Skip to comments.NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN LIFE
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."
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
Oh, and I’ve read somewhere (wish I’d bookmarked it!) that when the single cell that eventually becomes the heart is formed, it is already ‘beating’! And I believe that was even earlier than 18 days after conception!! God has formed us in miraculous ways. How can we wantonly destroy the least defenseless among us? :*(
You’re the one who said they would vote for the Socialist Hillary. Who’s the conservative now?
Your faith in the states to uphold unalienable rights is misplaced, and negates the very reason for the existence of our nation.
To wit, the founding paragraph of America:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...
For America to be a just nation, and for the Union to endure, unalienable rights MUST be assured for all persons. All, on every square inch of our territory.
I am not disagreeing with you. But, the way things stand at present, our current Federal makeup will continue to allow babies to be murdered. At the state level we would still see some states continue this attrocity. But, the majority would go the way of life, I believe.
My thought at this point is to stop the killing. We can heal the nation later. We don’t just sit back and wait for the Feds to do the right thing. At the local level, where people live, they have to get the message about how wrong this is.
Personally, this will be the first time in my 47 year life that I have declared myself anything but Independent.
I need Rudy to lose the nomination. I vote Thompson.
If by some horror of reality, Rudy makes it, then I am charged to vote the lesser of two evils. Or as it states in my Catholic Voter’s guide...
8. What if none of the candidates are completely pro-life?
As Pope John Paul II explains in his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects. Logically, it follows from these words of the Pope that a voter may likewise vote for that candidate who will most likely limit the evils of abortion or any other moral evil at issue.
Or I could vote with my idiot BIL and go for Ron Paul. It would be as repugnant as a vote for Rudy.
We made it almost to post #700 before one of the Rooty Rooter FRiberals compared conservatives to the Taliban.”
In other words, vote GOP.
I just hope this conversation is moot. As far as my vote in the primary...well Pennsylvania does not vote until April...way past the winner of the nomination.
Exactly! So if Hillary is elected, there'll be another GOP takeover of Congress in 2010 then. The GOP will be much more stronger & certainly more conservative. Much better than drifting to the left more under a President Giuiliani, who would be cutting deals with the Rats and RINOs to pass more socialism.
And what has happened with all these blogs, the internet and your beloved FR?
The Internet, FR and the blogs were all the after-effects from the Clinton administration. Would there have been a FR or WND had Bush I been re-elected?
We had a Democrat takeover and a country that has turned FURTHER to the left. The internet doesn't just veer to the right, in case you haven't noticed.
The Democrats didn't take over anything. None of their major bills have passed. SCHIP just died in the House.
If the race is between Rudy vs Hillary, conservatives are going to stay home or vote 3rd party. You can scream about the Hillary bogeywoman all you want but conservatives simply aren't going to hold their nose anymore. Better to refresh the tree of liberty than to see it wither and die on the vine.
After 45 years of political experience it is my considered opinion that, in the long run, it would be better for the conservative movement and the country for Clinton to be President, with the GOP conservative, than for the country and the party be controlled by Giulani. It is rather a close call, but that is how I see it.
In addition, I decided more than 30 years ago that I would never vote for a baby killer for president. Better to be in hell on earth than in Hell for Eternity.
Honestly, that is what I am seeing too.
Wow, what a mixed metaphor!!
I think I like it, sort of.
“Has it escaped your notice that of the 50 MILLION babies slaughtered by your favorite SCOTUS decision, approximately half of them were females?
How can you support women’s rights and still support the murder of 25 MILLION women?”
I would like to hear the answer to that one myself.
Well strike me down, then. Because I ain't voting for Rudy, even if Stalin was his opponent.
” I decided more than 30 years ago that I would never vote for a baby killer for president. Better to be in hell on earth than in Hell for Eternity.”
B T T T
I dont think it's a comparable analogy. I read somewhere (probably here) that Rudy had to nominate from a list provided to him from a NYC committee. Dont remember if it was a committee of the NY bar, but it might have been. Anyway, I was just wondering if you had looked into the pool of people he had to choose from. I have not been able to rule out the possibility that this committee, by virtue of its composition, gave him a group that was largely liberals.
As I recall he did appoint some Republicans to the bench but I don't know their names.
“I ain’t voting for Rudy, even if Stalin was his opponent.”
Thank you for so beautifully proving my point.
There is nothing in my statement that would indicate I believed a "right to abortion" exists in the Constitution.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
In case you don't know how to find a dictionary, let me inform you that the word "posterity" refers to those who are not yet born.
Posterity is not limited to those who become citizens by birth. It could also be defined as those who become citizen at a later date through immigration as well.
