Indeed.
And...National Right to Life has done -- and continues to do -- wonderful work on behalf of the pre-born. But somebody's head(s) there should roll within that org after it elected last week to endorse Romney.
Elsewise, "pro-life" = nothing anymore. It becomes "We endorse pols who we deem are less 'pro-death' than others."
When NRTL leaders [distinction from NRTL, the storied organization or grassroots supporters]...
...start becoming as relativist and as utilitarian as the countless conservative humanists we see who pitch political relativism-as-an-absolute upon some of us...
...we're in DEEP, DEEP, DEEP trouble as a nation...
...[Yeah, I know that's self-refuting to try to impose political relativism as some "absolute" that we MUST bow down to...but it hasn't stopped the FR imposers on many threads!]
What we're about to enter into this political season is the Liberal "Twilight Zone" --
--where we'll have the most liberal of liberal Dems attempting to take a higher "moral high ground" vs. those they deem as social-issues hypocrites...
They'll preaching Romney supporters: "How DARE you preach your anti-abortion & big govt & socialized govt. sermons at us...when here you are beating up non-Romney supporter conservatives over not supporting a pro-abortion, big govt., socialized govt candidate (Mitt)! Forever shove it re: your abortion & big govt & socialist moralizing!"
In about the only time I tuned into NPR (last week), even one guy doing an interview there claimed the positions between Romney & Obama were not that "starkly" different.
I was shocked when I heard of this endorsement. Romney isn't even the nominee, and this was totally unnecessary. #DenyMitt1144