Dan Becker Continues To Embarass Himself; Hurt Pro-Life Cause

June 5, 2010 14:05 pm

by Icarus · 189 comments

WSB TV’s Lori Geary filed this report last night.

Dan Becker has called Karen Handel “Barren and Infertile”. When asked on camera about his comments, he replies “That’s going to be a no comment, and then off the record, I’m going to say, that was out of context.”

Perhaps he first needs to understand that “off the record” is not generally done in front of a news camera that is rolling.

More importantly, he should understand that calling someone Barren and Infertile in an effort to discredit their pro-life views hurts not only himself and his organization, but the pro-life effort itself.

Update by Chris: Dan Becker responds in the comments.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 2:16 pm

Playing the “offensive language” game just like the left. Karen continues to run against the pro-life community. Great strategy!

In The Arena June 5, 2010 at 8:23 pm

Nice Karen, it was pretty telling when you didn’t get the endorsement from GRTL. Now with your attacks on GRTL for not endorsing you because of your stances, we know you are a sore loser in addition to being pro-choice. Attacking an organization that has been a loyal voice for conservative citizens in Georgia? You alienate people more and more every time you let Dan McLagan and Marty Ryall open their mouthes.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 8:48 pm

Wrong spin. Becker attacker her, she didn’t attack him or them.

ready2rumble June 6, 2010 at 8:00 pm

It’s way down in this post. Handel has the same prolife stance as the NRTL. The GRTL stance is different. Handel is prolife.

Mayonnaise June 6, 2010 at 8:53 pm

Handel is pro- “grounded in the reality of the current political landscape”.

bowersville June 6, 2010 at 9:41 pm

Mayo, I’m sure there are more like me that are undecided. I have followed this blog since before the ’06 primaries and every cycle sock puppets for a particular candidate march to the front with what they believe to be sound tactics. But in reality it is a poor strategy. Your continually biased remarks towards Handel are becoming quite annoying.

The reality of the pro-life POLITICAL movement is that it must know and operate in the existing POLITICAL climate if they are going to make any progress in slowing the abortion rate. I for one believe Icarus when he states the slowing down of the abortion rate was possible in the POLITICAL climate that existed before GRTL and Becker moved the goal posts. We argued that out right here on the PP when it happened and at the time of that debate the GOP controlled the House, Senate and the Governors office. How many babies have been aborted since the goal posts were moved? What has the GRTL under Becker done to slow the abortion rate? Did Becker miss an opportunity to slow the abortion rate by not knowing the POLITICAL climate? Becker claimed POLITICAL ignorance as an excuse for such a dumb insensitive statement about “barren and infertal” women. I don’t want to believe Becker has a sinister motive for his actions, but it makes one wonder.

Will we ever have that opportunity again? I don’t know. Now as all who are a little more than a casual observer, we know you are an EJ sock puppet.

So clue us in on what EJ will do to slow the abortion rate. EJ has been in a position of power with in the GOP for a number of years. Was EJ prevented from making progress on lowering the abortion rate by the moving of the goal posts by the GRTL?

I’m open to voting for EJ and not turned off on voting for EJ but you’re getting me there.

Lady Thinker June 7, 2010 at 2:09 am

I don’t think you will get an answer from him. Another poster asked Mayo about the $280,000 Johnson failed to document and never got an answer.

dj June 5, 2010 at 2:22 pm

We have bigger issues to face other than Dan Becker’s choice of words, or Pro Life rhetoric, namely the BP oil spill…Icarus, since you are a FFP, how about posting something on that issue???

Henry Waxman June 5, 2010 at 2:31 pm

I think the Daily Kingfish is covering the BP spill. I really don’t think that has too much to do with Georgia politics at the moment…but I could be wrong.

http://www.dailykingfish.com/

dj June 5, 2010 at 2:46 pm

Henry Waxman,
Perhaps you think Karen Handel’s fertility and/or Dan Becker’s comments re same are more important topics of discussion rather than the oil spill? You can’t be serious, but something tells me that you are…it has everything to do with GA Politics…and so much more…

Henry Waxman June 5, 2010 at 2:54 pm

I didn’t say this Dan Becker situation was an important issue – I was just saying that other blogs were covering the BP oil spill and that I didn’t consider it to be a Georgia political issue.

I also said I could be wrong.

Henry Waxman June 5, 2010 at 3:03 pm

DJ, Peach Pundit is fairly open. You are free to write and post a long, detailed discussion about how the BP oil spill “has everything to do with GA Politics.” You don’t have to rely on the FPP’s.

I’m sure the next open discussion thread will be up soon, and I look forward to reading your post.

dj June 5, 2010 at 3:35 pm

Henry Waxman,

To you as well…please tell me how this DOES NOT affect GA Politics…and if it doesn’t, I’m at a complete loss…

http://romenews-tribune.com/view/full_story/7780630/article-Isakson-remains-open-to-drilling-off-Ga–coast?instance=home_news_lead_story

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 3:04 pm

In Icarus’ defense, the BP oil spill is not directly a Georgia issue.

dj June 5, 2010 at 3:28 pm

MSBassSinger,

Check out Senator Isakson’s comments…and then tell me this oil spill is not “directly” a Georgia issue?

http://romenews-tribune.com/view/full_story/7780630/article-Isakson-remains-open-to-drilling-off-Ga–coast?instance=home_news_lead_story

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 4:01 pm

OK. I read it. The BP oil spill is not directly a Georgia issue.

Whether drilling can take place off the Georgia coast or not is a Georgia issue. It was an issue before the oil spill, and is still one.

Oddly enough the NIMBYs who wouldn’t allow offshore drilling in relatively shallow waters are one of the causes of this oil spill. Although these kind of spills are rare, it could have been handled much faster and safer had it been in 500 feet of water instead of 5,000 – which is where these rigs would be were it not for the NIMBYs.

That the Obama administration has made the situation worse, bungled the government’s involvement, and enabled BP to cause this by their neglect is a topic worth discussing, but not a Georgia issue.

dj June 5, 2010 at 4:42 pm

re your comments…BP oil spill is most assuredly a Georgia issue, fishing, tourism, coastal development (i.e, Jekyll Island Development Project)…or are you of the opinion that we need to wait until the current brings the oil ashore until we deem it as such?

Re NIMBY…two words…alternative energy…

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 6:25 pm

First of all, the Gulf oil spill isn’t coming to Georgia’s beaches. The Gulf Stream speed (about 5 knots max) is too slow, and the what does come up the Atlantic seaboard is too far offshore. By the time any residual oil would get here, it would have evaporated or been re-absorbed.
http://oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu/atlantic/gulf-stream_3.html

Second, “alternative energy” is a sham. Solar, wind, and geothermal cannot come even close to generating enough energy to matter. Besides, what we use oil for generally cannot be compensated for by whatever dribble of energy we could get from very expensive, and environmentally unfriendly, “alternative energy”.

A basic knowledge of science and rational thought makes both rather obvious.

dj June 5, 2010 at 9:59 pm

I don’t even know how to respond to such blind ignorance…so please, go on the record, and let us all know that the GA coast will have no impact from this oil spill…if you dare…

dj June 5, 2010 at 10:00 pm

never mind, your comments are meaningless…don’t bother

dj June 5, 2010 at 10:12 pm
MSBassSinger June 6, 2010 at 4:33 pm

I assume you noticed your cartoon explicitly says “they are not a forecast of where the oil will go”. Also, the current flowed pretty far off the Georgia coast.

In addition, this was using dye, which unlike oil, only dissapates. Oil evaporates and dissapates. Note the article behind the cartoon says “The dye tracer used in the model has no actual physical resemblance to true oil. “, and ” The dilution of the oil relative to the source will also be impacted by details such as bacterial degradation, which are not included in the simulations.”

So, let me make this really clear: There will be no BP-spill Gulf oil washing up on Georgia shores. Try science instead of science fiction.

macho June 5, 2010 at 2:32 pm

What an awful human being this Becker guy is.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 2:37 pm

The cat is out of the bag so Handel running hard to the left.

Three Jack June 5, 2010 at 3:03 pm

the only thing ‘barren and infertile’ is the space between beckerhead’s ears…what db!

Three Jack June 5, 2010 at 3:06 pm

should be ‘what a db’!

