Wake-up America—MURDER v. LIFE, part 3
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on July 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: http://www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com/
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do not plan to get to them until after the general election in November.
I do plan to discuss Iraq before the election. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
http://www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com/
http://www.childpredators.com/
http://www.lifedynamics.com/
http://www.libertylegal.org/
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/
http://www.searchtv.org/
Wake-up America!!! Who ultimately is in control—GOD or man? Who determines right and wrong—GOD or man? Who controls the weather—GOD or man? Who determines righteousness and sin—GOD or man? Who controls our economy—GOD or man? Who defines good and evil—GOD or man? Who controls what happens to the United States of America—GOD or man?
As a Christian, I believe that there are three crucial issues in this Presidential election. Tonight, I begin a discussion on what I consider to be the number one issue of the campaign: The MURDER of the unborn—one of the most if not the most immoral, profane, debasing actions a person can take against another person.
A few months ago, I purchased a book entitled The Party of Death by Ramesh Ponnuru. I haven’t yet read it but I have scanned it to provide tonight’s historical summary. The material quoted is from Chapter 2 and is from pages 21-26. From what I have read and scanned, I would recommend this book. The quoted material:
“‘Realignment’
‘I was born out of wedlock (and against the advice that my mother received from her doctor) and therefore abortion is a personal issue for me,’ wrote the minister. He went on to compare abortion to slavery. ‘If one accepts the position that life is private, and therefore you have the right to do with it as you please, one must also accept the conclusion of that logic. That was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore outside of your right to be concerned.’ He asked, ‘What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience?’ (That question is important!!! What happens to the moral fabric of a nation when it accepts the MURDER of its own unborn babies? The moral fabric of the nation is destroyed!!!—my addition)
Those words were written in 1977. Eleven years later, their author, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, was running for the Democratic nomination for president—and speaking very differently. ‘Women must have freedom of choice over what to do over their bodies,’ said the candidate.
Jackson was part of a Democratic field that unimpressed pundits had labeled ‘the seven dwarfs.’ He wasn’t the only former pro-lifer in the pack. Five of the dwarves had, earlier in their careers, opposed abortion. Delaware senator Joe Biden had voted to amend the Constitution to reverse Roe (Roe v. Wade the obscene and illegal Supreme Court decision that allows the MURDER of unborn babies—my addition). Illinois senator Paul Simon, the liberal lion, had been pro-life, too. In 1981, he introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that the states could generally ban abortion. In 1987 he answered yes when a pro-life group asked if he would ‘support the appointment of judges who will respect the sanctity of innocent human life.’
Missouri congressman Dick Gephardt, who would later become the leader of the House Democrats, had co-sponsored a constitutional amendment to ban abortion when he entered Congress in 1977. He called Roe ‘unjust,’ He switched positions in 1986, in preparation for his presidential run. In 2003, while preparing to run for president again, he addressed the issue in a speech to the annual dinner of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. He blamed his pro-life past on the misfortune of having been ‘raised in a working class family of Baptist faith.’
Tennessee senator Al Gore voted with pro-lifers many times when he was in the House. He voted for an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1984 that would have protected ‘unborn children from the moment of conception.’ After Gore switched his position, he generally took the advice proffered by an aide: ‘deny, deny, deny’ having ever been pro-life.
Several of the Democrats’ 1992 hopefuls had the same problem. As governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton had written to the state’s Right to Life organization in 1986: ‘I am opposed to abortion and to government funding of abortions.’ Bob Kerrey, a Nebraska senator who ran against him, had also been pro-life.
Even Ted Kennedy was once pro-life. He wrote to a constituent in 1971: ‘While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life … When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.’
Richard Durbin of Illinois (He is running for reelection this year and strongly encouraged Barack Obama to seek the Presidency—my addition.), who has the second-highest job in the leadership of the Senate Democrats, was one of the first voices to insist that John Roberts should not be confirmed to the Supreme Court unless he pledged his fealty to Roe. What Durbin was saying was that Roberts should be disqualified for the job if he took the exact same position that Durbin took in the 1980s. In a 1982 primary, Durbin boasted that he had served as master of ceremonies for annual pro-life rallies in Springfield, the state capitol, five times. He voted for constitutional amendments to overturn Roe and continued to express the wish that it be overturned as late as 1989. Six years later, he had done a complete 180, voting to keep even partial-birth abortion legal.
The Democratic party, in short, was once home to quite a few pro-lifers. It was the party of Ed Muskie, Hubert Humphrey, and Tom Eagleton—all pro-life Democrats who had made it very near the top of American politics. It was the party of the little guy. Yet somehow it turned its back on the littlest guy of all.
The shift appears to have been driven by Democratic elites (THE MONEY GUYS—my addition), not rank-and-file Democratic voters. The party’s nomination of George McGovern in 1972 represented the triumph of social liberals, and of new forms of activism that displaced older party structures that arguably represented the voters better. These social liberals were much less likely than Democratic voters, or voters in general, to belong to a church. They tended to see legalized abortion as a step toward women’s equality in the workplace (Instead, it made MURDERERS out of every woman who had an abortion—MURDERERS of their own child!!!—my addition) and toward population control. (It is difficult for people today to comprehend how large a concern domestic population control was in the late 1960s and 1970s.) [It was similar to the incorrect predictions of today in relation to “global warming.” Some “experts” were predicting mass famine and massive death totals because of the famines and resulting wars to seize any crop producing area to feed the overpopulated earth. Sound familiar?—my addition]
McGovern himself was not very pro-abortion: He thought that states should set abortion policy, and he prevented the convention from adding a pro-abortion plank to the party platform. As the years passed, however, the changes set in motion at that convention would transform both parties.
The new Democratic party would push some socially conservative Democrats into the Republican party. It would also cause some groups not previously engaged in American politics, such as evangelical and fundamentalist Christians, to become active Republicans. (It’s instructive to note that two of the leaders of the National Right to Life Committee, Darla St. Martin and David O’Steen, began their careers active in the same Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party to which Humphrey and Eugene McCarthy belonged.) Socially liberal Republicans, meanwhile, would start to vote for the Democrats. In the process, the demographic profiles of the party changed: The Republicans became more working-class, the Democrats more affluent.
The process took some time. Abortion was a much less partisan issue in the 1976 presidential race that it is now. A survey in September of that year showed that Democrat Jimmy Carter was getting 47 percent of the votes of supporters of a constitutional amendment to ban abortion—and 45 percent of the votes of its opponents. In 1980, as well, knowing where a voter stood on abortion did not make it easy to predict for whom he would vote.
Carter and Ronald Reagan were key figures in redefining the parties. Carter’s presidency coincided with rising evangelical opposition to abortion. Many evangelicals had supported Carter as one of their own in 1976. (And yet, he DID NOTHING to end the MURDER of unborn babies—my addition.) By 1980, many of them had concluded that he didn’t speak for them politically, and abortion was one of the reasons. Reagan, meanwhile, symbolized the alliance among pro-lifers, conservatives, and the Republican party. He powerfully branded each group with the others’ causes.
By the late 1980s, Democratic politicians had for years been voting for abortion rights at much higher rates than Republicans—and at increasing rates. The Democratic platform committed the party to Roe and to taxpayer subsidies for abortion; the Republican platform endorsed a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Yet Democratic voters were still more pro-life than Republican voters. (The last sentence is significant; you should reread it!—my addition)
By 1992, Americans’ views of abortion had become a better predictor of their behavior in the voting booth than their views on affirmative action, defense spending, or the recently concluded Gulf War. The economic issues that once divided the parties had ceased to organize the political passions of activists. Surveys of delegates to the Democratic convention found that they were more hostile to pro-life groups and to Christian fundamentalists than they were to conservatives, big business, the rich, or Republicans. Republican delegates were warmer to union leaders, liberals, and Democrats than to feminists and pro-choice groups. Yet even at this point, 61 percent of pro-life Democrats who remained were unaware that their party disagreed with them.
Since that time, abortion and related issues have continued to drive voters from one party to the other. The parties have become more and more clearly defined as a pro-choice party and a pro-life party—and, at the same time, as ideologically liberal and conservative parties. Democratic political theorists William Galston and Elaine Kamarck have called it ‘the great sorting out.’ Republican presidential candidates used to get more liberal votes, and Democratic candidates more conservative votes, than they do today. Now voters who consider themselves conservative vote for the party that presents itself as conservative.
One effect of this sorting out has been the creation of the famous division in American politics between ‘red’ (Republican) states and ‘blue’ (Democratic) states that characterized both the 2000 and 2004 elections. What made that visual depiction of the state-by-state election results so striking was that the country’s political divisions fell along the same lines as its cultural ones. The culturally conservative states voted for the Republicans, while the culturally liberal ones voted the other. The states in which people tend to raise large families voted Republican, and the states in which people tend to raise smaller families voted Democratic.
