To tell you the truth, I had some big time reservations about voting for the not-completely-conservative, not-150%-prolife [click for link] McCain. BUT this morning, his pick for V.P. really did it in for me! I LOVE his choice! Sarah Palin is just wonderful! She is currently the pro-life conservative Republican governor of Alaska, mom to 5 children, and is 44 years old. Her youngest, diagnosed with Down's Syndrome, was born in April. Here she wrote about his (Trig's) birth.

John McCain Selects Pro-Life Champion Sarah Palin for Vice Presidential Slot

Amen and Amen! Obama is 100% pro-choice / pro-death and should NOT be our next president! He doesn't want to impose his supposed "pro-life views" on anyone else because it's deemed religious in nature. What about murder in general? Isn't that "religious" (remember the Ten Commandments)? Aren't you imposing your views on another when you think that murder is wrong? It is the same with the little babies in the womb! There's no difference at all between it being against the law when murdering your neighbor or when murdering a child in their mother's womb! You're always imposing your views, morals and values on a murderer when you tell him/her that she can't kill someone. I just don't understand the logic here...that's because there is none. Logic is absent when choice is convenient!

Lisa

  McCain wrote or said the following quotes:

"I'd love to see a point where it (Roe v. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations." San Francisco Chronicle

"I would not seek to overturn Roe v. Wade tomorrow, because doing so would endanger the lives of women." Campaign Event

"If Roe v. Wade were repealed tomorrow, it would force thousands of young women to undergo dangerous and illegal operations." World Magazine

How John McCain Threatens the Pro-Life Cause

By Douglas Johnson
NRLC Legislative Director

(February 20) - - The presidential candidacy of Senator John McCain (R-Az.) has posed a threat to future advances by the pro-life movement.

Earlier this month, the Board of Directors of the National Right to Life Committee -- made up of an elected delegate from each state NRLC affiliate -- overwhelmingly voted to endorse George W. Bush. That vote recognized Bush's strong pro-life credentials. It also reflected the recognition among many knowledgeable observers that if elected president, McCain would be unlikely to use the office's powers to advance the pro-life cause.

In earlier stages of his presidential campaign, McCain made little effort to conceal his disrespect for the pro-life movement. For example, during an appearance on the Don Imus radio show on November 23, McCain referred disparagingly to "otherwise intelligent people who say that that's the only issue that will determine their vote."

But after his victory in the New Hampshire primary on February 1, McCain began working hard to appeal to pro-life voters in South Carolina and other states.

In response to criticism from NRLC and its affiliates, McCain has relied on two main defenses. First, he declares that his "17-year voting record" in Congress proves that he is "pro-life." Second, he charges that NRLC's criticisms are motivated entirely by opposition to his so-called "campaign finance reform proposals" -- a bill that, as McCain characterizes it, would hurt NRLC's "business." This second defense is basically a diversionary tactic, intended to evade close scrutiny of the inadequacies of McCain's pro-life positions.

Roe v. Wade

McCain joined the House in 1983, and became a senator in 1987. During his 17 years in Congress, McCain has usually voted anti-abortion -- but for a presidential candidate, that is not the only important data. After all, Al Gore had an 84% pro-life voting record as a member of the House of Representatives (1977-84), but he embraced the entire pro-abortion agenda once he reached the Senate and began to run for president. John McCain is not Al Gore -- but the clearest warnings about what a McCain presidency might entail are found in things that McCain has said and done over the past year, since he started running for President in earnest.

One example is what McCain said when he met with the editorial board of the very liberal San Francisco Chronicle on August 19, 1999:

"I'd love to see a point where it (Roe v. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."

This was no mere inartful wording. Rather, McCain actually offered a rationale for opposing repeal of Roe -- that it would "force" many women to have dangerous illegal abortions. This, of course, is a very familiar argument -- voiced often by politicians who support the continuation of legal abortion. In short, McCain embraced the "necessary evil" thinking of the pro-abortion movement.

When ABC's Sam Donaldson recently asked McCain about his statement to the Chronicle, McCain said that he "misspoke." But McCain has yet to explain why he argued as he did to the newspaper's editors. Did he believe what he said? And if he did, has he changed his mind, and if so, why?

On the January 18 Jane Chastain's radio show, Cyndi Mosteller, who serves as "National Policy Advisor for Family & Cultural Issues" for the McCain campaign, was asked about McCain's statement to the Chronicle. Mosteller replied that McCain had "made a mistake" under hard questioning by the newspaper editors. "They ate his lunch," she said, adding, "They were getting on him. And he said [to Mosteller], 'I was not strong when I needed to be strong.'"

