And unfortunately it is issues like abortion and gay marriage that are foremost in the minds of voters in Congressional District 22. When you talk to voters and mention some of Nick Lampson’s positions on the per
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dab76/dab76036a9414e59d1da57aacb927851cc60aa0a" alt=""
So, OK, where does Nick Lampson stand on Gay Marriage? Why not look at his voting record? Novel idea. There it is, right here. He voted in favor of a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman. OK?
Well, I’m not particularly happy about that, but that’s Nick. He’s not afraid of breaking ranks with his fellow Democrats when he sees fit. Why am I not happy about it? No, I’m not gay. I know some, am related to one, but I am not, myself, gay. I have come to the conclusion after years of struggle with the issue, that life is too short for this to be an issue. True love doesn’t occur very often in one’s life. When you fall in love with someone, and want to marry, you should be allowed to. Simple as that. It’s not Gays that upset me, not at all. You know who really upset me though? Bisexuals. They are having far too much fun.
The other issue that comes up? Abortion. Again, it’s all so surreal when you are talking to someone about, say, “Pay as you go”, and they come back with, “OK, but what are his views on abortion?” So, again, go look at the voting record. Then start scratching your head. The voting record gives no clear indication of his views. It appears that he is neither “Pro-Life” nor “Pro-Choice” [Don’t you love those appellations? Unless you’ve been around awhile in this country, you wouldn’t know what either of those viewpoints referred to]
So how do you label Nick’s view? Truth to tell, no single word in the English language describes it, specifically to this issue. Eskimos, Inuits actually, have 15 separate words for snow, but we don’t have one word to describe Nick Lampson’s view on abortion.
Believe it or not, Nick appears to be both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.
Wait, you say, isn’t that a conflict? You can't have it both ways. You would think so. But last April I got the long-version explanation of his view on this subject in a small crowded room where Nick appeared and spoke on the issues for almost 2 hours.
Let me see if I can reconstruct the argument.
First, Nick is a Catholic. The Church has made its view on abortion to its 1 billion members time and time again that all human life is sacred. So should we have a law that forbids people from having or performing abortions? No, Nick said. That was tried before and it didn’t work. Nick said he that wants America to be a place where there are no abortions. Women will seek out an abortion when they think they have no alternatives. Nick said that we have to pass legislation to make it possible for women not to have abortions. He listed a few possibilities, one that I recall being assistance to women who have financial reasons for needing an abortion.
And that, in the end, is why I like Nick. He doesn’t let strident beliefs direct the issues. He is a pragmatist and a negotiator. He doesn’t want to dictate what people ought to do in order to achieve a goal, he wants to explore as many paths as it takes in order to allow people to make decisions toward that goal.
Contrast that with the views held by “Pro-Lifers”. They apparently have no problem
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d97d7/d97d7e33716b7b5fe03f88fa598050225c82210f" alt=""
We all need to vote for Nick Lampson, but even more, we all need to get active in his campaign and make sure that he wins in November.
1 comment:
Well that's the problem, isn't it? We have moderate Democrats like Lampson who are cursed as the Devil Incarnate and a threat to Western Civilization while they are Democrats, but when they jump to the Republicans--like Phil Gramm and Ben Nighthorse Campbell--they become on the side of the angels with the exact same positions!
The only exception was Greg Laughlin, who was so far off the Reservation while a Democratic Congressman in Texas 14 that the Democrats kept making the excuse, "Well, after all, he's the best we can do in this conservative district." So come the Republican landslide and Laughlin jumps parties, saying that ALL ALONG he was really a Republican. Laughlin boasted that he'd handily be re-elected because he was the only Democrat that his predominantly Republican supporters voted for. Except that Ron Paul knocked him out by his Achilles Heel, the Republican Primary. I can't say I'm sorry, either! At least Ron Paul is a man with principle, who doesn't cut his clothes to fit the season.
Post a Comment