Home
Loading
  Contact Us    
Pro-Life is Not Pro-Bush

There is more than one issue in this campaign.

by Jonathan Wilson
June 22, 2004

Bookmark and Share


Pro-Life is Not Pro-Bush_Jonathan Wilson-There is More than One Issue in This Campaign I have just received a soliciation from a national Pro-Life advocacy group. A young lady with excellent telephone manners thanked me for my previous donation. She then went on to give the spiel, that President Bush was pro-life and that pro-abortion advocates were vowing to unseat him, so with 5 months left to go before the election we all needed to do our part to see Bush re-elected. Would I be willing to make another contribution?

My reply was, "I'm pro-life, but not pro-Bush, so thank you anyway," click.

I could have tied up this young woman's phone line with a sermon. I decided it would be unfair to her. Instead, I will share what was on my mind with all of you on the Partial Observer.

You see, I am pro-life. I have participated in walk-a-thons to help Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Chicago. That meant raising money. And that meant being rebuffed by Church-going people who do not share my views.

Being pro-life does not mean I lack sympathy or understanding for other points of view. I understand that there is a great deal of diversity, that there is a spectrum of convictions. On that spectrum I end up on the pro-life side. Abortion is traumatic, and those women who choose abortions need to receive proper medical care in addition to proper emotional care.

Pro-life does not make me Pro-Bush. Recently I have seen an e-mail post, a satire of neo-conservatives called "What You Must Believe to be a Republican." I carry no card for the Republican Party, but in all fairness, that post should have read instead "What You Must Believe to be a Neo-Conservative." As far as the neo-conservatives, they are the people Bush has surrounded himself with, and they are the reasons why I will not vote for Bush in the next election.

Here is why I am not seeking Bush's re-election:

I am Pro-life. I am also Pro Geneva Conventions.

I am Pro-life, but I am Anti-Abu Ghraib.

I am Pro-life, not only for Americans but for Iraqis as well.

I am Pro-life, and I also recognize the sickening lack of proportion in our enforcement of capital punishment.

I am Pro-life, and I see up close that the No Child Left Behind law is a mechanism by which all students in a school will be punished for the poor performance of a few.

I am Pro-life, and I do not see how spirialling annual deficits and a ballooning national debt is creating a positive situation in adulthood for all those babies I'm trying to save today.

I am Pro-life, but this election is about so much more.

Comments (9)


Post a Comment

Brian Mack from Grand Rapids, Michigan writes:
June 22, 2004
I could not agree more. Well said Pastor Jon!

I would also add that I am deeply disturbed by the position that lack of support for the sitting president is a vote against a Godly man in the White House. This is a view that has been presented to me on several occasions.

I equate it with those professional athletes who thank God for assisting them in overcoming their opponents. As if God was choosing sides and had blessed the color of one jersey over another.

I am offended by any politician who leverages their faith (sincere or not) for the purpose of one-upping their opponent.

Mr. Moo writes:
June 25, 2004
Pastor Jon,

U-Da-Man! I couldn't have addressed this better. Wish I could.

Mr. Moo

Tracy Dupuis from Irn Mtn, MI writes:
July 4, 2004
I take it from your article you are not going to vote for Bush. I agree with you that he is not 100% pro-life, all his programs aren’t the best, but when it comes to a president there is George W Bush & John Kerry! Anyone else has no chance of winning. (In the last election GWB & Al Gore got about 50 million votes each, the next closes candidate got just under 3 million votes.) If you vote for anyone beside GWB, you are making it easier for Kerry to win.

Rural Wisconsinite from Rural Wisconsin writes:
July 6, 2004
If you vote for anyone beside GWB, you are making it easier for Kerry to win.

Anything to make it easier for Kerry to win!

I am pro-life, GWB is pro-life when it comes to babies, but trigger-happy when it comes to war.

In the eyes of many of us who reject single-issue politics, he is not very good at being President.

Not very good isn't good enough. Somebody else should have a turn now.

