Why I'm Voting for Huckabee Tomorrow

I know many people will consider the above statement an admission that I'm "throwing away my vote" or some such. And I even toyed with that notion myself, wondering if there was any point in going ahead and voting for him when it's basically inevitable that McCain is going to get the nomination. After thinking that to myself a few times, I finally voiced it aloud to Tim who gave me one of his patented "Gosh sometimes you're thick" looks that I really can't adequately reproduce in words and asked, "Well, certainly, if everyone who thinks that way gives up now, you're right. He doesn't have a chance." There is decidedly some truth there. And yet...even pushing that aside, I don't think he'll get the nomination. Still, tomorrow he gets my vote, and here is why.

First off, while I agree with some friends that I'm not sure in today's world we can afford to be single issue voters because there are too many issues that are insanely important if the US is to survive. However, that said, my primary issues are life and family oriented. There's a strong reason for this - if you can't understand that human life is valuable and that the traditional nuclear family (consisting of a married man and woman with their children, in case there's a question what I mean by that) are of the utmost importance, then our society and culture are going to continue to collapse and leave us wide open for physical attack regardless of how sound and informed your foreign policy. It happened in Ancient Greece. It happened in Ancient Rome. And it's happening here, though we're too proud and stupid to see it. (Just like the Greeks and Romans, by the way.) Once you set a foot on the slippery slope of the relative merit of born vs. unborn and acceptance of the idea that marriage is outdated and only a tax break and should, therefore, be available to anyone in any situation, then you're already sunk.

And so, what I look at when I look at these Presidential candidates is the following:

• Do they support any sort of stem cell research other than adult stem cell research? If so, then they're out. Especially in light of the fact that the breakthroughs in the use of stem cells have all been from adult stem cells. Yet it's the abortion lobby that wants to continue to create a need for fetal tissue that is pushing the suppression of these facts and the idea that only fetal stem cells are necessary. They're already succeeding in the cosmetic industry (check your anti-aging creams and be sure they're herbal, cause if they're not? Yeah, that's what you're smearing on your face.) They're already succeeding in the immunization industry (the chicken pox vaccine base is aborted fetal tissue - and the vaccine itself doesn't even guarantee immunity. I'm not a vaccine alarmist, but this is one I will not get Joshua, for moral reasons and because I simply want him to have immunity and not be at risk for contracting it as an adult, when it's so much more dangerous.)
• Parental notification for minors seeking an abortion. These are children. Minors. And parents need to know when they're having an elective surgery that has a serious possibility of long term physical and emotional harm and, in extreme cases, can cause death to more than just the intended victim.
• Protection of marriage as the union between one man and one woman. I know a lot of folks who don't understand why this is a big deal, and it's not purely religious. However, if we allow homosexuals to marry, then what's the next step? Pedophiles. Seriously. If it's ok for two men or two women to marry, then why are we regulating their age? Why can't a man marry a little boy? Yes, for me, it comes down to God's word. But if that's not enough, why can't people see that it's ridiculous to make a law for less than 3% of the population? Many/most of whom actually don't want to marry except as a way to give the finger to people with traditional values and make homosexuality "normal".
  
• Limits on the federal definitions of "hate crimes". Yes, hate crimes are real. Yes, people should be protected from them and perpetrators should be punished. However, we don't need a federal definition. And the more federal definitions that we get for things like this, federal definitions that are funded by lobbies to include certain groups and exclude others makes it more and more possible that we become a country where there is religious freedom for anyone other than Christians and there are protections for any sexual orientation other than heterosexual. And if conservatives won't step up and be counted, then we're going to wake up one morning and find ourselves outlawed.
• Illegal immigration. Yes, this is a family issue. Because the more funding and protection we provide to those who choose not to enter this country legally, the less we have to give to the families who are here legally who need help. There are legal channels into the US and they need to be enforced, and those who choose to try and scoot around them need to simply be scooted right back home. Period. End of story. Logistically this is probably a nightmare, I understand that. So my solution? Make it less inviting here for illegals. Punish employers who can't produce valid documentation for their workers. Abolish the anchor baby laws. And don't allow people without valid documentation to get free medical care. Harsh? Probably. But I think it would more than likely cut down on the influx and let us divert our resources to the citizens who need them.

When you stack them up? It's a vote for Huckabee tomorrow. If nothing else, maybe my vote along with the other conservatives who want us to nominate a conservative will send a message to the party that we're out here and we have a voice. Yes, we'll likely end up with McCain anyway. But hopefully they can come up with a running mate who actually has some conservative values so that we're not electing democrats regardless of who we vote for in November.