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 3:07 pm

Okay, let’s look at this statement from Handel’s website:

http://blog.karenhandel.com/2010/06/the-truth-about-karen-handel-and-life/

“Her willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human. ”

What?!?!? So she believes they are fully human but won’t protect them from being killed because of the “current political landscape” ????

Sounds like she values votes more than human life. Cowardly position to say the least. What other decisions will she make based on the “current political landscape” instead of her convictions?

Clone Of B. Plyler June 5, 2010 at 3:13 pm

Good points Mayo.

Henry Waxman June 5, 2010 at 4:33 pm

If I were an official part of Team Handel, I would make sure whoever approved that quote was removed from that position ASAP.

I can’t even think of a PC way to describe how stupid that is…

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 5:02 pm

A glimpse into the soul of Karen Handel. Politician first, defender of life second. I’m sure the quote will be removed very soon.

B Balz June 5, 2010 at 5:35 pm

Mayo, your onscreen persona portrays a pathetic little polyp, go have a cold brew and relax. I know this is your moment, but really, you are so over the top.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 5:51 pm

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortions are legal so all this sermonizing is a mute point. People’s views on abortion are not going to solve Georgia’s problems and Karen can’t change that law. This thread is about an idiot who used his position within his organization to personally attack a gubernatorial candidate over her inability to have children. All he did was push votes her way, which I appreciate.

EthicsEther June 6, 2010 at 11:17 am

Yes, your point is well taken. Abortions are legal, whether we like it or not. States might inhibit them, if they so choose. Handle believes abortions should not be prohibited for rape and incest. Her opinion does not impact the victims, since abortions are legal. Though abortion is legal, The Georgia Right To Life has a stated mission to promote life.

What GRTL is, in fact, doing, is power brokering, on an issue that has already been decided. Faith based organizations have blessed GRTL with the power to make that one issue the deciding factor in elections.

Guess who makes up at least on half of most faith based orgs ?

Women. When women of faith learn that the GRTL spokesman is pushing an arcane stereotypic view of womanhood as inferior, those women of faith, will , in large part, be unconcerned about GRTL’s questionnaire and more concerned about the overall ethics that candidates seem to exhibit.

Lady Thinker June 6, 2010 at 1:14 pm

Good points! Thanks for your response.

Doug Deal June 6, 2010 at 1:17 pm

You fault her for recognizing a political reality? So you only approve of wide eyed dreamers who have only rhetoric and no chance of enacting their fantasy.

If it were not for hard liner, no excpetion abortion warlords, abortion would likely be illegal in most jurisdictions in this country. Job one is enacting legislation is laying the ground work of getting the people behnd you first. We are not a dictatorship, no matter how much you would like this to be one, and you cannot pass laws that go beyond what the people want.

So, instead of having a widely supported three exceptions ban, we have pretty much nothing. Karen is right, you cannot move the issue forward without those exceptions, and anyone taking the purity test route only keeps abortion permanently legal.

Clone Of B. Plyler June 5, 2010 at 3:12 pm

Charlie,

The stuff you have been spouting out lately about Handel & GRTL speaks volumes to me. Quite frankly, most of what you are saying is trash , & I think you know it. If she wants to continue to take this track , let her. If you want to continue to take it with her, then fine. However why don’t you just start purchasing your “earned media” in order to post it on PP?

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 3:18 pm

If the media reports are accurate (generally a big “if”), then Becker’s response is unbecoming a Christian and a man of honor.

Having said something so useless, stupid, and unrelated to anything about preventing the death of unborn babies, he should have the honor and courage to admit he was wrong, to apologize, and commit to being more like Christ.

It grinds my gut when people who are supposed to be Christian act like devils, especially in public. Such actions bring shame to the name of Christ. To paraphrase John Wesley, they have act as if they have the faith of a demon and the life of a heathen.

sonofliberty June 5, 2010 at 3:28 pm

MSBassSinger…..”Your gift of $100, $50, $25 or more will build up your treasure in heaven, by helping Dan Becker help the moms and the unborn babies of Georgia”……start your heaven equity account by mailing Dan a check at P.O. Box 927, Lawrenceville, Georgia 30046……

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 4:02 pm

Yeah. Check’s in the mail…

dj June 5, 2010 at 3:47 pm

My whole point in my numerous posts about the abortion issue has been to illustrate that the HLA amendment will never pass in light of the extreme consequences to a woman’s choice of contraceptive measures, which no one would respond to…(i.e., Doug Grammer)…and others. The Pro-Life agenda is just a vote getter…we all know it…I suppose that most are banking on the ignorance of the GA voters to not see it as that…and I’m beginning to think that, based upon these posts, “most” would be correct in their respective assumptions. Corruption in politics is the issue, with devastating consequences to the populate, via economy and ecology.

Dan Becker June 5, 2010 at 3:50 pm

Icarus,

Let me agree with you and quickly! I DID totally botch the TV interview by my “no comments” statement.

I am accustomed to Jim Galloway’s style of journalism that allows for a respected “off the record” comment that allows me to fill in background details so that he understands what I am trying to communicate. He has always been fair in that respect. Much of my TV interview was excised by the producer, information that explained my comment. I am humbled by my lack of experience with the News media and it shows. It is embarrassing.

My comment was NEVER directed AT Mrs. Handel and my very real public apology for everyone who took it that way from Galloway’s article. I was trying to articulate to Galloway the brunt of our public policy regarding IVF technology in particular, those practices that purposely end a child’s life and how we sympathize with women generally,___ who are faced with treating infertility. This is clearly articulated on our public website I was restating our public policy:

“INVITRO FERTILIZATION
GRTL opposes invitro fertilization as a technology when it ignores rather than enhances respect for human life. Whereas we sympathize with infertile couples, we cannot ignore the fact that research and clinical trials for this procedure have involved the destruction of newly conceived human embryos in the laboratory.”

Let’s get beyond my personal failings and concentrate once more on the issue. (An ad hominem attack is always a good way to redirect the real discussion.) I do want to set the record straight.

We do NOT seek to ban all IVF only the part that takes life instead of producing it. We do NOT believe infertility treatment, per se, is immoral, only when PGD or selective reduction are employed and a child is killed. We oppose the practice of donating any of the over 40,000 frozen embryos in Georgia to the bio-tech industry so that they can conduct actual human experimentation ___ending in the destruction of the child. All of the other leading Republican gubernatorial candidates have rejected these practices and refused to take money from tainted sources. I have been told that they are paying a price for their principled pro-life position.

Mrs. Handel defended these practices in the course of a 1 hour interview with my Executive Director and myself. She indicated she understood the terms and their implications. We agreed to disagree.

We seek to impose the same regulation that many of the liberal European countries have enacted ___ commonsense limits that protect the mothers and the children involved in the IVF process from underage birthweight, large multiple births (Octomom) and the dangerous hormonal overstimulation of a woman’s ovaries when she is told by the doctor that he needs as many as 10-20 eggs to make the process “cost effective.” Most countries legislate a limit of two eggs AND ALL that are fertilized must be implanted and given a chance at life. She told us that she was opposed to ALL regulation. I would love for her to publicly refute that statement.

I will be happy to have this very public discussion as long as she wishes to engage. Her position on unregulated IVF is NOT prolife by the definition of any other pro-life groups in the nation. We live in the 21st century and the definition and issues surrounding being pro-life have changed. We would welcome her to join us.

Dan Becker
President
Georgia Right to Life

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 4:35 pm

Mr. Becker,
Do you think your comment might be taken as sexist, and demeaning to women, since it indicates a woman’e sole value is in reproduction? That view seems to indicate an objectification of women.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 6:00 pm

Great insight.

In The Arena June 5, 2010 at 8:34 pm

Just like Karen Handel is narcissistic (if anyone gets in my way, im going to smear them in the dirt, because I am the only one who is right about anything), makes comments demeaning to all pro-life Georgians (attacking Georgia Right to Life, really, where are you from? Maryland?), and with a sole purpose of jumping from one office to the next before anyone catches on her act.

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 4:45 pm

I’ve known Karen for 5 years. Mrs. Handel is a person of strong moral character and maintains a tenacious spirit. Her actions far outweigh Mr. Becker’s condescending attitude.

