Our fearless leader and blogmeister, Shane Vander Hart, has been addressing what “went wrong” in 2012 for the GOP over the last few days. I agree with many of his opinions, so there is no need to reiterate them all here. I must take exception, however, with his take on abortion and other social issues as it pertains to 2012. Shane posted on Facebook this response to a Caffeinated Thoughts comment:
“Just had a “conservative” tell me that my belief that the life of a baby conceived by rape is just as sacred as yours and mine was repulsive. Fascinating.”
We should not be in the least bit surprised by this man’s response to a true pro-life position. Even “Conservative” Christians accepted a GOP candidate who promised he would not protect children conceived during a rape. Some Christian ministers even chastised those that refused to vote for Romney. But does Romney believe the lives of unborn children are sacred? No! A thousand times “NO!” And when Christians publicly declared their support for him, endorsed him and voted for him anyway, we told the whole world – no, some babies are not sacred.
Shane also seemed surprised that Romney didn’t go on the attack against Obama’s “radical” position on abortion. He wrote: “He ignored or played defense on abortion when he should have been playing offense.“ He is assuming that Romney and Obama are on different teams. They are not. Christ and His followers are on one team, those who know not Christ are on the other. Luke 11:23: “He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.”
It is simple. Romney doesn’t see Obama’s position as much different than his own on abortion. They both hold the position Shane’s “conservative” poster does. Apparently so do most Americans, for according to Gallup polls, only 20% believe abortion should be illegal in all cases. However, just as a mother can’t be somewhat pregnant, a person cannot be somewhat pro-life, believing that the 6th Commandment (Do not murder) doesn’t apply in every case.
Shane re-raised the issue of Todd Akin and others who believe that all abortions should be banned. He suggested that maybe these candidates should consider deflecting questions about exceptions with this response:
“Why are you bringing up something that rarely occurs in the midst of this campaign? We have other topics that need to be discussed”
I believe this is the wrong answer and perhaps the only reason Akin found himself in the midst of a mess in the first place: He had also attempted to minimize the number of those exceptions by suggesting that perhaps pregnancy does not occur as often in rape as one might think. Thankfully, Akin stood up for every unborn children – God Bless him. However, it doesn’t matter if it only occurs 3 times a year in the US or 30,000 times, a pro-life candidate won’t deflect, he will defend. We need more candidates like Akin and Mourdock, not less. And we need other Christians to get behind them. Not because we will necessarily win; but because it is the right thing to do.
Rush Limbaugh is correct on this one. Christians, like the Republicans, lost in 2012 because we were vastly outnumbered. Right now, the United States is not pro-life, not by a longshot. I am not worried about the Republican brand. I am more concerned about a church that would compromise on child killing, supporting a candidate who spat on them at nearly every opportunity, promised not to fulfill a pro-life agenda, and backpedaled towards death at every stage of the campaign. And what did the so-called pro-life community do in response? Why, they showed up in droves to vote for Romney. That’s what went wrong in 2012.