United they sat
According to a reliable source who was in the room, only 2 people of over 50 did not stand at the September 29 meeting of conservative leaders in Salt Lake City when asked whether they would support a minor-party pro-life candidate in the event Republicans put forth a pro-abort, i.e., Rudy Giuliani.
They were Darla St. Martins, National Right to Life’s executive co-director, and James Bopp, National Right to Life’s general counsel.
Bopp also serves as special advisor on life issues to the Romney campaign.
Oct.12, 2007 10:44 am |
Political anti-life bias |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I am not surprised by this in the least. I love me my National Right to Life, but I don’t see them supporting someone who does not have a chance of winning. I myself am wondering what I will do.
I’m guessing Nathan is correct. It’s not the NRLC PAC would support Rudy if he was nominated – it’s that they wouldn’t support anyone.
I’m guessing their PAC by-laws state they can’t endorse a candidate who isn’t electable.
You Americans are in the same position as us Canadians were about 20 years ago or so. In Canada, we realized that our national parties were not going to listen and at least put in place laws restricting abortion. All the parties, Liberal, Conservative and NDP (socialist) were (and still are) pro abortion. So, since many CAtholics belonged to or voted for, the Liberal party, they began to work from the grass roots up to field pro-life, pro-family candidates. Unfortunately for prolifers, this was a VERY successful strategy. When candidates meetings were run in a electoral riding, prolifers often got their candidates sponsored in the riding. Jean Chretien (who was head of the Liberal party and eventually became our PM)put an end to this – it is impossible now to bring in a candidate who is prolife – instead the Liberal party ensures that all candidates tow the party line which is stridently pro-abortion.
The fact of the matter is that prolife, profamily people, who are the majority of working class Canadians have effectively no say in our country’s social policies.
Added to this is the fact that the Conservative vote is now split between two factions – the traditional conservatives and other conservatives who vote for independent or Family Coalition Party candidates.
The above happened in my riding on ONtario in the last federal election. The Conservative party candidate was a good CAtholic man who was solidly prolife, profamily, promarriage. Unfortunately, FCP also ran a candidate in the election and he received 514 votes – the exact amount that the Conservative candidate needed to win by 1 VOTE. So, we have a liberal Catholic Liberal MPP representing our riding who is living common law and supports pro choice, and the gay agenda. I have spoken to the FCP candidate and his wife and they do not regret what they did.
I sincerely hope that the US does not do this – the only result can be the Democrats will run your country for YEARS, destroying it and the conservative faction will have no say.
Please learn from us, north of the border. There is still much in America to give hope – you at least are still fighting.
Thank you Patricia.
Sounds like your country could use a few Guadalupe novenas ;-)
We were told by Pro-choice to chill out, it’s just another election. Your post brings to forefront precisely why we can’t chill out.
Fr. Pavone comes to mind. He incessantly pounds into his homilies the need to vote pro-life. He, nor we, won’t give up.
And I have a funny little feeling that “Lake of Fire” might be to our benefit.
Just speculating.
Jasper, I wouldn’t tell you to “chill out” about the upcoming election, but do you really see any pro-life candidate who has a realistic chance to win?
Doug