GRTL provides a tremendous service. However, in this situation not only did it’s director and spokesman bungle his argument, he shows clearly what an insensitive, disrespectful bigot he is.

bowersville June 5, 2010 at 5:16 pm

I love how the others on here that oppose Handel either by:

1. express a condecending attitude towards Handel or just in general a sexist attitude

2. some how try to twist it into a fight against the GRTL when it is a fact, Becker called her out and made it as personal as it can get,” barren and infertile.” He couldn’t just state the endorsements of the GRTL, Becker had to make it personal and publicly humiliate Handel. Why Becker, you can’t stand a strong willed woman?

3. absolutely lie about Handel’s views, left of Roy etc.

4. and Becker this is for you. Your statement is pathetic. Not once do you even appear to get it. You made it personal and when given an opportunity to ap0logize….No…off the record and out of context. Admit it Becker, you won’t apologize to Handel.

5. Becker you have tremendous responsibilty on your shoulders. You as President of the GRTL operate in a political arena….In fact you make it political by your very actions yet you stand behind your political in-experience as an excuse.

6. There will be the shallow who believe or try to convince others to believe Handel is taking on the GRTL. Becker among them.

7. I’m not a Handel supporter….yet…she’s on my radar screen along with several others. Yet your actions made me mad Becker.

8. Now there’s the rest of Ga. Keep it up Becker and you give Handel a political boost.

9. You also create the same potentential for Handel that McBerry did. Will the other candidates be called out to condemn your sexist remark, “barren and infertile?”

10. Man up Becker, apologize…no more no less. Unless you do your attitude will become the issue instead of the cause of the GRTL.

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 5:25 pm

Man up? He’s already proven he’s a duck and cover person with that no comment and off the record. What kind of idiot stands before a camera and microphone and says something that stupid? The whole purpose of the reporter there was not to empower his rhetorical presence but to ask him a simple question.

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 7:23 pm

Maurice, what part of Mr. Becker’s reply do you object to? It sounded very reasonable and rational to me. Pro-lifers must oppose IVF procedures that “waste” embryos. This position is well accepted in the pro-life community.

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 8:25 pm

The position statement I HAVE NO BEEF WITH. What I do have a problem with is his snarky editorializing (actually grandstanding with arrogance) with the REPORTER. It’s all on the record now…

I would think that most pro-life supporters and contributors to the GRTL are Christians or align themselves with the faith based community. Karen Handel is not their enemy, yet his obvious disdain referring to her as Ms. Handel and his comments regarding her as “barren and infertile” have nothing to do with the endorsement. It certainly suggests he must have some problem with her or her campaign.

It still strikes me funny that he apparently could care less and indicated he has no concern about another candidate’s immoral and sexual deviant behavior. His only concern is with this. That’s outrageous. Then to suggest she is either not pro-life or maybe not pro-life enough is intellectually STUPID.

It was not a good day for Mr. Becker.

dj June 5, 2010 at 8:43 pm

Maurice Atkinson,

You should have a beef with it…but we would be better served if faith based institutions dealt with this on a local level rather than a “legal” level, as the “legal” avenue will never come to fruition…it’s a waste of time, and resources…unless you are ignorant enough to believe otherwise…let’s focus on the real issues that effect our economy, prosperity, and strength as a nation and state, and not the sexual morality of individuals…as relating to birth control, gay rights, etc. LOOK AT THE GULF OF MEXICO!!!

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 10:22 pm

“Christians or align themselves with the faith based community. Karen Handel is not their enemy”

Oh really? Making nice with the homosexual community and the Log Cabin Republicans when she was running in Fulton County and then denying that she did when running statewide shouldn’t be a problem for Christians? All the abortions that took place at taxpayer expense at Grady Hospital when she was on the Fulton Board shouldn’t be a problem for Christians. I don’t know that she alone could have done anything about that, but did she try?

dj June 5, 2010 at 11:21 pm

Red,

I might suggest that you focus on visiting the Grady Maternal/OB wing and find “foster parents” for the crack addicted babies…have you visited, and what are your thoughts? Or is it okay with you that they go home with the birth mothers?

Red Phillips June 6, 2010 at 12:23 am

I went to medical school at Emory and did the vast majority of my clinical rotations at Grady including my OB/GYN rotation. I am well aware of what Grady is like. (Ha! I know you weren’t expecting that answer.)

I have no idea how to solve the problem of crack addicted mothers or whatever else. One thing that would surely help is more authentic Christianity which would lead to less drug use and less outside of wedlock sex. But I know the solution is not killing the POC (product of conception) as they called it during my OB rotation at Grady.

dj June 6, 2010 at 1:43 am

Dr. Red,

While you are certain that those babies have a right to life…tell me…what happens to those crack addicted babies when they are sent home with the mothers…

So…I know you have witnessed the horrors…I agree with you that more “authentic Christianity” would help; however, what to do with the situation at hand? What is the solution? Offer one, please…perhaps more DFAC involvement, or people like you who are educated, financially secure and “moral” to adopt? Have you any interest in adopting one of these babies? And if not, why not? Let me guess, it is someone else’s problem, not yours, yet you proceed to pass judgement, and not offer respite for the babies…

Red Phillips June 6, 2010 at 2:06 pm

That is a canard. You can not possibly have as a standard that everyone who speaks out against the killing of unborn babies has to either adopt an unwanted child or go away. That is simply a way to shut people up.

What you are suggesting that we do about “the situation at hand” is that we just kill the little inconvenient buggers. Heck why stop there? Why not just round up all the undesirables and march them to a camp? Why don’t we just force sterilize the undesirables you deem unsuitable to procreate?

The answer is for people to conceive and bear children within the bounds of wedlock preferably with a heavily invested extended family. How do we get there from here? I don’t know. One thing that would sure help is a lot more Christianity and a lot less fretting about those evil moral conservatives. The situation I describe above sounds suspiciously like what traditionalist conservatives and Christians yearn for and bemoan the decline of.

Lady Thinker June 6, 2010 at 2:19 pm

What you said above is more for married people or those engaged.

What about children who are raped? As the doctor, surely you are aware that if a child is too young and pregnant, like some ten and eleven year old rape/incest victims, carrying a fetus to full-could kill them. Would you give these kids the “morning after” pill or would you advocate them carrying the baby until the baby kills them.

dj June 6, 2010 at 10:46 pm

Dr. Red,
No…it is not a canard…and to the same “analogy”…you cannot assert that every child that is born under the circumstances that I have proposed (that you have unfortunately witnessed), will not endure misery unless and until Pro-Lifer’s step up to the plate and adopt them…unless, of course, you are after the vote and not the child…

Lady Thinker June 7, 2010 at 2:17 am

Red,

I do not believe in abortion as a birth control method, however, I have worked these sad cases. Sometimes, the child’s mother requests the morning after pill, which was administered to one ten-year-old victim.

There were several cases with the worst two being the rape murders of two seven-year-old girls.

The murders in thse two cases were caught and prosecuted but some of the other rapes were not. Fortunately for us but not for the child, the suspect was a family member.

I believe these children should get the morning after pill because abortion is legal for them to choose. I may be wrong, but I defend the kids right to do so.

dj June 6, 2010 at 1:52 am

Dr. Red,

Ha! You weren’t expecting that response…everyone has compassion, of course they do…but deal with the reality of the situation…what happens to those babies? Did you follow up when you were in “rotation” at Grady, or did you just let it go???

dj June 5, 2010 at 11:32 pm

Of course you haven’t…you are just pushing your politcal “agenda”…adopt one of the crack babies and show us that you mean what you say…

David Staples June 9, 2010 at 2:09 pm

I somewhat agree here. I know many pro-lifers who say “someone will adopt them”. Who is that someone? I know very few people who have actually adopted children. Meanwhile, people continue to have multiple children of their own while pushing the pro-life position. When will that “someone” who will adopt these children become them?

Icarus June 5, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Welcome Mr. Becker

1) Can you please explain for me how much time you spent talking to the male candidates who have children about invitro fertilization in their “interviews”? Or was this subject confined to those you determined to be barren and infertile?

