LF: Donald Trump rejected by Georgia Right to Life PAC (endorses Darrell Castle)

Title: Donald Trump rejected by Georgia Right to Life PAC (endorses Darrell Castle)
Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
URL Source: http://politics.blog.myajc.com/2016 ... cted-by-georgia-right-to-life/
Published: Jun 10, 2016
Author: Jim Galloway
Post Date: 2016-06-10 22:50:58 by Hondo68
Keywords: flip flop Trump, defends Planned Parenthood, baby killer sister to SCOTUS
Views: 2395
Comments: 9

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks in Billings, Mont., last week. . AP file/Brennan Linsley

Georgia Right to Life has just become the first major conservative group in the state to look at Donald Trump and give him a big “thanks, but no thanks.”

In an email that just popped over the transom, the anti-abortion group announced that it is going elsewhere in the 2016 presidential contest. From the press release:

I called Wilson to make sure that GRTL’s endorsement was exclusive, and that the group had rejected Trump. Which she confirmed. Said Wilson:

Georgia Right to Life PAC Endorses Castle for President

Contact: Gen Wilson, Georgia Right to Life PAC, 770-339-6880

NORCROSS, Ga., June 9, 2016 /Christian Newswire/ -- Georgia Right to Life (GRTL) PAC today announced its endorsement of Constitution Party candidate Darrell Castle for President.

"America is in political and moral freefall," said GRTL PAC Director Gen Wilson. "We need someone who understands our founding principles and truly respects the immeasurable value of human life. Darrell Castle is that person."

Castle, a Memphis, Tennessee, attorney, has clearly stated his support for ending abortion, which has claimed the lives of more than 57 million innocent children since 1973.

"Some candidates support unlimited abortion, while others play word games to sound pro-life," Wilson said. "It's time to elect someone who will protect all innocent children."

Wilson noted there is an extensive effort underway to get Castle on the Georgia ballot by June 30. She urged pro-life supporters to visit the Constitution Party of Georgia website, or call (404) 994.3586, to volunteer as a petitioner.

"Supporting a third party candidate is not a wasted vote," Wilson said. "Abraham Lincoln was a third party candidate and Alaska U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski won her re-election as a write in candidate in 2012."

Castle, a Vietnam War veteran who served with the U.S. Marine Corps, started his own law firm in Memphis in 1984. Since then, he has opened firms in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Detroit, Michigan; Kansas City, Missouri; and St. Louis, Missouri.

Concerning abortion, Castle believes the right to life comes from God and it is the role of the government to protect that right, not take it away.

"Our culture has been flooded with slick propaganda designed to cover up the truth about abortion," Wilson said. "Darrell Castle sees through that smokescreen."

Castle's website states: "It is the nature of the State to seek dominance over the population. Freedom will not ultimately remain intact if we leave it unattended. America needs forward thinking leaders—leaders who do not apologize to the politically correct demands of the thought police. Self-hatred and appeasement only foster more disrespect. We must find a way to chart our course in the world as a free and independent people."

Castle has also indicated his support for ending the Federal Reserve, the Environmental Protection Agency, and taking the U.S. out of the United Nations.

Georgia Right to Life promotes respect and effective legal protection for all innocent life from earliest biological beginning through natural death. GRTL is one of a number of organizations that have adopted Personhood as the most effective pro-life strategy for the twenty-first century.

Obviously Georgia Right to Life PAC is a bunch of Paultards and/or Hillary- lovers. /s

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

What it means is that there are some people in Georgia who won't be voting for Donald Trump, they head an organization, and they are urging that those who are affiliated with the organization don't vote for Donald Trump either. Such is their right.

Obviously if Trump is more pro-life than they think, when he is elected and behaves in a pro-life way, it will be because he really believes his pro-life position, and not because he is currying favor with people who already rejected him.

US president's have very little leverage in the matter. Congress is where it's at, though since murder is a state and not federal matter (with limited exceptions), state laws are where it should be addressed.

Nominating USSC justices is about all the US presidents can do, and even then, Congress has to approve, and B) justices are about as unpredictable as any in how they'll rule. Look at how Roberts approved Obamacare.

At different times Georgia Right to Life PAC has given ringing endorsements to Cruz, Santorum, Gingrich and Huckabee. How did that work out for them? Not well, some will say. Others might say that their endorsement doesn’t do squat and based on the record, they would appear to be right.

Furthermore, in Bible-belt Georgia, one would think that pro-life organizations would support the federal “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which imposes a 20 week abortion ban (with exceptions for rape and incest). The bill passed the House last week generally along party lines, 242-184. But one pro- life organization vigorously opposed this bill. Georgia Right to Life wrote that the bill, H.R. 36, “contains dangerous exceptions that allow babies conceived via rape or incest to be murdered despite the ability to feel pain.” And while that’s true, this is more than a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It’s a case of Georgia Right to Life bullying itself into irrelevancy and ineffectiveness.

Nominating Supreme Course justices that pass the litmus test in private meetings with the President.

REPUBLICAN Justices are unpredictable. DEMOCRAT Justices are completely predictable, because only the most completely committed ideologues are ever named to the high court by Democrats in recent times.

The Republican justices named in recent times are also quite predictable, it's just that the REAL litmus tests of Republican Presidents have not been social conservatism but crony capitalism.

Remember, the Republican Party PRETENDS to be pro-life and socially conservative, but it really ISN"T. Social conservatives are just a country faction of the GOP. They're the electoral muscle, the duped rubes who vote Republican because the Republican elites wave boob bait for Bubbas in their face and whip up their outrage.

Donald Trump looks to be an actual pro-life conservative. He certainly is not a full-on social conservative, but on the pro-life matter he seems to actually be sincere. Which means you will probably get Justices who are moderate on sexuality, but pro-life.

One would think that such a combination could not exist, given the braying notes of the "leaders" of the conservative movement, but actually, such people are legion. There are PLENTY of people who are sexually libertarian, but who are very protective of children. For them, sexuality begins at adulthood, but children are off limits and to be protected from it. And for these people, abortion is the murder of children for sexual convenience.

If the law didn't legalize and previously illegal abortions, and did ban some previously illegal abortions - and it sounds as if this is the case - then it's deeply misguided for any pro-lifer to oppose it.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

It is not the case of Georgia Right to Life “having no influence and yet they’re bullies.” It’s a case of continued bullying by Georgia Right to Life will result in their being in a worthless state and become unimportant and useless.

As to influence, I was referring to your "At different times Georgia Right to Life PAC has given ringing endorsements to Cruz, Santorum, Gingrich and Huckabee. How did that work out for them? Not well, some will say. Others might say that their endorsement doesn’t do squat and based on the record, they would appear to be right."

You seem to be using a nonstandard definition of "bullying." (I agree that in their opposition to the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act they're unwisely letting the best be the enemy of the good.)

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.