By DEXTER DUGGAN
The long newspaper story about the abortion issue and Republican Party followed the dominant media’s script: an unfriendly view of “Christian conservatives,” “hard-line abortion language,” “unyielding opposition to abortion,” “can’t build a political majority,” “being intolerant,” “radical religious right,” “not real voting strength.” “That battle is now lost.”
As so very usual, the blame for political problems was put on pro-lifers, not on those pushing for more latitude to end preborn infants’ lives.
One political activist’s prediction in the article sounded strange, however. As time passes, he said, Republicans will move a bit away from abortion restrictions while Democrats will move a bit in favor of limits, so the two parties “will probably be in the same place.”
Considering today’s reality, there has been no such convergence. Exactly the opposite. The losing Democratic Party marched far off to demand taxpayer-financed permissive abortion throughout pregnancy, while the winning Republican Party adopted for its 2016 platform what LifeSiteNews.com called the GOP’s “most pro-life, pro-family” stand ever.
Although the newspaper story’s harsh characterization of pro-lifers was just what a reader would expect today, it actually was published 25 years ago, way back in December of 1992, from the Los Angeles Times’ political writer. The convergence theory turned out to be as hollow as the story’s indulgence of permissive abortion.
Some things just never seem to change, like dominant media’s out-of-touch pro-abortion tilt. Other things change quite a bit, like broadened influence and spreading victories as a result of pro-life dedication despite every bit of howling elite bias.
Wily Democrat triangulator Bill Clinton had just been elected president in 1992. Surely he could win the day for pro-abortionists with his slick false talk of preferring that abortion be “safe, legal, and rare.” But his riverboat shell game was too much of a losing task even for the deceptive Clinton to succeed.
Where clout-heavy reporters, editors, and commentators long ago wrote off the pro-life stand as hopeless and damaging, today the reality is strongly pro-abortion Democrats desperately hungry for help, despite the party having followed all of the elite’s recommendations to embrace death and pummel and purge pro-lifers from their ranks.
That’s an important lesson for President Trump to remember as these same media elitists scream their disastrous demands for what he must do. If pro-lifers had followed such counsel, they long ago would have faded from the scene.
On August 12 Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America (democratsforlife.org), issued a statement at her group’s website saying in part:
“Here are the facts — and we have no choice but to face them. The Democratic Party has been bleeding out. The number of Democrats holding office nationwide is at its lowest point since the 1920s. Alienating its pro-life voters, supporters, candidates, and officeholders is one reason why.
“In 1978, Democrats held a 292-seat majority in the U.S. House with 125 pro-life Democrats. Notice: As pro-life Democrats disappeared from Congress, so, too, did the Democratic Party’s majority,” Day said.
Nationally prominent Democrats recently have been slugging it out over how pro-abortion people must be in order to belong to the party. Can they be pro-life in their thoughts as long as they favor abortion outwardly? May they even run as political candidates with a pro-life label?
Even such strongly pro-abortion Democratic politicians as California’s Gov. Jerry Brown and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi counseled showing a friendlier face to pro-life Dems.
Not because these pols want pro-lifers setting policy; they just hunger for the pro-lifers’ numbers to provide the majority that would allow Dems to take command, including shoving through more pro-abortion legislation.
Conservative Republican political consultant Constantin Querard told The Wanderer on August 13:
“The Democrat Party has been hostile to pro-life candidates for more than 20 years. Of course they’re happy to have the votes of pro-life voters, but there is no place for pro-life candidates in the party. Given that, there is no rational basis for a pro-life voter to remain in a party that is hostile to their core personal values.”
Earlier in Day’s August 12 statement to fellow Democrats, using both boldface type and italics for emphasis, she said, “An extreme ‘abortion or bust’ strategy may work in California and New York. It may appeal to militant activists inside the Beltway, but it’s mostly a bust between the coasts.”
What should pro-life Democrats currently in office expect, Day asked, if “our party continues to send mixed messages about inclusion for pro-life Democrats or takes a hard line against them”?
The conservative Washington Free Beacon site noted on August 10 that a spokeswoman for the pro-abortion Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) said it “has no interest in working with Democrats for Life of America, despite their attempts” to reach out.
The Atlantic magazine site on August 10, noting the party’s internal controversy, posted an article saying:
“High-profile pro-choice activists and their progressive allies have framed the party’s unwavering support for abortion access as an electoral necessity, and argued that backing away from a staunchly pro-choice agenda could cost it crucial support.
“A coalition of progressive groups — including Democracy for America, MoveOn Political Action, and Indivisible Project — issued a statement of principles last week arguing that access to abortion is ‘not a secondary issue,’ and warning that ‘to organize, mobilize, and win elections we must field candidates who understand the integral nature of these core values’,” the Atlantic article said.
However, the Free Beacon post said the DCCC’s rejection of Democrats for Life “ran up against the claim of the DCCC’s chairman, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (N.M.), who a mere ten days prior said that abortion wouldn’t be a ‘litmus test’ for candidates in 2018. . . .
“Indeed, whether or not the party should be welcoming to pro-lifers is an issue that has conspicuously split Democrats since their shocking defeat in the 2016 election,” the Free Beacon said. “In April, Chair of the Democratic National Committee Tom Perez sparked the controversy by saying every Democrat should be pro-choice.”
Destroying The Family
Left-wing Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) acknowledged the problem for his party in an August 13 post at The Atlantic, writing, “For a generation, the Democratic Party of which I’m a member has steadily moved away from communities of faith. Today, according to a recent Pew study, more than one-third of Democrats — including 44 percent of self-described liberal Democrats — think churches and religious organizations actually have a ‘negative impact’ on the United States.”
Rather than confront how such a damaging transformation has come over a political party not so long ago known for a churchgoing working class as its backbone, Coons looks to ways that churches still can be pressed into service for liberal political goals, and finds comfort that some houses of worship have so cut themselves off from tradition that they celebrate “same-sex marriages.”
“Democrats welcome and celebrate our differences. Whether it’s race, religion, nationality, or sexual orientation, we are fighting for a country that is open, tolerant, and accepting — and we shouldn’t yield an inch in that fight,” Coons said, neglecting to recognize how little welcome or acceptance is offered to tens of millions of defenseless preborn babies.
Indeed, it’s remarkable for a political party that still tries to sell the idea it stands up for families that the core requirement of the Democratic Party is the destruction of the family in whatever trendy way that liquidation can be imposed.
In an August 10 opinion column at The Hill political news site, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the national pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, wrote, “Democratic political elites now publicly admit abortion extremism is costing Democrats the votes they need to compete nationally. We at SBA List welcome this admission. But will the Democrats really let pro-lifers’ nose under the tent?. . .
“The signs so far for pro-life Democrats are not promising,” Dannenfelser said.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress