Part 1 of this two part series covered the conversation I had with Dr. Michael Farris, President of Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), during the 2012 Republican Primaries. It is a good example to show his stand on abortion and constitutionality. He has an extremely warped view of constitutional politicians, as is so common these days.
But, in Part 2, I wanted to delve into a few more things to expose the hypocrisy of Dr. Farris. He wrote a lengthy explanation for who he was supporting and voting for in the general election in 2012. For some context, I will quote one of his opening paragraphs,
“…During the primary process I was very open about my inability to support the “front-runner” Mitt Romney. In the context of a primary election, there is no doubt that I had to support someone who had views and a record much closer to my own views. I supported Rick Santorum.”
Before Dr. Farris removed me from his friends list, he was very vocal about his support for Santorum and how the other candidates did not measure up to his “principles.” As can be seen in my discussion with him, the issue of abortion was a big issue for him, so he said. But, then things changed when it came to the general election, as he says,
“But now it is general election time. And I have to say that I have been much slower to reach a decision regarding the General Election than any previous election in my lifetime. I have heard the arguments about the inappropriateness of choosing the “lesser of two evils”. I have taken these arguments very seriously.”
Dr. Farris says he wrote this article to share the decision he has come to regarding how he planned to vote in the general election. In this article he says he seriously considered not voting, as he writes,
“The idea of not voting for anyone is something that I have seriously considered.”
After explaining that there is a difference between endorsing and voting for a candidate, Dr. Farris writes,
“There is no candidate in this race who is supportive of my views on my five most important issues. This includes third party candidates and the possibility of write-in votes.”
Dr. Farris admits that both President Obama & Mitt Romney will say one thing and do another. This is important to remember for some points we will get to later.
“I realize that on the issue of personal character we have limited information for both Obama and Romney. There could be skeletons hiding in the closet for either or both of them. And in terms of their political lives, both men are subject to criticism for saying one thing and doing another.”
In looking at the two candidates, Dr. Farris lays out how he determines who he will vote for,
“I have decided to evaluate the candidates based on the issues that are the most important to me using the four-standards I mentioned earlier. Take the issue of abortion, for example:
Does the candidate enthusiastically agree with my pro-life position?
Is the candidate willing to listen to my pro-life position and work with people like me to move in the right direction?
Is the candidate indifferent to my pro-life position?
Is the candidate openly hostile to my pro-life position?
If a candidate is in the 1st or 2nd group for all—or nearly all—of the issues that are most important to me, then I am willing to vote for such a candidate. If a candidate is in the 4th group (open hostility) for any of the positions that I hold to be most important, I would not be able to vote for such a candidate.”
Throughout the primary season, Dr. Farris said he had some tough words to say regarding Mitt Romney. But when he decided to vote for him he had to look at what he said regarding him and answer the question people would have about what changed. In this article he goes on to explain that the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare, the Obama administration’s attempt to pass the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilites, and the comments of his FB (and elsewhere) friends influenced his decision. So, he decided to address Obama & Romney on an issue by issue basis.
If you remember above, Dr. Farris already said “both men are subject to criticism for saying one thing and doing another.” But, because Mitt Romney told Dr. Farris in a one-on-one conversation (and in a personal, signed letter) that he is against UN treaties, this is one of the reasons he supported him.
The issue that is the biggest issue for me and shows how completely hypocritical Dr. Farris is, is the Abortion issue. In this article he writes,
“Barack Obama is openly hostile to the right to life. He is absolutely committed to Roe v. Wade and the full support of Planned Parenthood. He will fight us every step of the way on this issue.
Mitt Romney has a checkered past on this issue. He claims that he has been converted to the pro-life position. I don’t feel convinced that he has fully converted. However, it is clear that he is talking pro-life talk and taking pro-life positions. I think he does this, at least in part, because he realizes that being perceived as pro-life is necessary for his political success. And I don’t think he thinks that it is just necessary to be pro-life until November of 2012. He wants to be re-elected. So, at a minimum, I think we can count on him to keep up this pragmatic approach until November of 2016.
This does not make Mitt Romney my enemy. I think it is fair to say that he is listening to pro-life people and wants to work with pro-life people. I give him a “2” on this issue. He is not one of us. But he listens and is willing to have us in his coalition and knows the necessity of advancing some of our pro-life priorities.”
In Part 1 which covered my conversation with Dr. Farris, he specifically told me that abortion was a no-compromise issue for him. He went so far as to say,
“If the race was between Obama and Ron Paul I wouldn’t vote for either because I cannot vote for someone who directly advocates murder.”
Dr. Farris clearly states that he can’t vote for someone who directly advocates murder and this is an issue he cannot compromise on. Yet, above, he admits that he is not “convinced” Romney “has fully converted” to being pro-life.
So, we had a Republican candidate who was an OB-GYN, wrote an entire book on the issue of Abortion & Liberty, has continually tried to pass legislation to define that life starts at conception, and done more for the pro-life cause than most other Republicans, yet Dr. Farris classifies him as “someone who directly advocates murder.” Ron Paul has never once said he was for any abortion ever.
But, when it comes to the general election, Dr. Farris abandons his pro-life principles (that he said he would never compromise on) by supporting a candidate who actually “directly advocates murder.” As can be seen in a quote from Mitt Romney in 2005,
“I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother.” (July 26, 2005, Boston Globe, Why I vetoed contraception bill)
If Dr. Farris had not stated that this was an issue he did not compromise on, I wouldn’t necessarily say anything. But, this man is a hypocrite on one of the most basic issues: Life.
He states in one of his arguments in why he was voting for Mitt Romney,
“Only an all-or-nothing approach views these two choices as equivalent. All or nothing is not the way homeschoolers have achieved victory. And I aim for victory on the issues I believe in.”
There are some issues which don’t have to be an “all-or-nothing” approach. In other words, there are times when a candidate does not have to agree with you on your views 100% for them to earn your support. But,when it comes to the issue of life, it is “all-or-nothing” for me, because the lives of people and unborn babies depend on it. Aiming for victory on the issues one believes in does not mean you sacrifice protecting life.
Dr. Farris writes,
“While he is not “one of us”, Mitt Romney is not our enemy.”
This quote absolutely disgusts me. Mitt Romney is our enemy. He is the enemy of the LIVES of women, men and children around the world. He is the enemy of unborn babies in the womb. He is the enemy of the lives of American service men and women. He is absolutely not pro-life. His flip-flopping past, and even his current positions on abortion, go against the very foundation of being pro-life.
This is just a small portion of quotes out of the article Dr. Farris wrote on why he was voting for Mitt Romney. There are plenty of other topics I could’ve addressed, but they are not as important to me as the issue of life. When I see a man do the exact opposite of what he said he will do, he cannot be trusted.
-Qadoshyah Fish
I have never heard of Dr. Farris or the Home School Legal Defense Association but hypocrisy is hypocrisy. We do see this quite a lot and I never understand why. Remember when Romney went to speak at some religious college in the SE run by a big time preacher and they took down a course about cults including Mormonism. (Sorry, no source, just what I heard.) They way people justify things in their minds is not logical. Hopefully, many in his organization saw his non-consistency and went against him or will work to correct him. We are pushing forward to stem the tide and bring the United States of America back to the Constitution.