There are fewer regional divisions in American politics than ever. Southern Democrats and Northern Democrats no longer seem, as they once did, to belong to two different parties. But the geography of partisanship has gotten more stark. Republican states are more Republican, Democratic states more Democratic, and the in-between states fewer. The blue voters in red states tend to be clustered together, and vice versa. People move to neighborhoods that share their values. When a society and politics are divided over values, it stands to reason that people with the same politics will tend to move to the same neighborhoods.”
Note some of the Democrats who had, at one time, been pro-life and now are pro-death:
1) Senator Joseph Biden—the current Democratic Vice Presidential candidate
2) Jesse Jackson—his son is a Congressman from Illinois (the Chicago area).
3) Congressman Dick Gephardt from Missouri
4) Senator Al Gore from Tennessee—the same Al Gore who was Bill Clinton’s Vice President and who lost the Presidency to George Bush in 2000 and now is a proponent of “global warming” on a massive scale
5) Senator Paul Simon from Illinois—who has since died but was a Senator before Dick Durbin or Barack Obama.
6) Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois—he’s from the Springfield area—Central Illinois—and I doubt (my personal opinion having lived in Central Illinois) if he would have originally been elected to public office without claiming to be pro-life.
7) Senator Bob Kerrey from Nebraska
8) Senator Ed Muskie from Maine
9) Vice President Hubert Humphrey from Minnesota
10) Senator Tom Eagleton from Missouri
11) Senator Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts
12) President Bill Clinton from Arkansas
What caused these Democrats to “see the light” or to “sell their soul to the Devil”?
“Thus, in 1789 President Washington issued ‘The First Thanksgiving Proclamation of the United States,’ which he began with these words, ‘Whereas, it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits and humbly implore His protection and favor ….’”
“But the forces of unbelief that have moved in to control American life, would remove every influence of God among us. We are reminded of the statement by William Penn that, ‘If we are not governed by God, we will be ruled by tyrants.’”
“Rather He pronounced a blessing on ‘the nation whose God is the Lord.’ (Psalm 33: 12)
“He promised that his eye would be ‘upon those who fear him.’” (Psalm 33: 18)
“He has said, ‘Righteousness exalts a nation; but sin is a reproach (or a disgrace) to any people.’” (Proverbs 14: 34)
“‘Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.’”
“Without the influence of Divine Providence, believers will be disenfranchised and America will fall as other great societies in the past have done, from within.”
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on July 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: http://www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com/
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do not plan to get to them until after the general election in November.
I do plan to discuss Iraq before the election. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
http://www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com/
http://www.childpredators.com/
http://www.lifedynamics.com/
http://www.libertylegal.org/
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/
http://www.searchtv.org/
Wake-up America!!! Who ultimately is in control—GOD or man? Who determines right and wrong—GOD or man? Who controls the weather—GOD or man? Who determines righteousness and sin—GOD or man? Who controls our economy—GOD or man? Who defines good and evil—GOD or man? Who controls what happens to the United States of America—GOD or man?
As a Christian, I believe that there are three crucial issues in this Presidential election. Tonight, I begin a discussion on what I consider to be the number one issue of the campaign: The MURDER of the unborn—one of the most if not the most immoral, profane, debasing actions a person can take against another person.
A few months ago, I purchased a book entitled The Party of Death by Ramesh Ponnuru. I haven’t yet read it but I have scanned it to provide tonight’s historical summary. The material quoted is from Chapter 2 and is from pages 21-26. From what I have read and scanned, I would recommend this book. The quoted material:
“‘Realignment’
‘I was born out of wedlock (and against the advice that my mother received from her doctor) and therefore abortion is a personal issue for me,’ wrote the minister. He went on to compare abortion to slavery. ‘If one accepts the position that life is private, and therefore you have the right to do with it as you please, one must also accept the conclusion of that logic. That was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore outside of your right to be concerned.’ He asked, ‘What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience?’ (That question is important!!! What happens to the moral fabric of a nation when it accepts the MURDER of its own unborn babies? The moral fabric of the nation is destroyed!!!—my addition)
Those words were written in 1977. Eleven years later, their author, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, was running for the Democratic nomination for president—and speaking very differently. ‘Women must have freedom of choice over what to do over their bodies,’ said the candidate.
Jackson was part of a Democratic field that unimpressed pundits had labeled ‘the seven dwarfs.’ He wasn’t the only former pro-lifer in the pack. Five of the dwarves had, earlier in their careers, opposed abortion. Delaware senator Joe Biden had voted to amend the Constitution to reverse Roe (Roe v. Wade the obscene and illegal Supreme Court decision that allows the MURDER of unborn babies—my addition). Illinois senator Paul Simon, the liberal lion, had been pro-life, too. In 1981, he introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that the states could generally ban abortion. In 1987 he answered yes when a pro-life group asked if he would ‘support the appointment of judges who will respect the sanctity of innocent human life.’
