Posted on 11/20/2011 5:15:41 PM PST by xzins
A day after Michele Bachmann’s campaign attacks Newt Gingrich’s record on abortion, the Gingrich campaign e-mails this account of Gingrich’s record:
Newt Gingrich has consistently upheld a pro-life standard. He had a consistent pro-life voting record throughout his twenty years in Congress, including his four years as Speaker of the House of Representatives. Gingrich pledges to uphold this consistent pro-life standard as president. Gingrich’s consistent pro-life standard is reflected by the following:
1. 98.6% Lifetime Pro-Life Rating from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC). For the 20 years that Gingrich served in Congress (1979-1999), Gingrich supported the pro-life position in 70 out of 71 votes. (In the one instance that he did not take the NRLC position, it was because the NRLC opposed an early 1995 version of welfare reform because it changed certain welfare payments for mothers with children; NRLC did not oppose the final version of Gingrich’s welfare reform passed in 1996)
2. Supported the Hyde Amendment. Gingrich consistently voted for the Hyde amendment and other bans on government funding of abortions.
3. Partial Birth Abortion Ban. During Gingrich’s tenure as Speaker, the House of Representatives twice passed legislation banning partial birth abortions. President Clinton vetoed this legislation both times. Finally, a partial birth abortion ban was signed into law in 2003. The legislative effort to ban partial birth abortions had a very positive impact increasing pro-life support in the United States.
4. Signed the Susan B. Anthony List Pro-Life Leadership Presidential Pledge. In June 2011, Gingrich signed the SBA List Pro-Life Leadership Presidential pledge in which Gingrich pledges to the American people that if elected President he will (i) only nominate judges to the Supreme Court and federal judiciary who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, and not legislating from the bench (ii) select pro-life appointees for relevant executive branch positions, (iii) advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, (iv) defund Planned Parenthood; and (v) advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.
5. Pledges to Sign Two Pro-life Executive Orders on the first day of a Gingrich Administration.
i. “Mexico City Policy” of Respect for Life. Reauthorize President Ronald Reagan’s policy – also known as the “Mexico City Policy”— to stop the federal funding of any non-governmental agencies or charities that perform or promote abortions in foreign countries.
ii. Respect the Beliefs and Integrity of Healthcare Workers. No American working in a medical environment should be forced to perform any action or procedure that he or she finds morally or ethically objectionable. This protection should include, but not be limited to, abortion and sterilization procedures. Existing conscience clause protections need to be strengthened.
The tax code does not treat all people as equal, too.
So I ask again: do you refuse to pay income taxes?
Your sense of proportion is extremely skewed if you equate paying taxes with the equal protection of innocent human life.
I am simply testing your principles, your consistency, and your vainglorious proclamations of being unwilling to compromise.
I will gather by your non-answer that you do willingly pay income taxes despite the violation of the aforementioned Constitutional guarantee of equal treatment to all. And I am certain that you do so with the 100% certain knowledge that said unconstitutionally surrendered money would never in any possible way ever be used to advance the cause of abortion rights, yes?
Play with your silly straw man all night if you want. I’m not participating.
The only thing I’ll say about taxes is that I have a memory. I clearly recall Gingrich and his pals blocking any sort of fundamental tax reform for more than a decade, when they had the power to change anything and everything.
You holding him to account for that?
Out of 100 how many black babies are aborted each year?...
The answer might freak out black citizens if they knew..
Of course they would do nothing about it..
Blacks don’t get uppity and become republicans..
Their eyes roll around as they are Negrodamus-ized..
Very well, and you keep your ivory tower white and your pedestal high, but I’m not buying.
It is easy to demand “no compromise” when you are at no personal risk by doing so.
Grasping at straws with which to bludgeon Newt is not a principled stand. If the tax code is unacceptable, why not take a stand and refuse to pay?
They don't generally try to abort fifty year olds.
Unless they're disabled. Then we're all fair game, if the Constitution's requirement for equal protection is ignored.
Let me ask you a question: Would you give these politicians a pass if they supported legislation that allowed paraplegics to be shot in the heart and killed? Hey, they wouldn't feel a thing, right?! Would you support legislation that allowed Grandma or Grandpa to be done away with if they were given enough morphine? Hey, they wouldn't feel a thing, right?!
Why not? Can you delineate any moral difference between the paraplegic or Grandma or Grandpa and the child in the womb?
Because I’m not stupid. And I understand the moral difference between paying taxes and butchering babies.
-—”Would you give these politicians a pass if they supported legislation that allowed paraplegics to be shot in the heart and killed? Hey, they wouldn’t feel a thing, right?! Would you support legislation that allowed Grandma or Grandpa to be done away with if they were given enough morphine? Hey, they wouldn’t feel a thing, right?!”-—
If they try, I will oppose it.
If they succeed, I will gladly support any effort to reverse the abomination, even if that requires a piece-by-piece dismantling of said abomination in lieu of a revolution.
Now, right back at you: Would you let them continue shooting the paraplegics in the heart and euthanizing grandma rather than support an effort that could only save 99% of them, but not all?
Well that’s an easy distinction, but I thought you just gave me a giant manifesto talking about the Constitutional crisis of it, and demanding we accept nothing other than the complete equality of treatment guaranteed, even if it means sacrificing millions of unborn in the meanwhile.
And yet, you have no problem cooperating with a tax system that blatantly violates said Constitutional guarantees.
I really liked her when she first began but I don't like how she runs her campaign. It was fine to mention Perry's issue with immunizations...but then she just went on and on and on about it. Same with her adopting children...she seems to pick a topic and then gets stalled on it.
No-body’s ripping into Romney...he could almost make me literally sick by his sleazy way of cruising thru this primary..saying nothing at all...as if he's got it either all wrapped up or he simply doesn't care if he wins or not.
He's just not in this to win ....but I couldn't say the same thing about his leadership....THEY certainly are.
Not if it involved throwing every principle upon which the republic and our claim to liberty rests onto the fire of the altar of political expediency, no.
Not if it involves “legal” sanctioning of killing innocents, no.
Not if if involves gross abrogation of the sacred oath of office, no.
Especially when I knew that the claims of those who say they are going to save some by doing the above are a stinking lie in the first place.
That is a reply to #54, but not a response, EV.
Utter nonsense. I'm not the one sacrificing millions of the unborn. That falls on the shoulders of those who refuse to follow the most important principles of our republic.
And yet, you have no problem cooperating with a tax system that blatantly violates said Constitutional guarantees.
I've been fighting for a tax system that treats everyone equally for about twenty years. Much of that fight against the phony do-nothings in power like Gingrich. How about you?
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.