In reality, however, McCain repeated similar arguments in at least three other interviews. At a campaign event, he said, "I would not seek to overturn Roe v. Wade tomorrow, because doing so would endanger the lives of women," World magazine reported on August 21. In a written release dated August 22, McCain said, "If Roe v. Wade were repealed tomorrow, it would force thousands of young women to undergo dangerous and illegal operations." And on Cable News Network on August 22, McCain said, "We all know, and it's obvious, that if we repeal Roe versus Wade tomorrow, thousands of young American women would be performing illegal and dangerous operations."

McCain also wrote, "I will continue to work with both pro-life and pro-choice Americans so that we can eliminate the need for abortions to be performed in this country." [emphasis added]

These statements tracked the rhetoric of the pro-abortion movement. The pro-life movement does not believe that there is a "need" to kill unborn children, or that restoring legal protection to unborn children will "force" anyone to violate the law.

In more recent utterances, including appearances in South Carolina, McCain has said that he favors the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and that he believes that states ought to make abortion illegal (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest). But pro-lifers would be foolish to ignore the evidence of McCain's real inner thinking provided by his earlier statements. It is noteworthy that during McCain's 17 years in Congress, he never had an opportunity to vote on Roe v. Wade-- until October 21, 1999, when the Senate voted on a resolution-style amendment by Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) to endorse Roe v. Wade. McCain skipped the vote to make an extra campaign appearance in New Hampshire, as documented in a local newspaper. The amendment passed narrowly.

Others Agree

NRLC is hardly alone in recognizing that Bush and McCain would handle the abortion issue very differently as president. Bush has been endorsed by the most prominent pro-life leaders in Congress, including Congressman Henry Hyde, Congressman Chris Smith, and Congressman Charles Canady. "I'm convinced of Gov. Bush's commitment to the pro-life cause," said Hyde, who has criticized McCain for advocating weakening of the Republican Party's pro-life platform plank.

Pro-abortion leaders also see a big difference. Following McCain's win in the New Hampshire primary, the Republican Pro-Choice Coalition said that based on exit polls, "pro-choice Republicans overwhelmingly preferred McCain above all the other candidates."

Moreover, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) funded TV ads in New Hampshire attacking Bush for nearly a year before the New Hampshire primary, but never a single ad criticizing McCain.

McCain Winks on Abortion

A revealing observation was made on February 8 by Steven Brill, editor of the magazine Brill's Content, which covers the news media.

Speaking on the Fox News Channel program "The Edge", Brill said two reporters covering the McCain campaign told him, "You know, he really doesn't feel that strongly about abortion and about -- he isn't really as pro-gun as he lets on in the campaign. He has to do that because it's a Republican primary, but he's kind of let us know that he's not that hard-edged on those subjects."

Brill went on, "The point I'm making is that he was given permission, at least by these two guys [journalists], to pander. One of them actually said, 'At least when McCain panders he sort of lets us know he's doing it, and he kind of winks and kind of enjoys it, so he's a good guy.' Well, he's not letting the rest of the country know he's pandering."

In the same vein, liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen wrote on December 15, "McCain's people whisper, Don't worry. He's not really so anti-abortion."

Voting Record

McCain served in the House of Representatives from 1983-86 and in the Senate from 1987 to date. Throughout that period, McCain did not initiate pro-life amendments or otherwise take an activist role, but he did vote pro-life with a few exceptions. The most important exception was on the issue of federal funding of experimentation using body parts of aborted babies.

This question -- usually referred to in the press as the "fetal tissue" issue -- became a matter of major controversy during the Bush Administration. The Bush Administration blocked the use of federal funds for certain experimentation utilizing tissue taken from aborted babies.

In a January 7, 1992 letter to Arizona Right to Life, McCain promised to support President Bush's ban on federal funding of such abortion-dependent research. "I have no intention of supporting the use of fetal tissue resulting from artificially-induced abortions for research purposes," McCain wrote.

A few months later, however, McCain began voting to overturn Bush's pro-life policy -- a drive that succeeded after President Clinton took office.

The issue surfaced again in 1997, during consideration of a bill to expand federally sponsored research into Parkinson's disease, sponsored by McCain and Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Mn.). Pro-life Senator Dan Coats (R-In.) offered an amendment to prevent the use of the newly authorized funds for abortion-dependent fetal tissue research, but McCain prevailed in defeating the amendment, 60-35 (Sept. 4, 1997, Senate roll call Vote No. 215). Recently, McCain has falsely implied that only four senators disagreed with his position on the issue.