S.E. Shepherd from Chicago, IL writes:
July 9, 2004
The only way I make this election easier to win for Kerry is if I vote for Kerry. If I vote for a third party candidate, that makes a vote both Bush AND Kerry have to compensate for.

Voting for a candidate because you think he or she has a better chance at beating another candidate is a stupid way of voting - that is truly throwing your vote away! The idea is to vote FOR your candidate, not AGAINST someone else.

Gary Drumm from Kennedale, TX. writes:
August 11, 2004
You know I agree with most of what you say, however, if you are really pro-life, then there is no way you can vote for John Kerry in good conscience. Kerry has consistently voted in favor of the abortion establishment, and is the first candidate in history to garner the endorsements of Planned Parenthood and NARAL.

The issue of the the right to life is vastly more important than any of the other issues you mentioned because it is fundamental to all other freedoms and rights that we have in our society.

It's more important than an unpopular war. It's more important than prisoner abuse scandals. It's more important than budget deficits. It's more important than the seemingly disproportionate death penalty. You see, all of those things relate to people who are already born.

They relate to people who have had the opportunity to live their lives and they have made their own decisions that put them in the circumstances where they could be on death row, be in war, be in a war prison, or make enough money to even pay taxes and worry about the budget anyway.

The unborn, on the other hand, have not even been given the opportunity to be a part of the mess, as you might say. Instead they are snuffed out at the rate of 2500 a day in the name of the convenience of the mother and to the profit of the killers.

That's why Bush has my vote. He is the first President since Roe-v-Wade to make any real changes at the laws which protect the abortion establishment. He re-instated the Mexico City Policy, whihc bans Federal funds from providing abortions overseas, and he's working to chip away at the foundation of Roe, and restore America to some position of honor by stemming the flow of our children to Heaven's gates.

Michael H. Thomson from Merritt Island, Florida writes:
August 12, 2004
As they say in the community in the mountains where I grew up: my dog ain't in this fight.

In my opinion if the only reason ANYONE is voting for Bush or Kerry is on the basis of their stance on abortion - then my friend I hate to tell you - There are other issues!

(1) Personal Freedom - Kerry or Bush?

(2) Reducing largest deficit in history? K or B?

(3) Reminding China that they are not a superpower - yet. K or B?

(4) Becoming energy independent. K or B?

(5) Elevating new jobs above the status of McDonalds or Walmart. K or B?

(6)Bringing exported jobs back to the U.S. K or B?

(7)Being pro-life when it comes to American troops. K or B?

There's about 2000 more items so I'm going to stop here.

If this country goes broke, is invaded, or everybody leaves because they can't get a good job - Pro-choice and pro-life will go to the B list of important issues.



Brian Mack from Grand Rapids, MI writes:
August 19, 2004
I would agree that the issue of the right to life is one that transcends any single political position or election. As Evengelical Christians I believe that we are called to uphold the lives of the unborn.

However, I reject this issue as the political football that it has become. Conservative Christians have perverted this cause for their own political purposes. I would suggest that it is far too important to be reduced to such a level.

That said, it is also important to recognize that we all as a human race were graced by God with the freedom of choice. That freedom has not come without consequence. Similarly, the liberty that we enjoy as Americans is also fundamentally based on the freedom of choice. Not coincidentally the choices that we make in pursuing liberty will also have consequences. But we should still be allowed to make the choice.

To suggest that any single issue should be the litmus test for an individuals fitness to serve as a political leader is profoundly troubling to me. It effectively says (as has already been suggested) that Pro-Life = Pro-God = more fit to serve.

On the contrary, an individual that is being considered for the highest political office in our land should be considered based on the total of their contributions to date along with their positions on the myriad issues that we as an American society are facing.

Based on that criteria, I cannot in good conscience support a politician who advocates for the Constitutional alienation of any individual in our society, who is so cavalier with the lives of the men and women who defend our country, and who seeks out methods to limit the personal freedoms on which our nation was founded.

