Skip to comments.The Evolution of Senator Kerry on Abortion: 1972-2004
Posted on 10/14/2004 1:15:19 PM PDT by cgk
How a man went from opposing abortion in personal "belief", to disagreeing, but respecting those "views."
John Kerry, 1972: Lowell Sun, MA newspaper interview.
Washington Post: Kerry: "Between a woman, her conscience and her doctor"
August 2, 1994: Congressional Record
Factcheck.org: Yes, the quote is right
July 5, 2004: Interview with Dubuque, IA's Telegraph Herald
Washington Post: Kerry: "Life Begins at Conception"
July 22, 2004: ABC News Interview with Peter Jennings.
Kerry: "it's not the form of life that takes personhood in the terms that we have judged it to be in the past. It's the beginning of life"
(interview only available in Google's cache, ABC removed it)
Jennings: You told an Iowa newspaper recently that life begins at conception. What makes you think that?
Kerry: My personal belief about what happens in the fertilization process is a human being is first formed and created, and that's when life begins. Something begins to happen. There's a transformation. There's an evolution. Within weeks, you look and see the development of it, but that's not a person yet, and it's certainly not what somebody, in my judgment, ought to have the government of the United States intervening in.
Jennings: Could you explain again to me what do you mean when you say "life begins at conception"?
Kerry: Well, that's what the Supreme Court has established is a test of viability as to whether or not you're permitted to terminate a pregnancy, and I support that. That is my test. And I, you know, you have all kinds of different evolutions of life, as we know, and very different beliefs about birth, the process of the development of a fetus. That's the standard that's been established in Roe v. Wade. And I adhere to that standard.
Jennings: If you believe that life begins at conception, is even a first-trimester abortion not murder?
Kerry: No, because it's not the form of life that takes personhood in the terms that we have judged it to be in the past. It's the beginning of life. Does life begin? Yes, it begins.
Jennings: If I were really skeptical, Senator, I would say that when you use the phrase "life begins at conception," you're attempting to speak to those people for whom that is a slogan, making them totally opposed to abortion.
Kerry: Not in the least. It's a belief that is a belief of mine. It's consistent with everything I've always said over 35 years of public life. It is not a new statement, but it is consistent with my personal belief system about who chooses and what happens.
October 8, 2004: Second Presidential Debate.
Washington Post: Kerry: "I can talk reasonably about life and about responsibility."
But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that.
October 13, 2004: Third Presidential Debate.
San Diego Union Tribune: Kerry: "It's between a woman, God and her doctor."
I respect their views. I completely respect their views. I am a Catholic. And I grew up learning how to respect those views. But I disagree with them, as do many. All of those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of faith.
"But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that."
A stop sign imposes an article of faith on others that one shouldn't harm another person or another persons property. Mr. Kerry, perhaps we should not legislate stop signs when you drive through an intersection because they impose the article of faith that we should not harm an innocent person, or an innocent persons property.
You may be interested in this link:
Detailed votes on abortion... very pro-abortion.
Rated 100 by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.
Kerry scores 100 by NARAL on pro-choice voting record
That says it all right there. He espouses to be a Catholic - a religious man, but he then says he "disagrees" with his own religion's teachings and truths. It was quite telling during the town hall debate when the woman asked him about funding abortions with tax payer dollars and he responded with a theological discussion. She didn't mention God or religion. He can't argue the science of it either, so he chooses to attack the religious "right."
Kerry: "I was an altar boy."
So was Stalin.
THE FIVE NON-NEGOTIABLE ISSUES
These five current issues concern actions that are intrinsically evil and must never be promoted by the law. Intrinsically evil actions are those which fundamentally conflict with the moral law and can never be deliberately performed under any circumstances. It is a serious sin to deliberately endorse or promote any of these actions, and no candidate who really wants to advance the common good will support any action contrary to the non-negotiable principles involved in these issues.
The Church teaches that, regarding a law permitting abortions, it is "never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it" (EV 73). Abortion is the intentional and direct killing of an innocent human being, and therefore it is a form of homicide.
The unborn child is always an innocent party, and no law may permit the taking of his life. Even when a child is conceived through rape or incest, the fault is not the child's, who should not suffer death for others' sins.
Often disguised by the name "mercy killing," euthanasia also is a form of homicide. No person has a right to take his own life, and no one has the right to take the life of any innocent person.
In euthanasia, the ill or elderly are killed, by action or omission, out of a misplaced sense of compassion, but true compassion cannot include intentionally doing something intrinsically evil to another person (cf. EV 73).
3. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Human embryos are human beings. "Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo" (CRF 4b).
Recent scientific advances show that often medical treatments that researchers hope to develop from experimentation on embryonic stem cells can be developed by using adult stem cells instead. Adult stem cells can be obtained without doing harm to the adults from whom they come. Thus there is no valid medical argument in favor of using embryonic stem cells. And even if there were benefits to be had from such experiments, they would not justify destroying innocent embryonic humans.
4. Human Cloning
"Attempts . . . for obtaining a human being without any connection with sexuality through 'twin fission,' cloning, or parthenogenesis are to be considered contrary to the moral law, since they are in opposition to the dignity both of human procreation and of the conjugal union" (RHL I:6).
Human cloning also involves abortion because the "rejected" or "unsuccessful" embryonic clones are destroyed, yet each clone is a human being.
5. Homosexual "Marriage"
True marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Legal recognition of any other union as "marriage" undermines true marriage, and legal recognition of homosexual unions actually does homosexual persons a disfavor by encouraging them to persist in what is an objectively immoral arrangement.
"When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral" (UHP 10).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.