Missouri congressman Dick Gephardt, who would later become the leader of the House Democrats, had co-sponsored a constitutional amendment to ban abortion when he entered Congress in 1977. He called Roe ‘unjust,’ He switched positions in 1986, in preparation for his presidential run. In 2003, while preparing to run for president again, he addressed the issue in a speech to the annual dinner of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. He blamed his pro-life past on the misfortune of having been ‘raised in a working class family of Baptist faith.’
Tennessee senator Al Gore voted with pro-lifers many times when he was in the House. He voted for an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1984 that would have protected ‘unborn children from the moment of conception.’ After Gore switched his position, he generally took the advice proffered by an aide: ‘deny, deny, deny’ having ever been pro-life.
Several of the Democrats’ 1992 hopefuls had the same problem. As governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton had written to the state’s Right to Life organization in 1986: ‘I am opposed to abortion and to government funding of abortions.’ Bob Kerrey, a Nebraska senator who ran against him, had also been pro-life.
Even Ted Kennedy was once pro-life. He wrote to a constituent in 1971: ‘While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life … When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.’
Richard Durbin of Illinois (He is running for reelection this year and strongly encouraged Barack Obama to seek the Presidency—my addition.), who has the second-highest job in the leadership of the Senate Democrats, was one of the first voices to insist that John Roberts should not be confirmed to the Supreme Court unless he pledged his fealty to Roe. What Durbin was saying was that Roberts should be disqualified for the job if he took the exact same position that Durbin took in the 1980s. In a 1982 primary, Durbin boasted that he had served as master of ceremonies for annual pro-life rallies in Springfield, the state capitol, five times. He voted for constitutional amendments to overturn Roe and continued to express the wish that it be overturned as late as 1989. Six years later, he had done a complete 180, voting to keep even partial-birth abortion legal.
The Democratic party, in short, was once home to quite a few pro-lifers. It was the party of Ed Muskie, Hubert Humphrey, and Tom Eagleton—all pro-life Democrats who had made it very near the top of American politics. It was the party of the little guy. Yet somehow it turned its back on the littlest guy of all.
The shift appears to have been driven by Democratic elites (THE MONEY GUYS—my addition), not rank-and-file Democratic voters. The party’s nomination of George McGovern in 1972 represented the triumph of social liberals, and of new forms of activism that displaced older party structures that arguably represented the voters better. These social liberals were much less likely than Democratic voters, or voters in general, to belong to a church. They tended to see legalized abortion as a step toward women’s equality in the workplace (Instead, it made MURDERERS out of every woman who had an abortion—MURDERERS of their own child!!!—my addition) and toward population control. (It is difficult for people today to comprehend how large a concern domestic population control was in the late 1960s and 1970s.) [It was similar to the incorrect predictions of today in relation to “global warming.” Some “experts” were predicting mass famine and massive death totals because of the famines and resulting wars to seize any crop producing area to feed the overpopulated earth. Sound familiar?—my addition]
McGovern himself was not very pro-abortion: He thought that states should set abortion policy, and he prevented the convention from adding a pro-abortion plank to the party platform. As the years passed, however, the changes set in motion at that convention would transform both parties.
The new Democratic party would push some socially conservative Democrats into the Republican party. It would also cause some groups not previously engaged in American politics, such as evangelical and fundamentalist Christians, to become active Republicans. (It’s instructive to note that two of the leaders of the National Right to Life Committee, Darla St. Martin and David O’Steen, began their careers active in the same Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party to which Humphrey and Eugene McCarthy belonged.) Socially liberal Republicans, meanwhile, would start to vote for the Democrats. In the process, the demographic profiles of the party changed: The Republicans became more working-class, the Democrats more affluent.
The process took some time. Abortion was a much less partisan issue in the 1976 presidential race that it is now. A survey in September of that year showed that Democrat Jimmy Carter was getting 47 percent of the votes of supporters of a constitutional amendment to ban abortion—and 45 percent of the votes of its opponents. In 1980, as well, knowing where a voter stood on abortion did not make it easy to predict for whom he would vote.
