While catching up on the new this morning by watching Fox News, I saw a three-way discussion with a Republican Strategist, a Democrat Strategist, and the anchor. The topic was Rudy G.’s possible (read:likely) run for the White House. They both agreed on most issues which is what caught my attention. Then the Democrat, Steve Murphy, made the comment that the Republican base would not vote for Rudy because he is “pro-choice rather than pro-Life“.
Did you catch that?
It is the first time I have ever caught a Dem saying that they are not for “Life”. They twist and turn but never use the term “pro-Life”! What a hoot!
Look, I’ve made it clear from the start, I am a Pagan. Pagans are generally left-of-center and very much pro-abortion. Personally, I am right-of-center and very much pro-Life. My feeling is that if our society were to grow up where the subject of Sex is concerned then the need/desire for abortions would disappear in a puff of logic. Sadly, we are not there yet. Am I a pro-Life activist? No. Simply because I do not condone the vile methods used by many of that stripe -and- the fact is that being male I have no dog in that hunt unless the child being carried is mine. To date, I’ve not been placed in that situation.
The news here is the Dems giving us, finally, a clear view on how they see innocent Life: Completely expendable.
Bull, out.
Right On Bull!…
An eye-opener from The Bull Speaks. I concur!…
I don’t know that I’d read too much into Murphy’s statement — the right uses “pro-life” to describe its position the same way the left uses “pro-choice” to describe its own. It isn’t like he just coined the term.
The problem I have with the term “pro-life” is that it makes it seem as if being “pro-choice” is “anti-life” (which I think is a misnomer). Does being “pro-life” make someone “anti-choice”? I’m “pro-choice” for a variety of reasons, but two primary reasons are because a.) politically, I don’t think the government has the authority to tell a person what they can or cannot do to their bodies, b.) and personally, as a man, I’ll never be in the position of having an unwanted pregnancy in my body, and don’t believe I or anyone else has the right to force someone to carry that pregnancy to term.
I’m absolutely in favor of programs — private or government based — to encourage couples faced with an unwanted pregnancy to look at adoption as a preferably option to abortion; I’m in favor of sex-education so that individuals experimenting with sex will have the knowledge and opportunity to do so in a safe manner; I’m not opposed to encouraging abstinence, but I don’t think encouraging abstinence and hoping people won’t have sex is ridiculous – encouraging abstinence should be a part of a program of sexual education, “Put the condom on the bannana. By the way, don’t have sex until you’re at least thirty.”
Furthermore, I think Murphy is right about Giuliani. Giuliani is a great crossover candidate … in certain states: he’s a moderate Republican who is receptive to gay rights and pro-choice. A lot of blue-staters and a lot of die-hard Democratic voters would fall into his camp. For those same reasons, a lot of red-staters and die-hard members of the Religious Right would stay as far away as possible. While I don’t think being pro-choice is quite the vote killer in certain Republican-voting communities (primarily, the libertarian ones), I think he’d have a really tough time getting the Republican base behind him.
Pro-Life = folks that see abortion as murder.
Pro-Choice = folks that see abortion as a woman’s choice and not murder.