2) Can you tell me how you determined that being barren and infertile was justification to not endorse someone, but it’s O.K. to endorse someone that appears to have had an inappropriate sexual relationship with a 16 year old student of his? I mean, since you have a new emphasis on how children are conceived, I would think GRTL might have a problem with a candidate attempting to conceive a child with another child. But apparently, not so much.

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 8:24 pm

This is not a commentary on whether or not the allegations against Ray are true, but pro-lifers should be the strongest advocates of Ray’s platform of state’s rights. NOTHING positive concerning abortion is going to happen at the federal legislative or SCOTUS level anytime soon. Positive things could happen at the state level. Pro-life states should pass legislation outlawing and/or heavily regulating abortion IN DEFIANCE of the Feds and SCOTUS.

National Right to Life has opposed this course because they are afraid the state laws would be overturned further solidifying the precedent of Roe v. Wade. NRTL wants to wait until they believe the SCOTUS is friendlier. Good luck with that. States should proceed to pass pro-life legislation and if the SCOTUS wrongly determines them to be unconstitutional, the states should promptly round file the Court’s decision and get on about the business of protecting innocent human lives.

http://etherzone.com/2006/dphill110806.shtml

jenny June 5, 2010 at 10:25 pm

Red-

Ray is an aggressive bully who victimizes women, and his methods are appalling. Satan will espouse to the legitimacy of Jesus as God Incarnate- it doesn’t mean we all need to follow him.

Ray is so utterly void of understanding the basics of liberty, and goes so far as to bully and threaten people with lawsuits if they use their RIGHT and LIBERTY and FREEDOM to free speech.

Your defense of the indefensible is enough to gag a maggot.

Abortion can be regulated out of existence at the local county level.

A man who is tyrannical with the tiniest bit of power is not capable of advancing liberty with much power.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 10:37 pm

You have a link to the “abortion can be regulated out of existence at the local county level” implementation plan?

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 11:08 pm

Jenny I specifically said that my response had nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the allegations against Ray, because this is not about Ray. Do you think GRTL should have endorsed Karen Handel? Ick or anyone else bringing the allegations against Ray up is a red herring.

Do you not agree with me that states’ rights would be an effective tool in the arsenal against abortion and that states should nullify Roe v. Wade? I would be shocked to find out you disagree with that.

I fear you are letting your emotions get the better of you. I am not the enemy, and I haven’t “defended” anything except the states’ rights agenda.

Maurice Atkinson June 6, 2010 at 12:31 am

Red,

But they do go together. You’ve made an argument regarding an issue many are uncomfortable with and interjected it into this issue. McBerry’s relationship with a minor should be a HUGE red flag.

Furthermore, Jenny was one of McBerry’s champions. For her to have a significant change in her support of McBerry should speak volumes.

There are no “perfect” candidates. These are fallible human beings, however, my support of Karen comes from the Karen Handel I KNOW.

I don’t think her argument is with not getting an endorsement, although I’m sure she would have enjoyed it. The argument is in the hoopla that followed and the reckless, insensitive, bigoted remarks of the director. Also, his duck and weave from his remarks.

I have no doubt in my mind that Karen would not support ANY pro-life initiative that would reach her desk.

Personally, I think with the omission and the endorsement of a person who is clearly documented to have had a relationship with a minor kind of sets her apart from the field. There are 3 candidates I like in this race. Only one is going to win and only one, in my opinion, has the ability to rally the vote to beat the Democrat nominee in November. I believe Karen Handel is that candidate.

I am confident that she would promote fiscally sound budgets, work to reduce spending and promote Georgia in a way that bolsters our economy.

Red Phillips June 6, 2010 at 2:21 pm

“But they do go together. You’ve made an argument regarding an issue many are uncomfortable with and interjected it into this issue. McBerry’s relationship with a minor should be a HUGE red flag.”

Maurice, I really don’t get what you are saying here. GRTL did not endorse Handel, I believe rightly so, because she does not meet their objective standards. Ick brings up the allegations against Ray in the context of their failure to endorse Handel. One has nothing to do with the other. Whether or not GRTL should have declined to endorse Ray, despite the fact that he does meet their pro-life criteria, because of the allegations is a different subject. This is a classic red herring. Look up red herring in the dictionary and this argument is likely to be there.

I said that pro-lifers should support states’ rights and act at the state level to restrict or outlaw abortion in defiance of the wrongly decided Roe v. Wade, and if the Court rules against them the States should nullify the Court’s decision. This is an argument that stands on its own. Agree or disagree with it. That’s fine. But it is an argument that has NOTHING to do with the truth or falsity of the allegation against Ray.

People who don’t support Ray’s agenda (I don’t know if that includes you or not) are systematically using the allegations against him to discredit his agenda. This is clearly sleazy and intellectually dishonest, but as I told Doug, it sure beats having to do the intellectual heavy lifting of actually making an argument.

Jason June 5, 2010 at 5:13 pm

You, sir, scare me.

ready2rumble June 5, 2010 at 5:41 pm

Mr. Becker,
The best thing that you can do for GRTL is resign Monday. You have ruined the reputation of the organization. You have insulted tens of thousands of couples in Georgia with your attacks on Karen.

As far as debating Karen on the issue, she would bury you. Please do the right thing and resign Monday.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 6:23 pm

YOU insult Karen Handel, then women everywhere telling them what YOU think they should and should not do to get pregnant based on YOUR beliefs. Now you want to engage Karen in a discussion of the issues after attacking and humiliating her in order to make her hear YOUR views. I hope she tells you to F*** OFF! You sound like a misogynistic bas$^rd with a God complex, bullying people to see only one point of view, YOURS.

I hope YOUR Board of Directors decides to replace YOU. I am totally pis**d off regarding YOUR attitude toward women and I hope YOU lose YOUR job over YOUR overinflated ego. The nerve of YOU.

YOU probably think that every egg that passes from a woman’s body each month she doesn’t become pregnant is murder. YOU are a disgrace to the male sex and as much as I hate pedophiles, I think they are one slug above YOU.

In The Arena June 5, 2010 at 8:36 pm

And this post right here (^) is definitive evidence that Karen Handel is done. Not even Republican Lady can vouch for her this time.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 8:47 pm

How do you surmise that from my post? You are wrong but I am curious as to how you surmised your comments from my post.

Cool Hand Luke June 5, 2010 at 9:12 pm

What a classy broad!

Lady Thinker June 6, 2010 at 1:16 pm

That term speaks volumes as to what you think of women.

Cool Hand Luke June 6, 2010 at 4:30 pm

No, just what I think of you.

Lady Thinker June 8, 2010 at 10:36 pm

Again, that term speaks volumes as to what you think of women who dare to disagree with you.

sonofliberty June 5, 2010 at 4:10 pm

……. you should have publicly apologized on the record Danny Boy……when you had the opportunity…..GRTL needs….a new messenger…….you…..are hurting the cause.

dj June 5, 2010 at 4:45 pm

People like Dan Becker frighten me…and he can’t apologize on the record because he is hiding behind his “bully pulpit”…he’s afraid to come from out behind it…because then we will all see him for who he really is…a vote getter…

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 4:47 pm

What’s with saying “no comment on the record, but off the record….”? What a coward.

gawatchdog404 June 5, 2010 at 4:55 pm

Yeah someone should clip Dan and make him Barren and Infertile

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 5:02 pm

harhar….

The pro-life cause, which I strongly allign myself with is not being well served with that kind of attitude. What irritates me more is “endorsing” a person who has SERIOUS moral issues involving a minor. Good grief!!!

Three Jack June 5, 2010 at 5:04 pm

beckerhead should have stuck with his no comment position.

Maurice Atkinson June 5, 2010 at 5:21 pm

Now that’s just too funny…

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 5:07 pm

Dan Becker isn’t running for Governor.

Karen Handel is running for Governor.

“Her willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human. “

B Balz June 5, 2010 at 5:12 pm

Would you mind disclosing who you represent/advocate/work for? Just as a courtesy, please and thank you.

Icarus June 5, 2010 at 5:14 pm

No, Dan Becker isn’t running for Governor.

He’s believes he’s appointing one. And can change the facts on a per-candidate basis to suit his own personal agenda.

He predetermined that Handel wasn’t “pro-life”, and gamed the interview to suit his pre-disposed position.

