Christian Group Questions Palin's Pro-life Credentials

[fool]

That is exactly the point that ProlifeProfiles.com is trying to bring home.

Prolifeprofiles.com is BS!
From their Palin page;

- undermines the God-given right to life by promoting evolution while officially opposing creation

So she's not a YEC and that gets her negative points on the abortion issue?
Are they out of their mind?
What does one have to do with the other?
Useing "she's not a creationist" as a talking point against her is as stupid as useing the fact that I don't bielive in Yaweh against my Anti abortion massege.

 

[Lighthouse]

And you think I don't know that?

That's not the point I'm trying to make.

I agree, but at least they're 99% on our side.

Less than 1% of abortions are done for reasons of rape and incest.

Then what point are you trying to make? They say they are OK with killing children who are conceived in rape and/or incest. You make it clear you think we are wrong for opposing them because of this. Your own words condemn you.

 

[Delmar]

Prolifeprofiles.com is BS!
From their Palin page;


So she's not a YEC and that gets her negative points on the abortion issue?
Are they out of their mind?
What does one have to do with the other?

The survival of the fittest principal says, it's fine for a stronger animal to kill another animal. Are you just an animal or is your life precious?

Useing "she's not a creationist" as a talking point against her is as stupid as useing the fact that I don't bielive in Yaweh against my Anti abortion massege.[/QUOTE]I'm glad you are anti abortion, but I admit it is a bit of a mystery how an atheist reaches that position.

 

[Granite]

Del, as a member of several pro-life organizations for the past 20 years, I've heard all the arguments.

Please read what I have stated on this entire thread.

A few observations...

One, the ARTL seems to only accept its own definitions of what and who constitutes "pro-life" or a "pro-lifer." No other definitions of the word appear to make the cut in their eyes.

Two, no matter what the claims, protestations, and (often lengthy) track record of those the ARTL accuses, it won't matter. Doesn't matter what you've done or what you've said; if the ARTL decides you aren't "really" pro-life, and are "really" pro-choice, it becomes so in their opinion. The only way to change the minds of the ARTL is to agree with them. This is coercion and zealotry in action: nothing more, nothing less.

Three, the ARTL does not appear interested in convincing anyone of their perceived mistakes, and appears far more interested in brutalizing, attacking, disparaging, and criticizing men and women they deem either not pro-life enough, or in fact pro-choice--despite the evidence to the contrary. There is a willful, cannibalistic, deliberately destructive overtone to the ARTL's latest activities.

If, as I suspect, the ARTL's ultimate endgame is to dominate the pro-life movement and discussion and emerge as the nation's pre-eminent pro-life organization, it will inflict tremendous damage along the way in pursuit of this (ultimate futile) goal.

Nothing good can come from this.

 

[DocJohnson]

OK, I have now read every word that you have said in this thread, but it is not apparent to me what you said that addresses my question. Perhaps you could give me a post number, that you feel answers it.

Post #7 where I suggested holding elected officials' feet to the fire.

Post #13 where I suggested using politicians to get the job done incrementally if necessary.

Post #16 where I suggested using Sun Tsu's rules to get the job done. Know your enemy, choose battles wisely, and put a strategy together before attacking blindly.

The truth is I don't believe ARTL has been as nasty as all that. The truth needs to be pointed out, and you have to find a way to make people see it.

I've pointed out that RTL is not helping the cause. I know they probably mean well, but you know what they say about good intentions. In the Health Care debate, they have actually helped get the bill passed in the House because they pressured the Republicans to add an abortion amendment. Had that amendment not been in there, that bill wouldn't have passed at all.

...I admit it is a bit of a mystery how an atheist reaches that position.

There are several Atheists who are members of Operation Rescue.

There are several Atheists on this site who are pro-life as well.

It's not a mystery that abortion is wrong. I would even suggest that the vast majority of people know that it's wrong in their hearts. Some are simply willing to shrug off responsibility by saying it's a woman's choice and leave it at that.

 

[Delmar]

Post #7 where I suggested holding elected officials' feet to the fire.

Post #13 where I suggested using politicians to get the job done incrementally if necessary.

Post #16 where I suggested using Sun Tsu's rules to get the job done. Know your enemy, choose battles wisely, and put a strategy together before attacking blindly.

Thanks for your reply. I will re read those posts, when I get a chance, and get back to you.

 

[Delmar]

I've pointed out that RTL is not helping the cause. I know they probably mean well, but you know what they say about good intentions. In the Health Care debate, they have actually helped get the bill passed in the House because they pressured the Republicans to add an abortion amendment. Had that amendment not been in there, that bill wouldn't have passed at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think American Right to Life promoted that amendment. The article you linked had a quote from "Americans United for Life Action". Could that be the group you were referring to?

 

[koban]

Are they out of their mind?

Yes Fool, they are.

Hence the reason they are marginalized, ineffective and ultimately irrelevant.

If progress is ever made on the abortion issue, it will be made by those who are not zealots.

 

[Delmar]

There are several Atheists who are members of Operation Rescue.

There are several Atheists on this site who are pro-life as well.

