Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele is under fire from social conservatives for telling GQ magazine that abortion is an "individual choice" and homosexuality is not.
Despite declaring to GQ that women have the right to choose an abortion, Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Michael Steele has issued a statement saying he has always been pro-life and supports a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs for Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, says in Steele's interview with GQ, he "sounded like he was on the payroll of Planned Parenthood."
Barber admits he is also troubled that Steele told GQ that believing homosexuality is a choice is equivalent to saying, "Tomorrow morning I'm going to stop being black."
Some observations:
1. If Steele means that a person doesn't suddenly get up one fine day and say: "Hm, think I'll try the opposite sex for a while," I agree. I doubt that one chooses homosexual feelings or thoughts in the way that one chooses canned green beans over peas at the grocery store. However, I take issue with the notion that homosexuals have no control over how they act. Engaging in sodomy or its female counterpart isn't a whim, but a behavior. Suggesting otherwise implies that humans are mindless, rutting robots, enslaved to their genetic "wiring," or malfunction, in this particular instance.
2. Abortion is an "individual choice" in the same way that shooting my neighbor is an "individual choice." That I may choose a specific course of action says nothing about its moral goodness or abhorrence. If Steele believes that women have a right to kill their unborn children, then he is no believer in the ideal that humans--or even just Americans--have God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perhaps he can explain how a person explores these rights, after being vacuumed from his mother's womb like so much refuse and tossed into a dumpster.
3. Steele's public backpedaling on abortion indicates that he's either a liar or a moron. How does he make the transition from supporting a woman's "right to choose," to claiming that he "has always been pro-life," and an advocate of overturning Roe v. Wade? Sounds like someone has no core principles. Or perhaps he simply tells people what he thinks they'd like to hear. Either way, he embodies the GOP's ongoing problem of blurring the demarkation line between itself and the Democrats. Republicans can't wait to lose the next election.
4. Notice how Steeleskull consolidates homosexuality and having black skin under the classification: "Things People Just Can't Help." As if there's no discernible difference between the color of one's skin and engaging in buggery. If I were black, I'd find this comparison offensive and intellectually feeble. By the way, equating the two is a typical tactic of the Left--those destroyers of the family, those wreckers of everything that once represented Christendom.
What's the substantial difference between Steele and a Democrat?
No comments:
Post a Comment