Posted on 04/05/2007 9:14:04 AM PDT by Barney Gumble
You haven't.
Who didn't know Rudy was pro-choice.
And your baiting of area fifty one just so you can do your end zone dance makes me want to ask if you are six years old.
Rudy will rise or fall on the issues. He has never hidden what he believes but states them honestly.
For that I give him much credit.
You... you just want to hurry into the girl's bathroom so you can titter with your friends about the rascally rino... oh, isn't he bad? teehee teehee.
If he is a rabid supporter of abortion rights, why would NARAL let him speak before its members?
Archives of Rudolph W. Giuliani, 107th Mayor Opening Remarks to the N.A.R.A.L. "Champions of Choice" Lunch
The Yale Club, Thursday, April 5th, 2001
As Delivered
Thank you very much for inviting me to say a few words of welcome. This event shows that people of different political parties and different political thinking can unite in support of choice. In doing so, we are upholding a distinguished tradition that began in our city starting with the work of Margaret Sanger and the movement for reproductive freedom that began in the early decades of the 20th century.<
As a Republican who supports a woman's right to choose, it is particularly an honor to be here. And I would like to explain, just for one moment, why I believe being in favor of choice is consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. In fact, it might be more consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party. Because the Republican Party stands for the idea that you have to restore more freedom of choice, more opportunity, more opportunity for people to make their own choices rather than the government dictating those choices. Republicans stand for lower taxation because we believe that people can make better choices with their money than the government will make for them, and that ultimately frees the economy and produces more political freedom. We believe that, yes, government is important, but that the private sector is actually more important in solving our problems.
So it is consistent with that philosophy to believe that in the most personal and difficult choices that a woman has to make with regard to a pregnancy, those choices should be made based on that person's conscience and that person's way of thinking and feeling.The government shouldn't dictate that choice by making it a crime or making it illegal.
I think that's actually a much more consistent position. Many Republicans support that position, but you don't hear that as often. For example, in a recent poll by American Viewpoint, 65 percent of Republicans supported changing the plank in the Republican platform that calls for a constitutional ban on abortion. That's 6.5 out of every 10 Republicans. And over 80 percent of Republicans believe that the decision with regard to an abortion should be made by a woman, her doctor, and her family rather than dictated by the government.
[Applause]
In any case, I just wanted you to know that many of my fellow Republicans stand with you on this issue. So I thank you, I thank NARAL for taking the lead in establishing freedom of choice for all of us, and as the Mayor of New York City, I thank you for being here in New York City.
# # #
Gee, why do you suppose that is?
Could it be that abortion is LEGAL?
How much luck will someone have convicting someone of committing a legal act?
Arguments like that are a true discredit to real prolife citizens. And yes, I've stood on the sidewalk with the local Catholics in front of a local abortion clinic. And I've had my minor run in with the police over it.
But as repugnant as it is, it is still legal and a civil right. Interfering with a civil right is illegal and you lose when you do it.
I've made it pretty clear I'm not for Rudy. besides all the things I don't like about him his penchant for dressing up in drag really creeps me out!
I’m not sure if you are aware of it or not, but taxpayers currently fund certain abortions under the Medicaid program. George W. Bush hasn’t changed it. Rudy says he supports the status quo.
I think it’s easy for people to say they are against abortion when their opinion has no practical impact on policy. When the issue is put to people (California, for example, couldn’t even back parental notification laws). SD rejected the position, and ‘should of, would of, could of’ is speculation at this point.
Rights are easy to give and almost impossible to take away, as a practical matter. We are now approaching 35 years of the right to abortion, whether we like it or not. That’s a whole lot of people who grew up in an atmosphere were it was accepted. Taking it away from them is a huge fight, and I honestly don’t think pro life ranks have what it takes to do that right now.
Maybe in 1975 or 1980. Maybe in 1985. It’s too late - the questions these days aren’t ‘should abortion be legal,’ but rather questions about parental or spousal notification, government funding, etc.
I believe it’s human nature to believe in what is true and right, but to keep the option to do wrong open ‘just in case.’
I’d like to think you are right, but I just believe enough Americans want to keep at least first trimester abortions legal. Maybe I’m wrong, but I kjow that a lot of people are lousy.
Says you.
Rudy says he opposes abortion.
I suppose that when he says that he respects and supports laws that protect rights, even a womans right to have an abortion (a choice with which he disagrees) that you take that as no different than gleefully celebrating each and every abortion. Like I've said before, with some of you, anything short of killing abortions doctors and bombing clinics is being pro abortion.
Note well that the only Americans being asked to surrender their values are pro-life conservatives. That is why Giuliani is a danger to our freedoms, and a threat to the republic as we know it.
