Credible Political Footballs

Monday morning I received the following comment for 1 of my posts on Ann Coulter's latest. However it had nothing to do with the post. So, I rejected it as a comment & decided to put it in a post with some response of my own. (Note: Spelling, etc in the comment is exactly as I received it. I did a simple copy & paste.)

Allen,

To be credible yu have to have more than one issue. The fact is the abortion issue is a fraud issue because it is a political football if there ever was one. Let the Supreme Court reverse it . The never will. Rove vs Wade will not be reversed because Republican women especially would leave in drives. The only Republicans left would be the fundamentalists.

She signed herself as Philothea.

When I did a check, I found there is no info on this person. So, it appears to me that she doesn't have the courage of her convictions. Otherwise, she would be willing to use more than a fake name.

But, I will respond anyway.

1. Pro-Life is not 1 issue. It is a whole group of issues, including abortion, euthenasia, cloning, & stem cell research (what is & isn't ethical).

2. & even if it was just about abortion so what? Some issues are so overriding in importance that they eclipse everything else. Abortion IS 1, just like slavery was in the 1800s. Everything she said about opposing abortion being a single issue & that it will never end was what was said about slavery. According to her logic, people like Harriet Elizabeth Beecher Stowe were wrong to be so single-minded in their efforts to end slavery. Or what about Dr. Martin Luther King in the area of Civil Rights? Were they fraudulant issues because they were "political footballs"? Do I have to bring up any other "political footballs" to prove my point?

3. As for the claim about the # of people leavng the Republican Party esp women, it is patently false. Most Republicans I know are Pro-Life, men & women. & most of us in the party who are Pro-Life are not fundamentalists. I even know a few people who are agnostic that are also Pro-Life.

4. As for the bit about being credible, credible to who? You? You don't know me, nor do you know anything about how credible I am, on anything. & if my credibility in your eyes depends on my supporting abortion than you have the problem, NOT ME. I'm more concerned with doing what is right. & that is defending life from conception to natural death. Even if that means MY being attacked physically as well as verbally. & I have been in some situations over the years where I have been threatened physically while trying to exercise my Constitutionally protected right to protest peacefully. I support Pro-Life groups & candidates, & not just with money. & I undergird all this with prayer. I think that is credentials enough.

In conclusion, Philothea, your comment is made up of half truths & discredited canards. Much of what you say is totally devoid of logic. But it does have 1 bit of value. It shows how indefensible the pro-choice side really is.

PS: It was Roe v Wade & Norma McCorvey (Roe) has since admitted the truth about hw she was used & come over to the Pro-Life side.