Posted on 03/22/2014 2:46:47 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
I have no problem with any of those proposals. After 55 million dead babies you’re worried about the slippery slope in the other direction? We need some perspective here.
“There’s something worse than murder in this world. That something is refusing salvation.”
When you murder others, you rob others of their earthly life and liberty. When you refuse salvation, you may rob yourself of heavenly life and liberty. I would say that refusing salvation is akin to refusing a sales pitch of a wonderful product that could help you in the future. Clearly, that is not in the same class as murdering someone, especially the innocent unborn!
Disagree. On the basis of the bible itself. Unforgivable vs. forgivable sin.
If it is between a pro life and a pro baby killing candidate, always vote pro life.
If both or pro death, vote for the Republican. (They have at least a chance of voting right due to party pressure later.
“On the basis of the bible itself. Unforgivable vs. forgivable sin.”
Thankfully, the laws of the US are earthly laws. You will have to wait for your death to find out the constitution of the heaven(The Bible) to start.
No, the Nazis killed roughly six million Jews.
And seven million other Communists, Gypsies, homosexuals, and others deemed inconsistent with the ‘glories’ of the Third Reich.
////////////
Well put! Thank you.
In comparison to our abortion numbers, the Nazis were mere pikers, however.
Nope, they are revealed now and we are told to live by them now.
Casuistry only steers you to hell, and that begins with hell on earth, you can’t even say you have managed to put it off till eternity.
But the greatest mass-murderer of all may very well be Rachel Carson.
you can’t do anything if you don’t have a majority.
///////////////
True: But, if you would, please clarify just what it is you mean by “majority.”
Surely, you cannot mean we should merely settle for a majority of elected officials who haven an “R” after their names?
How many times have we been sold down the river by alleged “Rs” who voted “D” . . . When it REALLY mattered?
Answer: Far too often.
We need to elect officials who are uncompromising in their opposition to abortion.
Whether abortion is opposed via Federal or state legislation is a matter for debate. However, in keeping with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, I believe it better legislated at the State level.
Lest we forget, prior to the infamous Roe V. Wade decision, abortion was outlawed in something like 47 to 50 states. Roe v Wade overturned the laws of almost 50 states..., and this country has never since recovered.
Currently, abortion is legally practiced in all 50 states — though, I would hope, not for long here in Texas, Deo Volonte!
make that “47 to 49 states”
The only lasting victory will come from defunding the Left. With every passing year, the Dems get more people who are dependent upon government, and willing to vote the Dem line.
I could see the Dems offering a bargain: they would agree to not oppose the elimination of all government support for abortion, along with larger restrictions on abortion access, in exchange for our side not opposing a large expansion of government. Then, five years later when the Dems have leveraged this expansion to secure complete control of all branches, they cancel what they initially agreed to, and make abortion-on-demand to the 9th month a federally funded entitlement.
What will the remaining Christians of the 22nd Century think of you then? That you were noble to seek a short term victory, or that you were fools for losing the long-term war?
I appreciate your point, but if you look at the democRATS, they are all true believers, so their aliegence is never questioned, and the leadership manages to hold the line and enforce party discipline on their members who stray.
Republicans never seem to learn that lesson. The squishy R’s never seem to feel the pressure that they should. Juan McAmnesty and Lindsey Graham leap to mind but there are others as well. Gingrich did enforce some unity/loyalty to a large degree while he was speaker, yet Hastert the Bastert and even Boner never have.
This is really the issue you are addressing, and that is a function of the leader and who is able to manage enough allies to become speaker. The Whip so some degree needs to be the enforcer, and remind those members who go soft, that they will not be around in the next term if they run afoul of the agenda.
I don’t think that announcing their opposition to abortion is going to get ignored my the democRAT media, they will get trashed by the democRAT media, and thus will not get elected at all. Better to not discuss it like the democRATS do, give assurances that they are not going to ban it when questioned like the democRATS do with gun control, and then once elected just go ahead and do it like the democRATS do.
I agree that this is a state issue but we need to win national elections to appoint Federal judges who believe that this is a state issue.
Then you are officially 'pro-choice'.
That is a non-response, it is simply a way of saying you support abortion and the end of marriage.
Abortion is just “medicine” and gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and immigration is a state by state issue.
You sure have some crazy ideas.
not probably!
The most anti-God, perverse post of all, is the one trying to convince voters to not vote against abortion and to protect marriage, all the while pretending that it is for God.
Christians should always vote in a way that represents their Christian faith.
Vote as a Christian.
The right to life is first for a reason. If a candidate can’t get the most important one right, I can’t trust him or her to be strong on any of the others.
As with Amnesty,100%. Both positions render the candidate at least highly untrustworthy on all other apparently conservative positions.
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.