The Political Positive

The pro-life position is politically strong. When Americans are presented the truth about abortion they are pro-life.

Contrary to public perception only 20%c of Americans believe in abortion on demand for any reason. Nearly 70% say that killing a fetus is tantamount to manslaughter.

Therefore, the pro-life position is a politically positive issue. The key is educating the country.

Expose the ambiguity of "pro-choice". Reveal "choice" to be the god-like decision between life and death of an unborn child.

The concept of freedom of choice is held dear by Americans. They react when their ability to choose is brought into question.

Therefore, when the pro-aborts cloak their position with the phrase "woman's right to choose" it naturally gets a spontaneous impulse reaction of support and defense. However, if that "choice" is clearly defined as taking a child's life, the reaction is different.

There is an old saying in politics: "Perception is reality." That's why sound bites and impulse images are and have been effective in communication. Recall the public revulsion to partial birth abortion.

The pro-aborts, describe their position as "protecting a woman's right to choose". Why isn't that challenged? Why didn't the rebuttal ask: "Choose what?". Why not demand that "pro-choice" supporters define the "choice" they want to protect?

Why aren't the pro-life candidates and campaigns describing the "choice" that is being "protected"? Would the electorate vote for a candidate who supported the "right to choose ending a child's life?"

Oh, before I forget. Why aren't the proabortionists tell of the dangers for women who get abortion and the underlying medical dangers associated? Some may question if there is a profit motive?

The proabortionists can't cry "ignorance'" or that the baby in the womb is a blob of tissue. The science is in. Human life begins at conception. (see upcoming release on the medical aspects of abortion)

When people are made aware of the reality that abortion takes the life of an unborn child the response takes on a different dynamic. The key to the debate is simply presenting the truth in its fulness.

During a radio interview I was asked why more people are not more active in the abortion debate. I said it's real simple. To many Americans abortion is an abstract. They don't see the dead child. However, if they received a notice of an increase of their tax or heating bills, rest assured they will speak out.

Here's an interesting question. Since Partial Birth Abortion is equally as gruesome, violent and horrendous as all other abortions, why is it that over 80% of Americans want to ban it. Yet we are told that a majority of Americans want to maintain "choice"?

It is simple. The image of a child having its skull cracked with its brains sucked out while dangling from the mother's womb is a disturbing image. The message is simple and has been viewed on numerous occasions especially when the bill banning the procedure was debated in Congress.

However, other abortion procedures do not have the same image or fervor of support. Why? Because these are abstract...until presented with the truth.

Key to Political Victory: Define the Debate For years the pro-abortion supporters have been allowed to define the debate. They have demonized pro-lifers as wanting to impose their values upon a woman and conjuring up images of back alley abortions if the "right to choose" (choose what?) were taken away.

The debate needs to be defined in plain and unambiguous terms. The pro-life position needs to take the political and educational offensive. Let the truth in its entirety be presented in a clear and concise manner.

The pro-life position needs to be addressed in five categories. In each category the evidence is overwhelming in support of the pro-life position.

3. Economic--Abortion has deprived America of millions who would now be paying into Social Security, other taxes and creating jobs.

5.Spiritual--The faith upon which the nation was built establishes abortion to be taking the life of an unborn person. To abort them is an attack on God Himself. (See Jesus, Politics and the Church Updated and Revised, Chapter 18 entitled "God: Abortion's Other Victim

Why Present the Five Fold Categories? The pro-life position needs to be addressed from all the previous five categories for three reasons.

First, each category addresses a vital element of our national and individual existence.

Second, one category may not appeal to one person but may appeal to another. For example, an atheist would not be persuaded by the spiritual position on abortion but may be influenced by the constitutional or economic one. On the other hand, a deeply religious person may not be motivated by the economic position but by the spiritual one.

Third, the apologetics of each category corroborates the others. Each add their voice to the composite unity of the pro-life position further building its viability and credibility in a pro-life mosaic of truth.

From 1980 to 2000 Bill Clinton was the only pro-abortion candidate to be elected president. Even then his victory in the first election came with just over 40% of the popular vote.

In 1994 history was made with a sweep of Republican victories in the off year election. Americans overwhelmingly rejected liberalism. The basis of this victory was the "Contract with America" and the Republican platform which held strongly to it's pro life position.

In 1996 one of the strongest issues was Clinton's veto of the bill banning partial birth abortions. Over 80% of Americans supported the ban. Yet the Dole campaign ran from it-and lost.

In 2000, George Bush boldly professed that unborn children should be "welcomed into life and protected by law".

Faced with an incumbent Vice President who was radically pro-abortion and whose administration governed during economic growth (beginning with the Reagan administration), George W. Bush won the election.

The "pro life" position is a political winner when it is presented in a logical, truthful and intelligent manner. Americans are decent people who, when presented with the truth will support such decency.

Mr. Nassif is the author of Jesus, Politics and the Church Updated and Revised as well as numerous other articles and position statements on public policy from a moral/Biblical point of view. He's a national and international speaker and talk show guest with such prominent leaders as Dr. D. James Kennedy, Dr. Jerry Falwell, Armstrong Williams, Paul Weyrich, Beverly LaHaye, Focus on the Family, Janet Parshall, and many more. To unsubscribe please return email with the word "unsubscribe"

I'll admit I was one of those people that said, I don't believe in abortion but I don't think i have the right to tell anybody else what to do with their bodies. Then I came across the fact that the Mother and child do not share the same blood. The fact that a child could have a different blood type than the Mother, is what made me see abortion in a completly different light. (Don't laugh) I know it's so obvious,but i just never saw it. I know this is a trival point compared to the others but it changed my mind.

Not just a different blood type, but half of them are a different sex too... Glad to have you on the right side :-)

I'm not laughing. Many of us here have "changed our mind". Whatever the reason that brought us to see the light, makes no difference. LOL Glad to have you on our side. :)

I liked this article. It makes a lot of good practical sense to be pro-life, not to mention, we are RIGHT!

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.