Carter and Ronald Reagan were key figures in redefining the parties. Carter’s presidency coincided with rising evangelical opposition to abortion. Many evangelicals had supported Carter as one of their own in 1976. (And yet, he DID NOTHING to end the MURDER of unborn babies—my addition.) By 1980, many of them had concluded that he didn’t speak for them politically, and abortion was one of the reasons. Reagan, meanwhile, symbolized the alliance among pro-lifers, conservatives, and the Republican party. He powerfully branded each group with the others’ causes.
By the late 1980s, Democratic politicians had for years been voting for abortion rights at much higher rates than Republicans—and at increasing rates. The Democratic platform committed the party to Roe and to taxpayer subsidies for abortion; the Republican platform endorsed a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Yet Democratic voters were still more pro-life than Republican voters. (The last sentence is significant; you should reread it!—my addition)
By 1992, Americans’ views of abortion had become a better predictor of their behavior in the voting booth than their views on affirmative action, defense spending, or the recently concluded Gulf War. The economic issues that once divided the parties had ceased to organize the political passions of activists. Surveys of delegates to the Democratic convention found that they were more hostile to pro-life groups and to Christian fundamentalists than they were to conservatives, big business, the rich, or Republicans. Republican delegates were warmer to union leaders, liberals, and Democrats than to feminists and pro-choice groups. Yet even at this point, 61 percent of pro-life Democrats who remained were unaware that their party disagreed with them.
Since that time, abortion and related issues have continued to drive voters from one party to the other. The parties have become more and more clearly defined as a pro-choice party and a pro-life party—and, at the same time, as ideologically liberal and conservative parties. Democratic political theorists William Galston and Elaine Kamarck have called it ‘the great sorting out.’ Republican presidential candidates used to get more liberal votes, and Democratic candidates more conservative votes, than they do today. Now voters who consider themselves conservative vote for the party that presents itself as conservative.
One effect of this sorting out has been the creation of the famous division in American politics between ‘red’ (Republican) states and ‘blue’ (Democratic) states that characterized both the 2000 and 2004 elections. What made that visual depiction of the state-by-state election results so striking was that the country’s political divisions fell along the same lines as its cultural ones. The culturally conservative states voted for the Republicans, while the culturally liberal ones voted the other. The states in which people tend to raise large families voted Republican, and the states in which people tend to raise smaller families voted Democratic.
There are fewer regional divisions in American politics than ever. Southern Democrats and Northern Democrats no longer seem, as they once did, to belong to two different parties. But the geography of partisanship has gotten more stark. Republican states are more Republican, Democratic states more Democratic, and the in-between states fewer. The blue voters in red states tend to be clustered together, and vice versa. People move to neighborhoods that share their values. When a society and politics are divided over values, it stands to reason that people with the same politics will tend to move to the same neighborhoods.”
Note some of the Democrats who had, at one time, been pro-life and now are pro-death:
1) Senator Joseph Biden—the current Democratic Vice Presidential candidate
2) Jesse Jackson—his son is a Congressman from Illinois (the Chicago area).
3) Congressman Dick Gephardt from Missouri
4) Senator Al Gore from Tennessee—the same Al Gore who was Bill Clinton’s Vice President and who lost the Presidency to George Bush in 2000 and now is a proponent of “global warming” on a massive scale
5) Senator Paul Simon from Illinois—who has since died but was a Senator before Dick Durbin or Barack Obama.
6) Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois—he’s from the Springfield area—Central Illinois—and I doubt (my personal opinion having lived in Central Illinois) if he would have originally been elected to public office without claiming to be pro-life.
7) Senator Bob Kerrey from Nebraska
8) Senator Ed Muskie from Maine
9) Vice President Hubert Humphrey from Minnesota
10) Senator Tom Eagleton from Missouri
11) Senator Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts
12) President Bill Clinton from Arkansas
What caused these Democrats to “see the light” or to “sell their soul to the Devil”?
“Thus, in 1789 President Washington issued ‘The First Thanksgiving Proclamation of the United States,’ which he began with these words, ‘Whereas, it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits and humbly implore His protection and favor ….’”
“But the forces of unbelief that have moved in to control American life, would remove every influence of God among us. We are reminded of the statement by William Penn that, ‘If we are not governed by God, we will be ruled by tyrants.’”
“Rather He pronounced a blessing on ‘the nation whose God is the Lord.’ (Psalm 33: 12)
“He promised that his eye would be ‘upon those who fear him.’” (Psalm 33: 18)
“He has said, ‘Righteousness exalts a nation; but sin is a reproach (or a disgrace) to any people.’” (Proverbs 14: 34)
“‘Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.’”
“Without the influence of Divine Providence, believers will be disenfranchised and America will fall as other great societies in the past have done, from within.”
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home