Is this hypocritical of the Republican Party?

The Republican party wants less government interference, however they will push for government control on social issues, like abortion and gay marriage? Doesn't this seem inconsistent?

3 Answers

  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    First, I want to address abortion. Do you support the death penalty? I would guess no, seeing as you seem to take a more liberal view of our government. Let me ask you this then. Why is it, that you would oppose (I'm assuming) the execution of a criminal who most likely tortured and murdered another human being, yet you have no moral qualm about taking the unborn life of an innocent little baby? In Psalm 139:13, David is speaking to God, and he says, "For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother's womb." Anyone who reads this verse of scripture, I hope would think twice about considering abortion an acceptable procedure, given the fact that God Himself placed us all in the womb at the time of conception. I also want to quote our late President Ronald Reagan as saying, "I find it interesting that all of the people who support abortion have already been born." Very interesting indeed, all of the supporters of abortion rights have already gotten their chance at life, yet they want to strip that chance from another human being before they are even given the chance to enter this world.

    Okay, now onto homosexual unions. There are numerous scriptures in both the Old Testament and New Testament of the Holy Bible that at least answer for the opposition to this lifestyle, when concerning Evangelical Christian Believers, such as myself. Leviticus 18:22 and I Corinthians 6:9-10 to name a couple. But, because the Republican party does not necessarily represent all of the Christian tenets, I will stick with a more governmental view of this issue. Your question is asking, why would we as Republicans seek for more governmental control over homosexual unions, when we appear to want less government control. So, my question to you is this. Who is really asking for government intervention? Republicans or Democrats? Marriage has a very distinct and universal definition. One Man, One Woman, For Life. Period. This has been the case since marriage was first formed by God in the Garden of Eden between the fist couple, Adam and Eve. So, I ask again, who is really seeking for government intervention among the political parties? Democrats are the ones who want to change the definition of marriage to suit the homosexual lifestyle. Republicans are the ones pushing for our laws to remain the way they have been in place, since this country was first formed. God bless you and may His peace surround you.

    Source(s): Knowledge of Republican Party Platform, God's Word.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Economic conservatives want to reduce the size and scope of government.

    Republicans are for more liberty but they have a vision for a moral society. They have certain principles that are not logically derived from smaller government, but, nonetheless, they believe in them.

    On abortion, they believe the unborn life is equal to the mother's life. So the life can not be ended.

    On gay marriage, they by definition see marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman.

  • 4 years ago

    confident, enable's start up with the abortion difficulty. This marketing campaign is professional-life? i assume the fetuses in Iran do no longer in all probability count quantity or the girls individuals over there don't get pregnant or McCain does no longer be making a track "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" to the sea coast Boys. humorous how Palin's marketing campaign has been focusing on the abortion difficulty at present. that beautiful, sort woman who has virtually incited rebel at her campaigns now cares appropriate to the fetuses of the international. on the subject of welfare...confident he can supply it to important corporation. inspite of each and every thing, he married into huge corporation and pass the flavor of the "intense life" (sorry Cindy if I gave a plug to a competitor). He did no longer supply up it whilst it first started because of the fact it did no longer "first start up". HE started it. It merely did no longer paintings in his want. As Ross Perot stated of him "John cares approximately no person yet John". yet particularly, right here is the final analysis: do you opt for for a President who needs to win or needs the yankee public to win? He needs to be President. i choose for an honest stay because of the fact my governing our bodies are looking out for that.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.