Republicans, and more importantly conservatives, are going to have to face the fact that even if the Pope himself were elected president, he could not end the scourge of abortion. Given that reality, why all the huff over the top three Republican candidate’s stance on the subject? Rudi is pro choice, but he says he’ll nominate Supreme Court justices in the mold of Scalia and Roberts. That, coupled with his objection to the hideous practice of partial birth abortion is, realistically, about all pro-lifers can hope for from their president. Plus, I think we can accept Rudi at his word.
Mitt is a former pro-lifer, turned pro-choicer, turned pro-lifer again. He can point to the date and circumstance of his epiphanies on this subject and they seem believable enough. More importantly, I think he could be trusted act in accordance with his professed beliefs - whatever they happen to be at the time. McCain has always been pro-life, but given his flexibility on everything from free speech and taxes to his favorite color and what he likes on a hot dog, who knows what he might do. Ted kennedy as a Supreme Court justice doesn't seem out of the realm of possibilities for this guy.
The danger in this hot button issue is that if one of the top three gain the nomination, the pro-lifers will scream for a third party candidate. That will split the conservative vote and hand the election to Shrill and her socialists running mate Hussein Obama. This why it is important to remember the first line of this post:
Republicans, and more importantly conservatives, are going to have to face the fact that even if the Pope himself were elected president, he alone could not end the scourge of abortion.
We may have to settle on a candidate that will move the ball a little closer to the goal without scoring the touchdown. Remember this policy of abortion on demand was handed us through judicial fiat. It’ll probably have to be turned back through the judicial rather than executive branch.
No comments:
Post a Comment