We as Christians must continue to fight the good fight and run the race well. We must endeavor to build the kingdom by displaying God's love and grace to our fellow man. We must stand up for what is morally right. None of which necessarily requires that we vote for any particular party line.

Wendy from Columbus, OH writes:
September 13, 2004
Bush is not pro-life. He only uses that title to gain votes. Let us look at the facts. Bush signed a $15 billion bill in 2003 to send to Africa with the intent of fighting AIDS. He denied petitions that the money should only go to organizations who promote abstanance and allowed money to go to pro-abortion organizations.

In late 2003 Bush proposed blending partially treated sewage with treated sewage and discharging it into the nation's waterways. According to the Federal Register dated 10/27/03, the Bush administration is allowing corporations to boost pollution emissions. Check out www.ohio.sierraclub.org for more envirnmental examples.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Bush forbid the public release of select information relating to unsafe motor vehicles. His justification was that the data would cause competitive harm.

March 2003 the Mine Safety and Health Administration diluted the rules intended to protect coal miners from black-lung disease.

These last two examples come from The Columbus Dispatch 8/14/04.

Bush consistently chooses money over life. I had one brother in Christ ask me how I could support Kerry as a Christian - my response is how could he support Bush as a Christian?

Send Us Your Opinion
(Comments are moderated.)
Your Name:*


Your E-Mail Address:*
(Confidential. Will not be published.)


Location:


Comments:*
Note: In order to control automated spam submissions, URLs are no longer permitted in this form.



Verification:
Please type the letters you see above.

  Printer-Friendly

Bookmark and Share


EMAIL ALERTS
Sign up to receive an e-mail notice when new articles by this author are published. Your address remains confidential, and you may cancel at any time. A confirmation email will be sent.

Your e-mail address:
Pro-Life is Not Pro-Bush
po Books
Now Available!

Teachings of a Three Year Old... Turned Tyke,
by Hal Evan Caplan.

A father learns from the wisdom of his toddler.

More Information.

More by Jonathan Wilson
Hitler in Rehab
It is time for the quest of Hitler sympathizers to be demolished.
by Jonathan Wilson, 3/3/09
A Mystic Reads Rand, Part V
Celebrating success without guilt.
by Jonathan Wilson, 8/20/05
A Mystic Reads Rand, Part IV
Excuses and Excellence
by Jonathan Wilson, 8/6/05
A Mystic Reads Rand, Part III
Theism, Consciousness, and Objectivism
by Jonathan Wilson, 7/23/05
A Mystic Reads Rand, Part II
I. The Premises of Objectivism: Atheism and Consciousness
by Jonathan Wilson, 7/9/05
50 Years After Atlas Shrugged: A Mystic Reads Rand
Introducing a religious Libertarian's response to the creed of a Libertarian Atheist
by Jonathan Wilson, 6/11/05
Lunch Club for Men
To become a positive influence takes time and friendship.
by Jonathan Wilson, 12/6/04
» Complete List (43)


Recently Published
View Article Salvator Mundi
Not the painting but the Person
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 12/7/17
When the Newsman Becomes News
Lamenting yet another fallen hero
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 12/1/17
Let's Hear It for Moms and Pops
Celebrating Small Business Saturday in a very personal way
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/22/17
An Earthquake in La La Land
Examining what's been exposed in the rubble
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/17/17
Where is God?
Reflecting on the tragedy in a little Texas town
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/10/17
An All Saints Day Tribute
Remembering those who left us
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 11/3/17
A Mighty Fortress was His God
Remembering the legacy of Martin Luther 500 years later
by Greg Asimakoupoulos, 10/27/17

Get the Partial Observer's
'recently published' headlines via RSS.


RSS Feed for Recently Published PO Articles    What is RSS?

Reproduction of original material from The Partial Observer without written permission is strictly prohibited.
The opinions expressed by site contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.
Copyright ©2000-2017 partialobserver.com. All rights reserved.
Home · Site Map · Top