The Fifth Amendment (the heart of the original Bill of Rights):
No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law... That means charged, tried, and convicted on a capital offense. How is it possible for a child in the womb to be guilty of a capital offense?
It could also be interpreted that due process of law could mean the state's right to pass a law to allow for abortion.
The Fourteenth Amendment:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Do you agree with Blackmun that a child in the womb is not a "person"? Even he, in the text of Roe, admitted that if the babe in the womb were a person, that they were therefore protected by the Fourteenth Amendment:
A. The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.
You presume that I don't believe an embryo is a person, although your reference to a "fetus" is quite telling.
Tens of millions of American children have been brutally done to death because of the stupid lie that a child in the womb is not a person. And the slaughter continues every day because of the gross ignorance of ignoramus' like you.
Your again presume to know my position regarding the matter. Your comments are indicative of your basic lack reading comprehension skills. It is you who is the ignorant one.
Perhaps you should go back and read my initial post. Then again, I'm sure your knee wouldn't know what to do.
Read my initial post again, CAREFULLY!!!
Here is the critical difference, Extremely Extreme Extremist DID NOT say he would vote for Stalin, YOU WOULD VOTE FOR STALIN if he had an “R” after his name.
I have a feeling it distresses you to no end that Hitlery is a ‘Rat, because I’m sure you would love to vote for her. After all, you both share the opinion that men are “fanatics” who want to “control” women by not allowing them to commit infanticide.
Your entire post was that NONE of the posts had been based on the Constitution, but rather on Biblical principles.
You stated, “As abhorrent as abortion is, there is nothing in the Constitution which would prohibit it.” Many of us have shown otherwise, you still disagree.
Perhaps I haven't made myself clear.
I have no intention on supporting a pro-abortionist, pro-homosexual rights, cross-dressing, draft-dodger, twice-divorced, pro-gun control, authoritarian, big-city liberal Mayor who has profited off of 9/11 and is embroiled in his own corruption scandals and didn't have the guts to challenge Hillary in the 2000 & 2006 Senate races where he would have won. If the race boils down to Hillary vs Rudy, I will vote 3rd party. If Hillary wins, then we can get this show on the road, if you know what I mean.
That cleared it up for you?
The proclamation proves that person is not a conservative, but a pro-life single issue voter.
Only when the LIFE position is based upon Constitutional grounds and not moral grounds, new ground and new defenders can be added. When it becomes a CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER and not a religious issue a sea change can be affected. Joe and Jean Citizen don't like to be preached to but they are open to education.
When it becomes a CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER and not a religious issue, then the finger can be pointed at the ACLU and other groups and questioned, "where were you?"
Consider this, "Uncle Tom's Cabin" did more to affect the position on slavery than quite possibly any other medium. John Brown at Harper's Ferry did more to set it back.
I'm not sure how. That was a quote from the majority decision in Roe vs. Wade, written by Justice Blackmun.
What part of the word "person" is it that you don't understand?
Would YOU vote for Stalin if he had an "R" after his name? YES or NO?
Because EEE NEVER indicated that he would vote for Stalin under any circumstances.
I think you and the other Rooty Rooters are so immersed in typical liberal projection that you are incapable of basic reading comprehension.
Yeah, it could. If you're a flippin' idiot.
Which third party? The last third party to have any meaningful result was the Reform party, which was pro-choice. As is the Independent party and the Green party. Maybe the Constitution party which got 145,000 votes total in 2004. Or perhaps the Christian Freedom party which in 2004 receved an earth shattering 2,387 votes.
I read your post. Answered it. Crushed it. Now you're just whining.
"Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" was taken DIRECTLY from the Declaration of Independence. It was clearly reaffirmed in the Preamble to the Constitution.
this one was ever loopier:
"As far as what will I do if Rudy is the nominee, that would depend on the existence of a creditable third party. If there is one, I will support it. If not it would depend on how close the contest is in Florida. If it is close, I will privately vote for Hillary, as the most effective way to destroy the GOP."
Last I checked only one of the candidates is a physician (and an obstetrician at that), therefore likely to have performed an abortion - and Dr. Ron Paul claims to be pro life. The rest of the candidates, even the radial leftist pro abortion Democrats have likely never performed an abortion. Now it is possible that Hillery Clinton has had an abortion, but she has not ever claimed to have had one.
That said, radical right to lifers are doing their own cause more harm than good by alienating candidates and their supporters that are not as militant about the issue as they are. I hope that no babies were aborted, but until the law makes it illegal, it is a hard moral choice for the mother to make. Hopefully she decides to at least put it up for adoption, if she feels she can’t take care of it properly. If she does abort the baby, it is an emotional scar that she (not us) will have to live with.
If we abort freedom by staying home or voting for a losing 3rd party candidate, thus letting the radical left elect Hillery Clinton by default, we guarantee that legal abortions will continue at least another 4 years, if not much longer if Clinton gets to appoint more liberals to the Supreme Court.
Clearly you misunderstood what EEE wrote, because he NEVER said that he would vote for Stalin.
If you want insane, irrational and idiotic, you should examine THIS post by one of your fellow FRiberal anti-FReepers:
It's not going to be DNC Lite; it's going to be a more moderate conservative party though; you all have had your foot on our necks for too long.
This country has to be governed in the middle; the world has moved on from the 50's.
The Contract with America will unite this party again. But we're not going to let you make abortion and guns the big issues this time around.
Hey Bucko...I didn’t say that EEE would vote FOR Stalin...but any FANATIC that says they wouldn’t vote for Giuliani, even to STOP Stalin from winning is insane. Totally utterly frickin’ insane.
Rooty Toot will do far more damage to America than Stalin ever could have.
Only for mothers who don't have any morals.
You mean like all those of us who voted for President Bush? ;) Or Californian Republicans who voted for Swartzeneger?
Sometimes you just have to take the better choice you are given and work to get a better choice the next time.
As anyone who has created something for the real world knows, perfection is the enemy of good enough.
If JimRob kept FR to himself until it was perfect, we would not have had all these years to enjoy and make it into the powerful grassroots tool it is. In the old days, FR was far from perfect, but it was what all we had to work with.
Rooty Toot IS NOT "good enough." In fact, he is the worst possible GOP nominee.
I wrote that, " Rooty Toot will do far more damage to AMERICA than Stalin ever could have."
However, the fact remains, that American abortionists like Rooty Toot have killed far more innocent people than Stalin and Hitler COMBINED.
Add to your list.
"Rooty Toot will do far more damage to America than Stalin ever could have."
How about a little history lesson for the folks wielding jingoistic hyperbole:
To ensure his position and to push forward "socialism in one country," he put the Soviet Union on a course of crash collectivization and industrialization. An estimated 25 million farmers were forced onto state farms. Collectivization alone killed as many as 14.5 million people, and Soviet agricultural output was reduced by 25 percent, according to some estimates.
In the 1930s, Stalin launched his Great Purge, ridding the Communist Party of all the people who had brought him to power. Soviet nuclear physicist and academician Andrei Sakharov estimated that more than 1.2 million party members -- more than half the party -- were arrested between 1936 and 1939, of which 600,000 died by torture, execution or perished in the Gulag.
In the wake of the German defeat, the U.S.S.R. occupied most of the countries in Eastern Europe and eventually ensured the installation of Stalinist regimes. Stalin said later to Milovan Djilas, a leading Yugoslav communist, "Whoever occupies a territory also imposes his own social system." He believed that the Americans and the British "imperialism" would clash and eventually "socialism" would triumph.
After initially approving the participation by Eastern European countries in the U.S.-sponsored Marshall Plan (1947), Stalin forbade it. Stalin also sought to gain influence in Germany, though his exact goals remain controversial. Denied access to the western German occupation zones, he agreed to the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) in October 1949.
Encouraged by Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War and the establishment of the People's Republic of China in October 1949, Stalin gave the green light to North Korean leader Kim Il Sung to attack South Korea in June 1950.
His confrontational foreign policy and his domestic terror regime (the "Stalinist system") had an impact on Soviet society and politics well beyond the dictator's death of natural causes at age 73 on March 5, 1953.
I think there is more too it than that. Regretably, Ronald Reagan, who we all love and adore, had 3 picks for the supreme court. 2 of the 3 were duds. Only Scalia is in favor of dumping R vs W. Kennedy has maintained restrictions but wont overturn R vs W. O'connor was a total dud.
GHWB, gave us Souter! A Lib-Pig and Thomas, so he was 50-50.
So there is no certainty that a pro life President will give us the Supreme Court we need.
If R vs W is overturned, it goes to the States. So, there are maybe 5 states that will outlaw it.
Abortion will continue in the millions for as far as the eye can see.
If (unborn)life is everything, as this thread is premising, then it will not be ended by voting pro-life. (I am pro-life and have always voted pro-life).
The holocaust will continue.
If you are attacking another Freeper, it is common courtesy to ping him, especially when he is in general agreement with the site owner, and you are not.
Be that as it may, you are not living in reality. Our opposition to Giuliani is totally implacable. That is the world you live in. If you want to win the election, you had better stop him from being nominated, because he can not be elected.
You are correct; however, there IS a certainty that a pro-abortion President WILL give us a pro-abortion justice.
For a multitude of reasons, it is almost impossible to discern whether a Supreme Court nominee is pro-life, but it is very simple to tell if they are pro-abortion.
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.