In the process, he’s embarassed himself, his organization, and many of us who are very frustrated that those like Mr. Becker are more concerned with their own fiefdoms and personal power than they are reducing the number of abortions that occur every day.

Henry Waxman June 5, 2010 at 6:06 pm

Which one candidate is he “appointing”?

Clone Of B. Plyler June 5, 2010 at 6:28 pm

More Trash, Icky.

Cool Hand Luke June 5, 2010 at 9:13 pm

Come July 20th, you and the rest of your Hillary Handel buddies will be crying in your beer!

Cool Hand Luke June 6, 2010 at 4:33 pm

Icarus,

It sounds like you are accusing Becker of doing exactly what the front page posters here at PP do all the time….. :)

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 2:22 pm

Finally, Icarus gets called out. What an embarrassment to Peach Pundit.

dj June 7, 2010 at 2:35 pm

I’ll second that…

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 7:50 pm

There is a difference between being willing to accept a political compromise that allows for exceptions but will outlaw most abortions that comes about in the course of real world law making, and advocating or preemptively conceding them. An ultimate vote for the former can be defended on pragmatic pro-life grounds. But stating from the get go that you support outlawing abortion except in the cases of rape and incest comes off as an endorsement of those exceptions.

B Balz June 5, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Mr. Becker,

I am going to choose my words carefully and civilly, as I describe my disappointment, both as a GOP voter and as an advocate for thousands of Georgians who cannot speak for themselves.

GRTL’s position to “…oppose the practice of donating any of the over 40,000 frozen embryos in Georgia to the bio-tech industry so that they can conduct actual human experimentation ending in the destruction of the child.” is a slap in the face to every person diagnosed with chronic illness.

That you admit “I DID totally botch the TV interview by my “no comments” statement.” is of little comfort to thousands of sick people, in Georgia alone, whose hopes for a cure hinge on ethically sound and medically supervised biotechnology.

There exists some middle ground to accommodate the legitimate rights of those living breathing human beings diagnosed with chronic and incurable disease AND the unborn.

Politicizing this entire matter, in a self-admittedly poor
manner, dismays me as a Conservative and angers me as an advocate because that is hurtful to finding a middle ground. This matter deserves the highest level of respect and discussion, free from unseemly and clearly political influence.

You have failed your constituents, Sir.

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 2:51 pm

GRTL’s position to “…oppose the practice of donating any of the over 40,000 frozen embryos in Georgia to the bio-tech industry so that they can conduct actual human experimentation ending in the destruction of the child.” is a slap in the face to every person diagnosed with chronic illness.

Many proponents of human embryonic stem cell research argue that it is actually wrong to protect the lives of a few unborn human beings if doing so will delay treatment for a much larger number of people who suffer from fatal or debilitating diseases. However, we are not free to pursue gain (financial, health-related, or otherwise) through immoral or unethical means such as the taking of innocent life. The history of medical experimentation is filled with horrific examples of evil done in the name of science. We must not sacrifice one class of human beings (the embryonic) to benefit another (those suffering from serious illness).

Nazi War Crimes included “medical research” on living human beings and is now considered horrific. Human embryos are also human and deserve the dignity to live and grow peacefully, and to pursue happiness after birth. Embryonic stem cells have not been successfully used in even one medical procedure.

On the other hand, Adult and Placental/Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Research has resulted in thousands of successful medical procedures. This has not been accurately reported in the media. Adult stem cells come from human body tissue such as blood, bone marrow, skin, adipose, muscle tissue, and cardiac (heart) muscle tissue. They have all been changed into other body tissue types, such as heart tissue, nerve cells, brain and spinal cord tissue. Exponential research appears to be taking place with these ethical stem cell procedures.

Individuals suffering from chronic diseases have been misled into believing that a cure is around the corner in an effort to secure research funding. The voice of the suffering has been exploited to compel the public into supporting investigations that are speculative and unproven and that represent a significant departure from ethical standards that respect the sanctity of human life. Yet, no approved treatments have been obtained using embryonic stem cells and there are presently no therapeutic applications on the horizon.

The fatal flaw of current experimentation on these babies is that scientists must “destroy” (a synonym for “kill”) a human being to extract the stem cells they need. Emotionally based appeals are made to justify the practice by demeaning the unborn and undeveloped person and claiming an embryo is not as important as someone who has developed and is in need of the embryo’s parts. However, the mystical point in time that a human embryo develops into a human who cannot be sacrificed for science is unknown.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/jun/10/20070610-101423-4651r/

David Staples June 9, 2010 at 2:33 pm

So then since the issue of embryos has come up, let me ask you this. Do you then believe that those embryos have a right to be implanted into someone so that they can grow into fully developed humans? If so, does that right usurp a woman’s right to her own body? Are we then not going to have to pass some anti-implanting embryo legislation to go with the anti-microchip implanting legislation?

And if those embryos don’t have the right to be implanted into someone to grow to their full potential, do we then need to attempt to continue to grow them outside of a human’s womb to ensure that their rights are fully protected?

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 5:35 pm

Should Baptist and Methodist women protest Mr. Becker’s imposed limitations on womanhood?

I think he has neutered his org.

Doug Grammer June 5, 2010 at 6:04 pm

I just got off the phone with Dan Becker. I told him I had lots of issues with his remarks about Sec, Handel and I was about to publicly call for him to hold a press conference and apologize.

He explained to me that his comments were never about Sec. Handel personal and it fact were refer to a stated position on the GRTL website.

http://www.grtl.org/positionstatements.asp

INVITRO FERTILIZATION
GRTL opposes invitro fertilization as a technology when it ignores rather than enhances respect for human life. Whereas we sympathize with infertile couples, we cannot ignore the fact that research and clinical trials for this procedure have involved the destruction of newly conceived human embryos in the laboratory.

This is the quote that had me more than a little ticked off, lifted directly from the AJC article.

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/06/03/georgia-right-to-life-picks-a-fight-with-karen-handel/

This was the reply from Becker of GRTL on Wednesday afternoon, in a telephone interview:

“Someone’s desperate right to parenthood – because they’re infertile, they’re barren, whatever term you want to use – is an emotionally fraught subject that has our highest sympathy. But it should never be attempted to be addressed where a life is taken in the process.”

Looking at the two comments, side by side, I can see where he may have been drawing from one to the other.

My first two reads of his post still missed his apology to Sec. Handel. I think it was because I was not in a good mood about the whole situation. For anyone else who may have missed it, here it is again, at the beginning of his third paragraph: “My comment was NEVER directed AT Mrs. Handel and my very real public apology for everyone who took it that way from Galloway’s article.”

I also discussed GRTL endorsements of other candidates. He said GRTL is concerned with one issue, and the voters can sort out which candidate may be best for them, regardless of their stance on any other issue or any other baggage.

I expect we will see more from GRTL on this topic and candidate.

Doug Grammer June 5, 2010 at 6:12 pm

“Personal” should have been “personally.”

Icarus June 5, 2010 at 7:27 pm

Was he impersonally calling her barren and infertile?

His answer doesn’t hold water Doug. Nice try on his part, but his original statement doesn’t match the facts of his attempt to revise and extend.

You’re a leader both in the pro-life community and the Republican party Doug. Your first instinct was correct. His obfuscation continues to make the problem worse.

In The Arena June 5, 2010 at 8:38 pm

Give it up Icarus, Karen’s done.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 10:14 am

Just before the Wild Hog dinner, some may recall the exchange between Mr. Grammar and I, pertaining GRTL positions on IVF and biotechnology. The discussion was spirited, civil, and sought a middle ground.

The wisdom of PP’s owners by enabling a ‘search’ function allows all of us to revisit that exchange:

http://www.peachpundit.com/2010/01/06/doesnt-that-just-ultimately-accomplish-the-original-goal/

I had a lot of calls from that exchange, expectedly running positive among the medical community and those diagnosed with chronic illness. Unexpectedly, many called to say that they admittedly do not like the idea of ‘ending embryonic life at the cellular level’ but they leaned toward helping living, breathing people.

During the 80′s and 90′s the GOP adopted social conservatives, in the South, when the Dems abandoned them by straying extreme Left. Many here fought those battles only to be shocked and dismayed by last years embarrassments.