Rudy and his handlers plan to takeover the Republican party and destroy the party's longtime defense of traditional conservative "family values"......
Rudeo is a liberal Democrat squatting in the Repub party, and he and his handlers clearly intend to makeover our party into a clone of the Dems.
Rudy and his handlers want liberals to control all facets of the US government.
Rudeo would weaken our Nation and our freedoms b/c he would erase the systems of checks and balances the Framers wisely built into our system of government.
Rudeo is a threat to the Nation's stability as a two-party system; he is a threat to the freedoms of all Americans.
Rudy should get out of our party, and out of the 2008 race NOW.
I must not have been clear. He doesn’t think making abortion illegal and arresting doctors and women is a very good idea.
You can agree or disagree with him, and see if enough people want the law to change in this direction.
Tell that to the people whose 2nd Amendment rights were abridged by Rudy. He clearly didn't mind not supporting THAT constitutional law...you can't pick and choose.
I see a politician speaking to a constituency. In fact, what he’s saying is pretty safe since he’s saying that he supports current law.
And I can just as easily see him speaking to a pro life group and talking about the other side of the policy coin.
But using your reasoning as I understand it, W is pro abortion, too.
He hasn’t used every power at his disposal to stop the practice.
No, he has actually upheld and supported the laws that protect a woman’s right to choose.
That pro abortion bastard!
In addition, abortion is not an issue that most Americans consider a top priority right now. Iraq, Iran, foreign policy, healthcare, the economy, gas prices all take precendent over abortion in the current political climate.
Isn’t the topic abortion and not 2A rights?
Its not a question of can or will, its a question of perception on the part of the voters and likely voters. I think, and there is an ample amount of data going back many years, that in time of war the American people seek out candidates whom they already know to be strong leaders. They are not particualrly interested in holding auditions.
It’s true, George W. has not changed the current law, which provides for taxpayer funding of certain abortions under Medicaid. So he allows it, I guess he is pro-abortion, too. He had a Republican Congress for 6 years, so why wasn’t it changed?
I agree. While many people clearly tell pollsters they are against abortion, that doesn't mean that they all are passionately for criminalizing it. It's a leap in logic that many pro lifers make.
And criminalizing it isn't the most important issue for most people, I agree.
One good thing about a post-Roe USA is that we can start meaningfully putting this issue to votes in each jurisdiction. Whatever the decision, we as a nation have to welcome those outcomes in the interest of clarity - everyone will then know for sure where a majority stands, and everyone will just have to live with it.
End the shrill talk on both sides and find out what a majority wants, and go with it.
Simple: poor selection of Supreme Court justices: Stevens, O'Connor, and Souter (spit!). Some of them turncoat. Some of them compromises to get through the bipartisanly-liberal Senate.
And remember, back in the 70s many establishment "Republicans" like Kissinger were all for expanding abortion: for population control over populations they didn't like.
You are also forgetting that GW Bush has worked hard to keep the culture of death from expanding into new areas, like embryonic stem cell harvesting - at least at the Federally-funded level. I have many problems with the President, but at least he has consistently done this.
It’s a comparison.
You say that Giuliani is obligated by his oath of office to support the law, even if he is personally opposed to it. Let’s use that.
He’s personally opposed to abortion, but it’s law, so he supports it. Fine.
Then how do you do you excuse his opposition to guns...and his opposition to the 2nd Amendment? He supports national gun control. Your point about “supporting laws he may not like” doesn’t apply in this case. Otherwise, he’d be personally opposed to firearms, but he’d have gone about getting rid of the gun control legislation on New York’s books, not adding to them.
“And he is supposed to support the law, not just the ones he likes.
Supporting the law per one’s oath of office, what a concept!”
Rudy didn’t obey the welfare reform law when it went against new york’s sanctuary city policy.
He complained that he would have to follow that law and report illegal aliens to the feds. He took it to court to fight that law. It went to the supreme court. He lost.
He still disobeyed the law after that.
Do you agree with him disobeying the law in that case? Since you brought up the “he is supposed to support the law” angle.
Or will you be like the other rudy boosters and just ignore it, or say “it isn’t the topic at hand!!!”
That’s what I said in 111.
Now I’m not a Rudy historian, but what I’ve seen over the years on FR with a segment of the prolifers is that if you aren’t hell bent on stopping it at any cost you are pro abortion.
In fact the term proabortion is blatant propoganda and in most cases either dishonest or an outright lie.
They use the term to describe anyone with less fervor than they have.
So if a person genuinely believes that abortion isn’t right, but that they don’t have any business interfering iwth others’ decisions, then they are labelled pro abortion.
And if one upholds the current law despite opposite personal convictions, one is still pro abortion.
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.