Setting The Record StraightJun. 08, 2009
One of the responsibilities we at The Family Foundation take very seriously is challenging the misinformation, distortions, or outright lies propagated by those opposed to traditional values, particularly as spread through the Mainstream Media, which shapes so much of popular culture and thought. It's one of the reasons we started this blog and other social networking sites — to provide the truth. (Our YouTube channel, for example, provides uncut video of lawmakers in committee, where you can judge for yourself their attitude toward common sense, pro-traditional values, limited government legislation.) Two examples of misrepresentation in the media have occurred over the last two weeks. One was the murder of Kansas abortionist George Tiller. Our own president, Victoria Cobb, was interviewed about it last week on the popular Richmond's Morning News with Jimmy Barrett (hear it here) on WRVA-AM. In the interview, she dispelled the notion repeated by abortion extremists and some pundits that the murderer of George Tiller is representative of the pro-life movement in America.
She told listeners that, just as the pro-life movement was gaining headway(witness the recent Gallop poll that found a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life), pro-life advocates must expend precious time and energy to counter the notion that the murder somehow represents the overwhelming majority of thoughtful, peaceful pro-life Americans.
We know that some abortion extremists and mainstream media organs are using the murder to paint all Americans who seek to protect human life as enablers, morally equivalent to the acused murderer. That kind of rhetoric serves no positive purpose. Instead, it gives opportunities to extremists to label as dangerous law-abiding citizens who legally seek to protect unborn human life. It advances no cause and brings us no closer to resolution in this debate.
The other example was an opinion piece by Lindsay Oliver of the Richmond Reproductive Freedom Project, published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch a few weeks ago. She claimed that, "Although 15 states use their own funds to cover abortions under many circumstances, Virginia is not one of them."
This statement is absolutely false and Victoria responded as such in a letter to the editor the Times-Dispatch subsequently printed. In fact, despite legislative efforts by The Family Foundation, other pro-life organizations and thousands of pro-family citizens, Virginia continues to fund abortion — taxpayers even fund elective abortions! As Victoria wrote:
The Federal government subsidizes abortions only when a Medicaid-eligible woman's life is at risk or in the cases of rape or incest. In Virginia, we fund abortions beyond the Federal requirements. Incredibly, from 2006-2007, Virginia tax dollars have funded 301 elective abortions (149 in fiscal-year 2007, and 152 in fiscal 2006).
Public interest is in favor of ending this funding. The Family Foundation and the Virginia Catholic Conference co-sponsored a Mason-Dixon poll in December 2008, and when asked if they supported Virginia's policy of using state money to pay for abortions falling outside the categories of rape, incest, and endangering the life of the mother, 46 percent of respondents were opposed to the funding with only 39 percent in support. Furthermore, a recent Harris poll found that 63 percent of Americans oppose the taxpayer funding of abortion. Combine this with the widely publicized recent Gallup poll showing that 53 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be legal only in certain circumstances, and it's clear the tide against abortion on demand is growing.
The Family Foundation is honored to serve as a voice for traditional values in the public square. Correcting the lies and distortions of the left is a full time job, but one that we are more than willing to do.
Republican Moral DivideJun. 19, 2008
A quick look at Barak Obama's campaign web site finds several references to faith and values. Unfortnately, there doesn't appear to be any such reference on John McCain's site. This, while a new Gallop poll indicates that Republican voters are growing more concerned over the state of the nation's moral values. In just two years, the percent of registered Republicans who said the moral condition of American is "poor" has risen by 15 points. Today, 51 percent of the GOP is frustrated with the nation's moral climate, compared to 36 percent two years ago.
So, Republican voters appear to be more concerned about traditional values — not less. As such, these voters are more likely to seek out candidates who they believe share their concerns. Apparently, McCain and his advisors still don't get it.
And its not just Republican voters with concerns. Since 2002, Republicans, Democrats and Independents have grown more pessimistic about the nation's moral direction. In fact, 81 percent believe the nation's moral state is "getting worse."
So, in that context, how smart is it for McCain and other Republicans to avoid talking about moral issues? While their campaign consultants may convince candidates to avoid all talk about marriage and abortion, that appears to be exactly what the voters (and activists) want them talking about.
Don't get me wrong. Candidates can't talk only about moral issues. They have to address rising gas prices, the economy, Iraq, terrorism, etc. But they can't completely avoid moral issues either.
The message to Republican candidates is clear — avoid these issues at your peril. Don't expect the activists and voters who got you into office to be energized if you refuse to even mention the issues they care about.