Now the GOP prevails in the South, yet many longtime conservatives are less enthused by a vocal, organized, funded, group within the GOP that cares more about the life process in cells, than they do about the lives of other people.

I, resent this issue in light of the dramatic issues we face in the economy, now the Gulf, education, transportation.

Let people live their lives. Give us true fiscal responsibility. I want honorable individuals that keep their ears open and their fly’s shut.

The GOP candidate that comes closest to that criteria will have my vote, and I suspect that of the majority.

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:00 pm

“group within the GOP that cares more about the life process in cells, than they do about the lives of other people… Let people live their lives.”

Stop contradicting yourself. Letting people live their lives includes every human being, no matter what stage of the “life process” they’re in – embryonic, fetal, newborn, adolescent, adult, senior – we all go through them, and we have the right to life at every stage of the “life process”. Babies in the womb may not be breathing (in the same sense as we post-birth humans do), but they sure as heck are living. It’s a shameful example of today’s society when anyone says they support killing another human being in order to conduct experiments that might possibly maybe perhaps somehow someday extend their own life a little.

Doug Grammer June 6, 2010 at 12:53 pm

Icarus,

It is my understanding that Mr. Becker was not trying to describe Sec. Handel specifically as “barren and infertile.” He meant it as a factual statement about women who use more embryos for a successful invitro fertilization pregnancy would require.

It is unfortunate that Sec. Handel had had personal problems with this issue. I still think he should give her an apology and for the record, explain what he meant. I don’t think “no comment” will last very long.

ready2rumble June 5, 2010 at 10:42 pm

The always neutral Doug Grammer weighs in again.

Doug Grammer June 6, 2010 at 1:01 pm

R2R,

Do you really want leaders in the GOP telling you who to vote for? Wouldn’t that look like we meet in a backroom and decided whose turn it is to be Governor based upon the amount of kickbacks and special deals we get? We have rules against endorsements. We want our party to line up behind the nominee regardless of who he or she may be. Technically, I could probably get away with being more vocal for some or against others, but I don’t think it’s the right thing to do. The right thing to have happen is let the candidates run their campaign their way and trust the will of the voters.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 1:08 pm

Good point and great objective. Please keep us informed on the status of changing the GOP Oath, as you promised.

Doug Grammer June 6, 2010 at 1:35 pm

I have been told that the rules committee will meet before the next state committee meeting. If does, then I can.

Doug Grammer June 6, 2010 at 1:35 pm

If it does, then I can.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 3:16 pm

Thank You!

ready2rumble June 6, 2010 at 2:46 pm

Doug,
Your feigned neutrality in the issue. Quite honestly, Your opinion on who to vote for would cause to to look very hard at who ever you support.

Doug Grammer June 6, 2010 at 4:24 pm

Well to be honest, I don’t want people ask me whom I think they should vote for. I’d rather them decide for themselves. Voters should take it upon themselves whom to vote for and candidates should be telling voters why they should vote for them. Once the voters of the primary have picked our nominee, I’ll be telling you what redeeming qualities I find in him or her. Then we can compare our nominee against other party nominees, and let the voters in the general election decide.

As far as this issue goes, I was bothered enough to call Mr. Becker and get his side of things. I’m just conveying what he told me. You can decide for yourself how to deal with it.

dj June 6, 2010 at 10:51 pm

Doug Grammer,

And I am still awaiting your response as to what impact the HLA (that you support), should it be incorporated, could “conceivably” have towards a woman’s current legal rights to currently legal contraceptive measures such as birth control pills and IUDs…

dj June 6, 2010 at 11:22 pm

Doug Grammer,

Are you too “political” to answer the question…i.e., then the pharmaceutical companies would come down like white on rice on the HLA, …or…are you just taking your “requisite” time within which to respond???
Just curious…

Doug Grammer June 7, 2010 at 9:23 am

DJ,

You have massive reading comprehension disabilities. Asking a question and 30 minutes later asking the same question will not get you any faster response. My answer for people like you will to take your question and put it at either of these web site addresses http://www.google.com or http://www.ask.com . I don’t do your research for you. What part of “I find you too annoying to debate with” don’t you understand? Furthermore, I find it very strange that you would mention my family. (Done in another post.) Are you some type of deranged cyber stalker? Please either grow up or leave me alone.

dj June 7, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Doug Grammer,

I comprehend that you refuse to answer the question…

You said I reminded you of your 3 year old niece…remember; hence my reference…

And, about cyber stalking, you are so not my type, but if you choose to flatter yourself by thinking that you are…well, that’s your choice…

dj June 7, 2010 at 2:33 pm

Doug Grammer,

The mean bully type never really did it for me…

Icarus June 7, 2010 at 2:40 pm

dj,

You’re multiple responses to yourself while you attempt to harass Doug and others is actually quite annoying and not conducive to the discussion we try to facilitate here.

Furthermore, you constantly lose comments you make and then show up in other threads claiming they’ve been deleted.

I’d suggest you take a few days of “time out” and observe how others here interract with each other. If your present pattern of behavior continues, expect the time out to be longer and involuntary.

And regardless, stay away from Doug Grammer going forward.

Final warning.

dj June 6, 2010 at 10:42 pm

Doug Grammer,

But you insist that they sign the oath…remember…

John Konop June 5, 2010 at 6:20 pm

Dan Becker you are a major league CREEP! Only a low life would attack a woman for having issues with having children. YOU ARE SICK SEEK HELP ASAP!

John Konop June 5, 2010 at 6:26 pm

Before the crazy SICKO crowd defend him with BS spin. It was not secrete about Karen and her medical issues with having children. What type of sick person would not find his words WRONG on every level!

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:03 pm

I didn’t know she had medical issues with having children. Did Mr. Becker?

bowersville June 5, 2010 at 6:22 pm

Doug I appreciate your comments, but Becker is still mixing apples and oranges in his statement.

Why can’t he just apologize directly and publically to Handel? No convaluted statements, just an apology. A televised press conference is in order.

Plus from Becker’s statement above, “….we sympathize with women generally…” Now what does that mean?

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 6:49 pm

It means that in the instances other than “generally”, “We” do not sympathize with women. “We” being the masculine “We”, decision makers, and women being the “other” or object, subjugated ones. His objectification of women is clear. His dialogue posing a “we” vs “they” is very telling.

I would suggest that Mr. Becker has a dislike of women that may be rooted in a pathology.

Please hand him the mike and let him ramble.

He is creating a polemic that will neuter his org. GA politics would be a lot better off without them as dishonest brokers.

MSBassSinger June 5, 2010 at 6:51 pm

Mr. Becker, let me help you. And no, I am not a Handel supporter. I still haven’t chosen a candidate. I would suggest something like the following, after you call Karen Handel privately and apologize and send flowers, and accept whatever private chastisement she deservedly gives to you:

“I am making an unconditional public apology for what I said and how I said it. I was wrong. Period. What I said, as I said it, was offensive without merit, and disgraced the name of Christ because I call myself a Christian. I make no justification for my previous words. I acknowledge the deep hurt they caused, and I regret that more than most people realize.”

“While I still believe that once a baby is conceived, its life is precious and worth protecting, I have come to realize that my focus has become too narrow, and there are many unborn babies’ lives that could have been saved had I been more willing to follow Christ instead of man’s political “wisdom”.”

“There is overwhelming support for some legal restrictions on abortions – restrictions both Karen Handel and I agree on – and I have failed to work with the majority who want those common sense restrictions.”

“Further, I have come to realize that the primary way to reduce abortions is not by force of law, but by the force of sacrificial love. I, and the organization I represent, have not focused our primary attention on helping women with troubled or unwanted pregnancies. It takes individual Christians reaching out sacrificially, one on one, to help these women in a way that their choice is to keep their baby and either raise the child, or make the deepest sacrifice of all – allowing their baby to be adopted.”

“Karen Handel and I do not have to agree on every aspect of abortion in order to work together to do what we can to preserve life. I pledge to lead my organization and Georgia Christians into both helping in love the very women and unborn babies we say we care for, and in joining those, Christian or not, who may not totally agree with us to make the changes we can. If I fail in my pledge, I will resign my office.”

“I plead the mercy and forgiveness of not only Karen Handel, but of each person who was offended by what I said.”

John Konop June 5, 2010 at 6:54 pm

MSB,

WOW that was great!!!!!

