From Delaware Politics:
If Michael Steele gets forced out of his role as GOP Chairman by the pro-life movement as a result of his remarks, which, I’ll remind people, were pro-life remarks, then I’m leaving the party. And I’m pro life.
I am not sure how they were pro-life remarks. Steele himself may be pro-life, but his remarks definitely offered quarter to those who think abortion is a choice. An individual choice that only women can make. The Pro-Life movement, and the Republican Party, has long sought to give no quarter to those on the pro-choice side. Indeed, if you were pro-choice, you were a murderer. You were killing babies. That has been the mantra of the Pro-Life movement, and Republicans seeking the votes of the Pro-Life movement, since at least 1980. It did not matter that Roe v. Wade was the law of the land and that women did in fact have the ability to make the choice. According to the Pro-Life movement, they shouldn’t be allowed to make that choice, even in cases of rape and incest, and even in cases where the woman’s life was in danger. For if a woman chooses abortion, she and all involved in the decision, including the doctors and nurses, were immoral.
There is no middle ground there. That is the belief of the Pro-Life Movement. While Dave says he is Pro-Life as well, he now believes that the Pro-Life Movement has too much power over the Republican Party and should be focused on reducing abortion rather than fervently condemning people who chose it and acting like a movement. I have news for Dave. The Pro-Life movement has NEVER been focused on reducing abortions. For focusing on reducing abortions assumes the notion that abortion can be chosen as an option, and you are trying to persuade another option. Only the Pro-Choice side advocates reduction of abortion. The only presidential administration that had reduction as a policy was the Clinton administration, which was the safe, legal, and rare policy.
More news for Dave: I am anti-abortion. If the decision ever fell to me (however unlikely that would be since I am a man), I would never choose it. I believe adoption is a much better way to go, since there are many couples out there that are childless and can give a baby a good home. My religious beliefs also inform my stance, since I am Catholic, and do believe that life begins at conception. But, I also understand that abortion cannot be outlawed, for there are many situations where it may be the only choice. And I also feel, since my own position is based on religious belief, that I would be enforcing that belief on others that may not share it, the belief that life begins at conception. So, I consider myself pro-choice, because it should be a choice. People should be free to choose the option of abortion, and the moral consequences of that decision will fall on the man and woman choosing the abortion and their God.
Abortion is a gray issue to me. The Pro-Life Movement sees it as a black and white issue. If it truly is a gray issue for Dave, then yes, he should consider leaving his Party, for his Party has really left him. The Pro-Life Movement is pretty much indistinguishable from the GOP.
And if he is serious about leaving the party if Steele goes, then I promise you, Burris will be leaving the GOP for Steele is a dead man walking. The job of the national committee chair is not to be advocating policy. It’s mostly an operational position; nuts and bolts of raising money, helping state parties and getting Republicans elected. That is what Howard Dean really did. He left policy pronouncements to Pelosi and Reid. Sure, there is a public relations side to it where the chair will be asked about policy positions, but when that occurs, the chair better be damn sure he represents the views of the party he chairs. Or else there will be an uproar, as we have here. Steele, when he speaks, should be reinforcing the message of the elected leaders of his party. He should be taking his cue from Boehner and McConnell, Cantor and Kyl. He should not be prattling on about reproductive rights and the fact that homosexuality is not a choice (the other tidbit in the interview dooms him as well).
Before this week, Steele was already the target of a possible no-confidence vote. Steele already lost his battle with Rush Limbaugh for control of the Republican party. Now he’s gone on to champion two positions that’s not only against the party platform, but opposite to the very essence of conservative evangelical politics. That all but ensures that along with losing in his battle for control of the Republican party, he’ll also lose his position with the Republican National Committee.
And thus, Dave will have to leave the GOP.
Here is the thing, I will bet real money that Dave never does it.