A) Because in terms of pushing for a smaller versus larger government, there is at least the slim and remote possibility that the GOP can be reformed. In contrast, the Statist Party of America firmly stands for, and is racing towards, centralized planning and control, and exponentially increasing the size and power of the Federal govt. So which one should a member of a party who ferverantly believes as a cornerstone, in smaller government, be more likely to gravitate towards?

B) You think civil liberties have been corroded the past 8 years?….you ain’t seen NOTHIN yet. Have you not been paying attention these first 100 days? So why is the Statist party a better option?

Or are you saying it is better to just wander around in the woods, and then go to a Ron Paul rally every four years for kicks and grins, rather than ever ally yourself with one of the two parties that actually has a chance of winning?

C) Name one of your civil liberties that has been corroded “under the guise of RELIGION,” by the Republican party in the past 8 years? So your bill to change the law in the state you live in so that you can marry the man you are living with didn’t pass? Obama is against gay marriage too, not just those evil Christians. So you lose on that one. So…Name another one. Go ahead.

There is already some foaming at the mouth anger from the Left AT Obama for not “standing up” to the “right wing extremists” and defending that DHS report.

Doesn’t political conservatism deserve the same benefit of the doubt? Especially since in one instance the reference was to a guy whose politics they didnt’ agree with, and on the other, it is a person who many people believe, rightly or wrongly, was a mass murderer of human beings.

And somebody expressing a complete lack of sympathy for the Doctor is NOT necessarily, in all instances, an endorsement of the murder itself.

I suspect that if, in 1946, a confirmed Nazi death camp gas oven operator, who changed his name as was hiding out in the US, was gunned down in cold blood by somebody, there would have been quite a bit of “good – he had it coming to him” sentiments expressed by many if not most – especially in the Jewish community. But I believe that MOST of those very same people would, if asked in follow-up, reply – “well yes, the killer really does need to be arrested and prosecuted – murder is murder, even if the guy killed “deserved” it.”

Did you check out the Twitter feed I updated with? Here are a few:

# Crap, I always forgot hashtags. I’m happy Tiller’s dead. – Jennifer Waite, Selah, Washington
# UPDATE… Doctor George Tiller was aborted today in his 204th trimester – aren’t paybacks a bitch – Punch
# oh HAPPY DAY! Tiller the baby killer is DEAD! – Samantha Pelch
# George Tiller the baby killer was shot dead this morning. God bless the gunmen who hopefully won’t be caught. – readnwatchchris, Creedmor. NC
# was George Tiller the baby killers brain scrambled the way he scrambled full term fetuses.. one can only hope – Brad S

I didn’t see much sympathy either, but that’s to be expected.

I also saw several comments condemning the murder.

I saw several comments of concern that the murder will precipitate a full on attack on 2A.

However, the general “ban it because it’s a sin” mentality with pervades the deep south turns off a whole lot of voters.

It amazes and also amuses me that the anti-Christians’ and anti-social conservatives’ so-called “solution” to the GOP’s problems is to suggest that GOP throw the SocialCons under the bus and become Secularists.

What are the two biggest SocialCon issues in America? Gay Marriage and Abortion. Right?

Everthing else (like the over-inflated and bogus, hyped up by the liberal MSM, controversy over evolution/creationism in schools) is so minor as to be virtually irrelevant to the big picture.

And right now, the latest reliable national poll data shows the country is very slowly moving MORE towards being pro-life, and not less. It is right around 50-50. And a majority – over 50% – of the voters in one of the most ‘progresive’ states in America – California, just rejected legalizing gay marriage. And yet – Bush got something like 35% of the vote last time around, in California.

Hmmmm…something tells me it wasn’t pro-life or anti-gay marriage positions that cost him FIFTEEN percentage points – those uh….oh yeah, those pesky SOCIAL CON issues.. Must have been something else.

Like for example the failure of the GOP to keep its own house in order, both in the area of Ethics, and more importantly, chucking the philosphy of SMALLER government, which allows for lower and less burdensome taxation – and which can truly distinguish one party from the other……if not totally abandoned, like Bush and Co. did.

And also its ham-handed and clumsy ongoing failure to lure a larger percentage of voters in what should be a natural constituency for the GOP – blacks and hispanics – who are statistically MORE socially conservative than whites; but yet who consistently vote for the Secular Leftist party.

If the GOP could consistently attract even 35% of the Black vote instead of its current 8-9%….it’s all over for the Democrats.

So as much as it may the Libertarian wet dream for the GOP to abandon groups like pro-life Christians, I would assert the GOP does NOT need to do so, to recover and get back in power. Exhortations from its “friends” from the RINO, inside the beltway, elitist chattering classes notwithstanding.

The sneering and condescending “where else are they going to go,” which I have seen some Libertarians make, is not a winning formula for achieving a smaller Federal government. Which is a goal both SocialCons and Libertarians want to achieve. So I’m thinking it just may be better to work together and try to focus on common ground rather than calling religious people “cockroaches.”

“Kansas law generally allows abortions even into the third trimester so long as the physician determines the fetus isn’t viable. A doctor who makes such a determination after 21 weeks gestation must report the reasons why the determination was made.”

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/01/tiller.profile/index.html

So it’s not as if this guy was doing it just willy-nilly for kicks and cash. There were determinations made that either the fetus was not viable and/or that the mother’s health was endangered and a report filed. For anyone that’s going to claim he was cooking his reports, the last time I checked the rule was “innocent until proven guilty”, so unless you have some medical knowledge and have read his reports you really have no standing.

Each person places subjective/selective value upon life to decide which is taken and which is spared

Everyone is predator and everyone is prey

How each person derives value placed upon life, be it Constitution, Bible, etc. is purely subjective as opinion is vast & far reaching.

You take the chicken’s life because you seek sustenance

You take jihad’s life because you seek safety

It’s one choice over the other

The application of free markets & value placed is exactly what people do all the time

Why do you kill the ant & not your dog? You value the dog and not so much the ant

Abortion is no different. Your personal emotional opinion, subjective as it is, makes the decision about life

As an American I have no issue that each decides for self this issue. Again, I point to my earlier post that women will choose more accurately toward not having abortion when they develop more personal responsibility about who enters their body and the far-reaching consequences of such a decision without protection

Education & all possible options being open to women will support them in making these decisions

Which Alabama Christians are you talking about? Gerald Allen,who would ban books? Hank Erwin, who would ban gourmet beer? Those who ban sex toys?

When sex toy laws in Alabama are overturned, as opposed to being laughed at, I may believe you.

If Moore is what you say he is, based on his history, he needs to make the record very clear on issues such as these. Reading his columns at WND would lead most people to the opposite conclusion.

I know Judge Roy Moore personally. I can assure you he would never endorse unlawful much less murder.

As a Christian he believes such judgment in the hands of God and not man.

And he does not believe in forcing his views upon anyone.

He does not believe gay couples adopting childern is in the best interests. I take it you disagree with that view.

However, he would not support a renewal of the old sodomy laws or anything of the sort as I take you think he does.

He strongly believes in upholding the Constitution and REDUCING the size and scope of government not increasing its role in our lives.
The typical politician both left and right today is constantly trying to increase the size of government and its role in ours lives.

Sir, if you condemn all the Christians in this country due to your differences and overlook the fact that most Christians believe in reducing and restraining Government, you are throwing away your best allies in preserving and restoring liberty to this nations.

Thanks.

1) I’ve been doing some research to come up with a better define social conservative. There is a big difference between someone who is apposed to abortion, someone who would ban alcohol, and someone who would kill a preacher.

2) Time will tell regarding elections. I don’t think abortion is so much the issue, but banning other things certainly is.