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 6:58 pm

Beautifully said. May I make a suggestion:
“and disgraced the name of Christ ”

Christ’s name cannot be disgraced.

And, Grace is for the disgraced Christian and non Christian.

MSBassSinger June 6, 2010 at 6:44 am

In Scriptural Christianity, we who are Christians are expected to show grace and mercy to others, especially other Christians, as God has shown His grace and mercy to us through Christ. The grace and mercy we can show, while it comes from what He does in us and is of His kind of grace and mercy, is, of course, not the same as the grace and mercy God has shown us. His is without measure, and is from Him. What we can show is limited by our mortality, and for which we are conduits.

Implied in what I wrote is that Christ’s name can be disparaged in the eyes of unbelievers, and perhaps that would have been a better choice of words.

I hope this clears up what I wrote.

EthicsEther June 6, 2010 at 10:29 am

May I Ask:
“we who are Christians are expected to show grace and mercy to others, especially other Christians”

More human grace and human mercy to Christians?

MSBassSinger June 6, 2010 at 4:40 pm

The context of your question tells me you are somewhat unfamiliar with Scriptural Christianity.

Humanist grace and mercy is not what Christians offer. Such almost always falls short. The grace and mercy that Christians can show comes from the work of the Holy Spirit in each believer.

Do you oppose showing grace and mercy to others, whether humanist or Christian in origin?

EthicsEther June 6, 2010 at 5:21 pm

I can see where you might interpret my question that way, my question was ambiguous.

I think grace and mercy should be granted by humans to Christian and non Christian alike, not preferentially, or in greater abundance, to Christians. In fact, we may need to work harder at it with non-Christians, but they need to see it in practice.

I am an inperfect but practicing Christian [who studied theology and philosophy of religion].

MSBassSinger June 6, 2010 at 6:49 pm

I think we agree. No one has, or could, offend me more than I have offended Christ by the sins of my past. If He can show love, mercy, and grace to me while I was yet in rebellion to Him, and His enemy, how can I do less to those who offend me? Certainly their offense against me is less than my manifold offenses against God.

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:06 pm

Galatians 6:10: “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.”

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 7:11 pm

On a side note, can we get a list of the rest of Karen Handel’s positions that are based on “the current political landscape”?

“Her willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human. “

Red Phillips June 5, 2010 at 7:35 pm

Handel’s position of making nice to the homosexual community when running for the Fulton County Commission and then running from that position when trying to win a statewide GOP primary is a prime example of her basing her positions on “the current political landscape.” It is also frequently referred to as pandering.

Lady Thinker June 5, 2010 at 10:14 pm

What are your candidate’s stance on the issues facing Georgia?

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 7:26 pm

Why doesn’t GRTL get involved in advanced directives, like Ed Lindsey proposed? That was a Lu Lu, sponsored by Lindsey’s special interests? It allowed removal of meds, fluids, etc., without family consent in absence of patient’s advanced directive.

A second issue they could work: there is a loop hole in GA law that makes advanced directives meaningless.

Oh, yes, they are single issue special interest.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 8:59 pm

This entire thread is about a bunch of social moderates finally getting their opportunity to jump on and attack the Pr0-Life community. They’ve been waiting for this chance for years. So go ahead and have at it. David Brooks is proud of ya.

EthicsEther June 6, 2010 at 10:22 am

Single issue advocacy is often still advocacy for a good cause, however, GRTL has a PR issue of gargantuan proportion.

As I said earlier, when I spoke with the female leader over there at GRTL, regarding Sen. Nancy Schaefer’s horrific death, the GRTL leader had a serious lack of affect [emotion]. Her coldness was chilling. It was something far beyond an inability to process the event. She was outrageously rude about Nancy’s death.

Additionally, in my view, the male spokesperson denigrates womanhood while simultaneously indicating a lack of compassion for a lady who has had fertility problems. [No, I am not one of her supporters, however she seems to have it on ethics, comparitively.]

Their legislative advocacy indicates they are less concerned about what they say is their mission than they should be.

Who is really on whose payroll over there?

Who is really on the right side?

They are dishonest brokers. They need to be outted and neutered. And, the general public needs to understand that GRTL is promoting something, but it is not what they say they are promoting.

Info needs to go out on them, and as perceptions change, so, too, will their power. The faith community has a great network and the word can be easily disseminated.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 10:37 am

Excellent post. Throw the money changers out of the Temple.

John Konop June 5, 2010 at 8:57 pm

Any candidate that does not reject an endorsement from Dan Becker and the GRTL is promoting spewing HATE toward woman!

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 9:00 pm

Nice try JK.

John Konop June 5, 2010 at 9:18 pm

Mayo,

Help me understand why any ethical person would accept Dan Becker and the GRTL endorsement after his vicious insulting statement toward woman?

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 9:33 pm

Explain to my why any moral person would accept the following:

“Her willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human. “

Will Harrison June 6, 2010 at 11:27 am

It is a very stupid quote to put on your candidate’s website.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 11:40 am
EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 9:34 pm

Local papers are not carrying the story, and it may never be as well known to the public as it is among politicos. His hate speech must be well-known by the public before a politician can denounce the organization. It would take quite a while to properly disseminate the info on his statements/positions and properly follow the info with radio discussions, [in many locales] to assure a successful strategy to undo him.

Because popular opinion of the well-known organization would indicate that most people may vote with the organization’s endorsement…especially those who are not up to date on his hate speech, a politician would be wise to steer clear of controversy.

Renunciation of the GRTL could be a career ender for a politician in GA.

The first place to start to undo his undue influence might be to educate the churches/faith community about his misogynist views and extremely biased statements. After the public changes their opinion of the organization, then the politicians can announce their denouncement.

What are you waiting for, start disseminating to local papers, prepare radio discussions, contact faith based orgs.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 9:44 pm

My 200 copies of the following are already printed for tomorrow morning’s service.

“Her [Karenn Handel] willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human.”

TheSituation June 5, 2010 at 10:04 pm

You are a class act, aren’t you Mayo! Why do you think any of care what you do? WE DON’T. I’m sure the people at your church would rather you not interrupt them while they are practicing their snake handling skills.
ATTN PP readers: MAYO IS AN IDIOT.

ByteMe June 5, 2010 at 10:07 pm

It’s classier not to point out these things.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 10:38 pm

Yes! You’re stumped like everyone else! Karen must be sticking by the quote because it’s still up at the website.

John Konop June 6, 2010 at 6:46 am

Mayo,

You, Dan Becker and the GRTL attacking Karen Handel and other woman who have medical issues having kids to win an election demonstrates a new level of NO CLASS!

Dan Becker and the GRTL Platform:

Help create miracle for woman with IVI is murder

Help save a person and or cure a disease with stem-cell research is murder

Force 13 year old girls who are rape victims to have children or charge them with murder

Barnes will have a field day with this issue in the general.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 7:03 am

Yup.

Mayonnaise June 6, 2010 at 8:04 am

Boy do you look silly.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 9:44 am

Use the hour you should be listening to the preacher give his sermon to formulate a more cogent and thought provoking responses.

BTW, who do you represent/work for/advocate on behalf of? Oh, that’s right, you did not disclose.

Your obstreperous presence here correlates to this election cycle, yet your comments reflect the institutional dislikes of a long time observer.

Lady Thinker June 6, 2010 at 1:18 pm

Only to the uninformed.

ByteMe June 6, 2010 at 1:37 pm

BB: He’s an EJ sock puppet. Not a very good one, though. Can’t seem to make the case for his guy, so he has to trash the candidates he thinks are standing between his guy and victory. He would be interesting if he could back any of his made-up stories with facts, but he hasn’t been able to, so any credibility he might have is shot.

jenny June 5, 2010 at 10:12 pm

GRTL’s candidate questionaires have given Georgia a GRTL approved prolife majority in the House, Senate and Governor’s office which is impotent for ending abortion or even curbing it. They weasel and manipulate legislation through the House and Senate offering half-baked faux pro-life legislation that does little to save live but is very useful for fundraising.

I was shocked and appalled when I first got into pro-life activism and began discovering the intentional misleading Dan Becker engages in regarding the abortion industry in Georgia. And furthermore, as of the last time I asked him (spring ’09) he’d never been in front of the abortion mills of Atlanta, and I said,” Does GRTL exist to end abortion?” his response: “No. They exist to advance and promote pro-life legislation.”

