Posted on 10/20/2007 2:08:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
"I speak for at least half the people here, including the Founder Jim Robinson, who has stated he will not vote for Giuliani under any circumstance."
Agree.
Don't Cut and Run, vote pro-life every time. It's the way you always win.
‘We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life.’ —Ronald Reagan
The point here from my POV, is if you are going to rail against a man, take a look at yourself at the same time.
OK...my mistake and I apologize.
I agree with the CONCEPT of what you’ve said in the second sentence...but JR and MOST posters here abhor abortions...so in that sense, we’ve indeed looked ourselves in the mirror...
Yeppers, it’s been my honor to call him my friend....!!
Never thought I’d see the day when we have to fight against the Republican party in the fight for life. A pro-abortion Republican for presidemt? I stand by my words. Those who support or vote for the abortionist Rudy Giuliani will have the blood of millions of murdered innocent babes on their hands.
Just bumping that statement.......
Though I agree with him on virtually everything, I do not care for him as a person anymore: but his website is still marvelous.
Gentiles who have come to know and accept Yah’shua
are the ones spoken of as grafted in
= =
INDEED.
What a hideous prospect to observe that. God have mercy and spare us such a horrid event.
Oh for Pete’s sake.
Look, I do not understand where you are coming from here. Has anyone in Congress, or the Senate ever performed an abortion? I doubt it, it takes a really dark sick f*** to do that I would think. Have any of them ever had sex that ended in abortion? I cant answer that, and God forgive them.
By your analogy, most politicians have the blood of millions of murdered innocent babes on their hands, and in that way we all share that blood, just like the German people when they looked the other way during the holocaust.
Look, I do not know all of Rudy’s history, maybe you do. But I have to think that anti-abortion has to mean more than no Rudy.
You have a platform and people will listen
Regards
The “perfect” candidate does not exist.
Who is “worthy?”
McCain? Nope
Tancredo? Nobody knows him.
Hunter? Nobody knows him, either.
Romney? The Breck Girl of Boston...not a chance.
Paul? He isn’t going to win, either.
Thompson is the only one other than Rudy G who has a chance...and he’s being bashed nearly as hard as Giuliani. There is no candidate who can satisfy every Republican.
If you would bother to read Duncan Hunter's stand on ALL issues, and what accomplishments he's achieved in ALL his years in office, etc.
..you couldn't say that.
Please consider that 'nobody knows him' is because the MSM, and even Fox it seems, will not give him face time during the debates....he is almost completely shut out...
..and I have to ask my self WHY?
..because Duncan Hunter is the conservative's conservative.
He would be the perfect candidate if the ...'powers that be'.. wouldn't systematically & intentionally shut him out.
If you're a real conservative, you must ask yourself WHY?
This man is squeaky clean.....personable, extremely intelligent, articulate, caring, patriotic, has served our country militarily and his son is now serving as well.
Ask yourself.....WHY if the Republican Party really wanted to win and win with a real conservative...
..WHY AREN'T THEY PROMOTING HIM?
I’m a real conservative, ma’am.
Boy Scout
US Army officer
Fourth Degree Knight of Columbus
...and I stood for four hours in line last time to vote for Rick Perry.
Why, you ask, is Hunter being “ignored?”
Maybe you should ask the candidate that. He’s obviously not getting his message out. Add to that behavior/positions that can be considered isolationist as well as something of a charisma issue...it’s a recipe for being ignored.
I hasten to disagree. Most things are clearly black and white. There is no moral relativism.
"I sought for the key to the greatness of America in her harbors...; in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Stating that everything is not black and white is not moral relativism. It's simply the reality that you cannot delineate on most issues where exactly white becomes black. Some things can be easily said to be white and some easily black, but most issues are not clearly in one or the other. Gray does indeed exist in the real world.
The abortion issue is a case in point. Where does support for abortion in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother fall? What about morning after pills? What about those that support abortion only during the first trimester? Are they just as "black" as those that support abortion on demand during any period?
Yes. These positions can be wholly rejected. Abortion as birth control is without any merit.
Where does support for abortion in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother fall?
