#91 — “Alston, do you believe in the Constitution? If so, you must support outlawing abortion (or more accurately, enforcing the anti-abortion laws already on the books).”
Obviously there’s a reading comprehension problem in this tiny echo chamber. I haven’t discussed what I personally think about abortion. The weak minded apparently assume I must be for it. What I have discussed is whether or not abortion ought to be an issue at the national party level, and have advocated that the GOP drop the social planks so that those who want to vote one way or another do so at the state level.
(And here I thought republicans were all over this states rights thing.)
Why should the republican party have anything to say at all regarding social conservative issues? Take gay marriage. The democrats don’t have a party plank that says they’re for it. In fact they say nothing about it at all. Saying nothing doesn’t make the GOP into democrats. Saying nothing says only that the GOP as a political party doesn’t have an opinion on it.
Do you have an opinion on gay marriage? You do? Great! Go vote pro or con on prop 8 or whatever is the ballot measure in your state. It will pass or it won’t depending on the voters. If the good people of Kansas don’t want to see gays marry, what does this have to do with the GOP? Nothing. So why should the GOP be dragged into it?
Moreover, this is at the state level where it belongs. The only possible reason to have a stance on it as a national party is if you have some fantasy of a constitutional amendment. Good luck with that.
It probably doesn’t occur to you that there’s somehwere close to a million kids a year graduating school, and these aren’t social conservative voters. Not by a long shot. And they haven’t been for years. Meanwhile, the socon voters are dying out. What used to work in the 80′s is getting slimmer and slimmer. (I love how the echo chamber denizens cite socon victories viz Reagan.) Church membership in places that actually count (i.e. lots of electoral votes) in terms of national elections is practically on life support. As I see it, WITH social conservatives, there is an ever decreasing chance of the Republican party ever being in the majority or in the White House again. Of course, I arrived at this using a thing called math. I have no idea what you may have used for your claim.
The key to turning around the party is to get more votes. You can start with the umpteen million who have graduated since say 1990 who are largely democrat voters. (Do you ever look at voter demographics?) You do this by being inclusive. “Social conservative” issues aren’t inclusive. They’re what’s called divisive. For example, an issue that tells women what they can and can’t do with their bodies may not be perceived by those same young women as something OTHER than dictating terms to them. Take it or leave it. And it’s a big surprise when they leave it? Not a good plan when your recruiting base is already against those same issues.
There is no reason why the GOP ought to be involved in take it or leave it social issues, and this goes double for the party that is supposed to be supportive of personal choices. Either people can make their own personal choices or they can’t. I know you can’t see it, but advocating “take it or leave it” issues is self-contradictory and is going to cripple the party. Whether that’s sooner or later is the only real question.
#91 — “As for the futility argument, rape and murder are both illegal now, yet people still commit those crimes.”
The “futility argument” speaks to the inabilty of the minority to impose their personal beliefs on the majority. Most people (which includes some 85% of women last time I looked) are pro choice. Deal with it. Almost everyone is against rape and murder. Poor comparison on your part.
