10 comments

  1. jsm says:

    If no more than two candidates cry about it, I doubt it will be a real issue. I don’t know about Burgess, but Musselwhite is an elitist slum lord who is backed by Stacey “love those lobbyists” Reece.

    How can someone tell a pro-life organization that their standards for endorsement are “ridiculous”? Amazing.

  2. Dan says:

    I know there was a very long comment thread about this somewhere else on the site, but I just thought I’d share my reasons for not supporting the “one-exception” rule, at least not the way GRTL would prefer (like anyone cares).

    Any choice we make, has consequences, and we have to live with the results of those consequences. Having sex (and the possibility of producing a child) is a choice, except in the case of rape. GRTL would have me believe that a mother who exercises her free will to have sex should not have to deal with the consequences (even if those consequences are her life) but a mother who was raped and therefore had no choice should have to live with the consequences of her non-choice.

    I believe all life is valuable. I believe that life starts when God decides to create it. I don’t believe in the one exception rule. I can understand the zero exception rule. I can understand the three exception rule. The one exception rule is fundamentally flawed.

  3. jacewalden says:

    I don’t know who this Musslewhite guy is, nor do I care because even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    Musslewhite has a good point.

  4. MountainDawg says:

    GRTL is getting slammed, but you have to admire them. They are a single issue organization, and their sole purpose is to protect life. Candidates and elected officials know their position before they fill our their surveys (so the candidates that whine because they didn’t get their endorsement are either naive or stupid). Musslewhite is a good man, but surly he ahd a clue by drawing a line in the sand the group would be unable to endorse him. They endorsed the Governor, both Rep. Lt Governor candidates, a SOS candidates, and two Agriculture candidates. From their website, they have endorsed 26 INCUMBENT senators and 45

  5. SugarHillDad says:

    I do not always agree with GRTL on the 1 vs 3 exclusions but who is this Musslewhite to tell a private organization what to do. This endorsement should only matter to its members. How is this any different than a golf club saying no women allowed. Private group deciding their criteria. I am not trying to say who is wrong and right. I am saying it’s their group let them say what they want to say. Also if Musslewhite could read their website it clearly says what they will and will not support. If you know you are not going to qualify why go interview at all. Lastly if Musslewhite’s consultant was on top of thing he would have told him to not interview. BTW Musslewhite and Becky Burgess are both handled by Clint Austin for what I am told and I think Clint better be protecting Bobby Reese as his top priority. We don’t need Wayne Hill in the House.

  6. bowersville says:

    Well here goes, since I only have a “Liberal Arts Degree” in English, I may not offer an acceptible analogy. Let us sit down at the table of reason. No way you say, you agree with an exception, since you are absolutist in thought and principle…denying all else…even though the creator made mankind a free agent of choice. How is it that you absolutists are elevated to the lofty heights, to believe you have the understanding of the minds of those less fortunate, or greater the mind of G-D? Or do you actually believe you have been given such intuitive insight and understanding that you can make the “better choice” for all of us? Have you once stopped to think that in order for justice to exist, there must be conformity to truth, fact, or sound reason? Now I ask, what has happened to “GRACE?” That gentle amazing grace that anchors hope, changes lives, and that compelling grace-that gentle amazing grace that gives mankind its greatness?

  7. Mojo says:

    I’m confused, how can you be pro-life and still believe that the child should pay for the sins of the father and suffer an Old Testament execution of revenge and shame? I say that GRTL is right, you can’t be pro-life and still favor the murder of the young, even if it is only the unlucky few.

Comments are closed.