Sen. John McCain is floating the idea of choosing a pro-choice vice president. Unless Sen. McCain can justify political suicide, I don't recommend it. He is already on very thin ice with Reaganite conservatives, and truly pro-life evangelicals (and, yes, those categories overlap). No truly pro-life evangelical can vote for Obama, by the way, for reasons articulated here before. If you wonder about Obama's record on abortion, read the chapter on this in The Case Against Barack Obama by Freddoso.
To chose a pro-choice vice-president (like Tom Ridge or Joe Leiberman) would be to bow toward the culture of death. You don't want those who favor the slaughter of the innocents (over one million a year) on your team. This kind of diversity should be put in the dumpster. This is not simply a minor matter of political opinion. It touches the fundamentals of morality, law, and culture.
If McCain chooses a pro-choice VP, many pro-life people will either stay home or vote for a protest candidate. In fact, the Republican convention could get ugly under such as circumstance. It certainly wouldn't be a coronation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
That McCain would even float that idea doesn't bode well for those of us who would love to see a President who deeply understands the pro-life position and is able to articulate it consistently and persuasively.
Interestingly, there is a possibility that Obama could pick Tim Kaine, governor of Virginia as his running mate, who is pro-life.
I am already planning to vote for a protest candidate, so let him pick whoever he wants. He is no conservative.
If he picks Huck, that would be a diffrent story. But thats not going to happen.
Hi Dr.Groothuis, this is my first time writing on your blog, although I enjoy reading it on occasion. I'm grateful that you would speak out against the possibility of McCain picking a pro-choice Vice-President. It truly does amaze me how many of my evangelical friends blindly support the republican party, regardless of how far modern Republicans diverge from their conservative ideals.
I was going to reply to your blog entry entitled "Fetus Fatigue" several weeks ago, but the time has passed. I think what you are seeing in my generation (I was born in '77) is not fetus fatigue but republican fatigue. How throughout the last thirty years republicans have promised one thing and done another. This is most blatantly evident in the case of Roe v Wade. It is amazing to see the Supreme Court appointees over the 30 years and how many of them have upheld Roe v Wade ensuring, what we say we believe, the death of millions and millions of the unborn. Here's the actual breakdown (sorry for the long post).
Stevens, John Paul - nominated by Ford (Republican) voted to uphold Roe V Wade
O'Connor, Sandra Day - nominated by Reagen (Republican) voted to uphold Roe V Wade
Scalia, Antonin nominated by Reagan (Republican) - voted against RvW
Kennedy, Anthony M. nominated by Reagen (Republican) - voted to uphold RvW
Souter, David H. nominated by H.W. Bush (Republican) - voted to uphold RvW
Thomas, Clarence nominated by H.W. Bush (Republican) vote against RvW
Ginsburg, Ruth Bader - nominated by Clinton (Democrat) voted to uphold RvW
Breyer, Stephen G. - nominated by Clinton (Democrat) voted to uphold RvW
Roberts, John - nominated by W. Bush (Republican) remains untested
Alito, Samuel A., Jr. - nominated by W. Bush (Republican) remains untested
If you do the math, thats 8 out of the last 10 appointees coming from Republicans (including Reagan). It truly is a Republican supreme court... yet abortions continue unabated? Now McCain wants to run with Ridge or Leiberman? How long until we say enough is enough?
P.S. there is an interesting article on the nihilist existentialism of Woody Allen in the most recent Newsweek. I could almost hear Francis Schaeffer's prophetic warning in between the margins.
Dr. Groothuis,
Would it be a misnomer to call pro-choice pro-death?
Roger
Chris, etc.
This is a non sequiter.
If the Republicans have trouble appointing good judges, do you think the Dems (who are sworn to aphold Roe) will do better? That is absurd. A fortiori, the Dems would do far worse indeed.
Bush's last two appointments to the Supreme Court would like vote against Roe if given the chance. A few more good appointment by McCain can make the difference.
But put Roe aside. If Obama gets in, he will sign The Freedom of Choice Act. If so, ALL state restrictions on abortion would be nullified: repeat--ALL. McCain would not do that.
Moreover, the Republican presidents have take pro-life steps outside of the Supreme Court judges. Consider the Mexico City policy, not allowing abortions in the military, etc. These are what Clinton issued executive orders against shortly after taking office.
Your argument is entirely lacking in logic or evidence. If you think I'm wrong give me some logic and evidence, please.
Chris Durken has assured me that he is not pro-Obama, he was simply expressing frustration with the Republicans. I am frustrated, too!
“This is a non sequiter. If the Republicans have trouble appointing good judges, do you think the Dems (who are sworn to aphold Roe) will do better? That is absurd.”
Christ, etc. never said that Democrats would do better. He was merely expressing his frustration with the Republican Party and explaining why he’s frustrated.
Post a Comment