Crossing The Boundary

My buddy Chad explains why he is no longer a Republican, referring to an article, which I have excerpted quotes from.

‘The Republican Party does not have the head count to elect a president without the support of religious conservatives,’ Falwell said at an election training conference of the Christian Coalition. …’You cannot be a sincere, committed born-again believer who takes the Bible seriously and vote for a pro-choice, anti-family candidate.’

–Rev. Jerry Falwell

‘…the next president is going to appoint two, perhaps four, Supreme Court justices.’

–Sen. Orrin Hatch, on his hope of reversing Roe v. Wade

The Rev. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life ‘…likened politicians who support abortion rights to people who support terrorism.’

And according to Rep. Walter Jones, liberals are attempting to ‘eliminate the Judeo-Christian principles upon which this country was founded.’

Falwell says evangelicals control GOP, Bush’s fate

Of course, Chad is wondering how long until the Democrats alienate him. He’s an equal opportunity skeptic. I feel similarly. Increasingly there does not seem to be much difference between the “business as usual” political parties.

[via Ectophensis]

Explore posts in the same categories: Humanities, Social Science

2 Comments on “Crossing The Boundary”

  1. Elisa Says:

    Chad brings up exactly the same discomfort that I’ve heard from my other Republican-turned-Kerry friends…even from the church-going Christian ones…they don’t like his allegiance to the extreme fundamentalists.

    But I have to comment on something else: I see comments all the time about there not being “much difference” between the parties.

    I can never understand it, because I see a vast difference between the parties, including some topics I feel very strongly about like:

    -Pro-choice vs. Anti-choice (with a bunch of really old Supreme Court justices.)

    -Pro-environmental regulation vs. getting rid of them

    -Pro-civil unions vs. Pro-rewriting the Constitution to make 10% of our population second-class citizens

    -Pro-assault weapons ban vs. NOT

    -Pro-separation of church and state vs. NOT

    -Pro rolling back tax cuts for wealthy vs. making them permanent

    -Raising the minimum wage vs. NOT

    -Raising the cap, but keeping the Estate tax vs. Repealing it altogether

    -Allowing drug importation and government negotiation on drug prices vs. NOT

    I write about this topic on my blog a lot; here’s one specific post from which I took those issue differences above:

    We also have a 1-page handout, suitable for printing out, on the critical differences between the parties that you can find (among other interesting ones) here:

    I think it is the easy cynical, skeptical way out to say, “oh they are all the same.” But, it’s not the reality. Is it true that every candidate and every party will likely have positions you can’t get behind 100%? Yes, that I will say is true. And it puts each one of us in the position of prioritizing our positions and knowing what our litmus test issues really are.

    For me, I cannot vote for someone who is anti-choice, but I have voted for candidates who support the death penalty, even though I don’t.

    I supported Wes Clark in the primaries, even though I thought his position on flag-burning was lame.

    Anyway, you may not agree on all of the positions on issues that I list above. But they are not the same positions.

  2. Kathryn Says:

    Let me clarify my statement. By saying I don’t see much difference between the parties, I’m not referring to ideology. I’m expressing my anomie regarding the mechanics of politics and campaigning. Of course, this topic is not new; people have been alienated from the political process for one reason or another since forever. You make an excellent point regarding the necessity of prioritizing one’s value with regard to candidates.