Posted on 11/02/2010 5:29:56 AM PDT by markomalley
With 435 House races, 37 Senate races, and 37 Governor races across 50 states today, it could be tough to follow them all. So we’ve decided to divide up some of the races by theme. You might care mostly about abortion, or government reform. We’ll be looking for trends in the suburbs and among Tea Party insurgents.
So, let’s start with one issue that was largely under the radar — Abortion.
California Senate–Boxer, the champion of legal abortion: Boxer is a favorite of the pro-choice movement. She led the fight to keep partial-birth abortion legal. The fact that she’s in danger this year — in California — has pro-lifers giddy.
Washington Senate–Murray, the champion of government-funded abortions: Murray’s is second only to Boxer in defending abortion. Her “Murray Amendment” is an attempt to begin performing abortions on military bases. Much more than Boxer, Murray is vulnerable this year.
Michael Bennet vs. Ken Buck in Colorado Senate race: Democrats have decided the way to beat conservative Republican Ken Buck in Colorado is to attack him as an extremist on abortion — he opposes it in all cases, even when the child was conceived through rape or incest. If he goes down in a tight race, abortion could be part of it.
Keith Fimian, pro-life Catholic in a socially moderate wealthy district: Rep. Gerry Connolly attacks Fimian for his no-exceptions pro-life stance. Fimian stands firm.
Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill.: Hare is an unapologetic pro-choice liberal in a strong Democratic district, but he could lose to pro-life businessman Bobby Schilling.
Obamacare votes by pro-life Dems or those who claim to be: Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio), and Joe Donnelly (Ind.) are pro-life Democrats voted in the end for ObamaCare, even though it contained abortion subsidies. This earned the ire of some pro-life groups, like the Susan B. Anthony List, which has spent money to try to defeat them. Sen. Harry Reid basically fits into this category, since he describes himself as pro-life.
Hear... Hear...
Locally we have a trial starting soon wherein a woman is being charged with the death of an unborn baby (Drunk driver hit the pregnant mom's car IIRC) This should get interesting as far as the abortion issue goes.
I don’t necessarily disagree and I am voting my conscience on it today however I am stating that friends who are of many different faiths are not putting much into the basket because of the “Sand-Bag Theory” I explained before. I hope it passes but it would have been better if it would have started at a heartbeat instead of making the jump to conception. It is just simple maneuvering when you think about it.
Which would have been totally arbitrary, thereby destroying the principled basis for every moral, constitutional, legal and philosophical argument against abortion.
We choose not to use that word, for the simple reason that the enablers of the abortion holocaust in the medical profession have hijacked it, deceptively substituting what should be called "implantation" for "conception."
Opening the door to gruesome Mengele-like experimentation on little human beings at their earliest stages of growth.
So we say "creation," or "biological inception," etc.
It's exactly that kind of unprincipled "maneuvering" that has led to the utter failure of the old NRTL "pro-life" movement for 37 years.
Either they’re persons or they’re not.
If they are, even Blackmun, in the Roe vs. Wade majority opinion, admitted that they are protected by the clear imperative words of our Constitution.
If you think they’re not? Then you are in agreement with Blackmun. He and his colleagues dehumanized the child, and are directly responsible for more than fifty million barbaric killings.
Thanks for the ping!
I am not debating the evils of abortion but rather the likelihood of the passage of a particular bill. I think that an all or nothing approach was the wrong maneuvering and that a bill that more people could get on board with, like defining a person as someone with a heartbeat would have been the increment more suited to getting what we want out of 63. the problem with 63, regardless of how much we agree with what a person is, is that most people don’t and a smaller step with regards to a definition would have been better.... kinda like climbing Everest on day one.
It doesn’t work that way. When you give away the principle, death wins.
The lives of little babies are not something that can be sacrificed on the altar of political calculation.
It obviously does work that way and I am just as upset about this loss as you! you keep lecturing on principles I already know but politics and principle rarely go together, to assume otherwise is naive at best. Abortion is a proverbial elephant and it is going to take incremental steps to dispose of that large over-fed beast that now preys on our young women without remorse.So go ahead and continue your line of thinking but hopefully this will be a demonstration that CO is not ready to put principle with politics.... like I had said in the first post.
“The Grecians and Romans were strongly possessed of the spirit of liberty but not the principle, for at the time they were determined not to be slaves themselves, they employed their power to enslave the rest of mankind.”
—Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, No. 5, 1778
This quote isn’t going to change the practicality and measures that we need to practice to incrementally pass laws (not a single law in one fell swoop in a growingly liberal state) banning abortion.
Your way has been tried for 37 years. Sorry, but we’re not listening to you any more. Too many dead babies.
If you say so. What other measures were tried similar to the ones I predicted would work? Names or numbers and dates would be helpful. I don’t need to state the obvious here but, the tactics chose by you didn’t work either! Nice try on the time frames but a slow incremental change or a changing of all the justices is the best fix. good luck and maybe one of our ways will work eventually... you keep pressing your side and I will press my side and maybe we can end the genocide together.
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.