The National Public Radio (NPR) website today (10/2/07) reports a discussion on their daily radio show, “All Things Considered”, about the religious right’s new stand on the possibility of Rudy Giuliani winning the Republican presidential nomination:
“This weekend in Salt Lake City, Utah, a group of leading social conservatives — all members of an organization called the Council for National Policy, agreed on a resolution: If the Republican Party nominates a “pro-abortion” candidate, the group will consider running a third-party candidate.”
From the context of the NPR article, and because of the quotation marks around it, it is difficult to determine if the “Council for National Policy” actually used the term “pro-abortion” or if this was the terminology used on the radio show, but either way it is a fabrication and a misrepresentation of Giuliani’s stand on the abortion issue. Rudy Giuliani has stated very clearly that he is personally opposed to abortion but has no intention of supporting laws that take the “choice” of abortion away from others; he is NOT pro-abortion, he is pro-choice and its about time we separate those two very different things in the public debate.
The anti-abortion folks, such as the despicable Council for National Policy and the equally loathsome Christian Coalition Network refuse to consider the option of allowing Americans to make their own decisions about things like abortion or marriage. On these two subjects in particular, they want the entire population of the United States to think and act just as they do and they are willing to revise the United States Constitution to get their way. That is a dangerous bit of vanity they are engaged in. And this is not just rhetoric on my part — they already have anti-gay marriage amendments in the majority of state constitutions and they have pushed hard for an anti-abortion amendment.
While we’re getting terminology straight — for the ‘crime’ of labeling the Council for National Policy and the Christian Coalition Network as despicable and loathsome I will, no doubt, be considered by many to be an anti-religionist but that is also a misrepresentation. I am not opposed to religion or an enemy of those who are religious; I’m a pragmatic atheist who understands and supports religion (with the possible exception of Islam — the jury is still out on that one) as a force that holds many lives together and that has an overall positive effect on society. What I strongly oppose is not religion but religious dictators like those in the Council and the Coalition — dictators who want to force religion ‘down the throats’ of all Americans through Constitutional amendments or legislation.
It will be absolutely wonderful if Giuliani does get the Republican party nomination and forces the extreme-right religionists to make good on their threat of forming a third party — the wonderful part will be watching them ‘go down in flames’. The ‘devils brew’ of ultra-conservative Christianity and politics has already torn the Republican party asunder; I don’t imagine there are a whole lot of folks who want to see what it can do to the country with an American Ayatollah in the White House.
From the Blogs:
Blogs 4 Brownback: Rudy Giuliani: Abortion is not a litmus test.
So-Cons For Rudy Blog: A Singular Issue: Why Abortion Shouldn’t Doom Giuliani’s Campaign