of Santorum. And Romney is even worse. So. When you look at the economic and political aspects of Obama, Romney and Santorum, you see little difference.
The only difference Romney and Santorum bring to the table is that we can trust them with social issues.
Social Issues. I am convinced we will live or die by this as our primary agenda for 2012.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
