re: #311 mike(in)savage

I am not a social conservative-but I am pragmatic.

Mike, that is something that we should agree on in the Republican Party. It fits closely with principles of limited government. I think it’s an appropriate dodge of the abortion question. A candidate could say, “I am not for federally funding lots of things, and abortion is one of them, but what you pay for privately is your own business.”

Where the break seems to happen is at the Judicial level. I agree with Anton Scalia that there is no right to privacy in the Constitution. They blew it on abortion. It should be voted on by the representatives of each state. If states have different abortion laws, you can go and have the abortion you want in the state of your choice. Sure there might be some hardship, but let’s be honest, maybe if they would have taken precautions, they wouldn’t be in that spot in the first place. (BTW, I am talking about abortion on demand, not rape, incest, or life of mother stuff)

What about another hot issue of the 80’s-school prayer? I think most everyone can agree that we should not have a formal prayer in a public institution. However, a short moment of silence? but where does this stop-should muslims get foot baths for their moment of silence?

It is extremely hard in a blog to think about and debate these kinds of points constructively. I am supportive of Charles and hope the wackos don’t limit what he is trying to do. However, I disagree with Charles on eliminating all social conservatives from the Reps. The really right wing wackos may start their own party. We see how that has really helped the Dems with the Green Party on the left. Somehow, we have to accommodate them on certain issues. Especially abortion. Nominating judges like Scalia should appease them-even if we support them for far different reasons.