While I would argue these as well, for the sake of the argument, lets say these are gray areas... Given the vast number of abortions currently being performed, how much "Gray area" is there? I would suggest it is so minuscule as to be statistically moot.
Pretty black and white, I'd say.
You claim that someone who supports abortion only during the first trimester is just as evil as someone who supports abortion on demand. Once again, many, if fact I would argue most, would disagree. Who is correct here?
I am very much pro-life, yet I'm willing to bet there are areas in which we may differ on what we consider acceptable. The only way you are going to fit everything neatly into black and white areas is if you are arrogant enough to think you alone have figured out the "truth".
Me of course. Killing a baby because of one's irresponsibility while having a "good time" the night before is unjustifiable. It is every bit as evil as killing that person 32 hours, 3 months, 9 months, 20 years, 45 years, or 90 years later. No difference at all. It is murder. THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
You claim that someone who supports abortion only during the first trimester is just as evil as someone who supports abortion on demand. Once again, many, if fact I would argue most, would disagree. Who is correct here?
See above. First trimester is a man made distinction. God is the One who determines when life begins (and when it is to end), not man.
The only way you are going to fit everything neatly into black and white areas is if you are arrogant enough to think you alone have figured out the "truth".
See above. The truth is plain to see.
Nice to see you admit your arrogance in assuming only you have divined the "truth". Everyone that doesn't exactly agree with you must be evil. No one can disagree with the almighty you without being wrong?
Killing a baby because of one's irresponsibility while having a "good time" the night before is unjustifiable. It is every bit as evil as killing that person 32 hours, 3 months, 9 months, 20 years, 45 years, or 90 years later. No difference at all. It is murder. THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
So someone who is pro-life in most cases yet supports or is undecided on the morning after pill is just as evil as someone who supports abortion on demand? Many pro-lifers in your view must be evil then.
The truth is plain to see.
Why then is there not agreement on abortion even on the pro-life side if the truth is so plain?
It is not arrogance. It is written.
The only way to justify any other position is to deny the truth. There is no magic in "the first trimester". a baby isn't suddenly alive at 90 days and not alive before that time.
Within our justice system, a man who murders a pregnant woman is charged with two murders, no matter what month the pregnancy is in. It is ludicrous to claim there is a baby in that case, but not a baby when the mother decides to kill her own child.
It is simply a murder of convenience, a selfish act generally performed as the short sighted solution to acts of hedonism and adultery. To allow such a thing only supports the act, and will encourage all the more participation, as suddenly there is no apparent consequence.
It is also readily apparent that abortion and it's partner birth-control have driven the so called sexual revolution of the sixties, as they supposedly remove from society the natural consequences of "sexual freedom". The more it is legitimized, the more it will occur, and the more the result: MORE BASTARD CHILDREN, AND MORE DEAD BABIES.
This is not a matter of freedom, nor is it a matter of choice. It is just evilness and irresponsibility.
Everyone that doesn't exactly agree with you must be evil. No one can disagree with the almighty you without being wrong?
No, no one can disagree with Almighty GOD. He said "Thou shalt not kill", not little ol' me... Take it up with Him. And yes, BTW, it is EVIL by definition. What could be more evil than the taking of life from the most innocent among us? What evil is beyond us if we will do even this?
Check out what God has to say to those who "pass their children through the fire", because it is much the same thing. Those children, burnt alive on the alters of Baal and Ashteroth were the product of orgiastic religious service... Yes, "Love-ins". The offering as sacrifice served the same exact function as abortion does today- Societal birth control. Jehovah spends many a word saying how heinous those acts are to Him.
So someone who is pro-life in most cases yet supports or is undecided on the morning after pill is just as evil as someone who supports abortion on demand? Many pro-lifers in your view must be evil then.
Yes it is just as evil. Why wouldn't it be? Is the child less dead?
Why then is there not agreement on abortion even on the pro-life side if the truth is so plain?
By and large there is agreement that abortion is wrong. Especially on the pro-life side. What seems to be the issue is whether a woman has a choice to kill her own child or not, and when that "choice" ends.
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.