Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Evolution of Senator Kerry on Abortion: 1972-2004
Various | 10-14-04 (compiled) | John Kerry

Posted on 10/14/2004 1:15:19 PM PDT by cgk

The Evolution of John Kerry's Litmus Test: Personal, Political.. and in his own words.

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"

"On abortion, I myself, by belief and upbringing, am opposed to abortion but as a legislator, as one who is called on to pass a law, I would find it very difficult to legislate on something God himself has not seen fit to make clear to all the people on this earth. . . . And I think, therefore, with a sense of justice in mind that one has to leave the question of abortion between a woman and her conscience and her doctor,"

John Kerry, 1975: Lowell, Sun MA newspaper interview.
Talon News: Kerry: more important than abortion: "how to put people back to work, how to reduce crime and how to keep institutions from breaking down."
"I think liberals spend too much time pushing issues which just aren't relevant to the mass of people, including among such issues abortion, the death penalty and amnesty".

August 2, 1994: Congressional Record Yes, the quote is right

Kerry: "Mr. President, if this Constitutionally protected right is to be preserved, and if women are to be treated decently and with respect, abortions need to be moved out of the fringes of medicine and into the mainstream of medical practice."

July 5, 2004: Interview with Dubuque, IA's Telegraph Herald

Washington Post: Kerry: "Life Begins at Conception"

Kerry told the paper, "I oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I believe life does begin 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."

First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today.

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.

TOPICS: Extended News; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: creator; kerry; kerryabortion; lurch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: cgk

"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.

21 posted on 10/14/2004 6:09:45 PM PDT by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

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

22 posted on 10/14/2004 6:39:53 PM PDT by WOSG (George W Bush / Dick Cheney - Right for our Times!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cgk
What Ol' John Feckless Kerry has said and continues to say is designed to hedge his vote potentials ... and the truth be damned if it gets in his way to votes (he really doesn't care when a 'person' is present following conception, the court appointed right to kill the alive unborn is not to be infringed for liberals who vote Democrat). So, Almighty Lord, stay out of Mister Kerry's way while he's doing Satan's work here on Earth lest You be Judged partisan and 'unfair' to liberal demonspawn.
23 posted on 10/14/2004 7:01:34 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

"I cannot, however, support this bill [S. 46, Unborn Children's Civil Rights Act of 1985] because it is based on the premise that the fetus is a living human being. This is a religious, not scientific belief, and as such, I cannot support any legislation which imposes any one religious view on all people."

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."

24 posted on 10/14/2004 8:37:46 PM PDT by cgk (FReepers' Prayers helped to match my husband to his brother for a bone marrow match.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cgk

Kerry: "I was an altar boy."

So was Stalin.

25 posted on 10/14/2004 10:50:55 PM PDT by Deo volente (God willing, Terri Schiavo will live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics

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.

1. Abortion

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.

2. Euthanasia

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).

26 posted on 10/14/2004 11:17:39 PM PDT by NYer (Where Peter is, there is the Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson