When I am wrong about something, or someone, I have to own up to it and make a confession. As a pro-life, born again biblical Christian, I was wrong to enthusiastically support Scott Brown on this blog. It saddens me to have to write this. When Hannity and others where declaring Brown as a Conservative, I just assumed that he must be pro-life. Then again, not all conservatives are pro-life. That's unimaginable to me - but it's a fact in this day and age. Lesson learned? Don't ever take anything for granted! Get the facts, first.
Today, via the comment section at Gateway Pundit's blog I found out that Brown is "pro-choice" (a.k.a. pro-abortion).
I found out via this comment:
Tom63010
January 21st, 2010 7:50 am #11
Let me preface this comment:
1) I know Scott Brown is pro-choice (I am pro-life).
2) I am a huge supporter of Sarah Palin
3) The answer to the reporter was YES he does.
This guy is the first person I have heard in a long time that can answer a question in the manner of Ronald Reagan. Michael Steele needs to be tutored by this guy!
You don’t allow reporters to take you down a path where you don’t want to go. You don’t accept premises that reporters include in their questions. Even the Liberal media will be enamored by this guy if he disarms their prejudicial questions skillfully.
I believe we are seeing a shooting star! I’m like most who are not ready to anoint him as the “conservative messiah” but after wandering in the wilderness with the Republican Party anointing men like Bob Dole and John McCain to be our “Moses” but I’m ready for a guy like him.
I love Sarah Palin’s values but she can’t handle the media, she even stumbles with Glenn Beck. Since she has been on Fox News I’ve really grown tired of hearing her. I think the move to Fox News was a mistake.
I think a bigger mistake is her decision to announce that she will campaign for John McCain in person is a big mistake.
She should have waited until the Arizona Primary was over. What if a real good Republican conservative that has the backing of the “Tea Party” runs against McCain in the primary? What if John McCain looses in the primary to that person? She will then be on the side of a squishy moderate that told us not to fear Obama, “he’s a good man”.
"Tom" goes on to say that he still supports Brown, despite the fact that he (Tom) is pro-life. My question. Why would a pro-life person knowingly do such a thing?
Yes. Scott Brown's victory will (hopefully) stop Obama Hellcare. God can use anyone to answer the prayers of the faithful - even a pro-abortion candidate. However, if I lived in Massachusetts and knew that Brown was pro-abortion, I could not vote for him. Neither would I vote for him in the future if he becomes a candidate for the presidency.
The pro-abortion stance of Barack Hussein Obama was the very first reason why I could NEVER vote for him either! Wouldn't it be hypocritical of me to vote for Brown knowing that he believes, as does Obama, that the killing of babies in the womb is OK and not murder??
My comment at Gateway Pundit:
Christinewjc
January 21st, 2010 8:58 am #18
I am very sorry to learn that Scott Brown is pro-abortion. No wonder so many Independents voted for him in MA.
Unfortunately, I could never vote for a pro-abortion candidate for any political position. Period. Even if a pro-abortion candidate is the favored choice, I just cannot sacrifice a Christian core value such as life for the unborn for political expediency.
Here in California, when the choice for governor was pro-abortion RINO Arnold or pro-life candidate Tom McClintock – I voted for McClintock. To this very day, I have NEVER regretted that vote.
After this horribly destructive and revolting year with Obamafraud, look at all of the people who voted for Obama – even many Christians and Catholics – who now deeply regret their votes??
That’s what happens when people do not vote their conscience, values, and ethics. It leads to disaster.
My previously positive and enthusiastic opinion of Brown has now been lowered substantially. (Sorry to all who are celebrating his victory.)
At least John McCain is pro-life. That elevates him above Brown, in my mind, any day of the week.
I knew that he was pro-choice before the election and that is the one thing that gave me pause about supporting him. Brown does believe in restrictions for abortions like parental notification and is against partial birth abortions and other restrictions. I am extremely pro-life and was dissapointed by it, but then, I thought about it. In every other area he is a conservative and its easier to change a person's mind on one policy instead of fighting them on all of the policies. Plus, at least he is honest about his position unlike the so-called Democrats who claim to be pro-life and then make deals with the devil all in the name of health care reform. Abortion is not health care.
ReplyDeleteBrown is actually anti-abortion but walks softly on abortion in view of being a politician in Massachusetts instead of a red state... thus, he has been endorsed by anti-abortion organizations as a conservative "lesser of blue state evils."
ReplyDeleteYou need to understand the thin line a conservative walks to ever get elected in such a state as Massachusetts.
politics is what it is... unfortunately.
btw, I am strongly anti-abortion and knowingly supported brown... so don't beat yourself up, Ok?
Teresa and VotingFemale,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your kind responses. I'm not getting that nice reactions from commenters over at Gateway Pundit.
As I stated in my post, God can use anyone - even a pro-abortion Senator to answer our prayers for halting ObamaSCARE HELLcare. I'm not condemning those who voted for Brown. What I am saying is that I, could not personally have voted for him knowing that he isn't truly pro-life. This post was meant to convey my own personal disappointment in finding out Brown's views after the fact.
I've had enough of politicians hiding their past (like Obama has) and when someone is unwilling to stand by their convictions - it is a red flag to me.
I understand and truly appreciate the reasoning that you have shared, VotingFemale, behind Brown's caution on the abortion issue in that liberal leftist state. So be it. But for me, my disappointment on this particular issue with Brown runs deep. That's just the way it is.
Christine,
ReplyDeleteI understand your feelings better than you could know.
God bless you dear.
hugs
I hope he comes around to a true pro-life position, but I don't regret rooting for him. The lesser of two evils is less evil. And defeating ObamaCare is fantastically good. This may kill universal health care of at least a couple decades. Seriously. After HillaryCare and now this, who would touch it?
ReplyDeleteChristine -- I have searched the Net since yesterday morning for someone, anyone, who realized the pro-abortion stance of Scott Brown should be cause to NOT celebrate the "Republican" takeover of Ted's blue seat. I did receive an e-mail today from Randall Terry, who more than well realized it, and in his very bold way, said so. After reading Brian Burch, Deacon Keith Fournier, Jim Hoft, and so on and so on, gush over Scott Brown's win to the point I had to wipe their slobber off my screen, it was great to read Randall's words. Determined to find another human being on the Net that stated the Truth, I came across your comments on Gateway Pundit, and I wanted to personally thank you for same. You, of course, I can see, are a 180 from Randall Terry in your delivery, but just the same, both of you today are my heroes. I, too, was backing SB until I wondered why I heard no pro-life chatter about him, so I checked Scott Brown On The Issues, and saw he was indeed a pro-abortion candidate, and although I've always voted for the lesser of two evils, I don't believe I could have in this case. The road to the end of abortion is not via abortion. And I'm so glad I found this blog to affirm my beliefs. God love you and keep you ... Jeanette ...
ReplyDeleteThe Rosary Online
Good points, Neil, as always. I agree that there is a great purpose to this man's stunning accomplishment. Defeating universal health care has been the prayer of many TEA party attendees as well as town hall attendees and protesters. It seemed that Washington D.C. would NOT listen to We The People when we called, faxed, emailed, and protested with signs against ObamaSCARE HELLcare as well as all the other lunatic fringe legislation that the Dems and Obama wanted to ram through!
ReplyDeleteGod's solution? A man named Scott Brown. Not a perfect man (none of us are, of course) but a man who would stop the madness of the Democrat majority in Congress dead in their crazy liberal lunatic tracks! For that, we can be most grateful.
I'm with you. I sincerely hope that God changes Brown's heart to be fully pro-life in the future. It happened to Ronald Reagan - didn't it?
Thanks for your comment. You always make me feel better about issues and bring me back to the realization that it is all in God's hands anyway.
Dear Jeanette,
ReplyDeleteYour special comment meant more to me than you will ever know! Thank you so much for writing your thoughts here!
I have been walking around my house all day feeling sad and blue. I should be happy about the fact that Scott Brown will stop Obama HELLcare in it's tracks. I am happy about that, but am deeply saddened to learn that he has pro-abortion views.
You wrote:
The road to the end of abortion is not via abortion.
Well said! God bless you and thanks so much for your encouraging words of support.
Christine
Thanks, Christine. And I should add that ObamaCare was definitely going to have taxpayer funded abortions, so killing this bill saved countless lives.
ReplyDeleteVotingFemale,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your understanding and encouraging words. God bless you too!
