Bush backs proposed pro-life bills

Bush backs proposed pro-life bills
http://images.washtimes.com/images/clear.gif
http://images.washtimes.com/images/twt-grey2.gif
By Bill Sammon
President Bush supports congressional proposals requiring abortionists to warn some women that their unborn children will feel pain and banning adults from helping pregnant minors cross state lines to circumvent abortion laws requiring parental notification, the White House said last night.
“President Bush supports both pieces of legislation,” said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.

washtimes.com/national/20050125-121235-6464r.htm

[quote=mommy]Bush backs proposed pro-life bills
http://images.washtimes.com/images/clear.gif
http://images.washtimes.com/images/twt-grey2.gif
By Bill Sammon
President Bush supports congressional proposals requiring abortionists to warn some women that their unborn children will feel pain and banning adults from helping pregnant minors cross state lines to circumvent abortion laws requiring parental notification, the White House said last night.
“President Bush supports both pieces of legislation,” said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.

washtimes.com/national/20050125-121235-6464r.htm
[/quote]

Calling TPJ…More steps in the process!! Not enough??

[quote=jlw]Calling TPJ…More steps in the process!! Not enough??
[/quote]

Is this just symbolic??

[quote=jlw]Is this just symbolic??
[/quote]

If the bill is passed and is not turned back by the judges, then this is very good news indeed and a very good step. If the bill is similar to the PBA bill, and if it gets turned back by the judges, then it is mere symbolism. Again, time will tell–talk of support is cheap.

Thanks for posting this though, I was not aware of it and the information is something I will keep an eye on. Thanks again.

:rotfl:

:rotfl: :rotfl: You will find that sometimes across your path will come personalities that will make you go:eek: then:nope: and when you find a good opposition to said charges you go:whistle: God Bless

Lisa,

I am a bit thick, was that an insult? :slight_smile:

but he still doesn’t back over turning Roe V Wade…

[quote=space ghost]but he still doesn’t back over turning Roe V Wade…
[/quote]

Not with a buster-busting bomb maybe, but with a thousand cuts of a knife…yes he does…

[quote=jlw]Not with a buster-busting bomb maybe, but with a thousand cuts of a knife…yes he does…
[/quote]

not what he told Barbara Walters, and Laura Bush, when asked directly if she would over turn R v W, she replied “don’t ask me”!

[quote=TPJCatholic]Lisa,

I am a bit thick, was that an insult? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

No it wasn’t an insult.I got tickled because jlw called out for you;) I have been there with other posters myself:D You two will find your self searching the threads you know the other will be on to fight the battle of wills:rotfl: :rotfl: Gilliam and St.James would actually start threads to needle each other.I appointed my self a commentary on one of them;) I find humor in things like that so take what I say with a grain of salt.Unless, it is a vicious ant-catholic or an abortion supporter then my nature will change to this:mad: God Bless

[quote=space ghost]not what he told Barbara Walters, and Laura Bush, when asked directly if she would over turn R v W, she replied “don’t ask me”!
[/quote]

What he said also is what he didn’t say.

And Laura doesn’t want to be Hillary THANK GOODNESS. She may be pro-choice, she may not be, she isn’t making policy THANK GOODNESS.

[quote=jlw]What he said also is what he didn’t say.

And Laura doesn’t want to be Hillary THANK GOODNESS. She may be pro-choice, she may not be, she isn’t making policy THANK GOODNESS.
[/quote]

oh, she’s prodeath alright, and Barbara Bush is to… does that not tell you something…?

[quote=space ghost]oh, she’s prodeath alright, and Barbara Bush is to… does that not tell you something…?
[/quote]

That she would not get my vote if she ran for office?? But I love her as a first lady!

jlw,

Bush has repeatly stated that he feels that abortion should be available for women that have been raped, or in cases of incest. He has never, to my knowledge, cast a cloud over Roe V. Wade. If you can find a time when he said he stands against that evil decision, then please post it so we can all see it. Yet, I don’t think you will find Bush ever saying he wants to overturn Roe V. Wade. There is only two legal ways to slow and stop legal abortions: (1) Reverse Rove V. Wade, so the states can create legislative bans on abortion; (2) Write and pass an amendment that prohibits all cases of abortion. Bush is not standing behind either one of those options, instead he is seeking the soft approach. That just will not work, the dems will not fall for it. If Bush and his team are not willing to be truly tough, then he will not advance the cause for life–he has to not worry about making friends or creating a legacy…he is President for a reason at this time and place.

As for the thousand cuts…that sounds good if Bush was operating in a vacuum; however, he has millions of people in this nation that will fight nearly to their deaths to uphold baby killing…he must learn to strike when he has the opportunity because the dems will be back in the White House, probably in 2008.

There is waaaaaay to much overconfidence among the republican leaders…they seem to think they have embarked on a 30-40 year leadership run…yet I predict that their control is going to end fairly soon if they do not aggresively seek the end of abortion.

You may like slow-but-sure approach, yet we tried that for 20 years and it got us nowhere. I think there are a lot more people like me, who are itching to see Bush something real.

Lisa4,

Thanks for the clarification…jlw and I are on the same team, we just differ on how to solve the problem. JLW feels the slow, patient approach is best, I feel that we have had that for 30 years and it is time to get in the mud and get some advancement. Every war has many battles, and each battle is not the same…we pro-lifers have fought strongly for many years, we have been peaceful and prayerful as we should be…yet Bush now stands on the precipice of being able to do something incredible…I pray God gives him the direction and strength to take this battle more seriously and more fully.

TPJ: Bush is not standing behind either one of those options, instead he is seeking the soft approach. That just will not work, the dems will not fall for it.

I DON"T CARE ABOUT THE DEMS!!!

I CARE ABOUT THE MIDDLE!!!

Without the middle…you are NOTHING politically!!!

TPJ: You may like slow-but-sure approach, yet we tried that for 20 years and it got us nowhere. I think there are a lot more people like me, who are itching to see Bush something real.

20 years of gaining, gaining, gaining a MAJORITY. Those twenty years got you a Pro-life BUSH White House, and a 55-45 SENATE. We are ALMOST there!! You got plenty from the last twenty years…and it will culminate with a SCOTUS that restores Natural Law to our beloved Constitution!!!

jlw,

No reason to shout, if my opinion troubles you, just ignore me and move on.

I do not agree. Please try to remember that we were “Ohio” away from losing this last election…it was no landslide. You should very much care about the dems, because they are gearing-up bigtime to take back congress and the white house. Bush has an awful lot that can go wrong…he has Iraq, which I personally think will go well; he has the ecomony, which the dems have effectively bashed even though it is strong; he is going after social security reform and the dems are going to hang him with that one in 2006; he is going after tax reform and once again the dems are going to hang him in 2006…the dems will attach Bush’s policies to all republicans. Americans often have short memories and they often desire changes of direction.

Bush has 1-2 years to do something, then he is a lame duck and if he does not get anything through (abortion, social security, taxes, Iraq, terror), then the dems will make great strides again.

Our citizenry is quite fickle…you have waaay to much overconfidence…this might be the last chance we have for another 30 years! We cannot take this opportunity lightly, we cannot affored the slow approach.

We have made progress in terms of converting hearts, there is no doubt there. 10-12 years ago 63% of Americans thought abortion should be legal, today that number is around 51-51% depending on the survey…that is a dramatic drop. So I will agree that the grassroots Christian work to convince hearts is working…yet that means nothing if the dems regain control.

You darn well better worry about the dems, they aren’t gone you know. You may not know this, but George Bush received the most votes ever for a Presidential candidate, but guess who is in second place right after Bush? You got it–John Kerry. They did not lose by much, and there was the entire war and security thing hanging over the country as well.

Do presume that we stand on firm ground.

As for the judges, we have always been in complete agreement regarding the judges–if Bush appoints a couple pro-life judges, then the victory is won for our Lord. However, so far Frist has no intention of stopping the dems from fillibustering Bush’s nominations, so if they refuse to get tough, then Bush will likely nominate judges that are more to the liking of the dems.

This thing is fill of potential…yet the repubs have to be ready to get nasty!

Funny how those exclamation points add “volume” to written words.

When I say I don’t care about the dems, it’s just that their vehemence is a given–I know that they aren’t backing down and aren’t going away.

But what I do care about is the battle for the middle. The middle is where elections are won and public relations are won. Bush is being careful about keeping the middle from being scared of him and generally on his side when he wants to have “common sense legislation” for the Culture of Life. Democrats voted for Bush last time for a few reasons: because his “common sense” on the issue didn’t scare them, and that terrorists scared them more than anything else. Bush won on the margins.

As we were “ohio” away from losing, I would submit the Kerry was Penn, Wisc, and Mich away from getting blown out!! Those margins of victories were less than Ohio as I recall. But that is for another thread.

Not overconfident. Just not wringing my hands.

Hands clasped in prayer?? Youbetcha!!

This battle has been a long slog, and yes, we have a golden opportunity in the next 2 years. The moment of truth has arrived. I just am not calling for panic just yet.

jlw,

I am not paniced, nor am I calling for panic. I am saying that I see an awful lot of cockiness about a President that has not saved one American baby–not one! We are cocky about a President that is pro-abortion in some case. We are cocky about a President that has never once said he is against Roe V. Wade.

I am just saying we should be writing to our senators and the white house to let them know we will not except a loss on this issue.

Bush “saying” he is pro-life, does not mean he is…

Take your frustration with me and write some letters to your senators and to the white house…that is far more productive.

As for the election, if Americans were not afraid of terror, Kerry would be President, imo. We did not win a huge landslide victory, we were “Ohio” away from getting Kerry…yes that is true for Kerry in terms of other states…but the point is that the race was and is close…the dems will be back, and probably much sonner then you think. We do something now, or else we might not get nother chance for a very long time.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.