[A detailed memorandum documenting McCain's statements and votes on the fetal-tissue issue is available at www.nrlc.org/ Whatsnew/McCainrecordbodyparts.html.]

Warren Rudman

On January 15, McCain said that if elected president, he might appoint former Senator Warren Rudman (R-NH)--his close advisor and the co-chairman of the national McCain campaign--as U.S. attorney general. As a senator, Rudman voted to preserve Roe v. Wade, and was an active opponent of other pro-life legislative efforts.

The attorney general is the cabinet officer who most often serves as a president's key advisor on Supreme Court appointments, and who oversees the positions taken by an administration on issues before the Supreme Court.

Rudman voted to confirm anti-Roe v. Wade Justice Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, but later wrote in his 1996 memoirs, "If my vote had been the deciding one, I would have voted against Thomas, no matter what the consequences."

Rudman has been harshly critical of the pro-life movement and of Christian conservatives. He wrote, "If someone had told me in the 1960s that one day I would serve in a Republican Party that opposed abortion rights--which the Supreme Court had endorsed--advocated prayer in the schools, and talked about government-inspired 'family values,' I would have thought he was crazy."

Also, "Politically speaking, the Republican Party is making a terrible mistake if it appears to ally itself with the Christian right"--a group that he identified as rife with "antiabortion zealots" and "bigots," among other undesirables.

In a February 15 debate in South Carolina, Bush confronted McCain regarding Rudman, noting that Rudman had described the Christian Coalition as "bigots." Bush asked McCain, "I know you don't believe that, do you?" But McCain refused the invitation to repudiate Rudman's words, responding instead, "George, he's entitled to his opinion on that issue."

Moderator Larry King also invited McCain to "disclaim what Rudman said," but McCain did not respond.

Subsequently, Rudman told Manchester Union-Leader reporter John DiStaso that "he most certainly did call the Christian Coalition bigots," and "he included leaders of other conservative groups in the description, to boot." (Union-Leader, Sept. 17)

When, in the February 15 debate, Bush said that "every child, born and unborn, should be protected in law," McCain immediately attacked Bush for his opposition to adding exceptions for rape and incest to the pro-life plank in the Republican platform.

Free Speech About Political Figures

NRLC has certainly made no secret of its strong opposition to certain key components of McCain's "campaign finance reform" proposals, which would cripple the ability of NRLC and other pro-life groups to communicate with the public about the positions and actions of those who hold or seek federal office.

In some recent communications, McCain has emphasized that the latest version of his bill, introduced last October, did not contain the provisions restricting commentary on politicians by issue-oriented groups such as NRLC. However, at the time McCain made it clear that he was proposing a "stripped-down" bill only for tactical reasons, to try to overcome a filibuster for bill opponents -- not because he'd changed his mind. Indeed, when Senate Democrats forced a vote on the House-passed Shays-Meehan bill -- which contains sweeping restrictions on political free speech by independent groups-- McCain voted for it. (Oct. 19, 1999)

As recently as December 22, McCain told the Associated Press, "If I could think of a way constitutionally, I would ban negative ads."

[Further information on the how McCain's proposals would cripple pro-life groups, and further empower the institutional news media, is found at the NRLC website, www.nrlc.org, under "Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech."]

Please click here to watch Obama’s speech, listen to Dr. Dobson’s comments, and more.

Obama compares Dr. Dobson to Al Sharpton
In that 2006 speech, after stating that we are not a Christian nation, Obama directly compared Dr. Dobson to Al Sharpton. Obama then continued with an extremely convoluted discussion of the Bible – from Levitical law to the Sermon on the Mount – that caused Dr. Dobson to say Obama was “deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview.”

While Obama’s statements about Dr. Dobson are offensive, Obama’s misunderstanding of the Bible is alarming -- especially considering the blind faith so many of our fellow Americans seem to have in him!

Again, I want you to hear and see for yourself what Obama said, as well as Dr. Dobson’s comments.

These are extremely important issues that we must contend with. That is why Focus Action sponsored this radio broadcast – and it's why we will not stand by silently as any public figure drags biblical understanding through the gutter or undermines the role of people of faith in our society.

Thank you so much for standing with Focus on the Family Action.

Tom Minnery
Sr. Vice President, Government and Public Policy
Focus on the Family Action

This is a contraversial video (Jeremiah Wright's famous God D**** America is used a few times, as well as showing a beheaded reporter), so please do not watch with children present. That said, this is a VERY IMPORTANT video to watch! Scary stuff and we need to know what we could be getting ourselves into by allowing others to elect this man!

