Behind the Scenes, Christian Right Leaders Rally Behind Rick Perry

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Behind the Scenes, Christian Right Leaders Rally Behind Rick Perry
111
Tue, 07-05-2011 - 10:50am

I was wondering if there was still an active "Christian Right" they've been so quiet of late.

Does Perry stand a chance in hell of being nominated by the GOP?

http://swampland.time.com/2011/07/05/behind-the-scenes-christian-right-leaders-rally-behind-rick-perry/

In early June, TIME has learned, a group of prominent figures on the Christian Right held a conference call to discuss their dissatisfaction with the current GOP presidential field, and agreed that Rick Perry would be their preferred candidate if he entered the race. Among those on the call were Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council; David Barton, the Texas activist and go-to historian for the Christian Right; and John Hagee, the controversial San Antonio pastor whose endorsement John McCain rejected in 2008.

Religious conservatives have often played a substantial role in choosing past Republican nominees, but leaders on the Christian Right have been conspicuously quiet so far in this campaign season. Privately, however, they are enthusiastic about Perry and are encouraging the Texas governor to throw his ten-gallon hat into the ring.

Perry’s favor with the Christian Right is relatively new, and he is their candidate of choice as much by default as anything. Many leaders had hoped that Mike Huckabee would make a second run for the nomination and give them a fellow religious conservative (and a Southerner) to support. When Huckabee chose to sit out the race and Haley Barbour stepped aside as well, some Christian Right bigwigs considered throwing their support behind Newt Gingrich.

The former Speaker has made religious freedom for Christians his signature issue over the past few years. And more importantly, Gingrich needs religious conservatives more than they need him — he might feel indebted to that constituency if he won, the thinking went.

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
I do believe that whether or not we agree with these folks, they do have a right to their opinion.
Deeply religious people are offended by the commercialization surrounding the birth of Christ. Myself, I don't let the fact that there are people that celebrate the birth of Christ yet really are only celebrating. They don't acknowledge Christ at all. It seems pretty stupid to me to do this. It would be like me celebrating a Jewish or Muslim holiday because I thought it would be fun to get presents, eat, and drink. I can do that without the pretense of celebrating the actual event. However, that's their issue, not mine. Some feel the need to make it an issue and point out the hypocrisy of it. Do you think they should be castigated and made fun of for fulfilling their right to speak out?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Good, I'm glad you read it. Can you tell me why you said it called for investigating miscarriages? that seems a bit misleading.

I'm glad you thought I made your point by speaking the truth, to bad my truth didn't support your point.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
<>

Oh, yeah, that made my point.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
And let's not forget that many are against stem cell research too. They also scream bloody murder about any Death with Dignity legislation & yet support the death penalty....

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
These parts in particular prove that my point isn't "misleading." Funny how that was left out of your cut and paste of the legislation.

"(a) The State of Georgia has the duty to protect all innocent life from the moment of
15 conception until natural death. We know that life begins at conception. After nearly four
16 decades of legal human prenatal murder, it is now abundantly clear that the practice has
17 negatively impacted the people of this state in many ways, including economic, health,
18 physical, psychological, emotional, and medical well-being. These, too, are areas of
19 legitimate concern and duty of this state. The General Assembly therefore makes the
20 following findings of fact:
21 (1) A fetus is a person for all purposes under the laws of this state from the moment of
22 conception;
23 (2) The Georgia Constitution, at Article I, Section I, Paragraph II, provides: 'Protection
24 to person and property is the paramount duty of government and shall be impartial and
11 LC 21 0916
H. B. 1
- 2 -
25 complete. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.' Because a fetus
26 is a person, constitutional protection attaches at the moment of conception. It is therefore
27 the duty of the General Assembly to protect the innocent life that is being taken;"

"Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 31-10-1, relating to definitions relative
191 to vital records, by deleting the words "product of human conception" and replacing them
192 with "prenatal human person" in paragraphs (4), (9), and (15); by deleting the words
193 "induced termination of pregnancy" and replacing them with "prenatal murder" in paragraphs
194 (7) and (20); and by deleting the words "an induced termination of pregnancy" and replacing
195 them with "a prenatal murder" in paragraph (15)."

"(3) When a spontaneous fetal death required to be reported by this Code section occurs
211 without medical attendance at or immediately after the delivery or when inquiry is
212 required by Article 2 of Chapter 16 of Title 45, the 'Georgia Death Investigation Act,' the
213 proper investigating official shall investigate the cause of fetal death and shall prepare
214 and file the report within 30 days;"

""(a) Any person having knowledge or facts concerning any birth, death, spontaneous fetal
239 death, marriage, induced termination of pregnancy, divorce, dissolution of marriage, or
240 annulment may disclose such facts to the state registrar, and such disclosure shall be
241 absolutely privileged and no cause or action may be brought or maintained against such
242 person for such disclosure."

I'm adding this one just for grins and giggles since it is so patently ridiculous:

"No portion of this Act may be found to be unconstitutional by the federal
303 courts as they lack the subject matter jurisdiction to instruct this state how or whether to
304 prosecute certain crimes."


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Even though I'm not Christian I still celebrate the holiday because I have family members who are & I respect that. They also respect my observances...well, most of them do, with the exception of my SILs... ;)

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000

Taking Christ out of Xmas is hype IMO. No one today is stopping Christians from gathering & worshipping however they wish.... Even those that would burn the Koran or protest at funerals.

I send cards to friends depending on their religion/spirituality. Mid-Winter is a time of celebration for many religions long before Christ was born.

Taking the Christmas Out of Christ Even as conservatives rail against what they say is secularization of the holiday, some Christian churches forbid its observance.

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/dec/21/local/me-xmas21

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2011
((And let's not forget that many are against stem cell research too. They also scream bloody murder about any Death with Dignity legislation & yet support the death penalty....))

Your gross misrepresentation of the "Christian right" is extremely unfair. Nobody screams "bloody murder". I could use the same gross misrepresentations about liberals and say they are against putting child rapists to death but have no problem killing unborn children.

The attitudes of the regular liberal posters about Christianity is digesting to me. And I'm not even religious. I can see the blatant bias and I am surprised that the so called " open minded " people cannot see what they are doing.


iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
I would say that to anyone having a vaginal ultrasound, in fact, the first time I had one, when I had a miscarriage actually that's exactly what I told myself. Except that I added "get over it",
It has nothing to do with the activities that brought me or the person having the ultrasound there.
I did not make your point except in your mind where you seem to prefer to assume the worst about people and their motives.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Once again, question my motive and assuming the worst without fact. I did not intentionally leave anything out.
What exactly is your point? As I stated, the purpose of this legislation is to outlaw abortion, I don't think it will pass. Does it surprise you that there would be language to criminalize this activity in the legislation? I thought it was a given. Does it surprise you that a legislator that sponsored a piece of legislation to criminalize abortion would put wording in it that first assigns a responsibility of the state to protect life and then goes on to define life?

You said there were calls to investigate miscarriage. That was misleading. Adding this ancillary information defining life, and what would be considered the criminal act does not support the claim that miscarriages would be investigated. What would be investigated was clearly outlined in the sections I cut and pasted.

Pages