Their questionaire is a joke but what isn’t funny is the fact that they have foisted onto unsuspecting pro-life Georgians legislative leadership that is absolutely not pro-life.

~Jenny

dj June 5, 2010 at 10:16 pm

Jenny,,

To clarify, would this be the “abortion mills” that are so dangerous to women because they are forced to use stairs in lieu of elevators??? Just curious??? Do you think if women could have access to a “private medical facility” as you do, that maybe elevators would be installed?

EthicsEther June 5, 2010 at 11:47 pm

Does make you wonder if there are Swiss Accounts funded by Planned Parenthood or research orgs?

jenny June 5, 2010 at 10:31 pm

In vitro fertilization requires that a woman endure many daily rounds of hormone therapy and other invasive treatment in order to secure that ultimate viable implanted embryo. To “create” a human in a petree dish is to relegate the right to life and liberty for that person to a lab technician, an incredible amount of power that should not be allowed. Furthermore, viable embryos held in cryogenic suspension deteriorate over time. Under “pro-life” legislation, those deteriorated embryos can then be used for research.

To allow, endorse, and pay for the process of in vitro legitimizes a practice outside the bounds of secured individual sovereignty and individual life, liberty and property.

I would highly recommend that you guys read Wesley Smith’s book Culture of Death. He is NOT a pro-life advocate. But his book demonstrates the frightening place of de-humanization we have reached in the current medical community.

First, do no harm.

dj June 5, 2010 at 10:43 pm

Jenny,

As always, thank you for your thoughtful reply…yet, I am still awaiting your response on your thoughts as to how the HLA, if incorporated, could conceivably (no pun intended) impact a woman’s perrogative to utilize current legal options of birth control pills and IUDs, (not to mention the option of IVF in the event of infertility issues)?
Whenever you have the courage to respond??? Doug Grammer, you, too…

dj June 5, 2010 at 11:25 pm

Jenny???

Doug???

dj June 6, 2010 at 12:06 am

Jenny and Doug Grammer,

Please…just answer the question already and let’s put this issue to rest…but the two of you refuse to do so…and it makes me wonder why…Rep. Scott refused to as well…so you are not alone…but it does prove my point…Pro Lilfe is just a vote getter with no substance whatsoever…because those that support it refuse to answer the tough questions…wonder why???

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:13 pm

dj, do you *really* think that everyone else hovers over this blog 24/7 like you do? Asking a question and then wondering why it hasn’t been answered 42 minutes later, and then again 41 minutes later, is just plain whacko. Come back in a few days.

Mayonnaise June 5, 2010 at 11:20 pm

Anyone else hearing rumblings about an AJC hit piece on Karen tomorrow?

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 6:43 am

@jenny: You stated “Abortion can be regulated out of existence at the local county level. ”

Is this any different than the OCCUPANT at 1600 PA Ave WDC using EPA to regulate hugely expensive ‘green’ building initiatives that have questionable benefits?

Folks that use terms such as ‘personhood’, ‘rights of the unborn’, and ‘killing children’ and are not EQUALLY concerned with the rights of living, breathing people have a very duplicitous and strange sense of propriety.

EthicsEther June 6, 2010 at 7:26 am

Actually, single issue advocacy is an idiosyncrasy of the advocate, not a picture of the advocate’s entire ideology. So, an individual may choose their issue/issues for advocacy, and that choice does not mean that they do not have positions on other issues. Advocacy does not mandate all issues within the scope of one’s worldview. Some prioritize. Some pick their battles.

B Balz June 6, 2010 at 9:47 am

Not sure what this really means, but I appreciate the time you put into it.

jenny honestly and openly advocates for a cause and provides interesting commentary around here. . I respect that. I don’t agree with all of her views, but I deeply respect her opinions.

ready2rumble June 6, 2010 at 11:02 am

Are there any differences between the NRTL and GRTL concerning the two exceptions?

Julianne Thompson June 6, 2010 at 12:18 pm

Yes, NRTL will endorse candidates who’s exceptions exceptions rape, incest, and life of the mother. GRTL has only life of the mother.

Julianne Thompson June 6, 2010 at 12:19 pm

Sorry. I meant to say “who’s exceptions include”

ready2rumble June 6, 2010 at 12:22 pm

So Handel agrees with NRTL and is Prolife.

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:15 pm

Only if you think that NRTL is Prolife.

Jane June 6, 2010 at 2:07 pm

Is some one who supports Gun Control a RINO?
Is some one supporters higher taxes and opposes tax cuts a RINO? Purdue
Is some one supporters unions a RINO? Huckabee
Is some one who runs a flea bag hotel business supported by tax dollars a RINO? Graves
Is some one as County Chairman tolerated abortions at the county hospital a RINO? Handel
Is some one who talks about the virtues of Illegal immigration at the 2007 state GOP convention a RINO? Chambliss
Just asking?

Grand Ole Partier June 7, 2010 at 3:15 pm

Yes.

Mayonnaise June 6, 2010 at 2:09 pm

At this point it makes no difference what Karen Handel’s views on abortion are. She’s been revealed as a total phony on the issue and can not be trusted to defend the values of conservative Georgians.

” I have spoken with Karen at length about these issues, … Her willingness to permit abortions in certain rare circumstances is grounded in the reality of the current political landscape, and should in no way be interpreted as a belief on her part that children conceived by rape or incest are somehow less than fully human. ” Stephen Dillard CD 08 Chairman for Governor Mike Huckabee (2008)

Bring it on? Bring what on? The next set of issue polling so she can determine what her position should be?

macho June 6, 2010 at 6:55 pm

The leadership of GRTL interest in passing actual laws that would reduce the number of abortions is similar to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton’s interest in reducing racism. When you understand this, their moving goal post strategy, under Casey and Roe, makes perfect sense.

ByteMe June 6, 2010 at 8:06 pm

Exactly so.

David Staples June 9, 2010 at 3:00 pm

+1

Jane June 6, 2010 at 9:14 pm

GRTL has helped pass a number of laws that have helped reduce the need and the occasions for abortion Georgia. We have a a parental notification law, informed consent law otherwise knows as the Woman’s Right to Know law. The General Assembly has passed laws against using abortion for gender or race selection. It would be hard to pick which PAC is the most successful the GRTL or the NRA.

ByteMe June 7, 2010 at 6:00 am

How exactly did the parental notification law reduce the “need”? How exactly did the informed consent law reduce the “need”? Do you have any numbers to back up your claim or are you just spouting talking points?

Mayonnaise June 7, 2010 at 8:36 am

Sad.

TPNoGa June 7, 2010 at 10:46 am

I am a staunch pro-life voter; however, Ionly vote strictly pro-life only if the office has a direct effect on the issue. For example: President – it is a deal breaker. Senate – major factor (Supreme Court Confirmation). Unless or until Roe is overturned, Governor – small factor.

B Balz June 7, 2010 at 10:54 am

Interesting and extremely logical point in a few words. Good Post.

ByteMe June 7, 2010 at 11:09 am

Hmmm…. Playing the “logic” card. Interesting gambit. Your move, Dan Becker!

Mayonnaise June 7, 2010 at 1:44 pm

So there are no state laws concerning abortion? State regulations concerning are the same in New York as in Georgia?

TPNoGa June 7, 2010 at 2:10 pm

I understand your position; however, the legality of abortion is not the biggest issue facing the state. IMO, it is a federal issue until Roe is overturned. Any regulations are fairly minor and I am sure Karen Handel would support most, if not all, regulations passed by a GOP controlled legislature. But for me, the issues I am concerned about for the 2010 Governor’s election are jobs, taxes, education and ethics. Also, I am inclined to support more of an outsider than an insider. I am not sure I want someone who is from the Senate or Assembly. I was a supporter of Austin Scott because he seems like a true reformer. I am also tired of old conservative Democrats that run as Republicans (like Sonny). On 75% of the issues, I am fine with them, but it’s the last 25% that makes my blood boil. I am still undecided, but I am leaning toward either Handel or Johnson (I know he’s an insider). But, there I am.

Comments on this entry are closed.