It's not a mystery that abortion is wrong. I would even suggest that the vast majority of people know that it's wrong in their hearts. Some are simply willing to shrug off responsibility by saying it's a woman's choice and leave it at that.

I am aware that this is true, but it seems surprising to me, that someone who denies the existence of God would embrace the concept of absolute truth.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I am aware that this is true, but it seems surprising to me, that someone who denies the existence of God would embrace the concept of absolute truth.

Why? Is it surprising that the majority of people in general condemn child molesting and rape? What does atheism itself have to do with it?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Nobody expects 100% agreement on every issue, that would be silly.

However, there are issues that are deal breakers even if that issue is the only issue you disagree with. At this point I think it's healthy to be exploring all angles of every issue. 2012 is a long way off.

Oh for sure. I doubt any two people could agree on every issue. I was probably unclear in my post as I was specifically referring to agreement for the most part on the one issue alone under discussion.

I think it's far better to use reason to convince rather than villification, especially if people are 99% allied when it comes to being opponents to abortion. In such instances as rape/incest/underage pregnancy and pregnancy complications it's a common reaction to see more of a 'grey' area in those circumstances.

 

[DocJohnson]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think American Right to Life promoted that amendment. The article you linked had a quote from "Americans United for Life Action". Could that be the group you were referring to?

That was one of the groups, but the NRTL was the main force behind forcing the Republicans to vote for the amendment, even though Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) urged Republicans to simply vote "present" because, if it was included, Democrats were sure to get their majority and pass the whole bill. Shadegg was right.

 

[Granite]

I am aware that this is true, but it seems surprising to me, that someone who denies the existence of God would embrace the concept of absolute truth.

Maybe because your assumptions of atheists are incorrect or need to be reconsidered?

 

[chrysostom]

the only way to do anything about abortion is to get conservative judges on the court

the only way to get conservative judges on the court is to vote for the scumbag republicans

 

[Delmar]

That was one of the groups, but the NRTL was the main force behind forcing the Republicans to vote for the amendment, even though Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) urged Republicans to simply vote "present" because, if it was included, Democrats were sure to get their majority and pass the whole bill. Shadegg was right.

It does me good to see that you are willing to be critical of National RTL, and no, I am not going to accuse you of bickering. The fact is that kind of political maneuvering is exactly the kind of thing that American RTL has been opposing since it's founding.

 

[DocJohnson]

It does me good to see that you are willing to be critical of National RTL, and no, I am not going to accuse you of bickering. The fact is that kind of political maneuvering is exactly the kind of thing that American RTL has been opposing since it's founding.

I didn't see them opposing the amendment. All I see them doing is complaining about whether or not someone is pro-life enough, and even their information on that is questionable.

 

[Delmar]

I hate to bring a wrench to this RTL/PUSA machine, but these organizations aren't really helping the cause much. All they're doing is strong-arming conservative politicians into voting for amendments to bills which help those bills get passed... even though those amendments can easily be removed at a later time, and then you're stuck with the bill becoming law.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems you may have confused American Right to life with National Right to Life. Is that possible?

Targeting Palin or Romney or anyone else is also not helping the cause. All this will do is divide the nation even further. We didn't get into this mess overnight. This has been a long-term, step-by-step process of Leftist ideology becoming bad law. Yes, I agree we need to elect pro-life candidates... but digging into their past and rubbing it in their faces is not the way to reverse this trend. Holding their feet to the fire after they're elected will.

Why do we need to wait until they are elected to hold their feet to the fire? If we allow the republicans to pass Guys like Romney off, as 100% pro life, what incentive to they have to nominate a true pro life candidate? I don't want to have to strong arm supposed pro life candidates into voting the right way. I want the supposed conservative party, to put forward candidates that want to vote the right way.

 

[DocJohnson]

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems you may have confused American Right to life with National Right to Life. Is that possible?

No, I haven't. I know the difference. One group lobbies. The other denounces. The only group actually being productive, unfortunately, is the NRTL.

Why do we need to wait until they are elected to hold their feet to the fire?

Who's waiting?

 

[Delmar]

I didn't see them opposing the amendment. All I see them doing is complaining about whether or not someone is pro-life enough, and even their information on that is questionable.

How long has ARTL been on your radar screen? Could it be they have taken measures that you don't know about. prolifeprofiles.com Is not the first step, they have ever taken. Please don't take this as an attack but someone starts a sentence with "All I see them doing is" it starts to feel to me like the bickering, that they have been accused of. Let's you and I try to talk through this thing without going there.

 

[Granite]

I didn't see them opposing the amendment. All I see them doing is complaining about whether or not someone is pro-life enough, and even their information on that is questionable.

The reality is that very few Americans are opposed to abortion in all cases and by extension it shouldn't be surprising that most politicians find room for some exceptions, either. For all the insistence the ARTL has that every person running for office must conform to the ARTL's own pet definition of what "really" constitutes a pro-life position, they are absolutely setting up candidates for failure in front of a voting populace that is uncomfortable opposing abortion in every single instance. That's just the cold, hard, pragmatic reality.