Ah! Perhaps the following essay can explain why I feel so melancholy today:
ReplyDeleteExpose Obama: Remembering Roe - A Forgotten Warning from Ronal Reagan
The author's concluding excerpt is very powerful:
“I’d like to leave with you a quotation that means a great deal to me. These are the words of my friend, the late Terence Cardinal Cooke, of New York. ‘The gift of life, God’s special gift, is no less beautiful when it is accompanied by illness or weakness, hunger or poverty, mental or physical handicaps, loneliness or old age. Indeed, at these times, human life gains extra splendor as it requires our special care, concern, and reverence. It is in and through the weakest of human vessels that the Lord continues to reveal the power of His love.’”
Here was a warning against the pallbearers of the progressive death march, from Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger—who hoped to expunge the gene pool of “human weeds”—to the euthanasia precipice to which America is being dragged. It starts with the weakest of vessels: the infant in its mother’s womb.
Timeless words of wisdom to bear in mind this week, as America struggles to survive another year of Roe v. Wade.
I think VotingFemale and Teresa put it into perspective. He has said RoevsWade is settled law, but is against partial birth abortions, and is in favor of parental consent for minors. And very important, he wants no government funds to go to abortions. He has also voted to define marriage as between a man a woman. He has spoken out for the rights of ER workers who do not want to be complicit in abortions. I don't think this man will champion abortion law. He may do nothing to overturn it, but I don't he will be vocal on abortion rights.
ReplyDeleteWe've heard him say that he is not a conservative, yet in three major issues he is very conservative: the war on terror, health care, and cap and trade. He is fiscally conservative on almost every level I can find.
He represents a blue state. I think he has done what he had to do. I guess we'll find out.
You are right, yet again Neil! We can be grateful to God for that!
ReplyDeleteI also think that it will save countless lives of the elderly as well.
It's very sad to know that progressives think that the weakest among us - the very young (and unborn) as well as the very old - are not worthy of the self-evident truth given by God to us that they all deserve life.
Thanks Maggie. That's good to know. You are probably right that he "did what he had to do" to get elected in a blue state like Massachusetts. He does agree with most of the conservative principles that we hold dear. That's a good start.
ReplyDelete"And I should add that ObamaCare was definitely going to have taxpayer funded abortions, so killing this bill saved countless lives"
ReplyDeleteNeil -- Can I jump in if I may even though your comment was addressed to Christine. How is killing the health care bill going to save "countless lives"? I realize it will save us dollars as taxpayers, but I do not know why abortions will lessen as they haven't been currently funded by the government anyway. I've read his other small insignificant "pro-life" bills as well, and I don't see them adding up to big numbers in the "save" column. Fill me in when you get a chance. --Jeanette
Christine -- Thanks for writing back to me. I just received a forwarded e-mail (from a friend of mine, Patricia) with a blurb attached from Judie Brown (American Life League):
ReplyDeleteDear Patricia, et al,
The most powerful position in defense of the human being at any time during his life, from the beginning of his biological beginning, is that of defending him as a person. In order to do that, however, one must be consistent.
Pro-life people who described Scott Brown as pro-life are lying; they sold out to the political establishment long ago and no longer uphold the consistent principle of human rights due every single human being. This is the real tragedy. Scott Brown can be educated, but those with political blinders on, who are an integral part of the so-called pro-life movement, cannot because, apparently, they have chosen to deny truth.
That is the biggest tragedy of all. We should pray for them.
Judie Brown
Sad, but true, and I thought that might make you feel better. It helped me out to see her words. Anyway, keep the prayers going. America *will* one day be pro-life. --Jeanette
The Rosary Online
Jeanette,
ReplyDeleteOf course Neil can speak for himself, but what I think he meant by that comment was that "free" abortions (via taxpayer expense) would most likely increase the amount of abortions performed every day. Those who could not afford the expense may choose to give the baby up for adoption. If abortions were so easily available through the government, many more women might be tempted to go through with killing their babies.
Thanks for sharing that email. It does help to know that others see the apparent compromise that some people are willing to make. I think that so many people were just grateful to get a Republican into the Senate in order to be able to stop Obamacare, that they didn't care whether or not Brown was pro-life, or not.
Hi - the reasoning is simple: abortions will increase if funded by taxes/gov't. Brown's election may prevent that.
ReplyDelete