Lisa

Click Here To Watch

Mama Archer made me aware of this, and I'm not surprised by Obama's comments at all. The truth needs to be out there, so please pass this onto pro-lifers that you know! Obama hates children (see his pro-choice stance)! He should NOT be our next President!

God calls children a blessing!!

I am speaking now for my own personal perspective and not from any ministry I lead.

This past several weeks I posted a video stating that I could never voted for John McCain because he had voted for the funding of embryonic stem cell research.  I have made a vow that I would not be a participant in either the shedding of innocent blood or in the taking of any life at any stage.  It is my conviction that fertilized embryos are living cells.  As we know, today there are walking living human beings that were once embryonic stem cells that could have been killed for research purposes.  I have received some excellent feedback both for and against concerning my video.  One of the arguments against my stand is that science has now found a procedure that makes embryonic stem cell research a moot point.  Therefore they say McCain will not have to face this issue according to this argument.  Major Catholic leaders have come out and now endorse John McCain because of this supposedly closed issue.  Because of this, I have withdrawn the video because I don’t believe that I could lay my convictions on others who will be faced with a major decision on whether their conscience could allow them to vote for McCain.

As for me, and not my ministry, I remain steadfast in my earlier conviction that I cannot vote for John McCain.  I would like to include a part of James Dobson’s statement concerning McCain because there are obviously other issues involved. You may ask me, “Shouldn’t we vote for McCain because he is certainly better than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?”  My answer is maybe you should, but I have been praying that God would drive the abortion issue like a wedge into this nation.  Why should I take the wedge out by softening my stand?  If the church came out in mass and united behind a true pro-life candidate, like Mike Huckabee, it would forever make a statement to the Republican Party that we are not yours we are God’s.  Maybe it would be better to lose an election than to have another Missouri Compromise that keeps dumbing down the issue and will eventually bring us to divine judgment because we have ceased to become the conscience of the nation.  What is better, a compromising Zedekiah, or a hostile Nebuchadnezzer?  God was able to do more with the pagan king Nebuchadnezzer than he could with the compromising king of Judah.  Maybe our thinking is all humanistic and we believe in politics more than the power of prayer. 

Many of you have read my article on the five loaves and two fish candidate.  You can read it again on my blog.  I believe that the sudden surge of Huckabee and his confession that it was because of the prayers of the saints, could have been a sign and a test for the body of Christ to see whether or not we had eyes to see what we have been praying for, for so long.  The brown bag container may have been just too much for us, and we stumbled over the simplicity of the voice.  Here is a man, Mike Huckabee, that has stood for both a federal human life amendment and a federal marriage amendment arguing the brilliant case that to drive the issues to the states like John McCain would want to, is to make morality geographical.  That is what slavery was!  But no- we opted out and took the lie of elect-ability.  There was no clear prophetic clarity in the body of Christ and so we settle for that which can neither give us a true plumb line of righteousness or a measuring line of justice and we perpetrate the ongoing moral confusion that threatens to drown this nation and bring about a complete collapse of character. (I am deeply concerned about the immigration issue and am praying that Huckabee would take much more of a compassionate stand for illegal immigrants.  Still my stand of conscience is upon the foundations of life and marriage.) 

But it is not over; the word was that if the church would pray the next president would come in a brown bag and his five loaves and two fish would be more than enough.  Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race.  If the church would rise up with one voice in prayer and in voting a Godly man whom I have had the privilege to personally spend time with now and who stands on the values of marriage and life upon which civilizations rise and fall could still be elected.  And even yet if we pray God may do other things that no one could have expected.  For He raises up kings and He brings them down.  So I lay before you my convictions but I don’t lay them upon you.  But here I stand I can do no other.

For America,
Lou Engle

Statement made by James Dobson on February 5, 2008:

"I'm deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, who voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, who opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, and who has little regard for freedom of speech, who organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language… I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.” 


"But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should Sen. McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can't vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life. These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I am affiliated. They do reflect my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country."

James Dobson’s endorsement of Huckabee on February 7, 2008:

“The remaining candidate for whom I could vote is Governor Huckabee,” Dobson said. “His unwavering positions on the social issues, notably the institution of marriage, the importance of faith and the sanctity of human life, resonate deeply with me and with many others … Obviously, the governor faces an uphill struggle, given the delegates already committed to Senator McCain. Nevertheless, I believe he is our best remaining choice for president of the United States.”

My final statement:

I have heard such scathing comments against James Dobson from the body of Christ for his stand.  Be careful you may be among those who stone the prophets.  The great abolitionist heroes of the past were not known nor are now heralded by history for their political equivocation.