With all due respect to LifeNews.com this is sloppy clickbait b.s.
Thread...
Thread...
You can be an atheist and be a conservative. You can be lots of things and be a conservative. You can also be **wrong** on almost any single issue and be a conservative. Because conservatism isn't a single issue philosophy.
Philosophically, being pro-life doesn't require limited government (indeed, it requires government involvement). It doesn't speak to taxes, defense, etc. either.
I understand why pro-lifers (and I am essentially pro-life) feel the temptation to make this a definitional litmus test, but that's a bad idea politically and flawed philosophically.
Politically, pro-lifers need to broaden their appeal beyond the GOP coalition. Saying conservatism = pro-life and vice versa doesn't help that. You should want liberals and socialists to be prolife too. One of the best voices on abortion was the late liberal Nat Hentoff.
Lastly, the fact that they refer to me as a "Republican Writer" is suggestive. I am not a "Republican Writer" (ask around). I am a conservative. If you want to say you can't be a Republican and be pro-choice, that's a wholly different thing.
Parties are mere political coalitions and can have whatever litmus tests they want. It bother me not a whit if people want to argue the GOP should be a pro-life party, with costs and benefits to be weighed empirically.
But this attempt to milk my criticism of Lahren and imply I'm betraying some party line or endorsing her views is just lame.
